Ingemar Emanuelsson ECER Lissabon 020912
Ingemar Emanuelsson
Göteborg university
Department of Education
P.O. Box 300
SE–405 30 Göteborg
Sweden
E-mail:
Telephone: +46 8 550 972 75
+46 31 773 20 71
Fax: +46 31 773 23 15
DIFFERENTIATION, SPECIAL EDUCATION AND EQUALITY
-
A longitudinal study of self concepts and school careers of students in difficulties and with or without special education support
Paper to be presented at the ECER 2002 conference
Lisbon September 11–14, 2002
Abstract
Main aims in this project are to study and analyse if and in what ways school and learning careers of students with different kinds of special education support during their compulsory schooling differ from those judged not in need of such support. Especially, choice of study programs, success in their upper secondary schooling, and schools’ grading of their learning in compulsory school is being focused and related to further possibilities. Development of Self concepts and patterns of post secondary school careers as well as drop out problems are of special interest. Determined needs of special education support are related to individual student characteristics as well as curricular and teaching needs of differentiation and educational demands. In such respects school needs of special education support are related to individual students’ needs. Consequences from one or the other will be analysed.
The data base used is a longitudinal follow up of a representative sample of approximately 8000 students in Sweden, born in 1982 and followed from school start at the age of seven up through post secondary school (gymnasieskolan) to the age of 19. The comprehensive data base comprises repeatedly collected information from school registers – school marks, national test results, special education support given, subject and program choices etc. – questionnaire answers related to different aspects of self concept and school experiences. Also available is information on home background conditions and parent opinions as well as results from four ability tests at the age of 13.
Main analysis methods used are correlation and regression analyses in combination with Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) which makes it possible to identify latent variables (factors). Such factors might explain pattern differences between various groups of students.
Some tentative results are presented. Distribution and allocation of special education resources are found more clearly related to school and teaching needs of differentiation and less heterogeneous groups than to certain kinds of student individual characteristics and preconditions. This is also mirrored in relations to curricular demands as documented in e.g. school marks. Amount of as well as kind of special education support given to students is also related to self concepts and self confidence as well as further possibilities for students to choose and succeed in different post secondary school programs. Organisation models for special education support seem to be of certain importance here. Special need students, especially from special classes or otherwise segregated groups, are over-represented among dropouts and in low status program groups. In a conclusive way, much of the results could be summarised in saying, that most of the individual student education career possibilities are determined very early, in most cases not later than the sixth year of compulsory school. This seems to be most clear for students judged to be in or to cause difficulties and therefore in need of special education support. Results from the study are briefly discussed and related to similar results from follow up studies of earlier Swedish cohorts from the 1960’s and onwards. Such patterns are further related to the overruling aims in curricula and school policy documents, like development of inclusive education in “a school for all”. Some conclusive suggestions for more proactive roles for special education support teachers in school and teaching development are discussed. Challenges from special education knowledge to get closer to a fully inclusive education in school are somewhat stressed, too.
Background
The study reported here is part of a rather extensive research program over a long time period. Most of the studies included were longitudinally designed and based on a sequence of follow up studies on big representative samples of eight to ten thousand students from every fifth age cohort born in 1967 and onwards. The cohort sample used here consists of ca 8 500 students born in 1982. They are followed since their third year (age 10) in the Swedish comprehensive school and through their studies in the Upper Secondary school, which most of them left as 19 year olds in the year 2001. This cohort students are of special interest, as they are the first ones passing their educational career according to the reformed national curriculum of 1992 as well as being the first ones marked according to the new marking system decided upon in 1992.
Some facts about the Swedish school system
The relevant parts of the Swedish school system in this study are the nine year obligatory comprehensive school (grundskolan), which often is talked about as the “one school for all”. There are about 1.5 percent of all children, most of them with intellectual disabilities, who belong to special schools, although most often locally integrated in regular schools. These students are not included in the follow up study reported on here. After completed compulsory school there is in Sweden the three year Upper Secondary School (gymnasieskolan), as a rule including students 16–19 years of age. Although this school is a voluntary choice, it is more or less obligatory anyhow, as there are very small possibilities to find other alternatives for the youngsters to choose. Therefore, allmost all – today ca 98% – start Upper Secondary schooling, most of them directly after compulsory school, some later within a four year period.
Studies at Upper Secondary School (gymnasieskolan) are organised in a great number of National Programs divided into two groups – Academic and Vocational oriented. There are also some Special programs, as a rule organised in relation to special conditions in local communes or districts and chosen by quite small proportions of applicants. All National program exams qualify for further studies at university or college.
About 50 percent of the students on national basis chose the two academic programs: Science and Social Science. Even if every student have the right to chose according to her or his interest and will, not all will be accepted on first choice or accepted at all. They have to be qualified, which means that they must have at least the mark “passed” in school subjects Swedish, English, and Mathematics from compulsory school. Those who do not qualify are taken to the Individual Program (IV) as well as those students who can not manage in studies started at National Programs. The aim of Individual Program teaching is mainly, to help the students qualify for being accepted at one of the National Programs. The Individual Program has become the third biggest program – ca 20% of the age cohort – after the two dominating Science and Social Science programs in terms of proportion of students per year cohort in most communes and school districts. The variation in IV-student proportions is quite big between different Upper Secondary schools as well as school districts, a variation that is increasing lately.
Earlier studies on Special Education support on the 1982 cohort sample
In earlier studies, the 1982 cohort sample was followed up through grade six – age 12 – of the compulsory school. They focused mainly on the role of different kinds of and ways of organised special education support and were reported by e g Persson (1998; Emanuelsson and Persson, 1997). In Persson (1998) the follow up studies also were completed with more intensive studies on special education support and its consequences in a number of school settings. Of special interest are findings showing a great variation in reasons behind student selection to special education measures. Of course, some individual characteristics like certain disabilities were identified, but more evident were different context related conditions and reasons in the regular education and teaching settings. The picture shown, therefore, turned out being rather confusing in many respects. At the same time, the most common and strongest loaded individual factors related to being appointed to special education or not were social background and gender followed by intellectual ability. The most common reasons reported and found in school settings were difficulties in reading and mathematics as well as emotional disturbances causing problems in regular teaching.
Students’ special education careers started as a rule early in their schooling, and there were close to one fifth of the students who had some kind of special education support every school year. Many of them had that kind of support for just one year, but there were also several that had so for more years, some with interruptions for one or more years. Up to grade six the proportion of students having had some kind of special education for one year or more added to ca 35 percent. Further, the special educational measures taken were seldom very good evaluated by the schools, and one conclusion from the studies was, that special education must be understood and seen as one part of educational differentiation – mainly organisational – taking place in the regular teaching. It was reasonable to say, that the overall concluding picture showed, that every local school setting identified its own needs of Special Education support to an astonishingly equal amount seen over the very great number of settings. With a slight exaggeration, it looked like as every school class teacher having a certain amount of support available to use to her/his students, and that this amount of resources also was used within her/his own class. This means then, that support resources were allocated in relation to student variability in preconditions for learning in that group, which was used as frame of reference. No wonder then, that the summarised picture tends to be confusing, as there are great variation between school classes in student qualities and preconditions for learning and coping with school teaching (Persson, 1998). One consequence is, that special education students in the whole cohort sample show up as a very heterogeneous group in many respects. This is, of course, important to remember, when looking into results from further follow up studies of their careers in secondary and upper secondary school years.
The students of this cohort sample have now been followed through their continued schooling, and what is reported here are studies focusing first hand on special education students and their school careers and experiences up to the age of 19. Thereby differentiation, long term consequences and equality aspects are of certain interest, and in these respects, how they can be seen in individual students’ education careers.
Aims of the study
Main aims are to study and analyse if and in what ways school and learning careers of students with different kinds of special education support during their compulsory schooling differ from those not judged in need of such support. Especially, choice of study programs, success in their upper secondary schooling, and schools’ grading of their learning in compulsory school is being focused and related to further possibilities. Patterns of upper secondary school careers as well as drop out problems are of special interest. Determined needs of special education support are related to individual student characteristics as well as regular curricular and teaching needs of differentiation and educational demands. In such respects school needs of special education support are related to individual students’ needs. Consequences from one or the other will be analysed. Related to these factors are further students’ reported estimations of different kinds of self-concepts and abilities for school subjects and successful learning.
Previous research
Longitudinal studies of individual school careers over more than ten years are very scarce. Not least, in special education research this is a fact, often recognised as well as complained about. Need for studies of long term effects and consequences of different kinds of special education support given to students have been expressed since long (Österling, 1967; Emanuelsson, 1974). The same is said in a recently published overview of Special Education Research (Emanuelsson, Persson & Rosenqvist, 2001). Many reported studies from upper secondary schools surely relate student achievement results within to students’ earlier experiences in compulsory school, e.g. special education or other kinds of support. The same pattern you also find in drop out studies. But this has usually been done in a retrospective way and not as results from longitudinal follow up studies of the same students. Our own studies, mentioned above, are rather unique then, as well as the possibilities of using available longitudinal data for the studies reported here.
However, most research reported on student difficulties in upper secondary careers refer to earlier experiences of difficulties and problems as well as being in need of special support during compulsory school years as very important preconditions for success or its opposite. This is especially so in studies on different kinds of school difficulties and drop out, and a common result is reported as clear relations between having had special education support and upper secondary school experiences.
A recent study by Hultqvist (2001) from the reformed (see above) upper secondary school (gymnasieskolan) is of special interest here. She made observation and interview studies of groups of students belonging to the Individual Program (IV), i.e. students who did not qualify for the national programs or who had left these programs because of difficulties in following the teaching there. The results showed many similarities in these groups and educational settings to characteristics reported from studies of special education settings in earlier studies from compulsory schools. The results from her studies are discussed in very interesting ways of great relevance also for the study reported here. Therefore, some references and quotations (all translations from Swedish are done here by the present author) from her discussion and conclusions are highly motivated.