Little research has been conducted to gain deeper understandings of policy change of piloting special educational need coordinators (SENCO) in a Chinese education community. In response to the change in policy towards regularisation of the SENCO, we examined a trajectory of policymaking for SEN support in Hong Kong’s integrated education. Critical discourse analysis as a discursive method of analysing the local SEN practices in relation to the international policy development was adopted. The key questions are: What is the difference between this Chinese integrated education and international policy development for inclusion? What effects of the pilot SENCO have emerged in the policy and media texts in the Chinese integrated education? What recommendations can be derived to inform the regularisation of SENCOs in ordinary public schools? The findings shed light on the conceptual discrepancy between integrated and inclusive education in the policymaking. The economic considerations and administration accountability of the pilot SENCO affected the regularisation. As reflected in this Chinese integrated education, we also discuss the implications of changing the SENCO policy for quality SEN support in schools. Copyright © 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
|Journal||International Journal of Inclusive Education|
|Early online date||19 Jul 2018|
|Publication status||Published - 2020|
CitationSzeto, E., Cheng, A. Y. N., & Sin, K. K. F. (2020). Still not inclusive? A critical analysis of changing the SENCO policy in a Chinese school community. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(8), 828-848. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2018.1492642
- Chinese school community
- Critical discourse analysis