Logics and ambivalence : professional dilemmas during implementation of an inclusive education practice
Although inclusion has been a value set forth in international policy arenas and a focus for school development, research indicates there are problems in establishing more inclusive practices. Teachers may favor an inclusive model of education but often experience difficulty implementing inclusive p...
| Published in: | Education Inquiry |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Umeå universitet, Pedagogiska institutionen
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-98695 https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v6.26157 |
| Summary: | Although inclusion has been a value set forth in international policy arenas and a focus for school development, research indicates there are problems in establishing more inclusive practices. Teachers may favor an inclusive model of education but often experience difficulty implementing inclusive practices. The aim of this article was to analyze teachers’ experiences during the implementation of a top-down-initiated inclusive practice in a municipality in northern Sweden. The empirical data is based on qualitative interviews with four teachers, two from a special school and two from a compulsory school. The results show professional ambivalence in relation to introduction and information, cooperation and views on inclusion. The results are analyzed from an institutional theoretical approach and show that two institutional logics are apparent. One is educational logic, which is formal/ideological and contains norms and values connected to ideological ideals such as normality, equality, and inclusion. The other is social logic, which is not informal but vague and pragmatic; differentiation and disability are key aspects. Consequently, important inter-professional aspects of the implementation process, such as information, cooperation, and views on inclusion, were characterized by ambivalence. To conclude, the article adds to the discussion of the challenges—administrative, organizational, and practical—in implementing new discursive practices within inclusive education such as norms and values, routines, and rituals, which are not easily changed, regardless of political rhetoric. |
|---|