**1. Introduction**

In the current global educational movement, the term inclusion is not agreed upon. According to Kiuppis's [1] review of the UNESCO policies, the various definitions of inclusion seem to stem from the divide between the progress of "Inclusive Education" and "Education for All."

"Inclusive Education" originates from the Salamanca Statement [2], which is considered the starting point of a "new thinking" in special needs education. Since then, it has had a pivotal

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

role in the definition of educational international policies (e.g., [3]) and in the reforms of school curricula and guidelines of pedagogical practices of many countries, pushing the field of education to strengthen systems and develop support for children with special needs [1].

quality education for all while respecting diversity and the` different needs and abilities, characteristics and learning expectations of the students and communities, eliminating all forms

Curriculum Ideologies Reflecting Pre-Service Teachers' Stances toward Inclusive Education

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76326

39

However, the discrepancies between these two inclusion approaches have given rise to pedagogical confusion for teachers regarding how to interpret the NCC's [9] agenda and apply inclusive pedagogies. Pedagogical concerns have also been caused by the fact that the "inclusive principle" includes a twofold demand for teachers: inclusive pedagogy should address the individual learning needs of students (cf. [11, 12]), and it should include all students who

As discussed earlier, the reforms of putting inclusion into the curriculum are interlaced and presently highly debatable concepts in terms of enhancing the quality of teaching for all. Teachers especially feel confused because they are viewed as having the most direct impact on the day-to-day educational experiences of students in inclusive classrooms. They are responsible for encountering and treating all students equally, regardless of their [dis]abilities, social class, ethnicity, religion, or gender, as stated in the NCC [9]. At its heart, inclusion involves

Hence, teachers' set of beliefs in a situation where they are expected to implement new curriculum agenda and practices are crucially important for the success of the reform (cf. [14–16]). Therefore, if the attitudes and beliefs of teachers are not considered, especially when a radical change is in progress, more resistance from the teachers' side will be experienced (cf. [17]), and the commitment to change will be limited [15, 18]. As Schubert [19] has noted, curriculum is the practical application of a teacher's personal beliefs. That is to say, teachers' beliefs give meaning to their curriculum, and their instructional endeavors reflect their curriculum ideol-

For the current study, the curriculum reform in Finland serves as an impetus for exploring how pre-service teachers have understood and interpret the inclusive principle stated in the NCC [9]. The meaning of considering pre-service teachers is derived from the fact that they are regarded as change agents because of the updated knowledge that they have recently acquired. Furthermore, signals of confusion among the teachers, as shown in Haines et al. [24], signals the need to collect data from teachers to identify their set of beliefs and what kinds of curriculum ideologies they hold. The results are critical for enhancing the successful implementation of the inclusion principle, as well as developing teacher education.

This chapter also presents insights into the steps the schools in Finland are taking toward inclusive school culture, which is examined and interpreted through the lens of pre-service teachers. Therefore, in the chapter, I present the results of the study and address the following questions:

• What are the curriculum ideologies of pre-service teachers participating in the teacher edu-

• What kind of stances about inclusive education do these reflections represent?

teachers' commitment to the values of equity, equality, and participation.

of discrimination" (p. 18).

ogy [20, 21].

cation program?

face barriers to full participation in learning (cf. [13]).

"Education for All," in turn, began in the social justice agenda and was introduced by the "World Conference on Education for All" in Jomtien in 1990; the idea behind this concept was a call for every child to have a right to a basic education. This agenda has strongly accelerated since the agreement of the "United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities" [4]. Accordingly, inclusion has been accepted worldwide as a basic right and the foundation for an equal society. Furthermore, in many countries, the education systems have been reformed to reduce inequalities, develop teacher and system capabilities, encourage supportive learning environments, and develop high-quality support for vulnerable learners so that they can reach their potential (e.g., [5]). Although the idea of inclusion has been widely accepted, the global declarations espousing the ideals of inclusion rarely, if ever, mandate educational systems to establish inclusion.

In Finland, it has been corollary to agree with this "Education for All" philosophy because education has traditionally been perceived as a mechanism for enhancing social justice and equal educational opportunities for all students. However, the education system has maintained the "twin-track model" of labeling "exceptional" the individualized instruction, accommodations, and support most appropriate for their students before they are entitled to receive needs within special education settings.

The ongoing change started within the Special Education Strategy [6], which launched the updating of the legislation [7] and the National Core Curriculum [8] to be in line with the Salamanca Statement [2]. Since then, student diversity in mainstream settings has been rebuilt on the instructional "three-tier support model." The support consists of three steps: general, intensified, and special support. In addition, multicultural approaches are topical in Finland, entailing educational strategies that incorporate previously marginalized ethnic groups into the curriculum. The most recent National Core Curriculum [9], which has been implemented in schools since August 2016, relies on an inclusive principle in its underlining of student participation and requiring the meaningfulness of learning, making it possible for every student to experience success, as stated in the following:

The development of basic education is guided by the inclusion principle. The accessibility of education must be ensured. This means supporting the pupils' learning, development and well-being in cooperation with the homes. Basic education offers the pupils possibilities for versatile development of their competence. It reinforces the pupils' positive identity as human beings, learners and community members. Education promotes participation, a sustainable way of living and growth as a member of a democratic society. Basic education educates the pupils to know, respect and defend human rights. The social task of basic education is to promote equity, equality and justice. ([9], p. 18).

As the excerpt indicates, Finland has adopted the UNESCO [10] policy guidelines that combine both notions of inclusion by understanding inclusion as a "process aimed to offering quality education for all while respecting diversity and the` different needs and abilities, characteristics and learning expectations of the students and communities, eliminating all forms of discrimination" (p. 18).

role in the definition of educational international policies (e.g., [3]) and in the reforms of school curricula and guidelines of pedagogical practices of many countries, pushing the field of education to strengthen systems and develop support for children with special needs [1].

"Education for All," in turn, began in the social justice agenda and was introduced by the "World Conference on Education for All" in Jomtien in 1990; the idea behind this concept was a call for every child to have a right to a basic education. This agenda has strongly accelerated since the agreement of the "United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities" [4]. Accordingly, inclusion has been accepted worldwide as a basic right and the foundation for an equal society. Furthermore, in many countries, the education systems have been reformed to reduce inequalities, develop teacher and system capabilities, encourage supportive learning environments, and develop high-quality support for vulnerable learners so that they can reach their potential (e.g., [5]). Although the idea of inclusion has been widely accepted, the global declarations espousing the ideals of inclusion rarely, if ever, mandate

In Finland, it has been corollary to agree with this "Education for All" philosophy because education has traditionally been perceived as a mechanism for enhancing social justice and equal educational opportunities for all students. However, the education system has maintained the "twin-track model" of labeling "exceptional" the individualized instruction, accommodations, and support most appropriate for their students before they are entitled to

The ongoing change started within the Special Education Strategy [6], which launched the updating of the legislation [7] and the National Core Curriculum [8] to be in line with the Salamanca Statement [2]. Since then, student diversity in mainstream settings has been rebuilt on the instructional "three-tier support model." The support consists of three steps: general, intensified, and special support. In addition, multicultural approaches are topical in Finland, entailing educational strategies that incorporate previously marginalized ethnic groups into the curriculum. The most recent National Core Curriculum [9], which has been implemented in schools since August 2016, relies on an inclusive principle in its underlining of student participation and requiring the meaningfulness of learning, making it possible for every student

The development of basic education is guided by the inclusion principle. The accessibility of education must be ensured. This means supporting the pupils' learning, development and well-being in cooperation with the homes. Basic education offers the pupils possibilities for versatile development of their competence. It reinforces the pupils' positive identity as human beings, learners and community members. Education promotes participation, a sustainable way of living and growth as a member of a democratic society. Basic education educates the pupils to know, respect and defend human rights. The social task of basic education is to promote equity, equality and justice. ([9], p. 18). As the excerpt indicates, Finland has adopted the UNESCO [10] policy guidelines that combine both notions of inclusion by understanding inclusion as a "process aimed to offering

educational systems to establish inclusion.

38 Contemporary Pedagogies in Teacher Education and Development

receive needs within special education settings.

to experience success, as stated in the following:

However, the discrepancies between these two inclusion approaches have given rise to pedagogical confusion for teachers regarding how to interpret the NCC's [9] agenda and apply inclusive pedagogies. Pedagogical concerns have also been caused by the fact that the "inclusive principle" includes a twofold demand for teachers: inclusive pedagogy should address the individual learning needs of students (cf. [11, 12]), and it should include all students who face barriers to full participation in learning (cf. [13]).

As discussed earlier, the reforms of putting inclusion into the curriculum are interlaced and presently highly debatable concepts in terms of enhancing the quality of teaching for all. Teachers especially feel confused because they are viewed as having the most direct impact on the day-to-day educational experiences of students in inclusive classrooms. They are responsible for encountering and treating all students equally, regardless of their [dis]abilities, social class, ethnicity, religion, or gender, as stated in the NCC [9]. At its heart, inclusion involves teachers' commitment to the values of equity, equality, and participation.

Hence, teachers' set of beliefs in a situation where they are expected to implement new curriculum agenda and practices are crucially important for the success of the reform (cf. [14–16]). Therefore, if the attitudes and beliefs of teachers are not considered, especially when a radical change is in progress, more resistance from the teachers' side will be experienced (cf. [17]), and the commitment to change will be limited [15, 18]. As Schubert [19] has noted, curriculum is the practical application of a teacher's personal beliefs. That is to say, teachers' beliefs give meaning to their curriculum, and their instructional endeavors reflect their curriculum ideology [20, 21].

For the current study, the curriculum reform in Finland serves as an impetus for exploring how pre-service teachers have understood and interpret the inclusive principle stated in the NCC [9]. The meaning of considering pre-service teachers is derived from the fact that they are regarded as change agents because of the updated knowledge that they have recently acquired. Furthermore, signals of confusion among the teachers, as shown in Haines et al. [24], signals the need to collect data from teachers to identify their set of beliefs and what kinds of curriculum ideologies they hold. The results are critical for enhancing the successful implementation of the inclusion principle, as well as developing teacher education.

This chapter also presents insights into the steps the schools in Finland are taking toward inclusive school culture, which is examined and interpreted through the lens of pre-service teachers. Therefore, in the chapter, I present the results of the study and address the following questions:

