Inclusive education: Knowing what we mean€¦ · Web view1 Inclusive education: Knowing what we...

Inclusive education: Knowing what we mean

E848_1 Researching inclusive education: values into practice


of 43 30th January 2019

https://www.open.edu/openlearn/education/educational-technology-and-practice/educational-

practice/inclusive-education-knowing-what-we-mean/content-section-0

https://www.open.edu/openlearn/education/educational-technology-and-practice/educational-practice/inclusive-education-knowing-what-we-mean/content-section-0



About this free course

This free course provides a sample of postgraduate study in

Education, Childhood & Youth qualifications:

www.open.ac.uk/postgraduate/find/education-childhood-and-youth.

This version of the content may include video, images and

interactive content that may not be optimised for your device.

You can experience this free course as it was originally designed

on OpenLearn, the home of free learning from The Open

University: www.open.edu/openlearn/education/educational-technology-and-practice/educational-practice/inclusive-education-knowing-what-we-mean/content-section-0.

There you’ll also be able to track your progress via your activity

record, which you can use to demonstrate your learning.

The Open University Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA

Copyright © 2016 The Open University

Intellectual property

Unless otherwise stated, this resource is released under the terms

of the Creative Commons Licence v4.0






http://www.open.edu/openlearn/education/educational-technology-and-practice/educational-practice/inclusive-education-knowing-what-we-mean/content-section-0?utm_source=openlearn&utm_campaign=ol&utm_medium=ebook



http://www.open.ac.uk/postgraduate/find/education-childhood-and-youth?utm_source=openlearn&utm_campaign=ou&utm_medium=ebook



http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.en_GB. Within that The Open University interprets this licence in the

following way:

www.open.edu/openlearn/about-openlearn/frequently-asked-questions-on-openlearn. Copyright and rights falling

outside the terms of the Creative Commons Licence are retained

or controlled by The Open University. Please read the full text

before using any of the content.

We believe the primary barrier to accessing high-quality

educational experiences is cost, which is why we aim to publish as

much free content as possible under an open licence. If it proves

difficult to release content under our preferred Creative Commons

licence (e.g. because we can’t afford or gain the clearances or find

suitable alternatives), we will still release the materials for free

under a personal end-user licence.

This is because the learning experience will always be the same

high quality offering and that should always be seen as positive –

even if at times the licensing is different to Creative Commons.

When using the content you must attribute us (The Open

University) (the OU) and any identified author in accordance with

the terms of the Creative Commons Licence.






http://www.open.edu/openlearn/about-openlearn/frequently-asked-questions-on-openlearn

http://www.open.edu/openlearn/about-openlearn/frequently-asked-questions-on-openlearn

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.en_GB

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.en_GB


The Acknowledgements section is used to list, amongst other

things, third party (Proprietary), licensed content which is not

subject to Creative Commons licensing. Proprietary content must

be used (retained) intact and in context to the content at all times.

The Acknowledgements section is also used to bring to your

attention any other Special Restrictions which may apply to the

content. For example there may be times when the Creative

Commons Non-Commercial Sharealike licence does not apply to

any of the content even if owned by us (The Open University). In

these instances, unless stated otherwise, the content may be used

for personal and non-commercial use.

We have also identified as Proprietary other material included in

the content which is not subject to Creative Commons

Licence. These are OU logos, trading names and may extend to

certain photographic and video images and sound recordings and

any other material as may be brought to your attention.

Unauthorised use of any of the content may constitute a breach of

the terms and conditions and/or intellectual property laws.

We reserve the right to alter, amend or bring to an end any terms

and conditions provided here without notice.







All rights falling outside the terms of the Creative Commons

licence are retained or controlled by The Open University.

Head of Intellectual Property, The Open University

The Open University

United Kingdom by The Open University

978-1-4730-1865-5 (.kdl)

978-1-4730-1097-0 (.epub)







Contents Introduction Learning outcomes 1 Inclusive education: Knowing what we mean 2 Models of thinking 3 Transforming learning

3.1 Who is to be included? 3.2 A broad view of inclusion 3.3 From integration to inclusion 3.4 The Salamanca Statement 3.5 Centre for studies on inclusive

education (CSIE) Conclusion Keep on learning References Acknowledgements







IntroductionThis course introduces you to the contested area of educational

inclusion. You will look at differing perspectives on inclusion, in

particular the way that medical and social models have influenced

and shaped current thinking. You will also think about barriers to

inclusion and the difference between integration and inclusion. In

addition, you will consider some of the key documents, such as the

Salamanca Statement, that underpin current thinking in this area.

This OpenLearn course provides a sample of postgraduate study

in Education, Childhood & Youth qualifications.








Learning outcomesAfter studying this course, you should be able to:

understand more systematically the knowledge and be

more critically aware of issues in inclusive education

reflect critically upon and analyse perspectives

regarding inclusion

analyse and develop successful inclusive learning

practices

identify conceptual frameworks appropriate for

investigating inclusion issues, examining the

inclusivity of systems and for developing inclusive

education

develop techniques relevant to research scholarship.







1 Inclusive education: Knowing what we meanThere is no doubt that inclusive education is a contested area.

Indeed, nationally and internationally, it is the focus of what

Daniels has called ‘extraordinary debates concerning definition

and ownership’ (Daniels, 2000, p. 1). In this opening section we

will look at a range of perspectives on what inclusive education

means – drawn from a variety of sources, both ‘official’ and

individual. But first let us look at what inclusive education means to

you.

Activity 1 Personal experience of inclusionThink about your own experience of inclusive education. You may

need to identify who was to be ‘included’ in these situations or

definitions. Once you have done this, consider why such inclusion

mattered and for whom it was important.

You could then reflect on how your experience of inclusion

compares with what you believe inclusion should be about.

The perspectives that follow come from a range of viewpoints:

disabled activists, professionals working with children, government

documents and a campaigning organisation. As you read them,

compare these views with your own.







The Equity Group is based in Scotland, and describes itself as

‘a group of disabled people, parents of disabled children and other

interested supporters’:

Fundamentally, we believe that inclusive education is about

recognising children as having equal rights and being of equal

value. This should be a basic starting-point for educational and

social policy in a modern society.

(The Equity Group, 2004)

Chris Darlington is president of the National Association for

Special Educational Needs (NASEN), a national organisation for

professionals working in the area of inclusion. He defines inclusion

as:

a process, not a state … inclusion is not a simple concept

restricted to issues of placement. … Key principles are valuing

diversity, entitlement, dignity, individual needs, planning, collective

responsibility, professional development, and equal opportunities.

(Darlington, 2003, p. 2)

Simone Aspis, who describes herself as ‘a special school

survivor’ offers the following definition:







Inclusive education should create opportunities for all learners to

work together. This requires a recognition that learning is

enhanced when individuals of different abilities, skills and

aspirations can work together in a joint enterprise.

(Aspis, 2004, p. 129)

The next quote comes from Inclusive Schooling (DfES,

2001b), the official document issued by the Department for

Education and Skills (DfES) following changes in the law in 2001

which strengthened students’ rights to a mainstream placement:

Schools supported by local education authorities and others

should actively seek to remove the barriers to learning and

participation that can hinder or exclude pupils with special

educational needs.

(DfES, 2001b, paragraph 7)

The Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education (CSIE) is

a campaigning organisation promoting the growth of inclusive

schools:

Inclusion means enabling all students to participate fully in the life

and work of mainstream settings, whatever their needs. …







Inclusion may also be seen as a continuing process of breaking

down barriers to learning and participation for all children and

young people. Segregation, on the other hand, is a recurring

tendency to exclude difference.

(CSIE, 2002b, p. 1)

You may have noticed that the different definitions have much in

common, but also vary: for example, you may have noted that the

DfES's description focuses on ‘special educational needs’, while

the other perspectives view inclusive education as going well

beyond one particular group of learners. The scope and nature of

these definitions may in fact be similar or markedly different to your

own that you noted in Activity 1 in this section.

Although the word ‘inclusion’ now appears regularly in government

documents, no ‘official’ definition of it exists and, in the United

Kingdom (as in the United States), the terms ‘inclusion’, ‘inclusive

education’, ‘integration’ or ‘mainstreaming’, do not appear

anywhere in primary legislation. Consequently, when government

documents, academics, parents and activists speak of ‘inclusion’

or ‘inclusive education’, they may appear to be using the same

term while what they mean may not be the same at all.

Activity 2 What does inclusion mean to you?







Re-read the definitions above, compare them with your own ideas,

then note down your own definition of ‘inclusive education’. Who is

being included? What key words would you include in your

definition? Does this differ from the experiences of inclusion that

you have encountered or read about?

View discussion - Activity 2 What does inclusion mean to you?







2 Models of thinkingIn Section 1, you were asked to think about your own definitions of

inclusive education. In Section 2, we show how personal

experience of inclusion and exclusion has been a major driving

force in the development of inclusive education, with disabled

adults in particular struggling to redefine their experiences of

schooling. One major factor in this struggle towards redefinition

has been the shift towards a social model of disability.

Rieser and Mason have described a model as ‘not necessarily the

truth as borne out by scientific fact, just an idea that helps us to

make sense of information’ (Rieser and Mason, 1992, p. 13).

Writing with the experience of a disabled person, Mason describes

how medical approaches to impairment have given rise to the view

that people are ‘individual objects to be “treated”, “changed” or

“improved” and made more “normal” (Rieser and Mason, 1992, p.

13). The medical model of disability views the disabled person as

needing to fit in rather than thinking about how society itself might

change. Rieser and Mason contrast this view with the ‘social

model’ of disability:

Disabled people's own view of the situation is that whilst we may

have medical conditions which hamper us and which may or may

not need medical treatment, human knowledge, technology and







collective resources are already such that our physical or mental

impairments need not prevent us from being able to live perfectly

good lives. It is society's unwillingness to employ these means to

altering itself rather than us which causes our disabilities.

(Rieser and Mason, 1992, p. 15)

Rieser and Mason have contrasted the medical and the social

models and have shown the implications for schools of each way

of thinking. This is illustrated in Table 1 below:

Table 1 Comparing the medical and social models of disability

Medical model

Social model

• Child is faulty

• Child is valued

• Diagnosis

• Strengths and ne







eds defined by self and others

• Labelling

• Identify barriers and develop solutions

• Impairment becom

• Outcomes-based pr







es focus of attention

ogrammes designed

• Assessment, monitoring

• Resources made available

• Segregation and alternative services

• Training for parents and professionals

• Or

• Re







dinary needs put on hold

lationships nurtured

• Re-entry if ‘normal’ enough or permanent exclusion

• Diversity welcomed; child is welcomed

• Society remai

• Society evolve







ns unchanged

s

From: Rieser (2001, p. 139).

While Rieser and Mason focus on attitudes and responses to

disability, their analysis could be applied to many groups of young

people who find themselves marginalised in learning situations. It

is not only learners with disabilities or learning difficulties who find

themselves excluded. Exclusion can be based on a range of

factors and, as Ghuman (1999) has shown in his work with

adolescents from South Asia, some populations find themselves

the recipient of ‘multiple exclusions’ – racial, social, educational

and economic. Such ‘multiple exclusions’ have been documented

in England, where Parsons (1999), for example, has explored the

link between ethnicity and school exclusions, and has documented

the disproportionate numbers of minority ethnic students who find

themselves permanently out of school.

Activity 3 Experience of a deficit perspectiveThink about examples from your own experience where individuals

or groups of learners have been viewed from ‘deficit’ perspectives.

This is likely to relate to the left-hand side of Table 1 above. (You

could also consider your own experiences as a learner.) What of 43 30th January 2019






impact has that had on their (or your) experience of inclusion in

particular learning contexts? Identify and note the extent to which

these outcomes may be seen as positive and/or negative from the

learner's point of view.

Particular models of thinking can influence learning opportunities

by restricting the expectations of both teachers and learners.

Writing about the life stories of people who have experienced

‘special education’, Armstrong (2003) shows the impact of such

models. He cites the case of Penny, who after leaving a special

school, attended the special needs class at a local further

education college. This is what happened when Penny decided

that she wanted to join the full-time catering course in the ordinary

college:

‘I went to see my tutor about the course but he doesn't want me to

do it. He wants me to go on a course that's only one day a week.

It's all people from the special school. That's not what I want to do

but he'll probably get his own way.’

(Penny, cited in Armstrong, 2003, p. 108)

Armstrong points out that the question for Penny was that of who

was defining her interests. Decisions were being made about her

based not on her views but on the professionals’ expectations of

people with ‘learning difficulties’. Penny, however, was prepared to







resist and decided to contact directly the teacher from the

mainstream course. Speaking about her tutor, Penny commented:

‘What's important to me is not important to him. He just wants me

to do what he thinks is best for me. Because I'm in this centre it's

difficult to get into a main course and get what you want. It wasn't

even discussed at all whether I wanted to be in a mainstream

situation or a separate situation. That's what I would have liked. I

would have liked them to discuss and ask me: “Would you like to

have a go in mainstream, then if you find that you can't do it, go

and see the Assisted Learning Centre.” What I mean is students

should have rights to be able to be listened to. Just to be listened

to and not to be fobbed off all the time.’

(Penny, cited in Armstrong, 2003, p. 109)

Penny's story raises questions about needs, rights and

participation – all key areas of debate as we try to define inclusion.

We might see all these as questions about relative power within

education systems.

Activity 4 Penny's needsImagine that you are Penny's tutor. Write down a short definition of

Penny's ‘needs’. Imagine that you are Penny. How would you

define your own needs?







You should highlight the importance of looking at ‘needs’ from

various perspectives: think about how different people ‘construct’

learning difficulties, based on their own personal and/or

professional experiences.

View discussion - Activity 4 Penny's needs

For Penny, other people's expectations of her create a barrier to

learning. Nevertheless, she challenges those expectations and has

a strong sense of her own right to be listened to. She is claiming

her right to participate in her education in the way she prefers.

‘Including Penny’ involves a fundamental shift in perspectives and

expectations, one that requires changes in culture in individuals,

classrooms and schools.







3 Transforming learning

3.1 Who is to be included?Some critics have seen the focus on students with disabilities and

difficulties in learning as distracting from the real issue, that is, the

processes of inclusion and exclusion that leave many students, not

simply those with disabilities, unable to participate in mainstream

culture and communities (Booth, 1996). Such processes have an

impact on many students, not just those with ‘special educational

needs’.

In line with this way of thinking, the study of inclusion should be

concerned with understanding and confronting the broader issue of

marginalisation and the consequences of this process for

marginalised groups. There is a range of groupings of learners

who might be included here: traveller students, mature students,

those living in poverty, minority linguistic and ethnic groups; very

likely, you can think of others. The point is that we cannot consider

these groups in isolation if we are aiming to make real changes in

the way education works (Dyson, 2001).

Activity 5 Experiences of marginalisationIn your experience, what groups have you observed as likely to

experience marginalisation? How has the learning context either







contributed to or addressed that marginalisation? You may want to

think about pupils who are ‘different’ in some way from the

majority. Your examples are likely to go beyond disability and

learning difficulty, and may include, for example, students with

linguistic and social differences.

Once you have marshalled your thoughts, spend some time

explaining your examples to a friend. Does he or she agree with

your analysis? Make notes on the ways in which your friend's

viewpoint differs/agrees with your own.

3.2 A broad view of inclusionDefinitions of ‘inclusion’ and ‘inclusive education’, then, have

moved away from a specific focus on disability towards a broader

view that encompasses students from minority ethnic or linguistic

groups, from economically disadvantaged homes, or who are

frequently absent or at risk of exclusion. ‘Inclusive education’ has

come to mean the provision of a framework within which all children – whatever their ability, gender, language, ethnic or

cultural origin – can be valued equally, treated with respect and

provided with real learning opportunities. Inclusive education is

about participation and equal opportunity for all – in other words,

‘full membership’ of school and, later, society. Such a view of

inclusion presents a challenge to existing structures and systems







that have themselves contributed to the barriers that learners

experience.

Inclusion requires the transformation of learning contexts:

In the field of education, inclusion involves a process of reform and

restructuring of the school as a whole, with the aim of ensuring that

all pupils can have access to the whole range of educational and

social opportunities offered by the school. This includes the

curriculum on offer, the assessment, recording and reporting of

pupils’ achievements, the decisions that are taken on the grouping

of pupils within schools or classrooms, pedagogy and classroom

practice, sport and leisure and recreational opportunities.

(Mittler, 2000, p. 2)

This process of transformation not only has radical implications for

the way we think about the origins of learning and behavioural

difficulties, but also requires ‘systemic change and a national

policy’ (Mittler, 2000, p. 5). The wider social context of inclusive

education, at both national and international levels, is a crucial

element in our understanding of inclusion in schools.

3.3 From integration to inclusion‘Inclusive education’, then, goes beyond ‘integration’ – a term

which, until the late 1990s, was generally used to describe the







process of repositioning a child or groups of children in

mainstream schools. ‘Integration’ was a term used by

organisations such as CSIE (originally called the Centre for

Studies in Integration in Education) when seeking neighbourhood

placements for all students, and implied the need for a student to

adapt to the school, rather than for the school to transform its own

practices. The onus for change appeared to be on those seeking

to enter mainstream schools, rather than on mainstream schools

adapting and changing themselves in order to include a greater

diversity of pupils.

‘Inclusive education’ implies a radical shift in attitudes and a

willingness on the part of schools to transform practices in pupil

grouping, assessment and curriculum. The notion of inclusion does

not set boundaries around particular kinds of disability or learning

difficulty, but instead focuses on the ability of the school itself to

accommodate a diversity of needs.

The shift from ‘integration’ to ‘inclusion’ is not simply a shift in

terminology, made in the interests of political correctness, but

rather a fundamental change in perspective. It implies a shift away

from a ‘deficit’ model, where the assumption is that difficulties have

their source within the child, to a ‘social’ model, where barriers to

learning exist in the structures of schools themselves and, more

broadly, in the attitudes and structures of society. Underlying the







‘inclusionary’ approach is the assumption that individual children

have a right to participate in the experience offered in the

mainstream classroom.

Daniels and Garner (1999) comment that while the concept of

inclusion is not new, it has been given fresh impetus by

increasingly ‘rights-based’ arguments that go beyond classrooms:

It is the recent widespread and increasingly vociferous demand to

establish individual rights as a central component in policy-making

that has provided the impetus to place inclusion firmly on the

agenda of social change.

(Daniels and Garner, 1999, p. 3)

3.4 The Salamanca StatementIn 1994 over 300 participants – including 92 governments and 25

international organisations – met in Salamanca, Spain, with the

purpose of furthering the objectives of inclusive education. The

resulting Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994) was framed

by a rights-based perspective on education. Although the

Statement focused on children described as having ‘special

needs’, it asserted from the outset its commitment to:

Reaffirming the right to education of every individual, as enshrined

in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and renewing of 43 30th January 2019






the pledge made by the world community at the 1990 World

Conference on Education for All to ensure that right for all

regardless of individual differences.

(UNESCO, 1994, p. vii)

Later, in the section ‘Guidelines for Action at the National Level’,

the Statement acknowledged that ‘most of the required changes

do not relate exclusively to children with special educational needs’

(p. 21); rather, they are part of a wider reform of education needed

to improve its quality and relevance and promote higher levels of

learning achievement by all learners.

The Statement placed educational reform firmly within a broader

social agenda that included health, social welfare and vocational

training and employment. It emphasised that mechanisms for

planning, monitoring and evaluating provision for inclusive

education should be ‘decentralised and participatory’ and should

encourage the ‘participation of parents, communities and

organisations of people with disabilities in the planning and

decision making’ (UNESCO, 1994, p. ix).

The Statement acknowledged that in many countries there were

‘well established systems of special schools for those with specific

impairments': these schools, it asserted, could ‘represent a

valuable resource for the development of inclusive schools’







(UNESCO, 1994, p. 12). However, it urged countries without such

a system to ‘concentrate their efforts on the development of

inclusive schools’ (UNESCO, 1994, p. 13) alongside specialist

support services to enable them to reach the majority of children

and young people. All policies, both local and national, should

ensure that children with disabilities could attend their

neighbourhood school.

Evans et al. (1999) have noted that the Salamanca Statement and other United Nations proclamations have had a ‘powerful

influence’ on international perspectives on inclusion.

3.5 Centre for studies on inclusive education (CSIE)In an English context, the influence of the Salamanca Statement can be seen in the work of the Centre for Studies on

Inclusive Education (CSIE), which defines inclusive education as

principally a human rights issue. CSIE's manifesto, Ten Reasons for Inclusion, states in its headline that ‘Inclusive education is a

human right, it's good education and it makes good social sense’

(CSIE, 2004a). The manifesto then expands on the ‘human rights’

issue by providing a further list of imperatives:

1. All children have the right to learn together.







2. Children should not be devalued or discriminated

against by being excluded or sent away because of

their disability or learning difficulty.

3. Disabled adults, describing themselves as special

school survivors, are demanding an end to

segregation.

4. There are no legitimate reasons to separate children

for their education. Children belong together – with

advantages and benefits for everyone. They do not

need to be protected from each another.

(CSIE, 2004a)

Elsewhere, CSIE poses the question, ‘Why do we need

inclusion?’, and couches the answer in the terminology of human

rights:

Because children – whatever their disability or learning difficulty –

have a part to play in society after school. An early start in

mainstream playgroups or nursery schools, followed by education

in ordinary schools and colleges, is the best preparation for an

integrated life.

(CSIE, 2004b)







Inclusive education is a moral imperative, it argues, because:

Disabled children have an equal right to membership of the same

groups as everybody else. A segregated education restricts that

right and limits opportunities for self-fulfilment. People with

disabilities or learning difficulties do not need to be separated or

protected.

(CSIE, 2004b)

While CSIE's focus is primarily on young people with disabilities

and learning difficulties, the organisation's language is strongly

resonant of the language of civil rights used, for example, in the

United States in relation to equality of opportunity for black

students since the 1950s. In particular, it echoes the crucial

decision made in 1954 by the US Supreme Court, in Brown v.

The Board of Education, which established not only that black

children had a right to education but also that they had a right to

the same education as that received by white children. In declaring

that ‘separate can never be equal’, the Brown judgment led to a

variety of affirmative-action policies in the US educational system,

which had an impact not only on curriculum organisation and

opportunities in US primary and secondary schools, but also on

universities’ admissions policies.







In England and Wales, there have been no comparable judgments

in the area of individual rights. Instead, the 1981 Education Act

(which came into force in 1983) laid on local education authorities

(LEAs) a ‘qualified duty’ to ensure that, provided certain conditions

were met, a child ‘with special educational needs’ should be

‘educated in a school which is not a special school unless that is

incompatible with the wishes of his parent’. It could be argued that

the presence of such conditions, or ‘caveats’, has made access to

a mainstream place in England and Wales not so much a right but

a series of hurdles. Since 1983, individual children have

surmounted these hurdles with varying degrees of success,

depending on where they live, the nature of their disability or

learning difficulty, and how articulate and persistent their parents

have been. Recent changes in UK legislation, in particular the

Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001, have removed

all but one of the caveats, and have strengthened the rights of

individual disabled children to participate more fully in all aspects

of school life. However, recent case law has demonstrated that

new legislation is at variance with other parts of the Education Act

1996. Parents seeking inclusive education for their children and

who find themselves in dispute with their LEA are likely to need

expert advice to find their way through a ‘complex and confused’

legal situation (ACE, 2004).







ConclusionCommentators (e.g. Pijl et al., 1997) have described inclusive

education as ‘a global agenda’. The persistence of the forces that

marginalise individuals or groups of learners, and also the models

that would categorise them in particular ways, makes the struggle

for inclusion an ongoing one.

You will see why at the start of this section we felt it important to

define what we and others may mean when we use the term

‘inclusion’. This is because understanding what the term means is

constantly being redefined. The many different ‘stakeholders’ in

education who use the term give it their own meaning, and it is

important that you remain alert to changes in emphasis and intent.

Having read this unit you'll see that we are discussing notions of

what inclusive education might be. What we haven't done at this

point is to consider whether or not inclusive education is actually a

‘good thing’. Segregated and special education has a long history,

and exerts a powerful influence on education (Open University,

2003). It is easy to come across arguments against inclusive

education either as a concept or in the way that it is being enacted.

Over the next few days, when you are looking at newspapers,

listening to radio or searching the internet, you may want to note

these down.







Keep on learning

Study another free courseThere are more than 800 courses on OpenLearn for you to

choose from on a range of subjects.

Find out more about all our free courses.

Take your studies furtherFind out more about studying with The Open University by visiting our online prospectus.

If you are new to university study, you may be interested in our

Access Courses or Certificates.

What’s new from OpenLearn?Sign up to our newsletter or view a sample. of 43 30th January 2019





http://www.open.edu/openlearn/about-openlearn/subscribe-the-openlearn-newsletter?utm_source=openlearn&utm_campaign=ol&utm_medium=ebook

http://www.open.ac.uk/courses?utm_source=openlearn&utm_campaign=ou&utm_medium=ebook


http://www.open.edu/openlearn/free-courses?utm_source=openlearn&utm_campaign=ol&utm_medium=ebook


For reference, full URLs to pages listed above:

OpenLearn – www.open.edu/openlearn/free-courses

Visiting our online prospectus – www.open.ac.uk/courses

Access Courses – www.open.ac.uk/courses/do-it/access

Certificates – www.open.ac.uk/courses/certificates-he

Newsletter –

www.open.edu/openlearn/about-openlearn/subscribe-the-openlearn-newsletter









ReferencesAdvisory Centre for Education (ACE) (2004) ‘Laws to protect

children with SEN “in conflict”’, Bulletin no. 121, October, p. 4.

Armstrong, D. (2003) Experiences of Special Education: re-evaluating policy and practice through life stories, London,

RoutledgeFalmer.

Aspis, S. (2004) ‘Why exams and tests do not help disabled and

non-disabled children learn in the same school’, www.inclusion-boltondata.org.uk/FrontPage/data14.htm.

Booth, T. (1996) ‘A perspective on inclusion from England’,

Cambridge Journal of Education, 26 (1), pp. 87–99.

Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education (CSIE) (2004a) Ten Reasons for Inclusion, http://inclusion.uwe.ac.uk/csie/10rsns.htm

(accessed 31 July 2004).

Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education (CSIE) (2004b) What is Inclusion?, http://inclusion.uwe.ac.uk/csie/csiefaqs.htm (accessed

17 September 2004).

Daniels, H. (ed.) (2000) Special Education Re-formed: beyond rhetoric?, London, Falmer Press.






http://www.inclusion-boltondata.org.uk/FrontPage/data14.htm

http://www.inclusion-boltondata.org.uk/FrontPage/data14.htm


Daniels, H. and Garner, P. (eds) (1999) Inclusive Education,

World Yearbook of Education, London, Kogan Page.

Darlington, C. (2003) ‘The challenges of effective inclusion’, Times Educational Supplement, 19 September.

Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2001b) Inclusive Schooling: children with special educational needs, London,

DfES.

Dyson, A. (2001) ‘Special needs as the way to equity: an

alternative approach?’, Support for Learning, 16(3), pp- 99–

104.

Mittler, P. (2000) Working Towards Inclusive Education: social contexts, London, David Fulton.

The Open University (2003) Book 2 ‘Thinking it through’, E243 Inclusive Education: learning from each other, Milton

Keynes, The Open University.

Pijl, S. J., Meijer, C. and Hegarty, S. (eds) (1997) Inclusive Education: a global agenda, London, Routledge.

Rieser, R. (2001) ‘The struggle for inclusion: the growth of a

movement’ in BARTON, L. (ed.) Disability, Politics and Struggle for Change, London, David Fulton.







Rieser, R. and Mason, M. (1992, rev. edn) Disability Equality in the Classroom: a human rights issue, London, Disability

Equality in Education.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

(UNESCO) (1994) The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education, Paris,

UNESCO.







AcknowledgementsExcept for third party materials and otherwise stated (see terms and conditions), this content is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 Licence

Course image: Chris Potter in Flickr made available under

Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Licence.

All other materials included in this unit are derived from content

originated at the Open University.

Don't miss out:

If reading this text has inspired you to learn more, you may be

interested in joining the millions of people who discover our free

learning resources and qualifications by visiting The Open

University - www.open.edu/openlearn/free-courses







https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/86530412@N02/

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/



http://www.open.ac.uk/conditions

http://www.open.ac.uk/conditions


Activity 2 What does inclusion mean to you?DiscussionHere are some of the ideas we had in response to this activity. You

will notice that a number of them extend significantly the definitions

that open this section:

Inclusive education goes beyond ‘special educational

needs’: it refers to all learners who, for different

reasons, may find themselves at risk of

marginalisation or exclusion.

Inclusive education is about values: it assumes that

diverse groups of pupils are of equal worth and have a

right to be included.

Inclusive education does not focus on perceived

individual deficits, but on the barriers to learning that

individuals and groups of pupils may encounter.

Inclusive education is about changing the system so it

is better for all: this includes teachers, students and

everyone in the educational institution.







Inclusive education is about participation and learning

from each other.

Inclusive education is not a fixed state but an evolving

one.

Some of the key words that we noted were: rights, participation,

process, values, equality, diversity, and change.

Back to Session 1 Activity 2







Activity 4 Penny's needsDiscussionIn carrying out this activity you may have come to similar

conclusions to those of Armstrong (2003). He comments that:

the definition of ‘needs’ in any given situation may arise from

negotiations taking place between people with differing and

sometimes conflicting interests (those of teachers, parents, other

pupils, the LEA and the LEA's professional advisers, for example).

(Armstrong, 2003, p. 87)

What a professional may see as Penny's ‘needs’ – such as small

groups, a protected environment, amended materials – may not,

for Penny herself, be seen as needs at all. From her perspective,

her needs are for autonomy and decision-making power in her own

life.

Back to Session 2 Activity 2






Inclusive education: Knowing what we mean€¦ · Web view1 Inclusive education: Knowing what we...

Documents

Transcript of Inclusive education: Knowing what we mean€¦ · Web view1 Inclusive education: Knowing what we...