perspectives on inclusion: the politics of difference and diversity
TRANSCRIPT
To analyze the contradictory and contentious nature of inclusion
To explain the ways in which inclusion is a human rights and social justice issue
To analyze the ways in which inclusion is frequently reduced to a special education sub-system
To provide some insights into intersectional analyses of disability and discuss their implications for education policy and practice
Inclusion as a process of school improvement and development ( e.g Index for Inclusion- Booth and Ainscow 2002)
Inclusion is inexorably linked with the principles of equity and social justice (Ainscow 1999; 2007;Artiles et al 2006 ;Barton and Armstrong)
Armstrong and Barton 2007, 6)
Inclusion ‘is fundamentally about issues of human rights, equity, social justice and the struggle for a non-discriminatory society. These principles are at the heart of inclusive educational policy and practice’ (Armstrong and Barton 2007, 6)
Persons with disabilities are not excluded from
the general education system on the basis of
disability…. Persons with disabilities receive the support
required, within the general education system,
to facilitate their effective education
Children & Families Act 2014:
Section 19: General principles guiding Part 3−the SEN provisions
Develop inclusive practices and remove barriers to learning
High quality support to meet the needs of children with SEN/D
illegal exclusions from schools ( Children’s Commissioner 2013)
Exclusion also acts in covert wayse.g.‘streams’, ‘tracks’, ‘sets’
(Armstrong et al 2010:110)
Inclusion is ‘troubled by the multiplicity ofmeanings that lurk within the discourses thatsurround and carry it
(Graham and Slee 2008: 83)
Inclusion’ is not a single movement; it is made up of many strong currents of belief, many different local struggles and a myriad of practice”
(Clough and Corbett, 2000:6)
Inclusive Education is about values and principles; the kind of Education we want and the kind of Education we value
(Liasidou 2012a).
New understandings of difference and diversity, learning, emotional development, human rights, citizenship and social justice ( e.g Artiles et al 2006; Kershner 2009; Slee2014)
12
Disability Vs Impairment The social model of disability Vs The
medical model of disability
(Oliver 1996;Thomas 2004)
What are the implications for educational policy and practice?
Values of equality and social justice/Human rights-social democratic approach to schoolingVS
Market forces in education/neo-liberal discourse-utilitarian approaches to schooling
(Giroux 2012; Woods2001)
The aims of current schooling are in alignment with the demands of global economy that necessitates increased concerns for effectiveness, value for money and competiveness.
“local economies of student worth” ( Ball 2009:187)
Student as “commodities” (Dudley_Marling and Baker 2012)
The constitution of “ideal” and “non ideal” students (Harwood and Humphy 2008)
Disabled students are regarded “as eternally lacking (desiring subjects consuming the things they lack)” (Goodley 2007:321)
“Yet governments of all political persuasions bowing to a variety of economic, professional and parental vested interests, have acquiesced in the expansion of SEN industry, implicitly conceding its importance in dealing with potential groups, who, while being offered some education and training appear increasingly surplus in ‘knowledge economies’ and/or are in need of social control from an early age”
( Tomlinson 2012:2).
17
E.g.Warnock, M. (2010). ‘Special educational needs: A new look’. In Terzi, L. (ed.), Special Educational Needs: A New Look . London: Continuum
Warnock,M. (2005) "Special Educational Needs: A New Look.UK: Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain
‘Inverse inclusion’(Kassah and Kassah 2013)
Dominant versions of educational inclusion are occasionally reduced to special educational subsystems by providing compensatory and remedial models of support (Lloyd 2008).
The gaze is squarely placed on students’ presumed “deficits” and the common practice is to silence the ways in which disability is to a significant extent an ideologically and socially mediated phenomenon that emanates from and rests upon wider socio-political and cultural contextual factors.( Liasidou 2013 2012 b)
Disability as ‘an evolving concept’ (UNCRPD 2008)
The notion of intersectionality is presented a as means to explore the ways in which disability rests upon, is intertwined with and emanates from other sources of social disadvantage ( e.gLiasidou 2013a).
Simultaneous discrimination (Barnes and Mercer 2010; Thomas 1999)
Disability categories are frequently contingent on professional judgement which is occasionally skewed by prejudice and discrimination. (Dyson and Kozleski 2008; Tomlinson 1982, 2014)
students’ special educational needs are inexorably linked with multiple sources of disadvantage like ethnicity, social class, gender and poverty (DCSF 2009;Keil et al 2006; Mitler1999;Baca1999; Elwan 1999).
the vast majority of students assigned to ‘controversial categories of pathology … come from populations and cultures we have “Othered” on the basis of colour and socioeconomic status’ ( Rhodes 1995:460)
“Triple threat students” ( Baca 1990)
“triple threat students
Behaviour and Learning
difficulties
Limited English
proficiency
Poverty
( race and ethnicity)
► gaps in developmental tasks appear at 22 months
► the Millennium Cohort Study showslower vocabulary at age three for children from poorer
households.
►an FSM child has around 3 times worse odds of achieving good school outcomes than a non-FSM child at every critical point in their education after age 5”
Health Care System ‘children who are not born healthy, raised
in healthy homes, nourished well, and who do not have effective early intervention and robust medical treatment become special education students’ ( Turnbull 2009:7)
Schools are expected to coordinate a multi-disciplinary educational provision
A holistic approach to evaluating students’ needs (e.g'SEND code of practice: 0 to 25 years/ Education, Health and Care Plans)
New accountability regimes (Artiles et al 2006; Bringhouse2009)
Professional development for social justice and inclusion –e.gleadership for social justice and inclusion ( Liasidou and Svensson 20013)
The extent to which our educational policies are informed by a human rights agenda.
The extent to which the distribution of resources is informed by a human rights and social justice agenda.
The ways in which the contradictory policies around inclusion are understood, negotiated and actioned at school level by educational practitioners.
Ainscow, M. 2010. Achieving excellence and equity: Reflections on the development ofpractices in one local district over 10 years. School Effectiveness and School Improvement21, no. 10: 75–92.
Ali, Z., Q. Fazil, P. Bywaters, L. Wallace, and G. Singh. 2001. Disability, ethnicity andchildhood: A critical review of research. Disability & Society 16, no. 7: 949–67.
Artiles, A.J., N. Harris-Murri, and D. Rostenberg. 2006. Inclusion as social justice. Baynton, D. 2001. Disability and the justification of inequality in American history.
In Thenew disability history: American perspectives, ed. Paul K. Longmore and Lauri Umansky, 92–102. New York: New York University Press.
Bringhouse, H. 2010. Educational equality and school reform. In Educational equality, ed. G. Haydon. London: Continuum
Giroux, H. 2011. Education and the crisis of public values. New York: Peter Lang. Liasidou,A (2014): Disabling discourses and human rights law: a case study based on
the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, DOI:10.1080/01596306.2014.936928
Liasidou, A (2013): Intersectional understandings of disability and implications for a social justice reform agenda in education policy and practice, Disability & Society, 28(3) 299-312
Liasidou, A. (2012b) Inclusive Education, Politics and Policymaking. London: Continuum
Liasidou,A (2012a) Inclusive education and critical pedagogy at the intersections of disability, race, gender and class. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 10, 1, 168-184
