Developing applications of the ICF in education systems: addressing issues of knowledge creation, management and transfer

References

• World Health Organisation. International classification of functioning, disability and health. Geneva: WHO, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Ustün TB, Chatterji S, Bickenbach J, Kostanjsek N, Schneider M. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: a new tool for understanding disability and health. Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:565–571.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smart G. Mapping conceptual worlds: Using interpretative ethnography to explore knowledge-making in a professional community. J Bus Commun 1998;35:111–127.
   Google Scholar
• Brown HJ. Conceptual systems. New York, NY: Routledge, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Fleck L. Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.
   Google Scholar
• Cieza A, Bickenbach J, Chatterji S. The ICF as a conceptual platform to specify and discuss health and health-related concepts. Gesundheitswesen 2008;70:e47–e56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allan CM, Campbell WN, Guptill CA, Stephenson FF, Campbell KE. A conceptual model for interprofessional education: the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). J Interprof Care 2006;20:235–245.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rosenbaum P, Stewart D. The World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health: a model to guide clinical thinking, practice and research in the field of cerebral palsy. Semin Pediatr Neurol 2004;11:5–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Badley EM. Enhancing the conceptual clarity of the activity and participation components of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. Soc Sci Med 2008;66:2335–2345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar A, Smith B. The ontology of processes and functions. A study of the international classification of functioning, disability and health. [cited 2011 16 October 2011]. Proceedings of the AIME 2005 Workshop on Biomedical Ontology Engineering, Aberdeen, Scotland 2005. Available from: http://ontology.buffalo.edu/medo/ICF.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Imrie R. Demystifying disability: a review of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Sociol Health Illn 2004;26:287–305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen A. Capability and well-being. In: Nussbaum M, Sen A (eds). The quality of life. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993, 30–53.
   Google Scholar
• Mitra S. The capability approach and disability. JDPS 2006;16:236–247.
   Google Scholar
• Saleeby PW. Applications of a capability approach to disability and the international classification of functioning, disability and health [ICF] in social work practice. J Soc Work Disabil Rehabil 2007;6:217–232.
   Google Scholar
• Reindal SM. Disability, capability, and special education: Towards a capability-based theory. Eur J Spec Needs Educ 2009;24:155–168.
   Google Scholar
• Kwasnik BH. The role of classification in knowledge representation and discovery. Library Trends 1999;48:22–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ackoff RL. From data to wisdom. J Appl Syst Analysis 1989;16:3–9.
   Google Scholar
• Tuomi I. Data is more than knowledge: Implications of the reversed knowledge hierarchy for knowledge management and organisational memory. JMIS 2000;16:103–117.
   Google Scholar
• Bowker GC, Star SL. Sorting things out. Classification and its consequences. MIT Press, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Oudshoorn N, Pinch T (eds). How users matter. The co-construction of users and technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Norman DA. Cognitive artifacts. In: Carrol JM (ed). Designing interaction: psychology at the human-computer interface. Cambridge: CUP, 1991, 17–38.
   Google Scholar
• Sowa JF. Knowledge representation. Logical, philosophical and computational foundations. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Bereiter C. Education and mind in the knowledge age. New York & London: Routledge, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Florian L, McLaughlin M. Disability classification in education: Issues and perspectives. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson JG, Powell JJW. Comparing special education: Origins to contemporary paradoxes. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Hollenweger J. Teachers’ ability to assess students for teaching and supporting learning. Prospects 2011;41:445–457.
   Google Scholar
• Hollenweger J. MHADIE’s matrix to analyse the functioning of education systems. Disabil Rehabil 2010;32 Suppl 1:S116–S124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Students with disabilities, learning difficulties and disadvantages. Policies, statistics and indicators. Paris: OECD, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Hosp JL, Reschly DJ. Regional differences in school psychology practice. School Psychol Rev 2002;31:11–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan A, Stanovich P. The beliefs and practices of Canadian teachers about including students with special education needs in their regular elementary classrooms. Exceptionality Education Canada 2004;14:25–46.
   Google Scholar
• Norwich B. Categories of special educational needs. In: Florian L. The Sage handbook of special education. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2007, 55–66.
   Google Scholar
• Danforth S, Gabel SL (eds). Vital questions facing disability studies in education. New York: Peter Lang, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• D’ Alessio S. ‘Made in Italy’: Integrazione scolastica and the new vision of inclusive education. In: Barton L, Armstrong F (eds). Policy, experience and change: cross cultural reflections on inclusive education. New York: Springer Science, 2008, 53–72.
   Google Scholar
• Reindal SM. A social relational model of disability: A theoretical framework for special needs education? Eur J Spec Needs Educ 2008;23:135–146.
   Google Scholar
• Hall P. Interprofessional teamwork: professional cultures as barriers. J Interprof Care 2005;19 Suppl 1:188–196.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hollenweger J, Lienhard P. Standardisiertes Abklärungsverfahren (SAV). Instrument des Sonderpädagogik-Konkordats als Entscheidungsgrundlage für die Anordnung verstärkter individueller Massnahmen. Handreichung, Bern: Schweizerische Konferenz der kantonalen Erziehungsdirektoren [EDK], 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Hollenweger J, Lienhard P. Schulische Standortgespräche. Ein Verfahren zur Förderplanung und Zuweisung von sonderpädagogischen Massnahmen. Zürich: Bildungsdirektion des Kantons Zürich, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Sideridis GD. Teacher biases in the identification of learning disabilities: An application of the logistic multilevel model. Learn Disability Q 2008;31:199–209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podell DM, Soodak LC. Teacher efficacy and bias in special education referrals. J Educ Res 1993;86:247–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todorov A, Kirchner C. Bias in proxies’ reports of disability: data from the National Health Interview Survey on disability. Am J Public Health 2000;90:1248–1253.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benitez-Silva H, Buchinski M, Chan HM, Cheidvasser S, Rust J. How large is the bias in self-reported disability? J Appl Econ 2004;19:649–670.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Losen DJ, Orfield G. Introduction to racial inequality in special education. The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Sacker A, Schoon I, Bartley M. Source of bias in special needs provision in mainstream primary schools: Evidence from two British cohort studies. Eur J Special Needs Educ 2001;16:259–676.
   Google Scholar
• Norwich B. Education, inclusion and individual differences: Recognising and resolving dilemmas. Br J Educ Stud 2002;50:482–502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollenweger J. Development of an ICF-based eligibility procedure for education in Switzerland. BMC Public Health 2011;11 Suppl 4:S7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollenweger J, Moretti M. Using the international classification of functioning, disability and health children and youth version in education systems. A new approach to eligibility. Am J Phys Med Rehab 2012;91 (Suppl):97–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• French S, Swain J. The relationship between disabled people and health and welfare professionals. In: Albrecht GL, Seelman KD, Bury M. Handbook of disability studies. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2001, 734–753.
   Google Scholar
• Marston D, Muyskens P, Lau M, Canter A. Problem-solving model for decision making in high-incidence disabilities: The Minneapolis experience. LDRP 2003;18:187–200.
   Google Scholar
• Ward V, House A, Hamer S. Developing a framework for transferring knowledge into action: a thematic analysis of the literature. J Health Serv Res Policy 2009;14:156–164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landry R, Amara N, Pablos-Mendes A, Shademani R, Gold I. The knowledge-value chain: A conceptual framework for knowledge translation in health. Bull World Health Organ 2006;84:597–602.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar