From Policy to Practice in Teacher Professional Training: Systemic Misalignment in Pre-Service Teachers’ Implementation of Child-Friendly Education for Vulnerable Students

Casmudi Casmudi; Ririn Suyanti

doi:10.58905/jse.v7i1.856

Authors

Casmudi Casmudi Program Studi Pendidikan Profesi Guru (PPG), Universitas Balikpapan, Balikpapan, Indonesia
Ririn Suyanti Pascasarjana, Program Studi Pendidikan Ekonomi, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58905/jse.v7i1.856

Keywords:

Child-friendly education, Pre-service Teachers, Policy-practice equity, Professional Service of Teachers, Systemic Inequalities

Abstract

This study investigated the implementation of Child-Friendly Education (CFE) policies in the context of pre-service teacher training, focusing on how student teachers enforce the principles of non-violence, anti-bullying, and inclusiveness for vulnerable students during clinical practice. Using a qualitative design with multi-stage coding (open, axial, and selective), the study was conducted in six secondary schools in Balikpapan, involving 24 pre-service teachers, principals, and mentor teachers. The findings reveal a deep systemic misalignment between policy expectations, pedagogical enforcement, and the multidimensional reality of student vulnerability. While pre-service teachers demonstrate early adaptive efforts through personalized interactions and increased sensitivity, these practices remain largely situational, fragmented, and dependent on uneven guidance and school-based support structures. Significant constraints identified include inadequate readiness for inclusive pedagogy, difficulties in addressing hidden disabilities, and inconsistencies in policy translation during practicum experiences. Theoretically, this study argues that the policy-practice gap is not just a phenomenon in the field, but is firmly embedded in the formation of the teaching profession. The results show that systemic inequities stem from the teacher education framework itself and not solely from school-level implementation. This study underscores the need for a more coherent integration of policies, curriculum, and practicum design to better equip future educators for an inclusive and child-friendly environment.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

M. Ainscow, “Promoting inclusion and equity in education: lessons from international experiences,” Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Pol-icy, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 7–16, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587.

UNESCO, “A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in education,” 2017.

C. Boyle and J. Anderson, “The justification for inclusive education in Australia,” Prospects (Paris)., vol. 49, no. 3–4, pp. 203–217, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11125-020-09494-x.

K. Göransson and C. Nilholm, “Conceptual diversities and empirical shortcomings – a critical analysis of research on inclusive education,” Eur. J. Spec. Needs Educ., vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 265–280, Jul. 2014, doi: 10.1080/08856257.2014.933545.

L. Florian, “On the necessary co-existence of special and inclusive educa-tion,” International Journal of Inclusive Education, vol. 23, no. 7–8, pp. 691–704, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1080/13603116.2019.1622801.

F. R. Waitoller and A. J. Artiles, “A Decade of Professional Development Research for Inclusive Education,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 319–356, Sep. 2013, doi: 10.3102/0034654313483905.

I. Hardy and S. Woodcock, “Inclusive education policies – objects of observance, omission, and obfuscation: ten years on … ,” International Journal of Inclusive Education, vol. 28, no. 13, pp. 3234–3252, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.1080/13603116.2023.2257697.

R. Slee, Inclusive Education isn’t Dead, it Just Smells Funny. New York : Routledge, [2018]: Routledge, 2018. doi: 10.4324/9780429486869.

S. J. Ball, M. Maguire, and A. Braun, How Schools Do Policy. Routledge, 2012. doi: 10.4324/9780203153185.

A. Braun and M. Maguire, “Doing without believing – enacting policy in the English primary school,” Critical Studies in Education, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 433–447, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.1080/17508487.2018.1500384.

M. Maguire, A. Braun, and S. Ball, “‘Where you stand depends on where you sit’: the social construction of policy enactments in the (English) secondary school,” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Educa-tion, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 485–499, Aug. 2015, doi: 10.1080/01596306.2014.977022.

Cohen and Aviram, “Street-level bureaucrats and policy entrepreneur-ship: When implementers challenge policy design,” Public Administra-tion , vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 427–438, 2021.

M. Lipsky, Street-level bureaucracy. Russell Sage Foundation, 2010.

E. Z. Brodkin, “Reflections on Street‐Level Bureaucracy: Past, Present, and Future,” Public Adm. Rev., vol. 72, no. 6, pp. 940–949, Nov. 2012, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02657.x.

L. L. G. Tummers, V. Bekkers, E. Vink, and M. Musheno, “Coping During Public Service Delivery: A Conceptualization and Systematic Review of the Literature,” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 1099–1126, Oct. 2015, doi: 10.1093/jopart/muu056.

M. Davidovitz and C. Schechter, “Agentic leaders: School principals as street-level managers,” Management in Education, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.1177/08920206241269428.

T. Young and W. D. Lewis, “Educational Policy Implementation Revisit-ed,” Educational Policy, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 3–17, Jan. 2015, doi: 10.1177/0895904815568936.

OECD, Education at a Glance 2020. OECD Publishing, 2020. doi: 10.1787/69096873-en.

UNESCO, “Global education monitoring report 2020: Inclusion and edu-cation - All means all,” 2020.

J. W. . Creswell and C. N. . Poth, Qualitative Inquiry and Research De-sign. 2017.

S. B. . Merriam and E. J. . Tisdell, Qualitative research : a guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons, 2016.

K. Charmaz, Constructing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications, 2014.

Y. Chun Tie, M. Birks, and K. Francis, “Grounded theory research: A de-sign framework for novice researchers,” SAGE Open Med., vol. 7, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1177/2050312118822927.

Svend. Brinkmann and Steinar. Kvale, InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitatitve Research Interviewing. SAGE, 2015.

J. Corbin and A. Strauss, Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2015.

L. S. Nowell, J. M. Norris, D. E. White, and N. J. Moules, “Thematic Anal-ysis,” Int. J. Qual. Methods, vol. 16, no. 1, Dec. 2017, doi: 10.1177/1609406917733847.

E. G. Guba and Y. S. Lincoln, Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications, 1985.

F. R. Waitoller and K. A. King Thorius, “Cross-Pollinating Culturally Sus-taining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning: Toward an Inclu-sive Pedagogy That Accounts for Dis/Ability,” Harv. Educ. Rev., vol. 86, no. 3, pp. 366–389, Sep. 2016, doi: 10.17763/1943-5045-86.3.366.

L. Darling-Hammond, M. Hyler, and M. Gardner, “Effective Teacher Pro-fessional Development,” Jun. 2017. doi: 10.54300/122.311.

Jean. Lave and Etianne. Wenger, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripher-al Participation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

L. Heikonen, J. Pietarinen, K. Pyhältö, A. Toom, and T. Soini, “Early ca-reer teachers’ sense of professional agency in the classroom: associations with turnover intentions and perceived inadequacy in teacher–student in-teraction,” Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 250–266, May 2017, doi: 10.1080/1359866X.2016.1169505.

J. Aspfors and G. Fransson, “Research on mentor education for mentors of newly qualified teachers: A qualitative meta-synthesis,” Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 48, pp. 75–86, May 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2015.02.004.

M. Izadinia, “Preservice teachers’ professional identity development and the role of mentor teachers,” International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 127–143, Jun. 2016, doi: 10.1108/IJMCE-01-2016-0004.

T. Carmi and E. Tamir, “Who Learns to Teach? Student-Teachers as Change Agents, Mentor-Teachers as Learners,” European Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 654–670, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.1080/02619768.2021.1975677.