Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

There have been ongoing issues surrounding students with learning disabilities across different countries and cultures, including South Korea. This study aims to propose future education policies and practices for students with learning disabilities using Delphi surveys and topic modeling. To evaluate experts’ responses and validate the opinion-driven proposals of education policies and practices, we induced six education policies through three rounds of Delphi surveys of 10 experts from diverse backgrounds related to learning disabilities or special education in South Korea. Policy practices were manually reviewed and validated with content ratio values of at least .80. This study raises awareness of policies’ importance in supporting students with learning disabilities and their families. Furthermore, this study contributes to the field by offering insights on how to establish consensus on education policies and practices among experts with diverse perspectives, benefiting the global community.

Keywords

Delphi surveys education policies learning disabilities South Korea topic modeling

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Act on Special Education for Persons with Disabilities. (2008). Act no. 8852.

Agrawal

Barrio

B. L.

Kressler

Hsiao

Y. J.

Shankland

R. K.

(2019). International policies, identification, and services for students with learning disabilities: An exploration across 10 countries. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 17(1), 95–113. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1218057.pdf

Aro

Eklund

Eloranta

A.-K.

Ahonen

Rescorla

(2022). Learning disabilities elevate children’s risk for behavioral-emotional problems: Differences between LD types, genders, and contexts. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 55(6), 465–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194211056297

Barrio

B. L.

(2022). Culturally responsive individualized education programs: Building transition bridges between families and schools. Intervention in School and Clinic, 58(2), 92–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512211051071

Basic Academic Achievement Guarantee Act. (2022). Act no. 18458.

Beiderbeck

Frevel

von der Gracht

H. A.

Schmidt

S. L.

Schweitzer

V. M.

(2021). Preparing, conducting, and analyzing Delphi surveys: Cross-disciplinary practices, new directions, and advancements. MethodsX, 8, Article 101401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2021.101401

Benoit

Watanabe

Wang

Nulty

Obeng

Muller

Matsuo

(2018). quanteda: An R package for the quantitative analysis of textual data. Journal of Open Source Software, 3(30), Article 774. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00774

Birko

Dove

E. S.

Özdemir

(2015). Evaluation of nine consensus indices in Delphi foresight research and their dependency on Delphi survey characteristics: A simulation study and debate on Delphi design and interpretation. PLOS ONE, 10(8), Article e0135162. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0135162

Blei

D. M.

A. Y.

Jordan

M. I.

(2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993–1022. https://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume3/blei03a/blei03a.pdf

10.

Constitution of the Republic of Korea. (1987). Law no. 10.

11.

Denton

Coneway

Simmons

Behl

Shin

(2022). Parents’ voices matter: A mixed-method study on the dyslexia diagnosis process. Psychology in the Schools, 59(11), 2267–2286. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22762

12.

Harding

Chauhan-Sims

Oxley

Nash

H. M.

(2023). A Delphi study exploring the barriers to dyslexia diagnosis and support: A parent’s perspective. Dyslexia, 29(3), 162–178. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1743

13.

Jeon

(2016). KoNLP: Korean NLP package (R package version 0.80.2)[Computer software]. https://github.com/haven-jeon/KoNLP

14.

Kang

E. Y.

(2021). Awareness of competences and teacher education plan that special education experts should have to prepare for the era of intelligent information revolution. Korean Journal of Special Education, 56(2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.15861/kjse.2021.56.2.1

15.

Kang

E. Y.

Kang

(2021). Education alienation and education gaps narrowed by linkage between school and community, general education and special education. The Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 21(5), 125–145. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2021.21.5.125

16.

Kang

E. Y.

Park

Shin

(2023). Analysis of perceptions for the development of future education policies for students with learning disabilities in accordance with recent changes in the education field. The Korea Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(3), 111–138. https://doi.org/10.47635/KJLD.2023.20.3.111

17.

Kang

E. Y.

Seo

H. J.

Park

Y. J.

Shin

Y. S.

(2021). A case analysis on referral, selection, and rejection of special education students with learning disabilities. The Korea Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18(3), 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.47635/KJLD.2021.18.3.1

18.

Kim

Jung

(2018). Who are students with learning disabilities, dyslexia, low achievement, and learning support needs? Is the current educational support all right? The role and the task of special education. Korean Journal of Special Education, 53(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.15861/kjse.2018.53.1.1

19.

Kim

Baek

(2024). Inclusive education in South Korea. Remedial and Special Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325241240060

20.

Kim

(2016). Definitions and interventions of children at risk for disabilities: Experiences and perceptions of general and special education teachers. Korean Journal of Special Education, 51(3), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.15861/kjse.2016.51.3.1

21.

Korea Learning Disabilities Association. (2023). A call for policy research of Korea learning disabilities association.

22.

Lawshe

C. H.

(1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x

23.

Lee

Shin

(2019). A national online survey of South Korean high school students’ understanding of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 42(1), 46–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948718790062

24.

Lee

Shin

(2023). Universal design for learning in adapted national-level digital mathematics textbooks for elementary school students with disabilities. Exceptionality, 31(1), 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2021.1938062

25.

Lee

Lim

(2024). Marginalization at the intersection of language, culture, and disability: Systemic contradictions perceived by special education teachers in serving culturally and linguistically diverse students with disabilities in South Korea. Peabody Journal of Education, 99(1), 42–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2024.2307800

26.

Mahmić-Kaknjo

Tomić

Ellen

M. E.

Nussbaumer-Streit

Sfetcu

Baladia

Riva

Kassianos

A. P.

Marušić

(2023). Delphi survey on the most promising areas and methods to improve systematic reviews’ production and updating. Systematic Reviews, 12(1), Article 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02223-3

27.

Manyara

A. M.

Purvis

Ciani

Collins

G. S.

Taylor

R. S.

(2024). Sample size in multistakeholder Delphi surveys: At what minimum sample size do replicability of results stabilize? Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 174, Article 111485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111485

28.

Ministry of Education. (2022). 6th five-year development plan for persons with disabilities (2023–2027).

29.

Ministry of Education. (2023). 2023 Annual special education report.

30.

Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development. (1997). 1st five-year development plan for persons with disabilities.

31.

Murphy

M. R.

Christle

C. A.

(2022). Co-teaching for students with learning disabilities: One middle school’s journey. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 68(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2022.2138250

32.

National Center for Basic Skills Support. (2022). About basic skills support. https://k-basics.org/user/support.do?menuSeq=713

33.

National Institute of Special Education. (2019). Teaching and learning materials for inclusive education of students with disabilities: Grade 5 mathematics. MiraeN.

34.

Norwich

(2014). Changing policy and legislation and its effects on inclusive and special education: A perspective from England. British Journal of Special Education, 41(4), 403–425. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12079

35.

Papadimitriou

C. H.

Raghavan

Tamaki

Vempala

(2000). Latent semantic indexing: A probabilistic analysis. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 61(2), 217–235. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcss.2000.1711

36.

Park

Hong

Choi

(2012). Development and use of the quality indicators of inclusive education: Toward the evaluation of elementary inclusive education. Korean Journal of Special Education, 47(1), 87–117.

37.

Roberts

M. E.

Stewart

B. M.

Tingley

(2019). stm: An R package for structural topic models. Journal of Statistical Software, 91(2), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v091.i02

38.

Roberts

M. E.

Stewart

B. M.

Tingley

Lucas

Leder-Luis

Gadarian

S. K.

Albertson

Rand

D. G.

(2014). Structural topic models for open-ended survey responses. American Journal of Political Science, 58(4), 1064–1082. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12103

39.

Rodriguez

M. Y.

Storer

(2020). A computational social science perspective on qualitative data exploration: Using topic models for the descriptive analysis of social media data. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 38(1), 54–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228835.2019.1616350

40.

Romero Jeldres

Díaz Costa

Faouzi Nadim

. (2023). A review of Lawshe’s method for calculating content validity in the social sciences. Frontiers in Education, 8, Article 1271335. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1271335

41.

Rossetti

Sauer

J. S.

Bui

(2017). Developing collaborative partnerships with culturally and linguistically diverse families during the IEP process. Teaching Exceptional Children, 49(5), 328–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059916680103

42.

Shin

(2024). TextAnalysisR: Text mining workflow tools (R package version 0.0.1)[Computer software]. https://mshin77.github.io/TextAnalysisR

43.

Shin

Choi

(2022). The invisible population of students with learning disabilities in South Korea. Intervention in School and Clinic, 57(3), 194–197. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512211014883

44.

Shin

Park

Kang

E. Y.

(2024). Development of education policies and practices for students with learning disabilities in South Korea using Delphi surveys and topic modeling [Data set and code]. Center for Open Science. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TMF5A

45.

Special Education Promotion Act. (1994). Act no. 4716.

46.

Zeng

Zhang

(2024). The relationships among parent involvement, student self-determination, and postsecondary education enrollment for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 35(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221130748

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.09 MB

Development of Education Policies and Practices for Students With Learning Disabilities in South Korea Using Delphi Surveys and Topic Modeling

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material