No description available.

A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Education of the requirements for the Degree Master of Education in the Department of Educational Psychology and Special Education at the University of Zululand, 2019. / The implementation of inclusive education in mainstream schools has for some time faced challenges in South African schools. Although much has been achieved in terms of policy development, and the restructuring of schools, the effects of changes have not been properly managed and evaluated. Evaluation and monitoring changes will help to determine the achievement of the policies and tracking the implementation of inclusive education. The main aim of this study was to assess teachers’ experiences of the implementation of inclusive education and to determine the strategies they employed in order to accommodate diversity in their classrooms. Questionnaires were used, both closed-ended and open-ended questions to collect data from primary school teachers. Seven Richards Bay primary schools were identified as the sampling frame. Out of seven schools, one school chose not to participate. A total number of 104 teachers participated in this study. The closed-ended questions were analysed quantitatively. With regards to open-ended questions qualitative analysis was employed. The study revealed that teachers do embrace inclusive education however, most were still found practicing their old methods of teaching, which they were using before inclusive education was introduced. This was due to lack of skills and training. Teachers were given options to choose from with regard to special methods they use in accommodating diversity in their inclusive classrooms. Out of 104 teachers who participated, fifty nine (59) indicated that they do not use any special method to accommodate diversity in their classroom while (45) forty five declared that they use special methods in their inclusive classrooms. The study recommends that in-service training should be provided. Monitoring strategies should be put in place in order to provide support and guidance to teachers. Parents must also be involved in the education of their children. Through the involvement of the School Governing Bodies (SGBs).

No description available.

Educational institutions have remained remarkably unchanged throughout the last century, even when the political, cultural and social environments have undergone very significant transformation (cf. Duderstadt, 2005; Fullan, 2007; Rowan & Miskel, 1999). Because of the noted similarity among educational institutions and the institutions perceived inability to change, I wanted to identify a significant change at an educational institution, and examine the context and policy process that promoted this change. The focus of this study was the process of policy development within one type of educational institution, the university.<p> In this case study, I examined the policy process involved in establishing a joint, interdisciplinary school, the School of Policy and Research. Data were gathered from three sources: interviews, documents, and policies. I conducted semi-structured interviews with thirteen participants who had some connection to the School, and analyzed the data by coding emergent themes. These were not discrete themes, but rather were interconnected and reflected the complexity of the policy development process. From the findings, the concept of policy windows, as suggested by Kingdon (2003), was evident in the policy origin stage. The policy stream, the political stream, and the problem stream came together at a critical juncture as a confluence of forces that allowed the initiative of the joint interdisciplinary policy School to move forward into adoption and implementation. Due to this presence of a policy window, the initiative moved through the adoption stage relatively smoothly, at least initially. The policy actors were essentially the same at both universities; there was a core group of grassroots level faculty members who were involved in policy work and believed in the potential of the interdisciplinary policy School. They were supported by senior administrative personnel who saw this initiative as one way to address perceived problems confronting the institutions. However, the implementation stage at both universities was messy and difficult as the proponents of the School encountered many tensions, including issues around securing resources, program development, the proposal approval process, and several sources of resistance to change. The discipline-driven culture of the universities appeared to be an impediment to innovative practices that bridge disciplinary boundaries. Although the timing of this study obviated full consideration of the evaluation stage, the participants did speculate upon several intended impacts of the School, and they proposed possible collateral impacts. Implications of this investigation for practice included a need for individual organizations to conduct a thorough examination of situation-specific organizational practices that promote or inhibit innovation, including reviews of current practice for determining what programs need to be discontinued, for articulating how to monitor progress in achieving outcomes, and for identifying how to promote a more collaborative culture. In terms of implications for research, further exploration of the implementation stage of successful policy development was seen to have some potential. In change theory, further research could address the stark absence of the voice of resistors to change. Two elements of neoinstitutional theory that merit further research are the roles of agents in initiating change, and the role of isomorphic processes (coercive, normative, and mimetic) in inhibiting change in organizations. One theoretical implication of this study was the relevance of certain lenses (political, temporal, organizational, and cultural) in examining change. Additionally, the theoretical dichotomy of incremental and transformative change merits further examination in relation to the dynamics of the policy process.

Educational institutions have remained remarkably unchanged throughout the last century, even when the political, cultural and social environments have undergone very significant transformation (cf. Duderstadt, 2005; Fullan, 2007; Rowan & Miskel, 1999). Because of the noted similarity among educational institutions and the institutions perceived inability to change, I wanted to identify a significant change at an educational institution, and examine the context and policy process that promoted this change. The focus of this study was the process of policy development within one type of educational institution, the university.<p> In this case study, I examined the policy process involved in establishing a joint, interdisciplinary school, the School of Policy and Research. Data were gathered from three sources: interviews, documents, and policies. I conducted semi-structured interviews with thirteen participants who had some connection to the School, and analyzed the data by coding emergent themes. These were not discrete themes, but rather were interconnected and reflected the complexity of the policy development process. From the findings, the concept of policy windows, as suggested by Kingdon (2003), was evident in the policy origin stage. The policy stream, the political stream, and the problem stream came together at a critical juncture as a confluence of forces that allowed the initiative of the joint interdisciplinary policy School to move forward into adoption and implementation. Due to this presence of a policy window, the initiative moved through the adoption stage relatively smoothly, at least initially. The policy actors were essentially the same at both universities; there was a core group of grassroots level faculty members who were involved in policy work and believed in the potential of the interdisciplinary policy School. They were supported by senior administrative personnel who saw this initiative as one way to address perceived problems confronting the institutions. However, the implementation stage at both universities was messy and difficult as the proponents of the School encountered many tensions, including issues around securing resources, program development, the proposal approval process, and several sources of resistance to change. The discipline-driven culture of the universities appeared to be an impediment to innovative practices that bridge disciplinary boundaries. Although the timing of this study obviated full consideration of the evaluation stage, the participants did speculate upon several intended impacts of the School, and they proposed possible collateral impacts. Implications of this investigation for practice included a need for individual organizations to conduct a thorough examination of situation-specific organizational practices that promote or inhibit innovation, including reviews of current practice for determining what programs need to be discontinued, for articulating how to monitor progress in achieving outcomes, and for identifying how to promote a more collaborative culture. In terms of implications for research, further exploration of the implementation stage of successful policy development was seen to have some potential. In change theory, further research could address the stark absence of the voice of resistors to change. Two elements of neoinstitutional theory that merit further research are the roles of agents in initiating change, and the role of isomorphic processes (coercive, normative, and mimetic) in inhibiting change in organizations. One theoretical implication of this study was the relevance of certain lenses (political, temporal, organizational, and cultural) in examining change. Additionally, the theoretical dichotomy of incremental and transformative change merits further examination in relation to the dynamics of the policy process.

The advent of the Scottish ‘Curriculum for Excellence’ created a new paradigm of outdoor education. The term ‘outdoor learning’ found more common parlance as a reflection of contemporary discourse with renewed focus on curricular breadth and progression in outdoor education. This thesis examines these changes through the lens of educational policy analysis. The study bridges the gaps between literature in the fields of outdoor education, public policy making and curriculum theory to present a broad and historical analysis of the processes for the policy development of outdoor learning in Scotland. The methodological approach is grounded in the philosophy of pragmatism, and combines desk based research with data analysis of thirteen interviews with key policy actors. The findings identify health as an early policy driver and a prelude to later policy agendas including ‘character training’, work and employment. The processes for change in outdoor education policy are influenced by ‘galvanising events’ and via a ‘policy corridor’ of outdoor education advocates. Post Scottish devolution, the work of advisory groups has been a key influence in resolving what is identified as a ‘policy squeeze’ on outdoor learning. The research has implications for effective lobbying and understanding the processes for policy growth in outdoor learning.

In a world that is increasingly urbanised, cities are recognised as critical sites for tackling problems of climate change, both by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and addressing the impacts of changing climate conditions. Unlike climate change mitigation, adaptation does not have one clear, commonly agreed collective goal. Governing and making decisions on climate adaptation in cities entails contestation over knowledge, values and preferences. Currently, the two dominant conceptualisations of adaptation are as cycles or pathways. Do these models adequately theorise what can be empirically observed in cities as to how climate adaptation is undertaken? Most research on urban climate adaptation emanates from the Global North, where political, scientific, economic and administrative systems are well established and well resourced. There is a dearth of empirical research from cities of the Global South contributing to the development of urban climate adaptation theory. This thesis contributes to addressing this gap in two ways. Firstly, by drawing on both conceptual and methodological resources from the field of organisational studies, notably the streams and rounds models of decision making, organisational ethnography and processual case research. Secondly, by conducting empirical case study research on three processes of city scale climate adaptation in Cape Town, South Africa, a growing city facing many development challenges where the local government began addressing climate adaptation over ten years ago. The three adaptation processes studied are: the preparation and adoption of city-wide sectoral climate adaptation plans; the creation of a City Development Strategy with climate resilience as a core goal; and the inclusion of climate change projections into stormwater masterplans. Data were gathered through interviews, participant observation, focus groups and document review, through embedded research within a formal knowledge co-production partnership between the University of Cape Town and the City of Cape Town government. Processual analysis and applied thematic analysis were used to test models of adaptation and decision making against data from the three case studies. The findings suggest that both the cycles and pathways models of climate adaptation inadequately represent the contested and contingent nature of decision making that prevail within the governance systems of cities such as Cape Town. Based on ethnographic knowledge of how Cape Town's local government undertakes climate adaptation, it is argued that the rounds model of decision making provides conceptual tools to better understand and represent how the process of climate adaptation in cities is undertaken; tools that can be used to enhance the pathways model. The study concludes that progress in adapting cities to a changing climate is currently constrained by both the problems and potential solutions or interventions being too technical for most politicians to deal with and prioritize and too political for most technical and administrative officials to design and implement. It calls for urban climate adaptation to be understood as distributed across a multitude of actors pursuing concurrent, discontinuous processes, and thereby focus needs to be on fostering collaboration and coordination, rather than fixating on single actors, policies, plans or projects.

Research on the different ways in which climate change and adaptation (CCA) is communicated and taught has been growing in popularity over the last few decades. Researchers in communication science have found that the way in which information is presented and transferred is important in influencing people's perceptions and attitudes towards particular topics and issues. With this in mind, the lack of interest or realization of the severity of climate change at many levels of governance may be indicative that climate change, the subsequent negative impacts thereof and the need to implement adaptive and mitigative strategies - is not being effectively communicated to these audiences. This research explores the effect of CCA training-courses on participant knowledge, perceptions and attitudes towards CCA and related issues. It also highlights training methods and elements of course design which participants identified as enabling factors in enabling their understanding of CCA. The data collection used a mix methods approach, and focused around two training-courses. Participants (n=37) were mid-career professionals, many of whom engage in decision-making and policy development activities in different levels and sectors of government. Quantitative data was collected using scaled pre-and-post training tests. Qualitative data was collected through 14 semi-structured interviews, process observations, and anonymous feedback slips. A majority of participants (68%), showed an increase in knowledge scores after attending training. Similarly, 62% of participants responded more positively to questions relating to CCA in the post-training test compared to their pre-test responses. This research did not find a strong correlation between changes in knowledge, and changes in perceptions and attitudes; however, there were positive changes in all three variables. Participants discussed six methods of teaching and training which enabled their understanding of CCA and related issues; namely, PowerPointTM presentations, group work, practical exercises, games and role-play. Learnings from studying the training-courses highlight the importance of collaborative learning, diversity in participant groups, active engagement of participants with various mixed training methods and careful framing of content such that it inspires a sense of confidence rather than hopelessness. The effective communication and transfer of CCA information to professionals that are engaged in decision-making and policy development is key to increasing adaptive capacity, and subsequently adaptation at scale. It is therefore critical that CCA communication and capacity building efforts, such as training-courses, are designed such that they optimize participant learning and understanding.

Despite the UK’s abundance of renewable energy sources and the imperative for renewable energy to make a significant contribution to addressing the problems of climate change and fossil-fuel dependency, renewable energy capacity in the UK has developed slowly compared with some other EU states. The UK has introduced a succession of policies to promote renewable energy, but so far these have failed to meet national and EU targets. This signals the need for detailed examination of the reasons for these ‘failures’ and, in particular, the extent, nature and constraints on ‘policy learning’ within UK renewable energy policy. Policy learning has emerged in recent years as an innovative way of exploring the roles of knowledge acquisition and use in policy change. This study examines the contribution of policy learning to the development of UK renewable energy policy. It is argued that interpreting UK renewable energy policy development through the lens of policy learning yields fresh perspectives on why policies develop in certain directions and not others. In so doing, it critically examines problems caused by failings in policy learning and identifies options for the further promotion of renewable energies in the UK. The study distinguishes four different forms of policy learning: technical, conceptual, social and political. Little research has been conducted on the characteristics of these different learning types, the conditions under which they occur, the psychological, institutional and cultural factors that stimulate or constrain learning, and how they interact to shape policy change. The study utilises a qualitative methodology to analyse and explain changes in UK renewable energy policy over the past 20 years. The main methods employed are content analysis of policy documents (including legislative acts and instruments, consultations and select committee reports); and semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders from government, industry, NGOs, academia and the media. It is argued in the thesis that UK energy policy has tended to become ‘locked’ into low-level forms of technical learning because current government learning mechanisms do not challenge the parameters of existing policy and, thus, fail to stimulate broader processes of conceptual and social learning that might encourage more radical policy change. These forms of policy learning are particularly constrained by hierarchical institutional structures that hinder communication and learning between policy areas. Furthermore, the current style of policy making for renewable energy in the UK privileges the interests of incumbent energy companies, giving them the ability to filter or block new ideas that do not align with their commercial interests. Political learning was shown to operate alongside other types of policy learning and to take multiple forms but focused predominantly on political risk management rather than political innovation: thus, it tended to narrow rather than extend the parameters of debate. These findings were used to develop a model of policy learning in UK renewable energy policy. This was used to conceptualise relationships between different learning types, highlight specific barriers to policy learning, and illustrate dynamics of policy learning and change that might be extended to other policy areas and countries. Finally, it is argued that many of the barriers identified might be overcome by fostering more evidence-based policy making and learning mechanisms that engage with a broader range of stakeholders to stimulate more pluralistic government processes.

Are there policy markets in Australia, and if so, how do they operate? This is the core question for this dissertation. Beginning with a focus on this simple formulation of the problem, the thesis explores the idea of policy markets, breaking it down into its constituent parts��policy� and �markets��and develops four different ways in which policy markets (i.e. markets for policy analysis, research and advice) might be modeled: 1. the dimensions of knowledge, values and competition in policy development systems and processes; 2. a hierarchy of policy markets according to strategic, programmatic and operational concerns; 3. policy markets in the context of cyclical process models of policy-making, especially the variant posited by Bridgman and Davis (1998); and 4. a typology of policy markets ranging from �pseudo� forms through to a form of full (or �pure�) policy market. Against the background of this theory-building, the empirical evidence�which was gathered through a combination of documentary investigation and some 77 interviews with senior public servants, consultants and ministers�is addressed through three interrelated approaches: an analysis of the (relatively limited) government-wide data; a comparison of this material with experience in New Zealand; and a set of three extended case studies. The three case studies address the idea and experience of policy markets from the point of view of: � the supplier�in this case, the economic forecasting and analysis firm, Access Economics; � ministers-as-buyers�through a study of the Coalition Government�s 1998 efforts to reform the waterfront; and � the bureaucracy as implementers of an extensive program of outsourcing�through a detailed examination of the outsourcing of corporate services (especially human resource management) by the Department of Finance and Administration. Several conclusions are drawn as to the character, extent and theoretical and practical significance of policy markets in Australia. While various elements of actual markets (e.g. contracts, price and service competition, multiple sources of supply, etc.) can be detected in the Australian approach to policy-making, policy markets are not as prevalent or as consistent as the rhetoric might suggest. In particular, while the language of the market is a common feature throughout the Australian policy-making system, it tends to mask a complex, �mixed economy�, whereby there is a continued preference for many of the mechanisms of bureaucratic ways of organising for policy analysis, combined with a growing challenge from various forms of networks, which are sometimes �dressed� as markets but retain the essential elements of policy (or, perhaps more particularly, political) networks. Nevertheless, the growing use of the language and some of the forms of the market in Australia�s policy-making system suggests that practitioners and researchers need to take this form into account when considering ways of organising (in the case of practitioners) or ways of studying (for researchers) policy development in Australia.