Children with special educational needs included in Austrian mainstream schools are provided with special educational support, which aim to create learning environments, that meet the children’s needs on an individual level. Little is known about what adjustments children with special educational needs in mainstream school classes require to promote participation in school occupations. This is the first study in Austria exploring the student-environment-fit from self-perceived children’s perspective and comparing this to teachers’ perspective by using the School Setting Interview. In this cross-sectional matched pairs study twenty-five children (mean age 12.5 ± 1.4) with special educational needs and twenty-one teachers from six Austrian secondary schools were interviewed. Participants’ ratings were analyzed descriptively and statistically with Wilcoxon-Sign Rank Test. Reported adjustments from the child and teacher perspectives were analyzed with qualitative content analysis and presented using the occupational, social and physical environmental dimensions from the Model of Human Occupation. Results indicate perceived student-environment-fit differs between school activities as well as between children and teachers. Three out of 16 school activities showed a statistically significant difference between children and teacher matched-pair analysis. Children perceive more unmet needs then teachers. Most adjustments are reported in the social environment dimension and inform practitioners what adjustments are perceived to be useful for children with Special Educational Needs and their teachers. Both children’s and teacher’s perspectives provide valuable information. Significantly, children in this study were able to identify required needs and describe adjustments. To increase participation in school occupations, children can and need to be actively included in the decision-making process.
MULTIFILE
PURPOSE: To investigate factors that influence participation in and needs for work and other daytime activities among individuals with severe mental illnesses (SMI). METHODS: A latent class analysis using routine outcome monitoring data from 1069 patients was conducted to investigate whether subgroups of individuals with SMI can be distinguished based on participation in work or other daytime activities, needs for care in these areas, and the differences between these subgroups. RESULTS: Four subgroups could be distinguished: (1) an inactive group without daytime activities or paid employment and many needs for care in these areas; (2) a moderately active group with some daytime activities, no paid employment, and few needs for care; (3) an active group with more daytime activities, no paid employment, and mainly met needs for care; and (4) a group engaged in paid employment without needs for care in this area. Groups differed significantly from each other in age, duration in MHC, living situation, educational level, having a life partner or not, needs for care regarding social contacts, quality of life, psychosocial functioning, and psychiatric symptoms. Differences were not found for clinical diagnosis or gender. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals with SMI, different subgroups can be distinguished based on employment situation, daytime activities, and needs for care in these areas. Subgroups differ from each other on patient characteristics and each subgroup poses specific challenges, underlining the need for tailored rehabilitation interventions. Special attention is needed for individuals who are involuntarily inactive, with severe psychiatric symptoms and problems in psychosocial functioning.
MULTIFILE
In this study self-reported stress and burn-out levels between general and special education teachers in the Netherlands are compared. More than eight hundred teachers were assessed with the Utrechtse Burnout Schaal (UBOS-L/MBI) to determine their levels of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment within the school context. We also used instruments to measure different stress indicators (personal characteristics: self-efficacy, negative affect, and student characteristics: student responsibility and discipline, studentpeer relationships, and class size). Contrary to recent findings in the United States (Shoho, 2002), results regarding burnout did not show any significant differences between general education teachers (n=604) and special education teachers (n=206). However, we do find significant differences in stress indicators explaining burnout. We also looked for factors other than those intrinsic to teaching, by crossnationally comparing teacher stress and burnout. Teachers in the U.S. and the Netherlands differ significantly in burnout level. U.S. teachers experience more burnout.
DOCUMENT
