Search results

This paper aims to connect disability studies to multicultural education. This paper advances equity discussions and positions educators as interrupters of deficit dialogues that exclude students with social/emotional/behavioural (SEB) differences, disrupting the ableism that is present in schools.

The authors studied current children’s and young adult literature with representation of SEB differences to develop a three-dimensional model for educators. The authors synthesized interdisciplinary fields to provide educators guidance for planning, teaching and assessing student learning using such books.

The 3-D Model: Disrupting Deficit Dialogues with Literature (3-D model) is a framework that educators can use to evaluate SEB differences representation in books, deliver instruction that supports students’ critical thinking and assess student gains in literacy and social–emotional learning. This tool helps educators develop inclusive, interdisciplinary instruction, embedding social–emotional learning competencies in literacy lessons that disrupt deficit dialogues about SEB differences.

While other frameworks exist for evaluating books portraying characters with differences, they are not solely focussed on the assets of children with social/emotional/ behavioural differences. The 3-D model supports interdisciplinary instruction to meet mandated standards, incorporating concepts from disability studies in education into multicultural education. There is little research or guidance for educators in this field. However, challenging assumptions about disability and societal norms foregrounds possibilities for change as a foundation of multiculturalism.

The essential obligation of special educators under the law known as individuals with disabilities education act (IDEA) is to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to all students identified as having a disability. A secondary and related obligation is to provide a FAPE in the least restrictive environment (LRE). To assist a student's individualized education program (IEP) or placement team to determine the setting in which a student will receive a FAPE, the IDEA mandates that school districts have available a continuum of placements (CAP) in which the team will choose the least restrictive and appropriate setting in which the student will receive their special education and related services. Our purpose in this chapter is to explain these requirements and why following the chronological order of determining FAPE and then LRE when developing a student's special education program is critical to meeting the IDEA's programming and placement mandates. We also explain why determining FAPE in the LRE cannot be accomplished without using the CAP.

The purpose of this study is to examine both the responses of auditees to corporate governance audit (CGA) regulation and the practices of CGA auditors.

The study used a mixed method. Content analysis of 200 annual and CGA reports was carried out for 13 years, from 2008 to 2021, split into voluntary disclosure and mandatory disclosure periods. Quantitative analysis was also conducted using Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn's tests. Data gathered were interpreted through the lens of isomorphism and Oliver's (1991) strategic responses to institutional processes.

The study revealed that in the voluntary disclosure period, auditees responded mainly with acquiescence, motivated by mimetic isomorphic pressure. In the mandatory disclosure period, auditee responses ranged from acquiescence to dismissal of corporate governance regulation (i.e. coercive isomorphic pressure). Auditor reporting of CGA findings was found to be heterogeneous, suggesting that normative and mimetic isomorphism did not homogenize auditor practices.

The absence of uniform auditee responses to CGA regulation during the mandatory disclosure period suggests that the purpose of mandating the regulation has not yet been achieved and may signal inadequate coercive isomorphic pressure from the Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria (FRCN). Similarly, heterogeneous reporting of CGA findings by corporate governance auditors inhibits the comparability of audit findings, limiting their value for information users.

This study examines corporate governance auditor practices and auditee responses to corporate governance audit regulation.