WE ARE NOT TECHNICIANS,

WE ARE NOT MAGICIANS!A counter-narrative framework of special educators as inclusive

education activistsKATHLEEN KING THORIUS, PH.D.

INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF EDUCATIONINDIANA UNIVERSITY-PURDUE UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS

OBJECTIVES Examine traditional and alternative definitions and

practices of inclusive education; including the

roles of special educators in schools

Learn a three-dimensional

framework for PLCs engaged in inclusive

education work

Explore considerations for the application of these

towards radical* vision and practice of inclusive

education in your PLCs and schools

*radical=at the root; foundational change

TENSIONS IN DEFINITIONS & PRACTICES

INCLUSION

Often refers to the integration of students with disabilities into the general education classroom and curriculum (Hodkinson, 2012).

Inclusion into what? (Erickson, 1996)

INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

A global education movement to redress the systemic exclusion of students who have been marginalized in schools and society (e.g., students with disabilities, students of color, and students from low socioeconomic backgrounds) (Waitoller & Kozleski, 2013).

Assimilation or transformation? (Kozleski, Artiles, & Waitoller, 2014)

Why transformation over assimilation?

“Better Baby Competition” Indiana State Fair

Reproduced from the Indiana Eugenics Library

Better Babies Diploma

This is to certify that we have conferred

on Donald Workman first prize in division

1 at the Better Babies Contest for

attaining an average score of 99

percentum in physical and mental

development as measured by the

better babies standard score card on August 30, 1918.

(White, Non-disabled)

General Education(for whom?)

INCLUSIVE EDUCATION redistribution of quality opportunities to learn and participate in educational programs

recognition and value of differences as reflected in content, pedagogy, and assessment tools

opportunities for marginalized groups to represent themselves in decision-making processes that advance and define claims of exclusion and the respective solutions that affect their children’s educational future

(Waitoller & Kozleski, 2013, p.35, informed by Fraser’s (2009) three-dimensional social justice framework)

A CONTINUO

US STRUGGLE TOWARDS

Teaching is a political practice in which the dominant culture is threaded through the teacher and the curriculum in ways that grant access to some students and deny it to others, so it is imperative that teachers are conscious of their role in selecting what to “deconstruct, conserve and transform.” (Kozleski & Siuty, 2015)

INSTRUCTIONSIn PLC teams, discuss the following:Through your work in this project, what about special and general education have you been working to deconstruct? What remains to be deconstructed?

What have you worked to conserve?

What have you worked to transform?

TECHNICAL

CRITICALCONTEXTUAL

INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHER LEARNING TO ENACT INCLUSIVE EDUCATION (Kozleski, Artiles, & Skrtic, 2014; Kozleski, Gibson, & Hynds, 2012)

“Know” and “know-how”

Historically situated teaching practices, which occurs within complex social and geographic school networks (e.g., special educator identity)

Examination of who benefits from political, social & learning structures

Special Educator Identity and Practice• Teachers defined and practiced their roles as technicians,

diagnosticians, & magicians (i.e., “fixers”).• By examining contextual and critical arenas of their practice, they

began to struggle and extended such identity towards one of a tentative activist in their local schools. (Thorius, 2016).

Building MTSS Meeting Participation(Thorius, Maxcy, Macey, & Cox, 2014)Data Review Meeting

Key events across all data review meetings included:• pre-meeting• current interventions and data• decision points

Instructions: Assign each person a role, read the parts, discuss the prompts (20 minutes)

CONSIDERATIONS FOR SPDG PLCs

TECHNICAL

CRITICALCONTEXTUAL

INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

Applying the framework to your own PLC • MTSS and other building-level meetings• IEP meetings• Special education service delivery model• Shared practice (co-teaching, planning) between special and

general educators• The focus of instruction for students with dis/abilities• The role of the special educator in the general education classroom

(e.g. UDL vs. accommodations)

ReferencesErickson, F. (1996). Inclusion into what? Thoughts on the construction of learning, identity, and affiliation in the general education classroom. In D. L. Speece & B. K. Keogh (Eds.), Research on classroom ecologies (pp. 91-105). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Kozleski, E. B., Artiles, A. J., & Waitoller, F. R. (2014). Equity in inclusive education: A cultural historical comparative perspective. In L. Florian (Ed.). The Sage handbook of special education . London: Sage.Kozleski, E. B. & Siuty, M. B. (2015). Inclusive education: Teacher education through an equity lens. In G. Biewer, E. T. Bohm, S. Schutz (Eds.), Inclusive Pädogogik in der Sekundarstufe (pp. 149 – 163). Stuttgart, Germany: Kohlhammer Publishers.Thorius, K. A. K. Maxcy, B. D., Macey, E., & Cox, A. (2014). A critical practice analysis of Response to Intervention Appropriation in an urban school. Remedial and Special Education, 35, 287-299.Thorius, K. A. K. (2016). Stimulating tensions in special education teachers' figured world: an approach toward inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education. Online first. Doi: 10.1080/13603116.2016.1168877Waitoller, F. R., & Kozleski, E. B. (2013). Working in boundary practices: Identity development and learning in partnerships for inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 31, 25–45.