Abstract
In recent years, many countries have established inclusive education resource centres or rooms to facilitate the implementation of inclusion for children with disabilities, and China is no exception. Although much Chinese literature has explained how resource centres or rooms operate in different areas, studies have yet to systematically examine and analyse the development of inclusive resource support systems in China. Little research in this field has been published in English journals. This study used a scoping review methodology to locate 31 previous studies on establishing and operating resource support systems in China, published in peer-reviewed Chinese journals in the past 10 years (2013–2023). The results indicated that inclusive education resource centres or rooms played essential roles in supporting the learning and development of children with disabilities, and the data analysis conceptualised four significant themes to explain how the resource support systems provided high-quality services for all children at schools. However, teachers, schools, and governments faced some challenges in improving the quality of resource support systems. The implications for future research directions are also provided. The review also highlighted an under-researched area regarding the development of resource support systems in China.
Introduction
Traditionally, many children with disabilities, especially children with functional impairments, such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD), intellectual disability, etc., were often educated in segregated special education settings (Genovesi et al., 2022). After the Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education were issued in 1994, ‘education for all’ became the central theme in special education (Ainscow et al., 2019). Governments internationally aim to ensure that every child can receive appropriate education, and those with disabilities should get access to regular schools with relevant accommodations and adjustments (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, 1994). According to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) Articles 23 and 28, children with disabilities should have equal opportunities for education with their typically developing peers (United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF], 1989). The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) also provides a clear emphasis on the importance of education for children with disabilities, and Article 24 prompted that all state parties should create an ‘inclusive education system’ nationally (United Nations Division for Social Policy and Development Disability, 2006). Moreover, the fourth goal, ‘quality education’ in the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, highlights that governments must ensure an inclusive and equitable quality education provision for all children (United Nations, 2015).
As one of the signatories to the UNCRC and UNCRPD, China has aimed to reform the national policies in special and inclusive education to meet the international obligations towards citizens with disabilities in society (Fisher et al., 2011). In recent years, there have been many policies issued by the Chinese Government to promote the quality of special and inclusive education, such as the Regulations on the Education of Persons with Disabilities (REPD), Special Education Quality Improvement Programme (2014–2016) and (2017–2020), etc. In 2021, the 14th Five-Year Plan for the Development and Promotion of Special Education proposed that all levels of government and schools should provide quality inclusive education for all children, including children with disabilities (The State Council of the People’s Republic of China, 2021).
Indeed, promoting inclusive education has been paid much attention by governments around the world. The term ‘inclusive education’ in this article refers to an educational approach that ensures all students, including those with disabilities or other diverse needs, can be fully integrated into the general educational setting with appropriate support, modifications, and accommodations. Inclusive education goes beyond merely placing students with disabilities in mainstream schools; it involves creating a supportive and least restrictive environment (LRE) where all students can thrive. Unsurprisingly, children excluded from education may experience negative consequences, such as poor health, etc.; conversely, educational inclusion can help children achieve better social and academic outcomes (UNICEF, 2013). Therefore, promoting inclusive education is the prerequisite to improving the quality of education, especially for children with disabilities.
Literature Review
Inclusive educational settings differ from the traditional known mainstream educational institutions, as inclusive classrooms or schools often refer to places that include children with disabilities to be engaged in the general educational curriculum with appropriate modifications or accommodations (Gargiulo & Metcalf, 2017). Since inclusive educational institutions aim to create the least restrictive environment (LRE) and an inclusive curriculum to improve the engagement and effectiveness of learning for all students, inclusive educational settings are much beyond the places only placing students with disabilities in mainstream schools or classrooms. Although creating an inclusive environment benefits children’s learning and development, directly transforming mainstream schools into inclusive educational settings is challenging due to insufficient facilities, lacking human resources, different curriculum designs, and diverse teacher beliefs. For example, Low et al. (2019) and Helmer et al. (2023) stated that most mainstream teachers often lacked the knowledge to change their teaching pedagogy from treating an ‘average’ student to accommodating students with diverse classroom needs. Rae et al. (2010) also found that mainstream education teachers often held negative beliefs towards students with complex developmental and intellectual disabilities, especially students with ASD. As such, it is essential to provide additional and external support for teachers to address this change from ‘mainstream’ to ‘inclusion’.
Inclusive education resource support systems refer to some institutions that provide educational consultation, case management, individualised support, diagnosis, academic support, and interventions for children with disabilities (J. Xu & Zhou, 2006). This system can also provide teachers with quality support to address their professional needs when teaching students with disabilities. The system includes different levels of inclusive education resource centres and many resource rooms. Resource rooms and resource centres are often used interchangeably in the literature to describe inclusive education resource support systems (J. Xu & Zhou, 2006). However, in this article, the authors believed these two terms differed due to the size of institutions and the scope of services. Resource rooms are classrooms created within specific special education or mainstream education schools, and they only provide educational support for students with special needs who enrol in the schools (J. Xu & Zhou, 2006). Conversely, resource centres often cover several resource rooms, and they are institutions created by governments or communities to facilitate the implementation of inclusive education for children with disabilities (Heyder et al., 2020; Hofmann & Muller, 2021). Thus, resource centres can be communal, district, municipal, or provincial level centres to provide professional services within specific areas (J. Xu & Zhou, 2006). Indeed, the resource support systems as an external special education support system play a critical role in transforming from mainstream schools to inclusive education schools to serve children with disabilities better (Siska et al., 2020; N. Zhu et al., 2021). The philosophy underlying the resource support systems is to provide additional support for professionals working with students with disabilities (Helmer et al., 2023). Resource centres/rooms often offer specialist services, guidance, and supplemental teaching materials for teachers, parents, and students inside or outside schools (Siska et al., 2020).
However, Somerton et al. (2021) argued that although most resource rooms were established within mainstream schools, the institutions might segregate students with disabilities from their typically developing peers, as students with disabilities often took courses in resource rooms with different curriculum designs. Thus, resource centres/rooms may not be ultimately ‘inclusive’ (Somerton et al., 2021), but most students with disabilities benefit from the support and can learn in inclusive classrooms. Thus, establishing inclusive education resource support systems constitutes a significant initiative by the Chinese Government to promote the development of inclusive education.
In the 1990s, some mainstream schools in Beijing and Shanghai, China, created resource rooms within the schools to align with the international inclusion initiative. The early stage of resource rooms has been called ‘training rooms’, and the original intention was to provide individualised training for students with special educational needs and support them in staying in mainstream classrooms (L. Chen & Zan, 2020). The Chinese Government in 1994 proposed Trial Measures on the Work of Learning in Regular Classrooms for Children and Adolescents with Disabilities, and the term ‘resource centre’ was first written in political documents (H. Li & Huang, 2018). After 2000, establishing and managing resource rooms or centres became more normalisable and scientific, as the Chinese Government started including resource centres in educational policies and guidelines (J. Xu & Zhou, 2006). For instance, in 2016, the Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China issued the Guidelines for the Construction of Special Education Resource Classrooms in Mainstream Schools and the Reference Catalogue of Special Education Resource Classrooms in Mainstream Schools. They proposed that local governments should create more normative resource centres to fulfil the needs of children with disabilities in the communities. Also, these two documents highlighted that mainstream schools were required to provide special education curriculum, subject training, psychological counselling, and rehabilitation services for students with disabilities (L. Chen & Zan, 2020; L. Wang & Ma, 2019). In 2021, seven Chinese government departments worked together and published the 14th Five-Year Plan for the Development and Promotion of Special Education, which emphasised that schools should explore an effective educational model to promote inclusive practices for all students, strengthen the integration of resources, and create resource classrooms/centres in special or mainstream schools to meet the educational needs of students with disabilities (The State Council of the People’s Republic of China, 2021). Based on recent statistics, around 26 provinces or cities in China have established provincial- or municipal-level special (inclusive) education resource (guidance) centres, and most students with disabilities receive education in either collectivised education or one-to-one interventions (J. Xu, 2018). Indeed, the Chinese Government has paid much attention to developing inclusive education, and more and more children with mild to moderate disabilities have studied in inclusive education schools.
Although recent policies in China have advocated establishing resource centres or rooms and highlighted their importance and benefits for students with disabilities in inclusive settings, some issues remain unaddressed. Firstly, some studies, such as She and Feng (2017) and L. Wang and Ma (2019), indicated that many resource rooms were often idle inside mainstream schools, and resource development encountered the bottleneck. This highlights the need to reflect on the current operation and future development of resource support systems to work as it is supposed. Secondly, resource centres or rooms aim to maintain and improve the quality of inclusive education. High-quality inclusive education consists of different dimensions, such as appropriate curriculum design and instruction, an inclusive physical environment, high student-teacher ratios, and high teacher qualifications (Love & Horn, 2021). However, L. Chen and Zan’s (2020) study mentioned that the functions of resource rooms/centres were not fully utilised, especially in resource mismatching and the lack of expertise. Thirdly, much Chinese literature explains how resource centres or rooms operate in different areas, especially in Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu Province, and Zhejiang Province. However, very few empirical studies discuss the current situation of the resource support system in China, and there is little research to systematically examine and analyse the operation and development of inclusive resource centres/rooms in China. Little research in this field has been published in English journals. In order to fill the gap and address research problems, the researchers employed a scoping review methodology to explore how resource centres are operated in different areas of China and to analyse what achievements and challenges influence the quality of service provision for professionals, parents, and children with disabilities.
Research Questions
Three research questions were proposed to guide the current review:
(1) How are inclusive education resource centres/rooms operated and developed in different areas of China?
(2) How do inclusive education resource centres/rooms provide high-quality services for stakeholders?
(3) What challenges are faced in developing high-quality inclusive education resource centres/rooms for children with disabilities?
The significance of the study lies in its potential to address critical gaps in the understanding and implementation of inclusive education resource centres/rooms in China, which are essential for promoting high-quality inclusive education for children with disabilities. Firstly, by exploring the reasons behind the underutilisation (e.g., resource mismatching, lack of expertise, etc.), the study provides valuable insights into how these centres can be better operated to fulfil their purpose. This is crucial for ensuring that children with disabilities receive the necessary support in inclusive settings. Secondly, the study aims to examine how resource centres/rooms contribute to the multiple dimensions of high-quality inclusive education, such as appropriate curriculum design, inclusive environments, qualified teachers, etc. and identify gaps in service provision. The authors believe that identifying the achievements and challenges and comparing the operation mechanisms in different areas of China are significant in informing professionals’ practices and creating a more inclusive environment for children with disabilities. Thirdly, the resulting information can provide implications for government authorities to reform the policies in inclusive education and effectively support local schools to provide high-quality and accessible education for all students. Finally, by addressing the barriers to the effective operation and development of those centres/rooms, the study can contribute to the broader goal of promoting equity and inclusion in education. This aligns with global efforts, such as the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which emphasise inclusive and quality education for all.
Research Methodology
A scoping review methodology was used for this study to identify research gaps on a topic and summarise research findings from previous literature (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Munn et al., 2018). Munn et al. (2018) stated that the scoping review methodology was appropriate to find evidence to inform practice and identify specific characteristics and/or concepts within studies. According to Arksey and O’Malley (2005), to compare with a systematic review methodology, the scoping review can address broader topics and research questions, and the topic of this study is to find what studies are included in the scope rather than the effectiveness of teaching strategies or evidence-based practices (EBPs). Thus, the scoping review is more appropriate for the current study to explore how inclusive education resource support systems can support children with disabilities and what factors may influence the operation and development of resource centres/rooms in China. Based on Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) framework of the scoping review, the study followed five steps, including (a) identifying research questions, (b) locating relevant studies, (c) selecting studies, (d) charting and analysing the data, and (e) summarising and reporting the research results.
The Search Strategy
The authors followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) procedure to locate relevant literature in peer-reviewed journals and ensure the reproducibility and rigour of the study (Moher et al., 2009). The authors did a pilot search using predetermined terms, including ‘resource centre’, ‘resource classroom’, and ‘China’, in three English databases, including ProQuest Education Database, Scopus, and Eric. However, no relevant search results could be found during this stage. The authors realised that the topic focused more on how resource centres were operated and developed in China, so using Chinese databases would be more appropriate. Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) is the most extensive academic database in China and integrates different types of Chinese academic sources, such as journal /master's theses, conference papers, etc. Therefore, the CNKI was used for the current study to find relevant peer-reviewed journal articles. The authors realised that some articles written by authors in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Hong Kong SAR), Macau Special Administrative Region (Macau SAR), and Taiwan Province might be in Traditional Chinese. However, this study only covered studies found from CNKI and written in Simplified Chinese. All selected articles for this review must relate to the operation and development of resource centres/rooms in the Chinese context. Although the philosophy of inclusion or ‘learning in the regular classrooms’ has been practised for several years since the 1990s, the first establishment of resource rooms or centres in China remains controversial. Hence, the authors only located the most recent introductory or empirical literature from the past 10 years, between 2013 and 2022, to understand the most recent development of resource centres/rooms in China. The search terms in the CNKI are in Chinese, including ‘
Identifying Relevant Studies
The inclusion criteria used to screen relevant articles for the current scoping review include: (a) studies focused on the operation and development of resource centres/rooms, (b) resource centres/rooms are in China, (c) studies should include practical or operational trails in establishing resource centres/rooms, (d) articles were published in peer-reviewed journals, (e) articles were written in Simplified Chinese, (f) articles were published between 2013 and 2022, and (g) studies were based on empirical research or articles were written to introduce the operation of resource centres/rooms in specific areas.
The excluding criteria that were set to eliminate articles searched from the databases were: (a) articles were written in English or other languages, (b) articles were not published in peer-reviewed journals, (c) studies were focused on inclusive education or special education, (d) studies did not focus on resource centres/rooms, and (e) reviews, general summary or analysis, editorial commentaries, opinion pieces, theses, and grey literature. The reason for not including grey literature is that grey literature is often related to government reports or political statements that are irrelevant to investigating the operation and development of resource centres. The search terms and the inclusion and exclusion criteria are outlined in Table 1.
The Search Terms and Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria for Searching and Screening Relevant Studies.
Study Selection
After entering search terms into CNKI, 231 articles were found to review. The first author used the predetermined search terms in CNKI to find relevant articles. Then, she created a table in Microsoft Word and copied and pasted article tiles and abstracts into the table. Two authors read the titles and abstract independently to conduct an initial screening. After an initial screening, the results were entered into a spreadsheet. The spreadsheet included article titles, abstracts, justification for inclusion or exclusion, and each inclusion criterion. The 42 articles were selected after the initial screening, and these articles were used for full-text screening. The PRISMA visually represented the search procedures and brief descriptions of inclusion and exclusion processes.
The procedures of full-text screening were similar to the initial screening. After the final selection, two authors discussed and resolved discrepancies. The 34 articles that met all inclusion criteria were used for the scoping review. Figure 1 is a visual diagram to represent each screening stage via PRISMA.
Flow diagram of search results (in line with PRISMA guidelines [PRISMA’s four phases flow information diagram of a systematic review]; Moher et al., 2009).
Data Analysis Procedures
A thematic analysis approach was applied for the study to ‘identify, analyse, and report patterns (or themes) within data’ (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 79). Thematic analysis is an effective data analysis method to investigate people’s beliefs and/or the characteristics of objects and address some problems in a particular context (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Therefore, this approach was appropriate to meet the goals of the current scoping review.
During the data analysis, two authors participated in the coding processes to ensure the reliability of the analysis. Each selected article’s results/findings and discussion sections were analysed in terms. The two authors read these articles three times: the initial reading was to understand the contents briefly, the second reading was to code information inductively from the original articles, and the third reading was to review the codes. Two authors coded one qualitative study and one quantitative study independently. Then, the coding was compared and discussed to make sure that the coding was based on the same standards. Next, the first author followed the coding procedures to finish the coding for all selected studies. The authors believed that careful reading and using the original language (Chinese) for data analysis were essential to help the authors gain a clear understanding and increase the veracity of the data analysis. Finally, two authors discussed the codes and categories generated from the analysis, and the categories were condensed into themes. As the two authors were native Chinese speakers, the analytical documents were written in Chinese. After identifying the codes, categories, and themes, the first author translated the analytical results into English, and the second author checked the translation to solve any disagreements. The researchers in the current study actively constructed themes through a rigorous, collaborative, and iterative process involving two native Chinese-speaking authors. By employing thematic analysis, the research systematically identified patterns in the data and condensed codes and categories into overarching themes. During the study, the researchers also tried to strengthen the reliability and validity of their findings through a rigorous and collaborative process that included thematic analysis, inter-coder agreement, multiple readings, use of the original language, and careful translation and verification. These steps ensured the findings were reliable and deeply grounded in the data.
Research Results
Demographics
There were 34 studies that met the inclusion criteria for the current scoping review. Approximately 10 studies used a qualitative approach, and the other studies were the introductory or evaluation commentaries. Half of the selected articles were written by school teachers or leaders to introduce the resource centres/rooms created in schools or districts. The other half of the studies were conducted by researchers from universities or research institutions to discuss provincial- or municipal-level resource centres. Seven articles were conducted in Western China, seven in Central China, 16 studies in Eastern China, one study in Hong Kong SAR, and two in Taiwan Province. In Eastern China, seven studies explained the operation of resource centres in Jiangsu Province, three in Shanghai, three in Fujian Province, two in Zhejiang Province, one in Guangdong Province, and one in Liaoning Province. In Central and Western China, three studies were conducted in Beijing, four in Sichuan Province, one in Guizhou Province, one in Guangxi Province, one in Yunnan Province, one in Hubei Province, and one in Hunan Province. It is clear that researchers in Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu Province, and Sichuan Province valued the development of inclusive education resource centres/rooms; also, it is evident that more resource centres were established in these areas for children with disabilities and their families.
Thematic Analysis Findings
After conducting the data analysis using a thematic analysis approach, the data generated 98 codes and 23 categories, which were condensed into four themes to conceptualise the operation and development of resource support systems in China (see Table 2). Four themes included (a) characteristics of resource centres/rooms, (b) responsibilities of resource centres/rooms, (c) functions of resource centres/rooms, and (d) management of resource centres/rooms. All themes aligned with the research questions of the scoping review are presented separately in the following sections. Also, the visual representation of the conceptual framework based on the thematic analysis is shown in Figure 2.
The Concepts of the Operation and Development of Resource Support Systems in China based on Thematic Analysis Approach.
Conceptual framework of the development and operation of inclusive education resource centres/rooms.
Characteristics of Resource Centres/Rooms
Although resource centres/rooms are the initiatives to promote inclusive education development, students who received support from resource centres/rooms were mainly diagnosed with intellectual disabilities and developmental disorders (Huang et al., 2020; Kui & Lei, 2016; J. Zhang, 2017). In Taiwan province, the local governments prioritised resource centres for students with vision and hearing impairments, and the percentage of students with developmental disabilities was much higher than that of gifted and talented students (Kui & Lei, 2016). Hence, three studies conducted in Guizhou Province, Guangxi Province, and Zhejiang Province stressed that the primary responsibilities of resource centres/rooms were to provide additional support for students with disabilities in the special education classrooms within mainstream settings rather than providing inclusive education for all (Huang et al., 2020; Lu, 2019; J. Zhang, 2017). Also, teachers in the resource centre in Tongren City, Guizhou Province, thought providing education for children with moderate to severe disabilities at home was their primary responsibility (Lu, 2019).
However, six studies conducted in Shanghai, Sichuan Province, Jiangsu Province, Guangdong Province, Fujian Province, and Taiwan Province emphasised the importance of promoting inclusive education and that students should be placed in inclusive education schools with appropriate and regular support. For example, resource centres in Shanghai and Sichuan Province created inclusive education teams with mainstream school teachers, itinerant teachers, and students with disabilities (Luo & Shi, 2018; Zhou, 2023). Itinerant teachers often travel among schools to guide teachers to promote the idea of ‘learning in the regular classrooms’ for students with disabilities (N. Zhu et al., 2021). In Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province, resource centres provided different placement arrangements for students with disabilities; for instance, students could choose to study subject knowledge at resource centres during the morning and go back to inclusive classrooms in the afternoon (Q. Chen & Wang, 2021). In addition, student placement was very flexible at resource centres, and the placement arrangements were based on students’ needs (Q. Chen & Wang, 2021). After compulsory education, resource centres in Fujian and Taiwan Provinces also aimed to encourage those students to engage in vocational training and higher education. Indeed, resource centres should provide much support to make student placement to be more diversified.
Regarding teachers’ characteristics, teachers in the resource centres often lack professional knowledge in special and inclusive education, primarily to address students’ behavioural problems (Huang et al., 2020; Wu, 2016). Moreover, teachers who lacked sufficient experience in inclusive education and had difficulties using facilities or assessment tools significantly influenced inclusive practices in the resource centres (Huang et al., 2020; Sun, 2013). Because of the lack of full-time resource teachers in the centres (Qin & Zhao, 2022; Sun, 2013), teachers who had taught subject content often felt stressed to support inclusive practices, especially to design and implement individualised education plans (IEPs) for students with disabilities (Fei et al., 2020; Huang et al., 2020; Kui & Lei, 2016). Some teachers also had negative beliefs or misconceptions about resource centres. For example, some principals or senior managers at mainstream schools in Hong Kong SAR were unwilling to create resource centres/classrooms in the schools, as they believed that implementing IEPs for students with disabilities was not fair for typically developing students in the classrooms, but providing individualised education in the separate rooms could be seen as discrimination against students with disabilities (Wu, 2016). Teachers in Guangxi Province thought that resource teachers only focused on teaching students with disabilities in special education classrooms within mainstream settings, so these teachers often ignored students with disabilities who studied in inclusive classrooms (Huang et al., 2020).
Responsibilities of Resource Centres/Rooms
Resource centres are responsible for creating inclusive and accessible learning environments for all students (Qin, 2021, p. 33; J. Zhu, 2022). In Taiwan Province, resource centres often rent teaching assistive devices, textbooks, and assessment tools from mainstream and special education schools to design a more inclusive and appropriate classroom environment for students with disabilities (Qin, 2021). Moreover, resource centres in many places aim to create a more diversified environment to meet students’ needs; for instance, study spaces should be non-labelled to ensure that students with disabilities can feel inclusive and comfortable (Zhou, 2023). Resource centres are also divided into separate learning areas, including rehabilitation and play areas (Jia, 2017; Kui & Lei, 2016; L. Xu et al., 2013; Yang, 2018).
While the inclusive environment has been designed and created, resource centres aim to provide abundant teaching resources, especially rehabilitation equipment and assessment resources, for students with disabilities (Jia, 2017; J. Zhu, 2022). The resource centres in Hubei Province also established digital learning platforms to provide professional guidance remotely (H. Chen & Ma, 2018). Nevertheless, resource centres often disintegrate because of the lack of assessment software, continuing professional support, and low utilisation efficiency (Fei et al., 2020; Huang et al., 2020). In addition, some resource centres, such as Zhangjiagang Resource and Guidance Centre, highly relied on special education schools, so the curriculum and teaching strategies in resource centres were like special education schools and could not provide an assessable curriculum design for all students, including both students with disabilities and typically developing students (Qin & Zhao, 2022).
Providing an inclusive and differentiated curriculum design in this sense is the essential responsibility of resource centres/rooms. Resource centres in Shanghai, Shenzhen, and Dalian aimed to implement differentiated instructions for students in the classrooms, and teaching progress was flexible to align with students’ zone of proximal development (ZPD) (Lai & Tuo, 2022; Ma, 2016; L. Zhang, 2018). Resource centres were also responsible for supporting teachers to implement Universal Design for Learning (UDL) into course design to improve all students’ motivation and engagement in the learning process (Zhou, 2023). Resource centres advocated the combination of medical services and education. Several resource centres in Jiangsu, Fujian, Liaoning, and Sichuan Provinces created many rehabilitation school-based courses and carry out rehabilitation training for students with disabilities while teaching subject knowledge (Chu, 2018; Mao et al., 2017; L. Xu et al., 2013; Yang, 2018; Zhan, 2019; L. Zhang, 2018; Y. Zhang & Lu, 2020).
Since students have different skills and educational needs, resource centres often recruit itinerant teachers to carry out one-to-one training for students with disabilities based on their IEPs (S. Chen & Ruan, 2019; Q. Chen & Wang, 2021; Chu, 2018; Mao et al., 2017; Y. Zhang & Lu, 2020). Small group training was a primary teaching strategy used in the resource centres for students with high support needs (Q. Chen & Wang, 2021; Kui & Lei, 2016; Y. Zhang & Lu, 2020). For some students with severe disabilities who could not attend school regularly, the resource centres in Changshu City, Jiangsu Province, encouraged their parents or caregivers to send their children to resource centres to receive small-group or individualised rehabilitation training (Y. Zhang & Lu, 2020). The resource centres not only provided differentiated training and support for students with disabilities, but some art-based activities, such as painting, embroidery, etc., were also designed to help students mindfully explore their emotions (Mao et al., 2017; Y. Zhang, 2018). Since students with disabilities have some special needs that require intensive training, resource centres also create some courses to train students in essential learning and life skills, such as social skills, language skills, adaptive skills, emotion management, etc. (W. Hu et al., 2021; Zhan, 2019; Y. Zhang, 2018; Y. Zhang & Lu, 2020). All courses and curricula designed in the resource centres were based on a student-centred philosophy to ensure that the design and plans could meet students’ educational and social needs (Q. Chen & Wang, 2021; Kui & Lei, 2016; Zhan, 2019; Y. Zhang, 2018; Y. Zhang & Lu, 2020).
Although resource centres had responsibilities to create age- and skill-appropriate courses for students with disabilities who studied in inclusive settings, many studies showed that the main priority of course adjustments in the resource centres was to provide additional academic support and to ensure that those students with disabilities could keep them on track (W. Hu et al., 2021; Jia, 2017; Ma, 2016; Q. Sun, 2016; Yang, 2018; Zhan, 2019; Y. Zhang, 2018; Y. Zhang & Lu, 2020). For example, course contents taught in resource centres were more accessible, or the degrees of difficulty in examinations or assessments were decreased for students with disabilities (Ma, 2016). Teachers in resource centres believed that supporting academic learning for students with disabilities was critical to helping these students to be involved in inclusive classrooms (Huang et al., 2020; Y. Zhang, 2018; Y. Zhang & Lu, 2020).
Functions of Resource Centres/Rooms
Resource centres serve five main functions for teachers, schools, parents/caregivers, and society. Each function was explained as follows.
Firstly, providing high-quality in-service teacher professional development was the primary function of resource centres. Resource centres often collaborate with universities or research institutions to organise teacher training (S. Chen & Ruan, 2019; Qin, 2021). Half of the selected articles emphasised that organising and conducting professional training, especially continued and ongoing training, was essential to improve teachers’ knowledge and skills in inclusive education. The training contents included both theoretical and practical aspects. For instance, resource centres in Shanghai organised training about implementing individualised education for students with disabilities, including observation methods, diagnosis, assessment, designing IEPs, and teaching strategies (Ma, 2016). In Beijing and Sichuan Province, resource centres also encouraged teachers to operate teaching and research activities to discuss teaching pedagogies, policies, and educational research (Luo & Shi, 2018; Y. Sun, 2013; H. Wang et al., 2017). In addition to face-to-face and ongoing professional training, hybrid (face-to-face and online) training was also provided for teachers from different schools (Luo & Shi, 2018). Resource centres in Taiwan Province published professional development handbooks in special and inclusive education to support more professionals in developing their skills in working with students with disabilities (Qin, 2021).
The second function of resource centres was to conduct educational assessments for students with disabilities. The assessment was conducted for students with disabilities around cities or districts (Ma, 2016; Mao et al., 2017; Y. Sun, 2013). Based on students’ diagnoses from local hospitals, resource centres aimed to use assessment tools to assess students’ educational needs, and then, it would be beneficial for the centres and schools to provide appropriate accommodation and adjustments for those students (Chu, 2018; Huang et al., 2020; Lai & Tuo, 2022; Mao et al., 2017; L. Xu et al., 2013; Yang, 2018; Y. Zhang, 2018). However, research showed that it was difficult for resource centres in some cities to conduct assessments due to the lack of assessment tools and professionals (Kui & Lei, 2016).
Thirdly, designing and implementing IEPs for students with disabilities studying in inclusive settings were the other main functions of resource centres. Because many school teachers lacked sufficient knowledge and expertise to design IEPs, 10 studies in the review highlighted that resource centres could provide additional support to organise IEP meetings, design and implement IEPs, and assess the effectiveness of IEPs. Resource centres also helped schools create individualised records and manage students’ progress (Chu, 2018; Y. Sun, 2013; Zhang, 2017). However, in Zhejiang Province, teachers in resource centres complained that the lack of expert guidance was challenging for them to create relevant IEPs and guide teachers’ implementation at schools (Fei et al., 2020).
Fourthly, resource centres also serve a function to provide parental or caregiver training. Several studies in the current review highlighted that resource centres often organised parental meetings or seminars to impart knowledge about special education to parents or caregivers (S. Chen & Ruan, 2019; Qin, 2021; Q. Sun, 2016; Y. Sun, 2013). Resource centres in Xiamen City, Fujian Province, also published parental handbooks to guide parental practices in treating their children with disabilities at home (S. Chen & Ruan, 2019). In addition, resource centres guide parents or caregivers to select relevant intervention services, implement evidence-based practices (EBPs) at home, etc. (Qin, 2021; H. Wang et al., 2017; Yang, 2018; Zhan, 2019). Parents or caregivers can also consult with professionals and seek support from resource centres (Y. Sun, 2013; Y. Zhang & Lu, 2020). Changsha Special Education Resource and Guidance Centre in Hunan Province created an online platform providing parental consultation and guidance (D. Wang, 2019). Since many parents with children with disabilities felt stressed, resource centres in Beijing and Taiwan Province focused on parents’ psychological health and provided psychological counselling for parents who had difficulty educating their children with disabilities (Kui & Lei, 2016; H. Wang et al., 2017).
Finally, resource centres were responsible for advertising special and inclusive education to the broader society. On the one hand, resource centres provide counselling and guidance to social services to create an inclusive environment for people with disabilities (Q. Sun, 2016; H. Wang et al., 2017). In Beijing, Jiangsu Province, and Fujian Province, resource centres also collaborated with social media to advocate the philosophy of social inclusion and policies in special and inclusive education (S. Chen & Ruan, 2019; Q. Li, 2020; Mao et al., 2017). Moreover, resource centres also invited special education experts and professionals to speak about inclusive education practices. On the other hand, to promote high-quality inclusive education provision, providing implications for government policy reforms was the other primary function of resource centres. Resource centres in Fujian Province, Hunan Province, and Beijing created research platforms to inform local policy reforms (S. Chen & Ruan, 2019; D. Wang, 2019; H. Wang et al., 2017). Therefore, more than half of the selected articles highlighted that resource centres aimed to create close collaborative relationships among special and mainstream education schools, parents or caregivers, communities, universities and research institutions, local governments, and other professional services. This kind of cooperation benefited all stakeholders to be prepared to promote inclusion for children with disabilities.
Management of Resource Centres/Rooms
Currently, there are six types of resource centres based on local policies and situations. Resource centres in Shanghai are often divided into ‘stand-alone’, ‘joint’, and ‘stand-alone and joint’ types (Zhou, 2023; J. Zhu, 2022). This means that each school could establish a resource classroom to support students with disabilities within the school, or a resource centre was created for students with disabilities within the district (Zhou, 2023). In Hubei Province, several inclusive education resource centres were created under the provincial-level resource centre, and all centres worked collaboratively with local governments to provide inclusive services for children with disabilities (H. Chen & Ma, 2018). However, research showed an unbalanced distribution of resource centres and classrooms in remote or rural areas, such as Tongren City in Guizhou Province (Lu, 2019). In Chengdu City, Sichuan Province, 1+5+N resource centres were created with different responsibilities (Luo & Shi, 2018). ‘1’ means one municipal-level resource centre to overview and supervise resource centres, ‘5’ refers to five district-level resource centres to provide itinerant guidance and support, and ‘N’ means several school-based resource classrooms to improve teachers’ skills and support students with disabilities within schools (Luo & Shi, 2018).
Since the governments aimed to improve the quality of inclusive education, many local governments provided sufficient financial appropriation to support the development of resource centres (Huang et al., 2020; Lin, 2020). Teachers in resource centres had equal pay with teachers in special education schools (Qin, 2021; Y. Zhang, 2018). However, the lack of professionals in resource centres was a prominent issue in Western China (Huang et al., 2020; L. Li & Chen, 2018; Lu, 2019). Research in Guizhou and Guangxi Provinces indicated insufficient Bianzhi (
Discussion
The Gaps of Literature
After analysing the data from 34 articles related to the operation of resource centres/rooms in China, the answers to the first research question were apparent from the review’s outset. More studies about this topic were conducted in the eastern part of China. Because special and inclusive education development has been relatively fast in Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu Province, and Sichuan Province, researchers and teachers focused more on the operations of resource support systems in these areas. This indicates a general lack of literature on the topic, and less literature pays attention to the development of resource support systems in Western China, incredibly remote or rural areas. Also, there was an average of one or two studies in each province, and the operation of resource centres/rooms in 13 provinces, Hong Kong SAR, and Taiwan Province was discussed in the selected articles. No research in selected articles discussed resource centres/rooms in Macau SAR. This provides only limited information from a relatively small number of examples. Therefore, the scoping review provided significant insights into inclusive education resource support systems in China.
Achievements and Challenges
Creating Inclusive Environment
Creating an inclusive and accessible environment for all students was one of the responsibilities of resource centres/rooms. According to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 2004 (IDEA) in the United States, students with disabilities should be involved in the least restrictive environment (LRE), and it means that these students have the right to receive appropriate education alongside their typically developing peers in the inclusive classrooms (U.S. Department of Education, 2004). Indeed, engaging students with disabilities in the LRE is the central theme of inclusive education. In China, promoting inclusive education has been emphasised in the Regulations on the Education of Persons with Disabilities (REPD) and the 14th Five-Year Plan for the Development and Promotion of Special Education (The State Council of the People’s Republic of China, 2017, 2021). Recently, there has been an increasing number of students with disabilities enrolled in inclusive school education (Han & Cumming, 2022). Also, based on the philosophy of inclusive education, students with disabilities need to get into inclusive education settings and have sufficient opportunities to participate in activities on the same basis as their typically developing peers. Therefore, resource centres/rooms, in this sense, play essential roles in providing additional guidance for schools to create a more inclusive environment for students with disabilities.
Creating an inclusive environment is not an easy task. Teachers should have sufficient knowledge and skills in special and inclusive education, and then they can effectively implement knowledge to meet the needs of students with disabilities during teaching practices. After reviewing the literature, providing effective professional development for teachers is a main function of resource centres (S. Chen & Ruan, 2019; Qin, 2021). Previous research showed that teachers who received high-quality and continuing professional development might hold more positive beliefs towards students with disabilities and are more flexible in curriculum design (Corona et al., 2017; Han et al., 2023). This highlights that professional development provided by resource centres must be appropriate to meet teachers’ teaching needs.
Making Accessible Curriculum Design
In order to create an inclusive environment, accommodations and adjustments to the curriculum are also critical to ensure that students with disabilities can be actively engaged in the learning process. Based on the current review, recourse support systems, including resource centres and rooms, had responsibilities to provide inclusive and differentiated curriculum for students with disabilities (Lai & Tuo, 2022; Ma, 2016; Zhang, 2018). This finding is aligned with Gargiulo and Metcalf’s (2017) study, which found that implementing differentiated education and UDL was significant for all students who could be engaged in education. Hence, curriculum adjustments are not just to involve students with disabilities in learning; all students can benefit from learning by adjusting the course design. However, the review showed that resource centres were mainly for students with disabilities in the special education classrooms inside mainstream schools rather than those who studied in inclusive classrooms (Qin & Zhao, 2022). Teachers seemed less likely to design differentiated learning opportunities for all students (Jia, 2017; Ma, 2016; Yang, 2018; Zhan, 2019). This finding is notable, as teachers may lack sufficient knowledge and skills to implement inclusive practices for all students and hold stereotypical perceptions towards inclusive education. This highlights the need for resource centres to play a leading role in supporting teachers in changing their previous perceptions regarding inclusive education. Moreover, the lack of resource teachers was a big challenge to implement inclusive practices (Feng & Zhu, 2018).
Providing Effective Family Support
The current review showed two main functions of resource centres/rooms related to family support: (a) organising IEP meetings with parents/caregivers and (b) providing parental training and guidance (S. Chen & Ruan, 2019; Qin, 2021; Q. Sun, 2016). According to Murray and Mereoiu (2016) and Cook et al. (2012), creating close and collaborative teacher-parent partnerships was important for teachers and families to support the learning and development of students with disabilities, and parental involvement could improve students’ outcomes. There is no doubt that these two strategies effectively involve parents’ engagement in their children’s education, so many parents in selected articles believed that resource centres were places for them to feel safe, supported, and engaged (Kui & Lei, 2016; Qin, 2021; H. Wang et al., 2017). However, the review indicated that some parents had concerns about their children, who might be labelled as disabled or incapable if they and their children received services from resource centres/rooms (Huang et al., 2020). This is aligned with Stevens and Wurf (2020), who stated that parents often felt frustrated if teachers and parents of typically developing children treated them and their children differently at school. The research results are essential to inform that the target audience of parental training should not only include parents/caregivers with children with disabilities but also should involve other families of typically developing children in training to support all parents/caregivers to gain knowledge about inclusive education and change their negative perceptions towards disabilities. Besides, resource centres/rooms should be implemented to strengthen publicity on inclusive education and ensure that society is built to be more physically and emotionally accessible for people with disabilities.
Insufficient Human Resources and Unbalanced Distribution
The lack of human resources is a big challenge for resource centres and rooms. The current review showed that although the local governments in Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, and Beijing provided much financial support to establish resource rooms and resource centres, the utilisation rate was relatively low due to the lack of full-time staff to manage the institutions or staff who lacked sufficient knowledge and skills to use the facilities in the resource rooms or centres (Fei et al., 2020; Y. Sun, 2013). L. Chen and Zan’s (2020) study indicated that many schools did not set up a resource teacher position due to insufficient Bianzhi positions. Therefore, it will be necessary for schools and governments to realise the necessity of creating resource centres/rooms and recruit teachers with sufficient professional skills. It will also be essential to advocate inclusive education in society to make the social environment more inclusive for people with disabilities.
As discussed earlier, there was an unbalanced layout of resource centres/rooms across the country, as most centres were established in urban areas in Eastern China, and a few studies explored the operation and development in Western and Central China. Based on the review, there is a positive correlation between the levels of economic development of regions and the creation of resource centres. It is clear that many resource centres are created in economically developed regions, such as Beijing and Shanghai, China, and the construction and development of resource centres in these areas are relatively faster than in other places. Moreover, establishing resource centres is related to government decision-making and their understanding of inclusive education. L. Wang and Ma (2019) pointed out that even in the most developed regions, the local governments sometimes queried about the significance of resource centres. As such, improving schools’ and local governments’ understanding of inclusive education is the first step to constructing more resource centres in different regions; then, schools can provide high-quality education for all students in the school settings. In addition, providing sufficient financial support to resource centres is also beneficial to balance the construction and development of resource centres in remote or rural areas and to ensure that resource centres have enough resource supply to meet teachers’ teaching practices and students’ learning and intervention needs.
Conclusion, Implications, and Future Research Directions
Under the international initiatives of inclusive education, promoting the quality of inclusive education provision has become one of the central goals of Chinese governments. Since China has been entering a new phase with regard to inclusive education, this study is quite timely.
Resource centres/rooms as institutions in China aim to support inclusive practices for children with disabilities. Although there were some studies published in Chinese literature to introduce the operation and development of resource support systems in certain areas in China, little study has been conducted so far to systematically examine how inclusive education resource support systems provide quality services for all stakeholders, including children, teachers, parents/caregivers, and society, in practice. This scoping review was the first to summarise and conceptualise the operation and development of resource support systems in different areas of China and the achievements and challenges to creating high-quality services for children with disabilities.
In conclusion, resource centres/rooms are responsible for creating and designing inclusive and accessible learning environments for students with disabilities, and resource centres/rooms should support teachers to accommodate and adjust the curriculum to meet students’ needs and interests. In addition, resource support systems served five functions, including (a) providing in-service teacher professional development, (b) conducting students’ assessment, (c) designing and implementing IEPs, (d) providing parental training, and (e) serving society and advocating the philosophy of inclusive education to broad society. Indeed, resource centres/rooms aim to promote teachers’ knowledge of inclusive education and change their beliefs in order to create inclusive environments and design accessible curricula for students with disabilities. Although resource support systems have been quickly developed in some provinces and cities in China, there are some external factors, such as teachers’ professional knowledge and beliefs, students’ characteristics, parents’ and caregivers’ perceptions, government understandings, and economic investment, influencing the quality of services provided from resource centres/rooms for children with disabilities.
This study emphasised the importance of in-service teacher training to improve educators’ knowledge and beliefs about inclusive education. Educators in other countries can use this insight to advocate for ongoing professional development programmes that equip teachers with skills to design accessible curricula and create inclusive learning environments. Moreover, educators should recognise the critical role of parents, caregivers, and the broader community in supporting inclusive education. Schools can organise potential training sessions to help families understand the benefits of inclusive education and how they can contribute to their children’s learning. Educators should also work closely with local governments and policymakers to advocate for increased funding and support for resource centres/rooms, particularly in underserved areas. More importantly, educators can foster inclusive school cultures that prioritise the needs of all students, including those with disabilities. This involves not only physical accessibility but also creating a supportive environment where diversity is celebrated.
The current scoping review adds to the recent body of literature investigating the operation and development of resource support systems in China. However, due to the limited literature in this field, the authors suggest that more empirical and comprehensive research related to resource support systems is needed.
Firstly, since the current study only used the CNKI (Chinese database) to find relevant articles written in Simplified Chinese related to resource centres/rooms in China, some literature written in Traditional Chinese about resource support systems in Hong Kong SAR, Macau SAR, and Taiwan province might be missed. Therefore, it is essential to extend the scope of the research in the future.
Secondly, most articles in the current scoping review were introductory studies to briefly introduce how resource centres were created and operated in certain regions. Although some studies, such as Qin and Zhao’s (2022), used quantitative or qualitative methodology to explore the current status of resource centres in China, most findings focused on teachers’ perspectives on the service provision and operation of resource centres/rooms (Kui & Lei, 2016). There is a lack of empirical studies to examine teachers’, schools’, families’, and governments’ roles and responsibilities in constructing and developing resource centres/rooms. Therefore, it is essential to conduct more empirical research in this field to provide more sense of how resource centres/rooms can be constructed to meet teachers’, parents’, and students’ needs.
Thirdly, the current review showed that more than half of the selected studies about this topic were conducted in Eastern China. The four main target areas in the literature were Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu Province, and Sichuan Province. This means that more resource centres were established in the financially advantaged areas. Indeed, there was an unbalanced layout of resource centres/rooms across the country, and governments’ financial investment influenced the development of resource support systems. Therefore, the geographic distribution may influence the construction and operation of resource centres/rooms. This highlights a need for future research on the resource centres to consider the local economic development and needs. More research on this topic should be conducted in remote or rural areas in Central and Western China.
The findings of this study also have several important implications for researchers worldwide, particularly those working to promote inclusive education. Researchers in other countries can draw inspiration from this study to conduct similar investigations into the operation and development of inclusive education resource support systems in their context. Comparative studies between China and other countries could provide valuable insights into how different cultural, economic, and policy environments influence the effectiveness of resource centres/rooms. Also, future research should investigate the long-term impact of resource centres/rooms on students’ academic and social outcomes and their influence on teachers’ professional development and parents’ engagement.
Footnotes
Ethical Considerations
This is a scoping review article, so no ethics application is required.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The research reported in this article was supported by the First Batch of Postdocs Overseas Talent Introduction Programme (The Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China); Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (CCNU23XJ053); Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (CCNU23ZZ002).
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.