Addressing Gaps in Inclusive Education Through Innovative Approaches to Training Specialists in the Field of Psychological and Pedagogical Support for Children with Disabilities

Aitolkyn  Duzelbayeva; Zulfiya  Movkebayeva; Yermagambet  Aliya; Dana  Khamitova; Ainur  Kabdyrova; Malika  Ussenova

doi:10.48161/qaj.v5n4a2084

Authors

Aitolkyn Duzelbayeva Department of Inclusive education, Pavlodar Pedagogical University named after Alkey Margulan, Pavlodar 140000, Kazakhstan;
Zulfiya Movkebayeva Department of Pedagogy and Psychology, Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University, Almaty 050010, Kazakhstan;
Yermagambet Aliya Department of Pedagogy and Psychology, Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University, Almaty 050010, Kazakhstan;
Dana Khamitova Department of Inclusive education, Pavlodar Pedagogical University named after Alkey Margulan, Pavlodar 140000, Kazakhstan;
Ainur Kabdyrova Department of Education, Kazakh National Women's Pedagogical University, Almaty 050000 Kazakhstan.
Malika Ussenova Department of Pedagogy and Psychology, Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University, Almaty 050010, Kazakhstan;

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48161/qaj.v5n4a2084

Keywords:

inclusive education, psychological support, pedagogical strategies, children with disabilities, specialist training, multidisciplinary approaches, technology integration, professional development, educational policy.

Abstract

This paper examines the critical gaps in inclusive education, with a particular focus on the training of specialists in the psychological and educational support of children with disabilities. Despite advances in inclusive practice, there remains a significant shortage of adequately trained professionals to meet the diverse needs of these children. Through a comprehensive review of current literature and innovative training methods, this study highlights the effectiveness of multidisciplinary approaches and the integration of technology in enhancing professional competencies. It also examines case studies from different educational settings to demonstrate practical applications. The findings suggest that a holistic and adaptive training framework, including theoretical knowledge, practical skills and emotional intelligence, is essential for effective inclusive education. The study concludes with recommendations for policy makers, educators and training institutions to address these gaps, emphasising the need for continuous professional development and a collaborative approach to support inclusive education for children with disabilities. The objective of this study is to identify key challenges and propose evidence-based strategies for improving the professional training of specialists in inclusive education. The methodology involves a systematic review of recent academic and policy sources, along with case analysis from diverse educational contexts to ensure a comprehensive understanding of current practices and outcomes.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ainscow, M., & Messiou, K. (2018). Engaging with the views of students to promote inclusion in education. Journal of Educational Change, 19(1), 1–17.

American Educational Research Association. (2011). Code of ethics.

American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct.

American Sociological Association. (2019). Privacy and confidentiality committee guidelines.

American Statistical Association. (2018). Ethical guidelines for statistical practice.

Bankert, E. A., & Amdur, R. J. (2018). Institutional review board: Management and function.

Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2013). Principles of biomedical ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Bozkus Kahyaoglu, S., Balkan, B., & Balkan, O. (2019). Determinants of ethics auditing: Structural equation model approach. In Ethics and Sustainability in Accounting and Finance, Volume I (pp. 85–110).

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners.

Committee on Publication Ethics. (2019). COPE guidelines.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research.

Data Protection Act. (2018).

ERIC (Educational Resources Information Center). (n.d.). ERIC – Education resources information center.

Fisher, C. B. (2017). Decoding the ethics code: A practical guide for psychologists.

Fisher, C. B., & Anushko, A. (2008). Research ethics in social science.

Florian, L., & Black-Hawkins, K. (2016). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal, 42(5), 813–828.

Gilmour, A., Sandilos, L. E., Pilny, W. V., Schwartz, S., & Wehby, J. H. (2021). Teaching students with emotional/behavioral disorders: Teachers’ burnout profiles and classroom management. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 30(1).

Google Scholar. (n.d.).

International Organization for Standardization. (2018). ISO/IEC standards on data protection.

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.

Mertens, D. M., & Ginsberg, P. E. (2009). The handbook of social research ethics.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097.

National Institutes of Health. (2020). NIH data sharing policies.

Office for Human Research Protections. (2018). OHRP guidance on anonymization and data management.

Ozel, E., Ganesan, M. Z., Megat Daud, A. K., Darusalam, G., & Nik Ali, N. A. (2018). Critical issue teacher training into inclusive education. Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience, 24(7), 5139–5142.

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

PsycINFO. (n.d.). APA PsycINFO. American Psychological Association.

Resnik, D. B. (2014). What is ethics in research & why is it important?

Sharma, U., Forlin, C., & Loreman, T. (2008). Impact of training on pre-service teachers’ attitudes and concerns about inclusive education and sentiments about persons with disabilities. Disability & Society, 23(7), 773–785.

Sieber, J. E., & Tolich, M. B. (2013). Planning ethically responsible research.

Society for Research in Child Development. (2015). Ethical standards in research.

Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555–575.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2018). Protection of human subjects.

Wiles, R., Crow, G., Heath, S., & Charles, V. (2008). The management of confidentiality and anonymity in social research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(5), 417–428.