The importance of peer-support for teaching staff when including children with special educational needs

Abstract

Policies of inclusion in schools now transcend national boundaries; but much less is known about how teachers interact best with each other in order to establish a successful inclusion environment. School psychologists cannot work in isolation and require being fully conversant with this perennially polemic topic. This article reports on a study in which 43 teachers in three secondary schools across one local authority in Scotland were interviewed on a range of topics related to inclusion. One of the important themes to emerge was the importance of peer-support within staff groups. It was found that teachers could still hold positive attitudes towards inclusion, even if the management team and heads of department within the same school were not regarded as being particularly supportive. Peer support was highlighted as a valuable component enabling teachers to feel that they were able successfully to include children with special needs. Moreover, the importance of peer support was perceived as superseding other support across the three high schools. Some implications for a possible role for school psychologists in helping to establish peer support networks for teachers are considered.

Keywords

attitudes to inclusion educational psychologist high school teachers inclusion peer support school psychologist Scotland teacher interaction

The international context for inclusive education is grounded in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994) and in the UK (which is the focus of this article) Acts such as the Children's [Scotland] Act 1995 and the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA; 1995). In the USA the dominant piece of legislation is the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (1997; Zigmond, Kloo, & Volonino, 2009). The term ‘inclusion’ replaces ‘integration’ which was used in the UK in the 1980s to include children who were identified as having special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools (Allan, 2006). Inclusion has involved several dimensions including the implications for belonging to the local community or school and was an attempt to improve upon integrating children in mainstream provision with minimal support—which is exemplified by Vassie (2002) who described the ‘physical movement of the child from one place to another without a concomitant expectation of necessary change by the mainstream school’ (p. 2).

There are various definitions of inclusion—this is one example:

Inclusion and inclusive education are concerned with the quest for equity, social justice, participation, and the removal of all forms of exclusionary assumptions and practices. It is based on a positive view of difference and has at its heart the principle that all pupils, including those who are ‘different’, are considered to be valued and respected members of the school community. (Zoniou-Sideria & Vlachou, 2006, p. 379)

There are differing views as to what exactly the concept of inclusion involves and this will influence opinion in this subject area. Despite inclusion being an international concept the variance by country is quite marked due to cultural and legal issues. However, a full debate of this issue would be outside the realm of this article but it is worth considering what inclusion could potentially entail. For some, inclusion in school could be all children being educated in their local school where full facilities would be put in place to ensure that children with special needs are not disadvantaged educationally and socially from their peers. Others may argue that inclusion could include specialist provisions, which are separate to mainstream schools because the children are socially included with their peers who also have a range of special needs. Currently in Australia, Boyle, Scriven, Durnin, and Downes (2011) suggest that working in an inclusive environment should be regarded as a ‘professional positive’ and embraced as a method of ensuring that the education professional is stretching his/her skills whether as a teacher or as a psychologist. The UK government's report entitled ‘Removing barriers to achievement’ (Department for Education and Skills [DfES], 2004) stated that ‘all teachers should expect to teach children with special educational needs and all schools should play their part in educating children from their local community, whatever their background or ability’ (p. 7). This suggests that specialist provisions for children with more extreme special needs (e.g. Social Emotional Learning Difficulties, Autistic Spectrum Disorder should not exist outside the local community, if at all).

In the case of inclusion, it could be hypothesized that if the key members of the change implementation process, specifically teachers, are unhappy with or not supportive of the fundamental principles of this process then it surely follows that there may be some difficulties with the execution and operation of the policy. In Scotland there are almost weekly reports in the press of teachers who are finding it increasingly difficult to teach children who have special educational needs (Aitken, 2005; Smith, 2005). A study of teacher attitudes to the inclusion of children with special needs by Subbhan and Sharma (2006) indicated this was a variable that was never properly taken into account during the implementation of inclusion policies. They found that ‘there remains some concern about implementing inclusive education in the mainstream classroom’ (p. 51).

An analysis of apprehensions about inclusive education seems to indicate that many teachers have positive attitudes towards inclusion but still have concerns regarding adapting and modifying the classroom arrangements (Westwood, 2005). There is always a difference between the opinions of teachers and the practicalities involved in implementing inclusive practices, as there will be in many organizations. Being sympathetic to the philosophy of including children in mainstream education seems to be fairly common in the teaching profession (Better Behaviour, Better Learning, 2001; Salend & Duhaney, 1999; Smith, 2005). However, there seems to be a gap between a general acceptance of inclusion principles and the actuality of being supportive in its implementation (Bradshaw & Mundia, 2006; Mushoriwa, 2001; Subban & Sharma, 2006). A review of the literature on teacher attitudes was conducted by Avramidis and Norwich (2002), which highlighted variations in attitudes depending on the child (nature of and severity of difficulties/disabilities) and teachers’ characteristics (e.g. age, training). They also made suggestions for future research to be carried out in order to understand the reasons for the perceptions of inclusion that teachers have including a study into the quality of the teacher training available to students, and a longitudinal case-study approach to understanding teachers’ attitudes to implementing inclusions policies. The purpose of the current article is to illustrate the kind of research that school psychologists (SPs) can usefully carry out into teachers’ perspectives on inclusion.

In Scotland, SPs work at three levels, which may overlap; these are the levels of the child/family, school/establishment, and local authority. Within these levels, they have five core functions: Consultation, assessment, intervention, and training and research (Scottish Executive, 2002). The Education (Scotland) Act 1969 had made several functions mandatory for the SP; one of these prescribed duties is ‘the study of children with special educational needs’ (Jindal-Snape, Hannah, Smith, Barrow, & Kerr, 2009, p. 224). Therefore, they are tasked with the responsibility of liaising and collaborating with teachers, especially when working with children with SEN. However, a recent study with secondary school teachers working on an aspect of inclusive practice within an educational establishment has revealed tensions and dilemmas, including problems in their relationship (Davies, Howes, & Farrell, 2008). Within this context, Boyle (2009), then an SP in a Scottish Local Authority undertook a study on teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion of children with special needs. The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions and attitudes of teachers to inclusion in secondary schools, to better understand ways in which SPs could work and support positive teacher practice when working with children with special educational needs in mainstream settings. The results indicated that teachers were fairly supportive of the inclusion policy and reported that peer support was very important in the implementation of such a policy. This is perhaps not surprising as previous research has indicated the usefulness of informal and formal systems of peer support amongst teachers and others involved in the teaching profession, especially in a stressful or difficult situation (Roache, 2007; Schmitz & Brown, 2006). In this article, we are presenting data from a part of the Boyle (2009) study which focused on the issue of peer support in the context of departmental culture; school culture; effort-to-include; management support; and colleague support (as this is pertinent to understanding where and how SPs might be able to support their teacher colleagues).

Method

Participants

Three mainstream secondary schools were selected from a usable total of six schools, due to the relatively high response rates to an earlier questionnaire on teachers’ attitudes to inclusion as part of the larger study (Boyle, 2009). Individual staff interviews were carried out in each of the three case-study schools. A teacher volunteer was recruited in each school for interview about inclusion. One member of staff was selected from each of the 15 subject departments (which formed part of the Scottish curriculum) in the initial questionnaire on inclusion (Boyle, 2009). Overall, 43 interviewees were recruited (Case Study School 1 had two departments where staff were unavailable due to absence; whereas the other two had the full complement of 15 teachers each).

The researchers followed the British Psychological Society's Code of Ethics and voluntary participation and informed consent were obtained.

Design

Individual teacher interviews were deemed to be the most successful method as confidentiality between the interviewer and the participant could more easily be maintained, as well as providing direct opportunities for interviewees to have the prospect of responding to each question in as detailed a manner as was preferred. There were seven questions in the interview schedule asking teachers about their attitudes to inclusion. One question focused on the views of teachers about the effects of inclusion policy and the importance that peer support played in the implementation of this policy. The complete schedule is included as Appendix A. The question, which is detailed below, provided the opportunity for staff to indicate the levels of peer support in their respective departments and the subsequent relevance to the implementation of the inclusion policy.

Q4. Who in school supports you to facilitate inclusion?

a. Do you feel supported by peers in your department with regards to facilitating inclusion? (yes/no—why?). Any examples?

b. Do you feel supported by your head of department with regards to facilitating inclusion? (yes/no—why?). Any examples?

c. Do you feel supported by your school management team in facilitating inclusion? (yes/no—why?). Any examples?

Considering Lipsky's (1980) assertion about the power that front-line staff can weild, it was prudent to use these probing questions to consider how powerful these influences were from others in the school. The question worked in a bottom-up process by considering peers and then working up to the school management team (cf., Center, Ward, Parmenter, & Nash, 1985). If teachers regards themselves as inclusive, but feel that they are not being properly supported because of a systemic failure then it is appropriate that this is probed.

Procedure

The interviews were conducted by experienced SPs who worked in the same Scottish local authority as the first author. SPs were not assigned to schools that they served so as to reduce the potential for bias. In total, nine SPs volunteered and attended a briefing session on the interviewing process so as to maintain consistency in data collection. All the interviews were recorded using digital recorders, for which permission was confirmed prior to each interview, and were transcribed by the first author.

Results and discussion

The format for the display of the results will be by theme and will take the form of a thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The schools have been aggregated as the purpose of this article is to provide an overview of how teaching staff support their peers in implementing inclusion. These results are relevant to the professional support role of SPs when working with teachers. Recent studies indicate the necessity of SPs to be aware of the issues prevalent in teaching so as to ensure effective work with the teaching profession. Forlin (2010) describes SPs as playing an essential role in ensuring that learners achieve quality outcomes in school. This cannot be done in isolation; therefore, strong working relationships with teachers are essential in order to facilitate this outcome. Anderson, Klassen, and Georgion (2007) highlight that there can be a discrepancy between what teachers want from SPs and what is actually offered by SPs. If there is a failure from the school psychology profession to understand the needs of the teachers then questions may be raised as to whether there is a need for the high resource-demands of SPs (Boyle & Lauchlan, 2009).

The thematic analysis produced the following themes: Departmental culture; school culture; effort-to-include; management support; and colleague support.

Table 1 summarizes the individual questions answered by interviewees. The majority of staff (76.7%) felt that they were supported by their peers within the department with only 9.3% feeling that this was not the case (14% did not respond; perhaps because the interviewer failed to follow-up, or the interviewee feared later identification and resultant difficulties). This former concern is a recurring theme in that it has been intimated that peer support is an important mechanism for success in teaching practice, especially when working with children with special needs. Similarly, 74.4% of respondents felt they were supported by their heads of departments (HoDs), which, again, enabled staff to feel that support was within the department. When it came to the question of whether teachers felt supported by the school management team to facilitate inclusion there was a reduction to 65.1%. Whilst still being a majority, there were still some teachers who could not give an affirmative response; however, note must be taken of the various percentages of no-response. They may have felt that they could not give an answer for a particular reason, which may or may not be related to the issue of being identified in a negative way, despite reassurances from the researcher and interviewing SP that this would not happen. It seems that one very important aspect for inclusion is that teachers are supported within their department either by the HoDs and/or peers, and what happens outside of the department may not have as significant an impact on a teacher's ability to facilitate inclusion. From the SPs’ perspective it is important that they have awareness of whether this support is being provided to the teachers and what role they can play. This should be an opportunity for the SP to facilitate and build on the possibilities for peer support in schools and to ensure that this type of collegial support is emphasized from a psychological perspective.

Table 1.

Support to facilitate inclusion in school

Question 4 (n = 43)	Yes	No	Not given
Do you feel supported by peers in your department with regards to facilitating inclusion?	33 (76.7 %)	4 (9.3 %)	6 (14 %)
Do you feel supported by your HoD with regards to facilitating inclusion?	32 (74.4 %)	4 (9.3 %)	7 (16.3 %)
Do you feel supported by your school management team with regards to facilitating inclusion?	28 (65.1 %)	11 (25.6 %)	4 (9.3 %)

Departmental culture (13 of the 43 respondents gave responses under this theme)

In many occupations peer support is at the crux of facilitating a strong framework for quality working (Ellison, 2008), and teaching is no different when related to inclusion. Knowing that there is no stigma attached to asking a colleague for support with a class or individual children is a powerful mechanism for assisting teachers to continue to work effectively with children who have special educational needs, as has been indicated by an experienced teacher:

I am very privileged to work in a department where they help each other out … and I feel quite able to say to the colleague next door I'm having problems with them and we help each other out. (English, 27 years of teaching experience)

In a manner similar to the previous teacher, the following comment highlights the importance of a strongly inclusive department.

we work as a team in Science, not just our specialist subjects, but we all work together; my colleague and I work together in differentiating materials … because we both have several pupils who depend on that, so I think it's the ethos within our department that we all pitch in and help out in any way we can. (Science, beginning teacher)

The added value of linking with other departments and discovering what colleagues are doing elsewhere in the school, whilst working with children who have special needs was also noted.

Definitely the whole school contributes. I think departments feed off one another. (Technical, 2 years)

The departmental culture is important to individual staff members as they try to support children with special educational needs. Interestingly, the two teachers cited here have significantly different experience and curriculum foci but both highlight the usefulness of having a supportive department in order to facilitate inclusion.

If there is a pupil who is just disrupting the class and it's just not working … principal teacher is willing to take that pupil which is a great help. (Art, 1 year)

Certainly in the Maths department they are very much together as a department and we support each other in everything. (Maths, 30 years)

Within subject departments it could be argued that it is teachers interacting with one another that contribute towards a feeling of inclusiveness in the staff group. The teacher cited next indicates having a feeling of being supported because of the discussions on ‘tactics’ for working with various pupils that can emerge from informal dialogue between colleagues. It may be that the creation of formal networks may not be necessary; instead the availability of informal interaction can enhance discussions about how best to support various coping strategies.

In terms of staffroom discussions, just discussing ideas on how other teachers deal with them is helpful. I find peer discussions in the staffroom of a huge benefit. (Science, 2 years).

In contrast to what has been mentioned above regarding the positive benefits of supportive colleagues, another teacher highlighted the difficulties that may arise from a negative atmosphere towards inclusion. The suggestion is that teachers were affected by this, especially as this teacher was just entering the profession and who was at a crucial stage of development and, as such, may have found it difficult to ignore the levels of negativity that appear to have existed. It could be argued that this should be a career development stage where the new teacher needs positive role models in order to form a schema of inclusive education that can help form a positive outlook regarding children with special needs in the class.

Again there are peers who do support you, but there are peers who are not good examples. I think again with any job you can pick up good habits and bad habits, and if you have a poor mentor or you are surrounded by peers who all have a negative attitude, then its going to affect you. (Religious Education, new teacher)

The final statement under this theme links one teacher's belief that his/her department is inclusive with the notion that all the staff working together for the benefit of the pupils would ultimately bring benefits to the staff.

I think by nature a PE department is very much an inclusive department; everyone is involved. (Physical Education, 34 years)

Within this theme of departmental support, it was interesting to note that there did not seem to be any differences in views across departments or by length of service. The key aspects seemed to be that there was strong leadership from the head of department and staff working together to support the policy of inclusion within their subject area.

School culture (13 of the 43 respondents gave responses under this theme)

By its very definition, school culture will have a holistic influence as it transcends subject-area teaching boundaries. The first teacher quoted under this theme puts forward the point that inclusion is about the whole as opposed to the sum of its parts. This view that inclusion is about all teachers and staff becoming involved fits with Lipsky's (1980) study of ground level staff who have discretionary power to influence the application of government policy.

I would say it's not a kind of Senior Management issue or a Principal Teacher issue that inclusion is supported by all staff, including people who don't technically have a lot of experience. (Guidance/Pupil Support, 12 years)

The ethos of the school, it could be added, might not be solely grounded in the teachers, but is wider and more encompassing as it is also influenced by non-teaching school and external agency staff which helps contribute to the overall school ethos (Barnes, 2005). Another teacher commented on the importance of having all staff involved in the inclusion process as a means of creating a more welcoming and effective environment.

We just support one another. There are other non-teaching people who help you to be inclusive as well. Office staff and even the janitors, they kind of go un-noticed but they support in things we want to do. The majority of things we want to do probably would not get off the ground without the whole school helping. (Technical, 2 years)

The prospect of newly-hired teachers adding freshness to the staff room culture and an individual's practice may not obviously be linked to inclusion, but the perspective from one teacher suggests that newer teachers are able to energize more experienced members of staff to adapt their practice based on what they see from the new hires. Interestingly, no mention is made of these new teachers being seen as a threat to the more established teachers. On the contrary, the more experienced staff seems to have welcomed and embraced the opportunity to attempt new approaches to supporting children in the class.

We have a lot of new staff who have just been like a breath of fresh air. Pardon the cliché but that's what its like and they come in with fantastic new ideas and a whole new approach to what they are doing and I think maybe older teachers who have been here for some time are now beginning to steal from those ideas and breathe a bit more life into their classrooms again. (Guidance/Pupil Support, 12 years)

The importance of staff from different departments being able to come together and discuss various elements of practice is suggested by a teacher as being useful for a school to work well. This reflects the message of a document ‘A framework for improving teaching’ (Ainscow, 2000) which encouraged teachers to reflect on various aspects of their practice. The point was made here that, as there was no large staffroom, teachers tended to stay within their own departments; therefore there was not as much opportunity to interact and possibly to form inter-departmental relationships to the benefit of staff and pupils alike.

The fact that we don't have a staffroom in this school has a major detrimental effect. In the past we had a staffroom where we could all come together and an awful lot of information was passed between staff there … the fact that we are all in bases all over the school has had a negative effect. (Drama, 14 years)

Effort to include (21 of the 43 respondents gave responses under this theme)

Both teachers in the next examples refer to the importance of consulting with colleagues, as many teachers may have worked with a particular pupil with special needs and discovered effective strategies. This is a valuable and readily available resource which may be underused.

Keep asking questions of other people and in departments where maybe another department has the same pupils; say ‘How do you deal with this pupil?’ ‘Have you found something that works?’ (ICT/Business, 11 years)

As previously mentioned, another teacher referred to the support of colleagues but also indicated that teachers should be prepared to try very different strategies in order to find a method that works across the range of children in the class.

Getting advice from other teachers and, I think, just trying things, even things you might initially think that's not going to work or that's going to lead to a disaster or a riot, give it a try because sometimes the kind of out there things do actually end up being the most effective. (Religious Education, 6 years)

Teachers supporting teachers was found by Ainscow (2000) to provide ‘clear evidence that teacher partnerships that include planned opportunities … to carry out peer coaching can be powerful in creating stimulus for such professional development’ (p. 79). This contention is supported by evidence in the present study which indicates that this is still a powerful and often underused strength to teaching in special education. Although Boyle and Lauchlan (2009) have argued that the role of SPs should primarily be about direct work with children, and consultation should exist only as a supplementary activity, this is an area where SPs can provide support, especially as in the UK, where they also have responsibility for in-service training of teachers. These might include areas related to understanding SEN and teaching/learning/behaviour management strategies to facilitate a more conducive learning environment. Also, as other studies have suggested, teachers and principals see the SPs’ role as that of consultation and providing advice as well as working with children (Mägi & Kikas, 2009).

Management support (12 of the 43 respondents gave responses under this theme)

In order to facilitate inclusive principles in the classroom, it is vital for teachers to feel supported at the departmental and senior management levels within the school. When this is the case, teachers have more opportunities to operate effectively with all children in the class, as the following teacher commented about a senior colleague:

[She] is very good at supporting teachers to teach children in the class. (English, 27 years)

The above response indicates the importance of teachers being able to teach with the knowledge that support will be available to facilitate the basic principle of working in a classroom.

Colleague support (17 of the 43 respondents gave responses under this theme)

One teacher suggested that it was only by speaking with colleagues that she had developed an understanding of inclusion.

Nothing in particular, just chatting with other people I haven't read anything about it. (Maths, 30 years)

Following on from a similar point that was made under the theme of departmentalculture, a teacher emphasized the importance of sharing good practice with colleagues, especially when working with children who have special needs. It seems that this level of support is very encouraging in that teachers are not left to feel that they are struggling with a class or group of pupils. It could be argued that this collective effort will allow teachers to develop their expertise and be able to pool skills in order to teach effectively all children in the department.

We share good practice, and if I was having a problem with a pupil and found it difficult to include them in the class, we will discuss ways around that. Someone may have an idea to keep the pupil included or we sometimes share classes or swap classes or pupils to try to make sure we can include everyone. (Physical Education, 4 years)

Another experienced teacher put forward a perspective that illustrates the importance of working as a team so that problems can be dispersed amongst a group of teachers, thereby reducing isolation.

In actual fact, using teamwork, using the team who are there who may have an expertise that you may lack. When it's a shared problem it becomes less of a problem, it becomes a work-in-progress and people actually do very well as a result and then you are recognizing that other people have something to contribute to your professional development. (Modern Languages, 34 years)

It would seem that it is the support of peers and colleagues that is the most important element.

The biggest influence in the way I try and approach inclusion is just through general conversation with peers and colleagues. (Science, 2 years)

Support from colleagues seems to be the most valued aspect that the teacher has in relation to supporting inclusion and peer support and, it could be argued, makes up for the training that staff do not feel they are getting elsewhere. The value of informal support from SPs cannot be ignored, including informal discussions with teachers.

Figure 1 illustrates what could be considered to be the optimum link between attitudes and support. This study has indicated that both personnel resourcing and the attitudes to inclusion of colleagues are both important to effectively support children with special educational needs. Consideration is given to the fact that there are two types of support: That which is provided by colleagues and that which is supplied by the school's management through material and/or personnel resources. We argue here here that the optimum connection is between good attitudes and plentiful resources; for this brings important aspects of inclusion together. The attitudes of the teachers are crucial to successful inclusion, and in Figure 1 this is shown to be reinforced by support from management by way of adequate resourcing. Effective inclusion could still take place if ‘good attitudes’ were mixed with ‘scarce resources’, as ‘peer support’ would come to the fore. However, for how long this would be effectual is open to doubt, as teachers operating in a ‘scarcely-resourced’ environment might well find it increasingly more difficult to be supportive of colleagues. Pushed to the extreme, this scenario would eventually become ‘scarce resources’ mixed with ‘poor attitudes’; which would be the least conducive option and might well lead to a breakdown in the inclusion policy of the school.

Figure 1.

Attitudes versus resources.

Our findings indicate that support from other members of staff with helpful strategies, and using reflective practices as part of their teaching procedures (Ainscow, 2000), were valued by the majority of teachers in the three secondary schools involved in this project. Previously, Swafford (2000) has indicated that peer support among teaching staff is an important aspect to building successful approaches to good classroom management.

The findings of this study, albeit with a small sample, have emphasized the importance of peer support between teachers and others involved in the schools, such as SPs, for making inclusion policies work. It is important, however, to remember that the sample size and the setting of this study might make it difficult to generalize the findings. More studies of similar nature need to be conducted to get a clearer and more reliable picture. It is also important to bear in mind that the findings presented here represent teacher perceptions and do not necessarily demonstrate the inclusion policies are actually working well in the three schools involved.

Conclusion

Teachers being able to consult with each other on a professional level coupled with more informal levels of support are highlighted in all three case-study schools as being helpful for staff in coping with difficult class situations. Whilst there was often a perception of support from the school management team, this was not always the case. There is likely to be an important role here for SPs in providing support as well as in-service training, including facilitating improved support from more experienced staff and senior management. An important aspect which was highlighted in all the case-study schools was that of peer support both within and across all subject departments.

Sharing information and strategies on individual pupils across departmental boundaries seemed to be a key element that helped teachers. This is a practice that should be developed so that it becomes a legitimate and recognized strategy that would be financed, if necessary, as it is likely to produce motivated teachers who want to be inclusive. Regardless of the personal opinions of SPs about inclusion they have an opportunity, as well as an obligation, to contribute to recognized inclusive strategies which enhance the smooth running of schools, thereby ensuring that staff and students achieve positive outcomes.

There are implications for SPs’ practice resulting from this study. SPs are in an ideal position to support teachers without impinging on the organic and informal support that teachers might be providing one another. In their role of providing in-service training, SPs could support teachers, without regard to their position or years of experience. SPs work closely with teachers on a regular basis and this can provide the opportunity to understand teachers’ training needs as well as informally seek information about these needs.

Similarly, one of the roles that SPs play is that of working collaboratively with the teachers. Within this role, there can be a facilitation of peer-based support which could be evidentially-based upon further studies of this nature. Teachers state that peer-support is crucial for working effectively with children who have special needs, but it is the SPs who are in the best position to encourage and organize the realization within schools that this method of working is crucial for a positive and inclusive environment.

The conclusions of this article are based on the findings from one study of one local education authority in Scotland and generalizations beyond this area may not be appropriate. Nevertheless, the article provides some useful implications for practice within the sphere of school psychology and it is applicable to a wider international context. A more detailed study is required in order to ascertain whether these results would be replicated in different cultural situations and whether inclusion policies did, in fact, work better in supportive environments. This would be enhanced by a cross-cultural analysis, possibly involving a stratified random sample of schools, which would provide a clearer understanding of peer-support and how it can be facilitated by SPs. Gaining an understanding as to the best method for SPs to assume this type of activity, and as to whether it would be regarded within the field as a useful undertaking, would provide additional valuable information for practitioners.

Footnotes

Appendix A

Chris Boyle, PhD, is a Lecturer in Psychology and Inclusive Education in the Faculty of Education at Monash University, Australia. His main research interests are in the area of teacher perceptions of inclusion and students’ attributions for success and failure in learning. Chris has edited, with Keith Topping, a book entitled What works in inclusion? which will be published by McGraw-Hill (August 2012). This publication brings together some of the leading proponents of inclusive eduction from around the world. Address: Institute of Human Development and Counselling, Krongold Centre, Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3800, Australia. Email: christopher.boyle@monash.edu

Keith Topping is Professor in the School of Education at the University of Dundee. His main research interest is peer learning; others include parents as educators, problematic behaviour and social competence, and computer assisted learning and assessment. He has published 152 peer reviewed journal papers, 47 chapters and 21 books. He has consulted with government and large organizations in several countries and his work has been translated into 12 languages. Address: School of Education, Social Work and Community Education, University of Dundee, Nethergate, Dundee, DD1 4HN, UK. Further details are at

Dr Divya Jindal-Snape is a Reader in the School of Education, Social Work and Community Education at the University of Dundee. Her research interests lie in the field of inclusion and educational transitions. A significant proportion of her work has been with children and young people with additional support needs, especially children and young people with visual impairment, autism, learning difficulties, emotional and behavioural needs. This has also involved developing social interaction through drama techniques and other forms of creative arts education. Address: School of Education, Social Work and Community Education, University of Dundee, Nethergate, Dundee, DD1 4HN, UK.

Brahm Norwich is Professor of Educational Psychology and Special Educational Needs at the Graduate School of Education, University of Exeter. Address: Graduate School of Education, St Luke’s Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, Devon, EX1 2LU, UK.

References

Ainscow

(2000). The next step for special education. Supporting the development of inclusive practices. British Journal of Special Education, 27(2), 76–80.

Aitken

(January 25, 2005) Feedback: The inclusion debate. Glasgow: The Herald, p. 18.

Allan

(2006). The repetition of exclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 10(3), 121–133.

Anderson

C. J. K.

Klassen

R. M.

Georgiou

G. G

(2007). Inclusion in Australia: What teachers say they need and what school psychologists can offer. School Psychology International, 28(2), 131–147.

Avramidis

Norwich

(2002). Teachers’ attitudes towards integration/inclusion: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17(2), 129–147.

Barnes

(2005). ‘You could see it on their faces… ’. The importance of provoking smiles in schools. Health Education, 10(5), 392–400.

Better Behaviour, Better Learning (BBBL). (2001). Summary report of the discipline task group. Edinburgh: The Scottish Executive.

Boyle

(2009). The positive aspects of inclusion in secondary schools from the perspective of secondary school teachers. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Dundee, UK.

Boyle

Lauchlan

(2009). Applied psychology and the case for individual casework: Some reflections on the role of the educational psychologist. Educational Psychology in Practice, 25(1), 71–84.

10.

Boyle

Scriven

Durning

Downes

(2011). Facilitating the learning of all students: The ‘professional positive’ of inclusive practice in Australian primary schools. Support for Learning, 26(2), 72–78.

11.

Bradshaw

Mundia

(2006). Attitudes to and concerns about inclusive education: Bruneian inservice and preservice teachers. International Journal of Special Education, 21(1), 35–41.

12.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

13.

Center

Ward

Parmenter

Nash

(1985). Principals’ attitudes toward the integration of disabled children into regular schools. The Exceptional Child, 32(3), 149–161.

14.

Davies

S. M. B.

Howes

A. J.

Farrell

(2008). Tensions and dilemmas as drivers for change in an analysis of joint working between teachers and educational psychologists. School Psychology International, 29(4), 400–418.

15.

DfES. (2004). Removing barriers to achievement. The government's strategy for SEN. Nottingham: Department for Education and Skills.

16.

Ellison

C. M.

(2008). Reflective make-and-take: A talent quest reflective practice teacher model. Reflective Practice, 9(2), 185–195.

17.

Forlin

(2010). The role of the school psychologist in inclusive education for ensuring quality learning outcomes for all learners. School Psychology International, 31(6), 617–630.

18.

Jindal-Snape

Hannah

Smith

Barrow

Kerr

(2009). An innovative practitioner research model of continuing professional development: A case study of an educational psychologists’ professional development programme in Scotland. School Psychology International, 30(3), 219–235.

19.

Lipsky

(1980) Dilemma of the individual in public services. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

20.

Mägi

Kikas

(2009). School psychologists’ role in school: Expectations of school principals on the work of school psychologists. School Psychology International, 30(4), 331–346.

21.

Mushoriwa

(2001). A study of the attitudes of primary school teachers in Harare towards the inclusion of blind children in regular classes. British Journal of Special Education, 28(3), 142–147.

22.

Roache

(2008). Strategies to ameliorate teacher stress. Leadership in Focus, 12, 38–41.

23.

Salend

S. J.

Duhaney

L. M. G.

(1999). The impact of inclusion on students with and without disabilities and their educators. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 114–126.

24.

Schmitz

Brown

(2006) Mutual support, mutual challenge: Exploring a model of peer head teacher learning focused on self-evaluation and school improvement. Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.

25.

Scottish Executive. (2002). Review of the provision of educational psychology services in Scotland (The Currie Report). Edinburgh: Scottish Executive.

26.

Smith

(January 16, 2005). If the system is to work we need more teachers and more money. The Sunday Herald, p. 13.

27.

Subban

Sharma

(2006). Primary school teachers’ perceptions of inclusive education in Victoria, Australia. International Journal of Special Education, 21(1), 42–52.

28.

Swafford

(2000). Teachers supporting teachers through peer coaching. In Moon

Butcher

Bird

(Eds.), Leading professional development in education, Abingdon: Routledge.

29.

UNESCO. (1994). The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. Geneva: UNESCO.

30.

Westwood

(2005). Adapting curriculum and instruction. In Topping

Maloney

(Eds.), The Routledge Falmer reader in inclusive education, Abingdon: Routledge.

31.

Vassie

(2002) Inclusion of all pupils into mainstream education—insight no. 2. Cumbernauld: North Lanarkshire Council, UK.

32.

Zigmond

Kloo

Volonino

(2009). What, where and how? Special education in the climate of full inclusion. Exceptionality, 17(4), 189–204.

33.

Zoniou-Sideri

Vlachou

(2006). Greek teachers’ belief systems about disability and inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 10(4–5), 379–394.