Former special ed teacher Jennifer Stephenson has led a study looking into the qualifications, experience and scholarship of those running these uni courses, unearthing some surprising findings.

Analysing information on university websites and Google Scholar, the investigation found that of 124 Australian academics who are teaching units on special or inclusive education, just 23 per cent appeared to have a qualification in the area.  

A mere 20 per cent noted experience in settings relevant to people with disability, and just over half showed evidence of having undertaken research in the field.

“We were surprised and we were disturbed,” Stephenson, honorary associate professor at Macquarie University, tells EducationHQ of the figures.

“It could be that those qualifications aren’t being put into their bios that go up on the university, but as we said in the article, if that’s happening that suggests they’re not valued – we really don’t know.”

Stephenson is also worried by what she says is a growing focus on inclusion theory that’s now dominating postgraduate course content.

It’s the learning of children with disabilities that is most at risk here, she argues.

“A lot of courses in special or inclusive ed seem to be moving more to a lot of content around rights-based content and theory of inclusion.

“I mean that’s all very well, we’re certainly not opposed to inclusion, but at the same time once the kids are [in the classroom] somebody has to teach them…

“The kids need to learn, and if people haven’t got those skills or they’re not being supported by specialist teachers who’ve got those skills, it’s the kids with disabilities who suffer.”

Many special ed courses are lacking in terms of the instructional training they offer, with explicit literacy and numeracy teaching notably absent in a lot of offerings, Stephenson flags.

“There is no intervention that works for every kid, in every setting, in every context, but in special ed there are a lot of evidence-based practices that do work for kids with disabilities, especially those who’ve got intellectual disability.

“Explicit teaching, which is now finally making its way into mainstream education, it’s been advocated for kids with disabilities for 40 years or more [but has been] missing in a lot of courses.”

Curriculum-based assessment methods also need greater attention, the researcher argues.

“I mean, special ed is often accused of classifying kids by disability but that’s a misconception.

“One of the things we advocate is curriculum-based assessment, where you look at the curriculum and assess what the kid knows, their strengths and what they need to learn.

“This was another area that was missing in a lot of courses.”

Also absent is coverage of applied behaviour analysis and how this informs teachers’ practice in special education, Stephenson says.

“A lot of effective strategies in special ed have got their roots in applied behaviour analysis – so we would like special educators to have a fairly good grasp of the learning theory that’s underpinned by [this].”

Yet universities might not want to associate themselves with this area of behavioural science because it “gets a bit of bad publicity and it’s not something that was loved by mainstream education,” she adds.

The researcher is now calling on AITSL to develop specific standards for the accreditation of special educators in the tertiary sector.

“Such standards would address not only content but also the need for content to be developed and delivered by suitably qualified and experienced academic staff…” the study states.

Stephenson says she has trouble reconciling the arguments of those who support full inclusion with her own experience in schools.

“Yes, kids do get allocated to special ed settings because they have severe intellectual disability or severe behaviour disorders, but once they get in those settings, what you look at is the needs of the kids.

“What are their strengths? What do they need to learn? So, it’s not teaching based on a diagnostic category. It’s teaching that’s focused on the needs of the child.

“And I don’t think you can get more child-focused than that, than individualised assessment planning and then instruction and monitoring of that instruction to see that the kid actually learns what you’re trying to teach them.”