Count me in: comparative perspectives of inclusion from India and England’ Dr. Chandrika Devarakonda University of Chester and Dr. Krishna Duhan Common.

Count me in: comparative perspectives of inclusion from India and England Dr. Chandrika Devarakonda University of Chester and Dr. Krishna Duhan Common Wealth Academic Fellow The Forum for Research into Equality and Diversity (FRED ) 1

Aim To explore the concept of inclusion To compare and contrast the perspectives of inclusion in India and England To raise awareness of historical and contemporary contexts of inclusion in India and England 2

Who excludes/includes Individual Institution Society Is it accepted ? Or expected ? 3

Journey of inclusion GlobalNationalSettingPersonal 4

Diverse how SES /background Culture Language /communication Ability Religion Ethnicity /race Practices Expectations Types of families Services needed 7

Who are not included reality check Marginalised groups - Disadvantaged families - Races - cultures - Gypsy Roma and Travellers families - Caste Political / social / religious contexts Lack of access Lack of facilities Attitudes stigma Quality of inclusion Values and stereotypes 8

Multiple perspectives Elusive concept (Ainscow, 1999; Ballard, 1999, Slee 2000) No universal definition (Florian, 1998) Who includes/ excludes whom (Sebba and Sachdev, 1997) Different interpretations (Florian 1998; Ainscow et al 2006) Global agenda (Pijl et al., 1997) Ongoing process (Ainscow 2005) 9

Concept of inclusion Armstrong, Armstrong, and Spandagou (2011) have argued that the origin and development of the concept of inclusive education is restricted to the North and its entry into the global agenda has been driven by international agencies Children with disabilities were placed in regular school so that they could study along with their nondisabled peers. 10

Continued---- elusive concept (Singal 2005, 332), statement of fashion (Hodkinson and Devarakonda 2009, 97), and a tendency to be politically correct by taking on current trends in the West without a real or common understanding of their meaning (Kalyanpur 2008, 247). 11

India Singal (2006) - there is a visible struggle for clarity Singal (2008) rationalises her disability focus in her study based on how inclusive education is understood in India. highlighted the ambiguity and confusion surrounding the concept in government policies and among government officials and practitioners (Singal 2006, 2008) integration and inclusion were used interchangeably as if they mean the same. 12

Relevance to Indian context Establishing the concept of inclusion Translating policy from global perspectives to practice Preparing teachers to identify diversity of needs and meet them All children and their families are respected for who they are 13

Policies - Global level Education for all Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of having every child complete primary school by 2015. Salamanca statement 14

Policies at national level India Indian Constitution (Part IX, Article 45)states : The state shall endeavour to provide, within a period of ten years from the commencement of this constitution, for free and compulsory education for all children until they complete the age of fourteen years. The constitution of India does not explicitly include children with disabilities in the provisions made for education, but Article 41 does mention people with disabilities and says in part the state shall within the limits of its economic development make effective provisions for securing the right to work, to education and to public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness, disablement and in other cases of undesired want Right to Education Act 2010 15

Continued-- Article 45 does rectify this by stating that free and compulsory education should be provided for ALL children until they complete the age of 14 The ALL is never specifically explained. But the most recent 93 rd amendment to the Indian Constitution passed in December 2001, affirms the Governments commitment to (EFA) or Education for ALL. In Sanskrit it is Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA). The preamble explicitly states that this includes children with disabilities. 16

Continued-- The Tenth Plan (2002-2007) aims to provide Universal Elementary Education by the end of the plan. It also aims to provide basic education for the un- reached segments and special groups. the groups included girls, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, working children, children with disabilities, urban deprived children, children from minority groups, children below poverty line, migratory children and in the hardest to reach groups. 17

RTE Act (2009) Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009. The implementation of this Act will be considered successful only if it addresses the issue of making the children of marginalized communities visible within the four walls of the classroom. Many of these children, across the country come from socially disadvantaged backgrounds, such as Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) communities; ethnic and religious minorities, economically weaker sections (EWS), migrant labourers, nomadic and de-notified tribes, urban poor, children with special needs (CWSN) and so on 18

Historical context (England) Journey began in 1960s when policies of segregation were questioned with in the context of civil rights movement. Birth of integrated system which was legitimised by the Warnock Report (DES,1978) and Education Act (DES, 1981) The term Inclusion became part of governmental rhetoric gaining status in schools. New Labour Govt swept to power on a tidal wave of equality rhetoric and a commitment to reform how children with SEN and disabilities were to be educated (Hodkinson, 2005) Inclusion became a political process and a key component of governmental planning (Corbett, 2001) Equality Act (2010) simplified 19

Contemporary context Warnock critiqued the ideological understanding behind inclusive education, instead of the simplistic ideal of including all children under the same roof, we should consider the ideal of including all children in the common enterprise of learning (2010, 1415) 20

England The intention of Mary Warnocks term special educational needs, coined in the UK in 1978, was to imply that any child, with an impairment or not, may have an individual educational need at some point in their school career (e.g. dyslexia, or language of instruction as a second language) which the teacher should adapt to. (Giffard-Lindsay, 2006). 21

Inclusion is not Not just children who are easy to work with, obliging, endearing, clean, pretty,, capable, but every child - respecting them for who they are, respecting their language, their culture, their history, their family, their abilities, their needs, their name, their ways and their very essence. (Nutbrown 1996, 54) 22

Challenges and dilemmas Diverse Interpretations Overwhelming Literature from Western perspectives Raise awareness among schools, media and community Attitudes towards children from diverse backgrounds Provide training and resources to update teachers knowledge and understanding 23

Conclusion No consistent interpretation of the concept of inclusion Inclusion is a priority in national policies, but does not reflect in practice at grass root level Diverse perspectives of inclusion due to the social, political and cultural contexts of the settings and the community 24

The emphasis should be on developing situational appropriate solutions, by adopting a pragmatic and strategic approach, embedded in the realities of India. Singal (to be published), promotes fluidity of spaces and value-free transition points between different educational settings. 25

Idealistic or realistic ? If inclusion is based primarily on ideological feeling, it may suffer the fate of most ideologies by running out of steam when social or political conditions and fashions change. We may wish to continue to promote it, we may even such is the power of fashion be stuck with it and be obliged to make it work as well as we can; but if we are to do it justice, we have also to clarify and evaluate it. Wilson.J (2000) Doing Justice to Inclusion, European Journal of Special Needs Education, Volume 15, Issue 3 October, pages 297 304 Wilson.J (2000) Doing Justice to Inclusion, European Journal of Special Needs Education153 26

References Armstrong, D., A. C. Armstrong, and I. Spandagou. 2011. Inclusion: By Choice or by Chance? International Journal of Inclusive Education 15 (1): 2939. Giffard-Lindsay, K. 2007. Inclusive Education in India: Interpretation, Implementation, and Issues. CREATE Pathways to Access Research Monograph No. 15. Brighton: CIE, University of Sussex. Hodkinson, A., and C. Devarakonda. 2009. Conceptions of Inclusion and Inclusive Education: A Critical Examination of the Perspectives and Practices of Teachers in India. Research in Education 82 (1): 8599. Kalyanpur, M. 2008. Equality, Quality and Quantity: Challenges in Inclusive Education Policy and Service Provision in India. International Journal of Inclusive Education 12 (3): 243262. MHRD. 2009b. Right to Education Act. http://mhrd.gov.in/acts_rules_SE MHRD. 2011. Sarva Shikshya Abhiyan. Framework for Implementation. Government of India.http://ssa.nic.in/page_portletlinks?foldernamessa- framework Balasundram.P (2005) The journey towards inclusive education in India, paper presented at SEISA UNIVERSITY ASHIBETSU SHI, HOKKAIDO, JAPAN, 9 th July 2005. 27

References Singal, N. 2005. Mapping the Field of Inclusive Education: A Review of the Indian Literature.International Journal of Inclusive Education 9 (4): 331350. Singal, N. 2006. Inclusive Education in India: International Concept, National. Interpretation.International Journal of Disability, Development and Education 53 (3): 351369. Singal, N. 2008. Working Towards Inclusion: Reflections from the Classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies 24 (6): 15161529. Taneja.S.J (2014) A critical and contextual approach to inclusive education: perspectives from an Indian context, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18: 12, 1219 -1236,DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2014.885594 UNESCO. 1994. The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Madrid: UNESCO/Ministry of Education and Science. Warnock, M. 2010. Special Educational Needs: A New Look. In Special Educational Needs: A New Look, edited by L. Terzi, 1146. London: Continuum International Pub. Group. 28

Any thoughts, comments or questions 29

Count me in: comparative perspectives of inclusion from India and England’ Dr. Chandrika Devarakonda University of Chester and Dr. Krishna Duhan Common.

Documents

concept of inclusion

india singal

constitution of india

elusive concept singal

concept of inclusive

global perspectives

government policies

practitioners singal