PERSPECTIVES IN SEN AND INCLUSION

PERSPECTIVES IN SEN AND INCLUSION

Introduction

Salamanca’s statement, which has been adopted by UNESCO, is based on the notion that every child has the right to education (UNESCO, 2015, p. 8). Children have to be given opportunities not only to achieve their goals but also to maintain an acceptable learning level. From those mentioned above, it is clear that children, regardless of their disabilities, are entitled to an equitable education. As such, SEN and children with various disabilities are allowed to learn in regular schools. However, regular learning institutions should accommodate their needs through the utilization of child-centered pedagogy. Therefore, the inclusive education perspective is based on the notion that the SEN and children with disabilities have the right to study in the same learning environment with their peers. Educational policies in place have to accord them with the required opportunities, which can enable them to attain maximum academic potential (Global Partnership for Education, 2018, p. 17). The education offered for SEND should take place within the same learning environment with children without learning problems. Towards achieving this, the appropriate interventions have to be put in place as well as the most effective support programs.

The inclusion perspective outlines the need to reform education to fit the needs of children. Primarily, most countries provided education for SEN and disabled children through special education schools. Education has spearheaded the development of inclusive education for All (EFA). Disability has been defined as a lack of ability by a child to perform activities that can be done more effectively by normal children. This can either be through mental, physical, or psychological problems. SEN and disabled children develop issues in their development either at prenatal, perinatal or at the postnatal stage. Due to negative perception from the community, children with SEN and disabilities have been portrayed as incapable, dependent, and different (Corbett, 2011, p. 74). Such perceptions led to separation and marginalization in the education system. The SEN and disabled children have always been judged according to what they cannot offer rather than developing their capabilities in society (Wendell, 2015, p.11). This prompted the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and United Nations (UN) to strive towards the provision of equitable education for all children regardless of the capabilities. Education is an essential factor that can help in enhancing both the social and economic status of children in the future. Thus, the concept of inclusive education is centered on equitable access. Children with disabilities and SEN can acquire equitable learning programs by integrating them into inclusive educational programs rather than isolating them in special education schools.

Analysis of Concept of and approaches to inclusion education, SEN and disability

Inclusion education is slowly revolutionizing the way education is offered to SEN and disabled children in the world. It is viewed as “savior” to SEND children and a tool that can help in bridging social barriers in society. However, from the literature perspective, the entire idea has been manifested with discrepancies. For instance, from the definition of inclusive education, one realizes that it has ambiguities. The Salamanca statement from the UNESCO context outlines that the fundamental right of a child is to attain an acceptable education level (UNESCO, 1994, p. 12). What is this acceptable education level? The acceptable nature of education, as outlined, is subject to external variables. The existing variables, such as government domain, social and educational level, specialized staff for children in need of various types of therapies, SEND practitioners, and physical education, influences the effectiveness of inclusive education.

Another concept that requires critical analysis in inclusive education and raises questions is the educational need to SEND children to study in regular schools. The definition or understanding of regular schools varies from various countries. For example, regular schools in the UK may not be similar to ones in the US. Nonetheless, regardless of the desire to provide inclusion education, the number of specialized practitioners are not sufficient. This dramatically affects the implementation of the practice in education. In some instances, the development of a complete inclusion system in a school might not be realized. It is most likely that it will lack the essential elements. Such issues may lead to debates on what is inclusive education, its parameters, among other vital issues.

Nonetheless, “UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” (United Nations, 2015, p. 48) requires the countries to “ensure inclusive and equitable and quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.” The ideology, regardless of being intended to facilitate the desires of all children, we do not have inclusive education applying across the entire world. Inclusive education has been considered by authors such as Hayes & Bulat (2017, p. 14) has the “least restrictive environment,” which can improve the educational and social needs of children with SEND. It is viewed mainly as a preferred setting in which children with disabilities can develop.

Most countries across the globe are working towards the achievement of millennium goals on equitable education for both SEND and children without disabilities. Traditionally, children with disabilities received their studies in segregated locations. In such cases, they could receive their studies in special schools, being taught by the itinerant teacher. However, with the calls for equity in various agencies, various nations are moving towards inclusive education. Children who have disabilities are offered to acquire their educational needs through mainstream schools. Kuper, Saran & White, (2018, p. 47) outline that the move is fundamental since disability is only the set of the body, not the mind in most cases. This applies to those with physical disabilities. The approaches which can facilitate the children’s education with SEND in the inclusion context are thus based on elements from the segregation and inclusion context. For example, the most effective approach for the provision of education that is visually impaired is through equipping them with reading glasses from a segregated context.

Despite that, the approaches to the provision of inclusive education among the SEND learners are not standardized. It depends primarily on shifting from the segregated learning context to inclusive education. The effectiveness of the approaches in inclusive context is based on the cultural views of a country to disabled, existing education system, political will, and socio-economic issues affecting the nation (Global Partnership for Education, 2018, p.14). Most of the countries embracing inclusive education are investing heavily in the development of educational resources, which are intended for inclusion purposes. The majority are approaching the idea by developing resource centers, training specialized teachers, and shifting from a diagnostic approach to a particular assessment method. The approaches to offering education in inclusive education are developed according to the needs of the affected population. For example, those with learning disabilities can be assisted by assisting them in improving their reading capabilities.

Approaches to inclusive education are facilitated by investing in developing specialized facilities that can be utilized in addressing the needs of children with SEND. Global Partnership for Education (GPE) (2018) outlines in their report on the way countries are engaging in inclusive education. From their data, one highlight that from the total of 65 GPE countries, 51 has plans in their educational sector on inclusive education. They are heavily implementing on how they can facilitate inclusive education in their countries. These countries are engaging in a twin-track approach. As such, most of them are investing mainstream while finding ways in which they can address the needs of children with disabilities. “European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusion Education” (2016 p.8) outlines that the approaches towards enhancing inclusive education do not apply solely to the economic prowess of a country. The agency describes that the most effective method to its implementation is based on permission of governance mechanism to collaborate with various stakeholders.  This can be achieved through fostering strategic behavior and ensuring accountability issues are addressed by putting in place a practical monitoring approach.

The problem of practice, policy, and theory in inclusive education

The main challenges in which the practice, policy, and theory of inclusive education faces are connected with ideals and actions. The various international organizations such as UNICEF, UNESCO, UN, EU, and the Council for Europe’s definition of inclusion is based on similar elements. The values anticipated by inclusion in all the organizations, as highlighted by Hardy & Woodcock (2015 p.47) is characterized by interaction ideology. Therefore, inclusive education revolves around participation, democracy, equity, justice, and quality. The learners involved in inclusion have to participate in school culture and curricular. Since the unraveling of inclusive education for all ideology by UNESCO in 1994, most countries mainly in the European context acknowledge that inclusive education is crucial in the achievement of equity in educational rights for all (UNESCO 2013, p.18). Regardless of that, the practical aspect of inclusive education among various countries differ widely and even within the school itself. Hardy & Woodcock (2015, p.117) reiterate that “there appears, however, to be deep uncertainty about how to create inclusive environments within schools and how to teach inclusively.” This has been attributed to how different countries formulate and put into practice inclusive education. In a nutshell, one may view that there exists a wide gap in the practical context from different countries. The ideas in which the inclusion education to serve for the needs of the SEN and disabled children is not that practical. As such, it has led to various debates on how it can be achieved (European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusion Education” 2016, p. 5). Inclusive education has become a forum through which the government promises people a lot but the actions but is still larking.

Consequently, this has led to ambiguity nature of the promises outlining the practice of inclusive education. As described by Hansen & Quortrup (2013 p. 14), there are many battles regarding the inclusion interpretation. This is attributed to the definition of the idea, which affects how inclusive education treats and meets the needs of various groups of learners.

Inclusive education is viewed as a result of multiple processes and values. However, the values outlined can either agree or conflict with each other. It operates within a narrow approach since it dominates only on how to organize and teach SEN and disable students in an inclusive school set up. The inclusion of education was developed in 1960 to eliminate the experiences caused by integration. The integration perspective failed to eliminate marginalization, devaluation, segregation, and discrimination. However, the development of inclusive education from 1994 was geared towards the establishment of pedagogical changes in which integration failed to observe (Warnock, 2018 p. 62).  As such, it has been observed that the inclusive education perspective is mainly concerned with the placement of SEN and disable learners receiving special education. Focusing too much on the placement of special education learners into ordinary schools has led to devaluation and reduction in the quality of education offered. However, focusing inclusion to only help in the achievement of the educational needs of SEN and Disable learners hinders its mandate of “education for all.” According to UNESCO (1994), the inclusion education mandate for its development was to foster equal education for all children. From Salamanca’s perspective, the ideals of the inclusion were to help in enhancing not only learning for disabled but also for marginalized groups regardless of gender, social background, ethnicity, gender, and culture. Therefore, the practical and the implementation part of inclusive education face challenges that need further research and deliberations.

Global policies in the United Nations and millennium development goals on inclusive education, SEN and disability

Sustainable development goals, as outlined by the UN, entails for the achievement of quality education through inclusive education. It is intended that this will help in promoting lifelong learning opportunities for children from all dimensions. However, as outlined earlier, ideals and actions in the implementation process may hamper the achievement of inclusive education by 2030. This is based on the UN progressive report of 2019. UN views quality education as a “foundation for creating sustainable development” (United Nations, 2019, p. 17). However, from their report, inclusive education has not received attention in the education sector, which can propel the attainment of quality education. Inclusive education is still lacking in many countries despite that the world is made up of 15% of people living with disabilities (Thompkins & Deloney, 2015, p. 48). The recommendation in which UNICEF documented based on the initiative of education for children with disabilities provided a crucial framework through which if it had been implemented, sustainable development goals could be close to its achievement. For the achievement of SDG from UNICEF, funding, community participation, creation of flexible assessment and curricular were significant in the realization of inclusive education equitable in nature.  The report by UNICEF opened a room through which an inclusive information and communication system was designed.

In spite of the strides made, the UN outlines that various nations have not been able to achieve the inclusive education desired. From its point of view, the ideas based on the mechanism have not been materialized in an actionable mechanism. It attributes that various countries lack educational infrastructures, which can enhance inclusive learning. As such, developing nations cannot be able to realize inclusive education anytime soon. Nonetheless, the UN views that governance in some parts of the world does not permit inclusive education due to its governance. Supported by European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (2018 p. 12), most countries cannot achieve inclusive education not because of financial problems but due to failure to allow stakeholders to offer the necessary support. Therefore, the issue surrounding inclusive education is mainly at the idea parts despite its call to materialize the need from 1994. Most educational planners and countries view that redefining from the old ways is tedious and expensive. The concept of inclusive education in regular studies has also dragged the implementation of inclusive education. For instance, regular schools in various parts of the world vary. As such, through the UNESCO concept of inclusive education, only the European nations and other well-developed countries can be able to embrace it.

Approaches in inclusion education and their implications

The theoretical traditions and methods in inclusive education for children with disabilities are based on the human rights approach, inclusive pedagogy, twin-track, and multicultural approaches. The human rights-based approach is a holistic human rights treaty that addresses the fundamental rights of children. It emphasizes the traditional theoretical concept of human rights based on social, cultural, political, economic, and civic needs. It views education for all as a way through which the child can be able to achieve one’s full potential. As outlined by the “Convention on the Rights of the Child” (CRC), the government must ensure children realize their potential without discrimination despite disability (Hardy & Woodcock 2015 p.40). The countries are expected to help children access education in a way that promotes their social inclusivity. The human rights approach is based on four principles in the inclusive education dimension. The principle includes; non-discrimination, the best interest of the child, a realization of optimum development, and a child’s rights to be heard according to their age and maturity. Consequently, the human rights approach led to the formulation of policies based on article 24 stipulated in Conventions of Human Rights of the People with Disabilities (CRPD). It outlines that ” persons with disabilities can access an inclusive, quality and free primary and secondary education on an equal basis with others in the community they live in” (Lindsay, 2013 p. 117). Also, UNESCO underpinned various principles in the human rights approach in education. These principles include indivisibility, empowerment, universality and inalienability, equality, and non-discrimination. Through the human rights approach, the development of inclusive education has led to discussions concerning the role of education for sustainable development. Classes without stereotypes due to disabilities have also been realized. As such, children with disabilities have been empowered, and they have developed an acceptance feeling and sense of belonging. The human rights approach in inclusive education has also led to the development of equitable assessment methods in the school curriculum.

The inclusive pedagogy approach has also been used in offering inclusive education for SEN and disabled children. It is a student-centered approach, and thus, the instructor is expected to pay attention closely to the needs and abilities of an individual child. The approach involves working relations in terms of education between the teachers and the student (Shakespeare & Watson, 2011, p. 117). This helps in the creation of an open and supportive learning environment, thus fostering social justice. The approach allows for the individual learner to develop a sense of full representation and value in equal measures despite disabilities — inclusive pedagogy results in improved learning outcomes for all learners.

Twin-track approach in inclusive education was mainly concerned with the funding of inclusive education (UNESCO, 2009 p. 36). The plan was intended to help in investing and funding of the existing education to foster for an individualized support system. The Twin-track approach was meant to invest in an accessible building, development, and training of teachers and modification of curriculum to suit the needs of SEND learners. Nonetheless, the approach was intended to help in availing resources meant to facilitate a personalized support system. The specialized computer programs and other materials which were designed to improve learner education were the intentions of the twin-track approach. This led to an increasing number of enrolment to SEND children in schools, specialized instructors, and improved infrastructure.

Another approach used in inclusive education is multicultural. It is an inclusion method that fosters the cultural pluralism and existence of different races and cultures. It was developed to facilitate an appreciation of existence of various cultures in the world. However, the approach does not cover specifically on inclusive education for children with SEN and disability. Practically, it outlines the fundamental role in the development of inclusive education. In the introduction, one highlighted that inclusive education was developed to foster “education for all.” UNESCO (2015, p. 11) thus view the multicultural approach as vital since regardless of using the method to enhance pluralized education, emphasizing lies in education for all children. This has led to an increase in the number of enrolment in regular schools across the globe.

Inclusive Education, SEN and Disability issues in the UK and other countries

Inclusive education concept was first introduced in the UK in 1928 through the Wood Committee. It expressed a need for unification of both the ordinary and special education in the country. The same idea was reiterated in 1994 by the parliamentary secretary, who expressed the need for inclusive learning. Chuter Ede, who was the parliament secretary, highlighted that “Whilst we desire to see adequate provisions in special schools, we also desire to see many children as possible in the normal stream of school life” (Wendell, 2015, p.14). This simply echoed what had been stated by UNESCO in 1994. The intentions of the idea were noble. However, like many countries in the world, the manifestation of the idea was a challenge. It was viewed as complex, and its implementation in the learning system varied. Just like other countries, such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the United States of America (USA).  The policy has outlined by UNESCO was to provide equal “education for all” in regular schools. The countries understanding of the idea was not similar.  Just like in the UK, USA and UAE were in confusion state since the issues on the ideals, and the actions in the realization of inclusive education were perplexing (Miles & Singal, 2010 p. 47).  The confusion and debate emerged in various corridors of education. In the United Arab Emirates, the inclusion concept was used to define practices in special schools.

In contrast, in the UK, it was purely on the behavior but not the needs of SEN and disability. Countries such as the US view the concept of inclusive education to be similar to normalization, desegregation, and integration. The terms used by different countries concerning inclusive education has been established to vary in both the meaning and practice. Examining the literature, especially based on UNESCO (1994), one realizes that there is no particular definitive practice in the inclusive education context.

Salamanca Statement, as outlined in UNESCO, concerns inclusive education to individual rights at a particular education level, and it acknowledges the individual uniqueness in learning. The uniqueness issue is thus expected to be addressed through EFA or a principal approach in education in the society. The idea of the provision of education for SEN and disable in the neighboring schools was also a core idea from UNESCO. In the country level, the ideas are unclear, and that explains why the practical part varies from the countries mentioned above. As stated, the interpretation of inclusive education in the UK, USA, and UAE are different (Thomas, 2014, p. 93).  The core understanding of the education principles and policies, as outlined in the global context is the only way through which various countries can address inclusive education as intended. The countries discussed, therefore, represent the inclusive issues from other countries across the world.

Conclusion

Inclusive education development was an essential advance in the provision of equitable education for all regardless of disabilities. The idea was first developed in 1994 by UNESCO, famously called Salamanca statement. The core principle in the global context concerning inclusive education was to cater to education for children living with disabilities. The report intended for the development of social justice and the acceptability of SEN and disabled children through learning in regular schools. According to the literature place, the idea has remained in its idea state since the practical part has not been unified. The definition of the term in the narrow context based on the provision of inclusive education for children with disabilities by integrating or placing them in mainstream educational facilities. However, in the broader context, inclusive education aims at the provision of equal education to children from various cultural backgrounds.

Nonetheless, educational practices were to be carried out in regular schools — the policy cuts across the globe since it is a UN statement aimed at the realization of millennium development. The idea has not been put into practice as expected by UNESCO and the UN. What is dragging the practical part of inclusive education? Different states understand the concept different. For instance, the idea in the US, UAE, and UK varies. According to the UN, inclusive education attainment may not be realized by 2030 due to various challenges affecting the implementation of the notion. Varied definitions, governance in multiple countries, and the resources needed to implement inclusive education are a challenge. For inclusive education to be realized, research is required, especially on defining its context.

Reference list

Corbett, J.(2011). Supporting Inclusion Education. A Connective Pedagogy. (London:Routledge Falmer, 2011).(15)

European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. (2018). Evidence Of The Link Between Inclusive Education and Social Inclusion. A Review of Literature. (S. Symeonidou,Ed.)Odense Denmark:European Agency For Special Needs And Inclusive Education.

Global Partnership For Education. (2016). Disability and Inclusive Education.-A Stocktake Of Education Sector Plans And GPE-Funded Grants. Working Paper #3. Washington, DC:Global Partnership For Education.

Global Partnership for Education. (2018). Disability and Inclusive Education.-A Stocktake Of Education Sector Plans And GPE-Funded Grants. Working Paper #3. Washington, DC:Global Partnership For Education.

Hansen,O.,and L.Quortrup .(2013).”Approaches To Empirical Analyses On Inclusive Education”.Scandinavian Journal Of Disability Research12 (3)199-209.doi.

Hardy, I., and S. Woodcock (2015). “inclusive education policies: discourse of difference, diversity and deficit”.international journal of inclusive education19(2):141-164.doi

Hayes, A. M., & Bulat , J.(2017).Disabilities Inclusive Education System S And Policies Guide For Low-And Middle-Income Countries. Occasional Paper. RTI Press Publication Op-0043-1707.Rti International.

http://www.inclusive-education-in-action.org/iea/dokumente/upload/72074_177849e.pdf

Kuper, H., Saran, A. & White, H. (2018). Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) Of What Works To Improve Educational Outcomes For People With Disabilities In Low-And Middle-Income Countries. International Center for Evidence in Disability, London School of Hygiene and Campbell Collaboration.

Lindsay, G (2013). Inclusive education: a critical perspective. The British Journal of Special Education. Vol.30 (1)

Miles, S. & Singal, N (2010). The Education for All and inclusive education debate: conflict, contradiction or opportunity. International Journal of Inclusive Education. Vol.14 (1), pp.1-15

Shakespeare, T. & Watson, N (2011). The social model of disability: an outdated ideology? Research in social science and disability. Vol.2, pp.9-28

Thomas, C (2014). How is disability understood? An examination of sociological approaches. Disability and Society. Vol.19 (6), pp.569-583. Retrieved 23 Oct 2013 from the following: https://elibrary.utas.edu.au/utas/file/d68f2ae4-cc56-46bf-aa73-92580e82ab89/1/Dis_and_Soc_paper.pdf

Thompkins, R & Deloney, P (2015). Inclusion: The Pros & Cons. Issues About Change. Vol.4 (3)

UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Retrieved 23 October 2013 from the UNESCO website: www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_E.PDF

UNESCO (2009). Policy Guidelines on Inclusion in Education. Retrieved 8 November 2013 from the UNESCO website:

UNESCO (2013). Education policy-planning process: an applied framework. Retrieved 31 December 2013 from the UNESCO website: http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/11_200.pdf

UNESCO (2015). The Dakar Framework for Action. Retrieved 29 December 2013 from the UNESCO website: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001211/121147e.pdf

United Nations. (2015). transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. www.un.org/ga/searchview_doc,aspsymbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E

United Nations. (2019). transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. www.un.org/ga/searchview_doc,aspsymbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E

Warnock, M (2018). Children with special needs: the Warnock Report. British Medical Journal. Vol.1, 10 March 1979, pp.667-668

Wendell, K (2015). Dilemmas in the quest for inclusion. British Journal of Special Education. Vol.32 (1)