Dancing between money and ideas: inclusion in primary education in the Czech Republic from 2005 to 2020

Denglerová, Denisa; Kalenda, Jan; Šíp, Radim; Košatková, Markéta

dc.title	Dancing between money and ideas: inclusion in primary education in the Czech Republic from 2005 to 2020	en
dc.contributor.author	Denglerová, Denisa
dc.contributor.author	Kalenda, Jan
dc.contributor.author	Šíp, Radim
dc.contributor.author	Košatková, Markéta
dc.relation.ispartof	International Journal of Inclusive Education
dc.identifier.issn	1360-3116 Scopus Sources, Sherpa/RoMEO, JCR
dc.identifier.issn	1464-5173 Scopus Sources, Sherpa/RoMEO, JCR
dc.date.issued	2022
dc.type	article
dc.language.iso	en
dc.publisher	Routledge Journals, Taylor & Francis Ltd
dc.identifier.doi	10.1080/13603116.2022.2134475
dc.relation.uri	https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13603116.2022.2134475
dc.relation.uri	https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13603116.2022.2134475?needAccess=true
dc.subject	education policy	en
dc.subject	inclusive education	en
dc.subject	primary education	en
dc.subject	situation analysis	en
dc.subject	discursive arenas	en
dc.subject	stakeholders	en
dc.description.abstract	The aim of this study is to analyse the implementation of inclusion policy in primary education in the Czech Republic using the arena of discursive construction by the main actors and also the impact on the acceptance of inclusion. For this purpose, we use a qualitative research strategy based on situational analysis methods - the so-called maps of discursive arenas. The study describes two arenas of inclusive education between 2005 and 2020. The turning point came in 2015, when inclusion legislation was accepted. The study results suggest that both arenas are linked by two main opposing discourses. The Special Education Discourse argues that it is more effective when children of a similar level of abilities are educated together; the Inclusive Education Discourse strives to reduce segregation and isolation of pupils with various kinds of disadvantages. Both discourses tend to polarise the inclusion debate. One of the main reasons for this polarisation is that the state is failing to create a functional platform for communication which could help overcome the conflict.	en
utb.faculty	Faculty of Humanities
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10563/1011196
utb.identifier.obdid	43884107
utb.identifier.scopus	2-s2.0-85141028806
utb.identifier.wok	000873335500001
utb.source	J-wok
dc.date.accessioned	2022-11-29T07:49:18Z
dc.date.available	2022-11-29T07:49:18Z
dc.description.sponsorship	Czech Science Foundation [GA19-13038S]
dc.rights	Attribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.uri	https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.rights.access	openAccess
utb.ou	Department of Social Education
utb.ou	Research Centre
utb.ou	Department of Pedagogical Sciences
utb.contributor.internalauthor	Denglerová, Denisa
utb.contributor.internalauthor	Kalenda, Jan
utb.contributor.internalauthor	Šíp, Radim
utb.fulltext.affiliation	Denisa Denglerová a,c, Jan Kalenda a,b, Radim Šíp a,b and Markéta Košatková a a Department of Social Education, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic; b Research Centre of FHS, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Zlín, Czech Republic; c Department of Pedagogical Sciences, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Zlín, Czech Republic CONTACT Denisa Denglerová denglerova@utb.cz Faculty of Humanities, Department of Pedagogical Sciences, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Czech Republic, Štefánikova 5670, 760 01 Zlín ORCID Denisa Denglerová http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5354-3445 Jan Kalenda http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4871-4753 Radim Šíp http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9131-7403 Markéta Košatková http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6964-3440
utb.fulltext.dates	Received 16 February 2021 Accepted 3 October 2022 Published online: 26 Oct 2022
utb.fulltext.references	1. Ainscow, M. 2020. “Promoting Inclusion and Equity in Education: Lessons from International Experiences.” Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy 6 (1): 7–16. 2. Armstrong, D., A. C. Armstrong, and I. Spandagou. 2011. “Inclusion: By Choice or by Chance?” International Journal of Inclusive Education 15 (1): 29–39. 3. Bhatnagar, N., and A. Das. 2014. “Regular School Teachers’ Concerns and Perceived Barriers to Implement Inclusive Education in New Delhi, India.” International Journal of Instruction 7 (2): 89–102. 4. Butt, R. 2016. “Teacher Assistant Support and Deployment in Mainstream Schools.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 20 (9): 995–1007. 5. Carney, P. 2012. “Complexity Theory in Political Science and Public Policy.” Political Studies Review 10 (3): 346–358. 6. Carter, E. W., and C. Hughes. 2006. “Including High School Students with Severe Disabilities in General Education Classes: Perspectives of General and Special Educators, Paraprofessionals, and Administrators.” Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities 31 (2): 174–185. 7. Clarke, A. E. 2005. Situational Analysis. Grounded Theory After the Postmodern Turn. Thousand Oaks: Sage. 8. Clarke, A. E., C. Friese, and R. S. Washburn. 2018. Situational Analysis. Grounded Theory After the Interpretive Turn. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. 9. Colebatch, H. 2018. “The Idea of Policy Design: Intuition, Process, Outcome, Meaning, and Validity.” Public Policy and Administration 33 (4): 365–383. 10. D’Alessio, S., and D. Watkins. 2009. “International Comparisons of Inclusive Policy and Practice: Are We Talking the Same Thing?” Research in Comparative and International Education 4 (3): 233–249. 11. Danforth, S. 2015. “Social Justice and Technocracy: Tracing the Narratives of Inclusive Education in the USA.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 37 (4): 1–18. 12. Danforth, S., and S. Naraian. 2015. “This New Field of Inclusive Education: Beginning a Dialogue on Conceptual Foundations.” The Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability 53 (1): 70–85. 13. de Boer, A., S. J. Pijl, and A. Minnaert. 2011. “Regular Primary Schoolteachers’ Attitudes Towards Inclusive Education: A Review of the Literature.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 15 (3): 331–353. 14. Denglerová, D., and R. Šíp. 2021. “Optimalizací inkluze k prohlubování nerovností ve vzdělávání [překlad].” Pedagogika 71 (1): 126–130. 15. Dessemontet, R. S., and G. Bless. 2013. “The Impact of Including Children with Intellectual Disability in General Education Classrooms on the Academic Achievement of Their Low-, Average-, and High-Achieving Peers.” Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability 38 (1): 23–30. 16. Directives (Vyhláška) n. 248. 2019. Sb. [on-line]. https://www.psp.cz/sqw/sbirka.sqw?cz=248&r=2019. 17. Directive (Vyhláška) n. 606. 2020. Sb. [on-line]. https://www.psp.cz/sqw/sbirka.sqw?cz=606&r=2020. 18. Donohue, D., and J. Bornman. 2014. “The Challenges of Realising Inclusive Education in South Africa: Voices of Teachers and Teaching Assistants.” South African Journal of Education 34 (2): 1–14. 19. Downing, J. E., and K. D. Packham-Hardin. 2006. “Inclusive Education: What Makes it a Good Education for Students with Moderate to Severe Disabilities?” Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities 32 (1): 16–30. 20. EADSNE. 2020. European Agency Statistics on Inclusive Education: 2018 Dataset Cross-Country Report. https://www.european-agency.org/resources/publications/european-agency-statistics-inclusive-education-2018-dataset-cross-country. 21. Frey, N., and D. Fisher. 2004. “School Change and Teacher Knowledge: A Reciprocal Relationship.” Teacher Education and Special Education 27 (1): 57–67. 22. Glaser, B., and A. L. Strauss. 1967. Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine. 23. Glazzard, J. 2011. “Perceptions of the Barriers to Effective Inclusion in One Primary School: Voices of Teachers and Teaching Assistants.” Support for Learning 26 (2): 56–63. 24. Graham, L. J. 2016. “Reconceptualising Inclusion as Participation: Neoliberal Buck-Passing or Strategic By-Passing?” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 37 (4): 563–581. 25. Gulová, L., and S. Střelec. 2020. “Inclusion of Talented Children (Pupils) In the Current Czech Education System.” Czech-Polish Historical and Pedagogical Journal 12 (1): 54–68. 26. Hardy, I., S. Woodcock, M. Falkmer, A. Sim, M. Scott, R. Cordier, et al. 2014. “Inclusive Education Policies: Discourses of Difference, Diversity and Deficit.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 19 (2): 141–164. 27. Kalambouka, A., P. Farrell, A. Dyson, and I. Kaplan. 2007. “The Impact of Placing Pupils with Special Educational Needs in Mainstream Schools on the Achievement of Their Peers.” Educational Research 49: 365–382. 28. Keller, R. 2012. “Entering Discourse: A New Agenda for Qualitative Research and Sociology of Knowledge.” Qualitative Sociology Review 8 (2): 46–75. 29. Lamont, M., and T. Laurent. 2000. Rethinking Comparative Cultural Sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 30. Le Fanu, G., and T. A. C. Besley. 2013. “The Inclusion of Inclusive Education in International Development: Lessons from Papua New Guinea.” International Journal of Educational Development 33 (2): 139–148. 31. Lindsay, G. 2007. “Educational Psychology and Effectiveness of Inclusive Education/Mainstreaming.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 77 (1): 1–24. 32. Macartney, B., and M. Morton. 2013. “Kinds of Participation: Teacher and Special Education Perceptions and Practices of ‘Inclusion’ in Early Childhood and Primary School Settings.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 17 (8): 776–792. 33. MEYS. 2020. Statistická ročenka školství – výkonové ukazatele. [Annual Statistical Report on Education]. Praha: MŠMT, Odbor školské statistiky, analýz a informační strategie. http://toiler.uiv.cz/rocenka/rocenka.asp. 34. Miles, S., and M. Singal. 2010. “The Education for All and Inclusive Education Debate: Conflict, Contradiction or Opportunity?” International Journal of Inclusive Education 14 (1): 1–15. 35. Peters, M. A., and T. A. C. Besley. 2014. “Social Exclusion/Inclusion: Foucault’s Analytics of Exclusion, the Political Ecology of Social Inclusion and the Legitimation of Inclusive Education.” Open Review of Educational Research 1 (1): 99–115. 36. Pyryt, M. C., and B. L. Bosetti. 2006. “Accommodating Gifted Learners in Regular Classrooms.” In Including the Gifted and Talented, edited by C. M. M. Smith, 141–160. London: Routledge. 37. Ruijs, M. M., and T. T. D. Peetsma. 2009. “Effects of Inclusion on Students With and Without Special Educational Needs Reviewed.” Educational Research Review 4 (2): 67–79. 38. Slee, R. 2001. “Social Justice and the Changing Directions in Educational Research: The Case of Inclusive Education.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 5 (2-3): 167–177. 39. Štech, S. 2021. “Výzkum, experti a politici - podivuhodný život ideje inkluzivního vzdělávání v ČR [překlad].” Pedagogika 71 (3): 403–420. 40. Straková, J., D. Hůle, and T. Habart. 2019. Sociální aspekty vzdělávání dětí na ZŠ. [Social Aspects of Children’s Education at Primary Schools]. [On-line]. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEsA-gC_xbY. 41. Strauss, A. L. 1984. “Social Worlds and Their Segmentation Processes.” Studies in Symbolic Interaction 5: 123–139. 42. Symeonidou, S., and H. Phtiaka. 2009. “Using Teachers’ Prior Knowledge, Attitudes and Beliefs to Develop in-Service Teacher Education Courses for Inclusion: Teacher and Special Education Perceptions and Practices of ‘Inclusion’ in Early Childhood and Primary School Settings.” Teaching And Teacher Education 25 (4): 543–550. 43. Turnbull, H. R., A. P. Turnbull, and M. L. Wehmeyer. 2006. Exceptional Lives. Columbus: Prentice Hall. 44. Vorlíček, R. 2019. Jak se daří inkluzi u nás a na Slovensku [How Inclusion is Doing in Czechia and Slovakia]. Červený Kostelec: Pavel Mervart. 45. Wodak, R., and M. Meyer. 2001. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. 46. Zatloukal, T. 2020. Kvalita a efektivita vzdělávání a vzdělávací soustavy ve školním roce 2019/2020. Výroční zpráva České školní inspekce [Quality and Efficiency of Education and the Education System in the School Year 2019/2020. Annual Report of the Czech School Inspectorate.]. Praha: MŠMT.
utb.fulltext.sponsorship	This work was supported by Czech Science Foundation [grant number GA19-13038S].
utb.wos.affiliation	[Denglerova, Denisa; Kalenda, Jan; Sip, Radim; Kosatkova, Marketa] Masaryk Univ, Dept Social Educ, Brno, Czech Republic; [Kalenda, Jan; Sip, Radim] Tomas Bata Univ Zlin, Res Ctr FHS, Zlin, Czech Republic; [Denglerova, Denisa] Tomas Bata Univ Zlin, Dept Pedag Sci, Zlin, Czech Republic
utb.scopus.affiliation	Department of Social Education, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic; Research Centre of FHS, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Zlín, Czech Republic; Department of Pedagogical Sciences, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Zlín, Czech Republic
utb.fulltext.projects	GA19-13038S
utb.fulltext.faculty	Faculty of Humanities
utb.fulltext.faculty	Faculty of Humanities
utb.fulltext.faculty	Faculty of Humanities
utb.fulltext.ou	Department of Social Education
utb.fulltext.ou	Research Centre
utb.fulltext.ou	Department of Pedagogical Sciences