INDEX FOR INCLUSION
IN THE CZECH PRIMARY SCHOOLS
TEACHERS SELF-EVALUATION
IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS
RESEARCH
Mgr. Jana Kratochvílová, Ph.D.
Mgr. Jiří Havel, Ph.D.
Brno 2012
MASARYK UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF EDUCATION
The monograph was published in the research project MSM0021622443 “Special needs
of pupils in the context of the Framework Educational Program for Basic Education”
and its financial support.
Reviewed:
Doc. PaedDr. Petr Franiok, Ph.D.
Doc. PhDr. Lea Květoňová, Ph.D.
© 2012 Jana Kratochvílová, Jiří Havel
© 2012 Masarykova univerzita
ISBN 978-80-210-5931-3
CONTENT
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................4
1. RESEARCH OF INCLUSIVE ENVIRONMENT
IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS ...........................................................7
2. RESEARCH DESIGN ................................................................11
2.1 RESEARCH TOOL..........................................................................................11
2.2 RESEARCH SAMPLE.....................................................................................13
2.3 SELF-EVALUATION PROCESS IN THE SCHOOLS .................................. 14
3. RESEARCH RESULTS .............................................................16
3.1 EVALUATION ACCORDING TO THE AVERAGE ....................................... 16
3.2 EVALUATION ACCORDING TO MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM
VALUES ..........................................................................................................22
3.3 EVALUATION ACCORDING TO MODE ......................................................24
3.4 EVALUATION OF VARIANCE OBTAINED VALUES .................................26
4. CHOSEN INDICATORS OF INCLUSION ............................30
4.1 INDICATORS SUPPORTING COMMUNICATION ....................................30
4.2 INDICATORS SUPPORTING COOPERATION ...........................................44
4.3 INDICATORS SUPPORTING INDIVIDUALIZATION AND
DIFFERENTIATION .....................................................................................52
4.4 INDICATORS SUPPORTING MAXIMUM EXPECTATION
FROM PUPILS ...............................................................................................60
4.5 INDICATORS SUPPORTING RESPECT AMONG PUPILS
AND EDUCATIONAL STAFF .......................................................................67
5. A SET OF ARGUMENTS OF SCHOOLS TO
INDIVIDUAL CRITERIA .........................................................74
6. SELF-EVALUATION OF INCLUSION – THE ADITED
VERSION OF FRAMEWORK FOR SELF-EVALUATION ...109
CONCLUSION ................................................................................114
SUMMARY........................................................................................116
REFERENCES ................................................................................118
LIST OF TABLES........................................................................... 120
LIST OF SCHEME ..........................................................................121
SUBJECT INDEX .......................................................................... 122
APPENDIX ...................................................................................... 124
4
INTRODUCTION
Since the early 90s of the last century, the Czech educational system
has gone through many changes which were a response to the evolving
requirements of the newly established democratic society. Changes
are initially manifested in the refusal of all old, the introduction of new
innovations, changes, inspirations from abroad and other educational
systems; gradually finding its own ways using foreign and domestic experience
and set in the Czech environment. The Czech schools have entered
the idea of autonomy in legal, economic and educational area. Changes
have been enshrined in many legislative documents, in particular through
a main document – Act No. 561/2004 Coll. Preschool, basic, secondary,
higher vocational and other education (Education Act)1
, in
which education is officially based on the principles of equal access to
every citizen.
Educational autonomy was supported by the statutory definition
of the so-called two-level curriculum. The curriculum at national level in
primary education introduces the Framework Educational Programme
for Basic Education which is compulsory and also the starting point for
the development of school curricula and schools can be profiled according
to their current conditions, visions and objectives by them. On the
one hand it allowed the selectivity of basic education – in mainstream
schools there were set up classes with extended education concentrated
on a certain area of education (languages, mathematics, computing,
sports classes etc.), classes for gifted, on the other hand many schools
recognized that it is better to create a suitable environment for
education of all pupils in their community and began to openly
report their education philosophy to the idea “School for All”.
Teachers or other school staff, parents or school authorities did not
have many experiences with the creation of an inclusive environment; there
were not many theoretical and practical resources. RNDr. Pavla Polechová,
CSc. has spread the ideas of inclusion in Czech together with teachers
of innovative schools, has shared the international project INCLUSIVE
since 2000 and who also participated in edition of publications Jak se dělá
škola pro všechny and Školy v pohybu. It was the first publication which
allowed teachers to look at the principles of inclusion in practice.
General acceptance of the idea of inclusion by some schools can
be mentioned to a following example of thesis which we chose from
1
every citizen of the Czech Republic or another EU member to education without discrimination
due to race, color, sex, language, belief and religion, nationality, ethnic or social origin,
property, birth, health status or other status of a citizen, consideration of educational needs
of individuals, mutual respect, respect, tolerance of opinion, solidarity and dignity of all trai-
nees.
5
their educational programs, by which the school expresses their interests:
we focus on creating a safe climate by eliminating of all manifestations
of humiliation of children; realize vivid activating educational
process that develops and strengthens social skills and attitudes of
children, especially their ability to cooperate on the basis of mutual
respect; education is based on understanding, respect and development
of individual needs and interests of each pupil; we offer a stimulating
and creative environment that stimulates the most capable pupils, encourages
the less gifted pupils, protects and supports the weakest pupils
and ensures that every child can develop optimally through education
tailored to individual needs in accordance with its requirements for
education; prepares the conditions for education of pupils with special
educational needs.
From examples it is clear that teachers in their formal curriculum
define educational strategies based on the terms of respecting of all pupils
and declare development according to their capabilities.
What is the reality? How are teachers at the Czech schools prepared
for an environment respecting diversity of pupils and at the same
time how do they use these differences in the educational process? How
do teachers evaluate any conditions in their school and to what extent is
their view reliable? How do they implement the intentions of their school
curriculum in practice?
The research team of Department of Primary Education Masaryk
University in Brno was looking for answers of above questions: Mgr.
Jana Kratochvílová, Ph.D., Mgr. Jiří Havel, Ph.D., PhDr. Hana Filová,
Ph.D. and external collaborator RNDr. Pavla Polechová, CSc. under the
sub-project of research plan MSM 0021622443 “Special needs of pupils in
the context of the Framework Educational Programme implemented at
the Faculty of Education of Masaryk University” (the main project executor
Prof. PhDr. Marie Vítková, CSc.). The overall design of the research
project of above mentioned team is described in the first chapter.
Other parts of publication describe further results of self-evaluation
activities of teachers of selected sample of schools who in the
school year 2007/2008 evaluated to what extent and how they fulfil the
conditions of education “School for All”. Data were obtained through
a questionnaire of “Framework for Self-evaluation of Conditions of Education”
which is abroad known under the title “Index for Inclusion”
and has been translated into over than 20 languages.
This publication offers experiences with the implementation of the
above research tool in practice in the Czech Republic and closer analyses
and interprets the data obtained. The presented results show the complexity
of the current process of transformation of Czech schools focused
on implementing the ideas of inclusion in the real life of schools and the
differences between schools.
6
Let are all of the findings challenge and inspire for teachers in creating
such educational conditions which ensure a good quality of education
for all their pupils to develop their personalities in all their qualities
of life in the sociable and supportive environment.
Jana Kratochvílová
7
1. RESEARCH OF INCLUSIVE
ENVIRONMENT IN PRIMARY
SCHOOLS
In the partial internal project of the research project called: “Filling
the Content of the Curriculum Framework for Education of
Pupils with Special Educational Needs in Primary School and
Possible Education Strategies for Working with Pupils with
Special Educational Needs Resulting in Integrative / Inclusive
Didactic”, we asked whether the Czech educational system is ready to
implement and support inclusive education in general, what conditions
and requirements are defined by the state towards inclusive education,
whether schools are ready to accept and provide support to all pupils, for
whom the inclusive education is a benefit and whether we, as educators
of teachers, are ready and able to adapt the current study programs and
the content of their disciplines into practice?
Inclusive education is perceived as “an on-going process aimed at
offering quality education for all while respecting diversity and the different
needs and abilities, characteristics and learning expectations of
the students and communities, eliminating all forms of discrimination”
(UNESCO-IBE, 2008).
Under the third paradigm of diversity (Sliwka 2010, in Evropská
agentura pro rozvoj speciálního vzdělávání, 2011), differences are seen as
a resource for individual and mutual learning and development.
We accept four characteristic features of inclusion from Ainscow
(2005):
• Inclusion is a process. That is to say, inclusion has to be seen as
a never-ending search to find better ways of responding to diver-
sity.
• Inclusion is concerned with the identification and removal of barriers.
Consequently, it involves collecting, collating and evaluating
information from a wide variety of sources in order to plan for improvements
in policy and practice.
• Inclusion is about the presence, participation and achievement of
all students.
• Inclusion involves a particular emphasis on those groups of learners
who may be at risk of marginalisation, exclusion or undera-
chievement.
To be able to answer these questions that we mentioned above, we
formulated the basic objectives resulting in the overall design of empirical
research for the six-year period 2007-2013 (see diagram research in
Appendix 1). Progress of research we divided into four stages, in terms
8
of time and in terms of research goals. To approach readers we will show
a brief description of the research although later in this publication we
consider only the partial phase of our project.
Stage No. 1: 2007–2008
a) Content analysis of school curricula of sampled schools. Here we focused
on how individual schools in their formal curriculum (which
they have newly framed and started to implement in schools since
the school year 2007/2008) limited the care for children with special
educational needs and what conditions they formed for them.
b) Content analysis of educational legislation which defines the requirements
for schools due to care of children with special educational
needs (Education Act, regulations, guidelines of Ministry of
Education, the curriculum for basic education Framework Program
for Basic Education).
Type of research: qualitative.
Method of research: content analysis of school programs and legis-
lation.
The research results are contained in the publications of the team
members in years 2007–2009 and in the monograph entitled: Analysis of
SEP of basic schools as a mean of qualitative development of inclusion in
Czech school (Kratochvílová, Filová, Havel, 2007a, 2007b; Kratochvílová
2009; Kratochvílová, Havel, 2011).
Outcomes:
transmission of the results of content analysis to schools for reviewing
the school curricula and description of the conditions of education
of pupils with special educational needs on a qualitatively
higher level in them, realizing all connections in real curriculum;
presentation and publication of results at conferences and monographic
work (see above).
Stage No. 2: 2009–2010
a) Self-evaluation of the conditions for inclusion of education in real
life of schools. That was carried out by a team of teachers through
questionnaires.
Type of research: Mixed design: quantitative and qualitative.
Method of research: questionnaire called “Framework for self-evaluation
of conditions of education” which was created by British original
“Indicator for the Inclusion of Children”, content analysis of the arguments
from the questionnaires.
b) Team observations of expert teachers in action with an emphasis
on education of pupils with special educational needs: didactic pro-
9
file – the choice of strategies, methods, forms of work, principles,
tools and arrangements for teachers working with pupils with special
educational needs.
Type of research: Mixed design: quantitative and qualitative.
Method of research: observation (own observation system), content
analysis of the record from observation “5 positive” (5P).
Research results from this stage are contained in publications of the
team members in 2009–2011 and in the monograph entitled: “Self-evaluation
of Inclusive Environment in Primary Schools” (analytical study – results
of Framework for Self-evaluation Conditions of Evaluation), 2009.
Outcomes:
publications of partial results in the journal called “Komenský”
and presentations at conferences;
a set of eight workshops realized at schools for the purpose of exchange
experiences in education of pupils with special educational
needs and external evaluation of the strengths of an inclusive envi-
ronment.
Stage No. 3: 2011–2012
a) Evaluation of data from observations.
b) Creating a simpler tool for monitoring the conditions of education
supporting the inclusion and its verification and evaluation – a review
of existing instruments.
c) Observation of expert teachers in action with an emphasis on
teaching strategies supporting inclusive environment.
Type of research: Mixed design: quantitative and qualitative.
Method of research: content analysis of data from observations,
a quantitative evaluation of the level of care of children with special educational
needs in the real life of school, quantitative and qualitative analysis
of the results of a new self-evaluation tool.
Planned outcomes:
Publishing the results of observation, conference presentations.
The final form of the questionnaire for self-evaluation of conditions
of education – the new version.
Monograph contains the results of self-evaluation conditions of
school No II.
Stage No. 4: 2013
a) Final conference with international participation.
b) Monograph summarizing the findings of the research of conditions
of inclusive education in primary schools.
10
Analytical study presented in this publication is built on the content
analysis of educational programs which we realized on a sample of
eight primary schools in years 2007 and 2008.
The aim of this study is to present research results. Its aim
was to find teachers’ views on practical security conditions for inclusive
education in participating schools, i.e. school and class climate, applied
the principles and strategies of education and didactic resources “Schools
for All”, a school which elementary schools often declare in their school
programs and this idea becomes a part of the overall philosophy of the
school.
According to the extensive research investigation we offer the chosen
data in this publication which, we believe, could point to the complexity
of the issue of inclusive education, the differences in understanding,
but also to ensure conditions for all pupils in their schools and the difficulties
that arise from subjectivity of evaluation of individual schools.
11
2. RESEARCH DESIGN
The aim of our research was to determine what conditions teachers
create to their pupils in primary schools in education from the view on inclusion
and how they evaluate these conditions and verbalize. The starting
point for our investigation has become the following research questions:
1. How do teachers evaluate the level of ensuring conditions of an
inclusive education in their school? (Quantitative approach)
2. Are teachers able to agree to the self-evaluation conditions at work
in a team?
3. How do teachers understand the offered indicators of inclusion?
4. What arguments do teachers choose for defend of their evaluation?
(Qualitative approach).
5. What arguments do teachers use for improving the situation?
(Qualitative approach)
For finding answers to these questions, we have chosen quantitative
and qualitative approach and the corresponding research tool.
2.1 RESEARCH TOOL
For the self-evaluation of conditions of inclusion education
of schools, we have chosen an exploratory method used with the questionnaire
“Framework of self-evaluation conditions of education”.
The Framework of self-evaluation of conditions of education was
developed from an adaptation of the British original. The first adaptation
for the Czech environment was performed in the summer of 2002 by
a group of twenty teachers from schools involved in international project
INCLUSIVE (international project focused on multicultural education):
ES Chrudim, Dr. Malík; ES Krnov, Opavská, ES Ivančice-Řeznovice and
individual teachers from other schools under the supervising of RNDr.
Pavla Polechová, CSc. British draft was the structure, forming a crucial
part of the publication, whose name we could loosely translate as Index
for Inclusion2
. Material prepared by a team of several research institutes
in close cooperation with school has been available in every British school
since 2000 and has contributed to the creation of such school communities
in which all pupils and students live and learn together and through
their individual specific (health limitations, ethnicity, home background
etc.) reach the maximum possible success. This principle does not have to
be understood dogmatically – the starting points are education together
and inspire resulting from the use of differences. However, the best interest
of the child is the main aspect.
2
Booth, T. & Ainscow, M. (2002) Index for Inclusion: Developing Learning and Participation in
Schools. Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education (CSIE).
12
The whole questionnaire was divided into three main parts:
A. the creation of school culture and climate supporting inclusion,
B. the creation and cultivation of rules for dealing with supporting
inclusion,
C. support and develop inclusion of everyday life.
The original version of the questionnaire included a total of 45 criteria
for evaluation. Each criterion was followed by so-called “quidance
question” (479 in total). Czech version of 2002 was modified under the
leadership Pavla Polechová, included 42 criteria and the “guidance questions”
were greatly reduced in the number 195. For our research needs
we have taken over a modified Czech version and we realized slight modifications.
Some criteria and guidance self-evaluation questions we have
ruled out, some questions we have put conversely. Administered form
of the questionnaire contained a total of 40 inclusion criteria finally
(items for evaluation). The criteria were specified together by 186 selfevaluation
questions (sample of self-evaluation questionnaire is in Appendix
2).
Research tool of 2007 is divided into three basic areas (as well as
the original British version):
Part A is aimed at evaluating the school culture which reflects
the mutual cooperation between all members of the community
– students, teachers, parents; mutual respect and values related
to respecting individuals and their differences. This part contains
11 criteria with 46 guidance questions.
Part B refers to the specific principles and conditions of inclusion
education, rules and safety for all students. It contains 14 criteria
with 48 guidance questions.
Part C defines the indicators of inclusive didactic and affects the
process of teaching and learning directly. It contains 15 criteria
with 92 guidance questions.
The level of evaluation of inclusion criteria respondents expressed
on the seven-point scale (1 – not at all, 7 – completely). To each of
criteria respondents attributed the arguments in the first column which
they justified their chosen level for the evaluation of a current state and
the means to achieve an optimal state in the second column. Therefore,
it is a tool supporting self-regulation in improving the quality of
their schools.
The real evaluation activity and benefit for school teams consisted
of (more than in actual scoring criteria on a scale 1-7) searching and finding
specific evidence i.e. arguments as a basis for scoring evaluation of
each statement and particularly in the setting of further objectives and
funds to their fulfilment. Therefore, it is essential if the argument – the
answer to the current situation – school filled or not. First, respondents
had to think about the arguments and second, it allows them to return
13
to self-evaluation tool in presence or in future and think about it for
further school improvement. From teachers’ feedback, we found that the
tool itself is demanding:
a) to the time of respondents;
b) to the communication of team and the arguments;
c) to the formulation of new objectives and actions;
d) and probably also on understanding the importance of some criteria
of inclusion and guidance questions of teachers themselves
in Czech schools. One outcome from the research is that teachers’
arguments sometimes did not correspond to the content of the cri-
terion.
Difficulty of tool consists primarily in formulating relevant arguments.
This illustrates the fact that we completely miss the two arguments
of school so the qualitative analysis of the arguments has
been evaluated only from six schools. We are aware of demanding tool for
time of respondents, team communication, reasoning, formulating goals
and to understanding some of the criteria. All of these statements could
affect the access of teachers to self-evaluation activities. These results
led us to attempt to create a new simpler form of evaluation tool which we
could offer to schools in the Czech conditions (see Chapter 5).
2.2 RESEARCH SAMPLE
Educators of primary school attended this self-evaluation process;
finally there were eight elementary schools. It was a deliberate choice in
which we focused on equitable representation of rural or urban schools.
Although in the first phase original research sample formed ten schools
for analysis, we were not able to retrieve completely filled materials from
two chosen subjects. Positive contrast even after was preserved a balanced
representation of elementary schools from Brno and rural schools. The
other schools we numbered as 1 to 8 just for our processing. Schools from
Brno (i.e. schools number 1, 4, 6, 8) are mostly fully organized, there are
also two kindergartens integrated in. Number of students is from 217 to
649.
In contrast, three schools explicitly stated that they also educate
foreigners and children of various ethnicities, so it also brings a wide
range of social and cultural background of pupils. Number of teachers is
between 16 and 41. In schools with integrated kindergarten the number
of teachers is also increased due to teachers of kindergarten. Specifically
there is noticed nearly 100% of the qualification in schools in Brno (in
some cases teachers are still studying).
It was also found a pedagogical enthusiasm and a wide participation
in the actions of teachers’ lifelong education. Specific activities
towards the readiness of teachers for working with pupils with special
14
educational needs (SEN) or with exceptionally gifted pupils were not no-
ticed.
From rural schools there was one fully organized and three schools
were listed among small schools. In all the mentioned subjects is also kindergarten
integrated in! The number of pupils is between 45 to 165 pupils.
In view of social and cultural background of children it deals much
more homogeneous environment than in contemporary urban schools in
general. Number of teachers was quoted between 3 and 13. It is necessary
to add one or two teachers from kindergarten. Qualification varies
between 90 and 100% (and some teachers are still studying in further
education). Even in rural schools with high activity at events of teacher’s
lifelong education do not focus on specific activities towards working with
pupils with SEN or with exceptionally gifted pupils. Some of the observed
rural schools (number 5 and 7) are directly involved in the organization
and methodological guidance of further education of teachers.
2.3 SELF-EVALUATION PROCESS IN THE SCHOOLS
Our goal was not to evaluate educational conditions only individually,
but rather as a result of teamwork in their evaluation. Therefore,
the condition for completing the questionnaire was teamwork of teachers
in school due to a reducing the subjective evaluation by individuals
and thus strengthening validity and reliability. Participating respondents
had to evaluate together each of the forty common criteria on a scale
1–7 (1 – not at all, 7 – absolutely yes) based on some conventional wisdom
which was the result of discussion held over the guidance questions, improve
clarity the criteria of quality. Quantitative expression they had to
rely on arguments which they justified their evaluation.
Through the questionnaire the schools evaluated their level of
readiness to be a school for all. Each educational staff discussed whether
they can accept and use the differences of their pupils to develop their full
potentials as well as enrichment of others. The questionnaire was evaluated
together – by team. The result was a questionnaire for primary
level. At an incomplete school and at a small school, all teachers had
to participate on filling the questionnaire, at fully organized school was
enough a team consisted at least five teachers (one teacher representatives
the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th class).
Respondents had to receive the following instructions in ad-
vance:
1. read the criterion together and read its guidance questions;
2. write the current situation at their school (the first stage) and the
fact demonstrated it into left column;
3. write goals that the school will follow in the next period (two years)
and their means of fulfilment into right column;
15
4. the level of achievement of arguments in the present – i.e. evaluate
the current situation by checking the numbers on the numeric scale;
5. save the resulting form of Frameworks, print it for their needs and
send us.
It was highlighted to schools that the benefit of work does not lie
only in scoring the indicator on a scale from 1 to 7, but mainly in searching
and finding specific evidence, i.e. arguments as a basis for scoring
evaluation of each statement and then in setting goals and means for
their fulfillment. The tool could be also used for self-evaluation of school
activities.
16
3. RESEARCH RESULTS
Due to the nature of the research tool it is possible to get quantitative
data (level expression by degree) and qualitative data (content
analysis of arguments for sub-criteria) which are very important for
evaluation the objectivity of the chosen degree. For this reason the results
of research are interpreted quantitatively according to chosen aspects
closely tied to the results of qualitative investigation. Our aim
was to capture, if possible, all aspects that led the educational staff
to the specific classification or argumentation. All the possible views,
which we analysed, we present at the same order as they were formed
and some of them were also partially published (Havel, Filová, Kratochvílová
2009; Havel, Kratochvílová 2009; Havel, Filová, Kratochvílová
2010a, 2010b).
3.1 EVALUATION ACCORDING TO THE AVERAGE
The first aspect for evaluating the obtained data is the usual quantitative
aspect, i.e. the arithmetic average of all items. Generally, we can
say that big differences have been appeared in the self-evaluation of
school and in their argumentation:
A. At the quantitative evaluation of indicators – average school evaluated
the best 6,7 on their own; the worst degree by self-evaluation
was 4,7.
B. At the qualitative – the content justification of self-evaluation – i.e.
in the chosen argumentation.
According to the score, which school gave to itself, school No. 7
evaluates itself as the most positive (rural school). This school has the
highest point average for each question, exactly 6,7. Just to it, there is
one urban school with point average 6,6 according to the view on selfevaluation.
These two schools indicate the middle and most frequently
occurring value (median and modus) the highest possible, i.e. 7. They also
indicate the same minimum evaluation of questions – 5 points.
An elementary school No. 2 (rural school) evaluates itself
such as worst (or the most modest) with average only 4,7 points,
the middle value (median) and the most frequently occurring value
(modus) is only 5 points. Just in front of them, there is a school No.
6 (urban school) with much more optimistic evaluation. School No. 5
(rural schools), whose argumentation belongs to one of the most elaborate
and most specified, is self-evaluated on the third position with 6,5
points evaluation. General overview of the achieved values is shown in
Table No 1.
17
Table No. 1: Ranking the schools in order of decreasing average
AVERAGE 6,7 6,6 6,5 6,2 6,2 6,0 5,9 4,7
MODUS 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 5
MEDIAN 7 7 7 6 7 6 6 5
MAXIMUM 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
MINIMUM 5 5 3 4 5 4 2 1
SCHOOL NUMBER 7 1 5 8 3 4 6 2
From considered database of criteria we were also interested in
criteria evaluated (from point of view of average) the best and the worst.
These results are presented in the following text.
The best evaluated criteria
B 1.2 The school tries to accept all pupils from the catchment area.
C 1.12 Each pupil has the opportunity to participate in leisure activities
of the school.
A 2.6 The school tries to minimize any discriminatory practices and
acts of discrimination.
B 2.1 All forms of support of optimal development of child are con-
sistent.
B 2.7 There are reduced pressures to a disciplinary exclusion.
B 1.4 It is helped to all new pupils to feel comfortable and safe at
school.
B 2.3 Working with pupils with SEN is based on inclusive principles.
B 2.5 Support for pupils, for whom the Czech language is not a native
language, is coordinated with the support of their learning
as such.
So schools see themselves as the best in criterion B 1.2 – The
school tries to accept all pupils from the catchment area. In this
criterion the maximum value for all schools is at grade 7, which is not
in accordance with the information included in given item or in connection
with another criterion: “Wheelchair access is a part of a plan
for improving the school building...”.; “...physically disabled pupils have
not been interested in our school yet. If that happened, they would be
sent to school... that is designed as a barrier-free”. Although the school
justifies this situation by attitude of the municipal council, it should
not to indicate the maximum value into criterion B 1.2. Only schools
No. 1 and 6 should aspire to maximum value of this criterion for similar
reasons. According to the arguments, it is obvious that not all schools
“can” be a school for all in a broad sense. However, it should correspond
with self-evaluation.
18
The second best evaluated criterion is C1.12 – Each pupil has
the opportunity to participate in leisure activities of the school.
Only school No. 2 is more critical and comments its degree 6 by words:
“expand the offer of leisure activities” which does not apply to access for
all, it is not obvious. Otherwise, most of the arguments are adequate:
“They are adapted to opportunities for all pupils”; “They have the opportunity
to participate in activities according to their interests”; “All actions
of the school educational program are available to all students regardless
of their results or disability and their background.“
Although the criterion A2.6 – The school tries to minimize any
discriminatory practices and acts of discrimination seems like the
third best evaluated criterion, but used arguments do not correspond,
they are not specific enough: “School is more than trying to eliminate discrimination
of any form. The school has experts in prevention of socially
pathological phenomena”; “We are working on eliminating experienced
stereotypes”; “The school tries to minimize any form of discrimination.
Tasks are allocated to pupils according to their ability; everybody is handy
for something else.”
The fourth best evaluated criterion is B 2.1 – All forms of support
of optimal development of child are consistent. Either there
are not the arguments usually adequate. Answers such as “Yes” do not
tell anything about the situation. As an acceptable, we can include the
following: “year leadership, consultation of all teachers in the classroom“;
“Every teacher is actively involved in finding ways to help the child with
barriers in learning. They share experiences and results of their observations
of the child together.” “Class teacher transmits information about
pupils to other teachers.”
Argumentation of criterion B 2.7 – There are reduced pressures
to a disciplinary exclusion – is obvious, that problems are often
solved in the bud and in broader partnership of stakeholders in observed
schools. This is a positive finding and totally, it is the fifth best evaluated
criterion. But the argument: “There has been no disciplinary exclusion
in schools till now,” is perhaps a scuffle “heads in the sand.” After all
there are situations at primary education, when the pupil is excluded by
variety activities or when the pupil is punished. On the contrary, a very
solid argument is the resolution: “we prevent a problematic behaviour of
pupils by consistent observation.” So we just note that it is necessary to
work simultaneously on parental education, too.
Demographic develop causes that the vast majority of primary
schools do not prevent to acceptance any of new pupils due to existential
reasons currently, at any time. The arguments set out the criterion B
1.4 – It is helped to all new pupils to feel comfortable and safe
at school show that they have a relatively well-developed system of introduction
and adaptation of new pupils. The fact records to situation
19
that kindergartens are much more often part of the elementary schools
which requires the existence of “common objectives, strategies, events,
trips etc...” To a large extent they used “social and communicative games
to pull-in a new child into the collective of a class or a group work.” Conversely
unique, but very interesting, is a system when “each new pupil
has a mentor.” It is also pleasant, that some schools (despite the apparent
satisfaction with the level of this criterion) declare its decision to “develop
a comprehensive program for new pupils.”
At the seventh best evaluated criterion B 2.3 – Working with
pupils with SEN is based on inclusive principles is showed, how
teachers recognize that they cannot access to pupils with special educational
needs by the same “template”. The inclusive principles presented
by schools almost miss the moment when the methods and forms of this
education would be used for example for improving experiences of all pupils
or at least as prevention.
Last one of the best evaluated criteria, which we show, is B 2.5
– Support for pupils, for whom the Czech language is not a native
language, is coordinated with the support of their learning
as such. It is very pleasant that the observed schools evaluate
their readiness in this area as high because pupils, for whom Czech is
not the native language, in our schools increase significantly. But! The
general formulations which were completed into scoring – for example,
“maximum effort to support these pupils”, are not relevant again. It is
also evident that in most schools are educated only pupils with Czech
language so this situation is not really dealt in schools. However, teaching
staff should be ready for future which is related to lifelong education,
of course.
At first view, it is clear that among the best evaluated criteria
dominate those which were showed in area B focused on applying the
principles of maximum participation in the creation and development
of an inclusive environment in school. It can be said that our schools
are well prepared to educate a broad spectrum of children with special
educational needs or the principles of inclusion are often treated superficially
with some obvious, because it should be like that? Or even does
the education go already quite well? The answer will not be so easy. The
acquired knowledge is necessary to be clarified by other research tools
– for example observation of conditions of inclusion in education of elementary
schools.
In the following text, there are chosen and commented arguments
of criteria that were evaluated according to the average as the worst.
20
The worst evaluated criteria
B 1.3 Does the school consult with organizations, which associate
people with handicap, how the school should provide the
wheelchair access?
C 1.11 The access to homework contributes to learning of all pupils.
C 1.10 Teachers and assistants for pupils with SEN encourage and
promote active learning of each pupil.
A 2.1 Achieving of maximum results is expected of all pupils.
C 1.6 Self-evaluation and evaluation support the performance of
each pupil.
B 2.4 Way of identification and evaluation of SEN leads to the elimination
of barriers to learning and active participation of all
pupils.
A 1.2 Pupils help each other.
C 2.3 School staff produces or makes available sources (materials) to
support learning and active participation of all pupils, teachers
and parents.
C 1.5 Pupils work during lesson together.
The worst evaluated criterion B 1.3 – Does the school consult
with organizations, which associate people with handicap, how
the school should provide the wheelchair access? Low average
value significantly affects the school No. 2 which gives a single leader
used “one” throughout the research. In addition, this criterion appears
the highest dispersion of values. As an acceptable argument, we can offer:
“The school has a wheelchair access inside and outside. Two students
attend the school in a wheelchair.” We cannot accept such an argument:
“In school, there is no need to provide a wheelchair access at a present
time“ or “school is locked because of safety of pupils, access after the ring
is always allowed by the staff” – There was probably a misunderstanding
of the questions concerning the accessibility of “all”.
As the second worst evaluated criterion sounded C 1.11 – The access
to homework contributes to learning of all pupils. There is
evaluated to 7 points only one school, its comment is not answering the
partial questions under this criterion. There are often used one-word answers
“Yes” or merely repeating the question, not their own meaningful
argument. An example of a good argument is: “we differentiate homework,
we enter optional tasks, use the class library, internet classroom.”
“Homework is entered in that way that all pupils can satisfy it. Some tasks
are awarded on a voluntary basis; sometimes pupils have the opportunity
of their choice.”
The third worst evaluated criterion is C 1.6 – Self-evaluation and
evaluation support the performance of each pupil. For this item is
characterized a really high dispersion of value between schools. School
21
No. 7 and No. 5 are the best self-evaluated, the quality of comments
of school No. 5 is substantially higher than the quality of comments of
school No. 7. As a very adequate we can evaluate arguments such: “Pupils
regularly evaluate not only the results of their activities, but also the
learning process and the causes of success or failure. They are looking for
ways how to make a change in their own learning.” “Regularly used selfevaluation
of pupils allows them to reflect their knowledge, skills, level of
key competencies. At the end of group work we perform evaluations (writing
– a questionnaire, or oral).” “Information books are based on weekly
and monthly self-evaluation (pupils’ books are replaced).”
In the fourth worst evaluated criterion C 1.10 – Teachers and
assistants for pupils with SEN encourage and promote active
learning of each pupil were self-evaluated only 3 of 7 schools with an
assistant. Of course it tapers view of their support of pupil learning. The
importance of assistants will probably grow which can be documented
by the fact that one school declares its resolve “to provide more teaching
assistants.”
Also at criterion B 2.4 – Way of identification and evaluation
of SEN leads to the elimination of barriers to learning and active
participation of all pupils which is the fifth worst evaluated it seems
that observed schools can handle. They create functional individual educational
plans “based on pupil’s testing in the PPCC and SPC.” It is also
necessary to remind that the source of critical information also should be
parents or interested members of the teaching staff. One school also declared
intention to “create individual programs for pupils with disabilities
(problems) of behaviour.“
Another low evaluated criterion is A 1.2 – Pupils help each other.
Mutual assistance in the imagination of teachers is often linked to
the use of cooperative learning. With some exceptions (implementation
of personal and social education) schools little comment on the moral
profiling of pupils and educational activities of school, in general. Another
thing, that is gradually getting into public awareness of the majority
of schools, is a message that everyone is different, has different talents,
interests and needs – and that is the beauty and adventure of social co-
existence.
Among the worst evaluated criterion also belongs C 2.3 – School
staff produces or makes available sources (materials) to support
learning and active participation of all pupils, teachers and parents.
There is an exchange of materials between teachers and mutual
enrichment in many schools. We can find differences in various ways to
enable resources to parents and pupils. From these arguments, it is obvious
the diversity of teaching approaches and strategies which teachers
implement in realization of education supporting the inclusion. Group of
them can be an inspiration for teachers to their own self-reflection related
22
to the question: How do I (teacher) contribute to the idea of “School for
All“ in my class, i.e. schools with friendly faces?
The last mentioned criterion is C 1.5 – Pupils work during lesson
together. This item is closely related to social and personal competence
defined in the FEP. From the statements is clear that teachers pay
great attention to the cooperation of pupils in the classroom and in the
school. The statements are much more specific, mentioned activities in
the arguments go to cooperation, mutual assistance and respecting the
rules of communication in joint activities as well as their presentation.
It is also necessary to note that there are significant differences in the
argumentation of schools.
The above examples show how difficult is to find suitable arguments
to the chosen criteria. It requires understanding the whole issue
of inclusive schools and very carefully considers the situation in school. If
there is no comparison between schools, their statements are very different
in terms of degree of subjectivity. For this reason, we offer a battery
of criteria and arguments to participating schools that may serve to understand
the issue and reflect on their access and conditions (see Chapter
5 – A set of arguments of schools to partial criteria).
3.2 EVALUATION ACCORDING TO MAXIMUM AND
MINIMUM VALUES
Team of respondents could evaluate the sub-criteria up to grade 7;
it means that this criterion school fulfils “Wholly” or grade 1 with meaning
“Not at all”. Frequency of use of individual grade in the evaluation
criteria is shown in table No. 2.
Table No. 2: Percentage frequency grades in the evaluation
criteria
TOTAL 320 97%
7 140 44%
6 89 28%
5 55 17%
4 18 6%
3 2 1%
2 2 1%
1 1 0%
In 44% of cases schools are self-evaluated in the submitted criteria
by maximal degree 7, 28% degree 6 and 17% degree 5. Other grade
4, 3, 2, 1 occupy almost insignificant percentage. The highest evaluation
degree of 7 appears three times more often than it would correspond to
23
a uniform distribution (14,3%). It may mean that schools create excellent
conditions for inclusion or simply overestimate themselves. All criteria
received at least one maximum value 7. Only in five cases we observed
lower values than degree 4.
These criteria received degree three:
B 1.5 Does the school create its classroom so the respect of all
pupils equally is clear? (School No. 2)
Low evaluation appears probably from one reason – school No 2.
makes its class technically, i.e. according to the number of pupils. In most
schools pupils with special educational needs are integrated into heterogeneous
classes and re-education is implemented for example through
their dedicated work with special educators or directly differentiated
work by these pupils in ordinary classes.
B 2.4 Way of identification and evaluation of SEN leads to the
elimination of barriers to learning and active participation
of all pupils. (School No. 5)
The school also declares its intention: “to create individual programs
for pupils with disabilities (problems) of behaviour.” Perhaps the
evaluation may increase when it finds the ways how: “to study the possibility
to create individual programs, to find ways, how to record them
efficiently and easily find ways to record the progress of the child.”
These criteria received degree two:
C 1.6 Self-evaluation and evaluation support the performance of
each pupil. (School No. 2)
The school in arguments quite critically notes that the current
methods of evaluation do not reflect individual pupil development too
much. In the future it intends to create such evaluation methods that will
contribute to the recording of development of the individual pupil. However,
the school does not state the specific design.
C 1.10Teachers and assistants for pupils with SEN encourage and
promote active learning of each pupil. (School No. 6)
The school argues that it has only one assistant and in the future
it wants to ensure more assistants.
These criteria received degree one:
B 1.3 Does the school consult with organizations, which associate
people with handicap, how the school should provide
the wheelchair access? (School No.2)
The need of barrier-free access the school does not solve, this issue
will be solved at the moment of actual needs. We believe that this issue
should be dealt with the promoter in advance.
24
In the following table No. 3 is clearly shown what the minimum
value schools used to quantify the criteria. At the same time there is
documented that all schools used the maximum value.
Table No. 3: Sorting schools in order of decreasing minimum
AVERAGE 6,6 6,2 6,69 5,95 6,23 6,47 5,9 4,73
MODE 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 5
MEDIAN 7 7 7 6 6 7 6 5
MAXIMUM 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
MINIMUM 5 5 5 4 4 3 2 1
SCHOOL NUMBER 1 3 7 4 8 5 6 2
3.3 EVALUATION ACCORDING TO MODE
We calculated the modus to determine the characteristics of the position
in the evaluation scale. We were interested, which values are used
most frequently by schools and also which criteria are most often evaluated
by certain degree. These data are inserted into the table number 4
and follow-up summary.
Table No. 4: Chosen schools according to mode
School
Number
7 1 5 3 8 4 6 2
MODE 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 5
Frequency
of using
modus
30
times
26
times
22
times
20
times
18
times
14
times
24
times
17
times
The table shows the number how many times each school used
a value of modus. Modus acquires a grade 7 mostly (in 60% of criteria),
grade 6 (in 32,5% of criteria) and level 5 (in 7,5% of criteria). It means
that schools evaluate in the sub-criteria usually very positive on their
own. A comprehensive summary of evaluation of individual criteria is
listed below. Our comments, you can find in the third chapter.
List of criteria with a mode 7:
A 2.2 Teachers, school management, pupils and their parents / guardians
share a philosophy of inclusion
A 2.3 Does a school use a variety of pupils?
A 2.4 Workers and pupils are respected as individuals and as members
of groups who perform a role
25
A 2.6 School tries to minimize any discriminatory practices and acts of
discrimination
B 1.1 Every school staff has the same conditions for acceptance and professional
growth
B 1.2 School tries to accept all pupils from the catchment area
B 1.3 Does the school consult with organizations, which associate people
with handicap, how the school should provide the wheelchair
access?
B 1.4 It is helped to all new pupils to feel comfortable and safe at
school
B 1.5 Does the school create its classroom so the respect of all pupils
equally is clear?
B 2.1 All forms of support of optimal development of child are consistent
B 2.3 Working with pupils with SEN is based on inclusive principles
B 2.4 Way of identification and evaluation of SEN leads to the elimination
of barriers to learning and active participation of all pupils
B 2.5 Support for pupils, for whom the Czech language is not a native
language, is coordinated with the support of their learning as such
B 2.7 There are reduced pressures to a disciplinary exclusion
B 2.8 Barriers to school attendance are removed
B 2.9 It minimizes the risk of bullying
C 1.1 Education respects the diversity of pupils
C 1.2 Educational process is accessible to all pupils
C 1.3 Education develops understanding of the differences
C 1.4 Pupils are actively engaged in their own learning
C 1.7 Discipline in the classroom is based on mutual respect and compliance
rules created together
C 1.8 Teachers plan, teach and reflect on their work in partnership
C 1.10 Teachers and assistants for pupils with SEN encourage and promote
active learning of each pupil
C 1.12 Each pupil has the opportunity to participate in leisure activities
of the school
C 2.1 Professional and human qualities of each employee are fully
known and utilized
C 2.2 Differences between pupils are used as a source of teaching and
learning and mutual enrichment
List of criteria with a mode 6:
A 1.1 Everyone is welcome (there are arrangements to ensure that everyone
can feel good)
A 1.2 Pupils help each other
A 1.3 Employees of school support and help each other
A 1.4 Employees of school and pupils respect each other
A 2.1 Achieving of maximum results is expected from all pupils
26
A 2.5 Employees of school create optimal conditions for education of
each pupil
B 2.2 Further education helps teachers to work with diversity of pu-
pils
C 1.5 Pupils work together during education
C 1.6 Self-evaluation and evaluation support the performance of each
pupil
C 1.9 Teachers are interested in learning support and active participation
of all pupils
List of criteria with a mode 5:
C 1.11 The access to homework contributes the learning of all pupils
A 1.5 Between teachers and parents / guardians of pupils is a partner-
ship
B 2.6 Rules and procedures for the emotional and spiritual support of
pupils are linked with the development of the educational program
and procedures supported learning
C 2.3 School staff produces or makes available means (materials) to
support learning and active participation of all pupils, teachers
and parents
3.4 EVALUATION OF VARIANCE OBTAINED VALUES
We were also interested in dispersion (variance) of measured
values of the individual criteria in the data processing. The following
table No. 5 shows, in which statements schools were varied most.
Table No. 5: Criteria with the largest variance
Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Variance
B 1.3. Does the school consult with
organizations, which associate people
with handicap, how the school should
provide the wheelchair access?
7 1 7 5 x 4 7 4 4,29
C 1.10. Teachers and assistants for
pupils with SEN encourage and promote
active learning of each pupil
7 x x 7 x 2 x 5 4,19
B 1.5. Does the school create its
classroom so the respect of all pupils
equally is clear?
6 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 3,45
C 1.6. Self-evaluation and evaluation
support the performance of each
pupil
6 2 6 5 7 5 7 6 2,25
27
Criteria B 1.3 and C 1.10 are among the items with the largest
variance, they also belong to items with the best evaluated criteria according
to average (see description on page 17-20). In contrast, criteria C
1.6 and B 2.4, belong among the worst evaluated criteria according to
average (see note on page 20-23).
The above mentioned criteria have been already interpreted and
it does not need to deal with their content. These findings lead us to the
question: “Why the criteria are evaluated differently by schools?” Is it
according to reason the conditions in schools are so different or is it the
misunderstanding of contents of the specified criteria and thus distorted
the real situation?
Criterion B 1.3 – Does the school consult with organizations,
which associate people with handicap, how the school should
provide the wheelchair access? – has two guidance questions: Is
a wheelchair access also a part of a plan for improving the school building?
Does the school seek permanent progress in the accessibility of school?
We can find the arguments in the second of above questions but without
the knowledge of the context: “School is locked because of safety of pupils,
access after the ring is always allowed by the staff.” The lowest degree (1)
was chosen by school which in its arguments indicates that it does not
have disabled pupils currently and if it is necessary they will solve this
situation. It is also within the competence of a school founder and building
a barrier-free access is a long-term issue.
Increased objectivity of the evaluation could help to reformulation
of the criteria and guidance questions in the future which could
lead to increased objectivity. For example criterion B 1.3 could be defined
as follows: The part of school is also a wheelchair access. Guidance
questions: Is there a concept of school and school founder for building
a barrier-free access? Is it real to build a barrier-free access (in terms of
architectural and economic)?
The large variance of values in criterion C 1.10 Teachers and assistants
for pupils with SEN encourage and promote active learning
of each pupil is given by the situation that assistant was only in
one school at the time of research. Other schools could not tell anything
to this criterion, but some of them set the value by degree 7. School with
assistant evaluated this criterion by degree 2.
A further significant variance in criterion B 1.5 Does the school
create its classroom so the respect of all pupils equally is clear? is
caused by the evaluation school No. 2. It is a small school with compound
classes where the main aspect of the distribution of pupils is the number
of pupils in class. Ways how to divide pupils into ordinary classes are
very limited.
A very diverse evaluation can be seen in criterion C 1.6 Self-evaluation
and evaluation support the performance of each pupil.
28
This corresponds to a very different level of an argumentation of schools.
The lowest evaluation gave itself the school No. 2, which states that the
existing methods of evaluation do not reflect individual pupil development
too much, but also illustrates the efforts to solve this situation in
the future. The highest quality of comments achieves school No. 5 which
is justifiably evaluated by degree 7.
In the following groups of criteria (see table No. 6) we can see that
the variance in the degree of evaluation of schools is minimal. Most of the
criteria received grade 7 and 6 from the schools. Zero variance becomes in
criterion B 1.2 School tries to accept all pupils from the catchment
area. School No. 7 (small school with compound classes) takes pupils
outside of their catchment area, if parents are interested in.
From argumentation of criterion C 1.12 Each pupil has the opportunity
to participate in leisure activities of the school is clear
that there is a rich range of leisure activities in schools which is sufficiently
varied and is “supposedly” open to all. From argumentation, we
did not find how much is open to pupils from poor social backgrounds,
how their participation in these activities is dealt with financially and
whether the claims are indeed real.
Table No. 6: Criteria with the lowest variance
Criterion 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Variance
A 2.6 School tries to minimize any
discriminatory practices and acts of
discrimination
7 6 7 7 x 6 7 7 0,2
B 2.1 All forms of support of optimal
development of child are consistent
7 6 7 7 7 7 6 0,2
C 1.12 Each pupil has the opportunity
to participate in leisure activities
of the school
7 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 0,11
B 1.2 School tries to accept all pupils
from the catchment area
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 0
We have already mentioned that the other two criteria a 2.6
School tries to minimize any discriminatory practices and acts of
discrimination and B 2.1 All forms of support of optimal development
of child are consistent, are usually evaluated by the maximum
possible degree but the arguments of school do not correspond with so
high evaluation.
In accordance with the results (minimum variance), there is
a question whether do the above criteria have their foundation in the
questionnaire? Whether or not the text needs to be rephrased or some of
them remove from the questionnaire directly. The criterion B 1.2 School
29
tries to accept all pupils from the catchment area can be an example
which is a duty by a law in our conditions. The criterion we could
rephrase in the following example:
• The school is creating the conditions for acceptance of all pupils
from the catchment area (which would be associated with barrierfree
access, school facilities...).
• The school receives pupils from other area than the catchment because
of the request of parents, if capacity is possible.
30
4. CHOSEN INDICATORS
OF INCLUSION
Education supporting inclusion requires a stimulating and friendly
school environment, mainly based on mutual respect among staff and
pupils and appropriate method of communication among pupils and teachers.
At the same time, it aims at develop of the inner potential of each
pupil and at supporting of integration into social environment in
a classroom and ensuring safe climate. To the above mentioned aspects
of inclusion we also focused on analysing the obtained data and we
collected five other very important categories relevant for an inclusive environment,
to which we pay more attention in the next subchapters. Each
category mentioned below is characterized by the criteria selected from all
three parts of the questionnaire called “Framework for self-evaluation conditions
of education” and its content is described by the guidance questions
related to that criterion. At the same time we present a clear quantitative
evaluation of individual criteria. The obtained values are commented
by examples from a qualitative analysis of teachers’ argumentation, as in
previous chapters. The same criteria presented in the following chapters
again, we do not comment but refer to their description.
4.1 INDICATORS SUPPORTING COMMUNICATION
How much schools ensure the conditions for inclusive education
it depends on communication among all members of the community to
which education relates. It is not just about communication between
teachers and pupils, pupils themselves, teachers between themselves but
also the broader communication beyond the school. The level of communication
affects mainly the climate of class and school, relations with the
external environment which influences the communication backwards.
For this reason, we proceeded to extensive analyse the indicators, which
we believe, are closely linked to communication and have direct influence.
In this study, we focused on the evaluation of criteria and answers
to partial questions of A and B parts of the research tool that is more
closely linked to communication. For evaluation of quality indicators,
we used a quantitative approach, answers to partial questions we
processed qualitatively. Analysis of the arguments of the respondents
“current state and its reasoning” and formulations of partial measures for
self-evaluation “means of achieving an optimal state” shows the chosen
degree of scale for evaluation the criteria of quality of inclusive school.
In this article, we analyse 11 criteria of quality with 34 additional questions.
Even though, some of them were described in partial chapters of
this study above, we analyse them in more details again.
31
Part A / Creating a positive school climate
Creating a school culture and climate supporting the inclusion
is very closely related to the level of a teaching professional
communication. The starting point for building inclusive schools in this
section (A) is a creation of the school community (pupils, teachers, other
school staff) and the value system recognizing and promoting inclusion.
From the offer which provided us a complete self-evaluation questionnaire,
we chose 6 items as criteria of monitored quality due to a need of
analysis of levels of communication in a building positive school climate
(see table No. 7).
Table No. 7: List of chosen criteria and partial questions from
part A
Number
of item
Criterion
Characteristic
(Guidance questions)
A 1.1
Everyone is welcome
(there are arrangements
to ensure that
everyone can feel
good)
Is the first contact of people, who are
interested, with school friendly and
welcoming?
Is the information about school available
to everyone, regardless of his native lan-
guage?
Is behaviour of teachers, decor and school
environment friendly and welcoming?
Do common areas of school tell about all
members of the school community?
Can pupils co-decide about the appearance
and facilities of their classrooms?
A 1.3
Employees of schools
support and help
each other
Does the teaching staff exchange experiences,
information and materials among
themselves?
Are all teachers and their assistants
involved into the planning and evaluation
of SEP?
A 1.4
Employees of schools
and pupils respect
each other
Do employees act together with respect
regardless of their role in school?
Have the opinions of pupils got a real
impact to what is happening at school?
Are teachers interested in name, under
which pupil wants to be called?
Do the pupils know, who to go for, when
they have a problem?
Do teachers and pupils formulate the
common rules of coexistence and do they
respect them?
32
A 1.5
Between teachers
and parents /
guardians of pupils
is a partnership
Are there various opportunities, in which
parents can discuss both the progress of
their child and the fears associated with it?
Do all parents feel that their children are
respected at school?
Does the teachers appreciate knowledge
and ideas, which parents have about
their children?
If parents are concerned about something,
does the school deal with it?
A 2.2
Teachers, school
management, pupils
and their parents /
guardians share
a philosophy of
inclusion
Is a creating of positive climate considered
such as important as learning
outcomes?
Is supported a cooperation of all pupils?
Is the work of all pupils presented at
school and classrooms?
Is a “diversity” of pupils understood as
an enrichment of school and society – not
as a problem?
A 2.5
Employees of schools
create optimal
conditions for
education of each
pupil
Do teachers avoid building the pupils
“with special educational needs” and the
others into opposition?
Do teachers perform a systematic diagnostic
activity as the basis for creating
appropriate conditions?
Do teachers evaluate in cooperation with
pupils (self-evaluation) their individual
progress and do they plan their further
development?
Does the school try to minimize all forms
of institutional discrimination, whether
they are connected with age, race, social
status, gender, disability or student’s
results?
Degree of achievement of a specific criterion on a scale we presented
in the following table No. 8. Own interpretation of the arguments
is documented by citations of participating respondents.
33
Table No. 8: Quantified evaluation of criteria (Part A)
Number
of item
Criterion Average Mode Median
Maxi-
mum
Mini-
mum
A 1.1
Everyone is welcome
(there are
arrangements
to ensure that
everyone can feel
good)
5,86 6 6 7 5
A 1.3
Employees of
schools support
and help each
other
6,14 6 6 7 4
A 1.4
Employees of
schools and pupils
respect each
other
6,29 6 6 7 5
A 1.5
Between teachers
and parents /
guardians of
pupils is
a partnership
5,86 5 6 7 5
A 2.2
Teachers, school
management,
pupils and their
parents / guardians
share
a philosophy
of inclusion
6,14 7 6 7 5
A 2.5
Employees of
schools create
optimal conditions
for education
of each pupil
6,00 6 6 7 5
Ad A 1.1 – Everyone is welcome (there are arrangements to ensure
that everyone can feel good)
This indicator is interestingly reflected on a more general nature
of the criteria. Of course it confirms the quality of comments which have
a considerably wide range – from evaluation of barrier-free physical environment
of school to highlight the various ways of communication with
the outside school environment (including the offer of cooperation with
parents), such as: websites provide an availability of information about
school... parents routinely obtain information through colloquial hours,
34
class meetings and individual interviews... In the school there is a wheelchair
access to the building outside and inside. Some schools talk about
their “open to general public” but it is not specified. The other school
is based on repeated visits to children in the first class in kindergarten,
their involvement in education and work in the classroom, thus justifying
“welcome” preschool children; but mainly on the friendly and welcoming
behaviour of the participating teachers and nice decoration of environment
and common areas on which both teachers and children intensively
participate. Overall, the above arguments do not mean an average value
5,86 too much. This criterion has the lowest value of the research study
(together with the criterion 4).
Ad A 1.3 – Employees of schools support and help each other
As for how teachers cooperate with each other it gives two lines
quite naturally – the daily co-existence and respect and professional co-
operation.
Professional experiences of the school staff have been concentrated
around the processing of SEP in recent years but very important
is also the common everyday methodical cooperation, exchange of opinions,
materials etc. It is interesting that this line of professional cooperation
is not expressed by two schools at all. In other schools, cooperation
takes place in planning and evaluation of the educational process, e.g.
all teaching staff is involved in the creation of SEP and school evaluation
– especially during the summer holidays – week trip. A school staff shares
experience with each other, plans projects together, transmits materials.
As for the line of everyday co-existence and respect, most schools say
there are nice relations among workers which are proved by the participation
of all workers at many school events.
One school indicates that this area has considerable reserves, for
improving it helps cooperation on creation of SEP. The average value of
this criterion reached 6,29.
Ad A 1.4 – Employees of schools and pupils respect each other
We can say that the most transparent characteristic of this criterion
is the formal and informal existence of school rules and respect to them by
pupils, teachers and school management. Mutual respect in communication
between participating is one of the features of inclusive schools and
does not relate to the acceptance of the “otherness” but widely cultivated
and decent conduct of each member of the community. To create a positive
school climate is essential how the leaders of school show the relation to
people at all levels of management. Thence comes a feeling of ensuring
of each member without whom an inclusive school could not exist in principle.
Rules, socially sophisticated behaviour and discipline are not only
signs of a good school, but also a condition its good educational results.
35
Many comments to this criterion have a general character of the
declaration, or reference to mutual respect, respect and esteem in school
regulations (internal school regulations) in communications of chosen
schools. That may mean this relationship is an integral part of the school
climate, but also that enough is the “formal treatment” of this requirement.
In a similar way, some schools describe their institution as a safe
environment for children. Less clear is whether someone really cares about
the problems of pupils and whether their comments somehow reflect on
a real run (life) of school. If the reaction to these questions appeared in
the comments, they are usually reticent links of individual cases dealing
under the current needs and opportunities, most often with classroom
teachers so anything that would concern about the wider school culture.
Only in one case, school indicates that classroom teachers work systematically
with the opinions and needs of pupils, lead discussions and create
conditions for pupil’s reflection of school life. On the other hand, we can
ask what respect teachers use from pupils’ side, how they solve conflicting
educational situation and what character of educational measures
has the specific school. Despite the above notes, we found that this criterion
has the highest value of the whole set of items related to school climate
and creating a value system supporting inclusive education – 6,29
points from 7. However, the scoring does not fit to argumentation.
Ad A 1.5 – Between teachers and parents / guardians of pupils is
a partnership
In terms of opening up opportunities for communication, we can consider
the question: “Are there various opportunities in which parents can
discuss both the progress of their child and the fears associated with it?”
Most schools provide various possibilities of mutual contact
with parents, both through official meetings (class meetings, individual
consultations...) and through various social and sporting events: Parents
have many opportunities to discuss with teachers about the progress of
their child (class meetings, classroom consultations, open days, school
events and at any time outside lessons). Teachers appreciate their knowledge,
opinions and comments about children. If parents have comments
about the activities of the school, teachers discuss it at pedagogical councils.
Only one school in this context mentioned the Council of school in
which are parents’ representatives. One school in its SEP claims to be
open for the parental participation, but it does not show further information
which it would specify this fact.
Interestingly, four schools did not respond the other questions that
are listed in table No. 7 of this criterion at all. It seems that the awareness
of teachers (at least class) about the characteristics, specificities
and needs of individual children, which can provide parents, schools
do not take into account but they lose a good source for inclusion. The
36
proposals used parental cooperation for education and for material
and financial support to schools miss in argumentation. The average
value of 5,86 of this criterion is one of the lowest.
Ad A 2.2 – Teachers, school management, pupils and their parents
share a philosophy of inclusion
Creating a positive school climate is considered as an important
condition of school work, however, schools do not compare its importance
with importance of educational results. They often talk about the
need for “satisfaction” of all children (in their diversity) in school.
The philosophy of inclusion is not expressed specifically by staff of
four schools. Two schools reported very specific and clear argumentation:
it is discussed the necessity of inclusion and the benefits of inclusion for
each child with parents together or individually – we learn from all. The
school is an open system of furniture for every child, the opportunity to
use tools (handling, calculators, library, computers,...) to their personal
development and to seek help; two schools moved in general level in which
they did not respond to that question, but rather repeated: Diversity is
perceived as a rewarding opportunity for education, not as a problem.
Ad A 2.5 – Employees of schools create optimal conditions for
education of each pupil
This criterion superficially shows that schools are aware of their
professional mission. Their effects depend on the fact that the diagnostic
work of the teacher is starting point of its impact on students; in one
case, one school says that the difficulties in learning of a larger number of
pupils represent the feedback for evaluation of their work and reflection on
it (professional self-reflection) for the class teacher. Generally, teachers do
not enforce or do not prefer any pupil, all of them they take as individuals
and they take care about their needs. In this context, it is also mentioned
the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Again, there are large differences
in the argumentation of schools in terms of specification.
Part B / Are we really School for all?
In the second part of the self-evaluation questionnaire (Part B) participating
schools evaluated their measure of readiness to be School
for all. Individual educational staff discussed whether they can accept
and use the differences of their pupils to develop their full potentials as
well as enrichment of others. In 14 criteria they attempted a description
of the current situation and also to justify their view.
We chose five criteria of quality with answers to individual questions,
which we believe they indicate the communication within the educational
staff as well as communication with the external environ-
37
ment of the school. The above criteria are presented in table No. 9, accompanied
by typical questions that respondents answered during filling.
Table No. 9: List of chosen criteria and partial questions from
part B
Number
of item
Criterion
Characteristic
(Guidance questions)
B 1.2
School tries to accept
all pupils from the
catchment area.
Is an inclusion of all pupils from the local
communities presented as part of the
school rules?
After a pupil is accepted by school, is his
belonging to the school community obvious
as for other pupils?
B 1.3
School consults with
organizations, which
associate people with
handicap, how the
school should provide
the wheelchair access.
Is a wheelchair access a part of the plan
for improving the school building?
Does the school try to a permanent
progress in the accessibility of school?
B 1.4
It is helped to all new
pupils to feel comfortable
and safe at
school.
Has the school got a (minimum) induction
program for all pupils?
Are introductory programs for pupils
functional regardless when the pupil
begins to attend the school (both at the
beginning of the school year or during)?
Does school try to find out how the new
pupils feel at school?
Is there any support for pupils who have
particular problems in the beginning
with orientation in the school building?
Are pupils familiarized with the school in
advance before entering it?
B 2.5
Support for pupils,
for whom the Czech
language is not
a native language,
is coordinated with
the support of their
learning as such.
Is a support for pupils, for whom the
Czech language is not a native language,
seen as the responsibility of all teachers
at school?
Are the results of a high level expected
also from pupils for whom the Czech
language is not a native?
B 2.7
There are reduced
pressures to a disciplinary
exclusion.
Is there a meeting of teachers, pupils,
parents, in which participants try to solve
problems flexibly before they reach the top?
Is recognized an association between
symptoms of scorn to pupils on the one
hand and loss of interest, alienation, lack
of discipline leading to disciplinary action
on the other?
38
Degree of achievement of specific criteria on a scale is presented
in the following table No. 10. Own interpretation of the arguments is
documented by citations of participating respondents.
Table No. 10: Quantified evaluation of indicators (Part B)
Number
of item
Criterion Average Mode Median
Maxi-
mum
Mini-
mum
B 1.2
School tries to
accept all pupils
from the catchment
area
7,00 7 7 7 7
B 1.3
Does the school
consult with
organizations,
which associate
people with handicap,
how the
school should provide
the wheelchair
access?
5,17 7 6 7 1
B 1.4
It is helped to all
new pupils to feel
comfortable and
safe at school
6,57 7 7 7 5
B 2.5
Support for pupils,
for whom the
Czech language
is not a native
language, is coordinated
with the
support of their
learning as such
6,40 6 6 7 6
B 2.7
There are reduced
pressures
to a disciplinary
exclusion
6,57 7 7 7 5
Ad B 1.2 – School tries to accept all pupils from the catchment
area
Interested teachers agreed on the maximum values of evaluation
of this criterion as a single, i.e. 7,00 in average! They believe their own
school creates a suitable environment for the education of all pupils, including
pupils with special educational needs. Explicitly, they create the
space of equal access to education. However, they often illustrate the arguments
which do not explain high evaluation too much. In addition,
39
demand for acceptance of all pupils from the catchment area is given by
the legislation.
In essence, it is a criterion reflected a good communication of
schools towards the wider public and also to some extent it reflects the
current way, to the inclusive school. The item contains two typical questions
that should facilitate a justification of their evaluations to the re-
spondents.
To the guidance question whether: “Is inclusion of all pupils from
the local communities presented as a part of the school rules?”, they answered,
for example: The school is open to every child. The school accepts
all pupils from the catchment area and incorporates them into the team
(the school community). The school accepts all pupils under the same
terms. Each child is treated as individuality. One school says: An exception
may be only a pupil who transfers during the school year due to major
educational problems. About this student discussion is led with the
class teacher. If he would seriously disrupt the social climate in the classroom
and the teacher feels that the situation in the class has been already
unbearable, the school can refuse to accept the pupil. Such reasoning is
certainly understandable, but somewhat it contrasts with the response
other schools: The school is struggling with a lack of pupils, so of course
all pupils from the catchment area are accepted and pupils living outside
who are interested in education in our school.
On the second guidance question: “Is obviously same as for other
pupils after pupil’s acceptance by the school his belonging to the school
community?”, only one school answered in the questionnaire: After a pupil
is accepted by the school his belonging to the school community is obviously
same as for other pupils. Without further explanation it is only
a statement that copies the original question. It turns out that the vast
majority of schools are not trying to present their opportunities in the education
of pupils with different educational requirements and needs. One
of the monitored schools says confidently: Educators are trying to create
optimal conditions for all but there is a lack of accurate explanation.
Ad B 1.3 – Does the school consult with organizations, which
associate people with handicap, how should the school provide
the wheelchair access?
A criterion contained in this section is entirely the most transparent
features of inclusive schools. In terms of communication, as in the
previous case, it is a certain “message” of school towards the wider
public. At the same time, it is clear that modifications are very expensive
and also considerable technical and spatial requirements are placed
to them. In the table of this criterion, we can find both extreme values in
boxes of minimum and maximum and overall achieved average 5,17 is the
lowest of all the items in the second part of the questionnaire.
40
In responses of guidance question: “Is a wheelchair access a part of
a plan for improving the school building?”, very contradictory statements
appeared in accordance with the reported values on the scale. Some
schools would need a stimulus from the outside: At school there is not
currently required to provide wheelchair access. If necessary, the school
will ensure disabled access. However, the question is raising whether
the school ensures it and how long it will take when the school has not
thought about it yet. Another of the monitored schools has been already
moving in this direction at least: During building of the new facilities
it has been already stood by this issue. These new facilities are already
built as a wheelchair. Other fixes lead to barrier-free access, ground floor
is available and school is built in the panel so the access is too difficult.
A completely different approach is included in the statement: Wheelchair
access is not a part of a plan for improving the school. Disabled pupils
are not interested in our school. If that happened, they would be sent to
another school which is designed as a wheelchair accessible. Only one of
monitored schools is resolved like this: The school has wheelchair access
inside and outside. Two students attend the school in a wheelchair. We are
ready to educate disabled children.
On the second guidance question: “Does the school try of the steady
progress in the accessibility of school?”, only one school answered again.
However, it is obvious that in this case the question was not understood:
The school is due to the safety of students locked, access after the ring is
always allowed by staff. Generally, we can say that for the progress in this
area of cooperation with the founder of the school is necessary. Besides, it
is illustrated by the response of one of the schools: Headmaster presents
material requirements at the municipal council. However, it seems to them
to build a barrier-free access as economically unprofitable. It appears that
economic performance is one of the main causes of the large variance
in reported answers. Rather than conceptual work, the current demand
from parents of disabled children and the willingness of all interested to
solve this problem play a key role.
Ad B 1.4 – It is helped to all new pupils to feel comfortable and
safe at school
The value of the third of the chosen criteria is directly dependent on
the quality of communication within a particular teaching staff. The significance
of this criterion suggests five accompanying questions for evaluating
its quality. Teachers should know the strengths and weaknesses of
the educational environment in their school best, they should be interested
in the newly coming pupils – about their feelings, problems, and
needs. The average value of this criterion 6,57 is relatively high. However,
from more detailed characteristics implemented or planned efforts to help
pupils is not evident clarity and specificity in responses to the questions.
41
Answers of the first guidance question: “Do schools have an introductory
program for all pupils (minimal)?”, are not specific too much. One
school says: We try to smooth transition of children from kindergarten to
primary school and children from other schools, their friendly welcome
and seamless orientation in the school building. However, it is not told,
what the effort is. Rather more illustrative are these statements: Pupils
are familiar with the teachers, the school environment, with older classmates
at kindergarten. For pre-schoolers is set up the club “Pre-schooler”
whose goal is a better adaptation of these children to school work. The
school organizes information sessions for pre-schoolers, older pupils are
guides to first-graders. New students are admitted based on the ritual of
garden parties; we help them to integrate with activities and activities
at the exit at the beginning of the school year (trip Butterfly). The school
provides familiarization trips for pupils of newly formed teams, autumn
schools, demonstrations for kindergarten.
Therefore, it follows that schools the most frequently use mutual,
whole class or whole school events or stays for supporting a good adaptation
of pupils and for supporting a favourable climate for the education.
Particular attention is also paid for cooperation with kindergartens.
Intensive cooperation with kindergartens throughout the year can be
a good school “advertising”. The optimum situation is appeared if the
nursery school is a part of primary school: Children come to school from
their own kindergarten. We have common goals, common strategies, joint
actions and trips. Teachers of primary school are involved in education in
kindergarten. Although this school wants: To complete introductory program
for newly arrived pupils during the school year. Although this note
tells nothing about the work in this area but refers to the thinking and it
is better than the satisfaction of a current status.
Typically, respondents expressed other questions in a less extend.
To the second: “Are introductory programs for pupils functional regardless
of when the pupil begins to attend the school (either at the beginning
of the school year or during)?” only two schools indicated these responses:
Every child is aware of the building, employees, rules of moving around
the building and internal rules of the school. Before the arrival of a new
pupil to the team (and throughout the year) the class is prepared for the
acceptance of a new pupil, the conditions are set to feel welcome. In both
sentences it is a very general communication which did not convince us
about the existence of a sophisticated introductory program and even
less about its functionality.
Also to the third guidance question: “Does the school try to find
out how the new pupils feel?”, we found just two answers what is due to
the seriousness of the problem somewhat surprising. Both statements do
not fit with the task too much: Pre-schoolers go to the school to the club
called: “Zero Year” with their teacher from kindergarten and they get used
42
to their future primary teacher and school environment. Through community
circles. The first answer is in our opinion still binds to the first
guidance question and the second answer refers to the method requiring
good communication within the team but which in essence is not an investigative
method but a tool for promoting cohesion and climate.
The fourth guidance question of characterizing the criterion number
three: “Is there any support for pupils who have particular problems in
the beginning to be oriented in the school building?”, it brought following
answers: Patronage of pupils of 9th classes above first-graders; walks of
first-graders around the school building according to nature science; new
students of higher classes are guided through the school building and
informed about the running of schools. The school organizes information
sessions for pre-schoolers. In particular, patronage of older pupils above
newcomers was repeated in the questionnaires of many of schools. Elsewhere,
other schools do not deal with support for pupils too much: Due to
the size of our school newly arrived pupils do not have any problem with
the orientation in the school building. Although, adults can also have
problems with orientation in another building. Therefore, we recommend
more empathy and focused attention on this issue which may seem somewhat
trivial for adult in certain conditions.
To the last guidance question: “Are pupils familiarized with the
school in advance before entering it?”, only two schools expressed “traditionally”:
The initial introduction will take place in cooperation between
kindergarten and first class, at the date of registration they can observe
school. The day of open doors. Newly arrived students have the opportunity
in advance to familiarize themselves with the school environment
and with the style of education at the day of open doors. We believe that
particular day or days of open doors are the current trend which allows to
school to declare its openness and readiness to accept all pupils as well.
It should be also noted that many answers to this question can be already
traced in the preceding paragraphs. This item has shown that teachers
do not dispute the importance of help to pupils at least to feel comfortable
and safe in the school but they do not pay much attention to creating such
conditions.
Ad B 2.5 – Support for pupils, for whom the Czech language is
not a native language, is coordinated with the support of their
learning as such
Also the fourth of the chosen criteria was evaluated relatively high
in average 6,40. Arguments are not sufficient in favour of this value.
Further statements were again associated with guidance questions:
“Is a support for pupils, for whom the Czech language is not a native language,
seen as the responsibility of all teachers at school?” And again,
these claims were less demonstrable. For example: All teachers take into
43
account the language barrier. We try to do maximum support for these pupils.
We cooperate with the Centre for the integration of minorities. Pupils
work under an individual education plan. From these responses we cannot
really get the specific knowledge. In addition, most of schools have not
solved this situation “yet“: In our school there are only pupils with Czech
as a native language. Currently, pupils from a foreign language environment
do not attend our school, if they attended our school, their support
would be seen as the responsibility of all teachers. Similar claims were
very frequent so there is no choice then to ask again what will happen in
those schools when this situation occurs actually.
Answers to the second guidance question: “Are the results of a high
level expected also from pupils for whom the Czech language is not a native?”,
are accompanied by statements: Appropriate to their abilities and
capabilities. We believe that there was any reason not to expect the results of
a high level from these pupils. With those statements we can agree, especially
in a situation when in our schools the number of children with a native
language other than Czech is increasing and it is really surprising.
Ad B 2.7 – There are reduced pressures to a disciplinary exclusion
From a broader perspective it is a criterion reflected the quality of
communication both outside and especially inside of the teaching staff.
Sensitive assessment of disciplinary problems is often a tip on the scales
of the authority of the school as an institution now, by extension, individual
teachers of pupils. The fact that educators realize it, is probably
also reflected in the high value placed on the scale. It reached in average
6,57.
Its basic guidance question was: “Is there a meeting of teachers,
pupils, parents, in which participants try to solve problems flexibly before
they reach the top?” Generally, school groups corresponded logically:
On the class meetings and consultations in addition to the educational
field is also discussed the issue of behaviour that we try to prevent disciplinary
exclusion. Immediately, we solve these problems in cooperation
with the family. Consistent observation of pupils we precede a problematic
behaviour. Or a few key words: Regular consultations, class meetings,
and colloquial hours throughout the year and class hours, educational
committee. In any case, this means that for the ensuring solution of disciplinary
offenses is necessary to work actively and cooperate well with
parental public. Not all of them admit it: At our school, we do not find
greater difficulties (loss of interest, alienation). There has been no disciplinary
exclusion at school until now. Such statements cannot be considered
as an answer to the question.
And the same problem can be found in the responses to another
question: “Is recognized an association between symptoms of scorn to
pupil on the one hand and loss of interest, alienation, lack of discipline
44
leading to disciplinary action on the other?” The answers perfectly do not
cover outlined the essence of the problem: Teaching art and tact. Problems
are prevented by offering various activities, creating a class order
together and respect of individual differences or timely solution of the
emerging problem. Problems are solved in the beginning with the child
first, if necessary, in cooperation with parents. Teaching staff accepts to
pupils with respect. Aware and sensitive solutions of specific disciplinary
problem may be a decisive impulse to correct the pupil.
Overall, in the criteria focused on communication, all schools evaluate
themselves relatively high in the quantitative assessment indicators
scale (average value) – from seven-point scale the incremental indicators
have value: 7; 5,17; 6,57; 6,40; 6,57. In the quantitative evaluation of the
schools, there are not very large differences in the partial criteria. Usually
the difference is one to two degrees. The exception is the criterion No.
3 in the part A and criterion No. 2 in the part B where is higher difference
between maximum and minimum value.
4.2 INDICATORS SUPPORTING COOPERATION
One of the features of inclusive schools is cooperation at
all levels: cooperation between pupils, cooperation between educational
staff, cooperation between school management and other workers, cooperation
with the external environment, especially with professionals who
assist during integration of children with special educational needs in
the schools and classes. Important is also cooperation with parents. In
the analysis of conditions of inclusion, we have focused on cooperation
between pupils and cooperation between adults who directly influence
the education of pupils.
a) Cooperation between educational staff and other experts
Creating a school culture and climate supporting the inclusion
is very closely related to a level of professional educational communication;
cooperation is also very closely linked with it. In the broader
definition, it is not only the cooperation between educational staff, but
the cooperation of all the staff and at the same time also the cooperation
within the microenvironment of the school. In particular, cooperation
with parents, members of local community and many experts who can
contribute to the creation of an inclusive school environment. From the
analysis of educational programs in primary schools was found out, that
teachers most often ask for methodological support of staff of pedagogical
and psychological counselling centre and very closely cooperate with
special educators.
45
Three large urban schools have a comprehensive school counselling
department. Apart from the school counsellor and special educator
they also have well trained teacher for prevention and one school directly
employs the school psychologist. The situation in the functioning of school
counselling centres is in one case illustrated by special education centre
that provides a comprehensive special educational care directly at
school. One school also mentions the benefits of such a department in the
integration of different cultural backgrounds and socially disadvantaged
pupils, but after counselling and education of gifted pupils.
Only occasionally schools explicitly refer to the direct cooperation
with staff from the departments of medicine and social care. A very similar
situation is also in the area of help of experts of education of gifted pupils.
The starting point for building an inclusive school, in addition to the
above professional support, especially is cooperation between educational
staff. These are headmaster and deputy principal for pedagogical
activity, teachers (in different functional positions), teacher’s assistants
(their job is to help teachers with educational activity and communication
with pupils and parents, eventually with their community, support
for pupils in adapting to school environment, support for pupils at education
and preparation for it, eventually to help pupils with serious disabilities
in self-service and moving at school and school events), educators
in the after-school club and professional school counselling staff (special
educator, psychologist, school counsellor, teacher for prevention).
Especially, more important is everyday consultation, assistance
and cooperation between teachers and pupils’ assistants, if they are in
the classroom; cooperation between all teachers as well as cooperation
between teachers, assistants and professional staff of school counselling
department. Sharing pupils’ teaching objectives, finding common strategies
of an individual development, exchange of diagnostic data from the
learning process and its results in subjects and the best methods of work
can help teachers and assistants to find a way to help individuals overcome
the difficulties faced by the best possible way.
From the offer, it provided us a complete self-evaluation questionnaire;
we selected four criteria for the need of analysis the level of cooperation
between teachers which include personal and procession
aspects. Personal aspect particularly applies to the much desired cooperation
between teachers and between teachers and assistants. Procession
aspect presents a global looking at education, sharing its planning,
implementation and evaluation. The chosen criteria are shown in table
No. 11.
46
Table No. 11: List of criteria assessing the cooperation at school
among educational staff
Number
of item
Criterion
Characteristic
(Guidance questions)
A 1.3
Employees of school
support and help
each other
Do employees act together with respect
regardless of their role in school?
Does the teaching staff exchange experiences,
information and materials between
themselves?
Are all teachers and their assistants
involved into the planning and evaluation
of SEP?
C 1.8
Teachers plan, teach
and reflect on their
work in partnership
Do teachers cooperate in planning lessons,
preparation of projects and other
activities for pupils?
Do teachers sometimes teach in teams
(e.g. in pairs, projects, training semi-
nars)?
Do teachers always use a team teaching
as an opportunity for joint reflection on
pupil learning?
Do teachers modify their teaching in
response to feedback from colleagues?
Do teachers, who work together, provide
to pupils a good model for their coopera-
tion?
Does teaching staff solve the problem
together, if occurred concerns about the
state of a pupil or group?
C 1.10
Teachers and assistants
for pupils with
SEN encourage and
promote active learning
of each pupil
Are assistants for pupils with SEN involved
in planning the curriculum and its
evaluation?
Do assistants for pupils with SEN try to
ensure pupils maximally to be most independent
on their direct support?
C 2.1
Professional and human
qualities of each
employee are fully
known and utilized
Are teachers encouraged to further development
of their knowledge and skills?
Do teachers offer their special skills and
knowledge to others?
Do teachers discuss about the possible
origin of pupils problems with each
other?
Do teachers have the opportunity to
learn from practice and experience of
their colleagues from other schools?
47
The level of achievement of specific criterion on a scale is presented
in the following table No. 12. Own interpretation of the arguments
is documented by quotations of participating respondents.
Table No. 12: Quantified evaluation of criteria evaluated the
cooperation among educational staff
Number
of item
Indicator Average Mode Median
Maxi-
mum
Mini-
mum
A 1.3
Employees of
school support
and help each
other
6,14 6 6 7 4
C 1.8
Teachers plan,
teach and reflect
on their work in
partnership
6,14 7 7 7 4
C 1.10
Teachers and
assistants for
pupils with SEN
encourage and
promote active
learning of each
pupil
5,33 7 7 7 2
C 2.1
Professional and
human qualities
of each employee
are fully known
and utilized
6,29 7 7 7 4
Ad A 1.3 – Employees of school support and help each other
This criterion we have already presented in chapter focused on
a creating favourable school climate. We pointed out that the cooperation
of teachers is based on two lines: the daily co-existence and respect,
professional cooperation (see page 34).
This criterion has a relatively high average value of 6,14, also it
has a considerable variance in the range 4 to 7. Smaller rural schools
indicate very close cooperation and sharing experiences between
all employees which is also caused by the frequent involvement
of educators into teaching (especially educational subjects): Creating
a common “database” of ideas, suggestions, information, didactic
means, pictures, games etc. Accessibility for all teachers. Educational
staff plans the Educational program and prepare the evaluation (each
according to their specialization). In daily contact, they exchange experiences,
information, materials. If someone attends a course or seminar, he
48
tells to others the obtained information they could use in their work. One
urban school states that teachers prepare “example” hours for each other,
which they reflect. Other large urban school quite critically admits the
reserves in this area, which they will try to remove by the development
of teamwork.
Ad C 1.8 – Teachers plan, teach and reflect on their work in
partnership
This criterion belongs to the group of criteria with mode 7. Its value
is from 4 to 7. Two schools did not present any arguments to its evaluation;
other schools cooperate especially in the project days and many
school events, organization of the school year, trips, Children’s Day and
other events. The same type of cooperation is also shared by one urban
school, self-evaluated critically by degree 4, and states they would like to
try team teaching in the future. This school also mentions the close cooperation
with students of the Faculty of Education, Masaryk University,
who visit school within the school practice. Team teaching sometimes
appears only at one school.
Ad C 1.10 – Teachers and assistants for pupils with SEN encourage
and promote active learning of each pupil
This indicator was evaluated as the fourth worst in total. The reason
was that only three schools could comment on this evaluation due to
having an assistant in the time of making self-evaluation questionnaire.
Although two schools were self-evaluated by the highest degree 7, significant
arguments for this evaluation were not provided. The third school
was evaluated by degree 2 and wants to get more assistants for pupils
with special educational needs in the future.
Ad C 2.1 – Professional and human qualities of each employee
are fully known and utilized
In this criterion, all schools were self-evaluated by the relatively
high degree 6 or 7. This corresponds to the average of self-evaluation.
Only one school chose for the evaluation degree 4. In the argumentation
for their choice of evaluation of schools, they state all teachers are
supported in further education and have the opportunity after agreement
with the school management to be educated according to their interests
(if their education is connected with needs and philosophy of the school).
Some teachers act as tutors in events of further education of educational
staff. Some schools have a system of mentors and also meet informally.
At all schools they discuss about successes and problems of pupils and
they transmit their experience and advice how to solve problems. If necessary,
they ask teachers from other schools for help. One school would
be very glad to cooperate closely with other schools.
49
We would like to add to this criterion that during the research
project has developed a close cooperation between participating schools
through mutual visits, observations, changing experience and problem
solving, which all schools evaluated as a great benefit.
b) Cooperation among pupils
In each class plays an important role, to what extent is supported
the mutual assistance between pupils and their cooperation. If pupils
carry the responsibility for common results, they learn many cooperative
skills, including respect to others. They learn to accept their diversity
and use their potential for joint activities.
In the monitored schools is shown that teachers quite differently
perceive the fact that every pupil is different, has different talents,
interests and needs. Personal and social specific of individuals try to use
effectively to mutual enrichment of all and also to improve the quality
of living together. From the answers is clear that especially teachers
of small schools pay a great attention to cooperation between pupils in
the classroom. They often direct to cooperate and help each other, less to
the division of work and cooperative learning.
In the self-evaluation questionnaire were included two criteria selected
to explicit analysis of level of cooperation between pupils.
The first (A 1.2) refers primarily to the axiological dimension of cooperation
between classmates and mutual respect for the achievements of
others. The second criterion (C 1.5) monitors the current level of use of
cooperation and mutual assistance in the educational process. Chosen
criteria are clearly presented in the table No. 13.
50
Table No. 13: List of criteria evaluating the cooperation among
pupils at school
Number
of item
Criterion
Characteristic
(Guidance questions)
A 1.2
Pupils help each
other
Do pupils help each other?
Do pupils understand that from various
pupils could be expected different (maximum)
performance?
C 1.5
Pupils work together
during education
Do pupils perceive an offering and use of
assistance from classmates as a common
part of the lesson?
Are there set up rules, how to take turns
in contributing to discussion, how to
listen and how to request closer explanation
both from other classmates and from
adults?
Are pupils taught how to build joint outcomes
from the different contributions of
individuals and groups?
Do pupils share the responsibility for
help to overcome the problems that some
pupils have during lessons?
Are pupils involved in evaluation of quality
of teaching?
Do pupils help to each other to set immediate
targets of their education?
The level of achievement of specific criterion on a scale is presented
in the following table No. 14. Own interpretation of the arguments
is documented by quotations of participating respondents again.
Table No. 14: Quantified evaluation criteria have snack
collaboration among pupils
Number
of item
Indicator Average Mode Median
Maxi-
mum
Mini-
mum
A 1.2
Pupils help each
other
5,7 6 6 7 4
C 1.5
Pupils work together
during
education
5,5 6 5,5 7 4
Ad A 1.2 – Pupils help each other
This indicator is one of the lowest evaluated criteria in general (see
page 22). According to teachers, pupils help each other or at least they
are encouraged and they get enough space, on the other hand, there is no
51
more tolerance for individual performances. Most children understand
different performances, so it can be expected by different pupils,
but most of them feel that as an injustice.
From the filled questionnaires concluded that pupils are encouraged
to cooperation and mutual assistance from the beginning of the
school attendance. Pupils usually work in groups in the classroom or
project education. Teachers bind the development of mutual help to pupils
closely to the form of group work. However, they do not comment on
moral profiling of pupils so much and education of school in general.
Only three schools argue they lead pupils to be able to empathize with
the feelings and situations of others. Contrary, in the most school, they
apply forms of personal and social education explicitly; to pupils clearly
understand the principles of individualization in school and society. This
imbalance predicts one of the lowest averages between items 5,7 (value
from 4 to 7).
Pupils can better understand the diversity of evaluation based
on individual options (disabled, socially disadvantaged, specific learning
disabilities or behaviour). A very positive role also plays the creation
of uncompetitive environment or free choice of different tasks. In small
school classes, there are the optimum conditions for cooperation and mutual
help to pupils of different age groups.
Ad C 1.5 – Pupils work together during education
Also this indicator belongs to the worst evaluated. Teachers, in the
monitored schools, are aware of different degree that the level of cooperation
between pupils is closely linked with the development of their
social and personal competencies. From their statements it is clear
they are trying to pay considerable attention to this issue. Their statements
in the questionnaire were supported by arguments aimed at cooperation,
mutual assistance and respect for rules of communication in
joint activities and in their presentation.
The mentioned difference between schools also brings a considerable
variance of the minimum and maximum values (from 4 to 7) so it
means a relatively low average 5,5. To the undisputed positives also belongs
that in more than half of schools pupils perceive the offer and use of
assistance from classmates as a common part of lesson. There are clearly
set out rules of communication, especially for group work.
The half of school perceives a systematic leading of pupils to mutual
evaluation and self-evaluation as an important sign of cooperation.
This applies both to activities of individual and the whole groups; the
most systematic process is chosen by one of schools which systematically
requires a similar form from all teachers. It is emphasized that pupils
are involved in mutual evaluation of results and the whole lessons. The
mentioned systematization is highlighted by statement of other school
52
that pupils have been taught to the rules of communication in a group
since kindergarten.
4.3 INDICATORS SUPPORTING INDIVIDUALIZATION
AND DIFFERENTIATION
A necessary condition of inclusion is the application of differentiation
and individualization in education ensured that all
pupils can learn optimally and can achieve their maximum through
their differences. Application of individualization and differentiation
in education is explicitly expressed in the FEP BE for all groups of
pupils with special educational needs (with the exception of pupils
with social disadvantage). However, it is a fundamental requirement
of inclusion, which should concern every student. The starting point of
individualization and differentiation is a diagnostic activity of teacher
in classroom leading to define the learning objectives (according
to individual). Teacher tries to achieve these objectives in cooperation
with pupils through the educational content at a specific time and
with using selected teaching strategies and appropriate evaluation of
teaching. A teacher can differentiate education in terms of content,
timing, methodology and organization (Kratochvílová, Havel, Filová,
2011, p. 24).
Scheme No. 1: The process of individualization and differentiation
Self-assessment
(evaluation)
Setting learning objectives
(individual and group)
Subject matter
Teaching
strategies
Assessment
Self-assessment
(evaluation)
Teaching
strategies
Subject matter
Setting learning objectives
(individual and group)
53
To the group of criteria relating to the principle of individualization
and differentiation, we chose the following criteria and their indicators.
Table No. 15: List of criteria evaluating the principle of individualization
and differentiation
Number
of item
Criterion
Characteristic
(Guidance questions)
A 2.5
Employees of school
create optimal conditions
for education of
each pupil
Are difficulties in learning perceived
as anything what can be caused by the
school?
Do teachers avoid building into opposition
the pupils with “special needs“ and
the others?
Do teachers carry out a diagnostic work
in the classroom, which is the basis for
the creating suitable conditions?
Do teachers evaluate an individual
progress of pupils and plan their further
development in cooperation with the
pupil (self-evaluation)?
B 2.4
Way of identification
and evaluation
of SEN leads to the
elimination of barriers
to learning and
active participation
of all pupils
Do the individual educational programs
of pupils with SEN contribute to improving
their learning?
B 2.6
Rules and procedures
for the emotional
and spiritual
support of pupils
are linked with the
development of the
educational program
and procedures supported
learning
Are all teachers and assistants trained
how to react to signals of loss of interest,
alienation and lack of discipline?
54
C 1.1
Education respects
the diversity of pu-
pils
Is it possible for teachers to let pupils
explore anything new in teaching?
Are varied experiences of pupils used in
lessons?
Do lessons reflect on the differences in
knowledge of pupils?
Is reflected a different speed during lessons,
which pupils perform tasks with?
Do pupils have opportunities to apply different
learning styles in lessons?
Are the objectives of activities clearly set?
Do lessons sometimes start by a common
experience that can be developed in different
directions?
Are there included activities in lessons
that can be performed individually, in
pairs, groups and whole class?
Are there different activities in lessons
including discussion, interpretation, writing,
drawing, problem solving, used of
library, audio-visual technology, practical
activities and information technology?
Does an educational program allow different
concepts of subjects and use of
different learning styles?
Are pupils allowed recording their work
in different ways, e.g. using their native
language with translation, drawing,
photograph or audio recording?
C 1.2
Educational process
is accessible to all
pupils
Is it built on language experiences in lessons
that pupils gain out of school?
Do teaching equipment, teaching texts
and textbooks reflect on the background
and experience of different groups of
pupils?
Do pupils, for whom the Czech language
is not a native language, the opportunity
to speak and write in their native lan-
guage?
Does teaching reflect on the differences
in knowledge and work pace of pupils?
Are teachers aware that the differences
between pupils in momentum and skill
are natural?
55
C 1.6
Self-evaluation and
evaluation support
the performance of
each pupil
Do used evaluation methods allow all
pupils to reflect on their knowledge and
skills?
Do used evaluation methods allow all
pupils to reflect on their level of key com-
petencies?
Are there opportunities for evaluating
the results of group work?
Do used evaluation methods contribute
to the development of all pupils?
Do pupils receive a feedback telling them
what they have learned and in what and
how they can continue?
Is there a monitoring the results according
to different groups (boys/girls, pupils
from ethnic minorities, disabled pupils
etc.) to specific problems can be identified
and solved?
C 1.11
The access to homework
contributes the
learning of all pupils
Does the homework always follow a clear
objective?
Is homework entered with respect to
skills and knowledge of all pupils?
Are there opportunities to do homework
in different ways?
Does homework develop skills and knowledge
of all pupils?
Are the requirements for homework
modified, if the discussion shows that
some requirements are not relevant or
not appropriate for all students?
Do pupils have opportunities to do homework
in the school area, before teaching,
during lunch break or during free time?
Are pupils supported by homework to
take over responsibility for their own
learning?
Is homework achievable without help of
parents?
Do pupils have an opportunity for cooperation
in doing homework?
Do pupils have a choice of homework to
could fill it based on their knowledge and
interest developed by it?
The level of achievement of specific criterion on a scale is presented
in the following table No. 14. Own interpretation of the arguments
is documented by quotations of participating respondents traditionally.
56
Table No. 16: Quantified evaluation of criteria assessing the
principle of individualization and differentiation
Number
of item
Indicator Average Mode Median
Maxi-
mum
Mini-
mum
A 2.5
Employees of
school create optimal
conditions
for education of
each pupil
6 6 6 7 5
B 2.4
Way of identification
and evaluation
of SEN leads
to the elimination
of barriers
to learning and
active participation
of all pupils
5,71 7 6 7 3
B 2.6
Rules and procedures
for the
emotional and
spiritual support
of pupils are
linked with the
development of
the educational
program and
procedures supported
learning
5,71 5 5 7 5
C 1.1
Education respects
the diversity
of pupils
6 7 6 7 4
C 1.2
Educational
process is accessible
to all pupils
5,86 7 6 7 4
C 1.6
Self-evaluation
and evaluation
support the performance
of each
pupil
5,43 6 6 7 2
C 1.11
The access to
homework contributes
the
learning of all
pupils
5,29 6 5 7 4
57
Ad A 2.5 – Employees of school create optimal conditions for
education of each pupil
From the relatively high values (average is 6), which individual
schools attributed to this indicator, implies that schools are aware of
their professional mission. According to the humanistic concept of education
they derive their force from diagnostic activity of teacher which
is starting point of his influence to children. One school says that the difficulties
in learning of a larger number of pupils represent the feedback for
evaluation of their work and reflection on it (professional self-reflection)
for the class teacher. Teachers carry out the diagnostic work with a view
to integrate children with special needs among others. Subsequently,
they reflect and look for ways for these children how to create optimal
conditions for education.
Only marginally, can be guessed from other comments that schools
pay attention to a monitoring personal development of pupil as an
evidence of his success, which is a sign of an informal approach to the
individualizing education in terms of inclusive schools. In general, teachers
do not promote or prefer any pupil, all of them they see as individuals
and take care according to their needs. In this context, there was also
a mention about Convention on the Rights of the Child and the important
note that pupils with special needs are not built up a contrast with
others. A necessary condition for the integration of each pupil is cooperation
with experts (special-pedagogical centres, pedagogical-psychological
counselling centre etc.) and systematic interest in the opinions of
involved children.
Ad B. 2.4 – Way of identification and evaluation of SEN leads to
the elimination of barriers to learning and active participation
of all pupils
Also at this indicator, it seems that schools can handle. This illustrates
the relatively high average value 5,7. Monitored schools state
they create individual education plans based on pupil testing in the
pedagogical-psychological counselling centre or special-pedagogical centre.
It should be noted that the source of well-prepared plan should also
include parents, members of involved educational staff and as well as
pupils, if possible. Just like that, it will be a useful document supporting
the development of pupils.
One school also declares the intention to create individual programs
for pupils with disabilities (problems) of behaviour. On the other
hand, considerable variance of values attributed to this indicator (see
table No. 16) suggests that some schools are aware of some weaknesses
in this area. For example, they have to pay more attention to increasing
the professional knowledge of their staff, because just like that it
may lead to faster detection of special educational needs and thus to faster
58
elimination of barriers in learning. It is sympathetic that even though
all schools state the relevant arguments, they still look for ways how to
create an individual program best, how it should look like in content and
formally to effectively and simply record the child’s progress and allow
formulating the other strategies of development. If teachers, in certain
cases and situations, are not sure about measures for pupils, they will
consult with special educational teacher of the pedagogical-psychological
counselling centre, educational counsellor or with other teachers.
Ad B 2.6 – Rules and procedures for the emotional and spiritual
support of pupils are linked with the development of the educational
program and procedures supported learning
From the arguments presented in this attribute is clear that all
monitored schools try to develop a communication with parents
about problems and needs of their children. Interestingly, one
school claims that the knowledge of parents and children is used to overcome
these problems, but sometimes does not bring the expected effect.
This means teachers acquire knowledge from parents and children, but
then they cannot actually use it. It may correspond to the claim from
another school, it is necessary to be more educated in this area. Therefore,
it is desirable to maximally encourage the participation of teachers in
training and further education in the area of supporting learning, gaining
the interest of the pupil.
The high average of 5,7 and the relatively small variance between
minimum and maximum value (from 5 to 7) suggests that schools pay
a lot of attention to this criterion of inclusion. Self-confidence of all
pupils is tried to be strengthen by including topics of personal and social
education, gentle and understanding approach, highlighting their skills
in other areas. The cause of problems is often identified by regular contact
with the child’s parents. Problems can be reflected by loss of interest,
alienation, indiscipline symptoms (monthly consultations in three).
Teachers together with parents look for ways and opportunities how to
help the child.
Ad C 1.1 – Education respects the diversity of pupils
Despite the high average 6, it is clear that the arguments on this
item was often general or did not apply to a given indicator. For example,
to guidance question: Is it possible for teachers to let pupils explore
anything new in teaching? Teachers chose just short answers: see SEP,
essence of active learning, elements of Dalton, block teaching. However,
block teaching is an organizational form, not the method in which pupils
would have to discover something new (if it is possible, precisely in the
chosen method). Among general answers, we can assign the statement
that teachers use different teaching styles, but we do not know which ones.
59
But important information is that in lessons there are used the pupil’s
experiences gained outside the school.
More specific statements appeared in one school that lessons include
activities that can be done individually, in pairs, groups and with
the whole class. During lessons there are various activities including
discussion, interpretation, writing, drawing, problem solving and use
of library, audio-visual technology, practical activities and information
technology. Education is mostly supported on methods in which students
experiment, discuss and learn from each other. An important attribute is
the choice (order of tasks, individually, in groups, use of tools and techniques),
consideration of the individual pace of students. Pupils
learn to record their work in different ways, from which they can choose
the best one: common notes, mental map, audio record for children with
dysgraphia etc. Two schools stated that pupils are supported on the best
activities for them by differential task assignment. In line with current
trends they declare the general support of gifted pupils.
Ad C 1.2 – Educational process is accessible to all pupils
Also with the current state of this indicator of inclusion, our schools
are quite satisfied (average 5,8). However, in these statements, the evaluation
was not based on proper arguments again, but rather on the feelings
and impressions (we know...). It is very valuable that teachers are
aware of differences between pupils in momentum, skills, knowledge or
work pace. But there should be given, how they work with these differences,
so what is going on in the educational process.
From general formulation we chose – Teachers respect the individuality
of all pupils and adapt education so that everyone has the opportunity
to feel success and to integrate into business. The school uses various
sources of information, does not draw only from textbooks. Slightly more
specific are the claims there are prepared tasks of different intensity or
the evaluation is mostly based on evaluation of the personal progress of
individual.
Ad C 1.6 – Self-evaluation and evaluation support the performance
of each pupil
In all monitored schools, teachers focus on evaluation of pupils’
knowledge and skills and on authentication the development of
their key competencies. Systematically they lead pupils to self-evaluation
or evaluation of group work. The attention is not paid to monitoring
the results according to different groups (with the exception of one school
where the results of boys / girls are obtained by tests). In some schools,
there is also evident the mutually complementary system of teacher’s
evaluation and pupil’s self-evaluation. Self-evaluation is often implemented
not only verbally and randomly but also in writing form and in
60
the system of gaining regular information about pupils view on their own
results, the learning process and the causes of success or failure. However,
it does not correspond to all because this item belongs to those with
the highest variance (see table No. 16).
Schools are especially aware that the current evaluation methods
do not reflect an individual development of pupil too much. Therefore,
there is a gradual reduction in the importance of marks. Teachers
with their pupils create the evaluation criteria and gradually establish
information books based on weekly and monthly self-evaluation (pupil’s
registers are replaced). Part of diagnostic is also different types of selfevaluation:
orally, in writing, words, graphs etc.
Ad C 1.11 – The access to homework contributes the learning of
all pupils
This item is one of the worst evaluated items throughout the questionnaire
(see table No. 16). Although, in some schools there is clearly
promoted the idea of voluntary and election of homework. Sometimes
pupils are to leave the method of execution. So homework is more
practicing or vice versa detecting the new information. Mostly it is an
input, in which cooperation is not required from parents.
All schools clearly define the homework. A common feature is that
the homework always follows a clear objective, pupils know its meaning.
Homework usually follows practicing or extension a topic. Infrequently,
they force pupils to obtain further information (from parents,
literature, the Internet...). Sometimes they also create an opportunity
to cooperation. It is important that homework is entered with respect to
skills and knowledge of all pupils. Homework is filled by pupils at home
in most of schools. Most homework is achievable without help of parents,
only in some homework pupils have a possibility to cooperate. However,
two schools declare that pupils have opportunities to do homework in the
after-school clubs. Especially, this is a benefit for pupils from socially disadvantaged
backgrounds.
4.4 INDICATORS SUPPORTING MAXIMUM
EXPECTATION FROM PUPILS
In developing and creating (supporting of all qualities of pupils’ life)
conception of education, it is necessary to each pupil would be perceived
as a person and teachers would work sensitively with statements, whom
they express their expectations towards child. According to Mareš and
Křivohlavý (1995) teacher’s expectations may be a form of so-called self-fulfilling
predictions, under the certain circumstances. Teacher, who expects
some results from pupils, tries to do his best... It is necessary, that teacher
formulates for pupils such objectives based on his diagnostic activities
61
which will become a challenge for them (Mastery Learning – Bloom, In
Mareš, 2001, pp. 403-411) and will be available for them.
From the skills of teachers and pupils to work with teaching objectives,
is divided the choice of teaching strategies of teachers, defining learning
tasks for pupils, activities mediating specific curriculum and adequate
methods of evaluation, which returns to a specific aim. Necessary is the
targeting leading of pupils to work with the learning objectives by
teacher. In the personally developing model of learning is essential to be
familiar with objective, to which, both teaching activities of teachers and
learning activities of pupils, should reach. Teacher should enter with its
clear wording in front of pupils and would be able to transfer it into a language
understandable for pupils. An appropriate motivation, feedback and
belief in pupil achievement, which teacher is also able to explicitly express,
he supports pupils to achieve their maximum results. Indicators, largely
determining the leadership of pupils, we incorporated into table No. 17.
Table No. 17: List of criteria assessing the maximum expected
from pupils
Number
of item
Criterion
Characteristic
(Guidance questions)
A 2.1
Achieving of maximum
results is
expected from all
pupils
Does each pupil feel, that in attended
school, is possible to achieve the best
results?
Are all pupils motivated and encouraged
to expect they can achieve very good
results?
Are all pupils treated as well as the possibilities
of their results are unlimited?
Is evaluated the pupil’s success in comparison
with his individual abilities rather
than in comparison with other pupils?
Are pupils tested when they are adequately
prepared?
Are pupils encouraged to acknowledge
the results of others?
Do employees try to repress degrading using
labels indicating poor performance?
Is there an effort to overcome the fear of
failure which some pupils have?
B 2.5
Support for pupils,
for whom the Czech
language is not
a native language,
is coordinated with
the support of their
learning as such
Is a support for pupils, for whom the
Czech language is not a native language,
perceived as the responsibility of all
teachers at school?
62
C 1.4
Pupils are actively
engaged in their own
learning
Are all pupils encouraged to be responsible
for their own learning?
Is it clearly explained in lesons what
pupils should learn?
Does equipment in classrooms, such as
classroom bookcases, exposed materials
allow self-learning?
Are plans of educational program communicated
to pupils in the ways they can
work faster, if they want it?
Can pupils independently use library
and sources of information technology?
Are pupils taught how to make notes
from the interpretation and books and
how to organize work?
Are pupils taught how to present their
work in spoken, written and other forms,
individually or in groups?
Are pupils encouraged to summarize orally
or in writing what they have learned?
Is it consulted with pupils the support
they need?
Is it consulted with pupils the quality of
lessons?
Are the knowledge and skills that pupils
gained outside the classroom, used and
appreciated in lessons?
C 1.6
Self-evaluation and
evaluation support
the performance of
each pupil
Do used evaluation methods allow all
pupils to reflect on their knowledge and
skills?
Do used evaluation methods allow all
pupils to reflect on their level of key com-
petencies?
Are there opportunities for evaluating
the results of group work?
Do used evaluation methods contribute
to the development of all pupils?
Do pupils receive a feedback telling them
what they have learned and in what and
how they can continue?
Is there a monitoring the results according
to different groups (boys / girls, pupils
from ethnic minorities, disabled pupils
etc.) to specific problems can be identified
and solved?
63
C 1.9
Teachers are interested
in learning
support and active
participation of all
pupils
Do teachers monitor the progress of all
pupils in lessons?
Do all pupils feel they are treated fairly?
Are there efforts to look at teaching and
provided support through the eyes of
pupils?
Are assistants of teacher focused on
improving the active participation of all
pupils?
Are attempts to removal the barriers in
learning and active participation of one
pupil perceived as opportunities for improving
the learning of all?
The level of achievement of specific criterion on a scale is presented
in the following table No. 18. Own interpretation of the arguments
is documented by quotations of participating respondents.
Table No. 18: Quantified evaluation of criteria assessing the
maximum expected from pupils
Number
of item
Indicator Average Mode Median
Maxi-
mum
Mini-
mum
A 2.1
Achieving of maximum
results is
expected from all
pupils
5,57 6 6 7 4
B 2.5
Support for pupils,
for whom the
Czech language
is not a native
language, is coordinated
with the
support of their
learning as such
6,4 6 6 7 6
C 1.4
Pupils are actively
engaged in their
own learning
5,86 7 7 7 4
C 1.6
Self-evaluation and
evaluation support
the performance of
each pupil
6,29 6 6 7 2
C 1.9
Teachers are interested
in learning
support and active
participation of all
pupils
5,43 6 6 7 5
64
Ad A 2.1 – Achieving of maximum results is expected from all
pupils
In the overall evaluation of the questionnaire, this indicator was
among the worst evaluated (average 5,5). As though teachers only slowly
realized that there is no absolute maximum, only personal. Some schools
told about increasing attention for diagnostic work and mentioned the
need for further education of teachers in this area. According to our opinion,
it is the personal character of teachers, in connection with their acceptance
of humanistic philosophy of education. Very useful is also
a focus on pupil’s self-evaluation which enables children to evaluate their
own strengths and weaknesses and consciously work on their development
and also take responsibility for their own learning.
Exactly half of the monitored schools in some form say that their
teachers follow the possibilities of setting the personal maximum of all
children. To achieve personal maximum of individuals, they try to
use an inner motivation. In evaluating they prefer orientation on the own
progress of children (so-called individual relational norm) than their mutual
comparison and competition. In the classes are minimized the materials
that have the character of labelling (black dots etc.), emphasis is
placed on development of self-evaluation skill.
At one school is used a verbal evaluation. This school also in its
arguments to this indicator exactly states that pupils are classified only
after a careful discussing topic. There is a question, whether everybody
has enough time for it and whether they can come to the new topic truly
individualized. In this context, other school states that there are offered
extra challenges for gifted pupils and individual tasks for more practicing
for slowly children. We focus on the support in overcoming learning
uncertainty or fear of failure for weaker pupils.
Ad B 2.5 – Support for pupils, for whom the Czech language is
not a native language, is coordinated with the support of their
learning as such
This indicator, selected to the characteristics of environment in
which are expected the maximum efforts by all pupils, is included
to the best evaluated criteria by its evaluation. Achieved average 6,4 and
a small variance between minimum and maximum (6-7), reduces some
general formulation: We try to do a maximum support for these pupils.
Such an argument cannot be considered as an answer to the guidance
questions.
From the list of arguments is also evident that in most schools
are only educated pupils with the Czech native language, so this
situation is not dealt with in schools. However, teaching staff should
be prepared for the future, which is related to further education again.
Therefore arguments lack the specificity: Currently pupils from foreign-
65
language environment do not attend our school. If so, their support would
be seen as a responsibility of all teachers. Or: We believe that there would
be any reason not to expect results of high level from these pupils (assuming
their reflection, for example in the Czech language). Only one school
indicated that they have been already working with the Centre for Integration
of minorities.
Ad C 1.4 – Pupils are actively engaged in their own learning
This item is closely related to one of the key competencies of the
current curriculum for basic education, the responsibility for learning.
Monitored schools are convinced that their pupils are led to participate
in the projects, realization and reflection of their own learning. It
is evidenced by the relatively high average reached the value nearly 6,3.
Answers of individual schools are different in the extent of specificity
and generality again. From the relatively large number of arguments,
it seems to know the considerable effort in developing of all pupils in
the sub-items of learning competencies at all school. Pupils are encouraged
to be responsible for their own learning – actively participate in
setting the criteria for evaluation, self-evaluation and planning their
further learning (in the process of teaching during lessons, consultations
in three).
An important argument is that during lessons is explained what
students should learn, what is the aim of their work. Just like that each
pupil can monitor and regulate his own learning process. Equipment
is also important. Equipment in the classroom allows an autonomous
learning. Pupils can independently use the library and sources of
information technology. Three schools explicitly state that their pupils
are taught how to make notes from textbooks and how to organize their
work. Pupils are also taught how to present their work in spoken, written
or other form, individually or in groups. One school adds that within
the differentiated learning allows pupils the choice of learning content, as
well as forms and methods. Part of strategy is also a free choice of tasks
and solution of practical situations.
Ad C 1.6 – Self-evaluation and evaluation support the performance
of each pupil
Although all monitored schools, in the arguments mentioned in the
previous item, expressed in the sense that their pupils are led to selfevaluation
supporting their learning competencies; there is shown that
they are not fully aware of the importance of formative method of
evaluation and self-evaluation for the growth of their performance.
It is evidenced by the low average reached the value 5,4 and also
the fact that this average is evaluated as a one of the worst indicators.
This indicator, we also included among these ones characterizing the
66
level of individualization and differentiation necessary for the effective
inclusion (see Chapter 4.3).
Only two schools work purposefully and systematically with pupil’s
self-evaluation, which is documented by the argument that pupils regularly
evaluate not only the results of their activities, but also the learning
process and the causes of success or failure. They are looking
for opportunities what a change they should make in their own learning.
According to Zimmerman and Schunk (in Mareš, 2001, 505-525) the selfevaluation
is one of the six components having a significant influence
on the development of self-regulated learning (in addition to teaching
strategies, practical implementation of the self-regulatory strategies,
feedback on the effectiveness of self-regulation strategy, self-monitoring,
social support). Without self-evaluation, self-reflection, awareness of personal
capabilities and self-conception, pupil cannot manage to his learning.
The success of pupil during learning and its control are influenced by
his own potentialities and external sources, especially parents, teachers
and classmates.
It is necessary to bring to life of our classes more comprehensive
look at the evaluation, whose integral part is the autonomous self-evaluation
of pupil, which is not implemented occasionally, but is a part of
the whole system, model of a comprehensive developing evaluation
(Kratochvílová, 2011).
Ad C1.9 – Teachers are interested in learning support and active
participation of all pupils
Teachers of monitored schools in their arguments describe the
monitoring of development of all pupils and the use of knowledge from
monitoring for planning their development. At the same time there is
information about how much depends on the number of pupils in the
classroom. Only in two schools is appeared the view to teaching by pupils’
eyes or getting feedback from pupils, which may be one of the starting
points for planning other learning activities. Other teachers actually lose
an important motivational element in the learning process. This imbalance
is likely to cause an average value 5,8.
The fact that the schools are aware of the importance of this indicator
of the actual inclusion is documented in the arguments such as: We
try to look at teaching and provided support through the eyes of students.
Or: Teachers monitor the development of all pupils during lessons. An
important attribute of learning support of pupils may be a situation, in
which attempts to removal the barriers in learning of one pupil are perceived
as opportunities for improving the learning of all.
67
4.5 INDICATORS SUPPORTING RESPECT AMONG
PUPILS AND EDUCATIONAL STAFF
In the concept of curriculum (FEP BE) has become the concept of
child/pupil the basis for the new conceptual thinking about whole educational
process. More and more we are aware of pupil’s personality;
everything in education for the future begins from him. If we look at the
child as a person creative, curious, with the need to develop, explore and
create; person individual and social; person critical, open; active, acting;
compact, person responsible and capable self-regulation, then we have to
dealt with him by appropriate way.
Respect is generally unconditional acceptance of each individual.
Acceptance and respect due to the fact that I am, I exist. In inclusive
school is required the respect at all possible levels: pupil – pupil,
pupil – teacher, teacher – teacher, teacher – non-teacher, headmaster
– employee etc. Respect affects the climate of the class, school climate
and contributes to the understanding differences between individuals
and different groups. Indicators of this condition we included in the following
table No. 19.
68
Table No. 19: List of criteria assessing the respect among
pupils and educational staff
Number
of item
Criterion
Characteristic
(Guidance questions)
A 1.4
Employees of school
and pupils respect
each other
Are teachers interested in name, under
which pupil wants to be called?
Is a school interested in opinions of
pupils how the work of schools could be
improved?
Have the opinions of pupils got a real
impact to what is happening at school?
Do pupils have a possibility to express
themselves in an appropriate form to all
events at school?
Do the pupils know, for whom to go when
they have a problem?
Do pupils feel confident that their problems
will be solved effectively?
Do teachers and pupils formulate the
common rules of co-existence and do they
respect them?
A 2.3
School uses a variety
of pupils
Is diversity perceived as an enriching
opportunity supporting learning, not as
a problem?
Are all pupils respected and treated
equally (regardless of the jobs and position
of their parents?
Is a diversity of native languages and different
backgrounds of pupils perceived as
an enrichment of the school and society?
Are pupils with special educational needs
respected as well as pupils without special
educational needs?
Are pupils, who perform worse results,
respected equally as well as pupils with
excellent results?
Is a work of pupils – all – presented in
school and classroom?
Are the results of girls and boys equally
supported and appreciated?
A 2.4
Workers and pupils
are respected as individuals
and as members
of groups who
perform a role
Are all pupils respected for themselves
rather than the quality of their results?
69
B 1.5
Does the school create
its classroom so
the respect of all pupils
equally is clear?
Is with groups of pupils treated fairly in
the sense of using school equipment, location
of classes, the allocation of teachers
and other employees?
Does the school try to divide children
into classes with respect to their results
or disability?
If pupils are connected in some subjects
according to their abilities, are there
known ways how to prevent the loss of
their interest and self confidence?
If pupils are connected in some subjects
according to their abilities, do they have
equal opportunities to change the group?
Are groups in each class from time to
time changed to support social cohesion?
Are elective subjects into curriculum assigned
on the basis of the interest of pupils?
C 1.3
Education develops
understanding of the
differences
Are pupils encouraged to explore ideas
and views differing from their own?
Are opportunities provided to pupils to
work with pupils who are different in
sense of background, ethnicity, disability
or gender?
Does educational program try to develop
understanding differences in the area of
backgrounds, cultures, ethnicities, gender,
disability, sexual orientation and
religion?
C 1.7
Discipline in the
classroom is based on
mutual respect and
compliance rules
created together
Are pupils involved in setting the rules of
life in the classrooms?
Are pupils encouraged to self-discipline?
Do teachers cooperate in solving disciplinary
problems of pupils and share the experience
and knowledge that would help
them in overcoming?
Do pupils help to solve problems in the
classroom?
Is consulted with pupils how to create more
pleasant atmosphere in the classrooms?
Are there clear procedures, understandable
both for teachers and pupils, how to
react to inappropriate behavior?
The level of achievement of specific criterion on a scale is presented
in the following table No. 20. Own interpretation of the arguments
is documented by quotations of participating respondents.
70
Table No. 20: Quantified evaluation of criteria assessing respect
among pupils and educational staff
Number
of item
Indicator Average Mode Median
Maxi-
mum
Mini-
mum
A 1.4
Employees of
school and pupils
respect each other
6,27 6 6 7 5
A 2.3
School uses a variety
of pupils
6 6 6 7 5
A 2.4
Workers and pupils
are respected
as individuals
and as members
of groups who
perform a role
6,27 7 7 7 5
B 1.5
Does the school
create its classroom
so that it is
clear the respect
of all pupils
equally?
6,27 7 7 7 3
C 1.3
Education
develops understanding
of the
differences
6,17 7 6,5 7 4
C 1.7
Discipline in
the classroom is
based on mutual
respect and compliance
rules created
together
6,29 7 7 7 5
Ad A 1.4 – Employees of school and pupils respect each other
Mutual respect in communication between participating is one of
the features of inclusive schools and does not concern only acceptance of
“otherness”, but generally cultivated and decent conduct of each member
of the community. It can be said that the most transparent characteristic
of this indicator (the average value nearly 6,3) is the existence of formal
and informal school rules and respect for them both by pupils,
teachers and school management’s side. For creation a positive school
climate is essential the way, how the school management is reflected in
relation to people at all levels of management. From there comes a feeling
of certainty and security of each member, without who an inclusive
school could not in principle exist.
71
Rules, socially sophisticated behaviour and discipline are not only
signs of a good school, but also a condition for its good educational
results. Many comments on this indicator have a character, communications
of schools involved, of general declaration or reference to mutual
respect, respect and esteem in school code (internal school code). It can
mean that this relationship is an integral part of the school climate,
but also sufficient is the formal treatment of this requirement. In a similar
way some schools declare their institution as an environment safe for
children.
Less clear is, whether someone is truly interested in the problems
of pupils and whether their comments are somehow reflected in the real
run (life) of school. If the reaction to these questions appeared in the comments,
they are usually reluctant link that the individual cases are dealt
with under the needs and current opportunities, most often with classroom
teachers. So nothing that would concern the wider school culture. Only
one school states that the class teachers work more systematically with the
opinions and needs of pupils, they discuss and create conditions for pupil’s
reflection on a school life. On the other hand, we can also ask what respect
teachers enjoy by the pupils, how they solve conflict educational situations
and what character of corrective measures they have.
Ad A 2.3 – School uses a variety of pupils
Also in this indicator has been achieved a relatively solid average
6. However, we are afraid, that many schools declare their tolerance towards
differences of pupils formally. Only one school explicitly admits
that this issue is related to each member of community separately, i.e.
teachers. The basic argumentation for equal chances is presented by the
Charter of Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as
well as internal school code.
In the arguments of other schools were also appeared formulations
towards pupils: All pupils are perceived and accepted at school equally,
regardless of their belonging to different cultures, family background and
parental status, economic security. The diversity of cultures, language etc.
promotes mutual enrichment of all members of the school community.
All interests of pupils are welcomed and used – in the common
area of school are present information and formal familiarization with
various cultures. Worse achievement is not a reason for discrimination
against pupils in the classroom or school. Boys and girls have equal
chances, their results and creations are presented equally.
Ad A 2.4 – Workers and pupils are respected as individuals and
as members of groups who perform a role
Also from the average value, which was achieved in this indicator
(nearly 6,3), can be concluded that our schools are really trying to build
72
a climate of mutual respect between pupils and teachers. The formulation
of this item likely caused that most schools state just minimum or formal
comments. Acceptance of all members of the school community is
apparently common in our schools. We also found a small shortage of our
research tool “Framework for Self-evaluation” which does not offer the full
coverage of the item by guidance question for rigorous argumentation.
Even this may be a reason why the school staff did not comment on it.
If we want to characterize the most significant feature in the building
of mutual respect for all members of the school community, it
will be probably focus on the positive aspects of individuals and the effort
to take account of their talents and problems. One school declares, they
help individuals to find their own strengths and emphasize, that everyone
in the school community can find a place where he feels safe. It can also be
derived further positive feature, namely individual’s personality is more
important than his actual results.
Ad B 1.5 – Does the school create its classroom so the respect of
all pupils equally is clear?
Also in this indicator, a solid average 6,3 was achieved. However,
measurements showed that the situation in individual schools is quite
different, because this indicator was included to those with the largest
variance (see table No. 5). On the other hand, a relatively large number of
arguments suggest about very sympathetic trend in the current practice
of primary education, e.g. we divide classes in favour of social cohesion,
i.e. everyone can learn to cooperate with everyone. In most schools, pupils
with special educational needs are integrated into heterogeneous
classes and re-education is realized for example through their concentrated
work with special educators or directly differentiated work of
these pupils in ordinary classes. Homogeneous groups are especially in
language and elective subjects which do not represent a significant part
of education, so the heterogeneity of the nature group is maintained.
Some arguments in this indicator just follow the guidance questions
again; others go completely out of question: School respect all pupils
equally. Some of them state that school creates classes purely technically,
i.e. according to the number of pupils which is sometimes requested by
the need of organization of small schools: Pupils are divided into classes
according to the number of pupils in each grade. Another fully organized
school argues, when connecting grades into classes, they try to take
into account not only number of pupils but also but also their temperament,
intellectual abilities, talents and handicaps. When dividing
to the groups there are selected various forms, luck is used mostly and
with pupils is discussed the need to be able to cooperate with everyone.
The advantage of small schools is that pupils often work on projects in
mixed-age groups.
73
Ad C 1.3 – Education develops understanding of the differences
An average of all items listed in subchapter 4,5 is rarely balanced (see
table No. 20). Argumentation to this indicator, related to the respect differences
of pupils and their opinions, is already more specific and tells
more about activities in school. In schools, where there is no ethnic diversity,
teachers say that pupils do not have enough opportunity to meet with different
ethnic groups, cultures or religions. However, with this response, we
should not be completely satisfied. It is possible that these opportunities are
not immediately in school, but they are in everyday life, literature, media
etc. To this situation helps the fact, there are currently the opportunities to
multicultural education during professional assessment of new textbooks for
combating a latent xenophobia by one of the most important aspects.
To respect different opinions among children, schools did often not express.
However, for education towards tolerance and mutual listening
(i.e. attributes, noticeably absented in modern society) is this activity
absolutely crucial. In more than half of the schools, was appeared a claim in
the sense that children are encouraged to tolerance and understanding of differences
or pupils share experience with each other, but specification was only
in two schools: We often use dramatization, brainstorming, discussions in
a circle and the aim is the understanding the differences in cultures, ethnicities,
religions, sexual orientations etc. We present one of the three slogans of the
school: No one is better or worse person than I, we are just simply different.
Ad C 1.7 – Discipline in the classroom is based on mutual
respect and compliance rules created together
At the last attribute in this subchapter was also achieved “standard”
average 6,3. The attached arguments showed that teachers usually
give their pupils opportunity to participate in the formation of
disciplinary rules and cooperate on the procedure for solving disciplinary
problems. To the final version of the rules is also involved the
children’s parliament at larger schools. The consultation, which would
lead to a more relaxing atmosphere in the classroom or whole school in
cooperation with all pupils, however, happens exceptionally.
All schools agree that the key to mutual respect is to create positive
and open relationships in the classroom. Agreement is also valid when
pupils are involved in creating and commenting rules of action or behaviour
at school. Nearly half of schools explicitly stated that their pupils are
encouraged to self-discipline. Then there are clear procedures, understandable
both for teachers and pupils, how to react to inappropriate behaviour.
One school also adds if someone breaks rules, there are primarily explored
causes and consequently the possibility of changes in the action and behaviour.
Problems are solved by the community circle. Another school emphasizes
that school code (rules) is formed in cooperation of pupils, teachers
and parents and every year it is again discussed and updated.
74
5. A SET OF ARGUMENTS
OF SCHOOLS TO INDIVIDUAL
CRITERIA
Research investigation showed how difficult it is to find suitable
arguments to the chosen criteria. It requires understanding the whole
issue of inclusive schools and very carefully considering the situation in
school. If there is no comparison among schools themselves, their statements
are very different in terms of degree of subjectivity. For this reason,
we decided to implement measures in a research plan that would
help schools to gain some knowledge and experience in inclusive
pedagogy. One of them is the battery of criteria and arguments that
they may serve to understand certain issues and reflect on their attitudes
and conditions. In the set, we introduced the criteria of research tools
and we added the possible arguments that point to the application of an
inclusive approach in schools.
Individual criteria are characterized by key words that help readers
to navigate better. These indicators can serve to teachers to extend
knowledge – about strategies and conditions that support inclu-
sion:
From a humble awareness of knowledge about the issue (so they
can say “I know this”).
They can be inspired by them and incorporated them into the learning
process (“I can”).
They can reflect a recovery of them and gain experiences and arguments
like “I know why I am doing so”, “I know why this hap-
pens”.
5.1 VIEW A: CREATING A SCHOOL CULTURE AND
CLIMATE SUPPORTING AN INCLUSION
A 1 Creation of the school community (pupils, teachers,
other school staff)
A 1.1 Everyone is welcome (there are such conditions that everyone
can feel good)
Keywords: individual needs of stakeholders (children and adults), individual
expectations, creating optimum conditions for school work, availability of information
about the operation of institutions, clear rules, processes of co-operation
of schools running, sources of information about the school – websites, local and
regional newspapers, presentation of results of school in the village.
75
The first contact of children and visitors is friendly and welcoming
(interior, the behaviour of employees); decoration of children’s
work, diction information boards in the entrance area and the hallways
and in classrooms; schools are usually based on fact that due
to these positive characteristics they get parents to cooperation.
Some schools emphasize their openness to the public. They also
include an offer for cooperation with catchment nursery schools
– children and teachers.
Individual conditions are created before accepting of each child so
that everyone could feel “wanted” and well.
Accepting of new of children is associated with ceremonial rituals
(garden party, Butterfly, festivals etc.).
The school acts also gently in accepting of adult employees – if possible,
they make a deal with the work time etc.
Management of the school and all the participants analyse mutual
expectations, clarity and validity rules at the beginning.
Maximum information from multiple sources is available for all
(websites, leaflets and booklets for parents, local newspapers and
news, cooperation with local subjects, sponsors).
Work to support the school's image – all.
Pupils are proactively involved in equipment and facilities of their
classrooms, co-decide.
Commentar y:
This indicator interestingly reflects a lack of clarity and general
entry of criteria which of course confirms the quality of comments. They
have a very wide range – from evaluation of barrier-free physical environment
of schools to highlight the various ways of communication of school
with external factors (including the offer of cooperation with parents).
Specifically: “The availability of information about school is provided
by website... parents routinely obtain information through the voice
hours, class meetings and individual interviews... in the school there is
a wheelchair access to the building and in the building...“ Some schools
talk about “their openness to the general public” which under certain circumstances
can evoke a phrase. At another school they take pride in...
“repeated visits of children from kindergarten in the 1st class, their involvement
in education and work in the classroom (an interesting association
“welcoming” at school for children...); but primarily on a friendly and
welcoming behaviour of the participating teachers and nice decoration
of environment and common spaces where are intensively involved both
teachers and children” (it cannot be a phrase).
76
A 1.2 Pupils help each other
Keywords: cooperation, work in groups, share in the tasks of education and
projects, assistance, lending, sharing, cooperation within the school parliament,
joint activities and games regardless of gender and social inclusion.
Pupils are encouraged to be able to empathize to the feelings and
situation of another.
The shared problems are discussed, the shared solutions are found
based on analysis of problem.
Pupils have multiple opportunities to comment the running of
schools or vent any difficulties: school locker, community circles,
discussion with teachers, with school management etc.
Pupils are involved in the school parliament.
Since the beginning they have worked in groups, have created the
specifically teamwork.
In the school and in the after-school club children cooperate and
have fun together regardless of age or gender (older help younger).
Within the set of requirements on children, it is told that for different
pupils may be different requirements with regard to their
personal best (some pupils seem it as “injustice”).
Pupils lend each other equipment and assist each other; the competition
does not grow which would suppress success of the detriment
of the second one.
In small schools are optimal conditions for cooperation and assistance
of children of different ages, thus creating conditions for the creation
of community life (common trips, choir, theatre, flute choir etc.).
Commentar y:
Mutual assistance in the imagination of teachers is often linked to
the use of cooperative learning. With some exceptions (implementation of
personal and social education) schools just little comment on the moral
profiling of pupils and educational activities of school in general. Another
thing is gradually getting into the majority of schools to public awareness,
is a message that everyone is different, has different talents, interests and
needs – and that’s the beauty and adventure of social co-existence.
A 1.3 Employees of school support and help each other
Keywords: teaching and non-teaching staff, joint participation in events, creation
of SEP, evaluation of school work, planning the school year, a common informal
trips of teaching and non-teaching staff, transfer of experiences, materials,
work on joint projects.
All employees are involved in planning and evaluation of school
work for example by creating of SEP but also the annual plan for
schools etc.
77
Teaching and non-teaching staff are involved in joint school
events.
Mutual transfer, use of the experience and materials from the event
which were attended by individuals.
In some schools they point to certain provisions in the field of mutual
cooperation of employees, consider supporting through further
education or graduation of programs of individual development.
Working together on projects.
Staff acts together with respect and give the children an example of
behaviour.
In some schools staff creates a common database of ideas, information,
didactic aids and games.
Commentar y:
As for how teachers cooperate with each other, it quite naturally
shows two lines: daily co-existence and professional cooperation. Personal
contacts have a situational character. Professional experiences
of the school staff are concentrated around the SEP process (task) in
recent years but very important is the common everyday methodical
cooperation, exchange of opinions, materials etc. Close cooperation is
not common but it is common in schools which are systematically involved
in further teacher education courses. In good schools, teachers
accepted themselves not only as colleagues but also cultivate informal
relationships.
A 1.4 Employees of school and pupils respect each other
Keywords: rules of co-existence, respect, esteem, consideration, analysis of the
causes of improper action, correction, consultation with parents of children, calling
between teachers and children – according to agreed rules (name).
Children can turn with their problems to those employees to whom
they have the greatest confidence.
Officially, there are many schools with the school parliament, which
is involved in solving any problems of children at level of management
of the school.
In the school children are called by their name, surname is not
used.
It is not allowed to use derogatory salutation.
Support the development of positive personal contact between
pupils provides a systematic personal and social education in all
classes.
If it is really possible, views of the children have an impact of the
school running through and with the help of class teachers.
78
Commentar y:
We can say that the most transparent characteristic of this criterion
is the formal and informal existence of school rules and respect to them
by both pupils and teachers and school management. Mutual respect in
communication between stakeholders is one of the features of inclusive
schools and does not concern just accepting of the “otherness” but widely
cultivated and decent conduct of each member of the community. For creating
a positive school climate it is essential how the school management
is reflected in relation to people at all levels of management. From there
comes a feeling of security and safety of each member without which an
inclusive school could not from principle exist. Rules, socially sophisticated
behaviour and discipline are not only signs of a good school but
also a condition of its good educational outcomes. Many comments to this
criterion have a character of general declaration or reference to mutual
respect, respect and esteem in school code (internal school code) in the
communications of involved school. This may mean that this relationship
is an integral part of the school climate, but also that enough is the
“formal treatment” of this requirement. In a similar way, some schools
declare their institution as a “safe environment for children.” Less clear
is whether someone really cares about the problems of pupils and whether
their comments are somehow reflected in real school running (life).
If the responses to these questions appeared in the comments, they are
usually modest links to individual cases dealt under the needs and current
opportunities often with classroom teachers, so anything that would
concern the wider school culture. Only in one case the school states that
classroom teachers work systematically with the opinions and needs of
pupils, lead discussions and create conditions for pupil’s reflection of
school life. On the other hand, we can ask what respect teachers use from
pupils’ side, how they solve conflicting educational situations and what
character educational measures have in particular school.
A 1.5 Between teachers and parents / guardians of pupils is
a partnership
Keywords: opinions of parents to school, partners opened action with the participation
of pupils, joint activities (Butterfly, ski tours, school festivals, bazaars,
and arbore), open the information, after-school activities and extracurricular activities
by parents.
Parents are welcome at the school; parents' meetings are organized
in triad teacher – parent – child.
Teachers are sincerely interested in the way of life of children within
their families.
In some schools there is organized joint education of teachers and
parents – for example, how to prepare children for school (traditionally
preparation in foreign languages where parents do not
79
have the necessary knowledge) to teach children how to learn, to
work with information sources etc.
Especially at smaller schools parents are invited to the common
school events (e.g. ski training, school trips, school dance, carnival,
fair, summer school camps with Butterfly program etc.).
The opinions of children are taken into account in the joint creation
of rules of coexistence in school and in the classroom.
If parents are worried about their child's position in the school, the
school solves it – at first at level of class teacher.
Commentar y:
Actually, most schools do not “solve” this question; it is quite naturally
expected with parental cooperation and in SEP the attention is not
paid to this issue, officially – apart from the mention of class meetings
and voice lessons as a regular form of cooperation. With one exception any
school does not mention a way of action with parents of pupils as a condition
of informal cooperation; it seems that the established methods of
communication between families and schools have already more or less the
character of stereotypes which can seriously interfere with the changing
conditions in the life and work of the school. But there are schools, especially
small schools that try to build partnerships with parents and their
participation in many activities, the process of teaching and education. As
valuable, regular meetings with parents, teacher and pupil can be considered.
In the argument proposals of using parental cooperation for teaching
and for material and financial support to schools are missed.
A 2 Value system recognizing and supporting the
inclusion
A 2.1 Achieving of maximum results is expected from all pupils
Keywords: personal best of pupil in the classroom, individualization and differentiation
of tasks according to the demands and the interests and focus of
children’s projects such as integrated educational strategies appropriate for pupils
of different types, developing the ability to hand in quality work under any
circumstance, evaluation and classification of individualized education.
Teachers pay maximum attention to the diagnostic work and follow
the options of personal maximum of all children.
Systematically they work with feedback (self-reflection), particularly
in a situation of failure of a larger number of pupils in the
class in a particular subject or thematic unit.
Students are marked only after thoroughgoing over the subject.
For achieving personal maximum of individuals they try to use primarily
internal motivation.
80
In evaluating it is preferred an orientation of the progress of their
own children than their mutual comparison and competition. It is
used verbal evaluations (one school).
In the classrooms materials are minimized that have the character
of labelling (black dots etc.), emphasis is placed on development
skill of self-evaluation.
Due to greater failure it is offered an educational consultation to
pupils and their parents.
Schools use the individual education plans for children with special
needs.
There are offered extra tasks for talented pupils and individual
tasks for the slower children for practice.
It is provided a help to pupils in searching of their inner potential
(talent).
The weaker children are focusing on their support in overcoming
educational uncertainty, fear of failure.
The emphasis is also on partnership in relations of teachers and
pupils and pupils themselves.
Children are encouraged to be able to appreciate the good performance
of others (even their own).
Commentar y:
Some schools talk about the increased attention for diagnostic work
and mention the need of further education of teachers in this area. Very
useful is also a focus on student’s self-evaluation which allows children to
evaluate their own strengths and weaknesses and consciously cultivate
their talent (also take responsibility for their own learning).
A 2.2 Teachers, school management, pupils and their parents /
guardians share a philosophy of inclusion
Keywords: open school, “School for All” inclusive education, differentiation and
individualization of tasks according to possible of children, teaching awareness of
inclusive education, the philosophy of inclusion, teachers and parents’ attitudes
to inclusive education.
Positive social climate is a necessary condition of educational in-
clusion.
Positive climate and good educational results of the school are inseparably
linked.
There is an effort to provide more information to parents and the
public about the philosophy of inclusive schools, even if their children
do not have any special educational needs.
There is a tendency through the further education of teachers to
promote awareness and competence of school staff in the area of
the educational inclusion.
81
For a good progress of inclusion is necessary to lead children to
cooperation and understanding in the daily life of the school, using
various resources (community circles, drama etc.).
Commentar y:
Creating a positive school climate is considered as an important condition
for school work; however, schools do not compare the importance of
relevance of educational outcomes. They talk frequently about the need for
“satisfaction” of all children (in their diversity). Inclusion solves philosophy
“decently”: tactfully they circumvent the issue of attitudes to otherness
(“we will not highlight it”). In the self-evaluation questionnaire, however,
schools had to officially express which revealed a specific problem: otherness
is recognized but its consequences are reflected in the school evaluation.
When someone has a worse performance than the others, he has to
bear the consequences. Praises are not wasted. One school mentioned the
importance of praises for weaker pupils due to their motivation. Surprising
is the fact that schools admit there are basically different expectations
from the performance of girls and boys. It can be said that there is quite
a lack of consensus in the attitude of teachers to educational inclusion. Its
appropriateness is certainly vague in individual cases – its implementation
is solved by psychologists or special educators. Teachers who have to
cope with an integrated child in everyday life and they are not enough
personally or professionally equipped, of course may feel under pressure
(the accepting a child with more serious special needs to school, they sometimes
explain as an economic pressure of time to management of school or
other reason). However, it is necessary to take into account that all children
have an equal right to education, that the teacher is a professional
who can provide information himself and hence to develop competencies to
be able to devote to handicapped child as well as others.
A 2.3 Does a school use a variety of pupils?
Keywords: diversity of students, FEP and a framework for the integration of
children with different types of educational limitations, the consequences of exclusion
in basic education.
All students are perceived and accepted in school as well, regardless
of their belonging to different cultures, family background and
parental position, economic security.
The diversity of cultures, language etc. promotes mutual enrichment
of members of the school community.
Every interest of children is welcomed and used – in the common
area of school there are presented information and formal familiarization
with diverse cultures.
If the school staff feels some difficulty in communicating with the
child or his parents, they try to overcome in the mutual discussion
82
and reach consensus – the main argument is a “benefit for the
child”.
Worse achievement is not a reason for discrimination pupils in
class or school.
Boys and girls have equal chances, their creations and the results
are presented as well.
The basic argumentation for equal chances is presented by Charter
of Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and
also internal school code.
Commentar y:
We are concerned that a lot of schools declare their tolerance of differences
of students just formally, only one school admits that this issue
relates to each member of the community separately, i.e. teachers.
A 2.4 Employees and pupils are respected as individuals and as
members of groups who perform a role
Keywords: “School for All”, inclusive education, equal educational opportunities
in the Czech school – tradition and reality, gender issues, socially disadvantaged
pupils, pupils with a different native language.
At school we have the efforts to accept each member of the school
community as an individual with his talent and problems – focus
on positive aspects.
We help to individuals in their finding of their own strengths.
Everyone can find a place in the school community where he feels
safe.
Personality of an individual is more important than its actual re-
sults.
Commentar y:
The formulation of item likely caused that majority of schools stated
minimum or formal comments. Accepting all members of the school
community is apparently common in our schools. We found also a little
lack of research tools (Framework for self-evaluation) which does not offer
full coverage item by guidance questions for argumentation. Even this
may be the reason why school staff did not comment.
A 2.5 Workers of schools create optimal conditions for education
of each pupil
Keywords: inclusive education, equal educational opportunities in the Czech
school – tradition and reality, socially disadvantaged pupils, pupils with a different
first language, mentally and physically handicapped, specific disorders and
behaviour.
83
Pupils with special needs are not built to a contrast with others.
Teachers carry out a diagnostic work in order to maximally integrate
children with SN among others.
Teachers are thinking and looking for ways how to create optimal
conditions for learning of children with special needs.
During solution of formal conditions of education they are looking
for optimum opportunities (e.g. combination concentrated formula
in the area of handicap by special lessons with children with
similar difficulties and inclusion in ordinary lessons).
Teachers use both cooperation with experts and they are interested
in opinions of involved children.
Commentar y:
This criterion primarily shows that schools are aware of their professional
mission. They derived their work from the fact that the diagnostic
work of teacher is a starting point of its impact on pupils; in one case,
the school states that the difficulties in the teaching of a larger number
of pupils represent a feedback for teacher to evaluate their work and
think about it (professional self-reflection). Only peripherally it can be
from the comments guessed that schools pay attention to monitoring individual
pupil progress as evidence of his success (an informal approach
to individualizing education as a sign of inclusive schools). Generally we
can say that “teachers do not promote or prefer any student, all they take
as individuals and put to each according to his needs.” In this context,
also was appeared a mention about the Convention on the Rights of the
Child.
A 2.6 School tries to minimize any discriminatory practices and
acts of discrimination
Keywords: discrimination, discriminatory signs, preference of chosen pupils by
teachers, disadvantages, “School for All”, equality of educational opportunity.
The school tries to eliminate any type of discrimination maximally
(race, gender, age, cultural affiliation, economic situation, disabilities
etc.).
Reason for exclusion is not a handicap in an area where others
would manage the task better and faster (e.g. service class, the
dining room, message handling etc.).
Against discriminatory exclusion also affects the ability of realistic
self-evaluation (rather than teacher’s evaluation).
Commentar y:
Arguments against manifestations of discrimination are often too
general. Teachers do not specify ways how they minimize these signs.
84
Thus, although all schools formally state that the exclusion does not exist
in their school, in the follow-up observations we were sometimes convinced
that teachers break this requirement even with the best intentions.
5.2 VIEW B: PRINCIPLES OF MAXIMUM
PARTICIPATION
B1 Way to the School for all
B 1.1 Every school staff has the same conditions for acceptance
and professional growth
Keywords: accepting of employees, diversity pupils, further education, and professional
growth.
When adopting a new employee to the school it is not taken account
of the sex, age... – priority is their professional ability, harmony of
their ideas about school and learning with philosophy of school and
the ability to accept change.
All employees may participate in further education and work on
their professional growth.
The school has established targets in the area of a balanced representation
of employees (all have the opportunity to participate in
further education).
One of the key criteria is the ability to receive and support every
child, to this attitude is put a great emphasis also on solutions of
common situations in school.
It is desirable that all school staff can participate in further education.
Every year is a seminar with a common theme (the theme
of emotional education, new methods of work, teamwork etc.) addressed
to all school teachers, other workshops are attended by
school staff according to their individual personal development
plan.
We pay attention to qualification and further education of teacher.
The diversity of pupils is the criterion for accepting teachers who
lead leisure activities.
Commentar y:
In argumentation of observed schools is evident commitment to
building an erudite teaching staff to create optimal educational environments
for all students with respect to their current educational needs.
Specific criteria for diversity were not listed by any of school. Rather, it
is preferred adopting the concept and principles of school by employees
85
(significant in terms of validity of school education programs) and respecting
the personally developing access to the child. However, at the
same time for further education there is very often lack of money which
also limits material conditions (copier, computer, internet, current scientific
literature) which also influences the professional growth of teachers
and teaching proficiency at all. It is sad that one of these schools has the
fear of future development of financing and gives the aim only: “at least
maintain the current situation.” A positive example is the school that currently
“allows its employees to study extra-mural”.
B 1.2 School tries to accept all pupils from the catchment area
Keywords: inclusion of pupils from communities, equality in the school community,
catchment area.
The school accepts all students from the catchment area and pupils
of minorities.
Because the school is faced with a lack of pupils, of course, all students
are accepted from the catchment area and pupils living outside
who are interested in education in our school.
Teachers are trying to create optimal conditions for all. Accepted
students are integrated into the school community.
The school accepts all pupils under the same terms. Each child is
treated as individuality.
An exception can be only a pupil who transfers during the year due
to major educational problems. Discussions are led with the class
teacher about this pupil. If he could seriously disrupt the social
climate in the classroom and the teacher feels that the situation in
the class would be unbearable, school refuses to accept the child.
After the pupil is accepted to school, his school community belonging
is the same as for other pupils.
The school is open to every child.
Commentar y:
Whether the inclusion of all pupils from the catchment area is
a part of school rules, is not clearly stated by any school. The question of
inclusion of really all pupils from the catchment area (and outside) the
schools deal with at the moment when the pupil with special educational
needs finds. Building a “school for all” is clearly supported by a negative
phenomenon, i.e. Lack of pupils and its associated problems of existence.
However, if the schools access to this situation very constructively, this
phenomenon can occur rarely positive. Teachers do not have to be opened
and particularly further prepared (see further education and professional
growth).
86
B 1.3 Does the school consult with organizations which associate
people with handicap how the school should provide the
wheelchair access?
Keywords: wheelchair access, accessibility of the school.
The school is not required to provide wheelchair access currently.
Wheelchair access is not part of a plan for improving the school.
Disabled pupils have not been interested in our school yet. If that
happens, they will be sent to another barrier-free school.
There is not a wheelchair access in the school; it has not been necessary
yet.
During building the new space this issue has been already taken
into account. These new areas have been already built as a wheel-
chair.
New repairs lead to barrier-free access and the ground floor is ready
and available.
The school has wheelchair access inside and outside. Two students
attend the school in a wheelchair.
The school is due to the safety of students locked, after the ring to
school staff, the access is always allowed.
Commentar y:
In this criterion there are a large number of different arguments
but which sometimes indicate a misunderstanding of questions – “The
school is due to the safety of students locked, after the ring to school staff
the access is always allowed.“ The need of barrier-free access any schools
have not solved yet. They will be interested in this issue at the moment of
actual needs. We believe that this issue should be solved with the founder
in advance. Where wheelchair access is not possible for any reason it
should be known from the description of the spatial conditions of the
school. It turns out that the observed schools solve the issue of acceptance
of “all” literally at the knee and do not use the consultations with
organizations associating disabled people.
B 1.4 It is helped to all new pupils to feel comfortable and safe at
school
Keywords: introductory program, support for pupils, orientation at the school,
feelings of students.
The school organizes information sessions for pre-schoolers; older
pupils are guides to the first-graders.
To the school children come from their own nursery schools – common
objectives, strategies, events, trips.
Pupils are familiar with the teachers, the school building and with
older classmates as early as kindergarten.
87
For pre-schoolers there is set up the club “Pre-schooler” whose goal
is a better adaptation of these children to a school work.
Due to the size of our schools newly arrived pupils have no problem
with the orientation in the school building. Moreover, they have the
opportunity to become familiar with the school building and the
style of education at the days of open doors in advance.
The school accepts new pupils on the basis of ritual garden party,
helps them to integrate with actions and activities at the trip at
the beginning of the school year (trip Butterfly).
Before arriving of a new pupil to the team (and throughout the
year) the class is prepared for the arrival of a new pupil, the conditions
are set to feel welcome.
Pre-schoolers go to the school’s club “Zero Year” together with their
teacher from kindergarten. So they get used to their future primary
teacher and school environment.
Dating trips for pupils of newly formed teams, autumn schools in
nature, promotional events for kindergartens, intensive cooperation
with kindergarten throughout the year.
Through community circles.
Patronage of pupils of 9th classes above first-graders, new students
of higher classes is guided through the school building and familiar
with the running of schools.
The initial introduction of cooperation with kindergartens, at the
day of registration is tour of the school, walks of the first-graders
around the school within the curriculum of nature science.
Commentar y:
As mentioned above, the vast majority of primary schools do not
currently prevent the adoption of new pupils literally anytime from existential
reasons. From these arguments it is also obvious that the system
of introduction and adaptation of new pupils they have relatively
well-developed. To the situation records the fact that nursery schools
are more and more often the part of the primary schools, which support
the existence “common objectives, strategies, events, trips.” To a large
extent, there are also used “social and communicative games to pull-in
a new child into the class collective or group work.” Conversely unique,
but very interesting, is a system where “each new student has a mentor.”
For clarity, it should be noted that the community circle is not an
investigative method but it is an instrument of collective cohesion and
support of climate in the classroom. And finally – it is pleasant that
some schools (despite the apparent satisfaction with the level of this
criterion) declare their decision “develop a comprehensive program for
new pupils.”
88
B 1.5 Does the school create its classroom so that the respect of
all pupils equally is clear?
Keywords: dividing of children into classes, equal opportunities, social cohesion,
interests of pupils, change of groups.
The school respects all pupils equally.
Pupils are divided into classes according to the number of pupils in
each class.
Optional subjects are included in the curriculum on the basis of the
interest of pupils.
All school facilities are accessible to all students without exception.
We try to take into account not only the number of pupils at connecting
grades to classes but also their temperament, intellectual
abilities, talents and handicap.
Groups in classes are changed.
Non-optional subjects are included in the curriculum according to
the interests of students.
Small school – connection of grades is determined by the number of
pupils in grade and according to the school needs (unrelated to the
individuals or groups).
In the teaching of flute pupils are divided into groups according to
their abilities, pupils have the opportunity to move between groups,
if their skill changes significantly.
At dividing into groups different forms are chosen, mostly it is used
the luck and with pupils it is discussed the need to be able to work
with everyone.
In the projects pupils often work in mixed-age groups.
School desks are arranged in groups, pupils usually choose themselves
with whom they will sit.
Equal representation of children to the first-grade according to the
registrations tickets, if the parents wish, we will move the pupil to
another class.
Cooperation with Parents Club and the Council of the school, parents
are partners.
Optional subjects we offer from the first-grade.
Children with disabilities are integrated among healthy, due to the
unique characteristics of school children are not divided to classes
according to the results (except EN).
Pupils have the opportunity to change the group during project
work according to their wishes and project focus.
Classification of languages with regard to capabilities – for advanced
pupils is that the motivation to work beyond duty, contrary,
beginners are not in panic due to the success of advanced class-
mates.
89
Pupils are not divided into classes according to knowledge (we have
only heterogeneous classes).
In seven subjects, is possible the transfer of pupils with SEN to
classic classes.
Commentar y:
Quite a large number of arguments suggest about very sympathetic
trend in practice of primary education – “We divide the class in
favour of social cohesion, i.e. that everyone can learn to cooperate with
everyone.” In most, the pupils with special educational needs are integrated
into heterogeneous classes and re-education is implemented for
example via their concentrated work with special educators or directly
differentiated work of these pupils in ordinary classes. Homogeneous
groups are reported especially in language and optional subjects which
do not represent a substantial part of education so heterogeneity of natural
group of class is maintained. Some arguments of this criterion just
follow the guidance questions again, some go completely out of question
– “The school respects all pupils equally.” From others it is clear
that schools usually make classes purely technically, i.e. according to
number of pupils which is sometimes requested by need of the organization
of small schools.
B 2 Receiving and using differences
B 2.1 All forms of support of optimal development of child are
consistent
Keywords: child development, support for pupils, barriers of learning, active
participation, cooperation of teachers.
It is applied an individual approach.
Teachers are familiar with the conclusions and recommendations
of the pedagogical-psychological clinic and try to follow its recommendations,
particularly in subjects where the pupil’s handicap is
expressed.
All teachers are actively involved in finding ways how to help to
the child with barriers of learning. They exchange experiences and
results of their observations of the child.
Grade leadership, consultation of all teachers in the classroom.
Support for all pupils according to their talents.
The classroom teacher transmits the information about pupils to
other teachers.
Tutoring at school, club Všeználek for the weaker children.
Help of Roma assistant and assistant of teacher in lessons.
90
Commentar y:
Neither here the arguments are usually adequate. Answers like
“Yes” do not tell anything about situation. As an acceptable, we can state:
“Grade leadership, consultation of all teachers in the classroom”, “All
teachers are actively involved in finding ways how to help to the child with
barriers of learning. They exchange experiences and results of their observations
of the child”; “The classroom teacher transmits the information
about pupils to other teachers.” It is imperative for teachers to frequently
and in the broader context consult the necessary steps towards removing
barriers of learning.
B 2.2 Further education helps teachers to work with diversity of
pupils
Keywords: further education, the use of diversity of pupils, cooperative learning,
internal motivation of pupils, personal and social education, equal opportunities,
education reflection.
The group education is followed by a common reflection of presenting
the results of other groups, utilized for better acceptance and
use of pupils’ differences.
Pupils evaluate themselves and self-evaluate, discuss about problems,
give suggestions – Children's Parliament.
It is followed by a summary of information and drawing conclusions.
Lessons are prepared to motivate pupils to work as much as possible
and independent thinking and decision (non-traditional methods
and forms of work, projects etc.).
All teachers and support staff are continually trained in ICT.
Teachers continually study a variety of materials to support and
develop internal motivation of pupils, personal and social education
and how to deal with bullying (including racism, gender discrimination
and homophobia).
We work with disabled people especially within extracurricular ac-
tivities.
Teachers are educated in the management and implementation
of cooperative learning, using ICT, developing personal and social
education of pupils in special education areas.
Reflection is a common part of group and cooperative activities.
It includes not only the result of activities but also the process of
group work and inclusion of all its members.
Teachers look for ways and opportunities how to use a cooperative
learning as much as possible.
Teachers are educated in the areas of cooperative learning, emotional
education, personal and social development of pupils.
Teachers use ICT technology in education commonly, each class is
equipped with at least three computers connected to the Internet.
91
All teachers discuss about possibilities how to deal with victimization
and other types of undesirable events among children.
Prevention specialist studies the five-year training course of pre-
vention.
Self-improvement of teachers in the field of social and personal development
of pupils.
Modernization of classrooms and building specialized classrooms,
involvement computers into teaching.
Preventing victimization, we educate constantly.
The group work is followed by a joint evaluation of work, self-evaluation
of pupils.
All teachers use the opportunity to using computer labs in developing
projects of pupils, also they use audio-visual equipment.
Passing seminars and workshops organized by the school in cooperation
with Special Education Centre Brno in the project “How to
bullying.”
Part of the further education we use for education at work with
pupils with SEN, at the working meetings there are regularly included
information about working with children with SEN.
Commentar y:
The number of arguments mentioned in this criterion is quite high.
Further education of teachers in observed schools is aimed mainly to
social and personal development, cooperative learning and use of modern
technology. More often is also reflected the group work. Some arguments
are again only repeating of questions asked. However, it is necessary to
agree with the finding that “an offer of further education of teachers in
areas such as equal opportunities for people with disabilities is almost
zero.” Contrary, in the teaching process is often neglected the reflection
from the perspective of pupils. But even though, objectively education
is missing in specific methods and forms of work, it is always possible
to faithfully reflect the lessons just from the perspective of pupils. Give
them feedback. This is certainly a reliable way to detect the educational
potentiality of pupils but also teachers.
B 2.3 Working with pupils with SEN is based on inclusive princi-
ples
Keywords: special educational needs, inclusive principles, mutual learning.
Pupils included in the category of “pupils with SEN” are integrated
in mainstream classes (they are given individual care as well as
gifted students and everyone else).
Pupils with SEN are not perceived as a homogenous group but as
an individual with certain special needs.
92
Pupils without SEN and with SEN learn from each other and also
enrich each other.
Every child in school is perceived as an individual and with his
individual strengths and needs.
Teachers encourage mutual learning of children; look for opportunities
to every child could feel successful.
We pay attention to integration of pupils with SEN into the team.
Pupils are integrated into the class team, working in heterogeneous
groups.
The school has special classes for pupils with SEN.
Commentar y:
As it turns out, teachers acutely aware that the pupils with special
educational needs cannot be accessed by following same template. Only
the last argument goes outside the inclusion. The presented inclusive
principles almost miss the moment in which the methods or forms of
education of these pupils would be used for example for improving the
experience of all pupils or for prevention.
B 2.4 Way of identification and evaluation of SEN leads to the
elimination of barriers to learning and active participation
of all pupils
Keywords: elimination of barriers to learning, active participation of all pupils,
individual education program, diagnostic activities of teacher, cooperation with
institutions.
Individual education plans of pupils with SEN contribute to improving
their learning.
Individual educational programs of pupils with SEN are processed
to be specific, consulted with the pupil and his parents and to help
the child, teachers and parents.
If the teachers are not sure in certain cases and situations, they
consult with the special education teacher of pedagogical- psychological
counselling centre.
Cooperation with educational counsellor, parents and other teachers.
We have three special educators, dedicated to all needy students.
They are formed according to their individual needs.
Verbal evaluation, self-evaluation in weekly plans of pupils, individual
plans.
Based on the professional knowledge of educators more rapid detection
of SEN and thus faster elimination of barriers to learning.
Commentar y:
Also in this indicator, it seems that the schools can handle. They
create individual education plans “based on testing of students in the
93
PPCC and SPC”, but it should be noted that the source should be also
parents or interested members of the teaching staff. One school also
declares the intention “to create individual programs also for pupils
with disabilities (problems) of behaviour.” A very sophisticated is that
although all schools are given the relevant arguments, they always look
for ways “to study the possibilities of creating individual programs, to
find ways, how to record them efficiently and find ways easily, how to
record the progress of the child.”
B 2.5 Support for pupils, for whom the Czech language is not
a mother language, is coordinated with the support of their
learning as such
Keywords: support for students from foreign-language environment, the responsibility
of teachers, the level of results.
There are only pupils with the Czech mother language in our
school.
Currently, none pupils attend our school from a foreign-language
environment. If so, their support would be seen as the responsibility
of all teaching staff.
We believe that there would be any reason not to expect the high
level of results from these pupils (assuming the account for example
in CZ).
Currently, there are not any pupils in the school for whom the
Czech language is not a native language.
The effort of maximum support of these pupils, appropriate to their
abilities and capabilities.
Cooperation with the Centre for Integration of minorities.
We devote an individual attention to children; we have a teaching
assistant, pupils work according to an individual education
plan.
Expanding their lack of vocabulary by continuous and immediate
explanations of Czech words, phrases and puns as well as in leisure
time of educators.
Commentar y:
The general formulations such as “the effort of maximum support
of these pupils” are not the answer to the question again. From the list
of arguments is also evident that in most schools are educated only
pupils with native Czech language so this situation is not solved in
schools. However, teacher staff should be prepared for the future which
is related to further education. Therefore arguments lack specificity.
94
B 2.6 Rules and procedures for the emotional and spiritual support
for of pupils are linked with the development of the
educational program and procedures to support learning
Keywords: reactions to signals of loss of interest, lack of discipline, self-confidence,
knowledge and cooperation of parents, support learning.
The school reinforces the self-confidence of pupils and early solves
the symptoms of indiscipline in cooperation with parents.
Knowledge of parents and children is used in the process of the
overcoming these problems but sometimes does not bring the expected
effect.
The school purposefully reinforces self-esteem and self-confidence
of pupils and school staff.
The cause of problems is often identified by regular contact with
the child's parents. The problems are reflected by loss of interest,
theft, symptoms of indiscipline (monthly consultation in three).
Teacher together with parents looks for ways and opportunities
how to help the child.
Participation of teachers in the training in the area to support
learning.
Cooperation with the family takes place, further education takes
place according to financial possibilities.
Individually, as part of further education.
Self-confidence of pupils is reinforced by gentle approach and understanding,
highlighting their skills in other areas.
Regular consultations – class meetings, colloquial hours throughout
the year.
Commentar y:
From the argument is clear that all observed schools try to develop
communication with parents about the problems and needs of their children.
However, interesting claim is “knowledge of parents and children is
used in the process of the overcoming these problems but sometimes does
not bring the expected effect.” Does it mean that teachers use the knowledge
of parents and children, but they actually do not use it? Perhaps it
corresponds with the finding that “it is necessary to be more educated in
this area.” Therefore it is desirable to encourage participation of teachers
in training in the area to support learning.
B 2.7 There are reduce pressures to a disciplinary exclusion
Keywords: solving of problems, symptoms of scorn, disciplinary action.
In our school we do not meet with greater difficulties (loss of interest,
theft).
95
Problems are prevented by offering various activities, creating
class rules, respecting of individual differences or timely solution
of emerging problem.
On the class meetings and consultations apart from the educational
field is also discussed the issue of behaviour (so we try to prevent
disciplinary exclusion).
Teachers access to the pupils with respect.
Any disciplinary exclusion has not been in our school till now.
Problems are solved first with the child in the beginning, if necessary,
in cooperation with parents.
Immediately we solve these problems in cooperation with the
family, there is an educational committee.
Commentar y:
From the argumentation is obvious that in the monitored schools,
problems are solved in the beginning, in extensive cooperation. That is
positive. But the claim “In school, there has been no disciplinary exclusion
until now” is perhaps the scuffle “heads in the sand”. A situation
– for example the exclusion of a pupil from different activities or a pupil
punished – appears at the first grade, too. On the other hand, a very
solid argument is a resolution “we prevent problem behaviour by rigorous
observation of pupils”. We point out, it is necessary to work on education
of parental public at the same time.
B 2.8 Barriers to school attendance are removed
Keywords: going out of school, bullying, lack of friends, unexcused hours, removing
barriers.
Bullying is prevented by encouraging friendships and the implementation
of minimum prevention education program.
Children are emphasized by usefulness establishing friendships
between peers.
In the school, any serious cases of going out of school or bullying
have not been observed.
School always looks for the cause of pupil’s action and behaviour,
the next step is to search for the change in the action and behav-
iour.
Unexcused lessons of pupils at first grade are almost eliminated
based on good cooperation between pupils, parents and teachers.
Editing school code, tightening rules of attendance, is the tendency
of increasing the number of unexcused absent hours, school cooperation
with the Department of Social Welfare.
Teachers attended the course about bullying.
96
Commentar y:
For this criterion we consider a positive argument, which clearly
aims at prevention of undesirable effects – “We create such an atmosphere
to every child enjoys the school.” And also “to detect the first signs of bullying
by rigorous observation of pupils in time”. On the other hand, an argument
“to extend the range of recreational activities” cannot be considered
as relevant. Recreational activities are not a system support because the
most needed very often escape from the offer for various reasons. Finally,
“editing school code” does not solve that problem. Self-education in the
issue of bullying deserves an award.
B 2.9 It minimizes the risk of bullying
Keywords: bullying, rules for pupils and teachers, prevention and solutions,
strategies for prevention.
The school realizes minimal preventive program that helps to prevent
and deal with bullying.
Pupils know who to contact when experiencing bullying.
Teachers, parents and pupils know what is bullying.
At school assemblies of all teachers and pupils, is explained to pupils
that bullying can be both physical and psychological nature.
In the school code and in rules of behaviour, formed by a school
parliament, is defined what behaviour in school is acceptable and
what is not.
In the classes are discussed specific cases of signs of bullying –
mostly at the morning meeting.
Within the subject “Healthy Lifestyle” school realizes a program
that helps to prevent and deal with bullying.
Purposefully, it is worked on the positive relationships between
children at school.
Purposefully, educators entertain the subject of strengthening selfesteem
and self-confidence of each child.
Pupils participate in creating rules of behaviour and acting at
school.
Cooperation between teachers and staff of prevention.
Educational programs – communication in the classroom (How are
you talking?), mapping relationships.
Commentar y:
Criterion of prevention and suppression of bullying shows a wide
range of relatively good arguments. It should be noted that as bullying
is consider apart from physical hurt, also the verbal and psychological
assault. Therefore, it is very positive if “school works systematically on
positive relationships between children”. A good example is the “active
97
involvement in projects dealing with bullying” and “cooperation between
teachers and staff of prevention.” Again it is important to emphasize also
the cooperation with parents – explain them what is bullying, how to
react and who to contact, where to find help.
5.3 VIEW C: SUPPORT AND DEVELOPMENT OF
NON-DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICE
C 1 Organization of common learning
C 1.1 Education respects the diversity of pupils
Keywords: using the experience of pupils, individualization of education, differentiation
– individualization; work, group, mass; different pace, way of recording,
respect for learning styles, different methods and equipment`s.
Lessons include activities that can be performed individually, in
pairs, groups and whole class.
During lessons there are various activities including discussion, interpretation,
writing, drawing, problem solving and use of library, audio-visual
technology, practical activities and information technology.
Teaching is mostly supported on methods in which pupils experiment,
discuss, learn each other.
Pupils often share the planning lessons and the choice of teaching
methods and style.
There are alternated activities and methods for pupils.
Pupil often has the possibility of choice (order of tasks, individually,
in groups, use of tools and techniques).
Pupils learn to record their work in different ways, from which they
can choose the best one: common notes, mental map, audio record for
children with dysgraphia etc.
Before the long-term activity or evaluation of work, there are set
out goals and evaluation criteria together with pupils.
We take into account individual pace; include modern methods and
forms of work, activity and cooperative education.
Teachers let discover regularities, phenomena, rules when teaching.
This helps to group work, learning by doing, working with various
information sources.
During lessons are used also experiences of pupils gained outside
the school.
Respect for pupil’s talent, support for gifted pupils.
Support the activities in which a pupil is good, differentiated entry
tasks.
98
Commentar y:
Arguments to this item relating to respect for the diversity of pupils
were often general or did not apply to a given criterion. For example,
to the question whether “Are pupils encouraged to discover something
new by teachers?”, teachers chose the answer “see SEP”, “essence of activity
learning”, “block education”, “Dalton elements”. Block education is
an organizational form, not a method in which the pupil would have to
discover something new, even though it is possible, but within the chosen
method. Among the general answer, we can assign a statement “teachers
use a variety of learning styles”, but we never know which ones.
C 1.2 Educational process is accessible to all pupils
Keywords: respect for different language skills, the ability to communicate in
the native language, respect for differences – psychomotoric, cognitive and so-
cial.
The school reflects the differences in knowledge and the pace of
pupils.
Teachers are aware of natural differences between pupils in momentum
and skills.
Teachers respect the individuality of all children and adapt education
to everyone has the opportunity to feel success and to integrate
into activity.
Evaluation is mostly based on evaluation of personal development
of the individual.
The school uses various sources of information, not only text-
books.
There are usually prepared tasks of different difficulties.
Commentar y:
In these communications were not often the right “arguments”, but
rather a consciousness (we know). The fact, teachers are aware of the differences
between pupils in momentum and skills, is very valuable. But in
the argumentation should be also given, how they work with these differences,
what is actually happening in the educational process.
C 1.3 Education develops understanding of the differences
Keywords: difference – opinions, gender, ethnicity, visual, social, religious, cooperation
between children.
We often use methods of dramatization, brainstorming, and discussions
in the circle.
Pupils are free to decide – with whom they will work, how they will
proceed with given work.
Children are encouraged to tolerance and understanding differences.
99
In the school is supported experimentation, looking for different
options and solutions.
Pupils share experiences with each other.
Part of subjects Healthy Lifestyle and Earth science is understands
the differences in cultures, ethnicities, religions, sexual orienta-
tion...
Pupils work daily in mixed groups (age, sex, different types of tal-
ent...).
We pay attention to multicultural education; each pupil has enough
space to express himself.
We guide pupils to understand the fact that each person is an individual;
people are different in ethnicity, culture or can have disabilities
in different ways etc.
Trip Butterfly at the beginning of the school year is specifically focused
on the respect for differences and self-development of children.
We present one of the three slogans of the school: No one is better
or worse person than I, we are just simply different.
Development of self-esteem and self-confidence – who loves himself,
appreciates his abilities, may also like the others.
Commentar y:
Arguments to the item relating to respect for differences of pupils
and opinions is more specific and tells more about activities at school. In
schools where is not an ethnic diversity, teachers say that “pupils have little
opportunity to meet with different ethnicities, cultures and religions”.
However, with this response, we should not be completely satisfied. It is
possible that these opportunities are not immediately in school, but they
are in everyday life, literature, media etc. To respect different opinions
among children, schools did often not express. However, for education
towards tolerance and mutual listening (i.e. attributes, noticeably absented
in modern society) is this activity absolutely crucial.
C 1.4 Pupils are actively engaged in their own learning
Keywords: learning competencies – the responsibility for learning, knowledge
of objectives, choice of equipment, proper organization of work, presentation of
results, self-evaluation, consultation of development of pupil.
Pupils are encouraged to be responsible for their own learning
– frequent feedback, system of evaluation and self-evaluation...
Equipment in classrooms allows independent learning.
Pupils can work by individually pace.
Pupils are free to use the library and sources of information tech-
nology.
Pupils are taught how to make notes from textbooks and how to
organize their work.
100
Pupils are taught how to present their work in spoken, written and
other forms, individually or in groups.
Knowledge and skills gained outside the classroom are used in edu-
cation.
Pupils are encouraged to be responsible for their own learning – actively
participate in setting the criteria for evaluation, self-evaluation
and planning their further learning (in the process of teaching
during lessons, consultations in three).
With pupils is always discussed the aim of education and a sense of
learning a particular subject.
Pupils through projects learn to handle topic, to use the various
options for finding information and to present the results of their
work.
The school is equipped with a sufficient amount of material supporting
an independent learning of pupils (books, encyclopaedias, atlases,
Internet). These information sources are freely accessible to all
pupils. It is explained to pupils, what and why they should learn it.
During individual work, teacher teaches children to ask him for the
help, if they need it.
Choice of forms, methods and content of learning – differentiated
learning.
Verbal evaluation – they do not learn for marks.
Possibility of choice of a personal topic interested for pupil.
Commentar y:
This item is closely related to the general competence of FEP
– competency for learning. Responses of individual schools are again
different in level of generality and specificity. From the relatively large
number of arguments is to know a considerable effort to the development
of all pupils in the sub-items of learning competencies at all
schools.
C 1.5 Pupils work together during education
Keywords: mutual cooperation in teaching, evaluating, problem-solving.
Pupils perceive offering and use of assistance from classmates as
a common part of lesson.
There are the rules, how to take turns in contributing to discussion,
how to listen and how to request further explanation from
other classmates and adults.
Pupils are involved in the mutual evaluation of progress and outcome
of lessons.
Pupils are systematically taught to the rules of communication in
the group from kindergarten.
101
Group and cooperative education, speaking exercises and presentations,
presentation of results in front of class, comment into the
press.
Pupils are encouraged to help classmates during lessons; this mutual
assistance has become a common part of teaching.
In discussions, pupils are encouraged to listen to the others, leave
other finish the speech and not jump to speech.
Pupils learn to work together: a pair, in three, in a larger group,
they know the rules for group work.
The use of social and communicative games to pull-in a new child
into a class group.
Every new pupil has a mentor.
Commentar y:
The item is closely related to social and personal competence defined
in the FEP BE. From the statements is clear that teachers pay
great attention to the cooperation of pupils in the classroom and the
school. The statements are already considerably more specific, in the arguments
mentioned activities are to cooperation, mutual assistance and
respect for the rules of communication in joint activities as well as their
presentation. It is also necessary to note that in the argumentation of
school are great differences.
C 1.6 Self-evaluation and evaluation support the performance of
each pupil
Keywords: formative evaluation, evaluation of knowledge, skills and competencies,
assessment of mutual work.
Pupils regularly evaluate not only the results of their activities, but
also a learning process and the causes of success or failure. They
are looking for opportunities what change they can make in their
own learning.
Pupils evaluate their contribution to group work, look for causes of
unequal involvement of individual members of the group and ways
how to work differently next time.
Teachers monitor learning results and learning process of individuals;
do not distinguish membership to the various groups.
Results of the test Kalibro are distinguished separately for boys
and girls.
Regularly used self-evaluation of pupils allows them to reflect on
their knowledge, skills, level of key competencies.
In the monitoring results according to belonging to individual group,
it seems no sense.
Self-evaluation through the weekly plans is the rule in all classes now.
102
There is a gradual reduction in the importance of marks.
Information books are based on a weekly and monthly self-evaluation
(pupils’ books are replaced).
Joint creation of evaluation criteria.
Different types of self-evaluation – verbally, in writing, words,
graphs.
Commentar y:
Teachers focus on evaluating pupils’ knowledge and skills to check
their competencies. Purposefully they lead pupils to self-evaluation and
evaluation during group work. Attention is not paid to monitoring results
according belonging to different groups (with the exception of one school
where the results of boys/girls are gained by test Kalibro). In some schools
is a mutually complementary system of evaluation by teacher and selfevaluation
by pupils. Self-evaluation is often realized not only verbally and
randomly, but also in writing form and in the system of gaining regular
information about pupil view on his own results and learning process.
C 1.7 Discipline in the classroom is based on mutual respect and
compliance rules created together
Keywords: self-discipline, discipline, mutual creating the rules, cooperation in
dealing with disciplinary problems, clear process of teachers.
They help each other according to their abilities and situations,
solving problems through community circle.
Teachers cooperate in solving disciplinary problems of pupils and
share the experience and knowledge that would help them in over-
coming.
With pupils is consulted how to create more pleasant atmosphere
in the classroom.
There are clear procedures, understandable both for teachers and
pupils, how to react to inappropriate behaviour.
Pupils are involved in creating and commenting rules of action or
behaviour at school.
The rules are based on rights and obligations.
If someone breaks rules, there are primarily explored causes and
consequently the possibility of changes in the action and behaviour.
All pupils participated in setting rules of life in the classroom; the
final form of these rules gave the school parliament.
Discipline is still a problem for some pupils in higher grades. Their
inclusion in extracurricular activities helps to eliminate signs in-
discipline.
School code (rules) is formed in cooperation of pupils, teachers and
parents and every year it is again discussed and updated.
103
Commentar y:
Teachers usually give their pupils opportunity to participate in the
formation of disciplinary rules and cooperate on the procedure for solving
disciplinary problems. To the final version of the rules is also involved the
children’s parliament at larger schools. The consultation, which would
lead to a more relaxing atmosphere in the classroom or whole school in
cooperation with all students, however, happens exceptionally.
C 1.8 Teachers plan, teach and reflect on their work in partner-
ship
Keywords: partnership and cooperation of teachers – in planning and during
teaching process.
Cooperation – days project, sports days, cultural events, schools in
nature, tours, Children's Day.
Joint learning occasionally, joint reflection daily.
Clearly – to provide a good model of the teacher.
Teachers share experience with each other, some subjects teachers
teach in pairs.
If there is a problem at school, it is solved usually by teachers
together and there are looked for its causes and possibilities of
change.
Teachers cooperate in planning projects or lessons; work as a team
only on after-school events, school in nature and educational semi-
nars.
Teachers use feedback from colleagues. Cooperating teachers give
their pupils a positive model.
Teachers solve problems of pupils or groups of pupils.
Commentar y:
Cooperation of teachers (especially in large urban schools) occurs
primarily in the planning and implementation of extracurricular activities,
project days, educational seminars, in the organization of the school
year or in schools in nature. Teachers in smaller schools have cooperated
more in the planning of the actual teaching, consulting pupils’ results
and in mentioned joint actions. Education in a team occurs rarely, because
it is difficult in our conditions (personal, economic security etc.).
C 1.9 Teachers are interested in learning support and active participation
of all pupils
Keywords: personal development of each pupil, help of assistant.
Teachers monitor, support and encourage each pupil.
We try to look at teaching and provided support through the eyes of
students.
104
Attempts to removal the barriers in learning of one pupil are perceived
as an opportunities for improving the learning of all.
Teachers use a part of the lessons to observe pupils and individual
support of pupils who need it.
According to the number of pupils in the class, we pay attention to
the monitoring of individual growth of each individual and his opportunity
to tell his opinion.
Teachers monitor the progress of all pupils during lessons; they try
to treat with pupils fairly.
Assistant work with other pupils, too.
Commentar y:
Educational staff describes in their arguments the monitoring of
progress of all pupils and the use of observations to plan their development.
At the same time there is information, how much depends on the
number of pupils in the classroom. Only in little extent was appeared the
view to teaching by pupils’ eyes or getting feedback from pupils, which
may be one of the starting points for planning other learning activities.
Other teachers actually lose an important motivational element in the
learning process.
C 1.10 Teachers and assistants for pupils with SEN encourage and
promote active learning of each pupil
Keywords: cooperation of teachers and assistants, independence of pupils at as-
sistant.
Assistant works only at one school in the research group of schools.
He is assigned to one pupil.
Commentar y:
At the time of research, an assistant was assigned to a pupil only
at one school. Other schools stated that there is not an assistant and
argumentation to a given criterion did not appear. After two years of research,
the situation is quite different, assistants at schools are more
often so this criterion will be monitored continuously in the future.
C 1.11 The access to homework contributes the learning of all
pupils
Keywords: individualized homework – aim, form, scope, cooperation of pupils,
space.
The opportunity to cooperation – group long-term challenges, they
have a choice.
By homework is always followed a clear aim.
105
Homework is entered with respect to skills and knowledge of all
pupils.
Pupils have opportunities to do homework in the after-school club.
They are entered such a homework to be fulfilled without the help
of parents.
Homework is targeted either to practice known subject or for research
that will be used in the subsequent teaching block – pupils
know the meaning of homework.
Homework is often voluntary or optional.
We differentiate tasks, enter optional tasks and use the class library,
internet classroom.
Some homework can be done in several ways.
Homework is filled by pupils at home. Most homework is achievable
without help of parents, only in some homework pupils have
a possibility to cooperate.
Commentar y:
In some schools is clearly promoted the idea of voluntary and election
of homework. Sometimes pupils are to leave the method of execution. So
homework is more practicing or vice versa detecting the new information.
Mostly it is an input, in which cooperation is not required from parents.
C 1.12 Each student has the opportunity to participate in leisure
activities of the school
Keywords: availability of activities for all pupils.
• All actions of the school curriculum are available to all pupils, regardless
of results or disabilities and their background.
• All pupils have the opportunity to participate in school activities
according to their interest.
• Sport events include activities in which everyone can participate,
regardless of skills or disability.
• To all pupils without distinction is offered a participation in all voluntary
subjects and extracurricular activities.
• All pupils without exception have the opportunity to participate in
extracurricular activities. At the initial meeting in September, the
headmaster always explains to parents the benefits of extracurricular
activities.
• We believe that parents feel they are welcome in all extracurricular
events.
Commentar y:
Small rural and large urban schools, which were monitored, they
offer to their pupils a very wide range of leisure activities. Variety and
106
choice is thus ensured. From the argumentation is not clear how these
activities are offered for example to pupils from socially disadvantaged
backgrounds, whether the offer it is not limited economically for them.
It depends on whether the activities are run for a fee or not, whether
they need material equipment, whether they are associated with some
traveling etc.
C 2 Professional and human qualities of each employee
are fully known and utilized
C 2.1 Professional and human qualities of each employee are fully
known and utilized
Keywords: further education of teacher and the exchange of obtained.
We have a prepared plan for further education of teachers.
In school is a mutual presentation of the experience gained else-
where.
Teachers have the opportunity to learn from practice and experiences
of their colleagues from other schools.
Teachers have the opportunity in agreement with the school management
to be educated according to their interests (if their education
is related to philosophy and needs of school.
Teachers discuss the origin of pupils’ problems as well as the possibilities
how to help these pupils.
We are educated by the form of further education, we have a system
of introducing teachers, informal meetings.
Teacher teaches according to his abilities – not only in his class.
Leisure time activities, leading clubs by teaching staff according to
their interests and capabilities.
Commentar y:
From these arguments it is clear that monitored schools have
a sophisticated system of further education, which corresponds to the
philosophy of the school. Sharing knowledge and experience takes place
between teachers themselves. It can be also deduced that management
of individual schools can usually identify the professional and human
potential of its employees.
C 2.2 Differences between pupils are used as a source of teaching
and learning and mutual enrichment
Keywords: pupil as a person, mutual learning, exchange of experience.
Instinctively receive them, because they are used in teaching, the
after-school centres and leisure activities.
107
They are assistants to weaker children, may be a leader of the
group.
We create a situation where they can transmit their experience, it
is a mutual enrichment.
In education is often used the experience and knowledge of all pu-
pils.
Pupils often work in mixed groups.
One of the common methods used in teaching is mutual learning.
We often discus with pupils about different possibilities to solve
problems based on their different experiences, deduction or obser-
vations.
Presentation of pupils’ work before class, reports, voluntary tasks,
speech exercises.
Connection of kindergartens and primary schools.
Commentar y:
From the argumentation is obvious that the cooperation, learning
and sharing experiences are also naturally in small schools, where are
children of different age and abilities in one class. Cooperation is absolutely
an essential part of the educational process. In larger schools, cooperation
between children of diverse age is often induced by additional
actions (project days, patronage of older pupils above first-graders etc.).
C 2.3 School staff produces or makes available sources (materials)
to support learning and active participation of all pupils,
teachers and parents
Keywords: construction of supporting teaching materials, exchange of materials
between teachers, the use of e-mail and the Internet by teachers, communication
with teachers by phone, e-mail, adaptation of working materials.
Teachers develop supportive teaching materials for common and
repeated use.
The school provides various kinds of information sources to support
learning of all.
Computers are integrated into teaching across the curriculum.
The school allows to all pupils an access to the Internet to doing
school and homework. Teachers maximally use different sources of
information – books, internet, custom materials etc.
Pupil’s library is located in the corridor and is freely available during
lessons and after education.
Pupils have a special space for their personal study materials in
the class.
Teachers cooperate in preparation of lessons. Good work materials
created themselves, they put in folders. These are available to
all teachers now or in future, too. Each teacher has also available
108
several types of textbooks and workbooks for his subjects.
Both pupils and parents have the opportunity to communicate with
school and teachers by phone, e-mail and via the school website.
Pupils with disabilities are given special working materials.
Parents have the opportunity to participate in school activities and
education.
Lending literature to parents.
The school organizes educational activities.
Commentar y:
In many schools there is an exchange of materials between teachers
and mutual enrichment. Differences are found in the possibility of
access to various sources for parents and pupils. From these arguments
is obvious difference in teaching approaches and strategies that teachers
apply to the implementation of education supporting inclusion. Their
clusters can be an inspiration for teachers to their own self-reflection
related to the question: How do I (teacher) in my class contribute to the
idea of “School for All”, i.e. school with friendly face?
109
6. SELF-EVALUATION OF
INCLUSION – THE ADITED
VERSION OF FRAMEWORK FOR
SELF-EVALUATION
In chapter 2 we presented a research tool “Framework for self-evaluation
conditions of education”, its origin and its modifications during
domestication, including his form which we used in evaluating the conditions
of schools in the described research from the year 2007/2008. At the
same time we pointed out the difficulties with which teachers met during
its implementation into practice. The cardinal problem was particularly
time-consuming processing of the questionnaire and the less understand
ability of some sub-criteria. For the above reasons, we decided to reduce
the questionnaire of 2007, which included:
1) Revision of number of criteria for evaluation the conditions of inclusion
– the overall “slimming”.
2) Revision of guidance questions:
a) its transformation into indicators of the quality of sub-criteria,
which means the transformation into indicators – statements;
b) reduction of number of indicators of inclusion;
c) inserting some new statements related to some criteria of inclu-
sion.
3) Increased clarity of some criteria and indicators by the text refor-
mulation.
4) Transfer of criteria among three main groups A, B, C.
5) The formal cancellation of the group identified as B2, C2 (their
criteria were mostly transferred to other groups).
6) Change the name of categories for recording the arguments of
schools.
7) Maintaining a seven-point scale, but integration the requirement
for evaluation of each indicator (before guidance questions).
8) Graphic editing of the research tools.
In the new version of the questionnaire, we kept three fundamental
areas on which are concentrated the requirements of inclusion:
A Creating inclusive culture and climate supporting an inclu-
sion
B Principles of maximum participation
C Support and development of non-discriminatory practice
By transferring a range of criteria between sub-groups, we removed
the group identified as B2 and C2 formally. Their criteria and indicators
have not been completely removed from the questionnaire, but relocated
110
to other groups of criteria. Three main areas and their sub-groups in the
research tool from years 2007 and 2011, show the following conceptual
map.
Scheme No. 2: Conceptual map of the main areas and sub-areas
of Frameworks for self-education conditions of inclusion from
2007
B1 Developing the school for all
B2 Support of diversity
A1 Building community
A2 Establishing inclusive values
A Creating inclusive culture and climate
C Support and development of
non-discriminatory practice C2 Professional and human
qualities of each employee are
fully known and utilized
C1 Orchestrating learning
B Principles
of maximum
participation
Framework for
self-evaluation
conditions of
education 2007
Scheme No. 3: Conceptual map of the main areas and sub-areas
of Frameworks for self-education conditions of inclusion from
2011
A1 Building community
A2 Establishing inclusive values
A Creating inclusive culture and climate
C Support and development of
non-discriminatory practice
C1 Orchestrating learning
B Principles
of maximum
participation
Framework for
self-evaluation
conditions of
education 2011
B1 Developing the school for all
Due to the large time-consuming on the processing of the questionnaire,
we also tried to quantitative reduction of the criteria and especially
indicators of inclusion in schools. Original version from 2007, in which
was a total of 40 criteria and 186 indicators, we have reduced to a version
of 19 criteria and 93 indicators (see table No. 21 and No. 22).
111
Table No. 21: Comparison of research tool from 2007 and 2011
– the number of criteria
2007 2011
A
CREATING A SCHOOL CULTURE AND CLIMATE SUPPORTING
AN INCLUSION
A1
Creation of the school community (pupils, teachers,
other school staff)
5 6
A2
Value system recognizing and supporting the
inclusion
6 3
A 11 9
B PRINCIPLES OF MAXIMUM PARTICIPATION
B1 Way to the School for All 5 5
B2 Receiving and using differences 9 0
B 14 5
C SUPPORT AND DEVELOPMENT OF NON-DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICE
C1 Organization of common learning 12 5
C2
Professional and human qualities of each employee
are fully known and utilized
3 0
C 15 5
40 19
Table No. 22: Comparison of research tool from 2007 and 2011
– the number of indicators
2007 2011
A
CREATING A SCHOOL CULTURE AND CLIMATE SUPPORTING
AN INCLUSION
A1
Creation of the school community (pupils, teachers,
other school staff)
21 31
A2
Value system recognizing and supporting the
inclusion
25 15
A 46 46
B PRINCIPLES OF MAXIMUM PARTICIPATION
B1 Way to the School for All 18 19
B2 Receiving and using differences 30 0
B 48 19
C SUPPORT AND DEVELOPMENT OF NON-DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICE
C1 Organization of common learning 74 28
C2
Professional and human qualities of each employee
are fully known and utilized
18 0
C 92 28
186 93
112
From the mentioned reduction could arise a concern that some
important indicators for inclusion will be missed during self-evaluation.
However, in the new version, we tried to include all the essential characteristics
of the school for all and instead, we reduce duplication of indicators
of inclusion over the previous version and also we tried to
improve clarity of the text. The following three schemes illustrate which
criteria became a part of the three main areas of research tools. The sign
“+” for a given criterion contains hidden indicators, which we have not
included in the scheme for readability and clarity. Partial indicators can
be seen in Appendix 3. There is a new form of research tool “Framework
for self-evaluation conditions of education 2011”.
Scheme No. 4: Framework for self-evaluation conditions of education
2011 – area a with criteria
everybody is made to feel welcome
students help each other
staff collaborate with each other
staff and students treat one each
other with respect
there is a partnership amon staff,
parents and students
the school minimaze bullying
there are high expectations for
all students
student deferences are used as
“enrichment”
there are optimal conditions
for the education
C Support and
developement of
non-discriminatory
practice
B Principles
of maximum
participation
Establishing
inclusive
values
Building
community
Inclusive school A Creating
inclusive
culture and
climate
respect of student diversity
developing understanding
of diversity
students are actively involved
in their own learning
self-assessment and assessment
as a support of learning and
students achievement
homework contributes to the
learning of all
Scheme No. 5: Framework for self-evaluation conditions of education
2011 – area B with criteria
C Support and
development of
non-discriminatory
practice
Inclusive school
B Principles of
maximum participation
A Creating inclusive
culture and climate
113
Scheme No. 6: Framework for self-evaluation conditions of
education 2011 – area C with criteria
Questionnaire of Framework for self-evaluation conditions of education
also includes a part designed to verbalization of arguments, on
which basis teachers are evaluated and a part for definition means
for change. In the analysis in 2007/2008, we found that arguments of
schools did not often correspond to evaluated criteria and it was quite
often difficult to fully specifically justify their evaluation of the criteria.
For a greater clarity and proximity of the research tool to teachers, we
made a change in designation of these parts intended to arguments of
schools, which are called: on what basis we have determined our position
on a scale 1–7 and means for further improvement.
The newly modified version of the questionnaire was discussed with
RNDr. Pavla Polechová, CSc. and Doc. Mgr. Kateřina Vlčková, Ph.D. and
with teachers from practice. After their comments was made a final version
and the questionnaire was administered to the eight schools of our
research project again at the beginning of November 2011. The obtained
data will be analysed progressively. We will also reflect the reduced form
of the questionnaire – way of work, time-consuming and clarity. The overall
form of the questionnaire is given in Appendix 3.
C Support and
developement of
non-discriminatory
practice
B Principles
of maximum
participation
Developing
the school
for all
equal conditions for all staff
the school seeks to admit all
students from its locality
creating heterogeneous classes
in-service teacher education help
to respond to student diversity
participation in leisure activities
A Creating inclusive
culture and climate
Inclusive school
114
CONCLUSION
The presented results represent the initial findings of the authors’
team in the first two years of the partial task within the research project.
We managed to finish the main objective, which was to identify teachers
look at practical ensure of conditions of inclusive education in
participating schools, i.e. school and classroom climate, principles and
applied teaching strategies and didactic equipment “Schools for All”.
However, at the same time, the expected complicacy of the issue of
inclusion was confirmed in the conditions of elementary school. This is
mainly about diversity in understanding and providing conditions for all
pupils. Other difficulties emerged from the subjectivity of the evaluation
of schools. These are significant variables that we will try to detect and
take into account in further research, which, in the coming years, we
specify and complete the existing knowledge:
1. All referred schools in the quantitative assessment of criteria
(according to the average) self-evaluate rather high on the scale.
2. High values also take other measures of central tendency – median
and mode. The value of mode is 7 in five schools Median acquires
value 7 in four schools, value 6 in three schools and value 5 in one
school.
3. Mode acquires mostly grade 7 (in 60% of criteria), grade 6 (in32.5%
of criteria) and grade 5 (in7,5% of indicators). This means that
schools are mostly evaluated in the sub-criteria very positive.
4. In the quantitative evaluation of schools, there are not quite great
differences in the sub-criteria. The difference is usually one or two
degrees, maximum. In the qualitative assessment of responses to
additional questions to the criteria are great differences between
schools.
5. Some schools (especially two of the selected) to the additional questions
in most cases did not respond at all.
6. Teams of teachers for their argumentation often used the irrelevant
answers that were too wide, general and unspecified or did
not respond to the question suggesting a misunderstanding to the
criterion of inclusion and unpreparedness of teachers in both theoretical
and practical level to the integrative pedagogy.
7. One school was significantly different by its specific and factual
argumentation. This school also excelled in the content analysis of
the school curriculum.
8. One school relevantly replied in a half of answers to the questions.
9. Research tool requires revision – reformulation of some partial criteria,
its slimming for easier and more objective use in the conditions
of the Czech schools.
115
These results highlight the complicacy of self-evaluation of inclusive
environment in school. For a better perception of the issue of inclusive
environment, teachers of monitored school were familiarized with
the research results and received a set of arguments to the sub-criteria.
Continuously was also worked with teachers within the workshops, which
were used to recognize the environment, school conditions and exchange
of experiences about teaching strategies in these types of schools.
The described research has been followed by a research from
2009, structured observations in the participating schools. We want
to verify and particular objectify the obtained results directly in
schools by the method of observation. We will also observe, how the
feedback, provided to individual schools, is reflected in their work and
in their self-evaluation.
For this purpose, we revised a research tool “Framework for selfevaluation
conditions of education”, its new version we have verified since
November 2011 in practice. The obtained results will be continuously
published.
116
SUMMARY
Within the research project of the Pedagogical Faculty of Masaryk
University MSM 0021622443 Special Needs of Pupils in the Context
of the Framework Educational Program for Elementary Education
(principal researcher prof. PhDr. Marie Vítkové, CSc.) in 2007
– 2013, the research team of workers of the Department of Primary Education
(Mgr. Jana Kratochvílová, Ph.D., Mgr. Jiří Havel, Ph.D. a PhDr.
Hana Filová, Ph.D.) solves the internal project called “Filling the content
frame in the school curriculum in ensuring the education of
pupils with special educational needs at the primary school and
possible strategies of teaching in a work with pupils with special
educational needs resulting in integrative / inclusive didactics.
To solve this project are gradually answered the question, whether
in general the Czech educational system is ready to implement and
support of inclusive education in general, what conditions and requirements
are defined by the State towards inclusive education, whether
schools are prepared to accept and provide support to all pupils, for
whom the inclusive education is a benefit and whether we, educators of
teachers, are ready and especially able to adapt current study programs
and the contents of our disciplines to this situation in practice. Progress
of research, we divided into four stages due to time and research aims.
Analytical study presented in this publication provides results of
the second stage of the research concentrated on self-evaluation of conditions
of inclusive education in the real life of schools, it means by schools
themselves. A stimulus for this stage of the research has become a fact
that since the school year 2007/2008 elementary schools in the Czech
Republic have begun to work according to their school curricula.
The basis is a description of the results of self-evaluation activities
of teachers selected sample of schools, which in the academic year
2007/2008 assessed to what extent and how they fulfil the conditions of
education of school for all. Data were gathered through a questionnaire
“Framework for Self-evaluation Conditions of Education, which is abroad
known under the title “Index for Inclusion” and has been translated
into over than 20 languages.
Czech version of 2002 included 42 criteria and the “guidance
questions “ were considerably reduced to the number of 195. For our
research needs, we have assumed a modified Czech version and realized
minor adjustments. Some indicators of guidance self-evaluation questions
we eliminated, some questions we put conversely. Eventually an
administered questionnaire contained a total of 40 criteria of inclusion
(items for evaluation). Criteria were specified by 186 self-evaluation
questions.
117
Our aim was that the conditions of education were not evaluated
individually, but would be the result of teamwork in their evaluation.
Therefore, the condition of completing the questionnaire was teamwork
of teachers in school, due to the reduction of subjectivity of evaluation
by individuals and thus strengthens validity and reliability. Participating
respondents had to evaluate each of the forty general criteria together,
based on some conventional wisdom, which was the result of discussions
held over guidance questions, specify the criteria of quality. However,
quantitative statements they had to rely on arguments which justified
their self-evaluation.
The results presented in this study represent the initial findings
of the team of authors in the first two years of the subtask within the
research project. We managed to fulfil the main aim which was to identify
the teachers look at practical ensuring the conditions of inclusive
education in participating schools, i.e. school and classroom
climate, principles and applied teaching strategies and didactic means
Schools for all.
118
REFERENCES
Act No. 561/2004 Coll. Preschool, basic, secondary, higher vocational and other
education (Education Act). Enable from http://www.msmt.cz.
Ainscow, M. (2005) Developing inklusive education systems: What are the levers
for change? In Journal of Educational Change, Springer, No. 6, 109–124.
Booth, T. & Ainscow, M. (2002) Index for Inclusion: Developing Learning and
Participation in Schools. Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education (CSIE).
Evropská agentura pro rozvoj speciálního vzdělávání. (2011) Vzdělávání učitelů
k inkluzi v Evropě – Výzvy a příležitosti. Odense, Dánsko: Evropská agentura
pro rozvoj speciálního vzdělávání.
Havel, J.; Filová, H.; Kratochvílová, J. (2008a) Komunikace jako prostředek
autoevaluace učitelů v inkluzivní škole. In Vzdělávání žáků se speciálními vzdělávacími
potřebami II. Education of Pupils with Special Educational Needs II.
Brno: Paido, 97-113.
Havel, J.; Filová, H.; Kratochvílová, J. (2008b) Jak řešit výuku mimořádně
nadaných žáků ve školním vzdělávacím programu. In Komenský: odborný časopis
pro učitele základní školy. Brno: PdF MU, Vol. 132, No. 3, 5-8.
Havel, J.; Filová, H.; Kratochvílová, J (2009a). Jsme školou inkluzivní – školou
pro všechny? Analýza škol, ukázky argumentace-vytváření školní kultury a klimatu
podporujících inkluzi. Komenský: odborný časopis pro učitele základní
školy, Brno: PdF MU, Vol. 134, No 1,2, 21-29, 14-19.
Havel, J.; Kratochvílová, J. (2009b). Autoevaluace inkluzivního prostředí
v základní škole. In Vzdělávání žáků se speciálními vzdělávacími potřebami
III. Education of Pupils with Special Educational Needs III. Brno: Masarykova
univerzita, 127-135.
Havel, J.; Filová, H.; Kratochvílová, J. (2010a). Jsme školou inkluzivní – školou
pro všechny? Analýza škol, ukázky argumentace-principy maximální účasti.
Komenský: odborný časopis pro učitele základní školy. Brno: PdF MU, Vol. 134,
No. 3, 12-16.
Havel, J.; Filová, H.; Kratochvílová, J. (2010b). Jsme školou inkluzivní – školou
pro všechny? Analýza škol, ukázky argumentace-principy inkluze ve vyučovacím
procesu. Komenský: odborný časopis pro učitele základní školy. Brno: PdF MU,
Vol. 134, No. 4, 5, 14-18, 31-34.
Kratochvílová, J.; Filová, H.; Havel, J. (2007a) Zabezpečení výuky žáků mimořádně
nadaných ve školním vzdělávacím programu. In Dimenze pedagogické
práce s nadanými žáky. Sborník studií z mezinárodního vědeckého semináře,
CD ROM. Brno: MSD.
Kratochvílová, J.; Filová, H.; Havel, J. (2007b) Zabezpečení žáků se speciálními
vzdělávacími potřebami ve školním vzdělávacím programu. In Specifické poruchy
učení v kontextu RVP ZV. Brno: Paido, 43-54.
119
Kratochvílová, J. (2008) Podmínky pro vzdělávání a strategie výuky při vzdělávání
žáků se speciálními vzdělávacími potřebami. In Pedagogický výzkum jako
podpora proměny současné školy. Sborník sdělení 16. konference ČAPV. Hradec
Králové: Gaudeamus, 553-562.
Kratochvílová, J. (2009) Jaké podmínky deklarují školy svým žákům se zdravotním
postižením ve školních vzdělávacích programech? In Komenský: odborný
časopis pro učitele základní školy. Brno: PdF MU, Vol. 133, No. 5, 9-14.
Kratochvílová, J. (2011) Systém hodnocení a sebehodnocení žáků – Zkušenosti
z České republiky i Evropských škol. Brno: MSD.
Kratochvílová, J.; Havel, J.; Filová, H. (2011) Analýza školních vzdělávacích
programů jako prostředek kvalitativního rozvoje inkluze na 1. stupni ZŠ. Brno:
MSD.
Polechová, P. (2005) Jak se dělá škola pro všechny. Praha: Aisis.
Polechová, P. a kol. Školy v pohybu. Praha: UK, PdF.
UNESCO-IBE (2008) Conclusions and recommendations of the 48th session of
the International Conference on Education (ED/BIE/CONFINTED 48/5) Geneva:
UNESCO IBE. Electronic source available online at: http://www.ibe.unesco.
org/en/ice/48th-ice-2008/conclusions-and-recommendations.html.
Vyhláška č. 72/2005 Sb. O poskytování poradenských služeb ve školách a školských
zařízeních. Dostupné na http://www.msmt.cz.
Vyhláška č. 73/2005 Sb. O vzdělávání dětí, žáků, a studentů se speciálními
vzdělávacími potřebami a studentů mimořádně nadaných. Dostupné na
http://www.msmt.cz.
Watkins, A. (ed.) (2007) Assessment in Inclusive Settings: Key Issues for Policy
and Practice. Odense: European Agency for Development in Special Needs
Education
120
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. 1: Ranking the schools in order of decreasing average ................... 17
Table No. 2: Percentage frequency grades in the evaluation criteria.............. 22
Table No. 3: Sorting schools in order of decreasing minimum ........................24
Table No. 4: Chosen schools according to mode................................................24
Table No. 5: Criteria with the largest variance................................................ 26
Table No. 6: Criteria with the lowest variance................................................. 28
Table No. 7: List of chosen criteria and partial questions from part A........... 31
Table No. 8: Quantified evaluation of criteria (Part A).................................... 33
Table No. 9: List of chosen criteria and partial questions from part B........... 37
Table No. 10: Quantified evaluation of indicators (Part B).............................. 38
Table No. 11: List of criteria assessing the cooperation at school among
educational staff................................................................................................. 46
Table No. 12: Quantified evaluation of criteria evaluated the cooperation
among educational staff..................................................................................... 47
Table No. 13: List of criteria evaluating the cooperation among pupils
at school.............................................................................................................. 50
Table No. 14: Quantified evaluation criteria have snack collaboration
among pupils ...................................................................................................... 50
Table No. 15: List of criteria evaluating the principle of individualization and
differentiation..................................................................................................... 53
Table No. 16: Quantified evaluation of criteria assessing the principle of
individualization and differentiation................................................................ 56
Table No. 17: List of criteria assessing the maximum expected from pupils.. 61
Table No. 18: Quantified evaluation of criteria assessing the maximum
expected from pupils.......................................................................................... 63
Table No. 19: List of criteria assessing the respect among pupils and
educational staff................................................................................................. 68
Table No. 20: Quantified evaluation of criteria assessing respect among pupils
and educational staff ......................................................................................... 70
Table No. 21: Comparison of research tool from 2007 and 2011 – the number
of criteria .......................................................................................................... 111
Table No. 22: Comparison of research tool from 2007 and 2011 – the number
of indicators...................................................................................................... 111
121
LIST OF SCHEME
Scheme No. 1: The process of individualization and differentiation............... 52
Scheme No. 2: Conceptual map of the main areas and sub-areas of
Frameworks for self-education conditions of inclusion from 2007 ................ 110
Scheme No. 3: Conceptual map of the main areas and sub-areas of
Frameworks for self-education conditions of inclusion from 2011................. 110
Scheme No. 4: Framework for self-evaluation conditions of education 2011
– area a with criteria ....................................................................................... 112
Scheme No. 5: Framework for self-evaluation conditions of education 2011
– area B with criteria....................................................................................... 112
Scheme No. 6: Framework for self-evaluation conditions of education 2011
– area C with criteria....................................................................................... 113
122
SUBJECT INDEX
A
arguments 8, 11–19, 21–23, 27, 28, 30, 32, 34, 38, 42, 47,
48, 50, 51, 55, 58, 59, 63–66, 69,71–74, 83, 86,
87, 89–91, 93, 96, 98–101, 104, 106, 108, 109,
113, 115, 117
C
communication 13, 22, 30, 31, 33–36, 39–45, 51, 52, 58, 70, 71,
75, 78, 79, 94, 96, 98, 100, 101, 107
conditions for education 5, 26, 32, 33, 36, 53, 56, 57, 82
cooperation 11, 12, 22, 32–34, 40–53, 55, 57, 60, 73,
75–77, 79, 81, 83, 87–89, 91–98, 100–105, 107
criterion 12–14, 17–22, 27–44, 46–50, 53, 55, 58, 61, 63,
68, 69, 78, 83, 84, 86, 87, 89, 91, 96, 98, 104,
112, 114
curriculum 4, 5, 7, 8, 46, 61, 65, 67, 69, 87, 88, 105, 107,
114, 116
D
differentiation 52, 53, 56, 66, 79, 80, 97
F
Framework Educational Programme for Basic Education
4
Framework for Self-evaluation Conditions of Education
5, 8, 9, 30, 109, 112, 113, 116
I
inclusion 4, 5, 7–9, 11–13, 19, 21, 23, 24, 30–32, 35–37,
39, 44, 52, 58, 59, 66, 74, 76, 79–81, 83, 85, 90,
92, 102, 108–112, 114, 116, 118
inclusive school 22, 30, 31, 34, 39, 44, 45, 57, 67, 70, 74, 78,
80, 83
indicators of inclusion 3, 11, 30, 109, 110, 112
individual educational program
53, 92
123
individualization 3, 51, 52, 53, 56, 66, 79, 80, 97, 120, 121
integration of pupil 92
K
key competencies 21, 55, 59, 62, 65, 101
M
maximum expectation 3, 60
P
pupils with special educational needs
5, 7, 8, 9, 19, 23, 38, 48, 52, 68, 72, 89,
92, 116, 118
R
respect 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 22–27, 30, 31, 33–35, 44,
46, 47, 49, 51, 54–56, 58–60, 67–73,
77, 78, 82, 84, 85, 88, 89, 95, 97–99,
101, 102, 105, 120
S
school climate 31, 34, 35, 36, 47, 67, 70, 71, 78, 81
school educational program 18
school for all 4, 5, 14, 17, 22, 36, 80, 82–85, 108,
111, 112, 116
self-evaluation of school 15, 16
self-evaluation questions 12, 116
special education teacher 92
T
teacher 4–14, 18–21, 23–27, 30–51, 53, 54,
57–61, 63–87, 89–104, 106–109, 111,
113, 114, 116, 117
124
APPENDIX
Appendix No. 1: Graphical representation of empirical research
Appendix No. 2: Framework for Self-evaluation of Schools’ Conditions 2007
Appendix No. 3: Framework for Self-evaluation of Schools’ Conditions 2011
125
Appendix No. 1: Graphical representation of the research with
outputs:
School Educational
Program: „Ensuring the
education of pupils with
special educational
needs“
What are we
committed in SEP?
What is the content
and structure of
the part?
Self-
evaluation
of school
conditions
PRIMARY SCHOOL
How do we
evaluate
ourselvels?
Expert act
of teacher
How do we act,
in fact?
What is the
educational
profile of
teachers?
The proposal
to modify the
content and
structure of the
SEP
Integrative
inclusive
didacticOutcomes
Self-
evaluation
of school
conditions
126
FrameworkforSelf-evaluationConditionsofEducation
VIEWA:Creatingaschoolcultureandclimatesupportinganinclusion
A1-Creationoftheschoolcommunity(pupils,teachers,otherschoolstaff)
CurrentstateanditsreasoningThemeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
A1.1.Everyoneiswelcome(therearesuchconditionsthateveryonecanfeelgood)1234567
A1.1.1.Isthefirstcontactofpeople,whoareinterested,withschoolfriendlyandwelcoming?
A1.1.2.Istheinformationaboutschoolavailabletoeveryone,regardlessofhisnativelanguage?
A1.1.3.Docommonareasofschooltellaboutallmembersoftheschoolcommunity?
A1.1.4.Canpupilsco-decideabouttheappearanceandfacilitiesoftheirclassrooms??
A1.1.5.Dopupilsperceiveenvironmentoftheirclassesasanenironmentwheretheyfeelgood?
A1.2.Pupilshelpeachother1234567
A1.2.1.Dopupilshelpeachother?
A1.2.2.Dopupilsunderstandthatfromvariouspupilscouldbeexpecteddifferent(maximum)performance?
A1.3.Employeesofschoolsupportandhelpeachother1234567
A1.3.1.Doemployeesacttogetherwithrespectregardlessoftheirroleinschool?
A1.3.2.AreallteachersandtheirassistantsinvolvedintotheplanningandevaluationofSEP?
A1.3.3.Doesteachingstaffexchangeexperiences,informationandmaterialsbetweenthemselves?
AppendixNo.2:FrameworkforSelf-evaluationofSchools’Conditions2007
127
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
A1.4.Employeesofschoolandpupilsrespecteachother
A1.4.1.Areteachersinterestedinname,underwhichpupilwantstobecalled?
A1.4.2.Isaschoolinterestedinopinionsofpupilshowtheworkofschoolscouldbeimproved?
A1.4.3.Havetheopinionsofpupilsgotarealimpacttowhatishappeningatschool?
A1.4.4.Dopupilshaveapossibilitytoexpressthemselvesinanappropriateformtoalleventsatschool?
A1.4.5.Dothepupilsknow,forwhomtogowhentheyhaveaproblem?
A1.4.6.Dopupilsfeelconfidentthattheirproblemswillbesolvedeffectively?
A1.4.7Doteachersandpupilsformulatethecommonrulesofcoexistenceanddotheyrespectthem?
A1.5.Betweenteachersandparents/legalguardiansofpupilsisapartnership
A1.5.1.Aretherevariousopportunities,inwhichparentscandiscussboththeprogressoftheirchildandthefearsassociatedwith
it?
A1.5.2.Doesthestaffappreciateknowledgeandideas,whichparentshaveabouttheirchildren?
A1.5.3.Doallparentsfeelthattheirchildrenarerespectedatschool?
A1.5.4.Ifparentsareconcernedaboutsomething,doestheschooldealwithit?
128
VIEWA:CREATINGASCHOOLCULTUREANDCLIMATESUPPORTINGINCLUSION
A2-Valuesystemrecognizingandsupportingtheinclusion
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
A2.1.Achievingofmaximumresultsisexpectedfromallpupils
A2.1.1.Doeseachpupilfeel,thatinattendedschool,ispossibletoachievethebestresults?
A2.1.2.Areallpupilsmotivatedandencouragedtoexpecttheycanachieveverygoodresults?
A2.1.3.Areallpupilstreatedaswellasthepossibilitiesoftheirresultsareunlimited?
A2.1.4.Isevaluatedthepupil’ssuccessincomparisonwithhisindividualabilitiesratherthanincomparisonwithotherpupils?
A2.1.5.Arepupilstestedwhentheyareadequatelyprepared?
A2.1.6.Arepupilsencouragedtoacknowledgetheresultsofothers?
A2.1.7.Doemployeestrytorepressdegradingusinglabelsindicatingpoorperformance?
A2.1.8.Isthereanefforttoovercomethefearoffailurewhichsomepupilshave?
A2.2.Teachers,schoolmanagement,pupilsandtheirparents/guardiansshareaphilosophyof
inclusion
A2.2.1.Isacreatingofpositiveclimateconsideredsuchasimportantaslearningoutcomes?
A2.2.2.Issupportedacooperationofallpupils?
A2.2.3.Issupportedanindependenceofpupils?
129
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
A2.3.Doestheschooluseavarietyofpupils?
A2.3.1.Isa„diversity”ofpupilsunderstoodasanenrichmentofschoolandsociety-notasaproblem?
A2.3.2.Areallpupilsrespectedandtreatedequally(regardlessofthejobsandpositionoftheirparents)?
A2.3.3.Isadiversityofnativelanguagesanddifferentbackgroundsofpupilsperceivedasanenrichmentoftheschoolandsociety?
A2.3.4.Arepupilswithspecialeducationalneedsrespectedaswellaspupilswithoutspecialeducationalneeds?
A2.3.5.Arepupils,whoperformworseresults,respectedequallyaswellaspupilswithexcellentresults?
A2.3.6.Istheworkofallpupilspresentedatschoolandclassrooms?
A2.3.7.Aretheresultsofgirlsandboysequallysupportedandappreciated?
A2.4.Workersandpupilsarerespectedasindividualsandasmembersofgroupswhoperforma
role
A2.4.1.Areallpupilsrespectedforthemselvesratherthanthequalityoftheirresults?
A2.5.Employeesofschoolcreateoptimalconditionsforeducationofeachpupil
A2.5.1.Aredifficultiesinlearningperceivedasanythingwhatcanbecausedbytheschool?
A2.5.2.Doteachersavoidbuildingthepupils„withspecialeducationalneeds”andtheothersintoopposition?
A2.5.3.Doteachersperformasystematicdiagnosticactivityasthebasisforcreatingappropriateconditions?
A2.5.4.Doteachersevaluateincooperationwithpupils(self-evaluation)theirindividualprogressandplantheirfurther
development?
130
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
A2.6.Schooltriestominimizeanydiscriminatorypracticesandactsofdiscrimination
A2.6.1.Doestheschooltrytominimizeallformsofinstitutionaldiscrimination,whethertheyareconnectedwithage,race,social
status,gender,disabilityorstudent’sresults?
A2.6.2.Doteachersavoidassigningpupilstasksstereotypedbygender-forexamplewhendecidingwhotohelpwithrefreshments
ortechnicalassistance?
131
ViewB:PRINCIPLESOFMAXIMUMPARTICIPATION
B1–WaytotheSchoolforall
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONINGThemeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
B1.1.Allworkersofschoolhavethesameconditionsforacceptanceandprofessionalgrowth1234567
B1.1.1.Doestheschoolhaveobjectivesintheareaofequalrepresentationofemployees(intheirdiversity)?
B1.1.2.Isarespectforthediversityofpupilsanessentialcriterionforstaffacceptance?
B1.1.3.Canallemployeesattendfurthereducationandtherebyworkontheirprofessionalgrowth?
B1.2Schooltriestoacceptallpupilsfromthecatchmentarea1234567
B1.2.1.Isaninclusionofallpupilsfromthelocalcommunitiespresentedaspartofschoolrules?
B1.2.2.After,apupilisacceptedbyschool,hisbelongingtotheschoolcommunityisobviousasforotherpupils?
B1.3.Doestheschoolconsultswithorganizations,whichassociatepeoplewithhandicap,how
theschoolshouldprovidethewheelchairaccess?
1234567
B1.3.1.Isawheelchairaccessapartoftheplanforimprovingtheschoolbuilding?
B1.3.2.Doestheschooltrytoapermanentprogressintheaccessibilityofschool?
B1.4.Itishelpedtoallnewpupilstofeelcomfortableandsafeatschool1234567
132
B1.4.1.Doschoolshaveaninductionprogramforallpupils?
B1.4.2.Areinductionprogramsforpupilsfunctionalregardlessofwhenthepupilbeginstoattendtheschool(eitheratthebeginning
oftheschoolyearorduring)?
B1.4.3.Doesaschooltrytofindouthowthenewpupilsfeelatschool?
B1.4.4.Isthereanysupportforpupilswhohaveproblemsespeciallyatthebeginningwithorientationintheschoolbuilding?
B1.4.5.Arepupilsfamiliarizedwiththeschoolinadvanceofenteringit?
B1.5.Doestheschoolcreateitsclassroomsotherespectofallpupilsequallyisclear?1234567
B1.5.1.Iswithgroupsofpupilstreatedfairlyinthesenseofusingschoolequipment,locationofclasses,theallocationofteachers
andotheremployees?
B1.5.2.Doestheschooltrytodividechildrenintoclasseswithrespecttotheirresultsordisability?
B1.5.3.Ifpupilsareconnectedinsomesubjectsaccordingtotheirabilities,arethereknownwayshowtopreventthelossoftheir
interestandselfconfidence?
B1.5.4.Ifpupilsareconnectedinsomesubjectsaccordingtotheirabilities,dotheyhaveequalopportunitiestochangethegroup?
B1.5.5.Aregroupsineachclassfromtimetotimechangedtosupportsocialcohesion?
B1.5.6.Areelectivesubjectsintocurriculumassignedonthebasisoftheinterestofpupils?
133
POHLEDB:PRINCIPLESOFMAXIMUMPARTICIPATION
B2-Receivingandusingdifferences
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
B2.1.Allformsofsupportforoptimaldevelopmentofchildareinharmony
B2.1.1.Isasupportofpupils,whomeetwithbarriersinlearningandactiveparticipation,perceivedastheresponsibilityofall
teachers?
B2.2.Furthereducationhelpsteacherstoworkwithdiversityofpupils
B2.2.1.Doesthejointreflectionfollowthegroupteaching,isutilizedforbetteracceptanceandusepupils’diversity?
B2.2.2.Doteachersreflectlessonsfromtheperspectiveofpupils?
B2.2.3.Areteacherseducatedinhowtoeffectivelyuseandmanagecooperativelearning?
B2.2.4.Doteacherslearntocooperateeffectivelyinaclassroom?
B2.2.5.Areteacherseducatedinthemutualteachingofchildren?
B2.2.6.Doteachersandsupportstafflearnhowtousemoderntechnologyinteaching?(ICT)
B2.2.7.Areteacherseduactedinsupportinganddevelopinginnermotivationofpupils?
B2.2.8.Areteacherseduactedinsupportinganddevelopingpersonalandsocialeducationofpupils?
B2.2.9.Areteacherseduactedintheareaofequalopportunitiesfordisabled?
B2.2.10.Doallteacherslearnhowtodealwithbullying,includingracism,genderdiscriminationandhomophobia?
134
B2.3.WorkingwithpupilswithSENisbasedontheinclusiveprinciples
B2.3.1.Arenotpupilsincludedintocategory“pupilswithSEN”perceivedasahomogenousgroup?
B2.3.2.IsaprogressoflearningofpupilswithSENanopportunitytoimprovetheexperienceofallpupils?
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
B2.4.WayofidentificationandevaluationofSENleadstotheeliminationofbarrierstolearning
andactiveparticipationofallpupils
B2.4.1.DotheindividualeducationalprogramsofpupilswithSENcontributetoimprovingtheirlearning?
B2.5.Supportforpupils,forwhomtheCzechlanguageisnotanativelanguage,iscoordinated
withthesupportoftheirlearningassuch
B2.5.1Isasupportforpupils,forwhomCzechisnotanativelanguage,perceivedastheresponsibilityofallteachersatschool?
B2.5.2.Jsouočekáványvýsledkyvysokéúrovněiodžáků,jejichžmateřskýmjazykemneníčeština?Areresultsofahighlevel
expectedalsofrompupils,forwhomtheCzechlanguageisnotanativelanguage?
135
B2.6.Rulesandproceduresfortheemotionalandspiritualsupportofpupilsarelinkedwiththe
developmentoftheeducationalprogramandproceduressupportedlearning
B2.6.1.Areallteachersandassistantstrainedhowtoreacttosignalsoflossofinterest,alienationandlackofdiscipline?
B2.6.2.Doestheschooltrytostrengthenaself-confidenceofthosewhodoesnothaveenough?
B2.6.3.Istheknowledgeofparentsandtheirchildrenusedtoovercomeproblemsrelatedtolossofinterest,alienationand
expressionsofindisciplineofthesepupils?
B2.7.Therearereducedpressurestoadisciplinaryexclusion
B2.7.1.Isthereameetingofteachers,pupils,parents,inwhichparticipantstrytosolveproblemsflexiblybeforebeforetheyreach
thetop?
B2.7.2.Isrecognizedanassociationbetweensymptomsofscorntopupilsontheonehandandlossofinterest,alienation,lackof
disciplineleadingtodisciplinaryactionontheother?
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONINGThemeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
B2.8.Barrierstoeducationareremoved
B2.8.1.Isrecognizedtheconnectionbetweengoingoutofschool,bullyingandlackoffriends,inwhompupilshouldhavea
support?
B2.8.2.Isthereatendencyofanumberofabsenthourstoincreaseordecrease?
136
B2.9.Itisminimizedtheriskofbullying
B2.9.1.Doteachers,pupils,parentsknowwhatisbullying?
B2.9.2.Isitconsideredasbullyingoutsidethephysicalharmalsoverbalandpsychologicalattack?
B2.9.3.Isitperceivedthatbullyingcanappearatschoolatanytime-betweenpupils,teachersandbetweeneachother?
B2.9.4.Doestheshoolrealizeaprogramthathelpstopreventanddealwithbullying?
B2.9.5.Doalltheteachersandpupilsknowwhatbehaviorisacceptableatschoolandwhatisnot?
B2.9.6.Doboysandgirlsknowwhotocontactwhenexperiencingbullying?
B2.9.7.Arepupilsinvolvedindevelopingstrategiesforpreventingandminimizingbullying?
137
VIEWC:SUPPORTANDDEVELOPMENTOFNON-DISCRIMINATORYPRACTICE
C1-Organizationofcommonlearning
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
C1.1.Educationrespectsthediversityofpupils
C1.1.1.Isitpossibleforteacherstoletpupilsexploreanythingnewinteaching?
C1.1.2.Arevariedexperiencesofpupilsusedinlessons?
C1.1.3.Dolessonsreflectonthedifferencesinknowledgeofpupils?
C1.1.4.Isreflectedadifferentspeedduringlessons,whichpupilsperformtaskswith?
C1.1.5.Dopupilshaveopportunitiestoapplydifferentlearningstylesinlessons?
C1.1.6.Aretheobjectivesofactivitiesclearlyset?
C1.1.7.Dolessonssometimesstartbyacommonexperiencethatcanbedevelopedindifferentdirections?
C1.1.8.Arethereincludedactivitiesinlessonsthatcanbeperformedindividually,inpairs,groupsandwholeclass
C1.1.9.Aretheredifferentactivitiesinlessonsincludingdiscussion,interpretation,writing,drawing,problemsolving,useoflibrary,
audiovisualtechnology,practicalactivitiesandinformationtechnology?
C1.1.10.Doesaneducationalprogramallowdifferentconceptsofsubjectsanduseofdifferentlearningstyles?
C1.1.11.Arepupilsallowedrecordingtheirworkindifferentways,egusingtheirnativelanguagewithtranslation,drawing,
photographoraudiorecording?
138
C1.2.Educationalprocessisaccessibletoallpupils
C1.2.1.Isitbuiltonlanguageexperiencesinlessonsthatpupilsgainoutofschool?
C1.2.2.Doteachingequipment,teachingtextsandtextbooksreflectonthebackgroundandexperienceofdifferentgroupsof
pupils?
C1.2.3.Dopupils,forwhomtheCzechlanguageisnotanativelanguage,theopportunitytospeakandwriteintheirnative
language?
C1.2.4.Doesteachingreflectonthedifferencesinknowledgeandworkpaceofpupils
C1.2.5.Areteachersawarethatthedifferencesbetweenpupilsinmomentumandskillarenatural?
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
C1.3.Educationdevelopsunderstandingofthedifferences
C1.3.1.Arepupilsencouragedtoexploreideasandviewsdifferingfromtheirown?
C1.3.2.Areopportunitiesprovidedtopupilstoworkwithpupilswhoaredifferentinsenseofbackground,ethnicity,disabilityor
gender?
C1.3.3.Doeseducationalprogramtrytodevelopunderstandingdifferencesintheareaofbackgrounds,cultures,ethnicities,
gender,disability,sexualorientationandreligion?
139
C1.4.Pupilsareactivelyengagedintheirownlearning
C1.4.1.Areallpupilsencouragedtoberesponsiblefortheirownlearning?
C1.4.2.Isitclearlyexplainedinlesonswhatpupilsshouldlearn?
C1.4.3.Doesequipmentinclassrooms,suchasclassroombookcases,exposedmaterialsallowself-learning?
C1.4.4.Areplansofeducationalprogramcommunicatedtopupilsinthewaystheycanworkfaster,iftheywantit?
C1.4.5.Canpupilsindependentlyuselibraryandsourcesofinformationtechnology?
C1.4.6.Arepupilstaughthowtomakenotesfromtheinterpretationandbooksandhowtoorganizework?
C1.4.7.Arepupilstaughthowtopresenttheirworkinspoken,writtenandotherforms,individuallyoringroups?
C1.4.8.Arepupilsencouragedtosummarizeorallyorinwritingwhattheyhavelearned?
C1.4.9.Isitconsultedwithpupilsthesupporttheyneed?
C1.4.10.Isitconsultedwithpupilsthequalityoflessons?
C1.4.11.Aretheknowledgeandskills,whichpupilsgainedoutsidetheclassroom,usedandappreciatedinlessons?
140
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
C1.5.Pupilsworktogetherduringeducation
C1.5.1.Dopupilsperceiveanofferinganduseofassistancefromclassmatesasacommonpartofthelesson?
C1.5.2.Aretheresetuprules,howtotaketurnsincontributingtodiscussion,howtolistenandhowtorequestcloserexplanation
bothfromotherclassmatesandfromadults?
C.1.5.3.Arepupilstaughthowtobuildajointoutputfromthedifferentcontributionsofindividualsandgroups?
C1.5.4.Dopupilssharetheresponsibilityforhelptoovercometheproblemsthatsomepupilshaveduringlessons?
C1.5.5.Arepupilsinvolvedinevaluationofqualityofteaching?
C1.5.6.Dopupilshelptoeachothertosetimmediatetargetsoftheireducation?
C1.6.Self-evaluationandevaluationsupporttheperformanceofeachpupil
C1.6.1.Dousedevaluationmethodsallowallpupilstoreflectontheirknowledgeandskills?
C1.6.2.Dousedevaluationmethodsallowallpupilstoreflectontheirlevelofkeycompetencies?
C1.6.3.Arethereopportunitiesforevaluatingtheresultsofgroupwork?
C1.6.4.Dousedevaluationmethodscontributetothedevelopmentofallpupils?
C1.6.5.Dopupilsreceiveafeedbacktellingthemwhattheyhavelearnedandinwhatandhowtheycancontinue?
C1.6.6.Isthereamonitoringtheresultsaccordingtodifferentgroups(boys/girls,pupilsfromethnicminorities,disabledpupils,
etc.)tospecificproblemscanbeidentifiedandsolved?
141
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
C1.7.Disciplineintheclassroomisbasedonmutualrespectandcompliancerulescreated
together
C1.7.1.Arepupilsinvolvedinsettingtherulesoflifeintheclassrooms?
C1.7.2.Arepupilsencouragedtoself-discipline?
C1.7.3.Doteacherscooperateinsolvingdisciplinaryproblemsofpupilsandsharetheexperienceandknowledgethatwouldhelp
theminovercoming?
C1.7.4.Dopupilshelptosolveproblemsintheclassroom?
C1.7.5.Isconsultedwithpupilshowtocreatemorepleasantatmosphereintheclassrooms?
C1.7.6.Arethereclearprocedures,understandablebothforteachersandpupils,howtoreacttoinappropriatebehavior?
C1.8.Teachersplan,teachandreflectontheirworkinpartnership
C1.8.1.Doteacherscooperateinplanninglessons,preparationofprojectsandotheractivitiesforpupils?
C1.8.2.Doteacherssometimesteachinteams(eg,inpairs,projects,trainingseminars)?
C1.8.3.Doteachersalwaysuseateamteachingasanopportunityforjointreflectiononpupillearning?
C1.8.4.Doteachersmodifytheirteachinginresponsetofeedbackfromcolleagues?
C1.8.5.Doteachers,whoworktogether,providetopupilsagoodmodelfortheircooperation?
C1.8.6.Doesteachingstaffsolvetheproblemtogether,ifthestateofapupilorgroupraisesconcerns?
142
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
C1.9.Teachersareinterestedinlearningsupportandactiveparticipationofallpupils
C1.9.1.Doteachersmonitortheprogressofallpupilsinlessons?
C1.9.2.Doallpupilsfeeltheyaretreatedfairly?
C1.9.3.Arethereeffortstolookatteachingandprovidedsupportthroughtheeyesofpupils?
C1.9.4.Areassistantsofteacherfocusedonimprovingtheactiveparticipationofallpupils?
C1.9.5.Areattemptstoremovalthebarriersinlearningandactiveparticipationofonepupilperceivedasopportunitiesfor
improvingthelearningofall?
C1.10.TeachersandassistantsforpupilswithSENencourageandpromoteactivelearningofeach
pupil
C1.10.1.AreassistantsforpupilswithSENinvolvedinplanningthecurriculumanditsevaluation?
C1.10.2.DoassistantsforpupilswithSENtrytoensurepupilsmaximallytobemostindependentoftheirdirectsupport?
143
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
C1.11.Theaccesstohomeworkcontributesthelearningofallpupils
C1.11.1.Doesthehomeworkalwaysfollowaclearobjective?
C1.11.2.Ishomeworkenteredwithrespecttoskillsandknowledgeofallpupils?
C1.11.3.Arethereopportunitiestodohomeworkindifferentways?
C1.11.4.Doeshomeworkdevelopskillsandknowledgeofallpupils?
C1.11.5.Aretherequirementsforhomeworkmodified,ifthediscussionshowsthatsomerequirementsarenotrelevantornot
appropriateforallstudents?
C1.11.6.Dopupilshaveopportunitiestodohomeworkintheschoolarea,beforeteaching,duringlunchbreakorduringfreetime?
C1.11.7.Arepupilssupportedbyhomeworktotakeoverresponsibilityfortheirownlearning?
C1.11.8.Ishomeworkachievablewithouthelpofparents?
C1.11.9.Dopupilshaveanopportunityforcooperationindoinghomework?
C1.11.10.Dopupilshaveachoiceofhomeworktocouldfillitbasedontheirknowledgeandinterestdevelopedbyit?
C1.12.Eachstudenthastheopportunitytoparticipateinleisureactivitiesofschool
C1.12.1.Arealleventsoftheschoolcurriculumavailabletoallpupils,regardlessofresultsordisabilitiesandtheirbackground?
C1.12.2.Doallpupilshavetheopportunitytoparticipateinschoolactivitiesaccordingtotheirinterests?
C1.12.3.Dosporteventsincludeactivities,whereeveryonecanparticipateregardlessofskillordisability?
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
144
C2.3.Teacherscreateand/ormakeavailablesources(materials)tosupportlearningandactive
participationofallpupils,teachersandparents
C2.3.1.Doteachersdevelopthesupportteachingmaterialsforjointandrepeateduse?
C2.3.2.Doteachersprovidealreadycreatedmaterialswitheachotherforlessons,projectlearningandseminars?
C2.3.3.Aredifferentsourcesofinformationavailableinschooltosupportlearningofall?
C2.3.4.Arecomputersintegratedintoteducationacrossthecurriculum?
C2.3.5.Isane-mailandtheInternetusedasatoolofteachingandlearningbyteachers?
C2.3.6.Isthereanopportunitytoallpupilstocommunicatewithteachersandotherclassmatesbytelephoneande-mail?
C2.3.7.DoestheschoolallowtoallpupilsaccesstotheInternettofulfillschoolandhomework?
C2.3.8.Arethereforpupilswithdisabilitiessuitablematerials,forexampletheyarewrittenincapitalletters,inBraille?
145
VIEWC:SUPPORTANDDEVELOPMENTOFNON-DISCRIMINATORYPRACTICE
C2-Professionalandhumanqualitiesofeachemployeearefullyknownandutilized
CURRENTSTATEANDITSREASONING
Themeanstoachieveanoptimalstate
C2.1.Professionalandhumanqualitiesofeachemployeearefullyknownandutilized
C2.1.1.Areteachersencouragedtofurtherdevelopmentoftheirknowledgeandskills?
C2.1.2.Doteachersoffertheirspecialskillsandknowledgetoothers?
C2.1.3.Aretherebothformalandinformalopportunitiesforteacherstoresolveconcernsregardingpupils,sotheycanusetheir
expertknowledgeandprofessionsofeachother?
C2.1.4.Doteachersdiscussaboutthepossibleoriginofpupilsproblemswitheachother?
C2.1.5.Doteachershavetheopportunitytolearnfrompracticeandexperienceoftheircolleaguesfromotherschools?
C2.2.Differencesbetweenpupilsareusedasasourceofteachingandlearningandmutualenrichment
C2.2.1.Dopupilsknowwhattheycanlearnfromotherswithdifferentbackgroundsanddifferentexperiences?
C2.2.2.Dopupilswithricherknowledgeorskillsincertainareassometimesteachthosewhodonothavesuchknowledgeinthe
samearea?
C2.2.3.Aretheredifferentopportunitiesformutualsupportforpupilsofdifferentages?
C2.2.4.Iseveryoneperceivedasapersonwhocanteachotherpupilsanyimportantthingsonthebasisofhisuniqueness,
regardlessoftheirresultsordisability?
C2.2.5.Dopupils,whohaveovercomeaproblem,sharetheirexperiencewithothers?
146
FrameworkforSelf-evaluationConditionsofEducation
VIEWA:Creatingaschoolcultureandclimatesupportinganinclusion
A1Creationoftheschoolcommunity(pupils,teachers,otherschoolstaff)
CriterionEvaluation
A1.1Everyoneiswelcomeatschool(therearesuchconditionsthateveryonecanfeelgood)1234567
A1.1.1Informationaboutschoolisavliableforeveryone(includingrespecttonativelanguageorhandicap)
A1.1.2Commonareasofschooltellsaboutallmembersoftheschoolcommunity-notjustchosenpeople
A1.1.3Pupilscanco-decideabouttheappearanceandfacilitiesoftheirclassrooms
A1.1.4Accesstoschoolandmoveinitisallowedtopersonwithdisabilities,handicap
A1.1.5
Thereissupportforpupils,whohaveespeciallyatthebeginningofschoolattendanceproblemswithorientatationatschool
building
A1.1.6Theschoolhasdevelopedastrategyofprocessandsupportfortheadoptionofnewpupils
A1.1.7Teachersfindovertimehownewpupilsfeelattheschool
A1.1.8Legalguardianmayparticipateineducation
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
A1.2Pupilshelpeachother1234567
A1.2.1Pupilsspontaneouslyhelpeachotherintheirclass
A1.2.2Pupilshelpeachotherincommonareasofschool
A1.2.3Mutualhelpbetweenpupilsissupportedbyteachersanditisallewedtopupils(inlessons)
A1.2.4Pupilslearntousevariouscontributionsofindividualsandgroupsforacommonoutcome
AppendixNo.3:FrameworkforSelf-evaluationofSchools’Conditions2011
147
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
A1.3Employeesofschoolsupport,helpandcooperateineduaction1234567
A1.3.1Employeescooperateinplanninglessons,preparationofprojectsandotheractivitiesforpupils
A1.3.2Teachingstaffexchangesexperiences,informationandmaterialsbetweenthemselves
A1.3.3Teacherssometimesteachasateam(eg,inpairsand/orprojects)
A1.3.4Teachingstaffcooperatesinsolvingproblemsarisingintheclassroomorschool
A1.3.5Teacherscooperateinsupportingpupils,forwhomtheCzechlanguageisnotanativelanguage
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
A1.4Employeesofschoolandpupilsrespecteachother1234567
A1.4.1Thepupilisnamedbyhisownownname(pupilagreeswiththisname)
A1.4.2Ifpupilshaveaproblem,theysolveitincooperationwitheducators,schoolmanagement
A1.4.3Teachersandpupilstogetherformulaterulesofcoexistenceincassroom
A1.4.4Rulesofbehaviorofpupilsarevisiblyplaced
A1.4.5Therulesarerespectedanditisworkedwiththem
A1.4.6Theactbetweenteacherandpupilisbasedonarelationship(mutualrespect)
A1.4.7Parentsarefamiliarinrulesandproceduresinviolations
148
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
A1.5Betweenteachersandparents/legalguardiansofpupilsisapartnership1234567
A1.5.1Therearevariousopportunities,inwhichparentscandiscussboththeprogressoftheirchildandthefearsassociatedwithit?
A1.5.2Ifparentsareconcernedaboutsomething,theschooldealswithit
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
A1.6Theriskofbullyingisminimized1234567
A1.6.1Theschoolimplementstheprograminaprimaryschool,whichhelpstopreventionandresolutionofbullying
A1.6.2Boysandgirlsknowwhotocontactwhenexperiencebullying
A1.6.3Pupilsunderstandtotheterm"bullying"
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
149
A2Valuesystemrecognizingandsupportingtheinclusion
A2.1Achievingofmaximumresultsisexpectedfromallpupils1234567
A2.1.1Allpupilsareencouragedbyteacherstoachieveverygoodresults(alsopupilswithothernativealnguage)
A2.1.2Pupilsareencouragedtoacknowledgetheresultsofothers
A2.1.3Pedagogicalstaffdoesnotuse"labels"toexpressthepupil'sperformance(especiallylowperformance)
A2.1.4Pupilsevaluatetheirprogressinlearning
A2.1.5Pedagogicalstaffsupportstheindependenceofpupils
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
A2.2Differencesbetweenpupilsineducationareusetomutualenrichment1234567
A.2.2.1Diversityisperceivedasanopportunitysupportingandenrichingthelearning,notasaproblem
A.2.2.2Everyoneisperceivedasapersonwhocanteachotherpupilsmanyimportantthingsregardlessofhisresultsordisability
A2.2.3Pupilsincludedinthecategory"pupilswithSEN"arenotperceivedasahomogenousgroup
A2.2.4Teacherstrytostrengthentheselfconfidenceofpupilswhohaveitlow
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
150
A2.3Employeesofschoolcreateoptimalconditionsforeducationofeachpupil1234567
A2.3.1Inlessonsareclearlynamedaims,thatpupilsshouldachieve,areindividualized(speed,performance,content)
A2.3.2
Evaluationofthepupil'sworkisdonebyateacherincooperationwiththepupilandusedforhisfurtherlearning,isevaluatedthe
personalprogressaccordingtothesetpersonalaims
A2.3.3Teachersadaptlearningprocesstotheindividualneedsofpupils
A2.3.4Teachersincludepupils'viewintothereflectionofthelesson
A2.3.5Forpupilswithdisabilitiesandhandicapsaresuitablyadaptedequipmentandworkingmaterials
A2.3.6Ifthereisnowheelchairaccessatschool,itisapartoftheplanforthemodificationoftheconditionsofschool
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7
151
FrameworkforSelf-evaluationConditionsofEducation
ViewB:PRINCIPLESOFMAXIMUMPARTICIPATION
B1WaytotheSchoolforAll
B1.1Allworkersofschoolhavethesameconditionsforacceptanceandprofessionalgrowth1234567
B1.1.1Allemployeescanattendfurthereducationandtherebyworkontheirprofessionalgrowth
B1.1.2Therespectforthediversityofpupilsisanessentialcriterionforstaffacceptance
B1.1.3Schoolhasobjectivesintheareaofequalrepresentationofemployees(intheirdiversity)?
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
B1.2Schooltriestoacceptallpupilsfromthecatchmentarea1234567
B1.2.1InclusionofallpupilsfromthecatchmentareaispresentedaspartoftheSEP
B1.2.2Schoolevaluateshowawiderangeofpupilsisabletoeffectivelyeducate
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
B1.3Schoolcreatesitsclassroomsotherespectofallpupilsequallyisclear1234567
B1.3.1Groupsineachclassarefromtimetotimechangedtosupportsocialcohesion
B1.3.2Schooltriestodividechildrenintoclasseswithrespecttotheirresultsordisability
B1.3.3Ifpupilsareconnectedinsomesubjectsaccordingtotheirabilities,itisintheinterestoftheirdevelopment
B1.3.4Ifpupilsareconnectedinsomesubjectsaccordingtotheirabilities,theyhaveequalopportunitiestochangethegroup
152
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
B1.4Furthereducationhelpsteacherstoworkwithdiversityofpupils1234567
B1.4.1Teachersareeducatedhowtoeffectivelyuseandmanagecooperativelearning
B1.4.2Teachersareeducatedhowtosupportpartnerlearning-mutualeducationofchildren
B1.4.3TeachersandsupportstafflearnhowtousemoderntechnologyineducationofpupilsincludingpupilswithSEN
B1.4.4Teachersandsupportstaffareeduactedinsupportinganddevelopinginnermotivationofpupils
B1.4.5Teachersandsupportstaffareeduactedinsupportinganddevelopingpersonalandsocialeducationofpupils
B1.4.6Teachersareeduactedintheareaofequalopportunitiesfordisabled?
B1.4.7Teachersandsupportstafflearnhowtodealwithbullying,includingracism,genderdiscriminationandhomophobia
B1.4.8Teachersandsupportstafflearnhowtoconsistentlyandthoroughlyreacttomanifestationsofindiscipline
B1.4.9Assistanshasthepedagogicaleducation
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
B1.5Eachstudenthastheopportunitytoparticipateinleisureactivitiesofschool1234567
B1.5.1
Alleventsoftheschoolcurriculumareavailabletoallpupils,regardlessofresultsordisabilitiesandtheirbackground(withthe
possibleexceptionofthepenaltiesforviolationofrulesofbehavior)
B1.5.2Sporteventsincludeactivities,whereeveryonecanparticipateregardlessofskillordisability
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
153
FrameworkforSelf-evaluationConditionsofEducation
VIEWC:SUPPORTANDDEVELOPMENTOFNON-DISCRIMINATORYPRACTICE
C1Organizationofcommonlearning
C1.1Educationrespectsthediversityofpupils1234567
C1.1.1Teachersletpupilsexploresomethingnewinteaching
C1.1.2Inthelessonsteachersreflectdifferencesinknowledgeofpupils-useofindividualization,differentiation
C1.1.3Duringlessonsisreflectedadifferentspeed,momentum,skillwhichpupilsperformtaskswith
C1.1.4Pupilshaveopportunitiestoapplydifferentlearningstylesinlessons
C1.1.5Lessonsincludeactivitiesthatcanbeperformedindividually,inpairs,groupsandwholeclass
C1.1.6
Inlessonsaredifferentactivitiesinlessonsincludingdiscussion,interpretation,writing,drawing,problemsolving,useoflibrary,
audiovisualtechnology,practicalactivitiesandinformationtechnology
C1.1.7
Pupilsareallowedrecordingtheirworkindifferentways,egusingtheirnativelanguagewithtranslation,drawing,photographor
audiorecording
C1.1.8Teachersinlessonsbuildonthelanguageexperiencesthatpupilsgetoutofschool
C1.1.9Teachingequipment,teachingtextsandtextbooksreflectonthebackgroundandexperienceofdifferentgroupsofpupils
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
C1.2Educationdevelopsunderstandingofthedifferences1234567
C1.2.1Pupilsaremotivatedandencouragedtoexploreideasandviewsdifferingfromtheirown
C1.2.2
Thereareprovidedopportunitiestopupilstoworkwithpupilswhoaredifferentinsenseofbackground,ethnicity,disabilityor
gender
154
C1.2.3
Educationalprogramexplicitlyidentifiestheunderstandingofdifferencesandequalopportunitiesintheareaofdisadvantage
(backgrounds,cultures,ethnicities,gender,religion...)anddisability
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
C1.3Pupilsareactivelyengagedintheirownlearning1234567
C1.3.1Equipment(classroombookcases,exposedmaterials…)allowsself-learning
C1.3.2Pupilsaretaughthowtomakenotesfromtheinterpretation,theirownideasandbooksandhowtoorganizework
C1.3.3Pupilsaretaughthowtopresenttheirworkinspoken,writtenandotherforms,individuallyoringroups?
C1.3.4Pupilsareencouragedtosummarizeorallyorinwritingwhattheyhavelearned
C1.3.5Teacherorassistansconsultwithpupilsthesupportwhichtheyneed
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
C1.4
Self-evaluationandevaluationofknowledge,skills,andprogressofeachpupil'supporthisdevelopmentandis
consistentwithhiseducationalneedsandinterests1234567
C1.4.1Usedevaluationmethodsallowallpupilstoreflectontheirknowledgeandskills-aninformativefunctionofevaluation
C1.4.2Usedevaluationmethodssupportthedevelopmentofallpupils-amotivationalfunctionofevaluation
C1.4.3Feedbackprovidesinformationtoimprovingpupil'sperformance-acorrectivefunctionofevaluation
C1.4.4Thereareopportunitiesforevaluatingprocessandresultsofagroupwork
155
C1.4.5Duringthelearningprocessiswidelyusedaformativeevaluation
C1.4.6Evaluationofteachersiscomplementedbypupil'sself-evaluationandviceversa
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
C1.5Theaccesstohomeworkcontributesthelearningofallpupils1234567
C1.5.1Thereareopportunitiestodohomeworkindifferentways
C1.5.2Homeworkisachievablewithouthelpofparents
C1.5.3Pupilshaveopportunitiesforcooperationindoinghomework?
C1.5.4Pupilshaveachoiceofhomeworktocouldfillitbasedontheirknowledgeandinterestdevelopedbyit
C1.5.5Pupilshaveopportunitiestodohomeworkintheschoolarea,beforeteaching,duringlunchbreakorduringfreetime
Basedonwhatwehavedetermineditspositiononascale1to7Meansforfurtherimprovement
INDEX FOR INCLUSION
IN THE CZECH PRIMARY SCHOOLS
TEACHERS SELF-EVALUATION
IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS
RESEARCH
Mgr. Jana Kratochvílová, Ph.D.
Mgr. Jiří Havel, Ph.D.
Published by Masaryk University
1st edition, 2012
200 copies
Printed by MSD, spol. s r.o., Lidická 23, 602 00 Brno, www.msdbrno.cz
Typeset by LD
ISBN 978-80-210-5931-3