The special needs unit

In the next section I discuss the features of the special needs unit in the context of the local school used in this study.

4.4.3.1 The entry policy

As was noted earlier, in the context of this research project, the decisions of who is a learner with SEN is dependent on government policy, the Northern Territory Policy on the Enrolment of learners with disabilities in special schools and special centres (Section 1.3) (Department of Education and Learner Services, 2012). Accordingly, for learners to be placed in a special centre requires a formal diagnosis that shows impaired cognitive functioning, deficits in two or more adaptive functions, and an intellectual level below average.

A challenge emerging from the policy stance is the requirement of a formal diagnosis or label. As was noted in an earlier chapter, in spite of the

disenfranchisement with labelling (Section 2.4.2.2 (i)), labels are still the primary vehicle for getting learners the assistance and resources that they need in a school setup. Without these, learners are not able to access the special

173 centre services nor are they able to access additional government funding to support them at school. To this end, the system's formula resembles a very clear chain of reasoning: no diagnosis = no funding = no additional support. In other words, Goldstein, Arkell, Ashcroft, Hurley, and Lilley's (1975) reference to a label as the "passport to special education" (p. 17) is still relevant and applicable today. Since access to psychologists is scarce in this part of

Australia, the school hires a private psychologist to conduct assessments at set times throughout the year.

It is important to realise that the current policy stipulations give precedence to disability, and in particular to cognitive impairment, by excluding learners with emotional-behavioural challenges and learners who are disadvantaged in a school setting because of cultural-linguistic factors and/or socio-economic circumstances. Equally important, the perspective of the policy suggests a strong alignment with the medical model (Section 2.2.4) by basing special education on the fundamental assumptions that disability is a condition that individuals have, that a disabled/not-disabled distinction between learners is useful and objective, that special education is a coordinated system of services that helps learners who are labelled, and that progress in the field is made by improving diagnoses (Bogdan and Kugelmass, 1984, p. 178–179). Although the policy for entry into SEN units appears rational in its orientation, I find its restrictions on special education positivistic and reductionist in nature, and I prefer to align myself with broader, more inclusive definitions of special education to include learners who are finding negotiating school environments challenging with or without a formal diagnosis.

4.4.3.2 The entry procedures

In accordance with the RtI model, the school considers general teaching in the classroom as tier one. Second wave learners are accommodated in resource rooms, where programmes such as MultiLit and QuickSmart are run by

174 paraprofessionals to assist these learners in closing the gap. The learners in the research sample largely fit into the third wave or tier where they are identified as individual and intensive intervention and where they have been referred for psychometric testing. To explain, learners are placed in the special needs unit after mainstream teachers have made the recommendation for referral, a specialist such as a psychologist or medical practitioner has confirmed a diagnosis, and parents and carers were consulted and gave consent for the transfer from mainstream into a special needs unit. In the context of this study, the cohort of learners has proverbially speaking "been through the mill". In other words, these learners did not achieve the measures of success hoped for in a general classroom and for this reason they tend to enter into the SEN unit with a long history of academic failures trailing behind them.

4.4.3.3 The characteristics of the unit

As per trends noted in literature (see Section 2.3.1), the special needs unit of the school represents a disproportionate number of minority group learners and male learners. The unit has grown from one to six classes over the period of three years since it was first established. Class sizes in the unit average between three and nine learners. Typically, each classroom has a teacher and a LSA. The teachers and staff work fairly closely with the Student Services Division with respect to EAPs. The lesson structures run off a timetable and are each 55 minutes long. Learners typically have mathematics every day after recess. Learners with SEN stay in their class with their class teacher

throughout the day, except for the times when they attend mainstream classes for specialised subjects such as Art, Design and Technology, Multimedia,

Gardening and/or Cooking. They do not join mainstream classes during these

sessions, rather they are taught by mainstream teachers in the mainstream section of the school to facilitate release time for SEN teachers.

175 4.4.3.4 The sample from within the unit

I worked at the school as a teacher and wanted to use my class in the study for several reasons. These included convenience, but more importantly, it is my experience that behaviours of certain learners with SEN change when

newcomers are introduced into settings. In other words, some learners respond differently to someone with whom they are familiar than how they react to a stranger. Moreover, the fact that the learners were familiar with me and I with them helped me to personalise the design to our context. Additionally, by having my own class participate in the study, I had more time with the learners during the day to evaluate the overall effect of the intervention from a

perspective that would not be possible if the learners were not with me during their school day. For example, I could document examples of spontaneous transfer of their mathematical learning to other classroom activities. On the negative side, being the teacher of the class creates ethical issues such as the power imbalance between the learners and the teacher-researcher. These ethical issues and how they were addressed are discussed in detail near the end of this chapter (Section 4.10).

Patton (2003, p. 5) distinguishes twelve different types of purposeful sampling strategies. From his list I have selected the following as applicable and

relevant to this study:

● Typical case sampling. The cases that I have selected to write about in the research represent some of the more typical profiles common to SEN classes, namely, autism, global developmental delay, and foetal alcohol syndrome.

● Maximum variation sampling. I have purposefully picked a wider range of cases as opposed to autism only, for example, to get a variation on

different profiles of learners with SEN, and how learners with different levels of mathematical abilities respond.

176 The way the learners were invited to participate in the research is discussed at length in a later section of this chapter (Section 4.10). For now it will suffice to say that the families were contacted and the research was discussed with them, following which the learners of the families who gave their consent were invited through a mediator to participate. Only in cases where both the families and the learners themselves agreed to the study, were data collected from the learner and analysed for the purposes of the study. At the same time, all learners in the class (nine in total) participated in the activities as per their normal mathematics lesson for the day.

4.4.3.5 The class itself

i) Physical layout

For the last one and a half years I have been training in the NMT/NME model (see Section 2.4.3.2) and have been grappling with the meaning of their principles as it applies to classroom practice. With this in mind, I made an effort to increasingly reflect these principles in my own setting. For example, to allow for rocking movements, I have a swing chair in my classroom of the type one would normally place in a garden, a porch, or on a patio. Additionally, there are several swivel chairs that can rotate 360 degrees, a couch in one corner with a soft blanket on it, and several bean bags scattered around the room. In the middle of the room there are two round tables where the learners do group work. The learners also have individual tables along the side of the classroom walls. Lastly, the room has a side room adjacent to it, almost like a study, which contains a table with a few chairs and two steel cupboards against the wall to store classroom resources.

177 ii) Staff

I worked with a LSA who is with the class all day in a full-time capacity. Her role is to support the learners by assisting them with tasks where necessary, dealing with behaviours, and building positive relationships. She is not assigned to a particular learner but to the group as a whole and accompanies the learners wherever they go, that is, to different teachers and classes, throughout the day. During our discussion of the research prior to its launch, I asked that she assume a minimal role by not helping any of the learners with the task itself, that is to take care not to "solve the problem for them". For the most part, she assumed the role of an observer, watching from the side of the room as the learners tried to solve the problems, while occasionally chatting with them and checking up on their well-being.