The inclusion of students with vision impairment (VI) into regular classes is typically made possible via a raft of technical accommodations and special educational support. This article reports key findings of a small-scale qualitative Australian study conducted with a group of secondary school students with VI about teachers’ practices that increased their access and autonomy. Participants reported that a combination of (1) using appropriate communication modes, (2) making accessible resources available to students in a timely manner, (3) being able to ‘think outside the box’ about the provision of access to diagrammatic study material, and (4) being approachable outside of scheduled lessons for individual consultations increased their inclusion in the school. Raw data are presented to illustrate the value of these practices to the students. This article concludes with a discussion of the potential of students’ views to the facilitation of inclusive practices, and the broader implication of this to the teaching profession.
BallS. J. (2006). Education policy and social class: The selected works of Stephen J. Ball. New York, NY: Routledge.
4.
BoothT.AinscowM. (2011). Index for inclusion: Developing learning and participation in schools (3rd ed.). Bristol, UK: CSIE.
5.
BrownJ. E. (2009). Life pathways or lonely dead-ends? The transition from secondary school to post-school life for adolescents with vision impairment. In GarrickB.PoedS.SkinnerJ. (Eds.), Educational planet shapers: Researching, hypothesising, dreaming the future (pp. 97–113). Brisbane, QLD, Australia: Post Pressed.
6.
CharmazK. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
7.
Cook-SatherA. (2006). Sound, presence, and power: Student voice in educational research and reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36, 359–390.
8.
CoxP. R.DykesM. K. (2001). Effective classroom adaptations for students with visual impairments. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33, 68–74.
9.
ForemanP. (2011). Introducing inclusion in education. In ForemanP. (Ed.), Inclusion in Action (3rd ed., pp. 2–34). South Melbourne, VIC, Australia: Cengage.
10.
ForemanP.Arthur-KellyM. (2008). Social justice principles, the law and research, as bases for inclusion. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 32, 109–124.
11.
GlaserB.StraussA. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishers.
12.
HatlenP. (1996). The core curriculum for blind and visually impaired students, including those with additional disabilities. RE:view, 28, 25–32.
13.
HigginsN.BallardK. (2000). Like everybody else? What seven New Zealand adults learned about blindness from the education system. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 4, 163–178.
14.
KellyS. M. (2009). Use of assistive technology by students with visual impairments: Findings from a national survey. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 103, 470–480.
15.
KhadkaJ.RyanB.MargrainT. J.WoodhouseM. J.DaviesN. (2012). Listening to voices of children with a visual impairment: A focus group study. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 30, 182–196.
16.
MilesS.AinscowM. (2011). Introduction. In MilesS.AinscowM. (Eds.), Responding to diversity in schools: An inquiry-based approach (pp. 1–16). London, England: Routledge.
17.
MossJ. (2012). Curriculum, visuality and educational research (ROSE Professorial Lecture Series). Julianne Moss, Deakin UniversityJune42012.
18.
O’BrienP. (1989). Mainstreaming of secondary school students with visual impairments. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
19.
PalmerC. D. (2005). Educating learners with vision impairment in inclusive settings. International Congress Series, 1282, 922–926.
SharmaU.MooreD.FurlongerB.Smyth KingB.KayeL.ConstantinouO. (2010). Forming effective partnerships to facilitate inclusion of students with vision impairments: Perceptions of a regular classroom teacher and an itinerant teacher. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 28, 57–67.
22.
SleeR. (2011). The irregular school: Exclusion, schooling and inclusive education. London, England: Routledge.
23.
StraussA. C.CorbinJ. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
24.
TewsL.LupartJ. (2008). Students with disabilities’ perspectives of the role and impact of paraprofessionals in inclusive education settings. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 5, 39–46.
25.
TuttleD. W.TuttleN. R. (2004). Self-esteem and adjusting with blindness: The process of responding to life’s demands (3rd ed.). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
26.
WestJ.HoughtenS.TaylorM.LingP. K. (2004). The perspectives of Singapore secondary school students with vision impairments towards their inclusion in mainstream education. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 28(1), 18–27.
27.
WhitburnB. (2013). The dissection of paraprofessional support in inclusive education: ‘You’re in mainstream with a chaperone’. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 37, 147–161.
28.
WhitburnB. (2014). Accessibility and autonomy preconditions to ‘our’ inclusion: A grounded theory study of the experiences of secondary students with vision impairment. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 14(1), 3–15. DOI: 10.1111/1471-3802.12014.
