Jennifer Duke

A case for rethinking inclusive education policy creation in developing countries

This article presents a critical analysis of the development and implementation of the 2014 inclusive educational policy in Samoa. While Samoan culture is traditionally founded on inclusive social practices, rather than reflecting these practices in their policy, Samoan policy developers have been under pressure to adopt or borrow policy from other countries. The findings of this intrinsic case study highlight the complexity of formulating inclusive education policies for small developing countries and why policy developers borrow from other developed countries. The theoretical framework used to analyse observation data in this study is based on the notion that national process of development is a powerful influence in educational policy. The authors argue and advocate for the existing but overlooked strengths of the local knowledge community capacity when policy is borrowed from other countries, and how the findings of the case study contribute to future attempts at policy development. We found that the draft policy needs to and does reflect Samoan culture, values and vision. However, adopting foreign practices such as the individual education plan and placement rules is not relevant to the Samoan context. The identification and development of inclusive education beliefs, skills and practices in schools is a priority.

Learning about Inclusion from Developing Countries: Using the Index for Inclusion

There is a need for a more critical perspective and reporting about the value of taking a model of inclusion developed in western countries and based upon the human rights ethos applying it in developing countries. This chapter will report firstly on how the Index for Inclusion (hereinafter referred to as the Index) was used in Australia as a tool for review and development; and secondly how the process of using the Index is adjusted for use in the Pacific Islands and other developing nations in collaborative and culturally sensitive ways to support and evaluate progress towards inclusive education. Examples are provided from both contexts to demonstrate the impact of the Index as an effective tool to support a more inclusive response to diversity in schools.

Generating benefits and negotiating tensions through an international doctoral forum: A sociological analysis

Workshops and seminars are widely-used forms of doctoral training. However, research with a particular focus on these forms of doctoral training is sporadic in the literature. There is no, if any, such research concerning the international context and participants’ own voices. Mindful of these lacunae in the literature, we write the current paper as a group of participants in one of a series of doctoral forums co-organised annually by Beijing Normal University, China and Queensland University of Technology, Australia. The paper voices our own experiences of participation in the doctoral forum. Data were drawn from reflections, journals, and group discussions of all 12 student and academic participants. These qualitative data were organised and analysed through Bourdieu’s notions of capital and field. Findings indicate that the doctoral forum created enabling and challenging social fields where participants accrued and exchanged various forms of capital and negotiated transient and complex power relations. In this respect, the sociological framework used provides a distinctive theoretical tool to conceptualise and analyse the benefits and tensions of participation in the doctoral forum. Knowledge built and lessons learned through our paper will provide implications and recommendations for future planning of, and participation in, the doctoral forum series and similar activities elsewhere.

A case study of culturally informed disability-inclusive education policy development in the Solomon Islands

ABSTRACT Inclusive education in general, and disability-inclusive education in particular, is a high-level priority for development work in aid-supported countries. This paper presents a bottom-up process of developing disability-inclusive education policy in one country – the Solomon Islands. It is well understood that the promotion of quality in disability-inclusive education requires a clearly stated policy; however, in many developing countries, there has been a history of policy borrowing rather than culturally informed policy development. This paper will critically discuss how policy development occurs in aid-funded development work and then offers an alternative model of Australian aid-supported policy development as an in-depth case study.

Supporting Disability Education through a Combination of Special Schools and Disability-Inclusive Schools in the Pacific Islands

AbstractThis article reports on a multi-method study of the ways in which special and mainstream schools support the educational needs of children with disabilities in Fiji. The aims of the study w...

Crossing International Boundaries through Doctoral Partnerships: Learnings from a Chinese-Australian Forum

International forums for doctoral students offer a fertile context for developing strategic partner-ships between higher education institutions, as well as for building the intercultural capacity of early career academics. However, there is limited research investigating the benefits of international doctoral forum partnerships. This paper presents learnings from a recent international doctoral forum held in Beijing, China and attended by doctoral students and academics from Beijing Normal University (China) and Queensland University of Technology (Australia). Drawing on qualitative case study method and a model of boundary crossing mechanisms, we identify the beneficial outcomes of the forum. We describe how the forum arose from a strong ongoing partnership between the Education Faculties of Beijing Normal University and Queensland University of Technology. We then identify how, at the institutional and individual level, international doctoral forum participants can be challenged and benefit in four areas: collaboration, intercultural capacity, academic enhancement and program development. Implications for engaging successfully in international doctoral forum partnerships are also discussed.