Two Hong Kong studies are described which investigate the perceptions of junior secondary school pupils (high- and low-achieving) concerning the effectiveness of rewards and punishments. Both studies employ versions of Caffyn’s questionnaire. Initial analysis reveals that (a) there is a relationship between disaffection and achievement, and (b) pupils of both achievement levels have more favourable perceptions regarding the effectiveness of rewards than they do of punishments. A focus on the relationships between achievement and perceptions reveals that (c) high-achievers perceive a large number of rewards as more effective than do low-achievers, (d) low-achievers perceive very few other rewards as being more effective than do high-achievers, and (e) the situation is a little more balanced for punishments. The paper includes a discussion regarding particular reward and punishment items perceptions about which differentiate low-and high-achievers. Finally, it is noted that there is a high level of consistency between findings in the two studies reported in this paper. Where it is possible to make comparisons with other research findings from Hong Kong and elsewhere, a high degree of agreement between such findings is found.

The Des English Memorial Lecture provides an unique opportunity each year to reflect on the history that has brought us together and has carried us to this point in the evolution of the discipline of special education. It provides us with a time to dream, a time to foreshadow, a time to hint or guess at the better world that we strive to create in our classrooms each day, in our schools each week and in our administrative or academic systems each year. There are many lessons from the educational past for us to heed as we move forward towards the 21st Century and help forge the changes that our schools and services must necessarily undergo in order to serve well future generations of students with special academic and social needs.

This paper examines, from a philosophical perspective, some of the main ethical problems pertaining to the special education field. It is argued that while special education practice has been strongly grounded in psychological theory, it has not always been adequately justified by reference to general moral principles. Rationales for intervention are mostly couched in descriptive or explanatory terms while the over-riding prescriptive or evaluative dimensions are often presupposed without explicit justification. Particular issues such as diagnostic assessment, educational placement and behavioural management can be seen to entail complex ethical problems concerning the consideration of individual rights and interests, equality of educational opportunity, and respect for personal autonomy. Examples of the moral dilemmas inherent in particular special educational practices are examined. Finally, it is claimed that special educators must be able to defend not only the empirical bases of their educational theories, but also the value judgments implicit in them.

I am honoured to have been asked to deliver the Des English Memorial Lecture. While I never met Des English, I have long been aware of his signal contributions to the field of Special Education and have learned much in conversations with those who knew him well. It is thus a considerable challenge to respond to the invitation by the Conference Committee.

Apart from Iceland, Finland is the northernmost country in the world. Geographically it is one of the largest countries in Europe, but with only five million people it is one of the most sparsely populated. Like most other western countries, Finland has undergone a rapid process of urbanisation and change in occupational structure, although this did not begin until the 1940s. Nowadays about 65 per cent of the population live in urban areas (Statistics Finland 1991).

In Volume 35, Issue 1 of the Australasian Journal of Special Education, Carter, Stephenson and Strnadová (2011) replicated a study by Burns and Ysseldyke (2009). In Carter et al.'s study, 194 Australian special educators were asked to rate the extent to which they used eight instructional practices. These practices were applied behaviour analysis, direct instruction, formative evaluation, mnemonic strategies, modality training, perceptual-motor training, psycholinguistic training, and social skills training. The first four of these practices had moderate to high effect sizes (and were regarded by the authors as more desirable techniques), and the final four practices had low effect sizes, on the basis of past meta-analytic research. Carter et al.'s findings were that while the Australian teachers used some desirable strategies relatively frequently, they also used some less desirable practices frequently and so desirable instructional practices should be encouraged at the expense of less effective practices. While these results are of interest, they also have the potential to mislead readers and later sections of the current article examine these potential misconceptions.

Although international research has accumulated significant evidence on inclusive practices and their benefits for children, how this translates into early childhood settings is often unsatisfactory within and across countries. Against the background of general acceptance of the principles incorporated in the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities, we examine how 3 countries who are signatories to this convention, Australia, Greece, and Malaysia, are making progress towards inclusion in early childhood. Using an implementation science framework, the key components of enabling contexts, research-based practices, and effective implementation supports are explored. In this framework, each of these components is essential for achieving the desired outcomes of inclusion. The country profiles of Australia, Greece, and Malaysia are examined (including similarities and differences in legislation, policies, early childhood services, and practices) in an effort to support understanding of factors facilitating and challenging early childhood inclusion.

This article describes the evolution of inclusive education in Hong Kong, moving from segregation via integration to inclusion. The outside influence of education policies and trends from Britain, Australia, and the United States are identified, and the current situation is described. In particular, obstacles that are encountered on the route to inclusion are compared with those found in other countries. These obstacles include large class size, teachers’ often negative attitudes, parents’ expectations, teachers’ lack of expertise for adapting the curriculum and for providing differentiated teaching, and ongoing conflicts between the notion of ‘inclusive schooling for all’ and the ‘academic standards agenda’.