**5. The context**

**4. The research design**

**Inclusion …**

EI1 is a process

EI2 is aligned to a vision

EI3 requires promotion of locally negotiated responses

EI5 involves increased participation to maximise outcomes

EI7 needs all students to understand and value diversity

EI8 needs adults to value difference as a resource

**Table 1.** Existing indicators (*EIs*) of inclusive school practice.

EI6 needs a learning community that questions and challenges current practice

E19 requires practices that engender feelings of safety and belonging, and E20 requires *supporting and working with students, staff, parents and communities*

EI4 involves changes and modifications

**Figure 2.** Conceptual framework of research design.

tors (EIs) of inclusive school culture (**Table 1**).

40 New Pedagogical Challenges in the 21st Century - Contributions of Research in Education

Maxwell's [29] interactive model of research design was taken into account and consideration given to the reciprocal relationship between the research questions, goals, methods, validity and conceptual framework. **Figure 2**, illustrates the conceptual framework used in this study which draws together Schein's Theory of Organisational Culture [23] with the existing indica-

> The two Primary School case study sites are referred to as PS1 and PS2. Both schools had been identified by regional office staff as having quality outcomes and inclusive environments, and each had a strong sense of identity (**Figure 3**).

> They had similar numbers of students but different demographics. PS1 had above average levels of students with special needs (12% of total enrolment). Primary School 2 (PS2) had an average sized special needs program (9%) but around 50% of students came from backgrounds where English was an additional language or dialect. Both schools had demonstrated strong gains identified by the National Assessment Program.

> Both schools had undertaken a school capacity building process, in partnership with LRI team members, over anumber of years. Each school community had collaboratively developed a strong school vision, well understood and explicitly taught values, and a schoolwide pedagogical

**Figure 3.** PS1's and PS2's vision and SWP.

(SWP) framework [30, 31]. Each of these artefacts emerged as a result of the school engaging with the Innovative Designs for Enhancing Achievements in Schools (IDEAS) Project [22]. Interestingly both school communities adopted the image of a tree as a metaphor fortheir vision, even though each vision was distinctly different. Each vision and SWP is captured in **Figure 3**.

• PHASE 2: Themes linked to stakeholder factors (SF) and existing indicators (EI)

ing staff, parents, students, leaders and system interactions.

*pedagogies for context*

and respond to any concerns raised.

*ily contexts*

• PHASE 3: Theme differences identified, principles articulated and a model created

**PHASE 1**: The Stakeholder focused phase acknowledged that a school is a community of individuals working together. Factors relating to the key stakeholders were summarised according to staff, parent, student, and leadership with management related factors. Although there were context specific nuances, a number of inclusive strategies appeared to be in operation across both schools. These operated as integrated pieces of a whole school approach embrac-

Inclusive Schoolwide Pedagogical Principles: Cultural Indicators in Action

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70358

43

In both contexts, it had been reported that the principal had placed priority on developing staff capacity to support students with a particular need, and then followed up with additional sessions as required. Collaboration across the school ensured that planning was comprehensive and manageable by all parties inclusive of special support staff, teachers, teacher aides, students, parents and the leadership team. Professional development and time for professional conversations were a priority. Multiple opportunities were provided within the classroom for students to build metacognitive skills through mental processing tasks and 'talk alouds', so students could learn how to express their learning and emotional needs. This was particularly important for PS2 due to their high numbers of students with English as another language.

*Staff focused factors: targeted professional development; professional collaboration; intentional development of metacognitive skills; clear consciousness of varied needs; shared understanding of successful* 

Teachers indicated that considerable time was spent by the principal and other members of the leadership team, such as the Head of the Special Education Program, on contacting parents prior to a student's entry into school. Parents confirmed this. PS2 found this challenging as many parents did not speak English but translators were brought into the process. Multiple and varied opportunities were provided for parents to express their concerns and be 'heard'. Sometimes all that was needed was for parents to be reassured that support measures were in place for their child. Where regular consultations with medical practitioners and support personnel were needed, these were arranged and the school assisted parents to understand

*Parent focused factors: prior contact with parents; multiple opportunities for parents to engage; supported interactions with medical or other support services; empathy and understanding of diverse fam-*

Students were encouraged to be leaders of inclusive practice within their classrooms and whilst in the playground. Social skills and values education programs were in place to assist students develop peer relationships and support groups. Student leaders were actively encouraged to be the voice for their peers and were fully engaged in orienting students new to the school and becoming mentors in their initial transition to campus. Teachers were encouraged to provide multiple opportunities within each classroom for students to share their experiences, passions and hobbies in order to find 'triggers' and 'hooks' into learning. At both schools, students were encouraged to build independent learning skills within the classroom. Older students set their own learning goals and planned how to attain these through small achievable steps.
