European Journal of Teacher Education

Vol. 30, No. 2, May 2007, pp. 119–134

Embracing inclusive teacher education

Anne Moran*
University Of Ulster

This paper examines the extent to which initial teacher education (ITE) programmes contribute to
the development of inclusive attitudes, values and practices. Inclusive education is the entitlement
of all children and young people to quality education, irrespective of their differences or
dispositions. It is about embracing educational values of equity, diversity and social justice. The
data which underpins this paper was obtained through research commissioned by the Department
of Education (DE) Northern Ireland (NI) which sought to identify existing practices that increased
the motivation, participation and achievement of all pupils of school age with special educational
needs (Moran & Abbott, 2006). Head teachers and Special Educational Needs Coordinators
(SENCOs) views were sought on the effectiveness of ITE programmes in preparing student
teachers to work in inclusive school settings.

Cet article considère jusqu’à quel point les programmes de formation pédagogique initiale
(ITE) contribuent au développement d’attitudes, de valeurs et de pratiques inclusives. Tous les
enfants et les jeunes ont le droit à un enseignement de bonne qualite sans tenir compte de leurs
différences, de leurs tendances ou de leurs infirmités. Il s’agit d’embrasser les valeurs éducatives de
l’équité, de la diversité et de la justice sociale. Les données qui sont à la base de cet article ont été
obtenues à partir de recherche commandée par le ministre de l’Education (DE) pour l’Irlande du
Nord (NI) qui cherchait à identifier les pratiques actuelles qui ont augmenté la motivation, la
participation et la performance de tous ceux qui ont des difficultés d’apprentissage scolaire (Moran
& Abbott, 2006). On a demandé les opinions de Directeurs et de Coordinateurs pour
l’enseignement spécialisé sur l’efficacité des programmes de formation pédagogique initiale
(ITE) à préparer les enseignants stagiaires à travailler dans des établissements d’enseignement
inclusif.

Este documento examina el punto hasta el que los programas iniciales de formación pedagógica
contribuyan al desarrollo de actitudes, valores y prácticas inclusives. Todos los niños y los jóvenes
tienen derecho a la enseñanza inclusive, o sea, de buena calidad, sin distinción de diferencia,
temperamento ni discapacidad. Se trata de dedicarse a valores educativos de equidad, diversidad y
justicia social. Los datos que respaldan este documento fueron obtenidos por medio de
investigaciones encargadas por el Ministerio de Educación de Irlanda del Norte. Este pensó
identificar prácticas actuales que aumentaran la motivación, la participación y el rendimiento de
todos los alumnos de edad escolar que requirieran una educación especial (Moran & Abbott,
2006). Solicitaron las opiniones de los directores y de coordinadores de la educación especial
respecto a la eficacia de los programas iniciales de formación pedagógica en lo que se refiere a
preparar a los estudiantes de magisterio para trabajar en colegios con ambiente inclusive.

*University of Ulster, Faculty of Social Sciences, Newtonabbey, Co. Antrim BT37 0QB, N.
Ireland. Email: a.moran@ulster.ac.uk
ISSN 0261-9768 (print)/ISSN 1469-5928 (online)/07/020119-16
# 2007 Association for Teacher Education in Europe
DOI: 10.1080/02619760701275578
120 A. Moran

Dieses referat untersucht, inwieweit die ersten Lehrerausbildungsprogramme (ITE) zur

Entwicklung von inklusiven Einstellungen, Werten und Praktiken beitragen. Inklusive
Ausbildung bedeutet die Berechtigung aller Kinder und Jugendlicher zu einer erstklassigen
Ausbildung, ungeachtet ihrer Unterschiede, Veranlagungen oder Behinderungen. Es geht um die
Wahrnehmung der erzieherischen Werte von Fairness, Vielfalt und sozialer Gerechtigkeit. Die
Daten in diesem Referat wurden anhand von Forschung im Auftrag des Kulturministeriums
Nordirland (DENI) erworben, die versuchte, die bestehenden Verfahrensweisen zu identifizieren,
welche die Motivation, Teilnahme und Leistungen aller schulpflichtigen Kinder mit besonderen
schulischen Bedürfnissen förderten (Moran & Abbott, 2006). Schulleiter und Koordinatoren von
Besonderen Schulischen Bedürfnissen (SENCOS) wurden befragt im Hinblick auf die
Wirksamkeit von ITE-Programmen, Referendare auf die Arbeit in inklusiven Schulumgebungen
vorzubereiten.

Introduction
Inclusive education is the entitlement of all children and young people to quality
education, irrespective of their differences, dispositions or disabilities and is about
embracing educational values of equity, diversity and social justice. This study seeks
to establish the extent to which prospective teachers, through their initial teacher
education (ITE) programmes, are enabled to develop inclusive attitudes, values and
practices. The data which underpins the paper was obtained through research
commissioned by the Department of Education (DE) Northern Ireland (NI), which
sought to identify existing practices that increased the motivation, participation and
achievement of all pupils of school age, with particular reference to pupils with
special educational needs (Moran & Abbott, 2006). A particular aspect of the
research focused on the views of Head teachers and Special Educational Needs
Coordinators (SENCOs) to determine the extent to which they considered student
teachers were prepared to work in diverse school and classroom settings. It also
endeavoured to assess the effectiveness of the Teacher Education Partnership (TEP)
in Northern Ireland (NI), in respect of developing inclusive practices among
beginning teachers. Through a review of literature the concept of inclusion is
examined, including the challenges surrounding the implementation of inclusive
practices. This provides a reference point against which current practice can be
evaluated, in order to identify ways in which teacher educators and their students
might be encouraged to embrace inclusion through an examination and analysis of
their practices.

Inclusive education: the context

The Salamanca Statement: Framework for Action (UNESCO, 1994) was the single,
most powerful influence at national and international level for stimulating change in
respect of inclusive education, with 92 governments and 25 international
organisations signing up to education for all.
 Embracing inclusive teacher education 121

The guiding principle that informs this framework is that schools should accommodate
all children, regardless of their physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic or
other conditions. This should include disabled and gifted children, street and working
children, children from remote or nomadic populations, children from linguistic, ethnic
or cultural minorities and children from other disadvantaged or marginalised areas or
groups. (UNESCO, 1994, p. 6)

The Statement also took a clear position on where education should take place.
Regular schools with this inclusive orientation are the most effective means of
combating discriminatory attitudes, creating welcoming communities, building an
inclusive society and achieving education for all; moreover, they provide an effective
education to the majority of children and improve the efficiency and ultimately the cost-
effectiveness of the entire education system. (UNESCO, 1994, p. viii)

In the wake of this endorsement of inclusive education, successive governments have

subsequently demonstrated their commitment, in principle, to inclusion with the
unreserved use of the language of social inclusion. The United Kingdom (UK)
government first formally indicated its support in 1997 when the Green Paper
Excellence for all children was published (DfEE, 1997), along with the subsequent
programme for action published in October 1998 (DfEE, 1998). This was followed
by the document, Inclusive schooling: children with special educational needs (DfES,
2001a), and by the publication of Removing barriers to achievement (DfES, 2004).
The latter, most recent document, highlights the government’s vision for the
education of children with special needs and disabilities, emphasising the need to
make education more responsive to the diverse needs of individual children, so
reducing reliance on separate special educational structures and processes. It also
signalled a commitment to reducing child poverty, investing in early years’ education
and childcare, and targeting support at areas of social and economic deprivation.
While all of these initiatives are commendable, progress in achieving the vision
and goals outlined is less clear. Furthermore, the extent to which government
policies have been successfully implemented in practice has given rise to much
debate. One of the most frequently perceived contradictions is that which exists
between the inclusion and standards agendas, not least because of the perceived
irreconcilable tensions which many believe exist between inclusive schooling and
standards-based agendas and policies (Rouse & Florian, 1997; Thomas & Loxley,
2001). A recent study undertaken by Howes et al. (2005, p. 137) in England, found
the standards agenda to be a barrier to inclusion, due to its restrictive focus and
narrow specification of targets and outcomes. Another relates to the proliferation of
school types, such as specialist, academies and more recently the proposed
independent trust schools, which many argue create a two-tier system (Gorard,
2005; Smithers et al., 2005). Speaking in the context of teacher education,
Hargreaves (2003) is critical of what he refers to as the dispiriting world of
standardisation and professional compliance, which he believes, militates against
teachers preparing young people, least of all disadvantaged young people, with the
educational and economic ingenuity they need to succeed.
In addition to conflicting and competing policy agendas, controversy exists about
the nature of research surrounding the implementation of inclusive practices. Two
122 A. Moran

studies, each with a slightly distinctive but similar focus, have recently been
undertaken by Dyson et al. (2004) and Farrell et al. (2005) respectively, in which
each sought in different ways to explore the relationship between the inclusiveness of
a school and the outcomes it produces for its student population, especially for those
without special educational needs. The first was undertaken for the Department for
Education and Skills (DfES) on the relationship between inclusion and pupil
achievement, while the second examined the impact of population inclusivity in
schools on student outcomes. Findings from both studies, interestingly carried out
by a combination of the same authors, revealed that pupils who have no special
educational needs, suffer no adverse effects from studying in the same classes with
children who have physical, learning or emotional problems. This rather unusual
way of assessing and reporting the impact of inclusive school environments, suggests
that, for the DfES (2004) study at least, there is a strong desire on the part of the
government to prove that inclusive schooling and standards can indeed successfully
co-exist. There is an inherent danger, though, that in adopting such an orientation to
inclusion, predominantly motivated by a desire to justify that inclusion does not
adversely impact on educational standards, that it could be perceived merely as
rhetoric, resulting in a superficial commitment to inclusion in practice. A clear
distinction, therefore, needs to be made between the advocacy of more inclusive
approaches and the evidence available about the ways in which such inclusive
approaches are being successfully developed and sustained for the benefit of all
pupils.
There are different interpretations, too, in the use of the terms inclusion and
entitlement. Both are frequently used interchangeably and often become merged
with notions of equity. In this regard, Corbett (2001) makes a distinction between
entitlement and equity of access, arguing that one does not necessarily lead to the
other. Furthermore, inclusion policy is often seen as a model of distributive justice
rather than being grounded in an egalitarian conception of justice. Booth et al.
(2003), similarly, are of the view that inclusive schooling can be achieved only
through undertaking an analysis of the pervasive and pernicious forms and impacts
of exclusion. Exclusion can occur for a variety of reasons such as segregation and
isolation of minority students, forced change of language, a curriculum whose
content reflects only the culture of the dominant group, or a setting in which the
culture or customs of the dominant group are suppressed. It is only by focusing on
the causes of exclusion that progress towards developing more inclusive environ-
ments can be achieved.

Inclusion defined
In order to understand ways in which inclusive practices can be developed and
embedded, it is necessary to understand what is meant by inclusion. Many
competing definitions exist and often the terms integration and inclusion are used
synonymously. Integration is often interpreted as the practice of bringing children
 Embracing inclusive teacher education 123

with special educational needs (SEN) closer to their mainstream peers, through
curriculum adaptation or the provision of differentiated work and support, whereas
inclusion is frequently located within a broader human rights discourse, and is
concerned with issues of social justice and of consciously putting into action, values
and approaches based on equity, entitlement and respect for diversity. Booth, Nes
and Strømstad (2003, p. 2) characterise two contrasting approaches to inclusion as
assimilationist and transformative, while Cochran-Smith (2004) uses the terms
transmissive and constructivist. In the case of the transformative and constructivist
(inclusive) approaches, these highlight the development of renewed cultures, policies
and practices that are truly responsive to the diverse needs of learners. In contrast,
assimilationist and transmissive models (integrationist) assume that learners,
irrespective of their backgrounds, interests and identities, gender, attainment or
disabilities, should readily integrate into an existing mono-cultural education system,
with fixed curricula and approaches to teaching and learning. While the latter
approach might provide equality of access, it does not necessarily guarantee
inclusion.
Peters (2002) successfully captures the essence of inclusive practice through the
use of three overarching principles, which he deems essential for successful inclusive
education. The first is a philosophical commitment underpinned by a deep
understanding of why reform is necessary. The second is diversity, which he
describes as involving a paradigm shift, from a focus on diverse students to diversity-
in-action-within-specific-contexts. The third is a willingness among teachers to
acknowledge the complexity of the process of change that is required, if inclusion is to
be achieved (Peters, 2002, p. 305).
The HMIE report Count us in: achieving inclusion in Scottish schools (2002)
identified characteristics of inclusive schools. These were typified by a climate of
high expectation, valuing a broad range of abilities and achievements, removing
barriers to learning and promoting a positive appreciation of the diversity of
individuals (HMIE, 2002). Corbett and Slee (2000, p. 134), citing Branson and
Miller (1989), described inclusive education as an unabashed announcement, a
public political declaration and celebration of difference. Ahuja (2002, p. 80)
shared this view, when he referred to inclusion as reconstructing a school to
respond positively to all pupils. All imply the deliberate creation of a broad and
varied range of learning opportunities in which the learner is at the centre of the
process. Dyson (1999, p. 46) speaks of ‘a multiplicity of inclusions’ arguing that
instead of seeking a single form of inclusive practice, a wide range of
developmentally and culturally relevant practices should be considered and used
to inform insights into inclusion. In other words, any transition to fully inclusive
environments should involve an analysis of all existing exclusionary practices. This
in turn implies that there is no existing set of generic principles or guidelines that
can apply across a range of contexts and circumstance, but rather that each
institution has its own unique context which should be the starting point for
determining existing barriers which could inhibit the implementation of more
inclusive attitudes and practices.
124 A. Moran

Achieving inclusive educational environments

In essence, achieving inclusion requires a fundamental appraisal of all aspects of the
ways in which schools and classrooms operate as well as the quality of existing
relationships therein. Irvine (1992), Ladson-Billings (1992) and Garcia (1993)
describe the inclusive teacher–student relationship as fluid, humane, equitable and
characterised by a sense of community and team, and classrooms as featuring
participation, co-operative learning strategies, and acceptance. All highlight the
importance of connection, affiliation, and solidarity between pupils and teachers;
links between classroom content and students’ experiences, a focus on the whole
child and a repertoire of strategies for equitable teaching, coupled with a belief that
all students are capable of success. In attempting to deal with aspects of diversity and
difference, it is important that existing barriers are fully and openly examined, so
that approaches to learning and teaching, which are more inclusive, can be
developed and sustained. This not only has implications for existing personnel in
schools but for future teachers, and by implication their teacher educators. They,
too, are central to the change effort that is required.
Commenting on teacher education, Cochran-Smith (2004) is of the view that
little has really changed in the ways student teachers are prepared and that there are
dramatically different perceptions of teacher education for diversity, as well as major
disparities about notions of equity, teacher learning and social change (Cochran-
Smith, 2004, p. 140). Many teacher educators themselves, perhaps even most
teacher educators, have not had the transformative learning experiences necessary to
interrupt the conservative assumptions underlying teacher education programmes at
many higher education institutions. Few programmes and departments have built
into their ongoing operations, the intellectual and organisational contexts that
support teacher educators’ learning about (and struggling with) issues of race,
racism, diversity and social justice in education (Cochran-Smith, 2004, p. 13).
A recent study commissioned by the Equality Commission for NI (Elwood et al.,
2004) which sought to gauge the extent of awareness and prioritization of equality
issues in teacher education and training in NI, revealed that while all ITE providers
indicated that equality issues were a consideration within their courses, the extent to
which constituent aspects of equality (community background, race, gender and
disability) were addressed, varied between providers. Student teachers, whose views
were sought as part of the study, confirmed that a key initiative which had been
designed to heighten mutual awareness of student teachers from Catholic and
Protestant backgrounds, Education for mutual understanding, had not been effective.
Issues relating to gender, race, social class were reported as being addressed in an ad
hoc manner, either through subject methods courses or one-off lectures. Those
trained as teachers in NI, as opposed to the rest of the UK, agreed that, in general,
issues of equality were not adequately addressed in their courses. The exception to
this was special educational needs, with student teachers believing that the equality
issue given most consideration during their training was differentiation in terms of
pupil ability. Although issues such as grammar and non-selective schools, and
gender were also addressed in training, they believed they were not taught how to
 Embracing inclusive teacher education 125

deal with them directly. Any knowledge they had came from school experience
(Elwood et al., 2004, pp. 18–19).
In the light of this, it would appear that much remains to be addressed during
initial teacher education, if inclusive practices are to be fostered and embedded in
teacher education. The starting point must surely involve the sharing and
confronting of the unique prior knowledge and experiences which both prospective
teachers and teacher educators bring to all learning situations. The process must also
involve all the participants, university and college-based teacher educators, student
teachers and teachers in schools, working together. It is the synergy and
collaboration of these partnerships that has the potential to create a new dynamic
and powerful learning space, a reciprocal and dialectical relationship between the
learning of student teachers, and the learning of the teacher educators and the
teachers in schools with whom they work. At a very fundamental level, an
examination of how society constructs privilege and inequality should be central to
learning to teach inclusively, and it is important that prospective teachers have
opportunities to investigate the social context that produces these inequalities, as
well as an appreciation of the cultural contexts in which students develop and learn.
A critical task in becoming an effective teacher of all students, is coming to
understand young people in non-stereotypical ways, while acknowledging and
comprehending the ways in which culture and context influence their lives and
learning. Evidence about effective teaching repeatedly highlights the need to
understand children and young people’s experiences and to build links between their
home and school settings as well as the other cultural contexts in which students are
socialised (Alton-Lee, 2003). Evidence internationally, consistently confirms that
what happens in classrooms through quality teaching and through the quality of the
learning environment, generated by the teacher and the students, is the key variable
in explaining up to 59% of the variance in student scores (Hill & Rowe, 1996).
Teachers, thus, have a significant influence on student achievement and they can
and do make a difference. In turn, the quality of initial teacher education is crucial if
teachers are to develop a capacity to teach all learners and to perceive each as both a
person and a learner.

Research design and methodology

The data for this research were derived from a one-year study, commissioned by the
Department of Education (DE) in Northern Ireland (NI), in order to obtain a
deeper understanding of inclusion and of the related issues that surround the
achievement of an inclusive culture in NI schools (Moran & Abbott, 2006). Part of
the investigation focused on schools’ perceptions of the effectiveness of initial
teacher education (ITE) in preparing teachers for working inclusively in schools and
it is this aspect of the research that will be reported through this paper. Since the
nature of partnership is central to all aspects of teacher education, the views of those
working in schools was central. The Teacher Education Partnership, which was
introduced in NI in 1996 as a central element of the new school-based model of
126 A. Moran

initial teacher education, is one which comprises universities and university colleges,
schools and Local Education Authorities (LEAs). The partnership has responsibility
not only for initial teacher education, but for induction (1 year) and early
professional development (2 years) (EPD) and is compulsory for all beginning
teachers. Each of the three phases, while distinctive, is interrelated with a nominated
lead partner taking particular responsibility for each phase. At the initial phase the
universities and university colleges are the lead partners, and during induction the
LEAs, and during EPD the schools. Unlike other UK jurisdictions, partnerships
with schools for ITE in NI are voluntary since no resources transfer to schools. At
the outset of the new arrangements for teacher education in NI (1996), schools
indicated their unwillingness to become involved contractually as partners in ITE.
The Department of Education, while not in agreement with this position, conceded:
cooperation between HEIs and schools should continue to develop on an informal and
voluntary basis to whatever extent both parties find acceptable, rather than being
subject to the adoption of formal contracts. (DENI, 1996)

In spite of this, there is much evidence which suggests that very effective partnership
arrangements exist between schools and HEIs during ITE, although it cannot be
claimed that uniform arrangements exist across all partnership schools. Nor can it be
assumed that schools’ involvement in ITE is consistent and standardized across all
schools. However, the same could be said where formal partnerships exist. The
existence of a contractual partnership arrangement does not necessarily guarantee
uniformity.
Initial teacher education (ITE) in NI is provided through five Higher Education
Institutions (HEIs), but again unlike England and Wales, entrance to teaching is
limited to one of two main routes, a four-year degree offered by the two university
colleges and a one-year Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) offered by
the three universities. Entrance to the majority of courses is highly competitive with
up to five times more applicants than places available.
In an effort to obtain an objective view on the preparedness of student teachers to
work inclusively in schools and classrooms, a representative sample of head teachers
and Special Educational Needs Coordinators (SENCOs) was surveyed, using in-
depth semi-structured interviews. All mainstream post primary schools in NI have a
designated SENCO, a teacher who has responsibility for the day-to-day operation
and coordination of the school’s special educational needs (SEN) policy,
maintaining a register of pupils with SEN, providing support for teachers and
parents and liaising with external agencies. The interview questions were designed
and piloted for head teachers in nursery, primary, post-primary and special schools
and for SENCOs in the post-primary sectors. The focus of the interviews was
broadly similar for both groups and included details of existing cultures of inclusion
in schools, inclusive practices at classroom level, barriers to inclusion, the
effectiveness of ITE in preparing prospective teachers to work inclusively, the role
of external agencies in developing inclusive cultures and the key factors which led to
the successful inclusion of all pupils. One-to-one interviews were held with the forty
respondents and each was tape-recorded and transcribed in full, with each
 Embracing inclusive teacher education 127

respondent’s permission. Twenty-eight schools were selected to form a representa-

tive sample, seven each from the nursery, primary, post-primary and special sectors.
The main variables taken into account when selecting schools were sector, school
size and geographical location (the Local Education Authority to which each
belonged). The schools were representative of rural, city and urban areas. Overall,
there was a very wide range of school size, from 43 to 1060 pupils, and a wide
geographical spread throughout NI. In respect of the seven special schools, four
provided for pupils with severe learning difficulties, two for moderate learning
difficulties and one provided an outreach support service for children aged between
seven and eleven with emotional and behavioural difficulties (EBD).
While the full interview schedule was wide-ranging, the discussion in this paper
will predominantly be confined to those findings which related to the effectiveness of
the preparation of student teachers for inclusion, including the nature of inclusive
cultures in schools and the contribution and scope of partnership arrangements.
These will be reported under two main themes: the contribution and effectiveness of
Higher Education Institutions in preparing student teachers to work in inclusive
classrooms and schools; and the effectiveness and contribution of partner-schools
during initial teacher education to supporting inclusion.

Effectiveness of preparation by higher education institutions for inclusion

Without exception the head teachers in all four sectors described their whole-school
culture as inclusive. The main feature of a whole-school philosophy identified by the
majority of head teachers was catering for individual difference, and treating all
children the same regardless of ability or socio-economic background. Inclusion also
meant valuing all pupils, involving parents and the community, and accepting
children from different cultural backgrounds. Inclusion also extended to staff,
encouraging pupils to be accepting of disability, and anticipating pupils’ later needs.
Most head teachers thought that teachers in their schools understood the term
inclusion, although less so in post-primary than other sectors, and all agreed that a
language of practice had developed in relation to inclusive practice
The majority of head teachers who were surveyed did not feel that initial teacher
education prepared student teachers to teach in inclusive classrooms. They did,
however, praise the students’ enthusiasm and motivation to learn. It was acknowl-
edged that the sheer diversity of pupil needs was daunting and beginning teachers
had to realize the importance of taking a holistic view of the child or young person.
While the most common interpretation of inclusion among head teachers
concentrated on pupils with special educational needs, they recognised that
beginning teachers should have a much fuller understanding of pupil diversity and
suggested that they might benefit from spending an extended period of teaching
practice in a range of school types, including the special sector, and have greater
opportunities to work with and learn from the Special Educational Needs
Coordinator (SENCO) in schools. One primary head teacher commented:
128 A. Moran

Student teachers are not properly prepared at the moment. The ones we have are very
highly motivated people who will cope with inclusion depending on their individual
skills and personality. ITE doesn’t prepare student teachers to come in and teach
children with special needs, or with moderate learning difficulties. There needs to be
more in ITE … on strategies for ensuring that all children are learning, and also for
them to be made much more aware of how children are learning.

Another acknowledged some of the specific difficulties faced by student teachers:

Generally speaking, the new teacher knows about various forms of learning difficulty,
but they can be overwhelmed initially, by the extent of special needs and the range of
ability within a class. Very often we overlook the fact, or don’t spend enough time
considering, that you don’t just teach a lesson but that there are serious circumstances
that can intervene, like family background, social circumstances and individual learning
difficulties.

Continuing to focus on pupils with special educational needs, a special school head
teacher suggested that:
Every teacher should be a teacher of special needs with a background of experience in
child development, particularly in relation to children with emotional and behavioural
difficulties (EBD). It is the one area that today is still crying out for training, for
preparation, for resourcing, and it’s the one that causes the most problems. Student
teachers need knowledge and experience of coping with a range of special needs and
physical disabilities.

They’re full of enthusiasm, hard-working, professional and committed. They’re so open

to training and to working with us to identify and address their training needs, but there
is such an enormous vacuum.

The majority of interviewees recognized, however, that the lack of preparedness to

work in inclusive schools was not confined to student and beginning teachers, but
that all staff required to be supported in order to promote inclusive practices. In
particular, they considered that schools would benefit from guidance on how to
promote and manage a culture of inclusion. Quotations from two head teachers
attest to this:
We all need more in-service support—principals [head teachers] included. If inclusion
is going to become a reality and we are to be presented with children with very diverse
needs, we’re all going to need more training to manage it…..

Concerning inclusion, management in schools requires a culture change and

principals particularly have to lead this and be aware of how to create an inclusive
culture. Another recommended that:
Education and Library Boards [LEAs] should have a dedicated adviser to promote
inclusiveness in schools, because it isn’t just about children with special needs.

Most SENCOs, similarly, held the view that student teachers were not prepared
during Initial Teacher Education (ITE) to teach in inclusive classrooms, nor did
they have sufficient knowledge of the Special Educational Needs Code of Practice.
They believed, though, that experience was a crucial element of the process. In the
words of one:
 Embracing inclusive teacher education 129

Nothing sharpens your mind like being in a situation, so including more special needs in
teaching practice would be good.

This view was shared by another SENCO:

Student teachers are not prepared. Whether or not ITE prepares students teachers for
inclusion, it’s something they need to experience. They need more exposure to the
different types of special needs in the classroom.

The majority of respondents, both head teachers and SENCOs, discussed inclusion
in terms of the successful integration of pupils with SEN into mainstream schools.
Only a few adopted a broader interpretation which reflected the range of barriers to
learning and participation faced by many children and young people, for a variety of
reasons. Overall, they considered that ITE did not prepare students adequately to
teach in inclusive classrooms, as defined by their ability to cope with a range of
special educational needs in mainstream settings. They recommended, that during
ITE, a range of learning difficulties should be addressed, very much as raising
awareness and providing initial knowledge for students on a wide range of learning
difficulties and disabilities. The majority agreed that practice and experience was
essential to develop their ability and professional competence for dealing with the
range of pupil characteristics and circumstances found in all classrooms. During the
interviews significant emphasis was placed on the challenges of managing pupil
behaviour, with few interviewees acknowledging the significance of understanding
pupils’ life circumstances leading to the adoption of more proactive strategies for
behaviour management.

Effectiveness of partnership arrangements in supporting inclusive practice

In the context of partnership models of ITE, where responsibility for teacher
education is shared between higher education institutions and schools, it was
important to seek the views of schools about the effectiveness of partnership
arrangements. Their views, too, were important in order to determine the totality of
the preparation received by student teachers. Most schools provided an induction
programme for student and beginning teachers that emphasized the inclusive culture
of their school and most encouraged them to avail of specialist expertise among the
staff. SENCOs, in the main, had responsibility for assisting student teachers to work
successfully with all pupils, through the use of a critical reflective approach to
analyzing their practice, although access to this kind of expertise varied across
schools. It very much depended on the teacher who had formal responsibility for
student teachers, setting up these arrangements. Overall, implementation was
patchy and certainly not guaranteed. Specific help was given, not only with a range
of learning difficulties and disabilities, but with inclusive pedagogies and with the
drawing up of Education Plans. Observation of experienced staff and the SENCO
was encouraged and some head teachers referred to the social aspect of education,
making the new teacher feel part of a team and helping to build up his/her
confidence.
130 A. Moran

It was apparent from the interviews, that many of the schools surveyed recognized
the need to provide structured support for beginning teachers and some excellent
examples were provided, illustrating how this was achieved.
We’ve just recently put together the induction policy because we found it necessary to
get a much tighter handle on inclusion and there was a much clearer role for us to fulfill
with the young teachers. We try to make them feel part of a team very quickly. They
work very closely with the SENCO. The senior teacher in charge of induction is also a
sounding board for new teachers. He goes into their classes and talks through schemes
of work and strategies to include all pupils.

The suggestion, too, was made that greater collaboration and sharing of practices
might be achieved from closer collaboration between schools and HEIs, towards
developing inclusive education for all.
We have a teacher tutor who looks after student teachers, and the SENCO and Head of
Department work very closely with them to ensure that they know how to deal with the
different problems that inclusion presents. We have a very good induction programme
which ensures that if something hasn’t been covered during initial teacher training, we
do it here. I’m concerned though that there’s a gap between the teacher trainers and
ourselves, as we don’t share enough information.

The nature of the support provided for student teachers within some schools,
encouraged and enabled student teachers to critically reflect on their own and
observed practices, which in turn assisted them to work towards what Banks (2005a)
refers to as an ‘equity pedagogy’ (Banks, 1995a).
Our in-house training programme covers class analysis and training in a range of
topics. Very specific training might be geared to a particular child, or a skill that the
teacher didn’t have. The vice- principal or a member of the senior management team
or an experienced teacher tutor would show a range of different approaches to include
that child, and the new teacher has training in both approaches and skills needed. We
have a range of expertise here: teachers who are trainers, say, in emotional
behavioural difficulties and how to use particular techniques and strategies. We put
great emphasis on new teachers reviewing their own work and how they deal with
situations that arise, as part of personal and professional development, and we make
that explicit.

Discussion
A whole-school culture of commitment and support, including training for
inclusion, was highlighted repeatedly as being essential, if truly inclusive environ-
ments were to become a reality. Similarly, teacher educators within institutions, in
cooperation with teachers in schools, were seen as critical for ensuring the success of
inclusive practices. Interestingly, though, there was minimal mention of the
relationship between the two, with the exception of one interviewee who advocated
that there should be closer collaboration between schools and HEIs, highlighting
that insufficient information was shared about their respective contributions as well
as their expectations for school experience. A recurring theme during the interviews
related to student teachers’ dispositions; their motivation, enthusiasm and
 Embracing inclusive teacher education 131

commitment, and so they, too, have a role as catalysts and change agents, both in
their respective HEIs and in schools, for ensuring that all children are supported
equally to learn and develop in inclusive school environments.
The findings which emerged from the study illustrated awareness by schools
about inclusion and highlighted the specific and varied contribution they were
making to the training of beginning teachers. All agreed that the preparation of
student teachers by the universities and university colleges needed to be
strengthened and that prior to undertaking teaching practice, they should have
specifically addressed both the implications of promoting inclusive practices and
ways in which this could be achieved in the classroom. Schools considered that they
were fulfilling their responsibilities, although no evidence was provided which
suggested that the issue had been explicitly discussed with higher education tutors.
While this could be overlooked, on the grounds that inclusive approaches permeate
all aspects of teaching and learning practices, and indeed cannot and should not be
singled out, nonetheless it is in the context of schools that the observation and
analysis of practice takes on meaning and allows student teachers, in the presence of
teacher educators and teachers, to test, apply and make sense of their newly
acquired knowledge and understandings. All who were interviewed recognized that
practical experience was central to a fuller understanding of inclusive practices, not
least in relation to the unique contexts of schools. This, however, does not mean
that it is the schools’ sole responsibility. It is tempting, too, to suggest that since the
concept of inclusion is an all-embracing term, that it does not lend itself readily to
separate analysis from other aspects of classroom practice. Preparation for inclusion,
however, should not be left to chance, nor should it be assumed by university tutors
that schools will take responsibility for supporting students develop inclusive
practices. Truly effective partnership arrangements, which have a strong focus on
inclusion in practice, could ensure that prospective teachers, teachers in schools and
university tutors are better prepared to respond to the increasing challenges of
meeting the diverse needs of all learners. This in turn could address the needs
identified by interviewees, that all teachers required greater support in this area. If
partnership in this area was more fully developed then this could simultaneously
address the needs of beginning teachers and the many experienced teachers in
schools who support the professional development of beginning teachers, with
reciprocal benefits for both.
Emerging from the overall study, a number of recommendations were proposed to
the Department of Education (NI) in respect of inclusive teacher education. These
included:
N defining and clarifying the central tenets of a culture of inclusion during ITE, and
enabling student teachers to understand the underlying rationale of the concept of
inclusive practice;
N permeating the teacher education continuum with fundamental features of
inclusive practices;
N being aware of the range of barriers to learning and fostering positive attitudes
towards inclusion;
132 A. Moran

N incorporating comprehensive coverage of the different learning difficulties

encountered in classrooms, and of the appropriate strategies to support teaching
and learning that will be highly differentiated;
N arranging placement experience in special schools or in alternative education
provision, with staff in both invited to contribute to ITE (and in-service) courses.

Conclusion
Inclusive education is undoubtedly a challenging, complex and contested concept,
and its manifestations in practice are many and varied. It is about contributing to an
inclusive society through shaping the process by which the participation of all
children and young people in education is enhanced and maximised. A characteristic
common to much of the research on inclusion, is the restrictive interpretation of the
term in practice. As a term, it has been most closely associated with the assimilation
of pupils having special educational needs into mainstream schools. Policy-makers,
as well as practitioners, are guilty of this, as evidenced in a recently commissioned
DfES research report Inclusion and Pupil Achievement (Dyson et al., Research Report
578, 2004). While the authors recognised that inclusion is about processes of
partnership and learning, which are relevant for many marginalised, socially
disadvantaged, excluded children and young people, the term inclusive is narrowly
used in the report, to refer only to those pupils who have special educational needs.
Inclusion is about much more than including children with special educational
needs. It is about accommodating and celebrating diversity and difference,
confronting disadvantage and addressing exclusionary practices.
Policy-makers, though, are not unique in this regard. Teacher educators, too,
need to embrace the paradigm shift that inclusive education demands and to engage
in dialogue across a multiplicity of cultures, religions, identities and ways of thinking
(Cochran-Smith, 2004). Such a discourse could lead to new approaches to teacher
education, based on notions of equity, social justice and entitlement for all pupils.
Teacher education curricula should provide opportunities for student teachers to
challenge predispositions and belief systems and enable teacher educators and
student teachers alike, to critically examine assumptions and ideologies which
underpin their practice, as well as the dominant ideologies which prevail in society.
This collaborative articulation by student teachers and teacher educators, about the
manifestation of inclusive practices, and the ways in which these can be achieved,
could also provide an enabling mechanism for teachers in schools to better support
student teachers, while at the same time developing professionally themselves.
Teacher educators working alongside teachers in schools have the capacity to
effect change, to help transform practices and to make a difference to children and
young peoples’ lives. Such an approach could ensure the sustainability of the seeds
which were sown during initial teacher education. As Darling-Hammond et al.
(2002) reminds us
the most important differences in what happens to children at school, depend on who
their teachers are: what they understand about children and about learning, what they
 Embracing inclusive teacher education 133

are able to do to respond to the very different approaches and experiences children
bring with them to the learning setting, what they care about and are committed to as
teachers. (Darling-Hammond et al., 2002, p. 150)

Teachers, student teachers and teacher educators, in cooperation, must prepare all
young people to have the strongest chances of success, as a matter of sustaining their
own and others prosperity and as a matter of fairness and inclusiveness, where
opportunities are made available to pupils of all races, backgrounds and abilities.
This entails making teaching into a moral, visionary profession in which social and
moral questions are truly explicit and embedded. Those who focus only on teaching
techniques and curriculum standards and who do not embrace the greater, social
and moral questions of their time, promote an impoverished view of teaching and
teacher professionalism (Hargreaves, 2003, pp. 160–161).

Notes on contributor
Anne Moran is Professor of Education and Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences at
the University of Ulster. Before taking up the post of Dean in 2002, Professor
Moran was Head of the School of Education. Her research interests are in the
areas of teacher education and inclusive schooling.

References
Ahuja, A. (2002) Teacher training for inclusive education in developing countries: the UNESCO
experience, in: S. Hegarty & M. Alur (Eds) Education and children with special needs: from
segregation to inclusion (New Delhi, Sage Publications), 77–96.
Alton-Lee, A. (2003) Quality teaching for diverse students in schooling: best evidence synthesis (New
Zealand, Ministry of Education), June 2003.
Banks, J. A. (1995a) Multicultural education: historical development, dimensions, and practice,
in: J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds) Handbook of research on multicultural education (New
York, Macmilan), 617–627.
Booth, T., Nes, K. & Strømstad, M. (2003) Developing inclusive teacher education (London,
Routledge Falmer).
Branson, T. & Miller, D. (1989) Beyond integration policy—the deconstruction of disability, in:
L. Barton (Ed.) Integration: myth or reality? (Lewes, Falmer Press), 144–167.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2004) Walking the road: race, diversity and social justice in teacher education,
Multicultural Education Series (New York & London, Teachers College, Columbia
University).
Corbett, J. (2001) Is equity compatible with entitlement? Balancing inclusive values and deserving
needs, Support for Learning, 16(3), 117–121.
Corbett, J. & Slee, R. (2000) An international conversation on inclusive education, in:
F. Armstrong, D. Armstrong & L. Barton (Eds) Inclusive education: policy, contexts and
comparative perspectives (London, David Fulton Publishers), 133–146.
Darling-Hammond, L., French, J. & Garcia-Lopez, S. P. (2002) (Eds) Learning to teach for social
justice (New York, Teachers’ College Press).
Department of Education for Northern Ireland (1996) Arrangements for initial teacher education
in Northern Ireland from 1 September 1996, DENI.
Department for Education and Employment (1997) Green Paper, Excellence for all children: meeting
special educational needs (London, HMSO).
134 A. Moran

Department for Education and Employment (1998) Meeting special educational needs: a programme
of action, November.
Department for Education and Skills (2001a) Inclusive schooling: children with special educational
needs (London, DfES).
Department for Education and Skills (2004) Removing barriers to achievement—the government’s
strategy for special needs (London, DfES).
Dyson, A. (1999) Inclusion and inclusions: theories and discourses in inclusive education, in:
H. Daniels & P. Garner (Eds) Inclusive education: supporting inclusion in education systems
(London, Kogan Page).
Dyson, A., Farrell, P., Polat, F., Hutcheson, G. & Gallanaugh, F. (2004) Inclusion and pupil
achievement, Research report RR578 (London, DfES).
Elwood, J., Mc Keown, P., Gallagher, T., Kilpatrick, R., Murphy, C. & Carlisle, K. (2004)
Equality awareness in teacher education and training in NI, Equality Commission for NI, May
2004.
Farrell, P., Dyson, A., Kalambouka, A. & Kaplan, I. (2005) The impact of population inclusivity in
schools on student outcomes, review conducted by Evidence for Policy and Practice
Information and Coordinating Centre (EPPI) Inclusive Education Review Group
(London, Institute of Education).
Garcia, E. E. (1993) Language, culture, and education, in: L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.) Review of
research in education, 19, 51–98 (Washington DC, American Educational Research
Association).
Gorard, S. (2005) Academies as the ‘future of schooling’: is this an evidence-based policy?, Journal
of Education Policy, 20(3), 369–377.
Hargreaves, A. (2003) Teaching in the knowledge society (Maidenhead, OUP).
Hill, P. & Rowe, K. (1996) Multilevel modeling in school effectiveness research, School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7(1), 1–34.
Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education (2002) Count us in: achieving inclusion in Scottish schools
(Edinburgh, HMIE).
Howes, A., Booth, T., Dyson, A. & Frankham, J. (2005) Teacher learning and the development of
inclusive practices and policies: framing and context, Research Papers in Education, 20(2),
133–148.
Irvine, J. J. (1992) Making teacher educatioin culturally responsive, in: M. E. Dilworth (Ed.)
Diversity in teacher education (San Franciso, Jossey-Bass), 79–92.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1992) Culturally relevant teaching, in: C. A. Grant (Ed.) Research and
multicultural education: from the margins to the mainstream (Washington DC, Falmer Press),
106–121.
Moran, A. & Abbott, L. (2006) The development of inclusive schools in Northern Ireland: a model of
best practice, Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency, Research Report 42.
Peters, S. (2002) Inclusive education in accelerated and professional development schools: a case-
based study of two school reform efforts in the USA, International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 6(4), 287–308.
Rouse, M. & Florian, L. (1997) Inclusive education in the market-place, International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 1(4), 323–326.
Smithers, R., Curtis, P. & Taylor, M. (2005) Academies claim boost for GCSEs, Guardian, 26
August.
Thomas, G. & Loxley, A. (2001) Deconstructing special education and constructing inclusion
(Buckingham, Open University Press).
UNESCO (1994) The Salamanca statement: framework for action. Available online at: http://
www.unesco.org/education.