ETH302S Summary of all 5 chapters
written by
kfjellvik
The study-notes marketplace
Buy and sell all your summaries, notes, theses, essays, papers, cases, manuals, researches, and
many more...
www.stuvia.co.za
Downloaded by: hilde8620 | hilde8620@gmail.com
Distribution of this document is illegal
, Stuvia.com - The study-notes marketplace
Chapter 1: A framework understanding Inclusion
1.1 Introduction
Inclusion is a complex, multidimensional and controversial concept.
1.2 What is inclusion?
Inclusion has become something of an international and national buzzword and this is evident when
reading policy documents, media statements and newspapers. The broad principles common
between definitions of inclusion are:
Dedication to building a more democratic society
More equitable & quality orientated educational system
Belief that extends the responsibility of regular schools to accommodate the diverse learning
needs of all learners
In a wider sense inclusion is about:
About developing inclusive community & education systems
Based on a value system that invites and celebrates difference & diversity; diversity includes
gender, nationality, race, language, socio-economic background, cultural origin, level of
educational achievement & disability
Inclusion about ensuring the access, active participation, success of everyone: children and their
families, teachers, principals, education support staff and members of the community. Inclusion is
the expression of individual human rights & social justice. Inclusion is a worldwide movement with a
global agenda.
1.3 Inclusion in an international context
1.3.1 Changing paradigms
Schools do not function in isolation, but are influenced by social, political and economic
developments. What happens in schools is a reflection of the developments and changes in society.
Societies are going through fundamental changes as they go through from industrial to
informational and from national to international societies. Traditional conventions of schools and
classrooms are rapidly becoming outdated as the educational, social and political needs of society
continually change. Throughout history, changes in society are frequently paralleled with alternative
ways of thinking, or new paradigms about human nature. The Medical model and the socio-
ecological model are two of the most prominent paradigms related to disability and educational
support.
1.3.2 The medical deficit model
In the early 1970’s, a rapid paradigm shift occurred from a medical deficit model (within-child
model) to a social systems change approach. Professionals used these models to direct beliefs and
ideas which they demonstrated in their methods, behaviour and conversations. While inclusion is
Downloaded by: hilde8620 | hilde8620@gmail.com
Distribution of this document is illegal
, Stuvia.com - The study-notes marketplace
very prominent in educational today, the medical deficit model is still frequently used. The medical
deficit model is ultimately a model of diagnosis and treatment.
When applying this model in the field of education, children with any type of difference or more
specific disability are singled out. The professionals supporting this view tend to follow the "find-
what's-wrong-and-cure-it" paradigm. This implies that a thorough assessment of the child's
strengths and weaknesses needs to be conducted. Where possible, a diagnosis is made for
placement in a specialised environment and, inevitably, categorisation and labelling. In the previous
segregated education system such labels determined the type of special school, class or form of
"remedial attention" the learners and their families required. Thus learners who did not "fit into" the
existing education programme were often moved to special schools or classes, in order to "fix" them
and alleviate their differences. Such education aimed to offer the learner a special curriculum and
interventions by specialist staff or experts that were aimed at removing or alleviating the
deficiencies from within the child.
Although the medical deficit model was criticised, it is still part of the general consciousness of
almost everyone who works in education. It is deeply ingrained into the thinking of generations of
teachers, families, professionals and legislators and is not going to change rapidly, even though it is
argued that it is discriminatory and limiting. Traces of the medical deficit model are still evident in
educational and psychological policy, practice and attitudes today. However, the medical model of
thinking and doing should not be confused with medical information that is necessary to understand
Continuum
Medical deficit model Social-ecological model
Intention Exclusion Inclusion
Assessment Individual, neurological, physical and biological Environment, systems and
processes subsystems, individual,
proximal processes,
transactional approach, risk
factors, protective factors
Actions Managing or changing the child Changing systems
“fixing” the child to “fit in” – rehabilitation, Developing different systems to
medication support the child
Interventions predominantly by specialist personnel Collaboration between all role
Special placement based on labels players, including specialist
personnel
Ordinary schools (in SA also
full-service schools, special
schools)
Strengthening of proximal
processes
Discourses Medical deficit, individualistic, personal tragedy Social-critical, social
oppression, rights-based,
bioecological, resilience
Power Systems and professionals Families, learners, school and
district-based support teams
Critics propose a more
balanced approach that
considers the interaction
between the person and the
environment
Downloaded by: hilde8620 | hilde8620@gmail.com
Distribution of this document is illegal
, Stuvia.com - The study-notes marketplace
health, illness and disability in order to plan intervention and prevention.
1.3.3 The social-ecological model
Criticism of the medical deficit model has led to more social and ecological theoretical models. It
became increasingly evident that a paradigm shift was required that involved a refocusing away
from the "specialness" of learners and the "special" forms of provision they were seen to "need",
towards the removal of stumbling blocks within society and the participation of all people.
A shift in paradigm became visible when normalisation was introduced in Western societies the idea
of normalisation came to the fore in the late 1960s. Normalisation shows the ideal that all people
with disabilities should enjoy "patterns and conditions of everyday living which are as close as
possible to the mainstream of society. This means that people with "handicaps" have the right and
freedom to a "normal’ daily routine, which involves "normal" school and home circumstances,
"normal" jobs, and "normal" economic and environmental standards. This normalisation philosophy
was in direct conflict with the earlier practice of separate schools, and soon gave rise first to
mainstreaming and then to integration policies.
The terms mainstreaming and integration are the forerunners of inclusion and often used
interchangeable in the literature. However, they do not mean the same thing and while they are
closely related.
Differences between mainstreaming and integration
Mainstreaming is generally described as the Integration relies heavily on social and
educational equivalent of the normalisation political discourse. Humanitarian and civil
principle, which suggests that people with rights issues originally drove policies leading
disabilities have a right to life experiences that are to integration. The goal of integration is to
the same as, or similar to, those of anyone else in ensure that learners with disabilities are
society. The goal of mainstreaming was to return assigned equal membership in the
learners with disabilities to the mainstream of community. Integration aims to maximise the
education as much as possible, alongside normally social interactions between the "disabled"
developing peers. Learners needed to prove their and the "non-disabled". However, since the
readiness to "fit into" the mainstream. Supporters concept of integration did not specify what
of mainstreaming therefore assumed that a learner exactly was to be done instead of exclusion
must "earn" the opportunity to be mainstreamed by and segregation, many different
demonstrating the ability to "keep up" with the interpretations and examples resulted. A
work assigned to other learners in the class. further aspect that differentiated main-
Mainstreaming maintained and reinforced the streaming from integration was that in
medical discourse with its focus on the problem integration these special services followed
within the individual and about disability as the learner to the regular school. However,
different and in need of repair in order to "fit in". only a limited number of additional
This model has been heavily criticised in the past for provisions were made and the onus was still
not providing learners with sufficient support to on the learner to "fit in".
benefit from regular education. Among others it has
been referred to as "mainstream dumping", "dump-
and-hope" or "mainstreaming by default"
Downloaded by: hilde8620 | hilde8620@gmail.com
Distribution of this document is illegal
