Itkonen, Tiina
http://hdl.handle.net/10139/731
2024-03-29T09:40:03ZDisability or Learning Difficulty? Politicians or Educators? Constructing Special Education in Finland and the United States
http://hdl.handle.net/10139/4028
Disability or Learning Difficulty? Politicians or Educators? Constructing Special Education in Finland and the United States; Disability or Learning Difficulty? Politicians or Educators? Constructing Special Education in Finland and the United States
Itkonen, Tiina; Jahnukainen, Markku; Itkonen, Tiina; Jahnukainen, Markku
(Discussion): We began by discussing the ideological traditions of Finland and the US. In essence, equal opportunity and equity are grounded on different types of goals for schooling. These goals in turn shape policy design. For example, in a system in which responsibility is collective and schooling is grounded on the notion of absolute success, students who experience difficulties or deviate from some pre-determined norm, are provided extra resources. As we showed in the case of Finland, students are constructed from an educational stand point in this type of a system. We also showed that the originating institution of the policy shapes policy design, as courts and schools operate from a different set of assumptions. The role of courts is to protect citizens’ rights, whereas the role of schools is to educate informed citizens (and a future work force). Therefore, policy originating in courts is expected to be rights-based (as in special education or desegregation policies in the US) whereas a policy initiated by the school system would be expected to be educationally based.
In regard to the U.S. policy initiative to implement tiered interventions, it will be interesting to observe how this change in policy to one of local authority changes the 30-year practice. First, parent advocacy groups in the US have consistently advocated for increased federal oversight and vehemently resisted local control (Itkonen 2007). Second, the school system has an institutional history and memory which can be very difficult to change (March and Olsen 1989). Intervention model in essence would fundamentally change the way by which special education has been organized in the US. Another challenge with the proposed shift to an educational construction rests with the fact that it was first articulated in the special education statute, IDEA 2004. Since No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is still under reauthorization, intervention-based models are not included in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (which was re-named to NCLB in 2002). Since a tiered model starts in the general classroom, and the first and biggest responsibility rests heavily on classroom teachers (not special educators), until such language is added to the education legislation, it is likely that RtI will remain as a choice only for schools where capacity (knowledge, time, resources) exists.
Finally, our study has several limitations. First, our framework is preliminary and requires further empirical testing. Second, our findings should be examined with caution as many issues distinguishing these countries (e.g., cultural, linguistic, geographic diversity) were not included in this analysis. However, we believe that our application of construction of targets and our extension to institutional structures provide a way by which to conduct systematic cross-cultural comparisons by simultaneously examining the relationships among disability construction, policy design, and institutional arrangements at the micro-level.; (Discussion): We began by discussing the ideological traditions of Finland and the US. In essence, equal opportunity and equity are grounded on different types of goals for schooling. These goals in turn shape policy design. For example, in a system in which responsibility is collective and schooling is grounded on the notion of absolute success, students who experience difficulties or deviate from some pre-determined norm, are provided extra resources. As we showed in the case of Finland, students are constructed from an educational stand point in this type of a system. We also showed that the originating institution of the policy shapes policy design, as courts and schools operate from a different set of assumptions. The role of courts is to protect citizens’ rights, whereas the role of schools is to educate informed citizens (and a future work force). Therefore, policy originating in courts is expected to be rights-based (as in special education or desegregation policies in the US) whereas a policy initiated by the school system would be expected to be educationally based.
In regard to the U.S. policy initiative to implement tiered interventions, it will be interesting to observe how this change in policy to one of local authority changes the 30-year practice. First, parent advocacy groups in the US have consistently advocated for increased federal oversight and vehemently resisted local control (Itkonen 2007). Second, the school system has an institutional history and memory which can be very difficult to change (March and Olsen 1989). Intervention model in essence would fundamentally change the way by which special education has been organized in the US. Another challenge with the proposed shift to an educational construction rests with the fact that it was first articulated in the special education statute, IDEA 2004. Since No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is still under reauthorization, intervention-based models are not included in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (which was re-named to NCLB in 2002). Since a tiered model starts in the general classroom, and the first and biggest responsibility rests heavily on classroom teachers (not special educators), until such language is added to the education legislation, it is likely that RtI will remain as a choice only for schools where capacity (knowledge, time, resources) exists.
Finally, our study has several limitations. First, our framework is preliminary and requires further empirical testing. Second, our findings should be examined with caution as many issues distinguishing these countries (e.g., cultural, linguistic, geographic diversity) were not included in this analysis. However, we believe that our application of construction of targets and our extension to institutional structures provide a way by which to conduct systematic cross-cultural comparisons by simultaneously examining the relationships among disability construction, policy design, and institutional arrangements at the micro-level.
2010-01-01T00:00:00ZStories of Hope and Decline: Interest Group Effectiveness in National Special Education Policy
http://hdl.handle.net/10139/788
Stories of Hope and Decline: Interest Group Effectiveness in National Special Education Policy; Stories of Hope and Decline: Interest Group Effectiveness in National Special Education Policy
This study analyzes parent and professional organizations’ effectiveness in national special education policy from 1975 to present. Of specific interest are the relationships among groups’ policy victories, how groups construct their political messages, and organizational characteristics. The research is significant in that it is one of the first major studies of education client groups that examine group effectiveness over several decades. Drawing from coded Congressional testimonies and elite interviews with policy makers and organizational leaders, the major findings indicate that problem definition--how groups frame their interests, portray students with disabilities, and narrate their policy stories—is a significant determinant of effectiveness over-riding group resources. The implications for policy formulation are discussed.; This study analyzes parent and professional organizations’ effectiveness in national special education policy from 1975 to present. Of specific interest are the relationships among groups’ policy victories, how groups construct their political messages, and organizational characteristics. The research is significant in that it is one of the first major studies of education client groups that examine group effectiveness over several decades. Drawing from coded Congressional testimonies and elite interviews with policy makers and organizational leaders, the major findings indicate that problem definition--how groups frame their interests, portray students with disabilities, and narrate their policy stories—is a significant determinant of effectiveness over-riding group resources. The implications for policy formulation are discussed.
2009-01-01T00:00:00ZAn Analysis of Accountability Policies in Finland and the United States
http://hdl.handle.net/10139/493
An Analysis of Accountability Policies in Finland and the United States; An Analysis of Accountability Policies in Finland and the United States
Jahnukainen, Markku; Jahnukainen, Markku
This study examines student achievement and prevalence of students with disabilities in Finland and the United States (U.S.), by analysing international test scores, national reports, and special education legislation. The variables of interest include institutional design of each country, resources invested in and values surrounding public education, disability policies, and student diversity. Our findings indicate that the quality of the teaching profession, access to materials, intensive early interventions, equitable resource distribution, and values grounded on equity versus access are related to both student achievement and the prevalence of students with disabilities. We discuss implications of institutional arrangements and early intervention for policy formulation.; This study examines student achievement and prevalence of students with disabilities in Finland and the United States (U.S.), by analysing international test scores, national reports, and special education legislation. The variables of interest include institutional design of each country, resources invested in and values surrounding public education, disability policies, and student diversity. Our findings indicate that the quality of the teaching profession, access to materials, intensive early interventions, equitable resource distribution, and values grounded on equity versus access are related to both student achievement and the prevalence of students with disabilities. We discuss implications of institutional arrangements and early intervention for policy formulation.
2007-03-01T00:00:00Z