Development of students’ subject position in the process of internship in an inclusive school

Introduction. The requirements of the Federal State Educational Standards for the training of teachers and teachers-psychologists determine the list of competencies in the field of education of children with special educational needs, including the organisation of their joint activities with peers in an inclusive education institution. The implementation of inclusive principles is associated with the development of innovative ways for individualising the pedagogical process, creative nature of mastering learning strategies and socialising children with atypical development, which actualises the problem of transformation of pedagogical thinking stereotypes. In this regard, the professional training of students in the field of inclusive education requires searching for factors aimed at increasing personality subjectivity, development of abilities to demonstrate an active, transformative position, synthesis of know-ledge from various scientific fields, modeling of variative solutions to non-standard situations of inclusive process. An important component of a future teacher education is internship in inclusive schools, in the course of which direct interactions with children with different physical and intellectual capabilities actualise own resources of students and acquisition of required skills.

The aim of the experimental work presented in this publication is to identify the development factors and characteristics of a student’s subjective position in the process of continuous internship in inclusive education institutions.

Methodology and research methods. The present research is based on the methodological principles of the subjective and learner-centred approaches, as well as the provisions of the concept of transformability focused on the principle of permanent multiplication of success of each participant of the educational process. The questionnaire “Level of Personality Subjectivity” by M. A. Schukina and the questionnaire revealing a model of teacher-child interaction developed by V. G. Maralov, V. A. Sitarov were used as diagnostic tools. The method of qualitative analysis of students’ reflexive judgments was applied. The data was processed in the SPSS programme using mathematical statistics methods (Mann – Whitney U-test).

Results and scientific novelty. A working definition of the subject position of the teacher is given. The teacher’s subject position consists not only in the complex of specific knowledge and competencies learned and applied in practice, but also, and above all, in a high level of self-organisation and self-determination of the individual in non-standard situations. For the first time in the Russian education system, the authors of the present research made an attempt to implement the idea of future teachers’ preparation for activities in an inclusive environment through the formation of the subject position. The factors, influencing the development of student’ subjective position, are determined; the peculiarities of its manifestations are analysed.

Practical significance. The results of this experimental study could be of interest to teachers of higher education, teachers and heads of educational organisations, working in the conditions of inclusive education.

1. Ryapisova A. G. Inclusive education as a system innovation. Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta = Bulletin of the Novosibirsk State University. 2017; 7, 1: 7-20. DOI: 10.15293/2226-3365.1701.01 (In Russ.)

2. Rean A. A., Baranov A. A., Suntsova A. S. Family resources in socio-cultural integration of children with disabilities. Razvitiye lichnosti = Development of Personality [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Dec 06]; 4: 38-56. Available from: https://rl-online.ru/uploads/38-56.pdf (In Russ.)

3. Zagvyazinsky V. I., Strokova T. A. Resistance to innovation: Essence, preventive measures and ways out. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2014; 3: 3-21. DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2014-3-3-21 (In Russ.)

4. Alekhina S. V. Inclusive education: From politics to practice. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education. 2016; 21, 1: 136-145. DOI: 10.17759/pse.2016210112 (In Russ.)

5. Shkutina L. A., Rymkhanova A. R., Mirza N. V., Ashimkhanova G. S., Alshynbekova G. K. Human resource is a key factor in the successful implementation of the inclusive education system. Vestnik Novosibirskogo Gosudarstvennogo Pedagogicheskogo Universiteta = Bulletin of the Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University. 2017; 1: 21-33. DOI: 10.15293/2226-3365.1701.02 (In Russ.)

6. Nimante D., Tubele S. Key challenges for Latvian teachers in mainstream schools: a basis for preparing teachers for inclusion. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs. 2010; 10, 1: 168-176. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2010.01169.x

7. Siddik A. B., Kawai N. Preparing primary level teachers for inclusive education in Bangladesh. Asian Journal of Inclusive Education [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2019 Feb 10]; 6, 1: 49-71. Available from: https://www.ajie-bd

8. Lewis I., Coreoran S., Juma S., Kaplan L., Little D., Pinnock H. Time to stop polishing the brass on the Titanic: moving beyond “quick-and-dirty” teacher education for inclusion, towards sustainable theories of change. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2019; 23, 7-8: 722-739. DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2019.1624847

9. Huang C., Chen R. Attitudes toward inclusive education: A comparison of general and special education teachers in Taiwan. Asian Journal of Inclusive Education [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2019 Feb 14]; 5, 1: 23-37. Available from: http://www.ajie-bd

10. Sutton K. Nontraditional pre-service teachers: What they learn from inclusion literature. Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Mar 24]; 3 (4). Available from: http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie

11. Walton E. Inclusive education in the academy: pedagogical and political imperatives in a master’s course. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2018; 22, 8: 856-869. DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2017.1412512

12. Khitryuk V. V. Formation of inclusive readiness of future teachers: The effectiveness of the didactic model. Vestnik Baltiyskogo Federal’nogo universiteta im. I. Kanta = Bulletin of the Baltic Federal University named after I. Kant [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2019 Apr 15]; 5: 112-120. Available from: https://journals.kantiana.ru/vestnik/3002/8414 (In Russ.)

13. Molbaek M. Inclusive teaching strategies - dimensions and agendas. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2018; 22, 10: 1048-1061. DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2017.1414578

14. Abery B., Tichá R., Kincade L. Moving toward an inclusive education system: Lessons from the U. S. and their potential application in the Czech Republic and other central and Eastern European countries. Social Education. 2017; 5, 1: 48-62. DOI: 10.7441/soced.2017.05.01.03

15. Engelbrecht P., Savolainen H. Teachers’ perspectives of inclusive education: An international comparative approach. World Studies in Education. 2014; 15, 1: 5-21. DOI: 10.7459/wse/15.1.02

16. Polat F. Inclusion in education: A step towards social justice. International Journal of Educational Development. 2011; 31, 1: 50-58. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2010.06.09

17. Messiou K. The missing voices: Students as a catalyst for promoting inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2019; 23 (7-8): 768-781. DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2019.1623326

18. Florian L. Inclusive Pedagogy: A transformative approach to individual differences but can it help reduce educational inequalities? Scottish Educational Review [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Mar 22]; 47 (1): 5-14. Available from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1093085

19. Abulkhanova K. A. The worldview meaning and the value of the category of subject. Vestnik Krasnoyarskogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta imeni V. P. Astafyeva = Bulletin of the Krasnoyarsk State Pedagogical University named after V. P. Astafiev [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Apr 20]; 4 (38): 162-168. Available from: vestnik.kspu.ru/index.php/vestnik/issue/view/11 (In Russ.)

20. Bugrova N. A. Value-semantic foundations of the formation of the future teacher's subjectivity. Bulletin Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta kul’tury i iskusstv = Bulletin of the Kemerovo State University of Culture and Arts. 2017; 38: 202-210. DOI: 10.15217/issn2078-1768-1774 (In Russ.)

21. Alekseenko I. N. Determination of essence of professional subjectivity in socio-philosophical discourse. Istoricheskaya i sotsial’no-obrazovatel’naya mysl’ = Historical and Social Educational Idea. 2017; 3: 127-131. DOI: 10.17748/2075-9908-2017-9-3/1-127-131 (In Russ.)

22. Makoelle T. M. Pedagogy of inclusion: A quest for inclusive teaching and learning. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy. 2014: 5, 20: 1259-1267. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n20p1259-1267

23. Khodyakova N. V., Mitin A. I. Accounting for psychological mechanisms of personality development in the design of the educational environment. Psihologicheskaja nauka i obrazovaniye = Psychological Science and Education. 2017; 22, 1: 101-109. DOI: 10.17759/pse.2017220414 (In Russ.)

24. Florian L., Linklater H. Preparing teachers for inclusive education: Using inclusive pedagogy to enhance teaching and learning for all. Cambridge Journal of Education. 2010; 40, 4: 369-386. DOI: 10.1080/0305764X.2010.526588

25. Shchukina M. A. Subjectivity approach to self-development of the personality: theoretical understanding and empirical study. Psihologija. Zhurnal Vysshey shcoly ekonomiki = Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2019 Apr 11]; 2: 7-22. Available from: https://psy-jornal.hse.ru/data/2014/10/31/1102315715/Shukina_11-02pp7-22.pdf (In Russ.)

26. Vachkov I. V. Polysubject interaction in instructional environment. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshey shcoly ekonomiki = Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2019 Mar 11]; 11, 2: 36-50. Available from: https://psy-jornal.hse.ru/data/2014/10/31/1102315546/Vachkov_11-02pp36-50.pdf (In Russ.)

27. Goryunova L. V. Peculiarities of master’s preparation of pedagogical staff for organising in the system of inclusive education of sociocultural animation, rehabilitation, habilitation of students with disabilities. Gumanitarnyye nauki = Humanitarian Sciences [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Dec 06]; 2 (38): 169-174. Available from: http://science.cfuv.ru/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/gn-2-38-2017.pdf (In Russ.)

28. Zeer E. F., Symaniuk E. E. Methodological guidelines for the transprofessionalism development among vocational educators. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2017; 8 (19): 9-28. DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2017-8-9-28

29. Iarotckaia A. S. Dynamics of the subject development of students and study groups at different stages of educational process in university. Sotsial’naya psikhologiya i obshestvo = Social Psychology and Society. 2018; V. 9 № 2: 93-109. DOI: 10.17759/sps.2018090207

30. Safonova T. V., Suntsova A. S., Aslaeva R. G. Exploring the personal model of interaction with special needs children as structural component of teachers’ readiness for inclusive education. Integratsiya obrazovaniya = Integration of Education. 2018; 23, 1: 51-66. DOI: 10.15507/1991-9468.094.023.201901.051-066

31. Timor T. Attitudes of beginner teachers of special education to classroom management: whoэs the boss here? Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2018 Dec 19]; 2 (7). Available from: http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie

32. Hanssen N. Preschool staff relationships with children with language difficulties: A comparative study in Belarusian and Norwegian preschools. European Journal of Special Needs Education. 2018; 33, 3: 366-381. DOI: 10.1080/08856257.2017.1314112