Inclusion. A Challenge for School Development

Table of contents

List of tables

List of figures

Introduction

1. Explanation of terms
1.1 Education, educational equity and disadvantage
1.2 Heterogeneity
1.3 Inclusion

2. Historical review
2.1 General education and special education
2.2 Integration and inclusion before and after the Salamanca Declaration
2.3 Differences to integration and GU concept

3. A look into the future – further development
3.1 Further developing the school system
3.1.1 A binding model of inclusion
3.1.2 The "Index for Inclusion"
3.2 Developing the role of the teacher
3.3 Developing the role of the child in society

4. Concluding thoughts and summary

Bibliography

List of tables

Table 1: Differences between inclusion and integration (Hinz 2002, In: Biewer 2009, 127)

Table 2: Dimensions, domains, indicators and questions at a glance (cf. Index for Inclusion 2003, 17)

List of figures

Figure 1: What is Inclusive Education? (cf. EEN 2012)

Introduction

"Education should allow children to reach their fullest potential in terms of cognitive, emotional and creative capacities". (Global Monitoring Report 2005, 30)

Germany's education and school system faces the challenge of changing, of developing further, in order to be able to guarantee what the Global Monitoring Report demands with this statement. Only if all pupils have the same right to education and the same opportunities to access schools can it be ensured that all pupils are able to bring out the best in themselves, to realise their potential in all areas and to make the greatest possible gains in skills and abilities, but also, for example, in self-confidence. In the context of the discussion about inclusion and educational equity, which fortunately is no longer dying down, hints or even elaborated and tested concepts for the implementation of inclusion in German general schools are also presented again and again, which, however, far too few schools in Germany have made an effort to realise so far.

This Bachelor's thesis on the topic of "Inclusion - A Challenge for School Development", after explaining important basics, takes a look into the future in the last chapter and pays special attention to the further development possibilities of the school system. The work was used to ask questions, to think visions and to give impulses: How does the school system have to develop further so that it can enable inclusion? What changes could make it possible for more pupils who were previously taught at special schools or support centres to remain at mainstream schools? What concrete implementation proposals and manuals for creating an inclusive school already exist and what are their possibilities and limitations?

First, the most relevant terms for this thesis (and the entire inclusion debate) are explained in the first chapter. The terms education, educational equity and educational disadvantage are presented from an educational policy and pedagogical point of view, whereby the explanations are mainly based on official documents, for example various declarations of the UN (United Nations) or the information pages of the Thuringian Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (TMBWK) on the internet. Subsequently, it is explained what is meant by heterogeneity in general and in the educational context. Because of the very close connection, the explanations prepare the content for the concept of inclusion, which is then defined.

In the second chapter, there will be a historical review in which first general and special education will be examined with regard to their respective developments - moving away from each other at the beginning and finally (at least theoretically) coming together again. Afterwards, an outstanding 'station' in the history of the inclusion discussion, the Salamanca Declaration of 1994, will play an important role. Of particular interest here will be how inclusion developed before and after this declaration and what intermediate steps were necessary. After the historical background has been clarified, the concept of inclusion will be distinguished from concepts that are often erroneously used synonymously, such as integration and common education (GU).

The third and thus, in terms of content, last chapter is, as already briefly mentioned above, dedicated to a look into the future. In addition to changes and developments that are coming to the school system, the role of the teacher and the role of the child in society are also presented here in relation to necessary further developments or changes. This chapter is the most important part of this thesis and has contributed the most to new insights for the author.

Concluding thoughts and a summary will reflect both this thesis and the insights gained by the author.

1. Explanation of terms

1.1 Education, educational equity and disadvantage

Under the heading 'Education' on the website of the Thuringian Ministry of Education, Science and Culture it is written: "With its diversity, the Thuringian school system offers the right school for every pupil" (TMBWKa). But shouldn't the (general) school be so diverse that it can offer the right thing for every pupil? First, however, it should be clarified what the terms 'education', 'educational equity' and 'educational injustice' encompass.

The Thuringian Education Plan for children up to ten years of age understands education as a process that begins at birth and lasts a lifetime (cf. TMBWKc, 14). It goes on to say:

Education denotes the process and the goal of the educational process: the development of a self-responsible and socially capable personality that finds itself in the world in personal, social and factual terms and deals with it (cf. ibid., 17).

However, education is initially dependent on upbringing, because only through education can a person succeed in "acquiring knowledge about and orientation within the culture [into which he or she is born]". However, education can be seen as the more comprehensive phenomenon that "represents and makes possible conscious and well-founded decision-making in the respective society, the respective culture" (ibid., 14) and thus places the child's own activity in the foreground. Education as the active engagement with the environment also represents an open and incomplete process. Open, because each child engages with the environment in his or her own way, and unfinishable, because throughout life, human beings have to fight out new confrontations with the world again and again, so the process does not have a definite end point. Education thus encompasses both the active acquisition of knowledge, the ability to link this knowledge to existing knowledge and to apply it in various contexts of action, as well as cultural and practical life skills, social and personal competences. These also include, for example, a sense of responsibility, self-confidence, a sense of values, attitudes and the ability to act in the respective context. Education can take place both in school (in lessons) and out of school (in museums, in open child and youth work, etc.) and thus extends through all areas of life. (cf. ibid., 14ff).

In principle, since the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, "everyone [...] has the right to education" (UN 1948, Art. 26) and in the UN Social Covenant of 1966, which Germany ratified in 1973 (cf. Beck; Degenhardt 2010, 58), it is stated in Article 13 that "'education must be directed to the full development of the human personality and of the consciousness of its dignity'" and further that every person must be enabled to "'play a useful role in a free society'" (ibid.). The Special Rapporteur on the right to education, Mr Vernor Muñoz, visited Germany in 2006 to examine how the right to education is implemented here, to what extent education is equitably accessible to all and what obstacles and shortcomings still exist. Above all, he criticises Germany's disparate education system, which is due to the fact that educational matters are decided at the state and not the federal level, and the multi-unit school system, which in his view reveals a clear connection between pupils' social or migration background and their educational results. Muñoz strongly criticises this selection and related discrimination and advises that the system be abolished in this way and that instead a school system be built "that better meets the specific learning needs of each individual student" (UN 2007, 2). He further stated that the classification systems to the individual school forms have a particularly negative impact on children with a migration background, children from disadvantaged social milieus and children with disabilities. Thus, for him, equitable access to education, i.e. educational justice, is not given and he therefore urges that equal and just educational opportunities must be guaranteed for every child, especially "for those who belong to the marginalised sector of the population" (ibid.), in order to be able to eliminate the existing educational disadvantages. For Muñoz, inequalities in education always mean social inequalities. (cf. ibid., 2ff).

1.2 Heterogeneity

Heterogeneity, derived from the Greek 'heterogenis' - different, different - means the diversity in the composition of quantities or groups (cf. Wortbedeutung.info). In the pedagogical context, heterogeneity refers to the difference of pupils within a learning group, whereby diversity can show itself in various characteristics. For example, pupils may differ in "age, gender, interests, expectations, motivation, ethnic, cultural and social background, social competence and psychological development, as well as in terms of their cognitive, emotional and physical performance" (Netzwerk Heterogenität). The German Education and Science Union (GEW) states the meaning of heterogeneity in the classroom as "All are different - All are equal". What is meant here is that while pupils may differ in the characteristics already mentioned above, they are also alike in their "equal entitlement to optimal development and support." This means not only "recognising and challenging all potentials" but also "compensating, mitigating and supporting weaknesses" (ibid.).

Karl Dieter Schuck says that as a prerequisite for heterogeneity in teaching, there must be an "internal differentiation" of the subject matter as well as of the teaching methods, which already results from the "diversity of the pupils and the expectation to achieve the learning goals of a grade level or a type of school with all pupils" (Schuck i.E., 9). Internal differentiation contrasts with organisational "external diefference" (ibid.) according to specific school forms. The German school system, with its far too early selection and external differentiation, tends to favour homogeneous learning groups, the performance advantages of which have not been confirmed in all recent studies (cf. ibid., 3ff).

Heterogeneity in the classroom, as the guiding principle of inclusion, requires teachers and all others involved to deal professionally with the diversity of pupils, which is "of the utmost importance for the academic success of [...] pupils, for the professional satisfaction of teachers, but also for the quality and equal opportunities of the school system as a whole" (Netzwerk Heterogenität).

1.3 Inclusion

Although there are countless definitions of inclusion, the most diverse authors seem to agree on one point: Time and again, the heterogeneity of classes, schools, indeed society, is placed at the centre. They insist that "disability [...] is only one aspect of the heterogeneity of pupils, alongside gender, ethnic, cultural, religious and social diversity" (Biewer 2009, 126). Furthermore, it is precisely the diversity of pupils that is the starting point of the school concept of inclusive schools and is even seen as positive, as an advantage for all.

Inclusion, derived from the English 'inclusion', requires the school system to change fundamentally in order to do justice to this diversity (cf. ibid.). Efforts towards a 'theory of diversity' and away from the 'two-group theory' are thus clearly coming to the fore here (cf. Schmidt; Dworschak 2011). Thus, not only the two categories of disabled and non-disabled should exist, but each child should contribute to the diversity of the group with all its individual needs, abilities and characteristics, which then consists of different majorities and minorities. Of course, these considerations do not only refer to the aspect of disability/non-disability, but can also be applied to other aspects of heterogeneity already mentioned above.

Now, on the one hand, there are "inclusion advocates who keep special pedagogical-therapeutic programmes (...) outside of joint teaching open as an option for disabled children and young people in mainstream classes" (Theunissen 2009, 220). These options would be particularly important for children with specific learning needs or severe behavioural problems. Theunissen refers here to the special value of the 'resource room with special education teacher' model, i.e., for example, individual lessons outside the class (cf. ibid.).

On the other hand, there is the 'Inclusive Schools Movement', which advocates the conviction of 'full inclusion' and instead advocates the "unrestricted inclusion of all disabled pupils in mainstream classes. [...] Through 'itinerant services' (e.g. 'mobile support teachers'), 'collaborative teaching model' (two-teacher system), 'peer-tutoring', 'special friends programmes', 'peer support networks' (classroom help and support by non-disabled classmates or voluntary trusted partners) as well as forms of 'cooperative learning' [the representatives of this direction] want to do without special help outside the general classroom" (ibid.). For them, any therapeutic or special educational support outside the classroom means a division into the two categories of disabled and non-disabled. In other words, those who need extra attention and those who can manage without it. Instead, the representatives demand that all children benefit from the extra attention in the joint lessons, as the above-mentioned examples make clear, and so it is no longer obvious for whom it was specifically or exclusively intended.

If one takes a look at the often quoted Salamanca Declaration of 1994, which was decisive for the upheaval in educational thinking and action, one finds probably the best definition of inclusive education. This fact is related to the fact that it was the Salamanca Declaration that both led to the worldwide dissemination of the term inclusion and contributed to the standardisation of the term, because there were (and still are) many different ideas on the content of this topic.

“The Inclusive School

The fundamental principal of the inclusive school is that all children should learn together, wherever possible, regardless of any difficulties or differences they may have. Inclusive schools must recognize and respond to the diverse needs of their students, accommodating both different styles and rates of learning and ensuring quality education to all through appropriate curricula, organizational arrangements, teaching strategies, resource use and partnerships with their communities. There should be a continuum of support and services to match the continuum of special needs encountered in every school." (Salamanca Framework for Action, 1994, paragraph 7)

In the German language version of 1996, translated by the Austrian UNESCO Commission, 'inclusion' was mistakenly translated as 'integration', which of course gives a different meaning to the concept and the statement. Possible changes in content or differences in meaning were not considered here and apparently "there was no awareness at the time that this translation might not accurately capture the facts" (Biewer 2009, 125). It was not until several years later that the content was reworked, in which 'inclusion' was then translated as 'inclusion' from the beginning (cf. ibid.).

The UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) Guidelines for Inclusion of 2005 can be seen as an extension of the Salamanca Declaration, which speaks primarily about children with special needs. The authors assume that children with disabilities are only one of many groups at risk of exclusion and marginalisation, alongside linguistic, religious or ethnic minorities, children living in poverty or children with a migration background (cf. UNESCO 2005, 11). In this respect, an inclusive school welcomes every child and ensures that all children benefit from teaching and being together in school, not only the previously excluded children.

The Enabling Education Network answers the question of what inclusive education is as follows: "[Inclusive education is] about changing the education system so that it is flexible enough to accommodate any learner [and not] about trying to change the learner so that he/she can fit more conveniently into an unchanged system" (EEN) (Fig. 1).

Figure 1: What is Inclusive Education? (cf. EEN 2012)

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

This statement clearly reflects the view that inclusive education has of the child. Inclusive practice is based on a systemic approach that seeks to explore and remove barriers, obstacles and difficulties in the system (school), rather than an individual-centred search for problems in the child itself.

How the concept of inclusion has developed and which 'stations' in history have led to this 'new' concept and understanding will be addressed in the next chapter.

[...]