The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
QAE
26,4
502
Received 29 April 2018
Accepted 7 June 2018
Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 26 No. 4, 2018
pp. 502-510
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/QAE-04-2018-0049
Professionals’ attitudes toward
children’s participation:
implementing educational reforms
Eran Uziely
School of Education, Achva Academic College, Shikmim, Israel
Abstract
Purpose – In Israel, the decision which educational framework is most suitable for pupils with special needs
is made by a placement committee. In January 2005, the eighth amendment of the Israeli Special Education
Law determined that all pupils have the legal right to participate in their placement committee’s deliberations.
This paper aims to examine the implementation of this liberal reform that let young people’s voices be heard.
Specifically, the focus is on the attitudes of involved professionals (committee chairs, educational supervisors,
teachers, etc.) regarding the law, and whether and in what ways their views influence the extent to which this
law is implemented.
Design/methodology/approach – The research used an eight-step linear scale to investigate both the
desired and actual levels of children’s participation in the committee’s discussions, as evaluated by
professionals. In addition, the pupils’ satisfaction with the discussion process was evaluated, based on the
professionals’ perceptions. Furthermore, the research analyzed which socioeconomic, cultural and
occupational variables correlated with the degree of students’ participation in and satisfaction with the
process.
Findings – The major finding was that many of the adults responsible for the implementation of the reform
do not believe in its principles and are even opposed to child participation. In their discussions, child
participation was poor.
Originality/value – The conclusion drawn from the study is that legislation alone is not enough when
implementing a controversial reform. Spreading of this new social norm must be accompanied by efforts to
promote the concept of child participation among the professionals who implement it.
Keywords Special education, Children’s rights, Child participation, Placement procedure
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
All over the globe, major educational reforms are conceived and developed in central
government institutions; however, their implementation often depends on the good will of
teachers and other professionals in the field. In Israel, the Ministry of Education routinely
relies on laws and regulations to enforce new reforms, ignoring the need to persuade and
convince those professionals of its importance. This article discusses the results of that
approach.
Children’s rights and the right to participate
Twenty-five years ago, Israel ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the
Child (CRC), reiterating the commitment to ensure children’s nurturance rights as defined in
previous international documents. Yet the convention referred also to civic and political
rights, which had never before been granted to children: freedom of expression, the right to
privacy and the right to participate in decisions that pertain to their own lives (Melton,
2005a). Whereas the need for legislation regarding children’s nurturance rights is fairly
obvious, given that children depend on adults to access basic needs and to obtain protection, Educational
children’s right to self-determination is not self-evident and has been the source of numerous reforms
disputes (Bohrnstedt et al., 1981; Ruck and Horn, 2008).
The issue of children’s right to self-determination continues to arouse discussion to this
day, and both practical and theoretical debates regarding children’s ability to participate in
decision-making processes are still common. Various opinions can be found among parents,
professionals and members of academe, ranging from a conservative approach that views
the child as the parents’ property, to the inverse approach, which claims that children should
503
enjoy the same rights as adults do.
Unlike adults, children often need external help to realize their right to participate: first,
they need guidance and a thorough preparatory process to speak for themselves
(Kozminsky, 2004); and second, children are dependent on adults to give them the
opportunity to participate (Melton, 2005b). Therefore, one cannot discuss the realization of
the right to participate without regarding the attitudes of the people who are in charge of the
implementation. The implementation of rights depends on the good will of adults and
children to exercise these rights.
The study analyzed a very specific implementation of the CRC – the fulfillment of
children’s right to participate in the context of school placement decisions. The focus of this
article is on the attitudes of professionals who are appointed by the law to enhance
children’s participation in the discussions.

Pupils’ participation in placement processes in Israel

According to the Special Education Law 5748 (1988), the placement committee is the
statutory body that decides whether a pupil is eligible to receive special education services.
It also determines which educational framework is most suitable for the child: a mainstream
framework, a special education classroom within a mainstream school or a special education
school. The decision is based on the child’s educational needs and the obligation to place
children in the least restrictive environment possible.
The committee is headed by a representative of the local authority and includes a
psychologist, a special education supervisor and a representative of the Parents Council. For
every pupil, an invitation is issued to include two representatives from the child’s current
school (homeroom teacher and either school counselor, psychologist or principal) and the
child’s parents.
In 2005, Special Education Law (Amendment 8) was issued – “Right to a Hearing for the
Pupil in Placement and Appeals Committees” (Special Education Law (Amendment 8),
24/1/2005). In the spirit of the CRC, it stated that the placement committee will issue an
invitation to the individual pupil and will enable the child to state his or her claims. The law
posed no conditions regarding the child’s participation (such as age or severity of the
disability). The regulations for the implementation of this law were detailed about a year later,
in the Ministry of Education’s (2006)) Director General’s Circular 66/8(B). In addition to
participating in the deliberation, regulations also required the school staff to conduct a broad
and comprehensive preparation process with the child prior to the committee’s meeting.
There are four main reasons to suspect that the law is not thoroughly implemented: first,
child participation is not acceptable in most cultures around the world (Matthews et al.,
1999); second, many professionals believe that participation might be harmful to the child’s
mental health (Weithorn, 1998); third, some committee members feel that adding another
voice to the deliberation reduces their own power in the discussion (Melton, 2005b); and
finally, professionals may underestimate the opinion of the pupil on the matter – the child
QAE has limited knowledge on the subject matter, has a handicap or a disability and, above all,
26,4 cannot be objective.
The implementation of pupil participation in placement committees was announced
without making any effort to promote it or to explain it to the professionals. Given that
professionals on the committee are responsible for preparing the pupil for the discussion and
for the management of the deliberation, their attitudes toward child participation are crucial
504 to successful implementation.

Summary and the goal of the study

Professionals’ involvement in the implementation of child participation is crucial to its
success. Their views on the subject are one of the main factors that may advance or limit it.
Therefore, the current study analyzed professionals’ attitudes toward child participation in
placement committees.

Methods
Study population and sample
The study referred to professionals who participate in the deliberations of placement
committees. An online questionnaire was used to gather data from 115 participants from all
over Israel, among them committee chairs, regional supervisors of special education,
inclusion teachers, homeroom teachers and school psychologists.

Demographic variables
The questionnaire referred to background variables, such as gender, age, religion, personal
status, family income, number of years in the profession, role in the committee and age and
type of the population with whom the subject works routinely (mainstream or special
education). Professionals were also divided into three groups according to their remoteness
from working with pupils. In our sample, 41 per cent had daily interactions with pupils who
were the focus of the committee’s deliberations, 25 per cent interacted with them
infrequently and 33 per cent had no prior interaction with these pupils.

Measuring of dependent variables

Level of pupil participation. For the purposes of the study, an eight-point linear scale was
developed to describe various levels of pupil participation in the discussion. This scale was
based on a scale for evaluating civic participation in political decision making (Arnstein, 1969).
As this is a linear scale, each stage includes the ones that preceded it and adds a step,
from adults’ complete control, through shared responsibility, to full pupil control:
 The committee convenes without informing the pupil.
 The pupil is informed of the committee meeting but is not asked to attend.
 The pupil is asked to attend as an observer.
 During the discussion, the pupil is offered an explanation of what is taking place in
the committee.
 The pupil is present and expresses an opinion before the committee members.
 The pupil expresses an opinion, asks questions, and answers others’ questions (This
is the participation level the law requires).
 The pupil has a vote just like any other member of the committee.
 The pupil alone decides which school to attend.
Using this scale, participants were asked to indicate their responses to two questions: Educational
Q1. In your opinion, what would be the optimal (desired) level of pupil participation in
reforms
the committee’s discussion?

Q2. In your opinion, what is the actual level of pupil participation during committee
meetings? 505
Professionals were also asked to evaluate pupils’ and parents’ satisfaction regarding child
participation in the meetings, using statements such as “During the discussion, pupils
express their opinions freely” and “Pupils were treated fairly.” Each statement was ranked
on a four-point scale ranging from 1 (“do not agree at all”) to 4 ( “agree completely”). As
internal consistency between the statements was high, the average ranking of items was
considered a reliable measure of the pupils’ and the parents’ satisfaction regarding the
meeting.

Independent variables
Participants’ attitudes to unconditional participation. Using a dichotomous item,
participants were asked to indicate whether in their opinion each pupil should have the right
to participate in his or her own placement committee. If the answer was negative,
participants were asked to define which populations should not participate in the discussion.
Participants’ support for rights in different contexts. This measure was based on a
questionnaire used in the study of Khoury-Kassabri et al. (2006). Participants were asked to
mark on a scale from 1 (“do not agree at all”) to 4 (“agree completely”) the extent to which
they supported each of nine statements, which represented different facets of children’s
rights. Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency was 0.557, and the average score for the
nine items was considered a reliable measure of participants’ support for children’s rights.
Participants’ reports on the level of children’s participation within their own family.
Based on the questionnaire used in the study of Khoury-Kassabri et al. (2006), 12 statements
were formulated that describe various situations of children’s participation within the family
(e.g. participating in family decisions and expressing an opinion during an argument). On a
four-point scale, ranging from 1 (“do not agree at all”) to 4 (“agree completely”), participants
indicated the degree to which each statement described the situation in their own family.
Following the factor analysis, three statements were excluded. Due to the relatively high
level of internal consistency between the remaining statements (a = 0.741), the average
score for the nine remaining items was considered a reliable measure of children’s level of
participation within the family, as experienced by the participants.

Statistical analysis
The data were first analyzed descriptively: The distribution of variables was examined and
averages and standard deviations were calculated. Next, internal reliability (Cronbach’s
alpha) was examined for variables containing several items. Factor analysis was conducted
for variables with a low rate of internal reliability, and content areas were defined. The
groups’ averages for each statement were then used as the study variables.
Finally, correlations between the study variables were calculated to find significant
relationships. A stepwise multiple regression analysis was conducted for each of the main
variables. The t-tests were used to test the statistical significance of the differences found
between the study populations. Differences between the various professional subgroups
were examined in a one-way ANOVA.
QAE Results
26,4 In our findings, 54 per cent of the professionals supported the pupils’ right to participate
without any conditions. Among those who opposed unconditional participation, the main
justification for denying participation was young age (28 per cent).
The distribution of the desired and actual level of pupil participation is described in
Figure 1.
506 Of the 115 professional participants, 60.7 per cent indicated the sixth level of
participation as the desirable level, in accordance with the Special Education Law. None of
the professionals indicated a higher level of participation as desirable and 15.2 per cent were
opposed to pupil participation of any kind. These findings suggest that while many of the
professionals expressed a position that is consistent with the law, a substantial portion of
them disagree with the law.
According to the professionals, 80.4 per cent of the pupils attended their committee
meeting; a rate that is much higher than it was prior to the publication of the regulations, as
found in an earlier study (Igell, 2006). However, their presence is not enough: the purpose of
the law is to promote active and meaningful participation in the decision-making procedure
(Level 6 on the scale). That was met in only half of the cases reported. In all other cases, it is
likely that the pupils experienced tokenism, i.e. they were invited to the discussion but their
voice was not really heard.
Professionals evaluated pupils’ satisfaction regarding their participation as very high
(M = 3.523, SD = 0.629). However, these evaluations were not distributed evenly across the
participant subgroups: committee chairs and regional special education supervisors’
assessment of pupils’ satisfaction was higher than that indicated by the remaining
participants. A one-way ANOVA confirmed that the difference between the subgroups was
significant (F(6,91) = 2.634, p < 0.05).
The relationships found between the main variables are presented in Table I.

Figure 1.
Levels of desired and
actual pupil
participation
 Desired Actual level of Student’s satisfaction during
Educational
Independent variable level of participation participation the committee meeting reforms
Desired level of participation
Pearson’s R – 0.377** 0.070
Significance – 0.000 0.483
Actual level of participation 507
Pearson’s R 0.377** – 0.483**
Significance 0.000 – 0.000
Attitude toward unconditional participation
Pearson’s R 0.289** 0.144 0.029
Significance 0.002 0.138 0.764
Degree of participation in the family
Pearson’s R 0.033 0.156 0.253** Table I.
Significance 0.734 0.110 0.009 Correlations
(Pearson’s R)
Proximity to the Field
Pearson’s R 0.087 0.047 0.249*
between dependent
Significance 0.369 0.640 0.011 and independent
variables in the
Notes: *Level of (two-way) significance – 0.05; **level of (two-way) significance – 0.01 professional group

A multiple stepwise regression analysis of the desired degree of participation found a

significant correlation with two variables (F(2,96) = 11.74, p < 0.01): the actual degree of
participation and the attitude toward unconditional participation. These variables explained
19.6 per cent of the variance. A regression analysis of pupils’ actual level of participation as
indicated by the professionals correlated significantly with only one variable (F(1,97) =
16.09, p < 0.01): the desired degree of participation. This model explained 14.2 per cent of the
variance.
Finally, a regression analysis of participants’ estimation of pupils’ satisfaction with the
meeting revealed a significant correlation with two variables (F(2,90) = 28.28, p < 0.01): a
positive correlation with the actual level of participation reported and an inverse correlation
with the professionals’ frequency of daily interaction with pupils. In other words,
professionals who had less daily interaction with the pupils estimated higher pupil
satisfaction. These variables explained 38.6 per cent of the variance.
A significant correlation was also found between participants’ estimation of pupils’
satisfaction and the level of child participation within the professional’s own family.

Discussion
The Ministry of Education can enforce a new reform in three ways: by issuing new
regulations; making changes in resource allocations (cutting budgets, adding instruction
hours, etc.); and initiating a campaign among teachers and other professionals involved to
support the reform. In the case of child participation, aside from publishing the new
regulations, no efforts were made to promote the revolutionary reform,.
History reveals that attempts at social change that rely solely on legislation and court
decisions are doomed to fail. This is demonstrated in the numerous cases in which civil-
rights reforms put their trust in laws and regulations, ignoring the need to change public
opinion (Bollinger, 2004).
QAE Our results indicate clearly that four years after regulations were published, the new
26,4 norms are not widely spread: about half of the professionals involved in implementing the
reform were not convinced that every pupil has the right to voice his or her opinions or
concerns in the course of the committee’s discussion. Although 60 per cent supported a level
of pupil participation that coincides with the level required by law, there still remain 40 per
cent who have not aligned themselves with the law. These two findings are connected: a
508 review of the data in Table I reveals that participants who favored unconditional
participation tended to support higher levels of participation.
Knowing that both preparation for participation and participation itself rely heavily on
adults’ intervention and support (Mason et al., 2004; Test and Neale, 2004), and in view of the
percentage of adults who oppose child participation, it is reasonable to expect that both
procedures are not being properly implemented. And indeed, two-thirds of the pupils in the
current study reported that they had not been prepared for their participation in the
placement committee at all, by any of the members of the school staff (Uziely, 2015).
Furthermore, the actual level of pupil participation was found to be strongly correlated with
the level of participation preferred by the professionals. This confirms our initial
assumptions that adults have the power to influence the way in which the discussion is
conducted and consequently their views regarding child participation influence the extent to
which this law is implemented.
I suggest that we are facing a vicious circle that strengthens the negative approach to
this issue: professionals who disapprove of pupil participation prepare them poorly for the
committee meeting; the pupils show a low level of participation, justifying the adults’
negative perceptions regarding child participation and so on. The research results presented
herein provide us with an opportunity to consider the influence of a positive approach to the
issue: professionals who favor child participation and applied it in their own families
estimated that pupils were more satisfied with the deliberation process. This, in turn,
enhances pupil’s participation. Hence, the creation of a positive cycle is possible.
Results also indicate that professionals who did not interact with pupils on a daily basis
estimated higher pupil satisfaction than did their cohorts. A possible explanation is that it is
easier for those who do not encounter pupils with special needs on a daily basis to hold
liberal views about child participation. This finding is important, as it suggests that
legislators, who do not work with children at all, see the reality of child participation
through rose-colored glasses. This might explain why they assume that their own liberal
views are widely held, reducing the need for explanation and persuasion.
A review of the data presented in Table I demonstrates a correlation between the
professionals’ evaluation of actual participation and their evaluation of pupil satisfaction.
Thus, it appears that professionals assume that a low level of participation indicates a
pupil’s dissatisfaction. Interestingly, as demonstrated in an earlier study, the pupils
themselves did not link the two variables (Uziely, 2015). Rather, previous findings indicate
that a low level of participation is merely one manifestation of the pupils’ freedom to choose,
a choice that apparently is not in line with adults’ norms or expectations.

Summary and recommendations for practice and policymaking

On the matter of child participation, the Ministry of Education has relied on legislation and
regulations, disregarding the resistance emanating from the field. Given the finding that
many professionals are opposed to the law and its implications, and knowing that attitudes
toward child participation play a key role in the implementation of this law, we may
conclude that such legislation must be accompanied by efforts to promote child participation
among the professionals who work with children daily. This can be done through school
workshops, teacher training and the use of public media. Moreover, if we are planning to Educational
rely on the good will of teachers and of other professionals in the field of education, at the reforms
very least we ought to provide them with the tools to successfully carry out the mission with
which they are entrusted. In addition, developing and using tools for improving children’s
self-presentation and participation can also help to improve professionals’ attitudes toward
participation.
As we have mentioned earlier, difficulties in implementing new reforms are not unique to
the Israeli case presented here. On the contrary, similar scenarios often occur in other 509
countries, and on different controversial issues; cases in which legislators and decision-
makers try to enforce important social reforms through legislation processes only, ignoring
the need to accompany their efforts with a comprehensive advocacy campaign. A good
example of a gap between legislation and implementation is the law demanding the
inclusion of pupils with special needs in mainstream classes. For over 20 years, the
implementation of educational integration has met with great difficulties, despite massive
legislation processes (MacFarlane and Marks Woolfson, 2013). As in the case presented here,
teacher attitudes play a key role in the successful implementation of the reform, but
authorities seems to ignore the need to promote the subject in the field. This case provides
additional evidence for the need to act in various arenas to promote the issue at hand.

Prolog
Globally speaking, we can often see that many social reforms, which were achieved with
great efforts, are later diminished by newer forces and beliefs. Thus, the achievements of the
feminist revolution are limited by religious tolerance; racial integration is challenged by the
demand to be more responsive to parents’ free will; and so on.
In our case, a recent reform pertaining to placement processes was announced by the
Ministry of Education in 2018. Apart from some bureaucratic procedures, the main change
is that the decision regarding the appropriate educational framework for pupils with special
needs is being placed entirely in the hands of their parents. Thus, there is a risk that the
voice of the pupil will not be heard at all.

References
Arnstein, S.R. (1969), “A ladder of citizen participation”, Journal of the American Institute of Planners,
Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 216-224.
Bohrnstedt, G.W., Freeman, H.E. and Smith, T. (1981), “Adult perspectives on children’s autonomy”,
Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 443-462.
Bollinger, M. (2004), “Brown v. Board: 50 years later”, Socialist Worker.Org (accessed 14 May 2004),
p. 8.
Igell, C. (2006), “Decision making in interdisciplinary educational team – A research of decision making
processes in ‘placement committees’ mandated by the Special Education Law”. Thesis submitted
for Doctor of Philosophy degree, University of Haifa, School of Education, Israel [in Hebrew].
Khoury-Kassabri, M., Haj-Yahia, M.M. and Ben-Arieh, A. (2006), “Adolescents approach toward
children’s rights: Comparison between jewish and palestinian children from Israel and the
palestinian authority”, Children and Youth Services Review, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 1060-1073.
Kozminsky, L. (2004), Speaking for Themselves: Self-Advocacy of Learners with Learning Disabilities,
Yessod Publishers & MOFET Institute, Tel Aviv [in Hebrew].
MacFarlane, K. and Marks Woolfson, L. (2013), “Teacher attitudes and behavior toward the inclusion of
children with social, emotional and behavioral difficulties in mainstream schools: an application
of the theory of planned behavior”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 29 No. 29, pp. 46-52.
QAE Mason, C., Field, S. and Sawilowsky, S. (2004), “Implementation of self-determination activities and
student participation in IEPs”, Exceptional Children, Vol. 70 No. 4, pp. 441-451.
26,4
Matthews, H., Limb, M. and Taylor, M. (1999), “Young people’s participation and representation in
society”, Geoforum, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 135-144.
Melton, G.B. (2005a), “Treating children like people: a framework for research and advocacy”, Journal
of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 646-657.
510 Melton, G.B. (2005b), “Building humane communities respectful of children: the significance of the
convention on the rights of the child”, American Psychologist, Vol. 60 No. 8, pp. 918-926.
Nov 2005.
Ministry of Education (2006), Director General’s Circular 66/8(B).
Ruck, M.D. and Horn, S.S. (2008), “Charting the landscape of children’s rights”, Journal of Social Issues,
Vol. 64 No. 4, pp. 685-699.
Special Education Law 5748 (1988) [in Hebrew].
Special Education Law (Amendment 8), 24/1/2005, “Right to a hearing for the student in placement and
appeals committees” [in Hebrew].
Test, D. and Neale, M. (2004), “Using ’the self-advocacy strategy’ to increase Middle graders’ IEP
participation”, Journal of Behavioral Education, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 135-145.
Weithorn, L.A. (1998), “Youth participation in family and community decision making”, Family
Futures, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 6-9.
Uziely, E. (2015), “Implementing the principle of child participation: pupil’s participation in placement
committees in Israel” in Gal, T. and Faedi Duramy, B. (Eds), International Perspectives and
Empirical Findings on Child Participation: From Social Exclusion to Child-Inclusive Policies,
Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 59-88.

Corresponding author
Eran Uziely can be contacted at: uziely_e@netvision.net.il

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com