El pensamiento de sistemas para entender los sistemas sociales

Teachers developing skills, knowledge and attitudes is identified in the literature as a major factor in the development of inclusive pedagogy (Rouse, 2006). In any change process there are factors that facilitate change and there are others that may inhibit. One of this study’s research questions (Research Question 1) was concerned with identifying which aspects of classroom practice could facilitate the development of inclusive practice. Results from the research identified a number of aspects that were found to be both facilitators of, and barriers to, the development of inclusive practice. Because of its importance in student learning, and inclusive pedagogy, teacher assessment, analysis and planning practice is now examined.

7.3.1 How did the teachers assess?

Classroom observations and interviews revealed that assessment was a daily practice for the teachers. Formal assessment occurred when teachers

administered assessment instruments such as NUMP6 for mathematics, informal prose tests for reading and comparison of written language samples against exemplars. Less formal assessment, primarily observation and questioning, occurred daily as the teachers observed the children completing tasks e.g. writing a story or oral reading. Some of these formative assessments and linked teaching opportunities, however, were serendipitous for the student in that they occurred if the teacher happened to be interacting with them at the time they were having difficulties. The teacher of the junior class used a small note book in which she recorded skills, knowledge or processes that she had observed, whilst interacting with the children, that needed to be revised either with an individual or a group. However, she also reported that she did not carry out this task consistently for a variety of reasons including forgetting to use it, not taking the time to make entries and the demands of the children on her time. Other assessment occurred when the teacher evaluated the student’s efforts, occasionally as the child was producing written output, but generally at a later time when the teacher would review all the students’ efforts through ‘marking’ their books. Analysis of research results revealed that assessment was frequent, primarily formative and, on the whole, individually based.

7.3.2 How did assessment inform planning and teaching?

However, a further finding of the research was that analysis of this individual assessment did not generally transfer into planning to meet individual learning needs, especially during Cycle 1 of the research study. For instance the teacher of the senior class spent two days, early in the year, individually assessing each child’s numeracy skills with the NUMP test. Level of achievement in that test and other formal tests rather than level of learning was then used as the basis for the planning, because this teacher grouped her children for instruction based on scores, and instruction was delivered to the group as a whole with occasional individual teaching within the group. The teacher of the junior class tended to plan her teaching on the same basis. Such planning is predicated on the belief that all children within the group have the same learning needs. While the teachers would probably not agree that this is what they believe, it is their

practice. A research based characteristic of quality teaching for diverse students was that teachers adjusted their teaching to take account of the results of assessment (Alton-Lee, 2003). Both teachers did do this especially when working on an individual basis with a child (e.g., junior teacher working with children in reading group) but it was not planned for through goal setting, nor followed up and evaluated.

If inclusive pedagogical practice is about providing for participation, contribution and achievement then assessment, analysis and related planning are crucial skills that teachers require. An analysis of data should lead, amongst other things, to the setting of individual outcomes which then determines programme planning and developing teaching strategies. Together with evaluation and reflection, these activities constitute a cycle of skills necessary to enhance and develop a pedagogy that is inclusive (Ainscow, 2007), which are, coincidentally, similar to the action research cycle.

Following the completion of their action research projects both teachers had tentatively begun to use assessment and its analysis to plan for individual learning. For example, Janine, in the senior class, noted from her assessment data that there were a number of children in the class who needed extra support with reading comprehension. Her planning, therefore, proceeded from the learning need of the children. For ease of teaching delivery the children were still grouped but the focus of the teaching had changed. While admitting that she was not entirely comfortable with mixed ability/single need groups, she realised from her assessment analysis that these children had specific learning needs and that in order to meet these learning needs she had to find alternative and innovative methods of instruction. A second example from this teacher was that she modified her expectations for individual children and set differing outcomes for them whilst presenting them with similar tasks to their group peers. For example, in mathematics the group may have all been set subtraction algorithms to solve, but the level of difficulty of the algorithms for each child was individualised. Tina, the teacher in the junior class, also began to focus more on individual learning following her experience in the project. The use of peer tutors to help

example of this. Further, she began to encourage the class to set individual goals in some tasks and self-monitor their achievement of them. For children with lesser ability, assistance was given with formulation of the goals, and verbal prompts relating to the goals were given, prior to tasks being undertaken. There is a debate in the literature as to how teachers should cater for the differing learning of students (Guskey, 2003c; Westwood, 2001) but both writers would agree that the purpose of assessment is to inform planning and teaching leading to enhanced student outcomes.

Enhancing inclusive practice is facilitated by assessment in the classroom, especially when the analysis of the data influences the teacher to plan for individual learning. While the grouping of children for instructional purposes may assist in the delivery of teaching, the learning achievement of the individual should be the primary consideration. Where the formation of the group is the primary consideration then student learning is subsumed to teacher instructional practice which, in turn, becomes a barrier to inclusive practice. In this research, teacher practice began with a primary focus on strategies that facilitated instruction, but slowly and tentatively moved to a focus on learning following participation in teacher professional development. This research initially found that whilst collection of data was frequent and comprehensive the analysis of that data had a focus that was not inclusive. Professional development using action research assisted in beginning to change the focus of the analysis. Limited teacher practice in using individual assessment data to inform next step teaching and learning for individual students, is a barrier to inclusive pedagogy which is a major finding of this research.

7.3.3 Linking assessment, analysis and planning practices to the research questions

Contributions to all four research questions have occurred as a result of the findings presented in this theme, “Informing planning through assessment and analysis”.

Two major findings were discussed in this section of the thesis. The first related to the teachers’ limited use of their assessment and analysis data to plan for next

step learning opportunities for the children. Such practice is seen as a major barrier to the development of an inclusive pedagogy in terms of the definition (Section 2.2.3) and the key principles and characteristics (Section 2.2.5). Consequently, the limited practice became a classroom contextual factor that impacted on the teachers’ ability to meet educational needs (Research Question 1).

The second major finding, as discussed, acknowledged that through their action research projects the teachers’ practice began to change as tentative steps were taken to use individual assessment information in programme planning. Consequently, aspects of Research Question 3, relating to conducting practitioner research, and Research Question 4, relating to focussing internally and solving classroom challenges, were answered. Practitioner research facilitated the teachers to begin the process of change to their practice towards better providing for individual differences, and so enhancing their inclusive pedagogy.

The teacher practice change that occurred in the area of assessment and planning was partially due to the role of the researcher acting as a critical friend. The tasks that the researcher performed could also be carried out by a service delivery specialist. This finding adds to the information needed to answer Research Question 2.