Does%20rhetoric%20of%20inclusion%20really%20promote%20inclusive%20education?

1
Does rhetoric of inclusion really promote
inclusive education?

• Prof. Timo Saloviita
• University of Jyvaskyla, Jyvaskyla,Finland
• timo.saloviita_at_edu.jyu.fi

2
Origins of the word inclusion

• Integration of students with disabilities in the
  regular classes was called for since the 60ies
  e.g. in Canada.
• During the late 80ies several writers in the USA
  began to speak for the education of all students
  in the mainstream classes including the
  students with the most severe disabilities.
• This new policy statement needed a word of its
  own.
• The word inclusion emerged in the late 80ies
  to mean this new policy.

3
Early definition of inclusion

• Inclusion was defined by Stainback Stainback
  (1990) as
• education of all students in the mainstream (
  every student is in regular classes)
• appropriate educational programs for every
  student
• everyone is accepted and supported

4
The adoption of the concept by TASH

• The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps
  (TASH) Resolution on Inclusive Education 1993
• students with disabilities belong in general
  education classrooms
• Supported Education Resolution of TASH in 1988
  used the terms supported education and full
  integration.

5
Rapid spread of the concept

• United Nations (1993). Standard Rules
• integrated education
• UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca Statement
• inclusive education, enrolling all children in
  regular schools, unless there are compelling
  reasons for doing otherwise
• ILSMH (1995) International parents association
  for persons with mental handicap
• We fully support the inclusion of all children
  in regular education (TASH Newsletter, 21 (6).
• OECD (1997). There is now a widespread belief
  that policies need to be developed to stimulate
  the inclusion of children and adults with
  disabilities in the educational systems.

6
Inclusion and OECD

• CERI (The Centre for Educational Research and
  Innovation)
• seeks solutions and exchange views of educational
  problems of common interest
• Project Active Life for Disabled Youth
  Integration in the School (1990 - 1995)
• identified practices with respect to integration
• illustrated good practices
• disseminated findings
• The concept of inclusion appears in the end
  report in 1997, but not yet in its companion
  report in 1995.

7
The initial refusal of the term inclusion in
Finland

• National Board of Education (NBE) published a
  large evaluation report on special education in
  1996 (609 pages)
• inclusion was not mentioned
• UN Standard Rules - resolution (1993) or UNESCO
  Salamanca Statement (1994) were not mentioned.
• Both the rhetorics and policy of inclusion were
  supressed they were taboos.

8
From taboo to bandwagon

• During the years 1998-1999 the term inclusion
  began to become popular.
• It appeared in teachers in-service training
• Parents associations of intellectually disabled
  children became interested in it.
• In 1999 The Association of Special Teachers
  changed their rhetorics
• Statement Towards a common school for all.
• National Board of Education actively began to
  spread the term inclusion.

9
Conclusions I

• Inclusion was at first an undiscussable issue
  (see Argyris Schön, 1996)
• The taboo was broken when OECD changed its
  rhetorics in 1997.
• State authorities (NBE) changed their own
  rhetorics after this.
• Inclusion became an object of curiosity and
  interest what does it mean?

10
Did the policy change? Percentage of students
removed to special education
11
Changes in policy?

• No changes in legislation that would promote
  inclusion.
• Instead, removal of students into special
  education was made administratively more easy.
• Ministry of Education Development Plan of
  Education and Research (several issues)
• focus on early detection of special needs and
  development of special education
• inclusion or integration not mentioned

12
Conclusions II

• Finnish comprehensive school is moving towards
  increasing segregation.
• placements in special classes are increasing
• This development is politically widely accepted.
• no movement for inclusion
• At the same time the rhetorics of inclusion has
  got wide popularity.

13
Conclusions III

• Originally, inclusion was a sign that denoted
  radical policy of those who defended the rights
  of the most severely disabled persons to
  participate into community life and regular
  classes.
• When the term was adopted in Finland, it rapidly
  lost its original meaning.
• Today inclusion in Finland means something
  vaguely positive maybe it is already something
  like a taboo to oppose it.

14
Final conclusions

• The example of the term inclusion shows how
  radical terms which try to question the
  legitimacy of existing social order become
  interpreted from the positions of the prevailing
  ideology. This way they are made harmless.
• If the terms are truly revolutionary, they are
  ignored.
• If they are adopted, they are
• either redefined so that their contents are lost.
• or the stated goal is decoupled from any action.

15
References

• Argyris, C. Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational
  learning II. Readings Addison-Wesley
• National Board of Education (1996). The State of
  Special Education. (in Finnish). Helsinki
  Author.
• OECD (1995). Integrating students with special
  needs into mainstream schools. OECD.
• OECD (1997). Implementing inclusive education.
  OECD.
• TASH (1994). Resolution on Inclusive Education,
  December 17, 1993. TASH Newsletter, 20 (2) 4-5.
• Stainback Stainback (1990). Inclusive
  schooling. In Stainback Stainback (Eds.)
  Support networks for inclusive schooling.
  Baltimore Brookes.