Marjatta Takala

Frequency of co‐teaching in different teacher categories

Co‐teaching – or the use of more than one teacher in a classroom – has been commonly recommended as a means to promote inclusive education. The aim of the present study was to survey the actual frequency of co‐teaching among different teacher categories in the comprehensive school level in one Finnish city. The data were collected through a questionnaire answered by two representative samples of teachers including 117 resource room teachers in the first survey, and 317 teachers of various teacher categories in the second. The results showed that co‐teaching was a widespread phenomenon among resource room teachers and special class teachers but less frequent among other teacher groups. Overall, it was used only infrequently, typically from two to three hours a week. On a weekly basis it was implemented by every second special education teacher, every third classroom teacher and every sixth subject teacher. A comparison with a study from the early 1980s confirmed that the relative popularity of co‐teaching had increased only slightly during the years. Although co‐teaching is used sparsely, the teachers reported almost uniquely positive experiences obtained from it. It is argued that the promotion of co‐teaching needs additional incentives if it is hoped to make it more common.

The Core of Special Teacher Education: A Comparison of Finland and Norway.

In this paper, the situation of special teacher education in Finland and Norway has been analysed from three perspectives: how the curricula of special teacher education differ between and within the countries; whether inclusion is included in special teacher education; and how the special teacher education curricula reflect the national requirements. The result of this analysis shows a high degree of variation in Norwegian special teacher education, in contrast to a quite homogenous situation in Finland. Inclusion is shown to be a central part of the fundamental discourse of special needs education in Norway whereas this feature is not so central in Finnish special teacher education. The plurality seen in the Norwegian situation reflects the national discussion on the role of special needs education in relation to individualised education solutions. This discussion is partly critical of the marginalisation tendencies of special needs education. The official solution is to work towards an inclusive school using child‐centred strategies – one of which is special needs education. In Finland, special needs education forms a part of the national goal of high‐quality education, and inclusion is not mentioned. The Norwegian situation can be problematic for schools, pupils and parents because it is not possible to anticipate the kind of knowledge and help a special teacher can give. This situation can also diminish the professional identity of the special needs teacher. In Finland, the core of special needs education and the common knowledge shared by special needs teachers are very clear. However, in that country the role of inclusion is weak.

Can special education make a difference? Exploring the differences of special educational systems between Finland and Norway in relation to the PISA results

This article discusses the differences in special educational systems in Finland and Norway in relation to the PISA scores. By comparing the Finnish system with the Norwegian, we have found that the strong focus both on early intervention and on reading and writing in Finland have positive effects on this countrys PISA results. The situation in Norway is different, where there is less use of early intervention and a markedly weaker emphasis on reading and writing within special education. We discuss these differences in relation to these countries’ different cultural orientations with respect to education in general and to special education in particular.

A One-Year Study of the Development of Co-Teaching in Four Finnish Schools.

In this follow-up study, development of co-teaching was studied in four different schools in Helsinki, Finland. Teachers, altogether 54, 51 and 26, respectively, responded to an electronic questionnaire three times during one year. The attitudes towards co-teaching were positive although the frequency of co-teaching remained low. Co-teaching was seen as a developing mode of teaching and it was said to be suitable for all school subjects. Special teachers and class teachers had the most experience with co-teaching. The majority of respondents co-taught 2–5 lessons per week and that did not change during the follow-up, although monetary incentive was available to those who increased their co-teaching during the study period. For class-teachers, another class-teacher was most often the chosen co-teaching partner. Special teachers were frequent co-teaching partners for all teachers. The most common reason for not co-teaching was the lack of planning time. However, 15 minutes were considered enough to plan one lesson. The respondents had no education about co-teaching. Receiving more attention was the most often mentioned benefit of co-teaching for the students. Sharing and well-being were regarded as the greatest benefits of co-teaching for the teachers. The advantages and obstacles of co-teaching are discussed and some practical advice is given.

Auditory processing in developmental dyslexia: An exploratory study of an auditory and visual matching training program with Swedish children with developmental dyslexia

This study examined whether training using a nonverbal auditory-visual matching task had a remedial effect on reading skills in developmental dyslexia. The pretest/post-test design was used with Swedish children (N= 41), between the ages of 7 and 12. Training comprised twice-weekly sessions of 15 minutes, over eight weeks. There was an improvement in auditory-visual matching during the training period. There were also improvements in some reading test scores, especially in reading nonsense words and in reading speed. These improvements in tasks which are thought to rely on phonological processing suggest that such reading difficulties in dyslexia may stem in part from more basic perceptual difficulties, including those required to manage the visual and auditory components of the decoding task. The utility of the concept of auditory structuring is discussed in relation to auditory and phonological processing skills when a child learns to read.

Inclusion Seen by Student Teachers in Special Education: Differences among Finnish, Norwegian and Swedish Students.

This article describes various views of special teacher students towards inclusion. In order to examine these, we analysed a series of statements made by students in Finland, Norway and Sweden. The specific aims were to see how these views can be seen as supportive or challenging for inclusion in schools. A questionnaire with one closed question and two open-ended questions was used in all countries. The results show that students in similar Nordic countries have different views about inclusion. Norwegian students mostly supported inclusion while Finnish students expressed the most reservations. The arguments about inclusion by Norwegian students were the most pupil-focused; those by Finns were teacher-focused, with Swedes being in between. The results seem to reflect the educational policy in these countries. Discussions, more information, as well as good models of inclusion seem to be needed. The implications of these findings for special and regular teacher education are also discussed.

A Good Future for Deaf Children: A Five-Year Sign Language Intervention Project

Deaf preschoolers and hearing family members learned sign language in a 5-year intervention project. Once weekly, each child met with a teacher who was deaf. Parents, siblings, and other relatives met about once monthly to study sign language, and all families in the project signed together about twice yearly. The present study addressed four questions asked of parents about the project: (a) How did the children learn to sign? (b) Did both the parents and the children benefit from the project? (c) What was the position of sign language in the family? (d) Did the project have some impact on the familys social network? The families indicated satisfaction with the project; they learned to sign and their social networks expanded. Parents favored bilingual education: Sign language was the main language but learning Finnish was also important. Learning sign language was not easy, especially for the fathers. The families that were most actively involved in the lessons learned the most.

Special Education in Swedish and Finnish Schools: Seeing the Forest or the Trees?.

The purpose of this research was to study the content of the work of two special education professions in Sweden, special teachers and special pedagogues. In addition, we compare their work to the work of Finnish special teachers. The Swedish participants were 74 special educators: 27 special teachers and 47 special pedagogues. The Finnish data were from an earlier study, involving 133 special teachers. Participants in both countries were approached via a questionnaire. The results show that Swedish special pedagogues do more consultative work and Swedish special teachers more direct work with pupils. However, there is plenty of overlap in the work profiles of Swedish special pedagogues and special teachers. Most of the work content is in line with the Finnish findings, except that Finnish special teachers had a minor consultative role. It seems that the work duties across the two professions, special pedagogues and special teachers, are somewhat similar. Their ways of working in practice are discussed.

Students in higher education with reading and writing difficulties

The aim of this study is to explore adult students’ descriptions and understandings of their reading and writing difficulties, and to describe the ways they are copying with them. In higher level studies, information is typically gained by reading and giving evidence of knowledge acquisition in writing. When students have difficulties with these essential academic skills, studying and lifelong learning can be hard work as well as time-consuming. General understanding of dyslexia and reading difficulties at the higher education level has improved, although considerable ambiguity remains about what these mean in practice. This is a qualitative, interview-based study that seeks to improve our understanding of these difficulties. The data were analysed using content analysis, and our findings are presented in terms of: (a) the social experiences of students; (b) their expectations and solutions with respect to their academic progress; and (c) the individual strategies employed for copying with reading and writing tasks.

Effects of History and Culture on Attitudes toward Special Education: A Comparison of Finland and Norway

This paper discusses the role of special education in Finland and Norway. There are major differences in how special education is understood in these countries. The different perspective that Finland and Norway have on the concept of inclusion is also striking. The PISA test results show that the Finnish school is performing well, partly because of flexible part-time special education; the early intervention strategy also plays a role in this success. These aspects are making Finnish schools inclusive; support is offered immediately when it is needed without any bureaucratic process. An effective teacher education program is also a key element in creating a successful school system. Norway’s relatively weak educational results could mean that despite their strong focus on inclusion, Norwegian schools are not inclusive. The quality of special education is debated. If it is true that special education is helping to create success in schools, then clearly there is a need to discover more about the different systems and what factors may influence that success. Despite the close geographical and political relationship between Norway and Finland, there exists clear differences in the educational area.