• No results found

1.10. Structure of the Thesis

2.3.3. The Education of children with Down‘s syndrome

2.3.3.2. Mainstream Schools

2.3.3.2.1. Integration

―… diversity is assumed, welcomed and viewed as a rich resource rather than seen as a problem‖ (Booth et al.,

2003: p.2).

The idea of integration was generated from anxiety about the effects on children with special educational needs of learning in special schools in isolation from their peers studying in the mainstream system. Stephens et al. (1988) define integration as:

―the process of educational decision-making and planning for students with a handicapping condition in the least restrictive environment. It is based on the philosophy of equal educational opportunity that is implemented through individual planning to promote appropriate learning, achievement, and social normalization‖ (p.12).

The above definition implies that the education of students with special educational needs in mainstream education is a requirement for a ―least restrictive environment‖, which takes into account the needs of these pupils. According to Hodkinson and Devarakonda (2009), the term ―least restrictive environment‖ is widely used to denote children with special educational needs learning with their peers as far as possible, to avoid their exclusion, unless they cannot keep up with learning effectively in the classes

73

assigned for them inside the mainstream school. The Ministry of Education of a country is responsible for providing specialist teachers for children with special educational needs. The policies and legislation of some countries confirm this idea. For example, British legislation provides that children with special educational needs should be put in mainstream schools if the student can receive the learning that he/she requires, on the condition that it will not affect the learning of the other children (Mittler, 2000). It is noted from this legislation that it includes the condition of not affecting the other children‘s education, thus prioritising their rights over those of special educational needs in participation and learning.

It can be concluded from the literature reviewed above that there is widespread agreement among researchers that children with special educational needs have the right to join mainstream schools. The salient idea here is that access to mainstream schools will lead to improved academic results for children with special educational needs and also to greater social acceptance by their peers. This can be seen in schools when peers build friendships with children with special educational needs, which will consequently lead to their peers developing more understanding of their abilities, although such friendships can sometimes be difficult to achieve (Almalq, 2004). Moreover, the children with special educational needs imitate other children in the mainstream school, which is likely to have a positive impact on their academic achievements (Alkalifa, 2002). For example, students with speech difficulties can hear how their peers speak and this may lead to the development of their own speech by imitation (Jenkinson, 1997). This concept of integration is totally removed from the concept advocated by many academics and practitioners, which is that the school adapts to the requirements of every child and not the opposite. Integration tends to be primarily a question of geography, whereas inclusion requires the school to change in a more fundamental way. For example, Jenkinson (1997) argues that generally, in spite of children with special educational needs benefitting socially from integration, it appears to be an indication of difference among students that some children with special educational needs study in a separate class to their peers. Jenkinson (1997) asserts that schools try to minimise disturbance in regular classes by putting children with special educational needs in

74

separate classes. There have been tentative attempts in some schools to modify integration, with children with special educational needs sharing a part of the school day with their peers and spending the remainder of the school day in their special classes to complete their school programme (Thomazet, 2009).

According to Zollers et al. (1999), in practice, this results in children with special educational needs receiving a poorer quality of education. Arguably, integration is linked with the medical model of disability, with difficulties seen as inherent in the children, who therefore need to be educated separately. Children with disabilities are therefore still excluded from the school classroom.

In contrast, Pijl et al. (1997) argue that integration should not be about where to put the child or the standards of behaviour required to enter education, but that schools should be provided with the necessities to meet the requirements of students joining them, without exception.

2.3.3.2.2. Inclusion

―... education, as we conceive it, is a good, and a specifically human good, to which all human beings are entitled. There exists, therefore, a clear obligation to educate the most severely disabled for no other reason than that they are human‖ (Warnock, 1978: p.6).

Integration has been criticised by a number of leading educators, who called for the complete involvement of children with special educational needs with their peers in mainstream schools and for them to be granted more equal opportunities so that they can benefit academically and socially (Eldar et al., 2010). In fact, inclusion is an international movement calling for the education of all children within regular classes without making distinctions among them (Ballard, 2003). At the Salamanca Conference in 1994 it was suggested that:

―…schools should accommodate all children, regardless of their physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic or other conditions‖ (United Nations Educational, Scientific

75

However, schools should not be interested only in increasing the number of disabled students in the school while ignoring their participation in the educational process (Ainscow et al., 2006). The Salamanca statement called for the necessity of preparing mainstream schools to accept children with special educational needs in all countries in the world. Thus, it encourages countries to adopt the idea of inclusive education (Ainscow et al., 2006). This development needs to be part of a complete educational strategy in order to implement major reforms in mainstream schools (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO, 1994). Therefore, inclusive education supports calls for children to attend the local school (Ainscow et al., 2006). Based on the above, it is proposed that the main purpose of inclusion is to educate children with special educational needs in mainstream schools, based upon the right of every child to study with his/her peers without differentiation or discrimination. Moreover, there is a consensus among academics that inclusion for special educational needs was one of the major movements in reforming schools in the 1990s (Slavin, 1997).

According to Lipsky and Gartner (1999), inclusive education has educational benefits for children with special educational needs and their peers, as this education enjoys a unified system that meets the requirements of a changeable society. Lipsky and Gartner (1999) also held inclusive education to be ―a system that provides quality education for

all children‖ (p.15). Overall, inclusive education, seeks justice and excellence for all

students (Farrell, 2001). Further, Al-Habdan (2001) argued that the role of the parents in educating their children with special educational needs to remain a key feature in the development of inclusion, while Villa and Thousand (2005), noted the importance of inclusive schools and parents appreciating one another‘s inputs and having mutual respect. This is in order to promote a sense of belonging, which is one of the important principles of inclusive school (Miller and Katz, 2002). For instance, in practice, successfully applying inclusive education for those with Down‘s syndrome relies, inter alia, on the number of knowledge, skills, positivity, and experiences of parents, teachers and principals, which play a critical role in ensuring inclusive educational practices are successful (Norwich, 2013).

76

The issue of inclusion is a complex one. Some authors (for example, Wilson, 2000) have argued that inclusion for all children poses a threat to other children‘s rights as the provision of the requirements of a minority of pupils is at the expense of the majority. In addition, Farrell (2001) argued that empirical evidence must be relied on to develop education for all learners, including those with special educational needs. It seems that the transition to inclusive education for children with learning difficulties was slower than for other disabled children with sensory or physical disabilities (Thomson et al., 1990). However, another study suggests that the transition to secondary school is the point at which the inclusion of children with special educational needs in school breaks down (Jenkins et al., 1994).

Hence, it can be said that welcoming and supporting every child is the distinguishing and main characteristic of the inclusive school (Knight, 1999). The main component of inclusive education is the respect of the teacher for the children and their families. This means that graduates who join the teaching profession need to be aware that their classes should be conducted with respect, taking into account social justice issues (Ballard, 2003). The definition of inclusion in the UK by the DfEE focuses on the social side of inclusion in terms of the involvement of all students in the school curriculum and the social life in the mainstream school, with the aim of extending this beyond their leaving school (Department for Education and Employment, DfEE, 1998). The question of how to define inclusive education has been widely debated amongst scholars, but it is generally agreed that inclusive education has both social and educational benefits for students. Inclusive education was defined by Stainback and Stainback (1990) thus: ―…

everyone belongs, is accepted, supports, and is supported by his or her peers and other members of the school community in the course of having his or her educational needs met‖ (p.3).

A point of disagreement is the question of who the concept of ‗inclusive education‘ primarily applies to. For example, Booth and Ainscow (1998) commenting on the tendency of some authors to relate inclusion to Special Educational Needs, stated that

―some people continue to think of ‗inclusive education‘ as a new name for ‗special education‘ and limit their concern to students who are categorised as having ‗special

77

educational needs‘ because they are identified as low in attainment, deviant in behaviour or as disabled‖ (p.3). Educators have also suggested the concept of an

inclusive school as including those educational systems that are offered for children with special educational needs or their peers, for their development academically and socially (Laws et al., 2000).

In fact, Kibria (2005) defines inclusion as ―the policy of placing children with

disabilities in general education classrooms for instruction, with appropriate supports to meet their educational needs‖ (p.43). Kibria‘s (2005) article clearly focuses on inclusion

for children with disabilities, while ignoring other excluded children, such as children living in poor countries and even those from nomadic families, and thus the definition is limited in its scope.

However, ―inclusion should go even further, and schools should engage all families and

the community as well as all children, seeking effective intergenerational learning across the lifespan, which might occur inside schools or outside or through a combination of these‖ (Topping and Maloney, 2005: p.5). In that respect Booth et al.

(2006) argue that the term ‗inclusion‘ is:

as ―concerned with the participation of practitioners as

with the involvement of children and young people. Participation implies playing, learning, and working in collaboration with others. It involves making choices about, and having a say in, what we do. More deeply, it is about being recognised, accepted and valued for ourselves‖ (p.3).

This definition takes a broad view of the principle of inclusion, which is not confined to particular groups or activities, but is an attitude of valuing diversity. Accordingly, educators‘ attention has been diverted from providing special educational requirements for special categories to promoting the concept of education for all, so that all children benefit from education (Ainscow and Sandill, 2010).

Finally, Farrell (2001) suggests that inclusion has become more acceptable as the idea that everybody has equal access to education is becoming more mainstream. A number

78

of studies have focused on an inclusive direction in the development of practices in the classroom (Ainscow and Sandill, 2010). Other researchers have focused on the development of schools (Booth and Ainscow, 2002). Ainscow et al. (2006) and others have focused on teacher development. In this regard, Ainscow et al. (2006) indicate that change to inclusion takes time because it necessities significant changes in all countries.