首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Inclusive Education >Parental experiences of dealing with disputes in Additional Support Needs in Scotland: why are parents not engaging with mediation?
【24h】

Parental experiences of dealing with disputes in Additional Support Needs in Scotland: why are parents not engaging with mediation?

机译:父母在苏格兰的“额外抚养需要”中处理纠纷的经验:为什么父母不参与调解?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Partnerships with parents, particularly in the field of education, have featured prominently in policy rhetoric for many years, but routes of redress have not had much attention until relatively recently. The development of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the UK reflects the situation in several jurisdictions (e.g. Norway, Germany, the Netherlands) where citizens can choose not to go to court to resolve administrative disputes. Under the Education (Additional Support for Learning [ASL]) (Scotland) Act 2004 local authorities must establish and publicise procedures for identifying and meeting the needs of children requiring additional support for learning. The Act and Code of Practice advocate early intervention to prevent disagreements about the provision for additional support from escalating into more serious disputes, with local authorities required to provide information about, and access to, independent mediation for parents. In Scotland the ASL Act 2004 has resulted in four routes available for redress in the area of Additional Support Needs which include both mediation and litigation type processes: •Informal mediation•Formal mediation•Adjudication•Tribunal This article uses case study information from parents in three local authorities in Scotland to explore why independent mediation is being under-used by schools and parents, and what factors influence this. Questions are raised regarding the large numbers of parents who are unaware of mediation, the attitudes towards and use of independent mediation by local authorities and the suitability of independent mediation, particularly when the dispute is over resources.View full textDownload full textKeywordseducation policy, inclusive education, Additional Support for Learning, Alternative Dispute Resolution, mediation, parentsRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2010.548103
机译:与父母的伙伴关系,特别是在教育领域的伙伴关系,多年来在政策言论中一直占有重要地位,但是直到最近,补救途径才引起人们的关注。英国替代性争议解决的发展反映了几个司法管辖区(例如挪威,德国,荷兰)的情况,公民可以选择不诉诸法院解决行政纠纷。根据2004年《教育(额外学习支持)法》(苏格兰),地方当局必须建立并公布程序,以识别和满足需要额外学习支持的儿童的需求。该法案和《行为准则》提倡及早干预,以防止对额外支持条款的争执升级为更严重的纠纷,要求地方当局提供有关父母独立调解的信息,并为父母提供获得调解的渠道。在苏格兰,《 2004年ASL法》已导致在其他支持需求领域可采用四种途径进行补救,其中包括调解和诉讼类型程序:•“非正式调解”•“正式调解”•“裁决”•法庭本文使用的是案例研究来自苏格兰三个地方当局的父母提供的信息,以探讨为什么学校和父母未充分利用独立调解,以及哪些因素影响了这一点。提出了以下问题:大量父母不了解调解,地方当局对独立调解的态度和使用以及独立调解的适用性,尤其是在资源争端时。查看全文下载全文关键字教育政策,全纳教育,学习的其他支持,替代性纠纷解决,调解,父母“,pubid:” ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b“};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2010.548103

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号