Search results

We undertake a genealogical critique to undermine the very noble but hardly questioned implementation of inclusive education in Indonesia, less to identify dubious neo-colonial powers of particular groups, than to deconstruct ill-defined understandings of schooling as a process of ‘normalisation’ of the ‘abnormals’. We approach inclusive classes through Foucault's concept of Heterotopia, a space which is deviant from the norm. Instead of questioning inclusive education as a heterotopian way of schooling only, we contest regular schooling itself and the power normalisation. Along a second Foucauldian concept of Heterochronia we connect historical insights of seating Indonesian children at a regular school desks in 1920 with the training of children with special needs to be seated in Indonesian disability centres 2020. We argue that ‘normalisation’ as such can hardly be critiqued, because it is an existing social and institutional normality. But taking critique as a conflict between colonial, globalising and even humanitarian forces, enables a Foucauldian analysis of normalising technologies of education and of inclusive education in particular.

Even though the progress in creating inclusive learning environments varies across different countries, the implementation of inclusive education systems can clearly be considered a European shared policy goal. However, there is still a lack of both a clear definition of inclusive education and indicators on the provision of necessary resources in order to implement a high-quality inclusive school system. In the presented study, we aimed to shed light on how teachers who work at different schools in Austria perceive the resources provided to them in order to realize high-quality inclusive education. Furthermore, the study searched for factors, which influence teachers' subjective perception of resources, like years of work experience or the number of students in a classroom. To assess teachers' perception of resources, a revised version of the Perception of Resources Questionnaire (PRQ) developed by Goldan and Schwab (2018) was used focussing on three dimensions: human resources, material resources and spatial resources. The results generally indicate that teachers feel ambivalent or have a somewhat positive perception of available resources. In line with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) principles of inclusive education ‘each according to his needs’, we argue that it is not possible to clarify what ‘adequate resources’ might be. The creation of an inclusive learning environment requires considerable effort, and the degree of pedagogical support should be decisive for the allocation of resources. This can only be evaluated if the main learning barriers for each student are identified.

Despite an enormous growth of the literature and research on inclusive education during the last two and a half decades, theory and practice on inclusive education are still inconsistent across the education systems worldwide. It is defined, conceptualised and practised differently across diverse socioeconomic contexts and groups of scholars and practitioners. While some promote educating all students in a mainstream classroom setting irrespective of their abilities and physical, emotional and behavioural challenges, others emphasise improving the overall quality of education for all children from diverse backgrounds. Given that education is a multidimensional social enterprise, promoting a single perspective at the cost of others or merely emphasising the role of schools and teachers may hardly result in improved education outcomes and guarantee equal learning opportunities for all. This chapter will critically review the relevant theory and discuss the different approaches to inclusive education. Then it will discuss the potential challenges to inclusive education across the education systems. Finally, the chapter will offer an inclusive way forward for improving the quality of education for all children, irrespective of their backgrounds, in mainstream schools in multicultural contexts.

This chapter traces the shift of many progressive educators from a general faith in special education to the more recent push for democratic and ethical inclusive education. This chapter examines the critical scholarship that propelled many educators away from systems of special education and into the inclusive education movement. Two phases in the development of inclusive education are described, an initial failed attempt often described by researchers as “integration,” and the current social movement building toward a more genuine social transformation of classrooms and schools.

This chapter provides a discussion of Roger Slee and Julie Allan’s 2001 article “Excluding the included: A reconsideration of inclusive education” published in International Studies in Sociology of Education. “Excluding the included” is a salient example of the influential work of these two scholars, threads of which can be found throughout their prior and following work, and in the work of other scholars in the area. The importance of the work and its ongoing impact on the field of inclusive education is discussed.

With the move toward a more inclusive educational system across most jurisdictions, the expectation is that students with the most complex needs who have previously attended special schools, will gradually transition into inclusive schools. This expectation raises issues regarding the practicality of this move and the capacity of inclusive schools in being able to provide appropriate support and curriculum for these learners. Examples of transition programs across different countries are discussed to establish the most effective processes, support structures, and initiatives that have been employed to facilitate this transfer. The role of collaboration between schools and a review of support models that are provided for learners with high support needs in inclusive settings are discussed. Compared to the expectations for this move, and to understand the reality of it, perceptions of teachers, parents, and students are considered.

This chapter aims to provide a critical analysis of special needs education within the United Kingdom today. Central to such an analysis is an understanding of the rapidly changing social and political milieu within which special needs education is embedded, including the rapidly changing demographics of schooling, and the devolution of political power into four separate but linked countries – England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Following a discussion of such wider social, political and educational issues, the authors explore the convergences and divergences in policy and practice across the four devolved administrations. The authors describe a plethora of contemporary policy developments within each of the four administrations that speak to the need for special needs education to change in response to 21st century concerns about the problems of access to, and equity in, education for all children. Despite this, the authors remain extremely circumspect about the potential of many of these developments to lead to successful inclusive practices and developments on the ground – and explain why. The analysis in the concluding section focuses on the issue of teacher education for inclusion and some very innovate UK research and development projects that have been reported to successfully engage teachers with new paradigm thinking and practice in the field of inclusive special needs education.

Leading inclusion is a complex field of practice that is framed in traditional conceptions of school administration. Leadership in inclusive schools is a constant struggle with fluctuating dimensions, often compounding difficulties for students with difference and disability. Nevertheless, inclusive school leadership remains an important component of successful practice of inclusive education, where all students with diverse abilities equally benefit. This chapter provides an introduction to different types of leadership practices that promote inclusive practices. A key focus of the chapter is to discuss the social theory of Bourdieu in relation to understanding and measuring what we consider as effective inclusive school leadership. This framework provides both theoretical and practical approaches in developing inclusive school leadership practices and ways effective inclusive leadership practices could be measured.

This chapter explores a US state-endorsed tool for reviewing district, school, and classroom inclusive practices. The Best Practices for Inclusive Education (BPIE) assessment tool was developed through a collaborative initiative between state personnel, University faculty, and representatives from a federally funded technical assistance project, Florida Inclusion Network. The tool supports a facilitated review and subsequent action planning for greater inclusive practices that includes learners with severe intellectual disabilities. This chapter describes the BPIE process and offers examples of its application in districts across Florida with particular reference to practices that support learners with severe intellectual disabilities.