Skal højtbegavede børn inkluderes i den almene folkeskole?: En mixed methods undersøgelse af trivsel og læringsudbytte blandt højtbegavede børn på henholdsvis eliteskoler og den almene folkeskole
Forfattere
Christensen, Dunja Sønderkjær ; Olesen, Camilla Myrrhøj
Semester
4. semester
Uddannelse
Udgivelsesår
2015
Afleveret
2015-05-26
Antal sider
126
Abstract
Salamanca-erklæringen forpligter skolen til at rumme alle børn, også de højtbegavede. I praksis er inklusionsindsatser dog ofte rettet mod elever med faglige udfordringer, mens fagligt stærke elever sjældent får særlig opmærksomhed. Vi ønsker at skabe større bevidsthed om højtbegavede børn og undersøger, om eliteskoler (skoler for særligt begavede) giver et bedre fundament end folkeskolen, samt om det at samle højtbegavede i eliteskoler er eksklusion eller også kan forstås som inklusion. Konkret ser vi på, hvilke forhold i læringsmiljøet der påvirker højtbegavede elevers oplevelse af læringsudbytte og trivsel i henholdsvis eliteskoler og folkeskolen. Studiet bygger på en blandet metode-tilgang med både kvantitative og kvalitative data. For folkeskolen analyserede vi eksisterende kvantitative og kvalitative data via dokumentanalyse. For eliteskolen indsamlede vi kvantitative spørgeskemaer fra højtbegavede elever på en eliteskole. Derudover anvendte vi retrospektive spørgeskemaer fra højtbegavede børn og deres forældre om erfaringer fra folkeskolen samt et semistruktureret interview med en højtbegavet ung, der havde gået i begge skoleformer. Resultaterne peger på, at højtbegavede i folkeskolen kan blive skubbet ud af fællesskabet, hvilket kan tale for, at mange trives bedre i eliteskoler. Samtidig tyder analysen på, at læring styrkes, når der er passende sammenhæng mellem elevens kompetence og udfordringsniveau; blandede elevgrupper kan fremme både faglig og social udvikling gennem gensidig læring. Eliteskoler ser ofte ud til at mindske følelsen af anderledeshed, fordi forskellighed er normaliseret, men de kan også skabe et beskyttet miljø, som gør senere overgang til mere blandede miljøer vanskeligere. Læring og trivsel påvirker hinanden gensidigt og skal begge være til stede for, at inklusion af højtbegavede lykkes. Da meget tyder på, at højtbegavede både lærer og trives bedre i eliteskoler, vurderer vi, at deres deltagelse i eliteskolers fællesskaber også kan betragtes som inklusion. Vi fandt mere relationskompetente mønstre blandt højtbegavede i eliteskoler end i folkeskolen; med passende støtte kan sådanne mønstre udvikles i folkeskolen også. I forhold til mobning var fokus i eliteskoler mere socialt orienteret (gruppedynamik), mens det i folkeskolen var mere individuelt orienteret. Signifikant flere højtbegavede oplevede mobning i folkeskolen; et mere socialt fokus kunne muligvis mindske mobning her. Samlet set er der fordele og ulemper ved begge skoleformer, og den bedste løsning afhænger af det enkelte barn. På tidspunktet for vores dataindsamling pegede resultaterne overvejende på større udbytte i eliteskoler for både trivsel og læring, mens folkeskolen samtidigt var på vej mod mere inkluderende og socialt orienterede praksisser, som kan forbedre forholdene for højtbegavede.
The Salamanca Declaration commits schools to include all children, including those who are gifted. In practice, however, inclusion efforts often target students who struggle academically, while high-ability students receive little specific attention. Our aim is to raise awareness about gifted children and examine whether elite schools (schools for highly gifted students) provide a better foundation than public schools, and whether grouping gifted students in elite schools is exclusion or can also be understood as inclusion. We focus on which aspects of the learning environment shape gifted students’ perceived learning outcomes and well-being in elite schools versus public primary schools. We used a mixed-methods approach combining quantitative and qualitative data. For public schools, we conducted a document analysis of existing quantitative and qualitative material. For elite schools, we collected quantitative questionnaires from gifted students at an elite school. We also used retrospective questionnaires from gifted children and their parents about public primary school experiences, and a semi-structured interview with a gifted adolescent who had attended both school types. Findings indicate that gifted students in public schools can be pushed to the margins of the peer community, suggesting that many may thrive better in elite schools. At the same time, our analysis suggests that learning is strongest when the level of challenge appropriately matches students’ competence; mixed-ability settings can support both academic and social development through mutual learning. Elite schools often lessen feelings of otherness because difference is normalized, but they can also create a sheltered environment that makes later transitions to more mixed settings harder. Learning and well-being reinforce each other and are both necessary for successful inclusion. Because much points to gifted students learning and thriving better in elite schools, we consider participation in elite-school communities a form of inclusion. We observed more socially competent relationship patterns among gifted students in elite schools than in public schools; with appropriate support, such patterns can also develop in public schools. Regarding bullying, elite schools tend to adopt a socially oriented (group-focused) approach, whereas public schools focus more on individuals. Significantly more gifted students reported being bullied in public schools; a more social approach there might reduce bullying. Overall, each setting has advantages and drawbacks, and the best option depends on the individual child. At the time of data collection, most results pointed to greater benefits in elite schools for both well-being and learning, while public schools were moving toward more inclusive and socially oriented practices that may improve conditions for gifted students.
[Dette resumé er genereret ved hjælp af AI]
Emneord
