mothers voice their perceptions about their children's educational placement

This article was downloaded by: [The University of Manchester Library]On: 08 October 2014, At: 14:43Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Scandinavian Journal of DisabilityResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/sjdr20

Mothers voice their perceptionsabout their children's educationalplacementLise Roll‐Pettersson a

a Ph.D. lecturer in special education , Stockholm Institute ofEducation, Department of Human Development, Learning andSpecial Education ,Published online: 08 Jul 2009.

To cite this article: Lise Roll‐Pettersson (2001) Mothers voice their perceptions about theirchildren's educational placement, Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 3:1, 69-87, DOI:10.1080/15017410109510769

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15017410109510769

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms& Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/sjdr20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/15017410109510769

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15017410109510769

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

MOTHERS VOICE THEIR PERCEPTIONSABOUT THEIR CHILDREN'S EDUCATIONALPLACEMENT

By Lise Roll-Pettersson

Abstract:. In 1995, the Swedish Parliament passed a bill which stated that parents ofchildren with intellectual impairments have the right to choose whether or not theirchild should be enrolled in a special education school during a trial period. Thispaper presents a qualitative interview study which examines how the mothers ofseven children with mild to moderate intellectual impairments perceived the schoolplacement process and whether or not the mothers believed that they had a choice inselecting their child's placement The results indicated that the parents were notalways informed of the placement options. Some mothers of the children whoattended special education school classes reported feeling that their child wassocially isolated and that they wished he/she had more contact with other children.On the other hand, some parents of children who were educated in regular classesclaimed they had to struggle for their rights. The interviews suggest that more explicitguidelines are needed to define the parameters of parental involvement policies.

Introduction the second study 'Parent and ClassTeacher Perspectives.' The study consisted

The study described in this paper is part of parents of 100 children who receivedof a three-year project which was special educational services, and thecarried out at the Department of Human teachers of 93 of those pupils. From theDevelopment and Special Education in original pool, the parents of sevenStockholm (ESV-project). The project children with intellectual impairmentsconsisted of three studies which aimed were interviewed regarding how theyto study: 1) organisational and managerial perceived the school- placementperspectives, 2) parent and class teacher process,perspectives, and 3) pupil, group, andeducational perspectives (Fischbein, The framework for the SwedishMalmgren-Hansen, Allodi-Westing and educational system is stated in "theRoll-Pettersson, 1997). The author of Curriculum for the Compulsory Schoolthe present study was responsible for System" [Lpo-94] (1998) and the

SJDR - Volume 3,No.l- 2001 69

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4

USE ROLL-PETTERSSON

Education Act (1996). The Curriculumfor the Compulsory School Systemstates that parents should play an activerole in the education of their childrenand stresses the importance ofcollaboration between the home andschool. The Curriculum also states thateducation should be adjusted to theneeds of each pupil; that instructionshould assist the pupil's continuedlearning and development; and thatinstruction should be based on thepupil's background, previousexperiences, language, and knowledge.It is stated in the Compulsory SchoolOrdinance, chapter 5, (in EducationAct, 1996) that if a child needs specialeducational services, then an educationplan should be drawn-up, which isdevised jointly by school personnel, thepupil, and the parents or guardians.

The Swedish Parliament passed aGovernment Bill, 1994/95:212 whichresulted in the SFS 1995:1249 law. Thelaw enables the parents of children withintellectual impairments, i.e. learningimpairments, brain damage, and autismto choose whether or not their childshould be enrolled in a special educationschool during a trial period, January 1st,1996 till June 30th, 2000. Within thistime span, the above mentioned groupof children may not be enrolled in thespecial education school without theirparent's consent. If the parents choosenot to enrol their child then the child,will attend a regular class and followthe regular school curriculum inaccordance with the Education Act

(SFS 1995:1249,§§ 1-3). Children whoare enrolled in the special educationschool can be educated either in a"trdningsskoleklass" (life-skill class) forpupils with a moderate to profoundintellectual impairment or a"grundsdrskoleklass" (reading-based class)for pupils with a mild to moderateintellectual impairment, or have an"integrated placement1," in which casethe pupil will follow one of the specialeducation school curricula. Despite thefact that parents are now permitted tochoose whether or not their child is tobe enrolled in the special educationschool, they do not have the legalauthority (if the child is enrolled) toselect the type of instruction (i.e. life-skill or reading-based curricula). If thechild is enrolled and there is adisagreement between the parents andschool pertaining to the type ofinstruction and/or whether or not thechild may have an integrated place-ment, then the school authorities havethe final decision regarding both issues(Government Bill 1994/95:212). Thespecial education school classes are as arule mainstreamed in regular schools.However, the special education schoolis not always in the vicinity of theindividual pupil's home, and the pupilsmay have to travel long distances toattend school.

The Swedish compulsory school has inthe last few years experienced economiccutbacks which may have obstructedthe process of choice and familyinvolvement. This hypothesis is supported

70 SJDR - Volume 3, No.l - 2001

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4

MOTHERS VOICE THEIR PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THEIRCHILDREN'S EDUCATIONAL PLACEMENT

by an article written by The NationalAgency for Education (DagensNyheter, 2000a) which states that thenumber of pupils in the compulsoryspecial education school has increasedby an average of 52% between 1992/93and 1999/00, while the percentage ofpupils who are individually integratedhas remained at approximately 14%during the 1990's (The NationalAgency for Education, 2000b). Parallelwith the increase of enrolment in thespecial education school, has been adecrease in teacher employment in theregular school (The National Agencyfor Education, 1997). In a studyconducted by Tideman (1998), it wasfound that, due to fiscal cutbacks, pupilswith milder intellectual impairments whopreviously attended regular classes,were now being enrolled in self-contained special education classes.Furthermore, Rosenquist & Tideman(2000) reported that there appears to bea lack of ethical guidelines in the schoolplacement process. According to theirpaper, parents have reported feelingforced into enrolling their child in thespecial education school in order toprocure their child the resources he/sheneeds. In addition, Persson (1998)found, in an interview study, that someteachers question whether, in view ofeconomic cutbacks, it is worthwhileallocating extra teaching time to pupilswhose learning capacity is limited.Furthermore, Roll-Pettersson (2001) ina study which was part of the previouslymentioned ESV-project, found that themajority of teachers (92%, n=38),

regardless of whether they taught inself-contained special education classesor regular classes had not receivedinservice training on how to teachchildren with special education needs.89% (n=37) expressed the need fortraining in these domains. Roll-Pettersson (2001), as well as Werts,Wolery, Snyder, Caldwell, andSalisbury (1996), maintain that teachers'lack of supports and training may resultin excluding pupils with intellectualimpairments from regular classes. Notonly did teachers feel ill-equipped tomeet the needs of their students, butparents in Roll-Pettersson's study(submitted) expressed their greatestneeds in the information category, inwhich approximately 75% (n=76) rated,as their greatest need needing moreknowledge about future services whichthe school could offer their child.

Taken together, these factors suggestthat parents in fact are not able toinfluence their child's school placementto the optimal extent. This studydescribes the experiences and perceptionsof a few parents (i.e., mothers) in theschool-placement process.

Theoretical Perspective

The theoretical approach of this study isbased on ecological systems theory(Bronfennbrenner, 1977 and 1986). Inthe ecological systems model, theenvironment is divided into a hierarchicallylinked framework, extending from

SJDR - Volume 3, No.l - 2001 71

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4

LISE ROLL-PETTERSSON

microsystems to the macrosystem.Bronfenbrenner (1977) used themetaphor of Russian dolls to describethe different layers of the environmentswhich influence development. Thelayers move from inner most (proximal)to outer most (distal) environments.Microsystems consist of the proximalenvironments in which the developingperson resides and develop, such as thehome and classroom, and which therebyhave a direct influence on cognitive andemotional growth. The next layer, themesosytem, is made up of the relation-ships and interactions between micro-systems. Mesosystem factors, which arediscussed in this paper, are processesbetween parents and school. The nextlevel of interaction is the exosystemwhich consists of relationships andlinkages between at least two systems,whereof one of which does not containthe developing person. Exosystemvariables included in this paper are theambiguities between local and nationallevels regarding parental involvementin the placement process. The mostdistal layer of influence is the macro-system, which does not consist ofspecific environments, but is made upof the blueprints of a specific society orculture, i.e. their laws, regulations, andbelief systems. In summary, this studyanalyses how contextual variables inproximal and distal settings affectparental perspectives in the school-placement process.

Soder (1999) maintains that researcherstend to dichotomise between either a

clinical (individualistic) or a contextual(environmental) perspective whenanalysing special educational studies ortopics. Soder (ibid.) contends that it isimportant for researchers to move awayfrom possible predetermined biases inorder to develop new perspectives. Thediscussion section of this paper conformswith Soder's (1999) "relativistic approach"which he defines as "open" and inductive,and the commitment to a specificperspective is played down in favour ofmore openly asking "how competentactors handle dilemmas in their every-day lives" (p. 7).

Aim

The aim of this study was to investigatehow the parents of children with intelle-ctual impairments (a) perceived theplacement process, (b) if they felt theyhad a choice in deciding their child'splacement and c) what resources wereneeded for their child to be able to beeducated in a regular class.

Methods

Qualitative methods were selected inorder to gather descriptive data aboutparents' perspectives and experiences inthe placement process. Data collectionconsisted of using a semi-structuredinterview guide based on a set of basicquestions and areas to be explored(Erlandson, Harris, Skipper & Allen,1993). Probe questions were used to


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


gather additional data. The authorconducted all interviews during a nine-month period, each lasting 45 to 60minutes and verbatim transcriptionswere produced. Six of the seveninterviews were held in the families'homes (one mother preferred to meet atan office) in an effort to create as opena forum as possible, so that parents feltthat they could freely discuss the issuesat hand.

Participants and procedureThe participants consisted of sevenmothers of children with mild tomoderate intellectual impairments, allresiding within a 150-kilometre radiusof Stockholm. They were recruitedthrough the previously mentioned projectconducted at The Department ofHuman Development, Learning andSpecial Education. Participants in thelarger survey study consisted of theparents of 100 children who receivedspecial educational services, and theteachers of 93 of these children (Roll-Pettersson, 1999). All the parents weresent a letter of introduction along withthe surveys. The letter described thepurpose of the study and requestedparents who were willing to beinterviewed to write their telephonenumbers on an attached paper andreturn it along with the surveys. A totalof 30 parents agreed to be interviewed.Of these, 12 were parents of childrenrated as having an intellectual impair-ment. Eight of the children in this groupwere educated in self-contained classes,and four were educated in regular

classes. All parents who had a childwho attended a regular class wereautomatically selected to be interviewed(n= 4). One of the four moved to a self-contained class before the interviewtook place, reducing the number tothree. The parents of four children whoreceived their education in a small, self-contained class were selected becausethey happened to be at home when theauthor phoned. One of the latter interviewscould not be used due to a fault in thetape recorder, leaving a total of sevenparents for the study (three childrenattending regular classes and fourattending a special education school class).The absence of fathers in the presentstudy may be idiosyncratic and attributableto these particular families, with themothers assuming a more active role intheir child's education. A brief des-cription of the seven pupils and theirschool situation is given in Table 1.

SJDR - Volume 3, No.] - 2007 73

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


Table 1.

Description of the participating children and school situation

Name * Age © child characteristics (p Description of school placement 0

Sara 8

Ronny 10

Emma 11

Johanna 11

August 9

Magnus 9

Caroline 7

Has Down syndrome,no information ondegree of intellectualimpairment.

Has a suspectedintellectual impairment

Has autism and a mildintellectualimpairment.Has a suspectedintellectualimpairment.

No information ondegree of intellectualimpairmentHas a mild intellectualimpairment

Has a mild intellectualimpairment and ahearing impairment

Second grade, regular class, the class is divided in twogroups consisting of 12 and 13 children. Two teachers andone aide are responsible for the groups. Sara is notenrolled in the special education school. She is sociallyinvolved with her peers.Was in a regular class from first to third grade where hewas socially included. Started in a special education classin fourth grade in a new school. 9 pupils, one teacher andone teachers aide in the class. Is enrolled in the specialeducation school which has very little participation withreg. class.Fifth grade, regular class, 20 pupils, one teacher and oneaide. Does not receive special education services and isnot enrolled in the special education school.Attends a regular combined third- fourth grade class andparticipates in mostly non-academic subjects such a home-economics, music, gymnastics with each group.Receives sporadic special education services and is notenrolled in the special education school.Attends a self-contained class mainstreamed in a regularschool, some participation (plays, musicals etc.),encounters peers from regular classes on the playground.Attends a self-contained class located in a separatebuilding which also has other special education classes,very little contact with regular classes.Attends a self-contained class located in separatebuilding, almost no contact with regular classes.

* All names throughout report are pseudonyms.© Children in Sweden start first grade at seven.q> Child characteristics came from data collected from the larger study.0 Description of school characteristics as given by participants.

Data analysisThe interview data were analysed usingan emergent category designationprocess which involved dissecting eachinterview into separate units that forman idea, or convey a piece of information.

These units were compared to eachother and formed separate categories(Lincoln & Guba in Erlandson, et al.,1993). Themes were then evolved fromthe data. In order to validate inter-pretations, the author mailed the


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


transcribed interviews to each parti-cipant, along with a cover letter describingthe categories and general plannedcontent of this article. The purpose ofthis procedure was to insure thatparticipants had a clear understandingof how the interviews would be used,and thereby, were in a position to eitheragree or disagree with the categoriesand/or contents. Parents were alsorequested to contact the author if theyfelt the need to clarify any of the above.None of the participants responded tothis request.

Results

Four major themes emerged regardingparental experiences and perceptions ofthe placement process: a) perception ofpast encounters with other systems; b)educational placement; c) beliefs andthoughts regarding integrated/segregatedschooling; and d) being a parent,including personal attributes andreflections.

Perception of past encounters withother community-based systems

It is inevitable when talking about theplacement process that memories ofprevious encounters with other systemsshould arise. One issue was notreceiving enough information or helpfrom competent persons during theirchild's pre-school years. For example,in regard to the habilitation centre,Caroline's mother said:

The early interventionist must havejust accidentally fallen into her job.She wasn't much help. Caroline gotone of those 15 hours-a-week placesat a day-care centre; she had it sinceshe was three. It took a while beforeshe started receiving services...theearly interventionist was supposedto go out to the day-care centre andhelp the contact person, but thatdidn't work. She went there andpractically just scratched her head[meaning she didn't know what todo]... It is not easy [as a parent] toknow what you need when you areright in the middle of it all. Lookingback I think they handled everythingvery poorly.

A second issue was not being listenedto by people in authoritative positions.Sara's mother had decided before Sarastarted school that she wanted her toattend the local school and not travelthe 60 kilometres to another town inorder to be educated in the specialeducation school. She said:

The early interventionist continuouslyargued that the only educationalplacement possible was the specialeducation school ...'It would neverwork out in a regular pre-school, andit would definitely never work out inthe regular school.' She had a verypowerful resistance and saw onlyone alternative. That eventually leadus to cut off our contact with her.We had totally different perspectiveson how the work should be done

SJDR - Volume 3, No.l -2001 75

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


with our child. Because she [theearly interventionists] had such aposition, she also had an authoritativestatus, and the local school authoritieslistened to what she said. It isdifficult being a parent if you aren'tvery verbal or have the rightbackground to put forth what it isyou want. You are in an inferiorposition."

Despite these negative aspects, Sara'smother changed habilitation centres andhas been very satisfied with thefacilities at the new centre.

Educational placementRoutines and procedures for the child'splacement were unclear and differedbetween the individual families. Someof the parents were informed ofplacement option choices by the earlyinterventionist; others by a headmaster;some made their choice together with ateam; while still others seemed to havemade the decision themselves. Therealso appeared to be some doubt as towhether or not parents were informedabout their options, as well as whetherthe informers were knowledgeableabout those options. Ronny's mothersaid:

It was with a bit of agony that wedecided. It was difficult to getadvice because the teachers didn'tknow if it was better for him to stay

in the regular class [or go to thespecial education school].

Caroline's mother said that the earlyinterventionist spoke with her aboutplacement and that there then was ameeting at the habilitation centre withthe early interventionist and apsychologist (however, she pointed out,a representative from the local schooldid not attend the meeting). Referringto the local school she said:

I have later on understood that theyhave some kind of system so thatthey can check up on which childunderstands and which childdoesn't. I don't know where they getthat [referring to that information]...There was no money to have herthere [local school] with anassistant, besides every-one has said"all the assistants have to go". Yes,they decided that this [specialeducation school] was the bestdecision.

Later in the interview, when asked ifshe felt that she had any real influencein the school placement process, shesaid:

No, not at all, except that we simplymade the decision. Though, I don'tthink we had any choice. I never gotan answer [from the local school]about whether or not she couldattend that school with an assistant.We never got that far... they didn't


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


have to be bothered [referring totheir case].

Magnus's mother felt that she made thechoice regarding her child's educationalplacement. She said:

It doesn't feel as if anyone forcedthis on us. We have felt a lot offreedom to choose from theheadmaster. We visited the reading-based classes [referring to thespecial education school classes forpupils with mild to moderateintellectual impairments], and thelife-skill classes [for pupils withmoderate to profound intellectualimpairments], and we visited theregular school where we live. Youknow, we have older children thatgo there, and I don't think we wouldever get the resources needed tomake it work. And then, I know thatthe teachers in that school are so old.They've been there so many years.They would never understand whatall this en tails... When it comes toplacement I think we made thedecision ourselves. But, of course, Idon't know what they would havesaid if we had said that we wantedhim to go to our [name of localschool].

August's mother had originally hopedthat August could be educated in aregular class in the local school with anassistant, but she said that the schoolcould only afford to allocate supportfrom an assistant 10 to 12 hours per

week. For this reason, she felt thatintegration was not appropriate for him.On the other hand, she felt that she hadinfluenced August's school placementbecause she was able to choose betweenthe reading-based and life-skill basedclasses. She said:

...that type of instruction did notsuit him at all [reading-based]. Theydid not play the way they do in thelife skills class...He needs to useseveral senses together when helearns something [which they do inthe life-skills class].

Emma's mother refused to let herdaughter be enrolled in or transportedto the special education school inanother town. She said that theheadmaster and local school authoritieswere against placing Emma in a regularclass. Talking about her rights, she said:

There is no school or agency thatcan place a child in the specialeducation school against the parents,not according to the law. I told thatto the headmistress and afterthat...we had a meeting, and [shesaid] that we had to take intoconsideration the poorer quality ofeducation [in regular classes] andthe difficulties of integrating a childin the normal school.

Later in the interview Emma's motherdescribed how she struggled in order toprocure placement in the regular class:

SJDR - Volume 3,No.l- 2001 77

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


This is her normal school and this isthe school she is going to attend. Itis normal that the kids living here goto this school; it is the closestprimary school... Fight? Well, I kepther home from school a wholesemester and taught her myselfbecause the town couldn't arrangean educational placement for herfmy italics].

Sara's mother said that she had chosenthe local school because:

This is the school in our area, theclosest school to where we live.And, that is why we insist that aschool, is a school for all, and thatcertain [pupils] should not be pickedaway [excluded].

Another issue that arose in the contextof educational placement was thequestion why the child was referred tothe special education school. It appearedthat the special education school wasconsidered the natural placement forRonny because having an intellectualimpairment meant that he would fail thenational tests which are taken in thesecond and fifth grades. Ronny's mothersaid.

They tested him in the second orthird grade. It's a test that isidentical for all throughout Sweden,and his teacher judged that hewouldn't pass a new test in thefourth or fifth grade. She said that hewouldn't pass the Swedish, English,

or math. No matter how much helpthey could give him, he still wouldn'tpass.

While talking about placement, severalparents discussed the advantages anddisadvantages of their child's presentplacement. Magnus's mother said:

Magnus attends a small class withonly four pupils, it is calmer thereand he can work at his own pace.Another advantage is the teacher... isvery competent and knows a lotabout special education...Those arethe advantages but the disadvantageis that he is a bit isolated. I wish thathe could come into contact withmore children that weren't disabled.

On the other hand, Caroline's mother(special education school) was distressedthat her child's teacher was not moreknowledgeable about sign language.Sara's mother thought that theintegrated setting also improved herchild's learning accomplishments andwas sure that the special educationschools self-contained classes couldnever have helped her daughteraccomplish the theoretical and socialachievements that she had made in theintegrated setting. Emma's mother,though satisfied with the teacher,reported that Emma was not getting theresources she needed in the integratedsetting, nor learning as much as sheshould.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


..she has a very good teacher, onewhom she likes and who likes her.Everyone knows my daughter. Onthe other hand, she doesn't knowevery one, but if something were tohappen...then someone from theschool would let me know. Thoseare the advantages. The disadvantagesin this case are that she is not gettingthe help she needs. She is not goingto master what she needs tolearn...She is far behind in Maths,Swedish, and English.

Even though the classes in the specialeducation school were smaller, the poorbehaviour of other pupils seemed toeffect Ronny negatively. Ronny hadrecently started in the special educationschool, his mother said:

The disadvantage is that there aresome rowdy kids there that might bean explanation for why he hasbecome more rowdy. They seem insome way to get each other workedup. I didn't notice that in the oldclass.

Another topic that was discussed werethe supports and resources needed forthe child to be integrated in a regularclass [no distinction was made betweenenrolment and non-enrolment regardingintegrated placement]. Most of theparents mentioned the need for extrapersonnel, such as a special educator, ateacher's aide, language specialist, andan atmosphere that supports inclusion.Sara's mother summarised her ideas:

Personal aide, and one with a goodform of employment, well educated...the person should be very competentin many areas. There needs to be ateacher, personnel, and a work groupthat wants this and is capable ofgetting things done and changingthings. There needs to be a head-master who can lead this and whocan explain this outwardly topoliticians.

Other supports mentioned were smallerclasses, adjusted teaching methods andsyllabuses, computers, and physicaleducation adapted for children withspecial needs. Johanna's mother feltthat she could not demand the supportsand resources that her daughter neededin the regular class because of thepresent economic cutbacks. In addition,some mothers of children beingeducated in special education classesexpressed concerns about integratingtheir child into a regular class due to thelack of available supports in the school.As August's mother said:

It is very difficult for us to considerputting him in a regular schoolbecause classes have become muchlarger...and there are fewer teachingresources in the classrooms. Therewill have to be a radical change inthe regular school before we put himin there. He has both an older sisterand younger brother, so I know howthe school works. I would not wantto expose him to that. They do nothave time for the pupils.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


Cutbacks have entailed that treatmentsand aides that were recommended byother agencies have not been followed.Emma's mother said that it was writtenin Emma's educational plan (followingthe recommendations from an evaluationcentre) that she should receive supportfrom a special educator 10-12 hours aweek, but to her mother's knowledge,Emma was not receiving that support.In relation to supports and resources,the topic of goal setting was raised.Johanna's and Carolina's mother didnot seem to be aware that their childrenwere entitled to an educational plan.Johanna's' mother said:

No, I don't think we have [a goal]...it seems as if we work according toher pace and then hope that shemakes improvements... I don't knowif they [school staff] have any goals.If they have, then I haven't under-stood that they have told us so...Idon't think that they have a certaingoal for her.

When asked if school and parents writegoals together, Caroline's mother replied:

No, we don't. They have actuallynever asked me what I want fromthe activities in the school. No, theyhave never asked me; they actuallyhaven't. All I've done is look at thecomputer programs and other thingsthat she does.

Beliefs and thoughts regardingintegrated/segregated schooling.

When discussing educational placement,the third theme, integration versussegregation emerged. A patent issueperceived by parents of childreneducated in self-contained classes wasthe wish for more contact with pupil'sin the regular school. Magnus's mothersaid:

..I would like more integration, but Iwould still want the advantages thatthe special education school has;small classes and personnel thatreally understand what it is allabout; but still, that there was moreinteraction; that there was a groupwith pupils who are intellectuallydisabled but they are with the others.

One factor discussed by several parentswas environmental barriers. Two specialeducation schools had expanded and,within the past year moved, into newlybuilt units that were not connected tothe mainstream school. One of themothers mentioned that the situationreminded her of the 1800's. She saidthat the parents had not been informedin advance about the plan to separatethe self-contained classes from theregular school. Distressed about thedevelopment, she went to see theheadmaster and told him:

I thought the whole thing wascrazy... but he didn't think that itwas strange at all. When I told himthat it felt like being thrown out ofthe school, he just said, 'Well, thatwill have to be of your own


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


opinion,'[meaning that he doesn'tagree] though I really did feel that itwas terrible that they could do that.

Sara's mother viewed integration assomething philosophically deeper thaneducational placement, she said:

I think of this as a way of viewinghumanity. What kind of society dowe want? Are some to be left out, orare all to be included in our societyand our school? And if you feel thatway, then it [inclusion] isn't strange.But, if you feel that some belongand others don't, then one makesseveral schools and divides them upin different groups.

Being a parent: personal competenciesand reflections.

The comments from the participantssuggested that having a child withintellectual impairments had a prolongedand challenging influence on their lives.Emma's mother, who has fought theheadmaster and local politicians for anintegrated placement (without enrolment),said that the process has been so tryingthat she has at times felt almost unableto cope. Caroline's mother said:

One should be a doctor, a psychologist,a social worker, and languagepathologist all at once. You need tounderstand and know what yourneeds are, both in regard to yourselfas a parent and what is best for yourchild. But, as I said, you need to

have a basis of simply knowingwhat your rights are. It might not bethe handicap which is mostproblematic but everything elsesurrounding it.

Sara's mother, describing her experienceand the personal competencies shethinks are needed said:

Ever since her birth it has been acontinuous gnawing at all levels andfighting the whole time on someplane in order to explain, convince,motivate everybody and everythingon all levels. But if you are strong-willed, then you will succeed...Youneed to be one of the most competentpeople that has ever walked in a pairof shoes. You need to be stubborn,you have to be very articulate andable to speak up for yourself in allsituations, even when you are beingneglected and are standing there byyourself. You have to be a goodeducator and teacher so that youknow what level your child is on andwhat you should do next. You needto be a good lawyer so that youknow all the laws and paragraphs,all the loopholes, and all the supportyou can get. And never give up,always, when one door closes, findanother one, and then when that onecloses, find a new one. It is difficultto be such a combination of people,and it is hard to have the energy tofight in all instances.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


Discussion

This study provides a description ofhow seven mothers of children withintellectual impairments experience theschool placement process; if they feelable to make a placement choice; andhow they feel about their child's presenteducational placement. Generalisingfrom this study must be done withcaution and is restricted by severalfactors. First, this study is limited to theperspectives and experiences of sevenmothers. Secondly, the results are basedexclusively on statements from oneinterview; no further follow-up contactswere made with the mothers in order toask them to clarify uncertainties derivedfrom the interviews. For this reason, itis not always clear whether the motherswere knowledgeable regarding increasedparental influence as specified by theSFS 1995:1249 law. Sara and Emma'smothers articulate being aware of theirrights (not to enrol their child), but howthis information was obtained was notaddressed in the interview. It is possiblethat other mothers were aware of theirrights but did not execute the right "notto enrol" because due to i.e. economiccutbacks, there was no guarantee ofobtaining support from assistants, andthe regular school had large classes. Itis also unclear how the local schoolsinterpreted the law. In Caroline's case itappears that "integrated placement"may not be an alternative offered by themunicipality for a child enrolled in thespecial education school, and that thechoice to attend a regular class may

only be attained through non-enrolment.However, as mentioned earlier, the localschool obviously did not have thesupports or resources needed to procurea adequate quality education within aregular class. In summary, if parentswant their child to be integrated in aregular class, they must un-enrol theirchild, a strategy which leaves them atthe mercy of the dwindling economyand resources in the local school. Onceagain, these interpretations must beinterpreted with extreme caution as nofollow-up contacts were made witheither the mothers or the local schoolauthorities to verify or clarify thepreviously mentioned postulations.Despite the above mentionedmethodological limitations, the themesdescribed in this paper reflect thefeelings and experiences of theparticipating mothers and are thereforevaluable for the field.

The analysis reveals that the mothers inthis study have a relativistic approachconsidering both contextual factors andtheir child's idiosyncratic needs whenexploring placement options. Thespecial education school, with its smallclasses and specialised teachers, wasperceived by the mothers as offeringresources and supports which theregular school does not. Despitedifferences pertaining to enrolment andtype of placement, both Sara andAugust's mothers felt that they hadinfluenced their child's education andwere satisfied with the instruction andsocial development of their child.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


These findings are consistent withErwin, Soodak et al. (in press), whomaintain that the principle componentsof a well-functioning, parent-schoolrelationship are that parents feel thattheir child is treated well, that schoolstaff treat them (parents) with respect,and that they are viewed as significantresources in decision-making andplanning. The findings in this study arealso congruent with the Erwin et al.(1995) study which asserts that parentsexperience anxiety and frustration whenthey feel that their child is not attainingthe accommodations he/she requires, orwhen they disagree with the professionals.Among, the sources of anxiety orfrustration that parents in this studymentioned were placement options, lackof functional individual educationalprograms (IEP), and teachers who werenot knowledgeable about their child'sspecial education needs. One unantici-pated finding from the present studywas that within the last year (theinterviews took place in 1997), specialeducation schools were moved intounits that were separate from themainstream school. This situationangered and distressed the parents whofelt that their children were being"pushed out," a fundamental questionbeing; Is this a change that is occurringon a national level? Further studies areneeded to determine the extent of andreasons why separate units are beingbuilt. In search for a solution to thequestion of how best practice can bealigned with policy Erwin and Soodak(1995)observed:

In an effort to create moresupportive and effective educationalenvironments for children, schooldistricts must consider their policiesregarding families...However, affordingfamilies consistent opportunity formeaningful involvement in theirchild's education will requirerestructuring of school systems.Parent input is only meaningful in aschool system that values parents aspartners...Hopefully parents will nothave to 'stand up to the system,' butrather they will be seen as anintegral and valued part of thesystem, (p. 145)

Part of the discrepancy betweennational policy and day-to-day practicemay be the result of vaguenessregarding the intentions of the centralgovernment. Bill 1994/95:212 maintainsthat in order for parents to decidebetween the regular school and thespecial education school:

(T)he school has a dialog with them[the parents] and informs them ofthe different school alternatives.This information should include adescription of the requirements thatthe different school alternativesplace on the pupils, identify therequirements guardians are entitledto expect of the school and theschool's resources for meeting thespecial needs of the pupil.Guardians should also be informedthat the regular school has feweravailable resources for designing


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


individualised instruction than thespecial education school.. .while,intellectually disabled children maynot be enrolled in the specialeducation school without theconsent of their guardians, theirguardians are not entitled to choosewhich class their child should beplaced in (p. 16-17, my translationand cursive addition).

As described by the bill parentalinvolvement implies, on the one hand,that parents need and should have moreinput in the school-placement process;on the other hand, parents are notpermitted (when enrolled) to choosewhich class (reading, life-skill based, orintegrated) their child should attend.This macrosystem paradox may alsoexplain the findings in this study whichsuggest that in some municipalities theparents of children who are enrolled arenot offered an "integrated placement";instead the choice they are offered isbetween reading and life-skill classes.The content of the bill only marginallyhighlights the importance of parentalinput and the reason why parentsperceive integration as an importantalternative. The lack of these pers-pectives may be reflected in the factthat some municipalities, schooladministrators, and teachers do notappear to be aware of the humane andideological concerns that underline theintegration/inclusion school movement.The integration/inclusion movementpostulates that it is not a question ofpassing an exam designed for the norm,

but, rather a matter of serving studentswith all abilities and disabilities in theregular classroom with the neededsupport (Bennett, Deluca & Bruns,1997) regardless of whether or not theymeet the regular curriculum standards(Friend & Bursuck, 1999). Ronny wasremoved from a regular class because itwas clear that he could not pass theexams in Maths, Swedish, and Englishin fifth grade, despite the fact that hewas socially included and his motherpreferred the regular classroomplacement. Even though the integration/inclusion movement is more related tohuman rights and social issues, such asbelonging to a school and community,than to academic gains, learning can beenhanced in integrated settings, giventhe needed supports and resources (Hunt& Goetz, 1997). Despite thepredominantly normative stance regardingthe integration/segregation debate (Soder,1999), the results from this studyunderscore the need for genuine options(attending a large class with inadequatesupport and/or passing a national examis not a feasible option), flexiblesolutions, and a meaningful role forparents in the placement process.

The present study also agrees withErwin et al. (1995) in so far as someparents express more frustration overthe shortcomings of the system thantheir child's impairment. The presentstudy supports Mattson's (1995)finding that as a rule parents are notincluded by the school in the goal-setting process. There are also doubts as


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


to whether there are written goalstatements for all of the participatingchildren, or whether teachers instructaccording to the pupil's pace. The lackof IEPs and routines regarding goalsetting appear to be especiallyfrustrating when evaluation centreshave made recommendations to parentswhich are not followed up in theschools. A discussion concerning thelack of interagency collaborationbetween parents, schools, evaluation,and/or habilitation centres is beyond thescope of this paper. Nevertheless, thesharing of information and developmentof communication channels betweenagencies would undoubtedly ease thepreviously mentioned feelings offrustration. Mattson (1995) observesthat teachers have difficulties definingobjectives, planning, and evaluating.Roll-Pettersson (1999) found that ahigh percentage of teachers need moreinformation on how to teach their pupil(57%, n= 41 teachers of 93 pupils), onhow to write educational plans (41%,n=41 teachers of 93 pupils), and thatmore time needs to be allocated to writethem (61%, n= 41 teachers of 93pupils). An example on what could beincluded in the goal-setting process canbe found in the American Public LawIndividuals with Disabilities EducationAct, 1997 (Heufner, 2000), which statesthat the IEP (Individual EducationProgram) which is both a meeting(parents must be included) and adocument, includes a statement ofpresent performance, measurableannual goals, measurable short-term

objectives, a statement of specialeducation and related services, andevaluation procedures, i.e., how progresstoward the annual goals should bemeasured. Further implications of theIDEA are that teachers will need towork cooperatively with parents aspartners and that "dumping" a childwith an impairment in a regular classwithout needed supports is "totallyunacceptable" (see Heufner, 2000,citations p. 203). It is clear whenanalysing the data from the interviewsthat there is an ongoing interactionbetween contextual factors (type or lackof placement options) and individualcharacteristics (parents who are willingand able to defend their rights). Distalfactors, such as paradoxes and vaguenessin the law regarding parental involve-ment do have an effect on proximalsettings (i.e. schools' and local politicians'interpretations of parental involvementregarding placement, the child failsnational test, and interpretation of thisevent) and exert an impact on parents.For this reason, it is pertinent to suggestthat law makers re-examine the contentin the Education Act in regard toparental involvement and input.Following a change in macrosystemdocuments, researchers can then workwith parents, local school authorities,schools, and other agencies (i.e.evaluation centres and professions inhabilitation centres) to develop moreexplicit guidelines on how to enhancethe development of parental involvementin both the education of the child and inthe placement process. This will


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


undoubtedly also require restructuringexosystem variables, such as allocationof resources in municipalities andimproving teacher and school administratoreducation within this area.

Acknowledgements: Preparation of this articlewas supported by a grant from the ClasGrosinsky Foundation. I gratefullyacknowledge the guidance and help fromProf. Siv Fischbein.

Note:1 In this article "integrated placement" refers

to enrolment in the special education school.Terms such as 'attend a regular class' or'integrated' are used interchangeably,regardless of whether or not this involvesenrolment in the special education school.

References:Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Recent advances in

research on human development. In R.K.Silbereisen, K, Eyferth, & G. Rudinger(Eds.), Development as action in context:Problem behavior and normal youthdevelopment (pp. 287-309). Heidelberg:Springer-Verlag.

Bennett, T., Deluca, D., & Bruns, D. (1997).Putting Inclusion Into Practice:

Perspectives of Teachers and Parents.Exceptional Children, 64, 1, 115-131.

Curriculum for the Compulsory School System(1994). Lpo-94. Stockholm: Utbildnings-departement.

Education Act and Compulsory SchoolOrdinance (1996). Göteborg: Förlagshuset

Göteborg.Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L. &

Allen, S. D. (1993). Doing NaturalisticInquiry: A guide to methods. London: SagePublications.

Erwin, E. J. & Soodak, L. C. (1995). I neverknew I could stand up to the system:Families' perspectives on pursuing inclusive

education. The Journal of the Associationfor Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25, 2,136-146.

Erwin, E. J., Soodak, L. C., Winton, P. J. &Turnbull, A. (in print). I wish it all wouldn'tdepend on me. In M. J. Guralnick (Eds),Early childhood inclusion: Focus on change.Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Fischbein, S, Malmgren-Hansen, A., Allodi-Westing, M. & Roll-Pettersson, L. (1997).Elever i special pedagogisk verksamhet:Delrapport 1: Planering och genomförande.[Pupils in Special Educational Settings:Report 1: Planning and carrying through].Stockholm: Institutionen för special-pedagogik, HLS förlag.

Friend, M. & Bursuck, W. D. (1999). IncludingStudents with Special Needs: A practicalguide for Classroom teachers. Boston: Allynand Bacon.

Government Bill, 1994/95:212 (1995). Ökatföräldrainflytande över utvecklingsstördabarns skolgång – en försöksverksamhet[Increased parental influence over theEducation of intellectually disabled children– during a trial period]. Stockholm.

Heufner, D. S. (2000). The risks andopportunities of the IEP requirements underIDEA '97. The Journal of SpecialEducation, 33, 4, 195-204.

Hunt, P & Goetz, L. (1997). Research oninclusive educational programs practices,and outcomes for students with severedisabilities. The Journal of SpecialEducation, 31, 1, 3-9.

Mattson, E. (1995). Parents' and teachers' viewson the schooling of children with motorhandicaps. European Journal of SpecialNeeds Education, 10, 3, 249-257.

Miles, M.B. & Huberman, M.A. (1994). AnExpanded Sourcebook, Qualitative DataAnalysis. London: Sage Publications.

National Agency for Education (1997).Skolverkets rapport nr. 135: Beskrivandedata om skolverksamheten. [Descriptive dataregarding school]. Stockholm: Liber.

National Agency for Education, (2000a).Dramatisk ökning av särskolelever[Dramatic increase of pupils in the special


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4


education school]. Dagens Nyheter (TheDaily News), 00- 04-14.

National Agency for Education, (2000b). Hursärskild får man vara? En analys Avelevökning i särskolan. [How special canone be? An analysis of the increasedenrolment of pupils in the special educationschool].

Persson, B. (1995). Specialpedagogiskt arbete igrundskolan: En studie av förutsättningar,genomförande och verksamhetsinriktning[Special Education in the ComprehensiveSchool- A Study of its prerequisites, practiceand direction of action]. Göteborg:Göteborgs Universitet, Institutionen förSpecialpedagogik.

Roll-Pettersson, L. R. (2001). Teachers'perceptions of supports and resourcesneeded in regard to pupils with specialeducational needs in Sweden. Education andtraining in mental retardation anddevelopmental disabilities; 36, 4254.

Roll-Pettersson, L. R. (submitted). Needs ofparents with children receiving Specialeducation support.

Roll-Pettersson, L (1999). Specialpedagogiskverksamhet utifrån lärares och föräldrarsbehov [Special education practices describedfrom teacher and parental perspectives].Stockholm: HLS förlag.

Roll-Pettersson, L. R. Granlund, M. & Steenson(1999). Upplevda behov av råd och stöd hosfamiljer och klasslärare till barn i särskolan.In M. Granlund, et al. (Eds.) Elever medflera funktionsnedsättningar i särskolan-utbildningens effekter och effektivitet [Pupilswith several disabilities in the specialeducation school- the effect andeffectiveness of education]. Stockholm:Stiftelsen, ala, 105-213.

Rosenquist, J. & Tideman, M. (2000). Skolan,undervisningen och elever medfunktionshinder: Ett diskussionsunderlag påväg mot en teori om special pedagogik[School, instruction and students withdisabilities: Basis for discussion toward atheory of special education]. Mälmö:Lärarhogskolan.

SFS 1995:1249 (1995). Lag omförsöksverksamhet med ökatföräldrainflytande over utvecklingsstördabarns skolgång [Law regarding a trail periodwith increased parental influence over theEducation of intellectually disabledchildren]. Stockholm.

Söder, M. (1999). Specialpedagogisk forskningmellan det kliniska och det Kontextuella:Syntesrapport till och omforskningsprogrammet "Specsialpedagogiskkunnskaps og tiltaksutvikling" [Specialeducation research between the clinical andcontextual: The development of knowledgeand Initiatives in Special Education]. Bodo,Norway: Nordlandsforskning.

Tideman, M. (1998). I gränslandet mellangrundskola och sdrskola. Intervjuer medföräldrar till barn som blivit individuelltintegrerade. [On the boarder Between theSpecial Education School and the RegularSchool. Interviews with Parents whoseChildren have been Individually Integrated].Halmstad: Wigefors Institute.

Werts, M. G., Wolery, M., Snyder, E. D.,Caldweli, N. K. & Salisbury, C. L. (1996).Supports and Resources associated withinclusive schooling: Perceptions ofelementary school teachers about need andavailability. The Journal of SpecialEducation. 30, 2, 187-203.

Williams, L J. & Downing, J. E. (1998).Membership and belonging in inclusiveclassrooms: What do middle school studentshave to say? The Journal of the Associationfor Persons with Severe Handicaps. 23, 2,98-110.

The Author: Lise Roll-Pettersson, Ph.D.lecturer in special education at theStockholm Institute of Education,Department of Human Development,Learning and Special Education. Lise Roll-Pettersson has previously worked as ateacher in the special education school andas a researcher at the ALA researchfoundation in Stockholm.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r L

ibra

ry]

at 1

4:43

08

Oct

ober

201

4

mothers voice their perceptions about their children's educational placement

Documents