Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Use and abuse of resources for inclusive education: an overview of findings from Armenia, Serbia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine
Similar to Use and abuse of resources for inclusive education: an overview of findings from Armenia, Serbia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Use and abuse of resources for inclusive education: an overview of findings from Armenia, Serbia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine
- 1. Use and abuse of resources for inclusive education An overview of findings from Armenia, Serbia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine Mihaylo Milovanovitch Center for Applied Policy and Integrity Olja Jovanović University of Belgrade and Center for Applied Policy and Integrity
- 3. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Background of our research • Despite considerable efforts, in many countries progress with inclusive education remains a challenge • The process of change can be disruptive and disrupted at the same time, with multiple barriers emerging that can hinder progress • We wanted to know whether some of these disruptions involve illicit or illegal practices, and what role education policies may play in that
- 4. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity What did we want to know? • Explore the human side of experiences connected to acts of corruption in education as conveyed by those involved. • Our focus was on inclusive education in four countries • What part of the risk to IE is due to integrity problems, and how exactly do these problems prevent progress with IE reforms? • What role do reform plans and education policies play in that?
- 5. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Why resources in IE? • Most common area of complaint • Most often associated with corruption • Most of the hearsay is about abuse of resources, but evidence of that is rare • Policies and IE reforms put resource provision mechanisms at the frontline of IE change – is this the best way and how does that play out in practice?
- 7. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Conceptual framework: INTES • Initiated in 2010 in the framework of the OECD Anti-Corruption Network for Eastern Europe and Central Asia • Between 2010 and now, integrity assessments carried out in Serbia, Tunisia, Armenia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Georgia, Moldova, Mongolia, and Kyrgyzstan • Most recent focus: pre-school education; inclusive education; integrity in the use of resources
- 8. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Adverse circumstances in education Problematic conduct Causal model of corruption in education Education participant Adverse circumstances in education Motivation Opportunity Integrity violations (IVs)
- 9. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity 2. Why does it happen? Incentives/motives 1. What is happening in (inclusive) education? Description of integrity violations 3. How can it happen? Opportunities Conduct Professional environment The guiding questions
- 10. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Research methodology The research was conducted in Armenia, Kazakhstan, Serbia and Ukraine. • First phase: questionnaire with resource persons (presented at ECER 2017) provided initial signals that we are on the right track • Second phase: broadening and deepening the data-base through focus group discussions aimed at exploring the manifestations of integrity violations in inclusive education and their underlying mechanisms (2 FGs per country) • Third phase: three-day country workshops aiming to reach mutual understanding of different stakeholders on integrity issues and create action plan
- 11. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Data collection Broader questions on manifestations of integrity violations in inclusive education in the specific country Presentation of nine integrity violations and asking participants to share as much as possible of illustrations of these violations In-depth exploration of the most common integrity violations • A total of eight focus groups in local language, using funnel approach • The discussions were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and translated in English
- 12. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Sample • Purposive sampling (Krueger & Casey, 2015) • Participants differing in their position in the educational system, field of expertise and attitudes toward inclusive education. • Sample was constructed through snowball method based on consultations with local experts. Stakeholder group Country Total Armenia Kazakhstan Serbia Ukraine Parents 2 6 4 2 14 Regular education 2 2 4 7 16 Special education 1 / 2 1 4 Civil society organisation 5 2 7 4 18 International organisation 5 / 3 / 8 National government 1 2 1 1 5 Local or regional government 1 / 1 / 2 Assessment bodies 1 1 1 1 3 Academia and research institutes 2 3 / 2 7 Total 20 16 23 18 77
- 13. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Approach to the analysis of data Whichsegmentsdescribemisuseofresources? (N=78; ICA=84.5%) Does thesegmentdescribeintegrity violation? (N=205; ICA=69.1%) How does a misuseof resourcesmanifest itself? (9 categories verified through the process of peer debriefing) Whichpolicy gapsenablemisuseofresources? (11 categories verified through the process of peer debriefing)
- 14. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Conduct and practices in inclusive education: INTEGRITY VIOLATIONS
- 15. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Prevalence of resource abuse in IE Frequency by number of segments
- 16. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity IE resource abuse by target and purpose Illicit attraction of resources Misuse of entrusted resources Human resources Financial resources 52 44 49 39 Frequency by number of segments and target
- 17. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Common forms of illicit resource attraction Codes Manifestation 1 Illicit resource attraction through manipulation of access to IE 18 45.0% 1a Through manipulation of needs assessments 1b Through IOPs 2 Illicit resource attraction through additional IE-related services 7 17.5% 2a Through inflating the cost for additional IE services 2b Through misstating the need for additional IE services 3 Allocation of resources for IE based on alternative (political) loyalties 3 7.5% 4 Illicit resource attraction through fraudulent reporting on IE 12 30.0% 4a On student achievement (grades) 4b On exam-related student needs 45.0% 17.5% 7.5% 30.0% 1. “Schools with small number of students where teachers are at risk of loosing job, they start lobbying for enrolment of children with disability and suddenly assign IEP to some students, and that is manipulation.” 2. “For example, in some municipalities where services are well developed, child is assigned with a speech therapist and defectologist, so the services start accumulating around the child. In one school in the capital, each year they have exactly 10 students who need special pedagogue. If you start calculating, you will notice that this is the amount of work needed for the full employment of two special pedagogues” 3. “Additional funding for schools is directed to "our own" principals. 4. “We have situation in which children do not receive any support, and that two months before enrolment to secondary school teachers suddenly ask for IEP with adjusted achievement standards”
- 18. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Common forms of HR-related abuse in IE Codes Manifestation 5 Favouritism* in appointments to positions in IE 17 70.8% 5a To teaching positions 5b To supporting positions 5c To both 6 Favouritism* in the distribution of workplace advantages in IE 7 29.2% 6a Granting of IE-related bonus payments 6b Reduction of IE-related workload 70.8% 29.2% 5. “With a real lack of professional rehabilitologists, children psychologists etc, school principals take relatives or friends instead of training new people or search for a specialist.” 5. “Inclusive education gives more opportunity to hire relatives for work because there are more places for work, and it means more people can come.” 6. Children with disability are assigned only to certain teachers.”
- 19. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Common forms of financial abuse in IE Codes Manifestation 7 Diversion of funds for IE 8 61.5% 8 Intentional failure to provide a service 3 23.1% 9 Payroll fraud 2 15.4% 9a Ghost employees 9b Staff misclassification 9c Timesheet/workload fraud 61.5% 23.1% 15.4% 7. “I’d like to say that I heard about this from a parent when a child was transferred to another inclusive school, the parent actually found out that they were supposed to get transportation costs. For 2 years they had been in an inclusive school before, but they never received any money for transportation. My personal observations show that transportation costs were provided to the schools and the parent didn’t know about this and didn’t get it.” 8. “No home visits are done though the specialists’ records show they have done them.” 9. “One of the findings was that that one of the members, I think it was a member of the multidisciplinary team, was a dead body. A contract was signed, but this person, this person, in a word. This work kind of creates an opportunity, for instance, to have a teacher as a dead body would be difficult, this teacher must teach, go to school every day, sign in the register. But the system of the multidisciplinary team creates a possibility for having dead bodies.”
- 20. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Inclusive education environments: POLICIES AND VULNERABLE AREAS
- 21. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Integrity vulnerabilities and their prevalence VA No. VA areas VA1 Scarce budget for additional support in mainstream education VA2 Qualification requirements for specialist/supporting positions are not clearly defined VA3 There is a shortage of specialists VA4 Lack of support, guidance, and professional development for non-teaching staff VA5 Precarious or otherwise unsatisfactory working and employment conditions of teachers VA6 Lack of support, guidance, and professional development for teachers in IE VA7 Funding of IE is input based and relies on assessment of students' needs* VA8 Lack of support and guidence related to evaluation of students' achievement** VA9 Arbitrariness in the needs assessment of children VA10 Lack of transparency and accountability in the management of financial resources**** VA11 Criteria for school performance and education quality do not take into account inclusive education Frequency by share of VA segments 21.9% 3.5% 7.9% 5.3% 4.4% 15.8% 14.9% 8.8% 10.5% 5.3% 1.8%
- 22. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity VA No. VA areas Human resources Financial resources VA1 Scarce budget for additional support in mainstream education VA2 Qualification requirements for specialist/supporting positions are not clearly defined VA3 There is a shortage of specialists VA4 Lack of support, guidance, and professional development for non-teaching staff VA5 Precarious or otherwise unsatisfactory working and employment conditions of teachers VA6 Lack of support, guidance, and professional development for teachers in IE VA7 Funding of IE is input based and relies on assessment of students' needs* VA8 Lack of support and guidence related to evaluation of students' achievement** VA9 Arbitrariness in the needs assessment of children VA10 Lack of transparency and accountability in the management of financial resources**** VA11 Criteria for school performance and education quality do not take into account inclusive education Area of integrity impact of vulnerabilities
- 23. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Significance from stakeholder perspective VA1 Scarce budget for additional support in mainstream education VA2 Qualification requirements for specialist/supporting positions are not clearly defined VA3 There is a shortage of specialists VA4 Lack of support, guidance, and professional development for non-teaching staff VA5 Precarious or otherwise unsatisfactory working and employment conditions of teachers VA6 Lack of support, guidance, and professional development for teachers in IE VA7 Funding of IE is input based and relies on assessment of students' needs* VA8 Lack of support and guidence related to evaluation of students' achievement** VA9 Arbitrariness in the needs assessment of children VA10 Lack of transparency and accountability in the management of financial resources**** VA11 Criteria for school performance and education quality do not take into account inclusive education 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Motivation Opportunity
- 24. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Vulnerabilities by geographical distribution VA No. VA areas VA1 Scarce budget for additional support in mainstream education VA2 Qualification requirements for specialist/supporting positions are not clearly defined VA3 There is a shortage of specialists VA4 Lack of support, guidance, and professional development for non-teaching staff VA5 Precarious or otherwise unsatisfactory working and employment conditions of teachers VA6 Lack of support, guidance, and professional development for teachers in IE VA7 Funding of IE is input based and relies on assessment of students' needs* VA8 Lack of support and guidence related to evaluation of students' achievement** VA9 Arbitrariness in the needs assessment of children VA10 Lack of transparency and accountability in the management of financial resources**** VA11 Criteria for school performance and education quality do not take into account inclusive education
- 25. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Preliminary conclusions • Input based IE funding together with underdeveloped assessment procedures, tools and competencies of staff encourage the labelling of students as having additional needs and create “calculating” instead of inclusive schools. Resources alone cannot make education inclusive. • Lack of support, guidance, and professional development for teachers and non-teaching staff coupled with quality assurance mechanisms focused on document-based deliverables create incentives and opportunities for schools not to provide educational services, but to provide documents on delivering educational services. • Scarce resources devoted to schools with high demands from schools, create urge to use different sources, such as parental donations. When there is no system-level solution, quality of available support depends on parents’ resources. • Although similar, there are also significant differences among countries regarding IV manifestations and policy gaps. Therefore, recommendations must be context-specific and locally owned.
- 26. CenterforAppliedPolicyandIntegrity@educationintegrity Thank you! @educationintegrity | www.policycenters.org mihaylo@policycenters.org oljajovanovic.ps@gmail.com
Editor's Notes
- Despite the considerable activity in many countries to move educational policy and practice in a more inclusive direction (Mittler, 2000), inclusion remains a challenge that faces educational systems all over the world. Some of the reasons lie in different understandings of inclusion (Dyson, 1999) that can contribute to a disparity in expectations and a sense of uncertainty. These observations apply to the process of developing inclusive education as well. This process can be disruptive and disrupted at the same time: disruptive for educators and education systems by challenging their established ways and convictions, and disrupted by them as they resist the required changes in a multitude of ways that can hinder or even block the process of transition to inclusiveness
- The goal of our study is to contribute to a better understanding of the human side of experiences connected to acts of corruption in education as conveyed by those involved: educators, parents, civil society and authorities. Our focus is on inclusive education (IE). In the four countries we covered, IE is a relatively new, but also challenging priority, which may put IE reforms at risk. The challenges include resistance to change, a historic legacy of special education systems and institutions, questions about managing the inevitable clashes between old practices and novelties (Kovač Cerović, Jovanović, Pavlović Babić, 2016), and how to translate new policies into manageable working practices (Rose, Shevlin, Winter, O’Raw, & Zhao, 2012). Such dilemmas are quite common to countries in Eurasia and may put IE at risk of being confronted with corrupt practices, abolished or faked. . As a new policy focusing particularly on the education and integration of children and youth from vulnerable groups in developing countries, especially in Southeast Europe, Caucasus and Central Asian regions, and as a priority envisioned to create more equitable and just societies, the dream of inclusive education captures the interests of human rights activists and parents. But there are also a number of challenges. These two stakeholder groups are still relatively new and in traditional ex-communist countries were rarely faced as source of influence and demands. An additional obstacle is the fact that these countries have also inherited a well-developed special education system and a network of special institutions. They are also engaged in ongoing and often times politically sensitive discussions about minority rights, such as those related to the integration of the Roma. Even in settings in which there is a consensus about the need and direction of change towards inclusiveness, inclusive education can bring up difficult questions, such as what the right balance is between policy borrowing and authentic developments/solutions, how to manage the inevitable clashes between old practices and novelties (Kovač Cerović, Jovanović, Pavlović Babić, 2016), and how to translate the new policies into managable working practices in order to enable successful learning outcomes to be achieved (Rose, Shevlin,Winter, O’Raw, & Zhao, 2012).
- Most common area of complaint Most often associated with corruption Most of the hearsay is about abuse of resources, but evidence of that is rare Policies and IE reforms put resource provision mechanisms are at the frontline of IE change – how does that play out in practice?
- Data: Comparison of resource abuse with all violations Comparison with all violations by country Comments: We found various forms of problematic conduct (integrity violations) in IE. These are all the forms that we came across with, which are quite identical with those we knew from regular education. However, in the experience of principals, teachers, parents and CSOs, inclusive education integrity violations around abuse of resources were the second most-frequent integrity violation in their respective countries/
- Data: Distinction between Type 1 and Type 2 with examples Data: Distinction between human and financial resources Note: when it comes to illicit actions to attract resources, it is impossible to say whether the actions were aiming at financial or human resources, and the main reason for that is that in all countries the criteria and mechanisms for the allocation of such resources are the same for both money and staff. This in itself is already an integrity problem.
- Data: Here we show the main categories of Type 1 and cross-country comparison Data: We do not show data for the sub-categories, just quotes
- Data: Explain the subcategories of IV5. Provide an example for each 5.5 and 5.6. Show data on distribution for each subcategory by country Then provide an example for each sub-subcategory
- Data: Explain the subcategories of IV5. Provide an example for each 6.5, 6.6 and 6.7. Show data on distribution for each subcategory by country Then provide an example for each sub-subcategory
- 1. Input based IE funding together with underdeveloped assessment procedures, tools and competencies of staff creates motivation and opportunities encourage the labeling of students as having additional needs and creating “calculating schools” (Meijer et al., 1995). Funding alone cannot make education inclusive, but a carefully designed funding system can take away obstacles for inclusive education and actively support it (Pijl, 2014). One alternative to input-based models can be funding based on services, combined with an element of funding based on impact. 2. Lack of support, guidance, and professional development for teachers and non-teaching staff coupled with quality assurance mechanisms are focused on document based deliverables create incentives and opportunities for schools not to provide educational services, but to provide documents on delivering educational services (e.g. grades, documentation on homeschooling). As a result quality educational services are not reaching end-users. Moreover, access is ensured, but new forms of segregation are developed within mainstream education. Therefore, quality assurance mechanism focused not on control and inspection, but support and improvement of school staff competencies is required. 3. Scarce resources devoted to schools with high demands from schools, create urge to use different sources, such as parental donations. When there is no system level solution, quality of available support will depend on parents’ socio-economic status. 4. Although similar, there are also significant differences among countries regarding IV manifestations and policy gaps. Therefore, in preparing recommendations context should be taken into account.