Unterstützung trotz Dekategorisierung? Beispiele für Unterstützung durch Dekategorisierung

Hinz, Andreas; Köpfer, Andreas

doi:10.2378/vhn2016.art04d

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To some extent, and particularly in NRW, this can be traced back to the legal regulations, abetting the exploration of the individual shortcomings and leading to categorizations (Dederich, 2016;Hinz & Köpfer, 2016;Norwich, 2013;Skrtic, 1991). As long as the scope of SEN assessment is with respect to the individual pupiland not on the learning environmentthis dilemma (Clark et al, 1998) will persist.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stuck in failure: comparing special education needs assessment policies and practices in Sweden and Germany

Barow

Östlund

2020

Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The definition for special education needs (SEN) and the policies for its assessment varies widely between countries. This paper aims to investigate similarities and differences through a Swedish-German comparative approach. Based on the distinction between categorical and relational perspectives as expressions of specific thought styles, 58 SEN assessment reports from both countries were qualitatively analysed. The results demonstrate the maintenance of the categorical perspective in terms of focusing on the pupil's 'failure'. This result is even more notable in the German examples than the Swedish cases. Exceptionally and in both countries, a relational perspective emerges, taking teaching and the social environment into account. In conclusion, we suggest a flexible SEN approach with a stronger emphasis on the relation between the individual and the learning environment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the theoretical level, several authors (e.g. Amrhein, 2016;Dederich, 2016;Hinz & Köpfer, 2016) critically discuss the need for categorization in the context of inclusion.…”

Section: Special Education In the Swedish And German School Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stuck in failure: comparing special education needs assessment policies and practices in Sweden and Germany

Barow

Östlund

2020

Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The AO-SF procedures are partly unclear and leave room for different interpretations. Some interviewees were aware of a tension between categorisation practices and an inclusive school approach (Hinz and Köpfer 2016). With regard to the support category 'learning' in particular, the significance of intelligence tests for SEN assessment became obvious.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With regard to the debate on decategorisation and inclusion (Hinz and Köpfer 2016), there is little evidence so far for any impact on the practice of SEN assessment. The procedure, as stipulated in the Education Act and AO-SF, has a clear focus on the individual pupil.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Over time, the approach of labelling and categorising specific pupils has been criticised in the literature, above all with regard to inclusion and based on different models of disability (e.g. Thomas and Loxley 2007; for Germany in particular, Hinz and Köpfer 2016). In a European context, Watkins (2007) has observed greater consideration of the learning environment and an increased impact of mainstream teachers and pupils in SEN assessment.…”

Section: Inclusion Special Education and Sen Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

“The system shows us how bad it feels”: special educational needs assessment in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

Barow

Östlund

2019

European Journal of Special Needs Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the context of the North Rhine-Westphalian school reform towards an inclusive education system, this article problematises the practice of categorisation. Our research aims to investigate the assessment of special educational needs (SEN) and thereby enrich the discussion of the relation between inclusion and diagnostics. For this study, we interviewed 14 SEN investigators and five decision-makers. We discuss the results on the basis of a qualitative content analysis and against the background of Fleck's concept of thought styles. We mainly found inertia in special education traditions, expressed in the use of intelligence tests, the dominance of SEN teachers in the assessment process and the lack of participation of parents and pupils. We conclude that it is necessary to reform the SEN assessment rules. At the same time, we see major challenges in transforming existing thought styles into a more flexible and decategorising approach.

show abstract

Implikationen des Dekategorisierungsdiskurses der Inklusionspädagogik für den Begabungsbegriff

Boger

2018

Begabungsgerechtigkeit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unterstützung trotz Dekategorisierung? Beispiele für Unterstützung durch Dekategorisierung

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Stuck in failure: comparing special education needs assessment policies and practices in Sweden and Germany

Stuck in failure: comparing special education needs assessment policies and practices in Sweden and Germany

“The system shows us how bad it feels”: special educational needs assessment in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

Implikationen des Dekategorisierungsdiskurses der Inklusionspädagogik für den Begabungsbegriff

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About