The main problems regarding inclusion 1 Type of special educational needs

There is consensus among practitioners that pupils who present the greatest challenge as regards inclusion in mainstream classrooms are those with emotional and behavioural difficulties. This is the area of greatest pressure on places in segregated provision and where new special schools and units are opening. There are three strands to the issue.

First, teachers are mindful of their responsibility to all pupils in the group and reluctant to maintain a pupil within a teaching group if that pupil, despite support, is disrupting the learning of all the other pupils. Secondly, teachers are often concerned that their own skills are inadequate to meet the needs of pupils with severe emotional and behavioural difficulties and are loath to take responsibility for a pupil unless there is adequate support. Thirdly, there may be a lack of resources available in mainstream schools to provide adequate support for pupils with severe emotional and behavioural needs. These issues can be related to the management and organization of support services for emotional and behavioural difficulties. Some of these support services work directly with pupils but, more often, they work on whole-school strategies.

There is a reported increase in the severity of the emotional and behavioural difficulties with which pupils are presenting in schools. This is exacerbated in some areas – for example, the London boroughs – by the particular needs of asylum seekers and children traumatized by events in their own countries experiencing civil war as well as being isolated by language barriers.

There is concern that there is a group of pupils with mental health difficulties whose needs are not being addressed and who cannot be touched by educational interventions on their own: here, there is a need for effective interagency collaboration to support any educational initiative.

Disaffection is a considerable issue in the UK and a key element in the government’s social inclusion programme; pupils in the primary phase are also identified within this group. There is an extensive literature on strategies and approaches to address disaffection. Many approaches seek learning opportunities outside the ordinary classroom, in recognition of the fact that, particularly in the last two years of statutory schooling (ages 14–16), the needs of

disaffected young people are best met by innovative approaches. However, some schools which are taking initiatives as regards provision for disaffected pupils are scrutinizing their curriculum with regard to the way it has failed these pupils and there is evidence that this is having a downward effect on the curriculum (Cullen and Fletcher-Campbell, 2000) and may, in the future, reduce the number of young people becoming alienated from education.

The other main group of pupils for whom inclusion is difficult throughout the UK, with notable exceptions, is those with autistic spectrum disorders. This is largely because there is sufficient awareness for teachers to know that these children need a highly specialized pedagogy and, certainly in the early years, a substantial input of one-to-one attention, yet insufficient training and, often, insufficient resources, for there to be expertise available for these pupils in mainstream classrooms. Examples of good practice are available, albeit rare, and highlight the fact that it is not so much inclusion per se that is the critical factor but the provision of specialist support. For example, in a recent survey conducted by the National Autistic Society (Barnard, Prior and Potter, 2000), it was found that parental satisfaction did not relate to the mainstream/special school factor: parents of pupils in non-specialist special schools were less likely to be positive about their child’s education than were parents of pupils placed in specialist special schools and in mainstream placements with specialist support.

5.16.4.2 The educational climate and demands on the teaching profession

Teachers are, generally, reporting an increasingly heavy workload as they respond to various government initiatives aimed at raising standards of achievement for all pupils. This results in less time, energy and inclination for ‘extra’ activities. The negotiations, preparation and collaboration necessary for successful inclusion falls into the category of ‘extra’ activities unless it is securely embedded within a school culture and expectations. This is not a comment just on attitudes to inclusion: there is evidence, for example, that teachers are not so keen to seek promotion by taking on additional management responsibilities for which there may be minimal allowances in terms of financial remuneration and non-contact time.

Furthermore, in some schools, there may be a reluctance to offer places to pupils who are considered ‘hard to teach’ as these pupils may lower aggregate assessment scores and lead to less favourable overall school standards of performance.

5.16.4.3 Conceptual difficulties

The situation regarding inclusion in the UK is exacerbated by conceptual difficulties. These are, probably, shared to some degree with other countries. For example, there is insufficient consideration to whether schools should, per se and inevitably, be inclusive or whether schools should prepare young people to be able to make an effective transition to society and be able to participate and be included within that society for the rest of their lives, even if this means a period of segregated education during statutory schooling.

Little attention is given to pupil preferences and the way in which they can make significant contributions to school communities and gain self-esteem and confidence within different environments: some young people may prefer a small (special) school rather than be one of many in a large comprehensive school – this, of course, applies equally to pupils with and without learning difficulties. It is a largely unresearched issue.

Finally, there are limits to the concept of ‘inclusion’ (see Wilson, 1999 and 2000). There are hard and often ostensibly unpalatable issues but, unless they are faced, ‘inclusion’ may

continue to evade the grasp of practitioners and policy-makers. The UK research documents are presented in Appendix N.