European Journal of Alternative Education Studies
ISSN: 2501-5915
ISSN-L: 2501-5915
Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu
Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.345186
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION
POLICIES IN AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
Evangelos C. Papakitsos1i, Konstantinos Karakiozis2, Xanthippi Foulidi3
Adj. Prof. Dr., School of Pedagogical and Technological Education,
Department of Education, Greece
2Youth Counselling Station, Secondary Education Directorate of Western Attica, Greece
3 Dr., Supervisor of Cultural Affairs, Secondary Education Directorate of Western Attica, Greece
1
Abstract:
In this work we attempt to set a framework of proposals for the inclusion of pupils in
schools of areas with acute social problems. The necessity to adopt educational policies
for inclusion is highlighted in the findings not only of scientific research but also of
international organizations, despite their different ideological content every time. These
proposals recognize the central role of teachers, the necessity for their training and the
achieving of broader cooperation. In this respect, the development of inclusion policies
can be facilitated by the application of systemic methodology.
Keywords: inclusive education, systemic methodology, educational exclusion
1. Introduction
According to UNESCO (UNESCO-IBE, 2008), education systems worldwide are
challenged to provide effective training to everyone and to limit dropout and low
learning outcomes that mainly affect the most disadvantaged social groups. It is
characteristic that similar problems are not only faced by the pupils of developing
countries but also of the most developed ones, where there are sufficient financial
resources. Similarly, it is a key objective of United Nations (UN) to ensure fair and
inclusive quality education for everyone, aiming by 2030 to eliminate disparities
between the sexes in education and to ensure equal access to all education/training
levels for vulnerable social groups, including persons with disabilities, indigenous
populations and children (UN, 2015).
Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved.
© 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group
32
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
Dealing with the exclusions from the educational process requires the adoption
of policies that address economic, social, political and cultural factors that cause and
promote actions of inclusive education (UNESCO-IBE, 2008). In this context, the
concept of inclusion is not limited to pupils with special educational needs but attempts
to reduce/eliminate social exclusion because of different race, social class, ethnicity,
religion, gender and ability, by assessing education as a basic human right (UNESCOIBE, 2008: 5). In other words, the inclusive education:
focuses on the educational results of each and every pupil;
deals with the welfare of all pupils;
sets the transformation of schools into organizations, ready and willing to
welcome this pupils population.
The ultimate goal of this vision is no pupil to be left outside school and learn to
live together with each other (Barton, 2012: 54).
2. Framework
In this paper we follow the UNESCO-IBE approach (2008) on inclusive education as an
ongoing process, which aims at offering quality education for all, while respecting
diversity and the different needs and abilities, the characteristics and the pupil learning
expectations and communities, excluding all forms of discrimination. In other words,
inclusion differs substantially from the assimilation, posing questions of social justice,
equality, human rights, non-discrimination (Barton, 2012). At the same time, reference
is made to the findings of international organizations with a different frame of
reference, which recognize the necessity to promote policies of inclusive education:
Specifically, UNESCO functions as a global think tank, playing a regulatory role
in promoting international cooperation, setting standards of international
agreements and contributing to the dissemination and exchange of information
and knowledge, with the aim of developmental cooperation (UNESCO Hellas,
n.d.).
Similarly, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD), starting from a market economy based on democratic institutions,
collaborates and provides assistance to governments for the sustainable
economic development (OECD, 2016).
Finally herein, the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education
(EASNIE) is an independent and self-governing organization supported by the
European institutions (European Commission; European Parliament) and the
member countries (EASNIE, 2016).
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
33
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
The development of policies and guidelines for inclusive education is certainly a
complex task that involves many diverse factors. To facilitate the determination of
proposals and practices in a holistic and complete manner, the application of systemic
methodology is presented herein, according to the relevant conceptual tool of OMAS-III
(Papakitsos, 2013).
3. Systemic Methodology
The application of systemic methodology via OMAS-III in Education, generally
considered as a social system, has been proposed and/or conducted in a variety of
diverse educational issues that include:
Strategic and operational planning in local educational administration
(Papakitsos et al., 2017);
Conflict management in school-context (Papakitsos & Karakiozis, 2016);
The interrelation of labour-market to vocational education (Papakitsos, 2016a);
The development of curricula in tertiary education (Papakitsos, 2016b);
The designing criteria for educational websites (Papakitsos et al., 2016a);
The development of practices for teachers’ extracurricular training (Foulidi et al.,
2016);
(Papakitsos et al., 2015);
The application of blended-learning in educational projects of career guidance
The teaching and learning of writing essays for pupils of limited related
performance (Makrygiannis & Papakitsos, 2015).
Functionally, OMAS-III is compatible with the most comprehensive conceptual
framework of Systems Inquiry (Banathy & Jenlink 2001), that includes tools for the
systemic analysis of educational and social phenomena, among others. According to
OMAS-III, the systemic inquiry is based on the journalist’s questions, regarding the study
of a system that is conducted by classifying the related factors in the seven
corresponding categories causal
Which
spatial
Where
Why
temporal
outcomes/output
What
resources/input
regulative
How
and monitoring
When
Who . The application of OM“S-III for the study of policies and guidelines regarding
inclusive education will be demonstrated, next.
3.1 Causal Factors
The causal factors
Why
describe the overall context, like the dominant ideology of
inclusive education, the reasons of educational exclusion and the necessity of the
intended activities. Thus and according to the terminology used by international
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
34
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
organizations, the debate on inclusive education has exceeded the narrow
research/academic boundaries by constituting a political tool for the development of
disadvantaged or under-developed regions and vulnerable social groups. However,
Education as institution is linked to political practices, being an area of intense social
conflict as highlighted since the mid-1980s (Fragkoudaki, 1985: 17), when governments
tended to adapt schools to the needs of economy because of the increasing international
economic competition. The raising of the number of pupils, who were enrolled in all
levels of education, created problems regarding their integration in the labor market.
On the other hand, in modern reality it cannot be ignored that the implemented
educational reforms in recent years, along with inclusive education, had the market
conditions as their starting point and they were based on the hegemony of neoliberal
ideology (Liasidou, 2015).
Moreover, in modern society there is a separation of learning from the broader
social and cultural context, which enlarges the gap of underprivileged and vulnerable
pupils and displays these results in various physical, mental or psychological deficits,
ignoring sometimes the social or educational inequalities that exist (Dyson & Kozleski,
2008). In this context, the neoliberal practices in Europe increasingly dominate
education and the inclusion policies are formulated in terms of market economy
(Dyson, 2005). As a result of these practices, the school becomes increasingly
inhospitable for quite a number of pupils, who are considered incompetent to comply
with the requirements that include the curriculum and a pedagogy oriented to the
needs of the ideal pupil
Harwood and Humphrey,
.
Indicatively, it is noted that the formation of curriculum (Goodley, 2007) and the
introduction of school effectiveness indicators is based on the notion of ideal pupil
model , which prevails in neoliberal reasoning Dyson,
. Moreover, policies are
developed that focus on any pathology of pupils (i.e., through medical reports), without
seeking the authoritarianism relations and the inequalities that prevail in the
educational process (Liasidou, 2012). This means that schooling becomes more of a field
where pupils are divided according to their ability to contribute to the neoliberal
demands and expectations of the global economy (Lakes & Carter, 2011).
3.2 Output Factors
The output factors
What
describe the required outcomes that are influenced by the
causal factors and dictate the selection of concepts and practices for implementation by
the rest of them. Accordingly, the major international organizations present their
proposals about inclusive education.
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
35
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
In particular, UNESCO (2013) formed a framework of principles, based on the
international bibliography, for the support of inclusive education and the promotion of
teacher’s training in inclusive education, which is summarized in the following
It is the educational system that complicates the inclusive education and not the
pupils. Addressing barriers to inclusive education requires a systematic
approach, which comprises: (a) identifying the educational barriers; (b) exploring
strategic solutions to obstacles and (c) actions to implement changes to the
system. On a practical level, differentiated individual and group projects are
proposed that will enhance the fun, experiential learning and undertaking of
initiatives, positive discipline, multilingual teaching, equal treatment of girls and
boys and development of accession skills for pupils with disabilities.
Diversity should be regarded as strength and not as weakness. Commonly
applied teaching methods are only suitable for pupils with specific skills (e.g.,
teacher-centered didactics favors those pupils who are more effective in listening
and memorizing).
Teachers need training and support to implement learner-centered teaching
methods, as well as for the adaptation and development of relevant curricula.
They also need training in the understanding and use of evaluation practices.
Accordingly, educational institutes should also use a common framework for the
evaluation of learning.
Teachers should be supported in order to assess the individualized needs of
pupils and to recognize the obstacles that exist, as well as be given internship
opportunities as part of their training programs.
Young teachers need constructive and ongoing supervision and support by
trainers and mentors. These trainers of teachers must be associated with schools
and school communities of teachers, so as to derive the necessary
information/experiences.
The inclusive education requires a supportive environment and teachers need
guidance and expertise on how to develop and use supportive networks within
schools and school communities (e.g., other teachers, parents, etc.).
Undergraduate students that are going to work in inclusive education it is
effective to develop action research practices, in order to better understand
teaching and learning and to make the necessary adjustments.
Similarly, OECD proposes a framework of actions for schools and pupils that exhibit
socio-economic disadvantages, aiming at a broader economic growth (OECD, 2012),
that includes:
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
36
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
Reinforcement and support of school administration (leadership) through the
implementation of appropriate programs for preparation and support.
Configuring of a supportive school climate and learning environment that
promotes the development of a positive attitude in the classroom, the teacherpupil interaction, the pupils with their peers’ interaction and the avoidance of
disciplinary means. It also suggests the development of information systems for
the detection of pupils with learning disorders, the search of supportive
counseling services, mentoring or vocational guidance and the formation of
smaller classes and smaller schools for a more effective teaching and learning of
disabled pupils.
Improvement of the quality of educational work, through the relevant training of
teachers in specific learning conditions, guidance to new teachers and providing
of supportive working conditions.
Effective learning strategies in the classroom, through pupil-centered teaching
that will follow, though, the curriculum and assessment practices. Also, the
development of a culture that promotes high expectations of success.
Connecting schools with the families of pupils and the local community.
Specifically, when the parents of pupils are less involved in their children’s
education, due to economic and social reasons, it is important to encourage
positive attitudes towards school, in order to reduce absenteeism, the probability
of dropout and to enhance the performance of pupils. This is achieved by
improving and diversifying the school-family communication practices and by
providing clear guidance on how they can better support their children. At the
same time, to encourage the involvement of community members in the
educational process can help in improving the educational outcomes.
The need to change the dominant pedagogical thinking in a direction that will
involve all and not only most the participants requires both variations and another
educational context (Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011). The previous required goals can
be achieved through the adjustment of the rest of the factors towards relevant
educational practices, in accordance with the international bibliography.
3.3 Input Factors
The input factors
Which
describe the
raw material
of the studied system. In
particular, we firstly refer to the prime factor of an educational system: the pupils, along
with their accompanying social features, cognitive background, physical condition and
pedagogic needs. Obviously, a successful policy of inclusive education must take into
account all these features. Other input factors are: the infrastructure (building facilities);
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
37
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
didactic equipment (labs, libraries, learning manuals/books, available instruments and
technology); financial resources, both regular and alternative (Papakitsos et al., 2016b).
3.4 Spatial Factors
The spatial factors
Where
can be described in various manners, depending on the
nature of the system. In the present analysis, the spatial factors represent specific issues
of classroom that facilitate inclusive education.
In terms of classroom, a number of good practices are implemented, in
accordance with the international guidelines and the standardization of inclusive
education programmes, undertaken by the project INCLUD-ED Consortium (Flecha,
2015) that includes variations of pupils in the composition of classroom, such as:
Heterogeneous classes with reallocation of human resources. It consists of
specific groups of learners (e.g., with special education needs or immigrants) and
their support can be provided by teachers with the participation of family or
community members, in order to keep the pupil in a classroom of general
education.
Separating pupils in the classroom. For example, different teachers are
responsible for different heterogeneous groups of pupils, within the classroom of
general education. This model is used for specific topics (e.g., language and
mathematics), it allows the class to be organized differently and it reduces the
pupil-teacher ratio.
Inclusive option. The separation of pupils is not based on their abilities but on
their preferences, providing equal opportunities so as not to limit their
educational and social opportunities.
In heterogeneous grouping, there are not any distinctions made in the classroom
on the basis of ability or individual school performance. The existence of heterogeneous
grouping contributes positively to both the cognitive and social/emotional level of
pupils, cooperation of all pupils in a classroom and cooperation between other classes
based on a common topic (Boaler, 2006; EADSNE, 2005; Rytivaara & Kershner, 2012).
3.5 Temporal Factors
The temporal factors
When
describe issues of proper starting and finishing time,
duration and scheduling: annually, monthly, weekly and daily. Accordingly, the
relevant guidelines for inclusive education propose the extension of learning time. It is
implemented mainly for pupils that live in socially deprived areas or belong to
minorities. It may include: the extension of daily time at school beyond the normal
working-hours; family support activities through tutoring at school or at home;
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
38
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
additional educational activities after the normal working-hours, either at school or in
holiday periods.
3.6 Regulative Factors
The regulative factors
How
describe the conditions, theories, rules and guidelines
that regulate the function of the system. The relevant proposals include an
individualized inclusive curriculum, accompanied by the application of teaching
methods that facilitate learning, in order to achieve a higher cognitive level.
Considering these teaching methods, the proposed practices include collaborative
teaching,
collaborative
learning,
collaborative
problem-solving,
heterogeneous
grouping of pupils, effective teaching and adoption of alternative learning strategies.
Specifically:
Collaborative teaching implies cooperation between teachers in classroom, as
well as cooperation with teachers outside the classroom or other professionals, in
order to create a supportive framework for improving the confidence of pupils,
enhancing the diffusion of information and avoiding unnecessary mobility. In
addition, through cooperation with colleagues or specialists, any issues of
teachers’ isolation can be coped with. Examples of relevant practices include the
existence of a School Support Team (involving: Principal, Deputy Principal,
educational counselor, learning support teacher, inclusion teachers and liaison
teacher with home/school/community) and regular weekly meetings (EADSNE,
2005; 2011; 2012; Flecha, 2015; OECD, 2010).
Collaborative learning, where pupils help each other through one of their flexible
grouping system, in order to improve their knowledge and their socio-emotional
level, without limiting the more capable pupils. Such examples include the
existence of dissimilar pairs or teams of three (with the distributed roles of tutor,
pupil and/or observer that provides social reinforcement), where each pupil
gradually assumes all the roles. This approach helps to improve the self-esteem
of pupils and stimulates social interactions within the group. The result of this
practice is that pupils, who best know the needs and language of their
classmates, are able to explain whatever issues, based on shared lived
experiences. At the same time, empathy is developed among cooperating pupils
(Black-Hawkins, 2012; Cesar & Santos 2006; EADSNE, 2005; 2011; 2012; Flecha,
2015; OECD, 2010; Meister, 2012). Respectively, both family members and people
from the community can be involved in the educational process of pupils, thus
having increased learning outcomes for all stakeholders. Especially mentioned
are the learning communities in Spain and the lifelong learning centers in Malta
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
39
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
(Flecha, 2015). These programmes focused on promoting literacy among family
members, adult education and cultural activities (e.g.: reading lessons;
arithmetic; ICT based on knowledge voids; needs of families, like activities
especially designed for mothers, in places where they feel comfortable and able
to speak freely). Similarly, discussions took place in areas of interest for pupils
and their families.
Collaborative problem solving through agreed rules by all pupils in a context of
incentives and disincentives. Particularly at the beginning of the school year, a
class contract is recommended, where teachers and pupils will be actively
involved and the parents will agree on the operating framework and the
incentives/disincentives posed. Similarly, regular meetings are proposed
between teachers and pupils for reaffirming the established rules through class
councils and weekly school assemblies involving pupils/teachers/parents
(EADSNE, 2005; Flecha, 2015). Also, the existence of joint committees (with
teachers, pupils, parents and community members) positively operates to make
decisions about key school activities, like not only for solving regional problems
but also for improving infrastructure and essentially dealing with organizational
matters (Díez et al., 2011; Flecha, 2015).
Effective teaching, through the implementation of the standard curriculum,
which ensures a uniform framework for all pupils, as well as customized training
programs, where necessary. Teaching includes experiential and group work for
every pupil (Blatchford et. al., 2003; EADSNE, 2005; Koutrouba et al., 2006;
OECD, 2012; UNESCO, 2013). Specifically, it is proposed to diversify projects
and curricula, so as to meet the individual needs of each pupil, along with the
diversification of teaching methodology (Marzano et al., 2001). Indicatively, it is
suggested: to highlight the most important points of a course (summary); a
homework assignment to better consolidate the curriculum; the use of graphics
during teaching (Marzano et al., 2001). Accordingly, gradual learning with both
mandatory and optional activities and cognitive
mapping, where an
idea/definition is depicted graphically, can work positively (Meister, 2012).
Feedback is also an effective technique, especially when it includes standards of
correct responses, so pupils can identify their mistakes (Black & William, 1998).
Finally, the existence of a work plan within a specific timeframe can work
positively. In this case, binding tasks are set, classified as mandatory, optional or
supplementary. Pupils can work on a weekly basis, individually or in
pairs/groups, at selected topics. In parallel, pupils can freely choose working
topics, on a regular basis, as part of a differentiated course. Examples of free
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
40
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
working topics are: individual projects, interviews by specialists, learning games
and daily or weekly work plans (Meister, 2012).
Alternative learning strategies, where pupils are taught how to learn, how to
solve problems and how to acquire responsibility for their own learning.
Indicatively, the example of Sweden is mentioned, where pupils are responsible
for their working time, daily timeframe, learning objectives and how to achieve
them (EADSNE, 2005).
3.7 Monitoring Factors
The monitoring factors
Who
describe the impact of management in a social system,
which in this case is the impact of educators towards the achievement of the required
outcomes (see section: Output Factors). The previously mentioned ideological conflicts
(see section: Causal Factors) are not implemented in a vacuum but in the classroom,
bringing the focus of the debate into the role of teachers, who are trying to respond to
challenges and questions that are raised urgently sometimes. Thacker et al. (2002: 2121), give such indicative arguments:
“lthough I want to divide my time to all my pupils, there are some of them that require
ever greater share, which does not seem fair;
some pupils cannot attend the class because there is someone who annoys/interrupts/
causes noise;
the existence of such pupils in a classroom of general education undermines my job;
I feel that I am not a suitable teacher for such cases;
problems are created regarding my relationship with the team;
extra effort and extra work is required on my part.
Questions regarding the durability of teachers of general education in inclusive
education are raised. On research findings of the international bibliography, most
teachers feel an excessive load in inclusion cases (Vaughn et al., 1996), they feel
frustrated (Elshabrawy, and Hassanein, 2015) and are less motivated regarding their
professional development (Corbett, 2001; Reid, 2005). Similarly, general education
teachers usually make minor modifications in their methodology of teaching in
inclusion classes (Bender et al., 1995).
A first attempt to address these issues in order to improve their strength is that
teachers may ask themselves a number of questions for each pupil (Thacker et al., 2002:
32), as:
What is positive about him/her?
What is he/she good at?
What does it scares/bothers me about him/her?
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
41
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
Do I see a child or tags/labels that I put?
Can I offer myself what it takes?
Can I manage my emotions?
How do I usually speak to him/her?
What kind of interactions may he/she have with adults?
What kind of interactions may he/she have with his/her classmates?
Who does he/she get along better with and why?
For having though long term effects, an integrated approach is required that
include a comprehensive training program for educators, which will prepare them for
having the necessary confidence and skills (Alexiadou & Essex, 2015; Avramidis &
Norwich, 2002). According to a technocratic concept, a structured training program (for
teachers) in inclusive education should include: educational methodology, pedagogical
approaches, teaching practices, internship and the prospect of lifelong learning/training,
by integrating professional development information, evaluation and quality assurance
(UNESCO, 2013).
4. Conclusions
This work is an attempt to record a framework of proposals for the inclusion of pupils
in the school environment, in areas with acute social problems. In particular, it is noted
that a school should serve as a learning community by promoting collaborative and
peer learning, collaborative problem solving, heterogeneous grouping of pupils,
effective teaching and adoption of alternative learning strategies. Undoubtedly, these
proposals are neither a panacea nor an exhaustive list of the recorded bibliography.
Additionally at the implementation level, social dialogue is required along with
adaptation to the existing socio-economic environment, based on the ideological context
of the challenges of educational reforms. In any case, the central role of teachers, the
need for their training and the development of a different context, where there is active
cooperation of all members of the educational community (i.e., teachers, pupils, parents
and society), is recognized. For the achievement of the above goals, the application of
systemic methodology facilitates a holistic inquiry of inclusive education policies and
thus a more effective determination of the relevant conditions and the required
activities.
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
42
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
References
1. Alexiadou N., Essex J., 2015. Teacher education for inclusive practice –
responding to policy. European Journal of Teacher Education 39(1): 1–15.
2. “vramidis E., Norwich ”.,
. Teachers’ attitudes towards integration/
inclusion: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs
Education 17(2): 129-147.
3. Banathy B.H., Jenlink P.M., 2001. Systems Inquiry and its Application in
Education. In D.H. Jonassen & J.C. Belland (Eds.), Handbook of Research for
Educational Communications and Technology: I - Foundations for Research in
Educational Communications and Technology. Bloomington, IN: Association for
Educational Communications and Technology. http://www.aect.org/edtech/ed1/.
Accessed 10 January 2017.
4. Barton L., 2012. The policy of inclusion. In A. Zoniou-Sideri (Ed.), Modern
inclusion approaches: Theory & practice. Athens: Pedio (in Greek).
5. Bender W.N., Vail C.O., Scott K., 1995. Teachers' attitudes toward increased
mainstreaming: Implementing effective instruction for students with learning
disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities 28(2): 87-94 & 120.
6. Black P., William D., 1998. Inside the black box. Raising standards through
classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan 80(2): 139-148.
7. Black-Hawkins K., 2012. Developing inclusive classroom practices: what
guidance do commercially published texts offer teachers? European Journal of
Special Needs Education 27(4): 499–516.
8. Blatchford P., Kutnick P., Baines E., Galton M., 2003. Toward a social pedagogy
of classroom group work. International Journal of Educational Research 39: 153–
172.
9. Boaler J., 2006. How a detracked mathematics approach promoted respect,
responsibility and high achievement. Theory Into Practice 45(1): 40–46.
10. Cesar M., Santos N., 2006. From exclusion to inclusion: Collaborative work
contributions to more inclusive learning settings. European Journal of
Psychology of Education 21(3): 333–346.
11. Corbett J., 2001. Supporting inclusive education: A connective pedagogy.
London: Routledge.
12. Díez D., Gatt S., Racionero S., 2011. Placing immigrant and minority family and
community members at the school’s centre the role of community participation.
European Journal of Education 46(2): 184–196.
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
43
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
13. Dyson A., 2005. Philosophy, politics and economics? The story of inclusive
education in England. In D. Mitchell (Ed.), Contextualising Inclusive Education:
Evaluating Old and New International Perspectives (pp. 63–88). London:
Routledge.
14. Dyson A., Kozleski E.B., 2008. Disproportionality in special education: A
transatlantic phenomenon. In L. Florian & M. McLaughlin (Eds.), Dilemmas and
Alternatives in the Classification of Children with Disabilities: New Perspectives
(pp. 170–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
15. EADSNE, 2005. Inclusive Education and Classroom Practice in Secondary
Education. Odense, Denmark: European Agency for Development in Special
Needs Education.
16. EADSNE, 2011. Key Principles for Promoting Quality in Inclusive Education –
Recommendations for Practice. Odense, Denmark: European Agency for
Development in Special Needs Education.
17. EADSNE, 2012. Teacher Education for Inclusion: Profile of Inclusive Teachers.
Odense, Denmark: European Agency for Development in Special Needs
Education.
18. EASNIE, 2016. Who we are. Brussels: European Agency for Special Needs and
Inclusive Education. https://www.european-agency.org/about-us/who-we-are.
Accessed 12 February 2017.
19. Elshabrawy E., Hassanein A., 2015. Inclusion, Disability and Culture. Rotterdam
&. Amsterdam: SensePublishers.
20. Flecha R. (Ed.), 2015. Successful Educational Actions for Inclusion and Social
Cohesion in Europe (INCLUD-ED Consortium). London: Springer International
Publishing.
21. Florian L., Black-Hawkins K., 2011. Exploring Inclusive Pedagogy. British
Educational Research Journal 37(5): 813–828.
22. Foulidi X., Papakitsos E.C., Karakiozis K., Papapanousi C., Theologis E.,
Argyriou
A.,
2016.
Systemic
Methodology
for
Developing
Teachers
Extracurricular Training. Journal of Educational Leadership and Policy 1(2): 3642.
23. Goodley D., 2007. Towards socially just pedagogies: Deleuzoguattarian critical
disability studies. International Journal of Inclusive Education 11(2): 317–334.
24. Harwood V., Humphrey N., 2008. Taking exception: Discourses of exceptionality
and the invocation of the ideal . In S. Gabel & S. Danforth Eds. , Disability and
the Politics of Education (pp. 371–383). New York: Peter Lang.
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
44
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
25. Koutrouba K., Vamvakari M., Steliou M.,
. Factors correlated with teachers’
attitudes towards the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs in
Cyprus. European Journal of Special Needs Education 21(4): 381–394.
26. Lakes R., Carter P., 2011. Neoliberalism and education: An introduction.
Educational Studies 47: 107–110.
27. Liasidou A., 2015. Inclusive Education and the issue of Change: Theory, Policy
and Pedagogy. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
28. Liasidou A., 2012. Inclusive education and critical pedagogy at the intersections
of disability, race, gender and class. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies
10(1): 168–184.
29. Makrygiannis P.S., Papakitsos E.C., 2015. Writing or programming an essay? An
interdisciplinary systemic experiment in language teaching. Journal of Global
Research in Education and Social Science 4(1): 16-24.
30. Marzano R.J., Pickering D., Pollock J.E., 2001. Classroom instruction that works:
Research based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
31. Meister H., 2012. Basic pedagogical and didactic principles of inclusion. In A.
Zoniou-Sideri (Ed.), Modern inclusion approaches: Theory & practice. Athens:
Pedio (in Greek).
32. OECD, 2010. Educating Teachers for Diversity: Meeting the Challenge.
Educational Research and Innovation. Paris: OECD Publishing.
33. OECD, 2012. Equity and Quality in Education: Supporting Disadvantaged
Students and Schools. Paris: OECD Publishing.
34. OECD, 2016. About the OECD. http://www.oecd.org/about. Accessed 13 January
2017.
35. Papakitsos E., 2013. The Systemic Modeling via Military Practice at the Service of
any Operational Planning. International Journal of Academic Research in
Business and Social Science 3(9): 176-190.
36. Papakitsos E.C., 2016a. Systemic Modelling for Relating Labour Market to
Vocational Education. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education
and Training 3(3): 166-184.
37. Papakitsos E.C., 2016b. The Application of Systems Methodology to Curriculum
Development in Higher Education. Higher Education Research 1(1): 1-9.
38. Papakitsos E.C., Chatzistratidi F., Makrygiannis P.S., Kardara M., 2016a. The
Application of Communicational Criteria in Designing Educational Websites.
Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Informatics in Education (CIE2016): 392401, University of Piraeus, 14-16 October 2016 (in Greek).
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
45
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
39. Papakitsos E.C., Foulidi X., Karakiozis K., Theologis E., Argyriou A., 2016b.
Alternative Funding of Schools in Europe. European Journal of Education
Studies 2(7): 1-9.
40. Papakitsos E.C., Foulidi X., Vartelatou S., Karakiozis K., 2017. The contribution of
Systems Science to planning in local educational administration. European
Journal of Education Studies 3(3): 1-11.
41. Papakitsos E.C., Karakiozis K., 2016. Conflict Management via Systemically
Planned Peer Mediation. European Journal of Alternative Education Studies 1(2):
68-84.
42. Papakitsos E.C., Makrygiannis P.S., Tseles D.I., 2015. Modelling the application
of Blended-Learning in Career Guidance projects of the Hellenic Secondary
Education. International Scientific Conference eRA–10: The SynEnergy Forum,
Piraeus University of Applied Sciences, Aigaleo, Greece, 23rd-25th of September
2015.
43. Reid G., 2005. Learning styles and inclusion. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
44. Rytivaara A., Kershner R., 2012. Co-teaching as a context for teachers’
professional learning and joint knowledge construction. Teaching and Teacher
Education 28(7): 999–1008.
45. Thacker V.J., Strudwick D., Babbedge E., 2002. Educating children with
emotional and behavioural difficulties: inclusive practice in mainstream schools.
London: Routledge Falmer.
46. UN, 2015. Sustainable Development Goals. Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and quality
education for all and promote lifelong learning. New York: United Nations.
http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/education. Accessed 13 January
2017.
47. UNESCO, 2013. Advocacy Guide: Promoting Inclusive Teacher Education –
Methodology. Bangkok: UNESCO.
48. UNESCO Hellas, (n.d.). What is UNESCO, What does UNESCO do.
http://www.unesco-hellas.gr/gr/1_1.htm. Accessed 13 January 2017 (in Greek).
49. UNESCO-IBE, 2008. Conclusions and Recommendations of the 48th Session of
the International Conference on Education (ED/BIE/CONFINTED 48/5). Geneva:
UNESCO-IBE.
50. Vaughn S., Schumm J., Jallad B., Slusher J., Saumell L.,
. Teachers’ views of
inclusion. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice 11(2): 96-106.
51. Fragkoudaki A., 1985. Sociology of education. Theories for the social unequality
in school. Athens: Papazisi (in Greek).
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
46
Evangelos C. Papakitsos, Konstantinos Karakiozis, Xanthippi Foulidi
SYSTEMIC METHODOLOGY FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION POLICIES IN
AREAS WITH ACUTE SOCIAL PROBLEMS
Creative Commons licensing terms
Authors will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms
will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community
to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that
makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this
research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Alternative Education
Studies shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflict of interests, copyright
violations and inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated on the research work. All the published works are meeting the
Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and noncommercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
European Journal of Alternative Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
47