Abstract
Purpose
This study provides a comprehensive review of the highlights and developmental trends in special education in China over the past decade.
Design/Approach/Methods
CiteSpace was used to analyze 1,564 academic papers published in the Chinese Journal of Special Education (CJSE), the only academic journal focusing on special education in China.
Findings
Analysis revealed that the research highlights covered areas of special education governance, inclusive education (including learning in regular classrooms), teachers and the curriculum, the traditional “three basic disability types,” and the newly recognized category of Special Education Needs (SEN). The scope of research has expanded from a limited range of disability types to a wide range of SEN, policymaking has accelerated the development of China's special education, and curriculum reform has played a key role in facilitating the integration of general and special education systems.
Originality/Value
The published papers fully reflect international frontier research in the field of inclusive education over the past decade, revealing the discursive system and practice mode of inclusive education with Chinese characteristics.
Introduction
Following the introduction of the Reform and Opening-up Policy in the late 1970s, China instituted universal compulsory education for all. Enrolling children with disabilities, most of whom had been deprived of education, was a significant challenge for society at the time (Deng & Harris, 2008). Published in 1986, the Compulsory Education Law of the People's Republic of China stipulated that “local people's governments at or above the county level shall establish special education schools (classes) for the blind, deaf-dumb, and mentally retarded children and adolescents” (Tang, 2021). Since 1987, 15 counties and cities have conducted systematic experimental studies on learning in regular classrooms (LRC). The first national conference on special education was held in 1988, whereafter the then-State Education Commission officially made LRC a policy intended to include children with disabilities in regular classes (Xiao, 2005). By this point, the education placement for students with disabilities, structured by special education schools, special education classes, and LRC, had taken effect (Zhang & Zhang, 2021). In July 1994, the then-State Education Commission issued Trial Measures on the Implication of LRC for Children and Adolescents with Disabilities to regulate and disseminate the practice of LRC programs nationwide based on previous experiences.
Inclusive education is defined as “the process of addressing and responding to the diversity of needs of all learners by increasing participation in learning, cultures, and communities, and reducing exclusion within and from education. It involves changes and modifications in content, approaches, structures, and strategies, with a common vision that covers all children of the appropriate age range and a conviction that it is the responsibility of the regular system to educate all children” (UNESCO, 2005). In 2017, Regulations on Education for Individuals with Disabilities asserted the need to “actively promote inclusive education” (The State Council, 2017). Enacted in the same year, The Second Phase of the Special Education Promotion Plan (2017–2020) stipulated that “priority should be given to the use of regular education schools to accommodate school-aged children and adolescents with disabilities in the vicinity to receive compulsory education” (MOE and Six Other Departments, 2017). It also advocated the need “to promote inclusive education comprehensively by taking LRC as the major strategy, special education schools as the backbone, and homeschooling and distance education as supplementary forms of placement.” In 2020, the MOE issued Guidelines on Strengthening LRC for Children with Disabilities in Compulsory Education, which asserted that “LRC is an important way to ensure that children and youth with disabilities receive compulsory education on an equal basis” (Guo & Deng, 2021). In 2021, the State Council, the highest administrative power in China, advanced the Action Plan for Promoting Special Education during the Fourteenth Five-Year Plan Period formulated by the Ministry of Education and other departments and endorsed the goal of the “comprehensive promotion of inclusive education.” Responding to international and domestic calls for equitable and quality education for all, these regulations called for the development of comprehensive inclusive education and the expansion of LRC to be more inclusive.
As the only authoritative government-authorized academic journal in the field of special education in China, the Chinese Journal of Special Education (CJSE), founded in 1994, primarily publishes research papers related to special education. Unlike most Western educational journals that accept submissions and publish papers on special education, Chinese educational journals rarely publish papers on special education. As a result, the CJSE is the only academic journal for special education in China, thus becoming the basic platform for academic exchange and discipline construction for Chinese special education.
The CJSE has not only witnessed but actively promoted the transformation of traditional special education into inclusive education in China. Since the publication of “A Study on the Teaching Mode of Mathematics in Classes of LRC” (Hua, 1994) in the first issue of the CJSE in 1994, the journal has designed a column on inclusive education that has become a banner for the research and advocacy of inclusive education (Hua & Yan, 2022; Lu et al., 2021; Wang, Liu et al., 2022; Yang, 2021; Zhao et al., 2022). Given the importance and authority of the CJSE and Bradford's law of literature dispersion, most of the key literature is published in a few core journals (Chen et al., 2015). Publications in the CJSE reflect the theory and practice of special education and inclusive education development in China. Therefore, this study reviews and analyzes the highlights and development trends of special education research over the past decade. In doing so, this study identifies and frames the characteristics of Chinese special education and provides a reference for subsequent special education research practices.
Method
Data source
Data were obtained from the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), the largest full-text database of Chinese journals in China. Using the CNKI's advanced search function, we entered “Chinese Journal of Special Education” and selected “literature sources” as the source category. Figure 1 shows the identification of studies via CNKI, with 1,564 articles finally identified as valid samples.
Flowchart of data processing.
Research instrument
This study used CiteSpace visualization software, which was developed by Dr. Chen based on the JAVA language platform, to analyze data samples (Chen, 2006). Based on the pathfinder algorithm and co-citation analysis theory, CiteSpace has been widely used to examine research highlights and development trends by analyzing the literature published in a certain field.
Data analysis
The CNKI search results were exported in the Refworks format per CiteSpace's input requirements and analysis was performed using CiteSpace 5.8. R3. Figure 1 shows the data processing method.
Phase 1: Data identification. In this study, the literature source was limited to the CJSE and the study period from January 2012 to May 2022. After removing calls for submission, conference notices, and papers focusing on normal groups, a total of 1,564 academic papers were selected for the next processing phase.
Phase 2: Data analysis. CiteSpace was used for data analysis. The time span was limited to 2012–2022; the time slice was set to one year; and the term sources were set to “Title,” “Abstract,” “Author Keyword (DE),” and “Keyword Plus (ID).” The node type was set as “Keyword,” while the threshold was set as “Top n = 50.” The co-occurrence network of keyword analysis was used to reveal research highlights by detecting high-frequency and high-centrality co-occurrence keywords. As academic publications are summarized and condensed into keywords, high-frequency keywords can be used to represent the research concentration of studies in a specific field (Li & Chen, 2016). Centrality of keywords is widely employed to qualify the importance of a node's position, with high-centrality keywords considered important hubs in the network (Zhao et al., 2019). With respect to the co-occurrence network of keywords analysis, it should be noted that because the keyword “inclusive education” was translated into two different Chinese terms—namely, “全纳教育” (inclusive education) and “融合教育” (inclusive education)—the terms were merged into one in the results. The same was done in the case of the keyword for “autism,” which was translated into “自闭症” (autism) or “孤独症” (autism). Keyword burst analysis was used to indicate the research development trends. Burst words can indicate active topics that are attracting unusual attention from researchers in a certain period, thus enabling the exploration of research trends (Bicheng et al., 2022). Finally, the research topics were sorted by combining them with the results of the literature analysis.
Results
Keyword co-occurrence analysis
Figure 2 presents the co-occurrence network of keywords. The size of each keyword node represents the keyword's frequency: The more frequently the keyword appears, the larger the keyword node and the more attention the topic will receive from researchers. As Figure 2 shows, the most significant nodes were “special education,” “inclusive education,” “autism,” “migrant children,” “intervention,” and “learning in regular classroom.”
Co-occurrence network of keywords.
Table 1 presents the top 30 keywords with higher frequency and centrality, respectively. Keywords with both higher frequency and centrality include “special education,” “inclusive education,” “autism,” “migrant children,” “intervention,” “learning in regular classroom,” “social support,” “self-esteem,” “mediating effect,” “mental health,” “the United States,” “college students,” “depression,” “left-behind children,” “deaf students,” “resilience,” “sign language,” “children with special needs,” “test anxiety,” “individuals with disabilities,” and “influencing factors.” In other words, these keywords have received the most attention in the field, playing the most pivotal role in the field, and constituting the highlights of special education research in China over the recent ten years.
Top 30 keywords with higher frequency and centrality in the co-occurrence network.
Keyword burst analysis
As Figure 3 shows, this study identified a total of 17 burst keywords indicating research trends. Studies conducted over the last ten years can be divided into three categories based on research trends. The first stage lasted from 2012 to 2016, with the state issuing a series of policies, such as the National Special Education Promotion Plan (2014–2016), since 2012. The National Special Education Promotion Plan emphasized the importance of special education teachers and the combination of medicine and education (i.e., integration of medical rehabilitation training and education to address the development needs of special children). As Figure 3 shows, the main keywords in this stage were “mental health,” “teacher,” “combination of medicine and education,” “deaf people,” “adolescent,” and “coping styles,” indicating consistency between policies and practices.
Keyword burst detection results of special education research.
The second stage lasted from 2016 to 2018. In this stage, concentrated keywords were “executive function,” “experimental study,” “psychological security,” and “students with disabilities.” Such keywords indicate that more attention was paid to the characteristics and development mechanisms of individuals with Special Education Needs (SEN) and that empirical research—especially experimental studies and questionnaire investigations with large samples—dominated.
The third stage lasted from 2018 to 2022. In this stage, concentrated keywords included “inclusive education,” “moderating effect,” “learning engagement,” “self-esteem,” “meta-analysis,” “peer relationship,” and “school for the deaf.” This burst indicates that inclusive-education-oriented research focused on special children's behavioral performance and school education based on a more comprehensive research paradigm.
Overall, the terms “inclusive education,” “learning engagement,” “meta-analysis,” and “school for the deaf” are the earliest terms that are still in use. These four terms represent the research frontier of special education studies.
Analysis of research fields
Based on a comprehensive analysis of the results of co-occurrence and burst keywords and a thorough reading and understanding of the vast literature in this field, this study summarized and categorized special education into five dimensions: education governance systems, inclusive education, teacher education, curriculum construction, and SEN research (children with disability, children with autism, as well as gifted, migrant, and left-behind children). Table 2 presents the major keywords used in each dimension.
Research fields and major keywords related to special education in China, 2012–2022.
Research on the special education governance system
The special education governance system plays an important role in promoting the high-quality development of special education, the core of which lies in the establishment of management systems and rules. This dimension includes keywords like “special education,” “social support,” “medicine-education integration,” “special children,” and “people with disabilities” (see Table 2). The research content is primarily reflected in top-level national planning to comprehensively construct a modernized special education system. Since 2012, major special education-related policies and systems promulgated by the state include the National Special Education Promotion Plan (2014–2016), The Second Phase of the Special Education Promotion Plan (2017–2020), the Action Plan for Promoting Special Education During the Fourteenth Five-Year Plan Period, Regulations on Education for Individuals With Disabilities, and Guidelines on Strengthening LRC for Children with Disabilities in Compulsory Education. Such policies and systems have provided a strong guarantee for the continuous improvement of the special education system and the quality of special education (Tang, 2021).
The research findings in this area are mainly manifested in the following. First, the special education system has been improved. On the basis of ensuring compulsory education, the system has accelerated the extension of both special education to both the preschool and senior high school levels to support the entire process of education for those with disabilities. The traditional “spindle-shaped” mode of “big in the middle and small at both ends” (i.e., the scale of compulsory education is big, while preschool and high school education is small) has developed into a “trapezoid” mode with a more reasonable structure and smoother connection (Zhang & Deng, 2022).
Second, the educational management system has been improved. Since the Eighteenth National Congress of the Communist Party of China, a work mechanism for special education led by the government, with government departments performing their duties and the public participating in the work, has been established (Cheng, 2021).
Third, educational targets now cover all types of disabilities. In addition to the three traditional types of disability, more categories—such as cerebral palsy, autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and multiple disabilities—have officially been included in the scope of special education (Wang, 2017).
Fourth, formal education placement is now organized scientifically and orderly. Regulations on Education for Individuals With Disabilities specify the guiding ideology of inclusive education in the form of a legal system in the General Provisions. In recent years, governments at all levels have continuously worked to improve the LRC system, with more than 50% of students with disabilities enrolled in regular education schools as a result (Chen et al., 2022). China has thus formed a development pattern with LRC in regular education schools as the main body, special education schools as the backbone, and home delivery and distance education as supplements.
Fifth, the combining of medicine and education has become the focus of debate and research. Scholars who are supportive of the integration of medicine and education believe that promoting the reform of special education through the support of medical and rehabilitative services is a feasible response to the predicament of traditional teaching programs and methods being ineffective in educating those with special needs due to the structure change of education targets in schools of special education in China (Liu, Liu, Ma et al., 2021; Zhang, 2013). Those who disagree argue that combinations of medicine and education have undermined the social and educational model upon which the discipline of special education is based (Deng & Lu, 2012; Lu, 2013; Sheng, 2014).
Research on inclusive education
Table 2 lists the keywords relevant to this dimension, such as “inclusive education” and “LRC.” LRC is an educational innovation that improves the schooling access of children with disabilities in China. LRC can thus be regarded as a Chinese response to inclusive international education. This study mainly focuses on the following three aspects.
First, the discussion focuses on the localization of inclusive education. Some scholars believe that the theory of Chinese special education should be based on the model of LRC and move toward “Equal Regular Education,” which is consistent with the concept of inclusive education (Deng & Jing, 2013; Jing, 2021). Some scholars have suggested the inclusive education mode of “one body, two wings, and multi-core drive,” which takes inclusive education as the basic orientation and ultimate goal. In this respect, “one body” means that LRC is the main body or carrier for development, while “two wings” refers to a bilateral balanced and cooperative mechanism comprising ordinary and special schools. Meanwhile, “multi-core drive” refers to the systematic combination of rehabilitation institutions, special education classes, resource classrooms, and other placement options that complement one another (Deng & Du, 2019; Guo & Deng, 2021). Other scholars have advanced the “suitable inclusive education” mode. This mode takes equity and quality as its development goals, emphasizes the strategies of individualized and differential teaching, and constructs a support system emphasizing cooperation, sharing, and resource provision (Zhang & Deng, 2022). As such, these localized modes are becoming increasingly specific, fully taking into consideration the actual conditions and special education development needs in China and reflecting the implications of the conflict between local practices and international ideologies of inclusion.
Second, the research focuses on the teaching practices of inclusive education. Such practices primarily include the regional experiences of inclusive education, the building of an integrated professional support system, and a localized model of “trinity” combining the values of socialist collectivism, the concept of all-round human development, and a humanitarian spirit (Sun et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2017; Wang, Zhang et al., 2022). In terms of teaching organization, researchers have explored the characteristics and forms of differentiated, tiered, and inquiry teaching in the context of inclusive education (Hua, 2012; Wu, 2015; Wu et al., 2018), reflecting the increasing emphasis on providing appropriate education for students with diverse needs. In terms of classroom participation, research indicates that most teachers are conscious of providing support for the learning of students with disabilities but lack the necessary expertise and support to do so. At present, the classroom participation of students with disabilities in inclusive education is unsatisfactory and remains a marked challenge (Guan, 2017).
Third, the literature highlights a support system for inclusive education. Relevant policies in China have created comprehensive regulations for the school environment, financial support, teacher education and training, and school and class management to improve the support system for students with disabilities (Fan & Wei, 2022). Such regulations have paid particular attention to improving the accessibility of examinations for students with disabilities. A policy for separate college entrance examinations for higher education for persons with disabilities has also been enacted to practice (Cheng, 2021).
The literature also discusses specific support measures, including changing social values, advocating legislating laws and regulations, integrating special and regular education, reforming teacher training, and providing flexible curricula (Peng, 2020; Zhang & Li, 2022). The research trend in this field has transformed from a theoretical discussion on support systems to more empirical studies on implementing professional support systems in diversified educational settings.
Research on teacher education
The key to special education is teacher education. As Table 2 shows, this dimension includes keywords like “special education teachers,” “professional standards,” and “qualification certification.” Research has shown that teachers, professional standards, and qualification certifications play an important role in improving the quality of teachers and education (Gu et al., 2014). Such measures have been introduced in developed countries, such as the United States, Britain, New Zealand, and Japan. For example, in the United States, the current pre-service training mode for teachers of inclusive education is the “dual licensure” program designed to fully integrate regular and special teachers (Feng & Wang, 2015, 2021). Meanwhile, New Zealand provides both regular and special education knowledge for in-service preschool teachers through the “Graduate Diploma Program of Early Special Education” (Zhu & Wang, 2022).
This type of training mode has begun to influence the training of special education teachers in China (Liu, Liu, & Xin, 2021; Tang & Wang, 2021). In response to the two main placement choices of special schools and LRC in China, some scholars have proposed that professional standards for special education teachers be divided into two categories, professional standards for teachers in LRC and special education schools and that the relevant content of special education be included in the teacher qualification examination (Gu et al., 2014). In 2019, China issued the Special Education Professional Accreditation Standards, which has stipulated a three-level professional accreditation standard system ranging from qualified to excellent levels (Yao, 2020). In addition to conforming with the general practice of establishing professional standards for teachers in China, this will facilitate the construction of professional certification systems for special education teachers.
Research on curriculum construction
In addition to being a significant factor affecting the quality of inclusive education, the curriculum is a key indicator in determining whether inclusive education can be implemented. As Table 2 shows, this dimension includes keywords like “special education schools” and “curriculum standards.” This study focuses on two main aspects.
First, there are curriculum standards for special-education schools. The first learning standards specially formulated for students with disabilities in China—that is, the compulsory education curriculum standards for the blind, deaf, and intellectually disabled—were released at the end of 2016. These standards combined the general principles of regular education and the specific features of special education to promote the inclusion of students with disabilities in society. The MOE subsequently organized and compiled textbooks for the blind, deaf, and intellectually disabled, which were used throughout the country (Huang et al., 2019). To focus on the potential development and functional compensation of students with disabilities, the state has developed several special courses and vigorously promoted the teaching reform and evaluation of the special education curriculum.
Second, China's compulsory curriculum for inclusive education has been reformed. In this respect, the discussions remain focused on theoretical debates around topics such as curriculum modification and adaptations and the Universal Design of Learning (Fan et al., 2021, 2022).
Research on children with SEN
According to the co-display results of high-frequency and high-centrality keywords as well as the literature analysis, this study further categorized the research on children with SEN as follows.
Research on the three basic types of disabilities
Hearing, visual, and intellectual disabilities have long been the dominant target disability types for special educational services. Students with intellectual disabilities account for more than half of the total number of students with disabilities. While the proportion of students with hearing and visual impairments has decreased, the number of students with multiple disabilities and ASD has increased steadily (Li, Wang et al., 2021; Yang et al., 2016). As Table 2 shows, this field primarily includes keywords like “schools for the intellectually disabled,” “hearing impaired,” “visually impaired,” “sign language,” “braille,” “peer relationships,” “executive function,” and “IEP.” This study focuses on the following aspects.
First, the standardization of national sign language and Braille have become the focus of research on visual and hearing impairment (Fu et al., 2021; Ju et al., 2022). The National Common Words List for Universal Sign Language and National Common Braille Program stipulated two forms of language and related writing standards. Other important publications include the National Dictionary for Universal Sign Language and National Anthem in Universal Sign Language. In addition to the dissemination of the national universal sign language and Braille, national training for key personnel in sign language and Braille is conducted throughout the country. Standards for national universal sign language and Braille, as well as standards for the qualification (level) of sign language translators, have been developed. The assessment standards for the level of National Universal Sign Language have also been refined (Cheng, 2021).
Second, intellectual disability research covers a wide range of topics, evidencing a shift from a focus on language and cognition (e.g., executive function) to socialization (e.g., peer relationships), mental health, and learning ability in school, with children with mild and moderate intellectual disability becoming the primary research subjects (Liu et al., 2022; Tian et al., 2021). The topics of intervention research on intellectual disability are mainly related to learning ability, social communication, and independent living (Xu et al., 2021; Zheng & Liu, 2022), indicating that psychological counseling and intervention have begun to serve the learning and lives of special children.
In recent years, schools for intellectually disabled people in China have practiced IEP and developed localized education and assessment measures, including school-based curriculum design for students with mild and severe intellectual disabilities and multiple disabilities (Li, Liu et al., 2021). Some special schools have established “Individualized Curriculum and Textbooks” (Sun et al., 2015), and developed “individualized assessment” and student profiles for students (Xin & Cao, 2016). However, while the concept of IEP is now well established (Cao et al., 2021), its implementation still requires systematic and institutional support.
Research on ASD
Social communication disorders are one of the core difficulties in ASD (Zeng et al., 2021). Research in this field has primarily focused on educational interventions for social communication disorders, with visual attention and composite interventions receiving significant attention. As Table 2 shows, this field mainly included keywords like “autism,” “social communication,” and “intervention.”
Researchers have introduced three types of interventions. The first category comprises interventions common to autism, such as Applied Behavioral Analysis, critical response training, and other behavioral management skills. The second category pertains to an expanded alternative communication system for training children with severe autism to express their needs (Li et al., 2022), with the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) and Picture Exchange particularly popular (Feng & Hu, 2014). The third category focuses on play therapy methods that use individuals’ potential to promote communication initiatives (Sha et al., 2022).
Two trends have emerged in terms of educational intervention in recent years. The first involves improving communication behavior with respect to visual attention advantages. Children with ASD have a visual learning advantage, and research has shown that interventions featuring visual support are beneficial for their social skills development. Second, multiple composite intervention modes are becoming increasingly widespread. For example, the combined use of critical response training and Discrete Trial Teaching has significantly improved the joint attention behavior of children with ASD (Lin et al., 2021). Research also shows that PECS instruction based on video demonstration techniques effectively improves the active communication abilities of children with ASD while reducing the frequency of emotional behaviors (Chen et al., 2020). Joint attention has become one of the key skills for early intervention (He et al., 2021; Lin et al., 2021). Here, the focus is primarily on interventions to establish three typical target behaviors of joint attention in young children: eye gaze, finger instruction, and active display (Wang et al., 2016).
Research on learning, emotional, and behavioral disorders
Recently, a “humanistic special education” approach has been advocated in China. According to this approach, everyone has special needs and everyone needs special education. Therefore, research on learning, emotional, and behavioral disorders has become a focus of special education research in recent years. As Table 2 shows, the main keywords in this field included “types of learning disabilities,” “cognitive processing,” “educational interventions,” “depression,” “test anxiety,” and “coping style.”
First, in the study of learning disabilities, the main focus is on the characteristics of the cognitive processing mechanisms of different types of learning disabilities. Research on the cognitive processing mechanisms of learning disabilities based on the information processing theory has become the core paradigm of research to date. In this regard, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale (4th edition) and PASS theory have been used to evaluate the performance and scores of different kinds of learning disabilities in various cognitive domains, with the evaluation results providing a reference for the individualized cognitive processing training of children with learning disabilities (Li & Long, 2019; Liu & Mao, 2021; Zang et al., 2012). Learning disabilities are highly heterogeneous. In the past, research has struggled to clarify and discern the types of learning disabilities. As such, it is necessary to develop a moderate classification of learning disabilities to improve homogeneity among different types (Ma & Shi, 2014).
Second, research on emotional and behavioral disorders has highlighted the protective psychological mechanisms of people with SEN. In this regard, research targets include both ordinary groups of SEN and special groups such as orphans, abused and AIDS-affected children, those suffering from schizophrenia or alexithymia, and juvenile offenders (Wei & Liu, 2022; Yin & Yao, 2021; Yue & Zhang, 2022). Early studies typically focused on examining the psychological characteristics of a certain group or comparing psychological characteristics among different groups, with greater attention paid to negative emotions and problem behaviors. When examining targets at the middle school and later stages, researchers have employed more complex measures—such as structural equation modeling, latent variable growth curve modeling, and multi-layer linear modeling—to study the relationships between variables and psychological mechanisms, focus on studying psychological mechanisms, and reveal psychological laws from the perspective of protective factors (Gao et al., 2021; Mo et al., 2021).
Research on gifted education
As an important base point for the cultivation of top innovative talent, gifted education is a manifestation of educational equity and an important strategy for strengthening the country's talent (Su & Shi, 2022). As Table 2 shows, this field mainly includes keywords like “gifted children,” “top-notch innovation,” and “juvenile classes.” The research content mainly reflects the shift from the selection and cultivation of gifted children to the cultivation of top-notch innovative talent.
First, the scope of the research on gifted children has expanded. The object of education and research on gifted children has expanded from children with extraordinary intelligence to all children because ordinary children are believed to have extraordinary potential as well. If their potential is fully tapped and appropriate education provided, ordinary children can develop into extraordinary children (Cheng & Chu, 2016; Li & Kong, 2021; Meng & Guan, 2010; Wang, Diao et al., 2022). The identification and education of gifted children have also developed from an individual approach to one comprising large-scale identification and selection and group education in classes, forming a relatively complete three-level selection system of primary selection-reselection-dynamic observation (Zhang et al., 2008). The placement and education approach has progressed to an inclusive education model (Jing & Cheng, 2021; Li, Li et al., 2021).
Second, the practice has developed to explore “youth class” with extraordinary education. In China, gifted education begins with the holding of “supernormal youth classes” to cultivate teenage college students. An intervention for cultivating supernormal youth classes at the University of Science and Technology of China provides a representative example (Shi, 2021; Zhu & Kong, 2018). The selection of gifted children for youth classes comprises two aspects: The first highlights comprehensive quality, while the second involves an examination primarily focused on accomplishment in a comprehensive discipline. The curriculum mode centers on the combination of acceleration and enrichment, while the teaching focus shifts from the transfer of knowledge to the development of students’ creativity to cultivate leaders in various fields. Many universities in China have borrowed the cultivation path of “early stage broad learning, foundation strengthening, and major diverting” for the youth class as a reference to cultivate outstanding and innovative talents in their own disciplines. In the future, research on gifted children will move toward a more scientific and dynamic mode, and multidisciplinary collaborative research is expected to provide more convincing results.
Research on migrant and left-behind children
The dilemmas and challenges faced by a large group of migrant and left-behind children in the context of China's urban-rural dichotomy system have been widely studied. As Table 2 shows, this field mainly included keywords like “migrant children,” “left-behind children,” “mental health,” “psychological resilience,” “loneliness,” and “learning involvement.” Receiving significant academic attention, research on the mental health of left-behind children has shifted from a “problem-oriented” approach to one “exploring positive factors against adversity.” Increased attention has been paid to mental health-related issues such as loneliness, security, negative emotions, anxiety, and depression among left-behind children, with more studies showing that left-behind children exhibit specific positive developmental potential as a result of facing the adversity of being left behind (Ning & Zhou, 2022).
In recent years, the life satisfaction (Zhang et al., 2021), learning involvement, and learning satisfaction (Cao, 2021) of migrant children have emerged as popular research topics. With the advancement of the new urbanization process, migrant children have experienced constant changes while returnees and re-migrating children have emerged as a new group of migrant children. Economic, psychological, linguistic, and cultural shocks caused by environmental changes make migrant children prone to internal conflicts and low levels of psychological health (Wan et al., 2021). Constructing a need-oriented evaluation and support system that considers the unique needs of different types of migrant children as the starting point is regarded as a powerful tool to solve the educational problems of migrant children.
Discussions
From the “pursuit of quantity” to the “promotion of quality”
Since the 1990s, LRC has become a basic measure for the development of special education in China and played an important role in increasing the enrollment of children with disabilities. However, LRC faced challenges in improving the quality of education. Special education development entered a new historical stage at the beginning of the twenty-first century, changing from the pursuit of quantity (enrollment) to an emphasis on quality education, with curriculum construction and reform considered key to promoting inclusive education and the integration of the regular and special education systems (Xu et al., 2020).
The results show that a relatively complete curriculum system has been formed for special education at the compulsory education stage in China, including curriculum standards for special education schools, special curricula, and teaching materials. This not only regulates the teaching and learning of special education but helps promote educational equity and improve the quality of special education. This is reflected in the following characteristics.
First, the curriculum standards for special education schools are developed under the guidance of the new curriculum reform concept and based on the framework of regular education school curriculum standards. It considers both regular and special education principles. In addition to connecting with the curriculum standards of regular education schools, the curriculum standards fully reflect the characteristics of special education. Second, the teaching objectives not only focus on academic achievement, but on compensation for deficiencies, potential development, and adaptation to society. Third, curriculum construction adheres to the principle of serving all students and accommodating differences. It also uses teaching materials creatively, reflecting the flexibility and openness of the curriculum. In terms of classroom teaching, it calls for teaching reforms and the implementation of differentiated and individualized teaching. Fourth, it requires the integration of LRC into the overall work of regular compulsory education, which can guarantee a unified arrangement and the acceptance of annual assessment and special supervision and evaluation. Thus, the construction and reform of the curriculum as a means to promote comprehensive inclusive education facilitates the deep integration of the regular and special education systems, further promoting the shift from superficial inclusion to quality-oriented inclusion.
From limited disability types to a wide range of SEN
The results show that the target of special education has developed its scope over time, expanding from the three traditional disability types to all legislated types of disabilities, eventually covering many of the newly recognized disability categories of cerebral palsy, ASD, learning disability, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, and social and emotional disorder, among others. More recently, the wider concept of SEN has been discussed and researched, with gifted, migrant, and left-behind children now included under the scope of special education services. As such, the research objects extend from traditional special groups on a very limited scale to various SEN groups, which reflect the concept and goal of inclusive education to guarantee equal rights to education for all children with diverse learning needs.
This concept and goal is closely related to the development of the concept of disability and SEN. The development of special education has gone through three stages: exclusion and segregation, charity and relief, and acceptance and integration (Zhao & Wang, 2013). The development of special education has gone through three stages accordingly: namely, special education characterized by segregation and classification, special education “back to the mainstream,” and inclusive education. In the early period, the concept of special education was based on physical defects or deformities. At the end of the twentieth century, special education expanded to cover a wide range of “disability” categories. Defects and disabilities were divided by the binary idea of whether they were “normal,” exacerbating the inequality between special and regular education. The introduction of the concept of “humanistic special education” saw the gradual emergence of the tenet that “everyone has special needs and everyone needs special education,” resulting in the focus of attention on special education shifting from disability to an expanded range of individual differences. As Deng and Xiao (2009) explained, from “defect” to “disability” and then to ‘SEN’, it is the process of expanding the research scope of special education, as well as the process of changing the basic concept and practice of special education.
From care and support to a special education mandate
Research shows that the state has published a series of laws and regulations to mandate the implementation of special and inclusive education, including developing goals, placement options, resource and support systems, and teacher education. To date, policy has sought to provide a strong guarantee for promoting the rapid development of special education in the following areas. First, special education policies emphasize both the enrollment and quality of education for students with disabilities. Second, since 2014, inclusive education has been directly referenced and regulated in relevant regulations and documents. As such, more attention has been paid to the promotion of inclusive education. Third, policies focus more on providing high-quality inclusive education, while the provision of a professional support system has become a future development objective. These policies have provided the legal basis for the development of special education in China, ensuring that the legalization and standardization of special education in China are on track.
However, these policies reflect the longstanding tradition of “benevolence” and “care” for people with disabilities instead of equal opportunities. Many policy documents use terms like “caring,” “supporting,” and “improving,” illustrating a disability model of social welfare. Indeed, the core values of inclusion—such as equity and full participation—were not emphasized in Chinese special education until recently. Policies at the national level are comprehensive and cover almost every aspect of special-education development. However, many of the stipulations in national policies are permissive or suggestive—failing to provide the mandate or authority necessary to ensure that they are put into practice. For example, the Action Plan for Promoting Special Education During the Fourteenth Five-Year Plan Period shifted to a more right-based model, using clearer rather than suggestive clauses to ensure the establishment of a high-quality special education system and delegate responsibility for implementing special education programs to various governmental departments and agencies.
From imported theories to a localized special education discourse
The discursive system is the reflection, expression, and dissemination of the academic system, which mainly manifests in the creation of new concepts, categories, and expressions that can be easily understood and accepted by the international community (Xie, 2019). Research results show that Chinese special education originated with Western missionaries in the late nineteenth century, with all practices imported from the West. After the 1950s, the Soviet Union Model, based on Vygotsky's defectology, was reproduced in China. Numerous Western theories regarding inclusive education and intervention techniques have been introduced to China, including Applied Behavioral Analysis, IEP, and Response to Intervention. However, China needs to develop its own theories and practices to fit its specific cultural and educational context.
First, the LRC is a localized theoretical and practical exploration in China. At present, the most distinctive mode of inclusive education in China follows a clear development pattern, namely, “LRC of ordinary schools as the main body, special education schools as the backbone, and home delivery and distance education as the supplement” (MOE and Six Other Departments, 2017). Second, the mode of inclusive education in China underscores “pragmatism.” Unlike the foreign modes of full inclusion, multiple forms of educational placement and rehabilitation training institutions coexist in China. As such, China's inclusive education is characterized by the pragmatic approach of “multiple choices toward integration.” In this respect, it is necessary to develop an action plan specifying the local mode of inclusive education, that is, guidance on what is “suitable for inclusion.”
Conclusion
Taking the academic articles published in CJSE, the authoritative academic journal in the field of special education in China, as an example, this study found that published research typically focused on five major areas: special education governance system, inclusive education, teacher education, curriculum construction, and research on SEN. The development of special education has undergone a shift from the “pursuit of quantity” to the “promotion of quality,” the scope of inclusive education research has expanded from limited disabilities to a macro scope of SEN, and national policy has changed from caring for and supporting special education to the implementation of policy mandating inclusion. Meanwhile, the initial discursive system for special education with Chinese characteristics has taken shape. Therefore, this study reflects the forefront of research in the field of special and inclusive education at home and abroad, reveals the discursive system and practice mode with Chinese characteristics, and enriches the development of international special education, particularly the theory of inclusive education.
Implications
This study's revelation of China's localized mode of inclusive education has some implications to the field. First, as it is based on the actual situation in a country, it is suitable. People should consider the political, economic, and cultural traditions of their country as the fundamental starting point to explore an appropriate mode of inclusive education. Second, as it makes full use of the experience of other countries in the world, it aligns with global trends. In addition to adhering to the principle of “borrowlism,” China critically absorbs and learns from the useful experiences and lessons of other countries. Third, China's localized inclusive education demonstrates a new pragmatic mode. In the international context of inclusive education, LRC is an educational innovation based on the practice of special education in China. It enables children with disabilities to study in the nearest regular education schools so that they receive compulsory education economically and conveniently. This pragmatic mode of inclusive education is a Chinese solution which might shed lights on other developing countries seeking to advance inclusive education in their contexts.
Footnotes
Declaration of conflicting interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by the “Key Project of Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Scientific Research Institutes of NIES” (grant number: GYB2021009).
