Inclusion of Children with Special Educational Needs and Typically Developing Children in Joint Problem-Solving (With Tasks on Understanding Multiplicative Relations as an Example)

This article presents results of an experimental study on inclusion of children with special educational needs (SEN) and normally developing children in the process of joint solving of learning tasks depending on the type of interaction and relationships between children and between children and adult. The hypothesis was that the inclusion and development of higher mental functions in children with SEN can occur in specially organized learning interactions with other children and the adult that contribute to the emergence and development of child-adult communities. It is shown that the interactions between participants, the processes of communication and mutual understanding that develop under these conditions mediate the transition from the orientation on the objective characteristics of the problem to the analysis of the very ways of joint problem-solving. The relationship of the processes revealed in our study (means of interaction, communication and mutual understanding) characterise 4 types of child-adult communities and also serves as an integral indicator of the children’s inclusion in joint problem-solving. The results of the study are important for understanding the processes that affect the inclusion of children with SEN in learning situations, as well as for understanding the sources and mechanisms of mental development in social interactions. It is shown that the evolving interactions and relationships between the children and adults promote the development of higher mental functions in the participants of these interactions.

1. Vygotskii L.S. Psihologiya razvitiya cheloveka [Psychology of Human Development]. Moscow: Smysl Publ.; Eksmo Publ., 2005. 1136 p.
2. Vygotskii L.S. Sobranie sochinenii: V 6 t. T. 3. [Collected Works in 6 vol. Vol. 3]. Problemy razvitiya psikhiki [Problems of development of the mind]. Moscow: Pedagogika Publ., 1983. 368 p.
3. Vygotskii L.S. Sobranie sochinenii: V 6-ti t. T. 5. [Collected Works in 6 vol. Vol. 5]. Osnovy defektologii [ Foundations of defectology]. Moscow: Pedagogika Publ., 1983. 368 p.
4. Vygotskii L.S., Luria A.R. Etyudy po istorii povedenia: Obez’yana. Primitiv. Rebenok [Studies on the history of behavior: Monkey. Primitive. Child]. Moscow: Pedagogika- Press Publ., 1993. 224 p.
5. Vysockaya E.V. Psihologicheskie osobennosti vvedeniya shkol’nikov v soderzhanie nauchnyh ponyatij pri ispol’zovanii predmetno-orientirovannyh komp’yuternyh uchebnyh sred: diss. kand. psihol. nauk. [Introduction of schoolchildren into the content of scientific concepts when using subject-oriented computer learning environments: Psychological features]. Moscow, 1991.
6. Gromyko U.V. Psihologiya iskusstva v nauchnoj shkole L.S. Vygotskogo: problemy teorii i kommunikativnyh praktik raboty s soznaniem [Elektronnyj resurs]. Kul’turno-istoricheskaya psihologiya [Cultural-historical psychology], 2018. Vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 85—92. doi:10.17759/chp.2018140309 (In Russ.; abstr. in Engl.).
7. Guzman R.A. Rol’ sovmestnoi deyatel’nosti v reshenii uchebnyh zadach [The role of joint activities in solving educational problems]. Voprosy psihologii [ Psychology issues], 1980, no. 3, pp. 133—136. (In Russian).
8. Lubovskii V.I. Inklyuziya — tupikovyi put’ dlya obucheniya detei s ogranichennymi vozmozhnostyami [Elektronnyi resurs] [Inclusion is a dead end for educating children with disabilities]. Special’noe obrazovanie [ Special education], 2016, no. 4. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/ article/n/inklyuziya-tupikovyy-put-dlya-obucheniya-detey-s-ogranichennymi-vozmozhnostyami (Accessed 29.06.2019). (In Russ.; abstr. in Engl.).
9. Luria A.R. Problemy vysshei nervnoi deyatel’nosti normal’nogo i anomal’nogo rebenka. Moscow: Akademii pedagogicheskih nauk RSFSR Publ., 1958. 46 p.
10. Perre-Klermon A.-N. Rol’ social’nyh vzaimodeistvii v razvitii intellekta detei [The role of social interactions in the development of children’s intelligence]. Moscow: Pedagogika, 1991. 248 p. (In Russ.).
11. Rubtsov V.V. [i dr.] Kommunikativno-orientirovannye obrazovatel’nye sredy. Psihologiya proektirovaniya [Communicatively-oriented educational environments. Design Psychology]. Rubtsov V.V. (eds). Moscow: Psihologicheskii in-t RAO Publ, 1996. 158 s.
12. Rubtsov V.V. Social’no-geneticheskaya psihologiya razvivayushchego obrazovaniya: deyatel’nostnyipodhod. Moscow: MGPPU Publ., 2008. 416 p.
13. Rubtsov V.V. Social’nye vzaimodeistviya i obuchenie [Elektronnyj resurs] [Social interactions and learning]. Psihologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie [ Psychological Science and Education], 1996, no. 2. Available at: http://psyjournals. ru/files/2141/psyedu_1996_n2_Rubtsov.pdf (Accessed 01.07.2019). (In Russ.; abstr. in Engl.).
14. Skripkina T. P. Kognitivnye sposobnosti v obshchenii: formirovanie [Cognitive abilities in communication: formation]. In Bodalev A.A. (eds.), Psihologiya obshcheniya. Enciklopedicheskij slovar’ [ Psychology of communication. encyclopedic Dictionary]. Moscow: Kogito-Centr, 2011. 600 p.
15. Cukerman G.A. Zachem detyam uchit’sya vmeste? [Elektronnyj resurs] [Why should children learn together?]. Moscow: Publ. «Znanie», 1985. 80 p. Available at: http:// psychlib.ru/inc/absid.php?absid=11127. (Accessed 09.10.2019).
16. Belland B.R., Glazewski K.D., Ertmer P.A. Inclusion and Problem-Based Learning: Roles of Students in a Mixed- Ability Group. RMLE Online, 2009. Vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 1—19. doi: 10.1080/19404476.2009.11462062
17. Erdogan F. Effect of cooperative learning supported by reflective thinking activities on students’ critical thinking skills. Eurasian journal of educational research, 2019, no. 80, pp. 89—112. doi:10.14689/ejer.2019.80.5
18. Fitch E.F., Hulgin K.M. Achieving inclusion through CLAD: Collaborative Learning Assessment through Dialogue. International journal of inclusive educational, 2013. Vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 423—439. doi:10.1080/13603110601121453
19. Gagne N., Parks S. Cooperative learning tasks in a grade 6 intensive ESL class: role of scaffolding. Language teaching research, 2013. Vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 188—209. doi: 10.1177/1362168812460818
20. Hall J.K. Interaction as method and result of language learning. Language teaching, 2010. Vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 202—215. doi:10.1017/S0261444809005722
21. Katerina M. Examining peer acceptance in verbal and non—verbal interaction during computer—supported collaborative learning: implications for inclusion. International journal of inclusive educational, 2012. Vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 119— 138. doi:10.1080/13603111003671657
22. Lusy G. Group cooperation, inclusion and disaffected pupils: some responses to informal learning in the music classroom. Music educational research, 2008. Vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 177—192. doi:10.1080/14613800802079049
23. Martin L. Children’s problem-solving as inter-individual outcome. D, Diss., University of California, San Diego, 1983. P. 164.
24. Perry B.D. Childhood Experience and the Expression of Genetic Potential: What Childhood Neglect Tells Us About Nature and Nurture. Brain and Mind, 2002. Vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 79—99. doi:10.1023/A:1016557824657.
25. Rubtsov V.V. Organization and development of joint actions among children in the learning process. New York.: Nova Science Publishers. 1994.