Page 288 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 288
ear ly school leaving: contempor ary european perspectives
school since the traditional programmes and teachers fail to meet
their needs (Palladino, Poli, Masi, & Marcheschi, 2000).
Interventions to combat ESL therefore need to be based on an un-
derstanding of its complex determinants and the factors that op-
erate in individual cases. The goal should be to promote a whole-
school approach including teachers’ professional development since
teachers’ improved social and emotional competencies and didac-
tical approaches would offer a great supportive factor for students
with learning difficulties in the ESL prevention context.
Some programmes have already proven to be successful for prevent-
ing ESL for students with learning difficulties, such as Cognitive
Behavioural Interventions, the Check and Connect programme, and
Shema Broadening Instruction. Therefore, further development of
prevention programmes could be based on experiences with them.
Key words: learning difficulties, learning disabilities, early school
leaving, prevention
Introduction
Learning difficulties have constituted very diverse and extensive phenome-
na in education research ever since reading and maths literacy were recog-
nised as key skills for mastering everyday life with education institutions
being considered responsible for developing those skills and others. In the
present century, the extent and problem of educating students with learn-
ing difficulties is more and more recognised although it is impossible to ex-
actly determine the extent of the phenomenon since there is no consensus
on the definition and diagnosis of learning difficulties. Even the terminol-
ogy is not abundantly clear since learning difficulties, learning disabilities
and learning disorders are often used as synonyms. In addition, the term
special educational needs includes similar descriptions.
Depending on various definitions, some authors (Geary, 2006; Mercer
& Pullen, 2005) claim that there is a 4%–8% prevalence of learning diffi-
culties among students. Other authors indicate quite different propor-
tions of students with learning difficulties or learning disabilities. Taanila,
Yliherva, Kaakinen, Moilanen & Ebeling (2011) reported that in Finland
approximately 21% of children had learning difficulties. As explained, the
terminology is a great issue while attempting to determine the precise prev-
alence of students with learning difficulties.
288
school since the traditional programmes and teachers fail to meet
their needs (Palladino, Poli, Masi, & Marcheschi, 2000).
Interventions to combat ESL therefore need to be based on an un-
derstanding of its complex determinants and the factors that op-
erate in individual cases. The goal should be to promote a whole-
school approach including teachers’ professional development since
teachers’ improved social and emotional competencies and didac-
tical approaches would offer a great supportive factor for students
with learning difficulties in the ESL prevention context.
Some programmes have already proven to be successful for prevent-
ing ESL for students with learning difficulties, such as Cognitive
Behavioural Interventions, the Check and Connect programme, and
Shema Broadening Instruction. Therefore, further development of
prevention programmes could be based on experiences with them.
Key words: learning difficulties, learning disabilities, early school
leaving, prevention
Introduction
Learning difficulties have constituted very diverse and extensive phenome-
na in education research ever since reading and maths literacy were recog-
nised as key skills for mastering everyday life with education institutions
being considered responsible for developing those skills and others. In the
present century, the extent and problem of educating students with learn-
ing difficulties is more and more recognised although it is impossible to ex-
actly determine the extent of the phenomenon since there is no consensus
on the definition and diagnosis of learning difficulties. Even the terminol-
ogy is not abundantly clear since learning difficulties, learning disabilities
and learning disorders are often used as synonyms. In addition, the term
special educational needs includes similar descriptions.
Depending on various definitions, some authors (Geary, 2006; Mercer
& Pullen, 2005) claim that there is a 4%–8% prevalence of learning diffi-
culties among students. Other authors indicate quite different propor-
tions of students with learning difficulties or learning disabilities. Taanila,
Yliherva, Kaakinen, Moilanen & Ebeling (2011) reported that in Finland
approximately 21% of children had learning difficulties. As explained, the
terminology is a great issue while attempting to determine the precise prev-
alence of students with learning difficulties.
288
