APA
Click to copy
Xin, W., Li, L., & Ruppar, A. (2022). Curricular Philosophies Reflected in the Chinese Special School Curriculum Standards for Students with Intellectual Disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 71(5), 721–737. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2022.2154325
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
Xin, Weihao, Lingyu Li, and Andrea Ruppar. “Curricular Philosophies Reflected in the Chinese Special School Curriculum Standards for Students with Intellectual Disabilities.” International Journal of Disability, Development and Education 71, no. 5 (2022): 721–737.
MLA
Click to copy
Xin, Weihao, et al. “Curricular Philosophies Reflected in the Chinese Special School Curriculum Standards for Students with Intellectual Disabilities.” International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, vol. 71, no. 5, 2022, pp. 721–37, doi:10.1080/1034912X.2022.2154325.
BibTeX Click to copy
@article{weihao2022a,
title = {Curricular Philosophies Reflected in the Chinese Special School Curriculum Standards for Students with Intellectual Disabilities},
year = {2022},
issue = {5},
journal = {International Journal of Disability, Development and Education},
pages = {721-737},
volume = {71},
doi = {10.1080/1034912X.2022.2154325},
author = {Xin, Weihao and Li, Lingyu and Ruppar, Andrea}
}
Although curriculum standards define educational requirements that students are expected to learn and teachers are expected to teach, little is known about the curricular philosophies of the Chinese Special School Curriculum Standards for students with intellectual disabilities. This study uses content analysis to examine how different curricular philosophies are reflected in the 2016 Special School Curriculum Standards and their alignment with the 2011 Compulsory General Education Curriculum Standards. Results show that most curriculum learning items reflect general curriculum access philosophies, but only 13.59% of them are required for typically developing students at the same grade levels. There is a significant difference across curricular philosophies regarding the alignment of the special and general curriculum standards. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.
