European Landscape PBS Europe - Windesheim

European Landscape Positive Behaviour Support Europe – PBS EUROPE-‐ 50996-‐LLP-‐1-‐2010-‐NL-‐COMENIUS-‐CMP

European Landscape PBS Europe

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 1 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Foreword This report contains the results of (desk)research on the issues and needs of the five case-‐ study secondary schools in the Comenius Multilateral LLP PBS Europe project, in particular on the behavioural issues and behavioural problems identified in each school. The report is also published on the public project website (www.europbs.com), as are the individual country reports which were the basis of this document. The Positive Behaviour Support Europe project, with its acronym PBS Europe (PBS Europe 2010-‐2013), was funded by the European Commission under project number 509966-‐LLP-‐1-‐ 2010-‐1-‐NL-‐COMENIUS-‐CMP. PBS Europe is a unique experiment in cooperation between three teacher-‐training institutes (affiliated with universities) and five European secondary schools strategically located across Europe, from the Netherlands to Finland, from Finland to Hungary, from Hungary to Turkey, and from Turkey to Portugal. These schools belong to a current European School Network of twenty-‐one secondary schools from nine European countries (www.esnetwork.eu). The coordinating institution and leading partner was VU University Amsterdam (the Netherlands) and the co-‐partners were the Windesheim University of Applied Sciences (Zwolle, the Netherlands), Tampere University (Tampere, Finland), Corderius College (Amersfoort, the Netherlands), Valkeakoski Upper Secondary School (Valkeakosken, Finland), Babits Mihály Gymnázium (Budapest, Hungary), Istek Belde School (Istanbul, Turkey), and Don João II (Setubal, Portugal). Other schools belonging to the European School Network acted as associate partners. The consortium expressed the need for tools, interventions and strategies to support their teachers in dealing with students exhibiting various kinds of misbehaviour. The consortium feels it has identified a highly relevant theme for European secondary schools. The content of this report was member checked by all of the (associate) partners involved in the PBS Europe project, and we thank them for their kind assistance and support. We would also like to thank Judith Bekebrede, Jules Groot, Dianne Roerdink and Pamela Lenaerts for their assistance with the desk research and for conducting, processing and analysing the Skype interviews. Amsterdam, August 2013 This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 2 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


PBS Europe project team • Sui Lin Goei (Project Manager, VU University Amsterdam) • Margreet van Oudheusden (PBS coach, Windesheim University of Applied Sciences Zwolle) • Tirza Bosma (PBS coach, VU University Amsterdam) • Reinder Blok (PBS coach, Windesheim University of Applied Sciences Zwolle) • Berber Klein (PBS coach, VU University Amsterdam) PBS coordinators five case-‐study schools • Ilona Nagy, internal PBS coach and PBS coordinator (Babits Mihály Gimnázium, Budapest, Hungary) • Marella Berns, internal PBS coach and PBS coordinator (Corderius College, Amersfoort, the Netherlands) • Ramiro de Sousa, internal PBS coach and PBS coordinator (Escola Secundária D. João II., Setubal, Portugal) • Ayse Lale Hazar, internal PBS coach and PBS coordinator (Istek Belde Schools, Istanbul, Turkey)



Contents 1. 2.

General introduction to PBS Europe ................................................................................ 5 Challenges for schools in Europe: inclusion ..................................................................... 9 2.1. Trend towards inclusion within Europe ......................................................................... 9 2.2. SEN in education: facts and figures .............................................................................. 10 2.3. Focus on behavioural issues and problems ................................................................. 11 3. Individual country analysis for each case-‐study school .................................................. 12 3.1. Finland ..................................................................................................................... 12 3.1.1. Historical background ........................................................................................... 12 3.1.2. National school system and curriculum ............................................................... 13 3.1.3. Inclusive education ............................................................................................... 14 3.1.4. Teacher training system ....................................................................................... 15 3.1.5. Student achievement and drop-‐out rate .............................................................. 16 3.2. Hungary ................................................................................................................... 17 3.2.1. Historical background ........................................................................................... 17 3.2.2. National school system and curriculum ............................................................... 18 3.2.3. Inclusive education ............................................................................................... 19 3.2.4. Teacher training system ....................................................................................... 19 3.2.5. Student achievement and drop-‐out rate .............................................................. 20 3.3. The Netherlands .......................................................................................................... 20 3.3.1. Historical background ........................................................................................... 20 3.3.2. National school system and curriculum ............................................................... 21 3.3.3. Inclusive education ............................................................................................... 22 3.3.4. Teacher training system ....................................................................................... 23 3.3.5. Student achievement and drop-‐out rate .............................................................. 23 3.4. Portugal ................................................................................................................... 24 3.4.1. Historical background ........................................................................................... 24 3.4.2. National school system and curriculum ............................................................... 25 3.4.3. Inclusive education ............................................................................................... 26 3.4.4. Teacher training system ....................................................................................... 27 3.4.2. Student achievement and drop-‐out rate .............................................................. 28 3.5. Turkey .......................................................................................................................... 29 3.5.1. Historical background ........................................................................................... 29 3.5.2. National school system and curriculum ............................................................... 29 3.5.3. Inclusive education ............................................................................................... 31 3.5.4. Teacher training system ....................................................................................... 31 3.5.1. Student achievement and drop-‐out rates ............................................................ 31 4. Participating schools, perceived problem behaviours, expectations concerning the project and perceived teacher self-‐efficacy in the case-‐study schools ................................... 33 1.1. Participating schools ............................................................................................... 33 1.2. Behavioural issues and problem areas .................................................................... 35 1.3. Expectations concerning the project ....................................................................... 36 1.4. Teacher Self-‐Efficacy ............................................................................................... 38 4.5. Summary ...................................................................................................................... 42 5. Concluding remarks ............................................................................................................. 43 Literature ................................................................................................................................ 44 This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 4 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


1. General introduction to PBS Europe PBS Europe is a unique experiment in cooperation between three teacher-‐training institutes (affiliated with universities) and five European secondary schools strategically located across Europe, from the Netherlands to Finland, from Finland to Hungary, from Hungary to Turkey, and from Turkey to Portugal. These schools belong to a current European School Network of twenty-‐one secondary schools from nine European countries (www.esnetwork.eu). PBS Europe addresses the needs of teachers in secondary schools as they attempt to cope with challenging behavioural issues in daily school life, more specifically with students who exhibit various kinds of behaviour problems. Challenging behavioural issues can negatively influence teacher-‐student interaction, the class climate and the learning environment. Teachers often feel unprepared or incompetent to manage challenging behaviour, lacking in confidence, and this can affect their sense of self-‐efficacy. Ultimately, if teachers are not coached or assisted in further developing their didactic and pedagogical repertoire, this can lead to stress, burnout and attrition. Teachers from all of the participating schools indicated the need for interventions, tools and support in dealing with challenging behavioural problems exhibited by students – both individually and as a group – and where possible in preventing this behaviour. The consortium feels it has identified a highly relevant theme for European secondary schools. The project intends to support participating secondary schools by transferring and adopting an implementation and problem-‐solving framework developed in the US called School-‐Wide Positive Behavior Support – in this report abbreviated to PBS – to the European context. PBS can be defined as: “an assessment-‐based approach for supporting students with behavioural problems that provides an empirically validated set of strategies for preventing problems and promoting pro-‐social behaviour” (Hieneman, Dunlap & Kincaid, 2005). On the website www.pbis.org, PBS is described as follows: “Improving student academic and behavior outcomes is about ensuring all students have access to the most effective and accurately implemented instructional and behavioral practices and interventions possible. SWPBS provides an operational This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 5 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


framework for achieving these outcomes. More importantly, SWPBS is NOT a curriculum, intervention, or practice, but IS a decision making framework that guides selection, integration, and implementation of the best evidence-‐based academic and behavioral practices for improving important academic and behavior outcomes for all students.” More importantly, PBS is a decision-‐making framework guided by six important principles: (1) develop a continuum of scientifically based behavioural and academic interventions and supports, (2) use data to make decisions, (3) structure the environment to prevent the development and occurrence of problem behaviour, (4) teach and encourage pro-‐social skills and behaviour, (5) implement evidence-‐based behavioural practices with fidelity and accountability, and (6) screen universally and monitor student performance and progress continuously. Implementing PBS entails a systems change process for the entire school. The underlying theme is teaching behavioural expectations in the same manner as any core curriculum subject. The school implementing PBS focuses on three to five behavioural expectations that are positively stated and easy to remember, such as ‘Be Respectful’, ‘Respect Relationships’ and ‘Respect Responsibilities’. In other words, rather than telling students what not to do, the school will focus on preferred and expected behaviours. PBS Europe was initiated in January 2010 by schools from the European School Network (ESN, www.esnetwork.eu) in cooperation with the teacher-‐training institutes of VU University Amsterdam and Windesheim University of Applied Sciences, both in the Netherlands. Both institutes have a broad expertise in teacher preparation for diverse and special educational needs, and classroom and behavioural management strategies. The teacher-‐training institute of Tampere University in Finland, with expertise in the topic of cultural identity, also participated. The five participating ESN secondary schools are strategically situated across Europe (the Netherlands, Finland, Hungary, Portugal and Turkey) and have their own specific cultural contexts. Other ESN secondary schools were associate partners in this unique project. This makes ESN an excellent platform to pilot the US PBS concept in a European setting. The results will be incorporated into the educational programmes of the teacher-‐training institutes involved, and there are many dissemination activities planned to enhance/stimulate further implementation and cooperation within ESN. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 6 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Since November 2010 the consortium has been busy developing the European PBS concept in a pilot study involving the five schools, using the methodology of design research, which focuses on school development and the design of interventions by a team of teachers in situ. The preliminary results focus on school development, teacher concerns, the autonomy of teachers, reward and reinforcement systems, the explicit linking of behaviour and academic performance, and student involvement as specific elements of a European PBS concept. The project delivered a general concept (description), various ‘tools’ to use in the implementation of the concept, such as a Handbook, training material, formats of various didactic and pedagogical interventions, and presentations by each of the five schools on their implementation of the PBS concept. More information can be found at www.europbs.com. The consortium wished to implement the PBS framework in its five participating secondary schools and, if possible and where necessary, ensure its cultural fit with the ecological situation present in each case-‐study school. Based on the results, experiences and observations of these five case-‐study schools, an initial European PBS concept was to be developed. The initial question of course is whether this was necessary. In this regard, Tim Lewis advised us not to reinvent the wheel because PBS is intended as a problem-‐solving framework which can be culturally contextualized (Lewis, personal communication). Therefore, the first step in the project was to describe the European educational landscape represented by the countries where the five case-‐study secondary schools of the project were located. Key figures and facts were collected and analysed through desk research, addressing the question: What are the historical, cultural, economic backgrounds of the educational systems in the countries of the case-‐study schools? Furthermore, Skype interviews were conducted with key figures from these five case-‐study schools to determine the needs of and questions raised by the schools and the teachers involved. The results gave us insight into the challenges these five case-‐study schools faced and their expectations with regard to the implementation of PBS in their schools. The results of this initial step are described in this report. The structure of this report is as follows. Firstly, the general trend in education towards inclusion is briefly outlined. This trend is altering the make-‐up of today’s classroom, resulting in a very heterogeneous population of students who have different instructional and This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 7 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


behavioural needs. Secondly, background information on the educational context of each of the five case-‐study schools is provided, focusing on the historical background, each national school system and curriculum, inclusive education and teacher training. Thirdly, the results of the Skype interviews and questionnaires are discussed. Finally, some concluding remarks are made on the formulation of a PBS concept for the European context.



2. Challenges for schools in Europe: inclusion 2.1. Trend towards inclusion within Europe With the notion of inclusive education, the emphasis has shifted from the deficit model, where the problem is seen to lie with the individual child, to a social service model, which focuses on the environment, the school curriculum and school climate more generally (Kinsella and Senior, 2009). Within Europe, the concept of inclusive education is centred mainly on the definition by Booth (2000, p. 78): “the process of increasing participation and decreasing exclusion from the culture, curriculum and community of mainstream schools”. Booth et al. (2002) also developed an Index for Inclusion, which provides a list of indicators and questions that can assist schools in self-‐reviewing their ideas, mission and practices with regard to inclusion. Inclusive education is supported by European Commission funding and promoted jointly by EADSNE and UNESCO. Many EU member states have the implementation of inclusive education high on the agenda. The core underlying assumption of this policy for children with special educational needs (SEN) is that they would benefit most from education alongside neurotypical children in mainstream schools, as opposed to special schools catering specifically for those with special needs. In most EU member states there is still some form of special provision; however, the trend is towards gradually reducing the number of special schools and increasing the number of children with SEN in mainstream education (NESSE, 2012). In the process, special schools are being transformed into resource centres for mainstream schools. The underlying principle of inclusion is that the school changes to meet the needs of all the children it serves and provides a framework within which they are valued equally (MacGiolla Phadraig, 2007, p. 291). Services are brought to the child rather than the child moving to the services and no distinction is made between pupils with SEN and others. To operationalize this ideology it is necessary that implementation is systemic, making changes to the entire school so that it might better educate all students and perhaps aid the broader education community as it struggles to respond to growing student diversity in race, culture, language, family structures and other dimensions of difference beyond ability or disability (Ferguson, This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 9 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


2008) 2.2. SEN in education: facts and figures Today, the concept of SEN is on the agenda in almost every country. Internationally, estimates of the number of students with special educational needs have increased dramatically in recent decades. The policy trend towards inclusive education has resulted in a broadening of the definition of SEN, greatly affecting prevalence estimates (Banks & McCoy, 2011). Across Europe, the rates of diagnosed or certified SEN students in mainstream education vary widely. This has much to do with the equally diverse diagnostic criteria and the varying definitions of SEN across Europe. Recent estimates place the number of children with special educational needs at 15 million (European Commission, 2012). The prevalence of dyslexia, a learning disability that impedes a person’s ability to read, is said to affect about 6% of Europe’s population (Gyorfi & Smythe, 2010). The prevalence of autistic spectrum disorders (ASD) is estimated to be higher than previously thought: it is generally accepted as ranging from 45 to 67 cases per 10,000; the most recent evidence suggests an increase of up to 116.1 cases per 10,000 children (Posada et al., 2007). The rates reported for students with SEN in basic education vary from 0.9% (Greece) to 17.8% (Finland). In more segregated educational settings, rates range from under 0.5% (Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain) to 6% (Switzerland) (Marsh et al., 2005). A distinction can be made between normative and non-‐normative difficulties. Normative difficulties are physical and sensory difficulties, on which there is broad agreement about normal functioning, with relatively objective assessment measures available. Normative difficulties tend to have low incidence rates. Non-‐normative difficulties refer to types of difficulties where professional judgement plays a part in diagnostic identification and recognition. These difficulties typically concern social, emotional and behavioural difficulties such as ASD, EBD (emotional behaviour disorder) and learning difficulties, including dyslexia and dyscalculia. Non-‐normative difficulties tend to have high incidence rates and reflect the large numbers of students identified or otherwise certified as having SEN in many countries (NESSE, 2012). In a recent report, NESSE, a network of experts in the social sciences and education, stated that statistics on the proportion of students with SEN reflect different identification practices that depend on local decision-‐making (NESSE, 2012). Member states across Europe This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 10 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


have their own system of categorizing children with SEN and this makes it difficult to compare SEN policies and practices. In some countries, SEN categorization is used to place children in special school settings. In countries with a large number of special schools there are relatively high rates of SEN, and in countries where SEN is linked to additional resource allocation, a relatively large group is also identified (NESSE, 2012). Education research tends to use the terms ‘special needs’ or ‘SEN’, however, there is debate about the usefulness of the term ‘SEN’, with the notion considered value-‐laden and deficit-‐ based. Other critics feel it divides children into ‘normal’ and ‘less than normal’, and rests upon notions of abnormality (Booth, 1998). 2.3. Focus on behavioural issues and problems Because of this trend towards more inclusive education in EU member states and the increasing number of students with SEN in the school classroom, teachers are increasingly confronted with behavioural issues to which they are not able – or feel they do not have the skills – to respond adequately and as a result feel incompetent and doubt their self-‐efficacy. Thus, the trend towards inclusion has altered the make-‐up of today’s classroom, resulting in a very heterogeneous population of students who have different instructional and behavioural needs.



3. Individual country analysis for each case-‐study school The first step in the project was to describe the European educational landscape represented by the countries of the five case-‐study secondary schools involved in the project. Key figures and facts were collected and analysed in desk research, addressing the questions: What are the historical, cultural and economic backgrounds of the educational systems in the countries of the case-‐study schools? How is inclusive education organized and what system of teacher training is used? In some European countries, student drop-‐out is a major problem. To drop out of school means leaving school before the final exams or leaving the educational system without enough training to be able to make a valuable contribution to the European workforce. This issue was examined in the individual country analyses. 3.1. Finland 3.1.1. Historical background Finland is a Scandinavian country with a population of more than 5.2 million people. There are two official languages: Finnish, which is spoken by the majority, and Swedish, which is the mother tongue of a minority (6 percent). Education in Finland underwent a major shift in the early 1990s based on two major events. First, there was a major economic recession and the country’s acceptance into the European Union in 1995. Second, because their largest trading partner, the Soviet Union, had collapsed, a change in export strategies was needed. The reliance on forestry products and traditional industries had to change. Along with a new national competitiveness policy, this resulted in an economy based on information and knowledge (OECD, 2010a). The economy changed rapidly from a traditional lumber and forestry-‐based economy to a knowledge-‐based economy focused on highly innovative technology. This shift in economic strategy had huge consequences for the school system. In order to build this economy, a well-‐educated workforce was needed. Therefore, the educational system also had to change, including the training of teachers. Emphasis was on skills and competences that could be used in the highly innovative technology industry. The role of mathematics, science and technology, in particular, together with skills in creativity,



problem-‐solving, teamwork and cross-‐curricular projects, were mentioned as very important (OECD, 2010a). 3.1.2. National school system and curriculum The quality of Finnish education is regulated by the Ministry of Education and the national school inspectorate. The Ministry of Education sets the national core curriculum, a framework which gives the schools and teachers some freedom in choosing what and how to teach. Decentralization is a keyword, with schools having the autonomy to decide for themselves; for example, they can choose which textbooks and other instructional materials to use (OECD, 2010a). Thus, the autonomy of schools and teachers is relatively high, and education is student-‐centred and of high quality. The national school inspectorate carries out a periodic sampling of student ability in grades 6 and 9, by which the school quality is assessed and monitored. Furthermore, the municipalities are legally obliged to evaluate the education provided by their schools (OECD, 2010a). In Finland, the keywords in the Basic Education Act (628/1998) are ‘educational equality’, ‘individuality’, ‘lifelong learning’ and ‘cooperation’, which are also emphasized in the National Core Curriculum for basic education (Koivula, Lakkala & Makinen, 2010). Important to Finland’s curriculum is the learner-‐centred approach. This means that students take an active role in the learning process (OECD, 2010a). Furthermore, collaboration and interdisciplinary projects also have an important place. The curriculum in Finland includes both Finnish and Swedish, as these are official national languages. This means that there are Finnish, Swedish and bilingual educational institutions (Nuffic, 2009). Furthermore, schools are full-‐service schools, including meals and healthcare. The availability of all of these services shows the commitment of the community and government to provide the conditions in which students can learn what is required to participate in the knowledge-‐ based economy (OECD, 2010a). This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 13 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Age of students

Programme duration (years)

Figure 1. The national education system in Finland (Eurodyce, 2012). Figure 1 shows that education is compulsory in Finland from grades 1 to 9 (age 7-‐16). The comprehensive school is divided into two parts: primary school (grades 1-‐6) and junior secondary school (grades 7-‐9). This is followed by two options for further education: vocational school or upper secondary school. At the end of upper secondary school a matriculation examination will take place, which, if passed, allows entrance to university. In upper secondary school, the curriculum is based on individual study plans, and there is no grade structure, with each student proceeding at his or her own pace within the modular structure. Students must sit exams in at least four subjects, with the mother tongue compulsory. The other three subjects can be chosen, and include the other national language, a foreign language, mathematics or general studies (topics from various subjects in religion and ethics, psychology and philosophy, history and sociology, physics, chemistry, biology and geography) (Nuffic, 2009). Important in the curriculum is the emphasis on helping students take increasing responsibility for their own learning, supporting the student’s growth and learning (OECD, 2010a). Students at upper secondary schools are supported by homeroom teachers and a school counsellor. The homeroom teachers regularly check whether there are absences, course difficulties and social problems. The school counsellor helps students with their course planning and is the person who students contact when they have a problem (personal communication, Syrjä, 11-‐1-‐2011). 3.1.3. Inclusive education As in pre-‐primary education, support for study and pupil welfare is shaped into three categories in the National Core Curriculum for Basic Education: general support, intensified support and special support. General and intensified support is used to bolster learning and growth and prevent the escalation of problems relating to learning. Intensified support is This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 14 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


used as the primary form of support before a decision for special education is made. The strategy for the development of special needs and inclusive education emphasizes the importance of the broad basic education network, supporting the right of every child to attend the nearest mainstream school. Instruction and pedagogy are increasingly being structured so as to fit heterogeneous student groups. The students’ own interests and choices are taken into account when planning the curriculum and selecting content, textbooks, learning strategies, methods and assessment devices (Koivula, Lakkala & Makinen, 2010). All this calls for a flexible, school-‐based, teacher-‐ and student-‐planned curriculum, along with student-‐centred instruction, counselling and remedial teaching (Välijärvi et al., 2002, p. 40). In line with this principle, children with special educational needs also attend comprehensive school. However, these children will start school one year earlier and leave one year later. Approximately 1.3% of the whole age group receives this eleven-‐year education. Approximately 18% of the age group receives some sort of special education (Jahnukainen, 2001). OECD numbers estimate that 8% of children have special educational needs, of which half attend special schools. In primary school there is a specially trained teacher assigned to each school to identify students in need and support them. Furthermore, at primary school there is a multi-‐professional care group, in which students in need of additional support are discussed. The group consists of the principal, the special education teacher, the school nurse, the school psychologist, a social worker and the teacher concerned (OECD, 2010a). In vocational education and training, students in need of special educational or student welfare services are provided with instruction in the form of special education and training. An individual education plan is drawn up for each student receiving special education and training. At upper secondary school there is no special support teacher, although there may be a school counsellor. All in all, the strategy has been formulated in the framework of inclusive education but it still consists of the elements of special education (Koivula, Lakkala & Makinen, 2010). 3.1.4. Teacher training system Primary school teaching is one of the most popular professions among young Finns. Teacher education in Finland provides students with a higher education degree. However, there are more applicants than places at university. Only 10 percent of the applicants are admitted each year. Therefore, there is a strict selection procedure for entrance to teacher education, This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 15 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


especially for primary school teachers. This procedure involves several steps. First, applicants are screened based on their matriculation exam score, upper secondary school record and extracurricular accomplishments. Second, a written exam must be taken, and observation of interaction and communication skills in a teaching activity occurs. Third, applicants are interviewed to determine their level of motivation (OECD, 2010a). Teacher training for primary school has an emphasis on pedagogical courses. Students will follow a major in education and a minor in at least two subjects from the curriculum. In contrast, upper secondary school teachers will major in the subject they will be teaching, and follow courses on education/pedagogics. This can be done in an integrated five-‐year programme, or by completing an additional fifth year after completing a BA to gain a formal teacher qualification (OECD, 2010a). Generally, teacher training is research based. There is a focus on developing pedagogical content knowledge, adaptive teaching styles for the various learning needs children may have, and one-‐year intern experience in a model school associated with the university (OECD, 2010a). In these so-‐called Teacher Demonstration Schools affiliated with the universities, special education teachers and the class teacher supervise the student teachers. In this way, the student teachers experience collaboration between teachers and gain a broader perspective on teaching heterogeneous classes. At many universities it is possible, and common, for student teachers to do their teaching practice with small groups of special needs children located in mainstream schools. The development of an inclusive education strategy has had an impact on teacher education. The Ministry of Education created the OSAAVA programme (2010-‐2016) to ensure that Finnish teaching personnel and teacher educators receive regular further education and in-‐service training to improve their professional competences. 3.1.5. Student achievement and drop-‐out rate Student achievement in Finland is high. Based on PISA 2009, Finland lies in the top three worldwide (top European country) (see Table 1, adapted from OECD, 2010d). These stable high results in the PISA are not due to highly visible innovation, but rather to steady progress (OECD, 2010a). This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 16 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Table 1 PISA 2009 results for reading, mathematics and science Country

Reading

Mathematics

Science

Finland

536

541

554

OECD average

493

496

501

The drop-‐out rate in compulsory education is low in Finland, with less than 0.03% leaving school before grade 9 (Jahnukainen, 2001). Most students enter further education after compulsory education, with 87.2% enrolled in further secondary education (OECD, 2010b). However, students with special educational needs are those most at risk of not entering further secondary education (Jahnukainen, 2001). The government has recently set an education guarantee, which stated that in 2008, 96% of students who complete compulsory education will continue to further secondary education without interruption (Ahola & Kivelä, 2007). The high graduation rate of 93% for upper secondary school is striking (OECD, 2010c), with the secondary qualification completed by 80% of the population in general (Jahnukainen & Helander, 2007). In 2010, more than 40% of the Finnish population between the age of 20 and 29 was enrolled in university; in comparison, the OECD average is 25% (OECD, 2010c).

3.2. Hungary 3.2.1. Historical background Hungary was under the strong influence of the Soviet Union from 1945 to 1989, but since then has been independent. This transition affected Hungary in all aspects, as it underwent a multidimensional process of change, influencing the economy, politics, cultural life and education (Kozma, 2005). An important aspect of the transition period was a temporary loss of regulations and control. There was a massive sense of insecurity about economic welfare, and at the same time there was a new feeling of liberty (Kozma, 2005). By the end of the 1990s, greater numbers of students were staying in school longer and there was a relatively high student-‐teacher ratio (latest figures OECD, 2010). This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 17 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


3.2.2. National school system and curriculum Hungarian education is regulated by the Ministry of Education, in close collaboration with the Ministry of Home Affairs (Nuffic, 2010). There used to be a centralized curriculum that was based on the Russian model, but from 1988 there was a new curriculum, based on the English model. The present Hungarian national curriculum has two levels. At the national level, there is a core curriculum; however, this is implemented in individual school programmes at the local level. The main point is that the national curriculum focuses on coordinating schools rather than central control (Kozma, 2005). The national curriculum states that there should be development in languages and computer sciences; however, it is flexible concerning which languages. The national curriculum also leaves opportunities to adjust the local curricula to the knowledge and capacity of the students (Kozma, 2002). At the local level, each community has the right to develop and support a school system. This has led to three general kinds of initiatives with respect to addressing the lack of control and regulations: first, private schools, which consider individual liberties; second, public schools with conservative teachers, in which there is a vision of collective existence (nationalistic); and third, faith-‐based schools, in which a morality based on the ethics of the particular community is the basic principle (Kozma, 2005). As can be seen in Figure 2, compulsory education extends from grades 1 to 11 (age 6-‐16), with three kinds of secondary school after general primary school. General secondary school (Gimnázium) prepares students for higher education; here, at least two foreign languages are compulsory. There are also two kinds of vocational education, one of which also prepares students for higher education. After finishing secondary school, students take a school-‐leaving exam. This consists of four compulsory subjects: mathematics, Hungarian language and literature, a foreign language and history. The exams can be taken on an intermediate or higher level, of which the higher level exam is required for admission to foreign language programmes of universities (Vágó & Vass, 2007).



Age of students


Note: Under the Public Education Act of 2011, education will be compulsory only until the age of 16. The change is being phased in: the new lower age (16) will be applied to students starting in grade 9 from the 2012/13 school year; the higher school leaving age (18) will continue to apply to students in the grades above.

Figure 2. The national education system in Hungary (Eurodyce, 2012) 3.2.3. Inclusive education Approximately 6% of students in general education have special educational needs (SEN) (Keller & Mártonfi, 2007). In order to receive special needs education an official expert and rehabilitation committee have to state that the student will be hindered in the education process, and they advise the parents about the appropriate educational institute (Vágó & Vass, 2007). Education of SEN students occurs in special educational institutions or through special education forms in mainstream educational institutions (Vágó & Vass, 2007). Since 2002, the number of SEN students in mainstream education has increased. Due to the decrease in student numbers, schools were more willing to incorporate SEN students (Keller & Mártonfi, 2007). Most mainstream SEN students have behaviour problems, as there are no special schools for them (Csány, 2001). In 2005, 75% of preschool students with SEN were integrated into mainstream education, with 42% in general schools, and 83% in secondary institutions (Imre & Györgyi, 2007). However, most schools have ‘cold mainstreaming’, which means that the integration concerns the technical facilities, sometimes with a special education teacher. Teaching materials and requirements are not adjusted to the needs of SEN students (Vágó & Vass, 2007). 3.2.4. Teacher training system Over the last ten years, the educational system has undergone many changes and these are still occurring, including the teacher training system (Felvégi & Ostorics, 2007; Nagy, 2003; Nagy & Varga, 2007). At present, all teachers complete a Master’s degree in education, although teaching at lower elementary levels only requires a Bachelor’s degree (from a This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 19 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


tertiary educational institution) (Felvégi & Ostorics, 2007). The teacher training programme has two cycles. In the first cycle, basic professional discipline-‐related knowledge is the core. The second cycle has a stronger focus on teaching. A single Master’s course is also offered, in which there is more time to acquire the skills and knowledge in the practice of teaching and subject methodologies (Nagy & Varga, 2007). Furthermore, every teacher must attend in-‐service training every seven years, in which 120 hours is mandatory. Schools are required to have an in-‐service education plan for every five-‐ year period (Felvégi & Ostorics, 2007; Nagy & Varga, 2007). 3.2.5. Student achievement and drop-‐out rate Student achievement in Hungary is close to the average of the OECD (PISA 2009) (see Table 2, adapted from OECD, 2010). Table 2 PISA 2009 results for reading, mathematics and science Country

Reading

Mathematics

Science

Hungary

494

490

503

OECD average

493

496

501

The drop-‐out rate in compulsory education is growing, and is up to 10% when the number of students enrolled in first grade is compared to the final grade of general school (Imre & Györgyi, 2007). In 2005, 76% of students continued to further secondary education, with 57% of 18-‐year-‐olds holding a final secondary school certificate (Imre & Györgyi, 2007). 3.3. The Netherlands 3.3.1. Historical background The Netherlands has approximately 15 million people. The predominant language is Dutch. The Dutch are traditionally a trading people. There is a long history of flourishing trade relationships with other countries that go back to Early Modern times. The Netherlands is characterized by cultural diversity and is an open society. In the 1960s, many immigrants arrived as ‘guest workers’, meaning that at present, 10% of the inhabitants of the country are of non-‐Western origin, and the figure may be as high as 30% in its larger cities (OECD, This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 20 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


2007a; 2007b). The Netherlands immigrant population comprises people from Turkey, Morocco, Suriname and the Dutch Antilles, as well as a number of refugee populations from Africa and Central Asia. The Netherlands has a long history of educational reform, with modern educational legislation founded in the eighteenth century. In the early twentieth century, the ‘Freedom of Education’ was established and grounded in the Constitution, meaning that private groups may, within certain limitations, establish their own schools, which are also funded by the government. The Education Inspectorate monitors the quality of all schools. From 2007, education became compulsory for all students until the age of 18. 3.3.2. National school system and curriculum Due to the Freedom of Education philosophy, decentralization and autonomy are the keywords. Private schools – funded but not founded by the government – are free to choose what is taught and how it is taught. However, standards are set by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. One of the methods used to ensure standards is to set examination syllabuses, core objectives (per subject), and the number of teaching hours. Schools are obliged to provide proof of results in relation to core objectives, such as core education in language, mathematics, citizenship and social emotional development (Eurybase, 2009; OECD, 2007a; 2007b). Furthermore, there is one independent advisory body, the Educational Council, which gives advice and recommendations about education and legislation to the government (OECD, 2007a; 2007b). Dutch is the official language; however, in the province of Friesland (in the north of the Netherlands), Frisian is also an official language and is taught in schools (Eurybase, 2009). After primary school (grade 6, age 12), students go to secondary school (see Figure 3). There are three types of secondary school, with different lengths: pre-‐vocational secondary education (VMBO), senior general secondary education (HAVO), and pre-‐university education (VWO). Depending on the secondary school certificate, different pathways are possible, either senior secondary vocational education (MBO) or tertiary education. Students from the upper levels of HAVO and VWO (from grade 10) must choose from four different profiles: Science and Technology, Science and Health, Economics and Society, or This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 21 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Culture and Society. Each profile prepares students for higher education and consists of general, specialized and optional components. Students in VMBO can also choose from four different

sectors:

Engineering/Technology,

Economics/Business,

Care/Welfare

or

Agriculture. In VMBO there are four different tracks which differ in difficulty and in terms of possibilities for senior secondary vocational education (see Figure 3). Dutch and English are compulsory subjects in the centralized secondary school exam (national examination), while all other subjects depend on the chosen track/profile (Eurybase, 2009).

Age of students


Figure 3. The national education system in the Netherlands (Eurydice, 2012). 3.3.3. Inclusive education In 1996, the ‘Going to school together’ policy was introduced to retain students with special educational needs (developmental, learning and behavioural difficulties) in regular primary education rather than special schools: referrals to special education would thereby decrease. To attain these goals, special education schools collaborated with mainstream education schools (Eurybase, 2009; Netten & Verhoeven, 2007). At present, inclusive education is high on the agenda in the Netherlands, and a new policy called ‘Appropriate Education’ has recently been put in place. Inclusive education means that all children should obtain an education that optimizes their chances for the best development, whether a typical student or a student with special educational needs. The renewal of inclusive education policy entails a welfare duty of schools. The aim of this policy is to improve the realization of education for every pupil with special educational needs. Under this policy, every school board has the obligation to provide appropriate education for every pupil who enrols, regardless of the kind of support he or she needs. Since not every regular school is This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 22 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


able to provide the appropriate education for every pupil, school boards collaborate with each other to arrange educational provisions in such a way that every child can be educated with their special educational needs taken into account. Schools are free to decide on how the arrangements are made. Due to this welfare duty, schools must collaborate in relation to both ‘light’ and ‘intensive’ care (Goei, 2012). Estimations are that 7 out of every 25 students have special educational needs; of these students, 80% have learning disabilities and 35% have social-‐emotional problems (Netten & Verhoeven, 2007). 3.3.4. Teacher training system There are different trajectories for primary and secondary school teacher education. Primary school teacher education occurs at the higher professional education level (HBO) at primary school teacher training colleges. The four-‐year programme also involves a lot of practical training, at the end of which the teachers are qualified to teach all subjects except physical education at primary school (Netten & Verhoeven, 2007). Since 2006/2007 an entrance exam testing the language and numeracy skills of the future teachers has been introduced (Eurybase, 2009). Secondary school teacher education occurs at the higher professional education level and at university. Although supplementary training for teachers in special education is optional, the majority of special teachers complete a two-‐year, part-‐time Master’s in Special Educational Needs. The course assumes the trainees (teachers) are already working in education and focuses on both theory and practice. There are several possibilities for specialization, including education for the visually impaired, behavioural problems, learning difficulties, remedial teaching and peripatetic teaching. 3.3.5. Student achievement and drop-‐out rate Student achievement in the Netherlands is above the OECD average according to the PISA 2009 results (see Table 3, adapted from OECD, 2010), with the Netherlands in the top five in Europe and eleventh in the world.



Table 3 PISA 2009 results for reading, mathematics and science Country

Reading

Mathematics

Science

The Netherlands

508

526

522

OECD average

493

496

501

The government is working hard to reduce the drop-‐out rate and increase the number of students who gain a basic qualification. To reduce the number of premature school leavers, especially in secondary education and senior secondary vocational education, many activities have been initiated, involving all the stakeholders (e.g., schools, municipalities, care institutions, police and parents) (OECD, 2007a; 2007b). In 2008/2009 the rate of premature school leavers was between 1% and 3% in secondary school and senior secondary vocational education (MinOCW, 2011). 3.4. Portugal 3.4.1. Historical background Portugal is situated in southwestern Europe, with a population of approximately 9.8 million. The language spoken is Portuguese. Up until two decades ago, Portugal was a country with few immigrants, most of whom were European. However, more recently this situation has changed and in 1997 large numbers of African, Brazilian and European immigrants were granted legal status. Portugal is a state with a long history, but it is still quite a young democracy. Economically, it is facing one of its largest economic crises, with high unemployment rates, cutbacks in government expenditure (including substantially lower salaries for teachers) and problems in the financial realm. Since the 1960s, public education has been available for all children between 6 and 12 years old. There was also an expansion of industrial and commercial technical schools and the founding of new universities. After 1976, the right to establish private schools resulted in an increase of the number of basic and secondary schools. Although there was large-‐scale expansion, education beyond the basic level was barely affordable for most Portuguese families. From the mid-‐1980s, the democratization of education began (Hartog, Pereira & Vieira, 2001; Wiarda, 1993). Today, there are large-‐scale programmes for the modernization of schools (OECD, 2009) and the keywords in education are decentralization, autonomy and This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 24 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


greater flexibility (Flores, 2005). The population in urban areas is multicultural (e.g., after 1975 many African students came to Portugal). Due to the large degree of cultural heterogeneity, the meaning and value of schooling varies significantly among the parents of students (César & Oliveira, 2005). 3.4.2. National school system and curriculum In 1960, a national curriculum was introduced; however, teachers had autonomy and there was no direct curriculum control. In the late 1990s, a new national curriculum with stricter guidelines and regulations, as well as competences required, was established by the government. This meant that the autonomy of teachers was restricted to some extent. While they still have autonomy in organizing curriculum practices within the school, their autonomy is restricted in terms of the curriculum content and assessment (Day, Pacheco, Flores, Hadfield & Morgado, 2003). An important aspect in the national curriculum is social and emotional development, in which attitudes, values and sensitivity to cultural differences are incorporated. This is considered to contribute to the development of student competences and to students becoming active participants in learning communities (César & Oliveira, 2005). Compulsory education was extended in 2009 from 15 to 18 years of age, before which only basic education was compulsory. Preschool education is optional, supplementing the role of the family in early education (OECD, 2009). Basic education is organized into three cycles (see Figure 4). The first cycle takes four years (ages 6-‐9), in which the focus is on basic skills and students are taught by one teacher. The second cycle of two years (ages 10-‐11) proceeds with the critical and creative assimilation and interpretation of information, continuing basic learning. The third cycle of three years (ages 12-‐14) offers a starting point for working life and further studies (Sousa & Fino, 2007). The Portuguese school system has a school retention scheme, whereby students remain in a grade if they underachieve. Basic education is followed by three years of secondary education (upper secondary school). There are four types: general secondary education, general and vocational secondary education, art education and vocational education. There are roughly five subject clusters: Nature and Technology; Economics and Society; Language and Literature; Culture and Society; and Visual Arts. Furthermore, Portuguese, one foreign language, philosophy, physical education and information technology are compulsory subjects (Nuffic, 2010). In This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 25 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


upper secondary education there are general, technological and vocational education courses comprised of the different subject clusters. The general courses are for students who want to continue to higher education. At the end of grade 12 there is a compulsory national examination (Sousa & Fino, 2007). Higher education (tertiary education) consists of two subsystems, university and polytechnical education (Gonçalves, 1998). Age of students


Note: Cursos tecnológicos are no longer provided to new students. However, students enrolled in the 11th and 12th grades are still able to complete the courses.

Figure 4. The national education system of Portugal (Eurydice, 2012). 3.4.3. Inclusive education In Portugal, approximately 80% of students with special educational needs attend mainstream education (Sousa & Fino, 2007). There is a culture of inclusion in Portugal (Kugelmass, 2006). As César and Oliveira stated (2005, p. 30): “diversity should be respected and celebrated instead of avoided and hidden”. There are some special schools for children with visual impairment or developmental disabilities. Most assistance in mainstream education is for hearing and vision impairment or physical disabilities. There is less assistance for intellectual disabilities, or learning and social-‐emotional disabilities. In mainstream education, support may be direct, through a specially qualified teacher, or may take the form of an educational plan proposed to the teachers. However, the number of specialized teachers is low, reflecting the general scarcity of qualified teachers (Gonçalves, 1998; Sousa & Fino, 2007). With particular regard to special needs education (SNE), new challenges have arisen due to the publication of a new law on SNE (Decree-‐Law nº 3/2008). This law states that pupils with special educational needs should not only receive their education in a mainstream school, This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 26 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


but also fully join their peers in the curriculum and in school life; that pupils with SEN should generally take part in mainstream classes rather than be isolated in separate groups; that separate provision might occasionally be necessary for specific purposes; and that schools should review and adapt their approaches to achieve greater inclusion. The reorganization of the SNE support system and a redefinition of the role of special schools, delineating their contribution in working with mainstream schools to support greater inclusion, will both be required, as will a definition of the responsibility of mainstream schools and mainstream teachers with respect to children with special educational needs. The development and implementation of the IEP (individual education plan) will also be necessary (Ferreira & Micaelo, 2010). 3.4.4. Teacher training system There is large variability in teacher training degrees. There are roughly three different kinds of teacher education models. Firstly, there is an integrated model, combining subject areas (disciplinary) and pedagogical components throughout the course. The integrated model is a five-‐year course, of which four years entail full-‐time study at university (public university or institution of higher education), followed by one year of practical teaching experience in a school (Flores, 2004). Secondly, there is a sequential model, in which disciplinary courses are followed by pedagogical courses. This was introduced for teachers who did not have a higher education degree. The third model is an in-‐service professional model, in which the courses are facilitated by the school (Santiago et al., 2009). Teachers in secondary education should have a Master’s degree (Licenciado), completing four to six years of study, while four years is sufficient for basic education (Sousa & Fino, 2007). Initial teacher training is carried out in higher education institutions – polytechnics and universities – with a Master’s degree being the minimum academic qualification for the teaching profession, according to the changes introduced within the Bologna Process. Pre-‐primary teachers and teachers for the first and second cycles of compulsory education are trained in teacher training colleges which are integrated into polytechnics or universities. Teachers for the third cycle of compulsory education and upper secondary are trained at universities. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 27 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Generalist Basic Education (Bachelor’s) and a Master’s degree in teaching are possible for the first cycle, second cycle and preschool education.

Generalist teaching activity in preschool and 1st and 2nd cycle from basic teaching Bachelor’s Master’s degree

Basic Education 1st cycle

2nd cycle

3rd cycle

Preschool education

Specialized training takes place in higher education institutions and aims at qualifications for particular specialized educational positions, duties or activities of a pedagogical or administrative nature, which are directly applicable to the function of the educational system and schools. 3.4.2. Student achievement and drop-‐out rate Student achievement in Portugal is below the OECD average (PISA 2009) (see Table 4, adapted from OECD, 2010). However, it should be noted that the results showed improvement in 2009.

Table 4 PISA results for reading, mathematics and science Country

Reading

Mathematics

Science

Portugal 2009

489 (493*)

487 (496*)

493 (501*)

Portugal 2006

472

466

474

Portugal 2003

478

466

468

Portugal 2000

470

454

459

Note: * the OECD averages from PISA 2009 In Portugal, the numbers of students graduating from upper secondary school (53% in 2004) was well below the OECD average of 80%. Only 28% of the population of working age (25-‐ 64) had attained at least upper secondary education in 2006 (Santiago et al., 2009). The major level of drop-‐out between basic education and upper secondary education is a problem, which resulted in compulsory education being extended to 18 years. This high proportion of drop-‐outs can be related to the low appreciation of schooling. Many parents have a low level of education; for example, in the mid-‐1970s less than 5% had graduated from upper secondary school. Furthermore, there are many unskilled jobs available and the unemployment rate is high (Santiago et al., 2009). This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 28 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


3.5. Turkey 3.5.1. Historical background In 1924, after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, the modern Turkish education system was established under Atatürk, the first president of the Turkish Republic. Primary school became compulsory (Hooglund, 1995). At that time, the literacy rate was lower than 10%, and the importance of education became clear to ensure radical change in politics, culture and economics (OECD, 2005). As a result, a number of changes were made in education, with educational goals set and a national curriculum introduced. However, it was not until the 1980s that all children between 6 and 10 went to school (Hooglund, 1995). Turkey is a country characterized by cultural diversity. There are many different regions with different cultural traditions and languages. There is pride and identity expressed in Turkish culture, which is reflected in the value of collective achievement in the family (Turan, Erbas, Ozkan & Kurkuoglu, 2009). At present, there is a large level of migration from rural to urban areas. Furthermore, the Turkish population is relatively young (OECD, 2005). 3.5.2. National school system and curriculum The Ministry of National Education regulates education in both state and private schools and is responsible for 25 million students in Turkey. Today, private schools are run as foundations, where the Board is connected to a university or hospital. The Ministry is advised by National Education Councils whose participants represent all social sectors and whose aim is to increase the quality and quantity of educational services (OECD, 2005). The Ministry outlines the framework of the national curriculum, which includes guidelines for curriculum planning, general goals, goals for each subject and materials (Gür, 2006). Due to recent developments, a student-‐centred approach has become an important aspect of the national curriculum, in which there is an emphasis on intellectual learning skills, stimulating student capacity for thinking and reasoning, and foreign language skills are highly valued. To comply with this student-‐centred approach, schools have been asked to monitor, develop and follow new innovations. There are different aspects in the curricula guidelines concerning the social, individual and economic approach to education (OECD, 2005). The important principles of the modern educational system are secularity, equality and generality, which means that schools in This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 29 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Turkey are non-‐religious and everyone has the right to basic education, despite race, gender or religion (OECD, 2005). Furthermore, schools are full-‐service, with free textbooks and lunches, and many include boarding facilities and transport, especially in scarcely populated regions. This is all structured to ensure that students receive high-‐quality education (OECD, 2005). Age of students

Programme duration (years

Figure 5. The national education system of Turkey (Eurydice, 2012). Since 1997, basic education from grade 1 to 8 (age 6-‐14) has been compulsory (see Figure 5), with enrolment at nearly 100% since 2001 (OECD, 2005). At the end of basic education there is a centralized exam. There are two types of secondary school, general secondary school and vocational and technical secondary school, usually attended for four years (age 15-‐18) (ÖSYM, 2006). The total schooling rate for secondary school was almost 60% in 2001 (Ministry of National Education, 2001). To enter higher education (university) there is a centralized ranking exam, which is the sole measure of performance. There are five main fields in this secondary school final exam: Turkish, mathematics, science (engineering, medicine, computer science), social sciences (history, geography, education) and foreign languages (OECD, 2005; ÖSYM, 2006). The pressure on students in secondary schools in Turkey today is high because of the centralized university entry exams and the small number of places available in Turkish universities. In 2010, only 55% of applicants obtained a place in higher education (ÖSYM, 2006), which creates pressure on students and carries the risk of ‘perfectionism’: having high standards and not performing according to those standards can



be a risk factor in developing depression (Ongen, 2009), with teachers and parents often contributing to this pressure.

3.5.3. Inclusive education Although there is no formal inclusive education policy, the Special Education Law 573 of 1997 made a range of services and opportunities possible, such as special education schools, inclusive schools and special classrooms, and support services (Cavkaytar, 2006). Furthermore, there are Guidance and Research Centres (RAM) around the schools, which offer guidance, psychological counselling, and the diagnosis and monitoring of students with special educational needs. There are 130 RAM centres in Turkey, employing 809 guidance teachers/counsellors (OECD, 2005). 3.5.4. Teacher training system Since 1983 the teacher training system has changed, with all teacher training transferred to the universities. Teacher training consists of basic education, preparatory education and practice. There is a focus on laws and regulations in education, followed by the curriculum. Pedagogy is important, however, there is a strong emphasis on teaching specialist subjects. Primary school teachers should be trained in two subjects, while secondary school teachers have a Bachelor’s degree in various areas (Athoğlu, 2002; OECD, 2005, 2007). After graduation, teachers work as trainees for one or two years, depending on their performance. Furthermore, teachers must also follow courses through in-‐service training planned by the ministry (Ministry of National Education, 2001). The focus in teacher education is on mainstream education, although some universities offer programmes in special education. In addition, there is a course on behaviour management for all teachers, which takes a behavioural perspective and trains prospective teachers to use the ABC model (Turan et al., 2009). 3.5.1. Student achievement and drop-‐out rates Student achievement in Turkey is below the OECD average (see Table 5, adapted from OECD, 2010). The important determinants of achievement in these subjects are student background, especially socioeconomic status, learning strategies, self-‐awareness and school climate variables. Of these determinants, it is difficult to influence student background, while changing the school climate and improving learning strategies is easier to accomplish (Demir, Kiliç & Depren, 2009; Dincer & Uysal, 2009). This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 31 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Table 5. PISA 2009 results for reading, mathematics and science

Country

Reading

Mathematics

Science

Turkey

464

445

454

OECD average

493

496

501

There is not much data on drop-‐out rates in Turkey. The number of students in primary and secondary education is growing. In 2004/2005, 86% of primary school students continued in secondary education (OECD, 2005). However, there are indications that the participation rate for girls is lower than for boys, with the challenge being to keep girls in school beyond grade 5 and into secondary school (OECD, 2007).



4. Participating schools, perceived problem behaviours, expectations concerning the project and perceived teacher self-‐efficacy in the case-‐study schools 1.1. Participating schools The content of this section is based on information gathered in Skype interviews held at the beginning of 2011, with either the principal or teachers from the PBS team at the case-‐study schools. Valkeakoski Upper Secondary School, Valkeakosken, Finland (http://www.valkeakoski.fi/portal/english/culture_and_education/upper_secondary_sch ool/upper_secondary_education/) Valkeakoski Upper Secondary School is a part of the Valkeakoski campus, which includes a university of applied sciences and a vocational school. In 2009, Valkeakoski Upper Secondary School moved to a new building. The school houses approximately 400 students between 16 and 18 years. About 78% of the students graduate in three years. The average group size is about 23 students. There are less than 10 students with special educational needs, related to Asperger’s, autism and ADHD, and less than 10 students with diagnosed behavioural problems. There are few behavioural incidents in the school. There is a team of approximately 30 teachers, with the average age of all staff being 45 years and average work experience 15 years (Syrjä, 2011). Babits Mihály Gimnázium, Budapest, Hungary (http://www.babits.hu/) Babits Mihály Gimnázium is a suburban school in Budapest with approximately 570 students from a middle-‐class population attending grades 5 to 12 (10 to 18 years old) and 41 teachers. The school was built in the 1980s. At the end of grade 4 there is a national entrance exam in which students compete to enter this school. Approximately 3% of the students have special educational needs; however, there are no diagnoses or statistics. Some form teachers have collected data suggesting approximately 25% of the students exhibit discipline problems. There are about five discipline referrals per week. Students



cannot be expelled from school unless another school can be found for that student (personal communication, Nagy and Antal, 9-‐05-‐2011). Corderius College, Amersfoort, the Netherlands (www.corderius.nl) The Corderius College is a government-‐funded Christian comprehensive school in the city of Amersfoort. It has 1,614 students between 12 and 19 years old. Corderius College offers education at all three levels of secondary education, VMBO (theoretical track, 28% of the students), HAVO (38% of the students) and VWO (34% of the students). The average class size is 25-‐30. There are 60 students with special educational needs, for whom the school receives additional funding from the government. Most of these students have an autistic spectrum disorder. Furthermore, there are approximately 230 other students with special educational needs, most of whom do not have formal diagnoses. Eighty students receive counselling on a regular basis about personal problems. There are four coaches, two remedial teachers and a care and advice team (a multidisciplinary team). Disciplinary methods follow protocols, with data showing that there are approximately ten latecomers and four discipline referrals every day. There are approximately 138 teachers, more than half are male (77). The average age of the teachers is 37 and average work experience is 14 years (Winterberg & Berns, 2011). Escola Secundária D. João II, Setubal, Portugal (http://www.esec-‐d-‐joao-‐ii.rcts.pt/) Escola Secundária D. João II is located in the city of Setúbal in Portugal and has a heterogeneous population of 1,122 students in grades 7 to 12 (12 to 20 years old). It is a public school with full state financial support. At the moment the school is being rebuilt. The average group size is about 28 students. There are 33 students with special educational needs, related to Asperger’s, ADD, cognitive deficits and sensory/motor disabilities. The students with special educational needs are integrated into regular classes. The school has a special education teacher. Most SEN students in the school are diagnosed before they arrive, although if teachers observe the need for specialist intervention, students can be referred to specialized educational support services. There are approximately 120 teachers, with an average age of 43, and 30 other staff members with an average age of 53 (Gonçalves & Correia, 2011). This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 34 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Istek Belde School, Istanbul, Turkey (http://www.istek.k12.tr/Icerik.aspx) Istek Belde School is a private school and part of the Belde Campus, including three other schools in Istanbul. The campus is located on the Asian side of the Bosphorus near the bridge that connects with the city’s European side. There are 659 students: 72 in kindergarten, 325 in primary school, 91 in science school, and 171 in English medium secondary school. The average group size is 24 students. In secondary school (science school and English medium secondary school) the age ranges between 14 and 18 years. There are 45 students with special educational needs relating to AD(H)D and dyslexia. There are no formal diagnoses of autism spectrum disorders. There are 21 students with behaviour problems. At school there is no prevention support; however, the students can obtain professional help. There are approximately 94 teachers, 15 of them male. The average age of the teachers is 40 years. There are six counsellors assigned to the school, two of whom work for the secondary school department (Hazar & Cimen, 2011). 1.2. Behavioural issues and problem areas The content of this section is based on information obtained in Skype interviews held at the beginning of 2011 with the teachers from the PBS teams of the case-‐study schools. In this interview the topic was the behaviour problems encountered in the schools. Although not fully representative, we are given an idea about the problem behaviours that teachers from these five case-‐study schools are exposed to everyday. Valkeakoski Upper Secondary School, Valkeakosken, Finland In the interview with two teachers participating in the PBS team, several kinds of problem behaviour were mentioned: passivity, restlessness, laziness, distraction, lack of concentration, day-‐dreaming, not doing homework and being late for class. They were also concerned about the students having a ‘so what’ or indifferent attitude. However, they mentioned that there were few behavioural incidents involving ‘externalizing’ problem behaviour. Babits Mihály Gimnázium, Budapest, Hungary In the interview with two teachers participating in the PBS team, several kinds of problem behaviour were mentioned: punctuality problems, exercise books left at home, not doing homework, smoking, overly friendly behaviour towards the teacher (hugging), not showing This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 35 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


respect for each other or for the teachers. They also mentioned problem behaviour outside the classroom, such as fighting, using bad language, and untidiness associated with eating. Corderius College, Amersfoort, the Netherlands The PBS team mentioned the following behavioural problems: lack of mutual respect, abusive/negative language, lack of motivation and concentration among students, disruptive behaviour such as talking in class, and failing to bring books to class (Winterberg & Berns, 2011). Escola Secundária D. João II, Setubal, Portugal In the interview with two teachers participating in the PBS team, several kinds of problem behaviour were mentioned: lack of attention, lack of a study method (problems taking notes, studying independently), bullying, disruptive behaviour and the use of mobile phones. Istek Belde School, Istanbul, Turkey In the interview with several teachers participating in the PBS team, several kinds of problem behaviour were mentioned: tardiness (latecomers), fighting, bullying, chatting in the classroom, disrespect, vandalism, lack of boundaries (children have the feeling that they have no limitations). Tardiness was considered a major problem, with data collected over six months showing that 447 students had been late. There were also office referrals and suspensions (Hazar & Cimen, 2011). 1.3. Expectations concerning the project The content of this section is based on information from the Skype interviews held at the beginning of 2011 with the teachers from the PBS teams of the case-‐study schools. In the interview we asked the teachers about their expectations for the project. Valkeakoski Upper Secondary School, Valkeakosken, Finland The two teachers hoped to find ways to address overly passive and unmotivated students, and they thought PBS would help them to develop tools to increase the level of motivation among students, without resorting to sanctions. They also hoped that PBS would provide them with some ideas about being more positive and giving positive feedback. This led to the formulation of four core values and accompanying actions for Valkeakoski Upper Secondary School: ‘Passion’ (be inspired, be passionate), ‘Agency’ (be creative, be This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 36 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


spontaneous), ‘Sociability’ (be social, be a team member, learn together, be respectful) and ‘Involvement’ (be active, be responsible, show commitment) (Syrjä, 2011). Babits Mihály Gimnázium, Budapest, Hungary The interview with the teachers from the PBS team revealed that they did not have any clear expectations. They mentioned discussions about situations in which problem behaviour had occurred. They found it important to speak about problems and to give and receive advice. Their attitude seemed to be that ‘the proof of the pudding is in the eating’. One of the teachers stated that they could see issues and possible solutions in their daily routines. This teacher hoped to see results during the project. This led to the formulation of three core values: ‘Good Manners’, ‘Responsibility’ and ‘Respect’. Corderius College, Amersfoort, the Netherlands The PBS team at the school believed that PBS would help to break down the tendency towards indifference and would tackle problems effectively. They thought PBS worthwhile because it was a school-‐wide principle, involving everyone concerned with the school (staff, both teachers and non-‐teaching personnel, students and parents) (Winterberg & Berns, 2011). One of the staff members of the school, who was also a member of the PBS team, mentioned that PBS would help the school change from a culture of punishment to a culture of positive feedback. In doing so, it would be important not to look solely at the behaviour of students, but also at the behaviour of the teachers. PBS would help to create clear, positively formulated rules and especially clear consequences. This led to the formulation of three core values: ‘Security’, ‘Involvement’ and ‘Responsibility’. Escola Secundária D. João II, Setubal, Portugal The PBS team had a clear reason to try PBS: to achieve greater efficiency and better school results, to develop new attitudes towards students and develop a simple and coherent way of dealing with situations (Gonçalves & Correia, 2011). In the interview, the two teachers from the PBS team stated that PBS would help to improve the environment in the school, making it more pleasant to enter the classroom. PBS would move in small steps. This led to the formulation of three core values: ‘Respect’, ‘Responsibility’ and ‘Confidence/Trust’ (Gonçalves & Correia, 2011). This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 37 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Istek Belde School, Istanbul, Turkey In the interviews with the PBS team several expectations were formulated: more school-‐ wide agreements about dealing with behaviour, and adhering to common rules. Furthermore, they hoped that teachers’ knowledge about learning and behaviour problems would improve (recognizing symptoms, coping mechanisms). This led to the formulation of two core values mentioned by the team: ‘Respect’ and ‘Responsibility’. 1.4. Teacher Self-‐Efficacy This section will first describe the concept of teacher self-‐efficacy and then present the results of the questionnaire that was administered. One of the aims of the project was to increase the teachers’ sense of self-‐efficacy in coping with problem behaviour in everyday school life. Recent research by Kelm and McIntosh (2012) found that teachers involved in SWPBS reported higher levels of teacher self-‐efficacy than teachers not involved in the project. Teacher self-‐efficacy, defined as a ‘teachers’ belief in his or her own capability to organize and execute courses of action requiring successfully accomplishing a specific teaching task in a particular context’ (Tschannen-‐Moran, Woolfolk-‐Hoy & Hoy, 1998), is positively associated with student academic achievement (Tschannen-‐Moran & Woolfolk-‐ Hoy, 1998), student motivation and the students’ own sense of efficacy (Midgley, Feldlaufer & Eccles, 1989). Allinder (1994) also found that teachers with high teacher self-‐efficacy are more organized, more willing to try new teaching methods and more persistent with struggling students. Thus, teachers should benefit from the implementation of PBS in their school. We expected teacher self-‐efficacy to increase significantly during the pilot phase because their competence in implementing interventions would improve (Kelm & McIntosh, 2012). Organizational health also improves in PBS schools (Bradshaw, Koth, Bevans Ialongoans & Leaf, 2008), which in turn has a positive effect on teacher self-‐efficacy. We were also interested in teachers’ experiences and the challenges they faced with the implementation. To explore whether teacher self-‐efficacy changed through participation in the project, standardized teacher self-‐efficacy questionnaires (Goei, Bekebrede & Bosma, 2011) were administered by mail at the start of the project. The questionnaire was specifically designed for this purpose and was a combination of the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (Tschannen-‐ Moran and Hoy, 2001, see also Hoy & Woolfolk, 1993) and parts of the Bandura Teacher Self-‐Efficacy Questionnaire (Bandura, 2006). The resulting questionnaire was translated into This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 38 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


the native language of each case-‐study school, with forward and backward translation, and consisted of 45 items, which teachers were asked to score on a 9-‐point scale. Valkeakoski Upper Secondary School, Valkeakosken, Finland Nine teachers, of which four participated in the PBS team, filled in the questionnaire on teacher efficacy, the results of which are presented in Figure 6. One striking finding was the diverse answers, with a tendency for average to high answer patterns, on the efficacy scale concerning creating a positive school climate. Diverse answer patterns, with a tendency to average efficacy, were found on instructional self-‐efficacy, which measures how capable a teacher feels in relation to fulfilling the educational needs of the students and in creating student engagement. There were average to high scores on disciplinary self-‐efficacy, which measures how capable a teacher feels in preventing and controlling disruptive behaviour. There was relatively high efficacy for instructional strategies – which measures how capable a teacher feels with regard to using effective instruction strategies that suit the needs of the students – and for classroom management. However, there was relatively low efficacy in relation to enlisting community involvement or parental involvement.

Figure 6. Teacher Efficacy mean scores Finland. Babits Mihály Gimnázium, Budapest, Hungary Seven teachers, of which five participated in the PBS team, filled in the questionnaire on teacher efficacy, the results of which are presented in Figure 7. One striking finding was the diverse answer patterns on the efficacy scale relating to creating a positive school climate. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 39 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


There was mostly average efficacy for disciplinary self-‐efficacy and instructional self-‐efficacy. There was relatively high efficacy for instructional strategies, student engagement and classroom management. However, there was relatively low efficacy in relation to enlisting community involvement and a tendency towards low to average efficacy with regard to enlisting parental involvement.

Figure 7. Teacher Efficacy mean scores Hungary.

Corderius College, Amersfoort, the Netherlands Seven teachers, of which four participated in the PBS team, filled in the questionnaire on teacher efficacy, the results of which are presented in Figure 8. One striking finding was the diverse answer patterns on the efficacy scale with regard to creating a positive school climate (Figure 8a) and on instructional self-‐efficacy. There was relatively high disciplinary self-‐efficacy and also relatively high efficacy in enlisting parental involvement. The efficacy in relation to instructional strategies (Figure 8f) and classroom management were also relatively high. Efficacy in relation to student engagement was average. However, there was lower efficacy in relation to enlisting community involvement, with no high scores given.



Figure 8. Teacher Efficacy means cores Netherlands. Escola Secundária D. João II, Setubal, Portugal Ten teachers, of which five participated in the PBS team, filled in the questionnaire on teacher efficacy, the results of which are presented in Figure 9. One striking finding was the diverse answer patterns on the efficacy scale concerning creating a positive school climate. Diverse answer patterns, with a tendency for average to high, were found for disciplinary self-‐efficacy, efficacy in enlisting parental involvement and instructional self-‐efficacy. There was relatively high efficacy for instructional strategies , student engagement and classroom management. However, there was relatively low efficacy in enlisting community involvement.

Figure 9. Teacher Efficacy mean scores Portugal. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 41 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Istek Belde School, Istanbul, Turkey Nineteen teachers, of which nine participated in the PBS team, filled in the questionnaire on teacher efficacy, the results of which are presented in Figure 10. One striking finding was the diverse answer patterns on the efficacy scale concerning creating a positive school climate. There was relatively high efficacy for student engagement and classroom management. Efficacy related to enlisting parental involvement, instructional self-‐efficacy and efficacy in instructional strategies were average to relatively high. There was average disciplinary self-‐ efficacy. However, there was a diverse response, with a tendency to low efficacy, in relation to enlisting community involvement.

Figure 10. Teacher Efficacy mean scores Turkey. 4.5. Summary The above results regarding the responses on the teacher sense of efficacy questionnaire show that in general, the teachers assessed their self-‐efficacy in the medium range. The results on the items, ‘creating a positive school climate’, ‘community involvement’ and ‘parental involvement’, show a high level of diversity in the responses across countries, with some teachers believing that they are less capable of creating a positive atmosphere and/or organizing support and involving parents or community members in the school. However, the ratings on self-‐efficacy in the area of discipline, as well as instructional self-‐efficacy and classroom management, are relatively high for the majority of teachers across the five countries. The latter outcomes show that the majority of teachers were quite confident about their classroom teaching practices. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 42 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


5. Concluding remarks This report is the first of a series of reports which will present the results and experiences of the five case-‐study secondary schools on their journey towards the implementation of a PBS framework in their school. This report reflects the first steps: our desk research, the interviews with teachers and participants in the PBS team on the perceived behavioural problems of students in their schools, their expectations of PBS implementation for their schools, and their perceived sense of efficacy in relation to various teacher competences required in daily school life. Within the PBS Europe project, the five case-‐study schools will be model schools for the associate partners within the consortium. They are strategically located across Europe and represent diverse school cultures. What do these preliminary outcomes mean for the formulation of a PBS concept for Europe? This question will be answered in the second report in this project.



Literature Ahola, S. & Kivelä, S. (2007). ‘Education is important, but…’ Young people outside of schooling and the Finnish policy of ‘education guarantee’. Educational Research, 49, 243-‐ 258. Allinder, R.M. (1994). The relationship between efficacy and the instructional practices of special education teachers and consultants. Teacher Education and Special Education, 17, 86-‐95. Athoğlu, Y. (2002). Turkey. In. I. V. S. Mullis, M. O. Martin, A. M. Kennedy, & C. L. Flaherty (Eds.). PIRLS 2001 Encyclopedia (pp. 289-‐294). Chestnut Hill, MA: International Study Center, Boston College. Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-‐efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.). Self-‐efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307-‐337). Information Age Publishing. Banks, J., & McCoy, S. (2011). A study on the prevalence of special educational needs. Dublin: Economic and Social Research Institute. Booth, T. (1998) From special education to inclusion and exclusion; can we redefine the field?, in Haug, P. and Tossebro, J. Theoretical Perspectives on Special Education, Kristiansan: Norwegian Academic Press. Booth, T. (2000) Controlling the agenda: policies on inclusion and exclusion in England, in Armstrong, D., Armstrong, F., Barton, L. (eds) Policy, Contexts and Comparative Perspective, p. 78. London: Fulton. Booth, T. et al. (2002), Index for Inclusion, Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education. Bradshaw, C. P., Koth, C. W., Bevans, K. B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P. J. (2008). The impact of School-‐Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462. Cavkaytar, A. (2006). Teacher training on special education in Turkey. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 5, 41-‐45. César, M., & Oliveira, I. (2005). The curriculum as a tool for inclusive participation: Students’ voices in a case study in a Portuguese multicultural school. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20, 29-‐43. Csányi, Y. (2001). Steps towards inclusion in Hungary. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 16, 301-‐308.



Day, C., Pacheco, J., Flores, M. A., Hadfield, M., & Morgado, J. C., (2003). The changing face of teaching in England and Portugal: A study of work experiences of secondary school teachers. European Journal of Teacher Education, 26, 239-‐251. Demir, I., Kiliç, S., & Depren, O. (2009). Factors affecting Turkish students' achievement in mathematics. US-‐China Education Review, 6, 47 -‐ 53. Dincer, M. A. & Uysal, G. (2009). The determinants of student achievement in Turkey. International Journal of Educational Development, 30, 592 -‐ 598. Eurybase (2009). Organisation of the education system in the Netherlands 2008/09. European Commission-‐ Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency. Eurydice (2012). Retrieved from http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/key_data_series/134EN.pdf European Commission (2012), ‘Special Needs Children and Disabled Adults Still Getting a Raw Deal from Education, says report’, Commission Press Release (July). As of 30 March 2013: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/12/761&format=HTML&aged =0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en Eurodyce (2012). http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/facts_and_figures/education_str uctures_EN.pdf 2012/13, accessed 13.02.13 Felvégi, E., & Ostorics, L. (2007). Hungary. In. A. M. Kennedy, I. V. S. Mullis, M. O. Martin, & K. L. Trong (Eds.). Pirls 2006 Encyclopedia. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College, pp.165-‐173. Ferguson, D.L. (2008). International trends in inclusive education: The continuing challenge to teach each one and everyone. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 23, pp. 109– 20. Ferreira, M.S., & Micaela, M. (2010). Teacher education for inclusion country report Portugal. TE41 Country report Portugal. Flores, M. A. (2005). Teachers’ view on recent curriculum changes: Tensions and challenges. The Curriculum Journal, 16, 401-‐413. Flores, M. A., (2004). The impact of school culture and leadership on new teachers’ learning in the workplace. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 7, 297-‐318. Goei, S.L. 2012: De leraar en de leerling binnen passend onderwijs, in: Harinck, F., Van de Ven, A and Willemse R. (eds.) Onderwijszorg en de keten, pp. 177-‐198. Antwerpen/Apeldoorn: Garant. Goei, S. L., Bekebrede, J., & Bosma, T. (2011). Teachers' Sense of Self Efficacy: meningen van leraren. Experimental version. Amsterdam: Onderwijscentrum VU. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 45 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Gonçalves, J. A. (1998). Perspectives of school failure: An overview of the Portuguese situation. European Journal of Teacher Education, 21, 307-‐324. Gonçalves, A. P., & Correia, M. J. (2011). Escola Secúndaria D. João II Setúbal-‐ Portugal. Presentation held at the EUROPBS team Conference, Budapest, Hungary 9-‐11 May 2011. Győrfi, A., and Smythe, I. (2010), Dyslexia in Europe: A pan-‐European survey. As of 30 March 2013: http://doitprofiler.info/media/13299/dyslexia_report_2010_final_mep.pdf Gür, H. (2006). Influences and controls: The national curriculum in England and Turkey. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 3, 39-‐53. Hartog, J., Pereira, P. T., & Vieira, J. A. C. (2001). Changing returns to education in Portugal during the 1980s and early 1990s: OLS and quantile regression estimators. Applied Economics, 33, 1021-‐1037. Hazar, A. L., & Cimen, S. (2011). Istek Belde Schools-‐Positive Behavior Support. Presentation held at the EUROPBS team conference, Budapest, Hungary 9-‐11 May, 2011. Hieneman, M., Dunlap, G. and Kincaid, D. (2005), Positive Support Strategies for Students with Behavioral Disorders in General Education Settings. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 779– 794. doi: 10.1002/pits.20112 Hooglund, E. (1995). Turkey: A country study. Library of Congress country studies. Retrieved on 28-‐7-‐2011 from http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/trtoc.html Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk, A. E. (1993). Teachers’sense of efficacy and the organizational health of schools. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 356-‐372. Imre, A., & Györgyi, Z. (2007). The educational system and the progression of students. In Z. Loboda, J. Lannert, & G. Halász (Eds.), Education in Hungary 2006. Budapest: Hungarian Institute for Educational Research and Development. Jahnukainen, M. & Helander, J. (2007). Alternative vocational schooling for the dropped-‐out: Students’ perceptions of the Activity School of East Finland. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 22, 471-‐482. Jahnukainen, M. (2001). Two models for preventing students with special needs from dropping out of education in Finland. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 16, 245-‐ 258. Keller, J., & Mártonfi, G. (2007) Inequalities and special needs in education. In Z. Loboda, J. Lannert, & G. Halász (Eds.), Education in Hungary 2006. Budapest: Hungarian Institute for Educational Research and Development. Kelm, J. L., & McIntosh, K. (2012). Effects of School-‐Wide Positive Behavior Support on Teacher Self-‐Efficacy. Psychology In The Schools, 49(2), 137-‐147.



Kinsella, W., & Senior, J. (2008). Developing inclusive schools: a systematic approach. International journal of inclusive education, 12 (5-‐6), 651-‐665. Koivula, P., lakkala, S., & Makinen, M. (2010). Teacher education for inclusion country report Finland. TE41 Country report Finland. Kozma, T. (2002). Transformation of education systems: The case of Hungary. European Education, 34, 10-‐33. Kozma, T. (2005). Moral education in Hungary fifteen years after the transition. Journal of Moral Education, 34, 491-‐504. Kugelmass, J. W. (2007). Constructivist views of learning: implications for inclusive education. The SAGE handbook of special education, 272-‐279. MacGiolla Phádraig, B. (2007). Towards inclusion: the development of provision for children with special educational needs in Ireland from 1991 to 2004. Irish Educational Studies, 26(3), 289-‐300. Marsh et al (2005). Special educational needs in Europe: The teaching & learning of languages. European Commission DG EAC 23 03 LOT 3, January 2005. http://ec.europa.eu/languages/documents/doc449_en.pdf. Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. S. (1989). Change in teacher efficacy and student self-‐ and task-‐related beliefs in mathematics during the transition to junior high school. Journal of educational Psychology, 81(2), 247. Ministry of National Education. (2001). The Turkish Education system and developments in education. Ministry of National Education. MinOCW (2011). Aanval op schooluitval [Attack on school leavers]. Retrieved from http://www.aanvalopschooluitval.nl/vervolg.php?h_id=2&s_id=103&titel=VSV-‐Cijfertabellen on 3-‐8-‐2011. Nagy, M. (2003). Teachers. European Education, 35, 15-‐26. Nagy, M., & Varga, J. (2007). Teachers. In Z. Loboda, J. Lannert, & G. Halász (Eds.), Education in Hungary 2006. Budapest: Hungarian Institute for Educational Research and Development. Netten, A., & Verhoeven, L. (2007). The Netherlands. In. A. M. Kennedy, I. V. S. Mullis, M. O. Martin, & K. L. Trong (Eds.). PIRLS 2006 Encyclopedia (pp. 269-‐278). Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. NESSE (2012), Education and disability/special needs: policies and practices in education, training and employment for students with disabilities and special educational needs in the EU, An independent report prepared for the European Commission by the NESSE network of experts. As of 30 March 2013: http://www.nesse.fr/nesse/activities/reports/activities/reports/disability-‐special-‐needs-‐1 This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. 47 This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein


Nuffic (2009). Evaluation of foreign degrees and qualifications in the Netherlands. Country module Finland. Den Haag: Afdeling onderwijsvergelijking, Nuffic. Nuffic (2010). Evaluation of foreign degrees and qualifications in the Netherlands. Country module Hungary. Den Haag: Afdeling onderwijsvergelijking, Nuffic. OECD (2005). Basic education in Turkey: Background report. Ankara: Ministry of National Education. OECD (2007a). Improving school leadership – OECD Review: Background report for the Netherlands. OECD. OECD (2007b). Reviews of national policies for education: Basic education in Turkey. OECD. OECD (2009). OECD/CELE Review of the Secondary School Modernisation Programme in Portugal. Co-‐Authors: R. Almeida, A. Blyth, D. Forrester, A. Gorey, & G. Hostens OECD: Centre for Effective Learning Environments. OECD (2010). Education at a glance. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/45/39/45926093.pdf OECD (2010a). Strong performers and successful reformers in education: Lessons from PISA for the United States. Chapter 5. Finland: Slow and steady reform for consistently high results (pp. 117-‐135). OECD. OECD (2010b). OECD average net enrolment rates of ages 15 to 19 as a percentage of the population aged 15 to 19 (year of reference – 2008). In Education at a Glance 2010, OECD publishing. OECD (2010c). OECD average net enrolment rates of ages 20 to 29 as a percentage of the population aged 20 to 29 (year of reference – 2008). In Education at a Glance 2010, OECD publishing. OECD (2010d). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do -‐ Student performance in reading, mathematics, and science (Volume 1). OECD Publishing. Ongen, D. E. (2009). The relationship between perfectionism and multidimensional life satisfaction among high school adolescents in Turkey. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 34, 52 -‐ 64. ÖSYM (2006). Selection and placement of students in higher education institutions in Turkey. Ankara: Higher Education Council Student Selection and Placement Center (ÖSYM). Retrieved from http://www.osym.gov.tr/dosya/1-‐56877/h/aboutosym.pdf on 1-‐8-‐2011. Posada, M., et al. (2007). European Autism Information System (EAIS) Report on the ‘Autism Spectrum Disorders Prevalence Data and Accessibility to Services’ Questionnaire (Q-‐EAIS). Madrid: Research Institute for Rare Diseases, Instituto de Salud Carlos III.



Santiago, P., Roseveare, D., van Amelsvoort, G., Manzi, J., & Matthews, P. (Eds.), (2009). Teacher evaluation in Portugal-‐ OECD Review. OECD. Syrjä, P. (2011). Positive Behavior Support EUROPBS: Goals and Values. Presentation held at the EUROPBS team Conference, Budapest, Hungary 9-‐11 May 2011. Tschannen-‐Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing and elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-‐805. Tschannen-‐Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of educational research, 68(2), 202-‐248. Turan, Y., Erbas, D., Ozkan, S. Y., & Kurkuoglu, B. U. (2009). Turkish special education teachers’ reported use of positive and reductive interventions for problem behaviors: An examination of the variables associated with use. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 211–221. Vágó, I., & Vass, V. (2007). The content of education. In Z. Loboda, J. Lannert, & G. Halász (Eds.), Education in Hungary 2006. Budapest: Hungarian Institute for Educational Research and Development. Välijärvi, J., Linnakylä, P., Kupari, P., Reinikainen, P., & Arffman, I. (2002). Finnish success in PISA: some reasons behind it. Jyväskylä, Institute for Educational Research, University of Jyväskylä. Wiarda, H. J. (1993). Portugal: A country study. Library of Congress country studies.Retrieved on 26-‐7-‐2011 from http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/pttoc.html#pt0077 Winterberg, R., & Berns, M. (2011). Corderius College – Positive Behavior Support. Presentation held at the EUROPBS team conference, Budapest, Hungary 9-‐11 May 2011.
