The Differences between Integration and Inclusion

―In integration, the child must make adjustments to the requirements of the school but, in inclusion it is the school that must make adjustments to accommodate or include the child‖ (Mushoriwa, 2001: p.142).

Any definition of inclusion needs clarification and a distinction must be made between it and integration, as integration has been used widely as a synonym for inclusion (Mittler, 2000). Indeed, some literature claims that the two terms are similar and the philosophy of the integration concept comes close to the concept of inclusion (Pijl et al., 1997). Some educators, when comparing the concepts of integration and inclusion, highlight the position of special educational needs in their definitions. For example, Jenkinson (1997) and Thomazet (2009) both maintain that in integrated school children with special educational needs attend a special class for part of the day, while for the rest of the day they are with their peers in the regular class, whereas in an inclusive school, children with special educational needs are with their peers in the regular classes all day. In addition, some authors differentiate between the concepts of integration and inclusion in terms of practice; for example, Vislie (2003) states that the concept of integration refers to the rights of children with special educational needs to study in the local school, while inclusion is a broad term, as inclusive schools take into consideration the requirements of all children, which consequently leads to changing curricula in order to provide a service for all children.

Thus, inclusive schools are meant to be effective and suitable for all children without exception. Loreman et al. (2005) distinguish between integration and inclusion by stating that in an integrated school, the children with special educational needs come to

79

all classes attached to the school and the schools help them to achieve harmony with the school environment, while in an inclusive school, pupils are part and parcel of the school system from the beginning.

Phadraig (2007) compares integration and inclusion by stating that pupils in an integrated school environment try to follow the school curriculum as far as possible, while in the inclusive school environment the curriculum, learning method and the school environment itself are flexible in order to accommodate all children. Mittler (2000) confirms this idea, asserting that the difference between integration and inclusion lies in the school curricula, which extends to include evaluation and teaching methods, such as cooperative learning method that can apply to teach students with disabilities (Schmidt and Harriman, 1998). Hence, all children are welcome in these schools. In the case of integration, it is not necessary that schools make changes to accommodate diversity among children, as those children study in classes specifically for them within the school. This is confirmed by Sommefeldt (2001: p.157) – in the past integrated students had to ―fit the dominant mould‖, and ―prove their suitability for normal

schooling, rather than schools having to adapt to meet their needs‖. Ainscow et al.

(2006) objected to the additional arrangements involved in integration and held that inclusive education involves the need to restructure the school to fit the needs of all students. Researchers agree that ―inclusion requires a wide array of school-wide

modifications to succeed‖ (Zollers et al., 1999: p.162).

Generally, researchers agree that the inclusive school has been exposed to change and development (Ainscow and Sandill, 2010). One positive aspect of inclusion is that support comes from the entire school community and this is beneficial for all children without exception, not only children with special educational needs. Udvari-Solner and Thousand (1995: p.147) propose that: ―inclusive education is seen as a process of

operating a classroom or school as a supportive community. Thus, it is different from integration and mainstreaming which focus upon how to help a particular category of students ... [to] fit into the mainstream‖. Villa and Thousand (2005) believe that

heterogeneity among the children in school is beneficial and meets the unique requirements for each child.

80

In comparing these various approaches to inclusion and integration, it is important to remember that inclusion is defined differently within each country, and sometimes differences in definition even exist within countries. Therefore, the process of reaching scholarly agreement is complex (Hodkinson and Devarakonda, 2009). In addition, the question of which approach is suitable for a particular child is complex. For any child, educators ought to look at their individual needs before making a plan for their education, and there might well be some children whose needs would be best served in an integrated rather than fully ‗inclusive‘ setting. Arguably, it is preferable that different educational choices exist on a continuum, with the focus being on the needs and wishes of the child and their family. For example, Down‘s syndrome is not very different from other special educational needs, so in some cases inclusion will be the best option for a child with Down‘s syndrome, whereas in other cases, integration or special schools may be more suitable.

Based on the evidence above, it is proposed that there are several differences between integration and inclusion. Integration calls for overcoming the problem of separating students from society, and, therefore, it encourages pupils to study in the local district school but be put in special classes. In contrast, inclusion upholds the right of all pupils to join the local school in the same way as their peers without discrimination, to establish the principle of justice. This involves the provision of requirements for success, such as modifying teaching methods, curricula, evaluation and so forth so that an equal service is provided to all children. Finally, children‘s attendance at a mainstream school is the key to their inclusion in the wide society. This viewpoint surrounding inclusive education rests on the social model, which is centred on the perspective that both society and school need to eradicate all limitations in the educational and societal domain that could result in special needs students‘ isolation (Villa and Thousand, 2005; Oliver, 2009).