Inclusion Policies in Two UK Countries : vernacular responses to global influence

publishedVersio

Bridging the theory and practice of eliciting the voices of young children::findings from the Look Who’s Talking Project

To foster children and young people’s skills, dispositions and understanding that underpin a voice agenda, practices need to be developed that support this from the earliest age. This article explores issues relating to this complex, challenging and under-researched area from the perspective of practitioners working with children aged from birth to seven. Using vignettes of practice, we explore practical and pedagogical examples and take the opportunity to deepen our understanding of the elicitation of voice through the lens of the eight factors previously identified in the Look Who’s Talking Project. Through this approach we highlight practices that elicit voice as a key element of children’s rights in a localised way, and exemplify productive connections between theory and practice

Development of teacher self-efficacy for teaching in rural schools in the circumpolar north:Lessons for teacher education

Teachers across the circumpolar north often share similar experiences working in small communities in remote areas with distinctive cultures and livelihoods. However, teacher education programmes tend to be universal, ignoring an ecological understanding of teaching. This paper describes the findings from a desktop study investigating the specific demands made of teachers working in rural schools and the implications for teacher education in supporting them to develop the necessary self-efficacy for this role. The results indicate that attention to specific teaching and teacher competences is required but that this must be undertaken with an awareness of the importance of place-based education

Look Who’s Talking: Eliciting the Voices of Children from Birth to Seven

First paragraph: Look who’s talking: Eliciting the voices of children from birth to seven was an international seminar series funded by the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, that brought together researchers and practitioners who work with young children (birth to seven) to give and support ‘voice’ in respect to different aspects of their lived experience; in other words, to elicit voice. The intention was to create a space for individuals working in this relatively underdeveloped field to work in a collaborative process, engaging with associated theory and practice. The aims of the seminars were: to move debate forwards; to develop guidelines and provocations for practice; and to advance understandings of the affordances and constraints on the implementation of Article 12 of the UNCRC with young children. The series comprises two seminars, one in January and one in June 2017, each of three and a half days duration. The first focused predominantly on mapping the field, sharing and discussing experiences and practices and exploring the affordances and constraints of eliciting the voices of those aged seven and under. It is this seminar on which this submission focuses. The second, held in June 2017, aimed to synthesise participants’ thinking and identify the needs and opportunities for development within the field

Analysis of Policies Supporting Teachers to Tackle Linguistic and Cultural Diversity and Facilitate Inclusion from the Perspectives of Iceland and the Faroe Islands

In today’s fast changing multicultural societies, governments and organisations must use their agency to ensure the contribution and inclusion of all cultures and ethnicities. A key factor for enabling this is ensuring education plays a leading role in facilitating the creation of an inclusive society. In this context, the education of teachers must be a priority given the reach and impact teachers have on a society. Therefore, teacher education with its role in preparing pre-service teachers for teaching in a multicultural setting is uniquely placed to enable focus on and engender a foundation for enabling inclusivity, equality and social justice in education. The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the policy framework needed for preparing preservice teachers to work with learners from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. The aim is to gain knowledge and understanding of how the concepts of inclusion and culturally responsive pedagogy are reflected in teacher education policy in the island nations of Iceland and the Faroe IslandsPeer reviewe

Developing inclusive practice in Scotland: the National Framework for Inclusion

Introduction and context Developing the Framework Principles of the revised National Framework for Inclusion Reflections on the collaborative processes in developing the Framework Using the Framework Conclusion References Full Article Figures & data References Citations Metrics Reprints & Permissions PDF Abstract This paper reports on the collaborative development of a ‘National Framework for Inclusion’ under the auspices of the Scottish Teacher Education Committee by a working party representing each of the Scottish Universities providing initial teacher education. Recent research, international legislation and Scottish education policy have refocused the notion of ‘special educational needs’ based on ideas of individual deficit to support and provision for all learners. As teachers are therefore charged with responsibility for an increasingly diverse population of learners, the National Framework of Inclusion was developed to support both pre-service and qualified teachers to work inclusively to provide fair and meaningful experiences for all learners. The paper examines the underpinning principles of the Framework, describes the collaborative process of its development and provides one innovative example of its use

Addition of four doses of rituximab to standard induction chemotherapy in adult patients with precursor B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (UKALL14): a phase 3, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Treatment for adults with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia requires improvement. UKALL14 was a UK National Cancer Research Institute Adult ALL group study that aimed to determine the benefit of adding the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, rituximab, to the therapy of adults with de novo B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. METHODS: This was an investigator-initiated, phase 3, randomised controlled trial done in all UK National Health Service Centres treating patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (65 centres). Patients were aged 25-65 years with de-novo BCR-ABL1-negative acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Patients with de-novo BCR-ABL1-positive acute lymphoblastic leukaemia were eligible if they were aged 19-65 years. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to standard-of-care induction therapy or standard-of-care induction therapy plus four doses of intravenous rituximab (375 mg/m2 on days 3, 10, 17, and 24). Randomisation used minimisation and was stratified by sex, age, and white blood cell count. No masking was used for patients, clinicians, or staff (including the trial statistician), although the central laboratory analysing minimal residual disease and CD20 was masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was event-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all participants who started trial treatment. This study is registered with ClincialTrials.gov, NCT01085617. FINDINGS: Between April 19, 2012, and July 10, 2017, 586 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care (n=292) or standard of care plus rituximab (n=294). Nine patients were excluded from the final analysis due to misdiagnosis (standard of care n=4, standard of care plus rituximab n=5). In the standard-of-care group, median age was 45 years (IQR 22-65), 159 (55%) of 292 participants were male, 128 (44%) were female, one (<1%) was intersex, and 143 (59%) of 244 participants had high-risk cytogenetics. In the standard-of-care plus rituximab group, median age was 46 years (IQR 23-65), 159 (55%) of 294 participants were male, 130 (45%) were female, and 140 (60%) of 235 participants had high-risk cytogenetics. After a median follow-up of 53·7 months (IQR 40·3-70·4), 3-year event-free survival was 43·7% (95% CI 37·8-49·5) for standard of care versus 51·4% (45·4-57·1) for standard of care plus rituximab (hazard ratio [HR] 0·85 [95% CI 0·69-1·06]; p=0·14). The most common adverse events were infections and cytopenias, with no difference between the groups in the rates of adverse events. There were 11 (4%) fatal (grade 5) events in induction phases 1 and 2 in the standard-of-care group and 13 (5%) events in the standard-of-care plus rituximab group). 3-year non-relapse mortality was 23·7% (95% CI 19·0-29·4) in the standard-of-care group versus 20·6% (16·2-25·9) in the standard-of-care plus rituximab group (HR 0·88 [95% CI 0·62-1·26]; p=0·49). INTERPRETATION: Standard of care plus four doses of rituximab did not significantly improve event-free survival over standard of care. Rituximab is beneficial in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia but four doses during induction is likely to be insufficient. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and Blood Cancer UK