An international perspective on the movement to inclusive education

education systems in the more affluent countries had established separate systems for learners with special needs and disabilities and those without these challenges. Segregated special schools thus catered for learners with special needs and disabilities. In many incidences, there were different schools for different disabilities, such as schools for the blind, the hard of hearing, the deaf and learners with intellectual disabilities. The rationale for these schools was that these learners would benefit from placement in separate settings. In many countries, special and mainstream educational institutions were governed by separate legislation and administrated separately. Special needs education was sometimes governed by legislation pertaining to health or social services rather than educational legislation. In many countries, provision for diverse learning abilities and needs was based on a process of assessment according to the medical model, which led to learners being labelled, categorised and segregated according to disabilities (Grenot-Scheyer, Bishop, Jubala & Coots et al., 1996).

Gradually, a strong movement towards educating learners with diverse learning needs in mainstream schools and classrooms surfaced in different countries (including South Africa), and inclusive education can currently be considered a global initiative (Taylor, 2001; Green & Engelbrecht, 2007). The international movement to inclusive education will first be discussed briefly, before returning to the South African context.

2.4.2

An international perspective on the movement to inclusive

education

Previously, the practice was to exclude any learner who was perceived to be different from standards set for from mainstream schools and classrooms. These learners were accommodated in special education, which developed as a separate system parallel to mainstream education in most developed countries (Green & Engelbrecht, 2007).

The inclusive education movement also originated from developed and more affluent countries such as the Scandinavian countries, the USA and the United Kingdom (Engelbrecht, Green, Naicker and Engelbrecht, 1999). During the 1960s, the separation of learners with diverse learning abilities from mainstream education was questioned

and led to a gradual inclusion of these learners in mainstream schools and classrooms. In the 1970s, countries like the USA and the United Kingdom followed suit and the trend of integrating learners with diverse learning abilities increased. During the 1990s, less affluent countries such as South Africa and Lesotho also developed more inclusive education initiatives.

On a global level, standards were set by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948) and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Article 28 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, United Nations, 1989), which emphasised education as a basic right of all children (Mittler, 2005).

When discussing the movement to inclusive education, it is important to consider the difference between mainstreaming on the one hand and integration and inclusive education on the other hand. Kapp (2001) defines mainstreaming as an approach that arose from the principle of normalisation that was developed in Scandinavian countries and were met by a positive response from most Western countries. Farrell (2000) contends that mainstreaming was the response of the USA to normalisation, whereas European countries employed the notion of integration. In both cases, it refers to placing learners with special educational needs in mainstream schools.

To a large extent, mainstreaming and integration are based on the medical model that locates the problem in the individual learner and requires the learner to adapt to the structures and practices of the school without the necessary support (Grenot-Scheyer et

al., 1996: Swart & Pettipher, 2005; Green & Engelbrecht, 2007). The social perspective on difference and disability, fundamental to inclusive education and inclusive schools and classrooms, represents a sharp departure from the medical model, as it does not view disability as a problem located in the individual but as a dimension of human difference. The diversity perspective as used by Green and Engelbrecht (2007) highlights a different way of thinking about the education system and schools. Inclusive education expects of education systems to make provision to protect the right of all learners, irrespective of different abilities and disabilities, and of schools to make the

necessary adaptations in order to accommodate all learners. Thus, the emphasis is on schools to change to be able to accommodate all learners with or without disabilities (Grenot-Scheyer et al., 1996; Barton, 1998; Swart & Pettipher, 2005).

Barton (1998) contends that the segregated special education system is currently regarded as part of an oppressive social system through which people with disabilities are excluded from participation in society. Inclusion expects society to facilitate the acceptance of those who are different. Inclusive education wants to improve the education system for all learners, for example by adapting the curriculum and teaching approaches to be able to accommodate all learners (Grenot-Scheyer et al., 1996; Swart & Pettipher, 2005).

UNESCO, the UN Development and the World Bank organized a conference in Jomtien as an initiative for Education for All (Mittler, 2000). The World Conference on Education for All held in Jomtien, Thailand, pointed out that many children in the world do not have access to quality education, and this was particularly the case as far as learners with disabilities were concerned. By 2000, the majority of the world's heads of state and education ministers made a commitment to the goals set by the education for all initiative.

In addition, the Salamanca Statement compiled at the Salamanca Conference in 1994 shaped the agenda for inclusive education by emphasising a call for inclusion of the world's children in restructured educational contexts. Representatives from 92 governments and 25 international organisations affirmed their commitment to the goals of education for all, recognising the necessity of providing education to children, youths and adults with diverse learning needs in the mainstream education system (UNESCO, 1994). UNESCO is currently active in the field of educational cooperation and aid, which enables the development of strategies in the provision of education for all. Education systems in all countries should ensure that all children should have access to free and compulsory education of quality by 2015 (UNESCO, 2000).

Green and Engelbrecht (2007) argue that the increased learner diversity in education places a responsibility on education systems worldwide to identify and address a wide

range of barriers to learning effectively. The fundamental principle of inclusive education is that all children should learn together whenever possible, regardless of differences they may have (UNESCO, 1994). In supporting this notion, all children are to be enrolled in mainstream schools, unless there are compelling reasons for doing otherwise. Inclusion in education is concerned with the well-being of all children. Sands, Kozleski and French (2000) view inclusive education as a process and outcome of social justice, equity and democracy in the education system. Inclusive education wants to ensure that those affected by chronic illnesses and disabilities, as well as those experiencing other barriers to learning such as poverty and inequality, can work and learn together with their peers in a caring school environment that respects the safety and human rights of all.

Among others, the international movement to inclusive education influenced the movement to a more inclusive education approach in South Africa (Swart & Pettipher, 2005). In the next section, the South African movement to and perspective on inclusive education will be discussed.