Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T10:16:40.237Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conductive Education in Australia: An investigation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2016

Margaret Dowrick
Margaret Dowrick*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Education, University of Southern Queensland, PO Darling Heights, Toowoomba, QLD, 4350
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Hungarian educational system of Conductive Education has been adapted in Australia for 20 years. Despite the ad hoc nature of its development, many positive outcomes have resulted. In this paper, these outcomes including those from an increasing number of scientific studies are examined. Eight studies are examined which have addressed three important aspects i.e. the nature of Australian adaptations, the efficacy or (validity) of the adapted programs and the role of parents in the early intervention process. The limitations of the methodologies and findings used in the eight studies are identified, yet this paper concludes that the findings of these studies though inconclusive demand further investigation. Three recommendations for future study are included.

Type
Research Article
Information
Australasian Journal of Special Education , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , January 1993 , pp. 42 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © The Australian Association of Special Education 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bailey, D. & Simeonsson, R. (1986). Design Issues in Family Impact Evaluation. In Brickman, L. & Weatherford, D. (Eds.). Evaluating Early Intervention Programs for Severely Handicapped Children and their Families, Pro-ed Austin: Tx.Google Scholar
Bairstow, P., Cochrane, R. & Rusk, I. (1991). Selection of children with cerebral palsy for conductive education and the characteristics of children judged suitable and unsuitable. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 33, 984–992.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bricker, D. & Kaminski, R. (1986). Intervention Programs for severely handicapped infants and children. In Evaluating Early Intervention Programs for Severely Handicapped Children and their Families. Pro-ed. Austin: Texas.Google Scholar
Bochner, S., Center, Y., Chappara, C. Donnelly, M. (in press). New Horizons: Evaluation of a pilot program using Conductive Education principles for students with physical disabilities at Truscott Street School, 1990, Part 1, published by the Macquarie University and the University of Sydney.Google Scholar
Catanese, A. & Cotter, C. (1989). The Knox Special Early Intervention Project. Melbourne: Spastics Society.Google Scholar
Coleman, G. & King, J. (1990). A Pilot Evaluation of Conductive Education in victoria. Bundoora, Victoria: La Trobe University.Google Scholar
Cooper, D. (1986). A Special Kind of Magic: Changes in Family Dynamics arising from parent participation in a Conductive Education program for children with C.P. Community Health Studies, 10(3), 294–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cottam, P. & Sutton, A. (1986). Conductive Educa tion: A system for overcoming motor disorders, London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Cotter, C. (1991). The Planned Future Developments: Australia. An address given at The First World Conference of the International Peto Association, held in Budapest, Hungary, Nov 29-Dec 1.Google Scholar
Cotton, E. (1991). Conductive education for adults: sitting around the edges. Conductive Forum. 2(1), 8–13.Google Scholar
Currie, G. & Hanlon, M. (1988). Conductive Education: A Scottish Perspective. St Andrew’s College of Education, Scotland.Google Scholar
Draft Guide-lines for the Establishment of Education Service Models Based on Conductive Education Principles (1993). Department of Education, Brisbane.Google Scholar
Dowrick, M. (1992). Conductive Education: An Investigation into its Relevance, Significance and Validity for Australian Children with Moderate to Severe Impairments, Unpublished report, M.Ed Studies. University of Southern Queensland.Google Scholar
Dowrick, M. (1993). Conductive Education: The problems in transference from the Hungarian Base to Australia - An investigation. Unpublished paper. University of Southern Queensland.Google Scholar
Fewell, R. (1986). The Measurement of Family Functioning. In Bickman, L. & Weatherford, D. (Eds.). pp. 267–307. Evaluating Early Intervention Programs for Severely Handicapped Children and their Families, Pro-ed Austin: Texas.Google Scholar
Filler, J. & Olsen, J. (1990). Early intervention for disabled infants, toddlers and preschool age children. In Gaylord-Ross, R. (Ed.). Issues and Research in Special Education, 1, 82–89. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Hedges, K. (1988). The Bobath and conductive education approaches to cerebral palsy treatment. New Zealand Journal of Physiotherapy. 16(1), 6–12.Google Scholar
Keil, H. (1991). The Peto system in Austria. An address given at The First World Conference of the International Peto Association. Nov 29-Dec 1, 31–32.Google Scholar
Kozma, I. (1991). The special quality, content and structure of conductor training. An address given at The First World Conference of the International Peto Association, Nov 29-lst Dec., 6–8.Google Scholar
Shields, R. (1989). A practical application of aspects of Conductive Education, Australian Journal of Physiotheraphy, 35(3), 159–165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sigafoos, J., Elkins, J., Hayes, A., Gunn, S., Couzens, D. & Roberts, D. (1991). A Review of Program for Young Children with Severe Disabilities. Schonell Education Research Centre, University of Queensland.Google Scholar
Sutton, A. (1991). Conductive Education in the United Kingdom: Chaos and Social Policy. An address given at The First World Conference of the International Peto Assocition, held in Budapest, Hungary, November 29-December, 1.Google Scholar
Topley, J. (1991). Conductive Education, Young Children, Motor Disorder and Good Practice, Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 16(4), 28–32.Google Scholar