The Enrichment Perspective, formulated in Norway as an alternative or supplementary approach to the diagnostic-therapeutic special education model, is described. the enrichment Perspective is a strengths- and ability-based model that involves an assessment of what the child can do as well as what the school can do, and uses this information as the point of departure in creating or adapting learning environments. in addition, the author provides a brief history of special education in europe, describes some illustrative examples of the enrichment perspective, and addresses several potential barriers to the implementation of the Enrichment perspective.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Befring, E. (1990). Special education in Norway. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 37, 125–36.
2.
Befring, E. (1994). Laering og skole: Vilkar for eit verdig liv [Learning and school: Conditions for a dignified life].Oslo, Norway: Det Norske Samlaget.
3.
Befring, E. (1996). Skolens møte med barn. Behov for pedagogisk nyorientering [The school and our children: The need for new educational perspectives]. In I. M. Helgeland (Ed.), Forebyggende arbeid iskolen-en pedagogisk utfordring [Preventative measures in school. An educational challenge] (pp. 15–34). Oslo, Norway: Kommuneforlaget.
4.
Brown, A. L. (1994). The advancement of learning. Educational Researcher, 8, 4–12.
5.
Egelund, N., Ertmann, B., & Jorgensen, P. S. (1993). Risikoborn-set fra en forskningssynsvinkel [Children at risk considered from a research point of view].Copenhagen, Denmark: Det Tvserminis-terielle Borneudvalg.
6.
Evans, P. (1995). Conclusions and policy implications. In P. Evans (Ed.) Our children at risk (pp. 137–145). Paris: Center for Educational Research and Innovation, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
7.
Helland, U. (1995). Moteplass fjell [Meeting place at Fjell School]. SCHOLA [The Journal of the Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research], 3, 11–14.
8.
Kohn, A. (1986). No contest: The case against competition.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
9.
Logstrup, K. E. (1989). Den etiske fordring [The ethical demand].Copenhagen, Denmark: Gyldendahlske Boghandel.
10.
Mostert, M. E., & Kauffman, J. M. (1993). The friend of discrimination: Education reform proposals, business strategies, and prospects for students with disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 9, 111–122.
11.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (1995). Integrating students with special needs into mainstream schools.Paris: Center for Educational Research and Innovation.
12.
Persson, B. (1995). Specialpedagogisk arbete i grundskolan [Special educational work in the elementary school].Goteborgs, Sweden: Goteborgs Universitet, International Standard Serial No. 1104–6759.
13.
Peterson, A. (1987). Schools across frontiers.Adriatics, Italy: United World Colleges.
14.
Skaalvik, E. (1996). Bams selvoppfatning-skolens ansvar[Children's self-concept: The school's responsibility] (2nd ed.). Oslo, Norway: Tano.
15.
Thousand, J. S., Villa, R. A., & Nevin, A. I. (1994). Creativity and collaborative learning: A practical guide to empowering students and teachers.Baltimore: Brookes.
16.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1994). The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. Document 94/WS/18. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
