Youth Rising: Centering Youth Voice in the Quest for Equitable and Inclusive Schools. Equity by Design (original) (raw)
Related papers
Publisher: Klinkhardt; In book: Facetten inklusiver Bildung, 2019
Across the globe inclusive education has become a movement that stands for the advancement of quality schooling and access for all learners (Löser & Werning, 2011; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2017). Specifically, inclusive education aims to transform school cultures to "(1) increase access (or presence) of all students, (2) enhance school personnel's and student's acceptance of all students, (3) maximize student participation in various domains of activity, and (4) increase the achievement of all students" (Artiles, Kozleski, Dorn & Christensen, 2006, p. 67). Currently, however, policy guidelines, particularly in the U.S., narrowly focus on how many students are placed in general education settings, with little attention given to what students are learning and who the students are in terms of their racial, linguistic, gender, and economic backgrounds-indeed, inclusive education has been largely colorblind. Moreover, the literature rarely addresses how inclusive education policies and practices engage "the conflation of race and ability, the attendant stigmatization of racialized forms of disability, and the ways in which the body becomes the site where these historically charged difference markers intersect to perpetuate the marginalization of particular segments of the US student population" (Artiles, Kozleski & González, 2011, p. 3).
In book: Facetten inklusiver Bildung, Publisher: Klinkhardt, 2019
Across the globe inclusive education has become a movement that stands for the advancement of quality schooling and access for all learners (Löser & Werning, 2011; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2017). Specifically, inclusive education aims to transform school cultures to "(1) increase access (or presence) of all students, (2) enhance school personnel's and student's acceptance of all students, (3) maximize student participation in various domains of activity, and (4) increase the achievement of all students" (Artiles, Kozleski, Dorn & Christensen, 2006, p. 67). Currently, however, policy guidelines, particularly in the U.S., narrowly focus on how many students are placed in general education settings, with little attention given to what students are learning and who the students are in terms of their racial, linguistic, gender, and economic backgrounds-indeed, inclusive education has been largely colorblind. Moreover, the literature rarely addresses how inclusive education policies and practices engage "the conflation of race and ability, the attendant stigmatization of racialized forms of disability, and the ways in which the body becomes the site where these historically charged difference markers intersect to perpetuate the marginalization of particular segments of the US student population" (Artiles, Kozleski & González, 2011, p. 3).
2019
Across the globe inclusive education has become a movement that stands for the advancement of quality schooling and access for all learners (Löser & Werning, 2011; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2017). Specifically, inclusive education aims to transform school cultures to "(1) increase access (or presence) of all students, (2) enhance school personnel's and student's acceptance of all students, (3) maximize student participation in various domains of activity, and (4) increase the achievement of all students" (Artiles, Kozleski, Dorn & Christensen, 2006, p. 67). Currently, however, policy guidelines, particularly in the U.S., narrowly focus on how many students are placed in general education settings, with little attention given to what students are learning and who the students are in terms of their racial, linguistic, gender, and economic backgrounds-indeed, inclusive education has been largely colorblind. Moreover, the literature rarely addresses how inclusive education policies and practices engage "the conflation of race and ability, the attendant stigmatization of racialized forms of disability, and the ways in which the body becomes the site where these historically charged difference markers intersect to perpetuate the marginalization of particular segments of the US student population" (Artiles, Kozleski & González, 2011, p. 3).
STUDIES IN INCLUSIVE EDUCATION Volume 25 Series Editor
Scope This series addresses the many different forms of exclusion that occur in schooling across a range of international contexts and considers strategies for increasing the inclusion and success of all students. In many school jurisdictions the most reliable predictors of educational failure include poverty, Aboriginality and disability. Traditionally schools have not been pressed to deal with exclusion and failure. Failing students were blamed for their lack of attainment and were either placed in segregated educational settings or encouraged to leave and enter the unskilled labour market. The crisis in the labor market and the call by parents for the inclusion of their children in their neighborhood school has made visible the failure of schools to include all children. Drawing from a range of researchers and educators from around the world, Studies in Inclusive Education will demonstrate the ways in which schools contribute to the failure of different student identities on the basis of gender, race, language, sexuality, disability, socioeconomic status and geographic isolation. This series differs from existing work in inclusive education by expanding the focus from a narrow consideration of what has been traditionally referred to as special educational needs to understand school failure and exclusion in all its forms. Moreover, the series will consider exclusion and inclusion across all sectors
Inclusive Education: Meaning, Concept & Objectives
JETIR, 2023
Inclusive education means all children in the same classrooms, in the same schools. It means real learning opportunities for groups who have traditionally been excludednot only children with disabilities, but speakers of minority languages too. The school and classroom operate on the premise that students with disabilities are as fundamentally competent as students without disabilities. Therefore, all students can be full participants in their classrooms, in the local school community and in the societies they live in. Much of the movement is related to legislation that students receive their education in the least restrictive environment (LRE). This means they are with their peers without disabilities to the maximum degree possible, with general education the placement of first choice for all students (Alquraini& Gut, 2012). Successful inclusive education happens primarily through accepting, understanding, and attending to student differences and diversity, which can include physical, cognitive, academic, social, and emotional. This is not to say that students never need to
The Educational Forum, 2020
The purpose of this collection of manuscripts is to interrogate assumptions about inclusive education that are generally regarded as stable or even canonical, particularly in the global North. My expectation is that this special issue will pose uneasy questions and cause epistemic distress as a means to animate a new generation of inclusive education scholarship (Grech & Soldatic, 2016). Before I describe the rationale and goals of the special issue, I explain my use of certain key terms. First, although there are differences in the conceptualizations of "inclusive education" and "inclusion, " I use these terms interchangeably for style purposes. In addition, I do not use the terms global North and South as expressions of a binary logic. I make this distinction "to delineate power, resource, epistemological and other differentials, that though not unshiftable, and though not localized, embrace a substantial portion of the world living in a scenario of profound geopolitical asymmetries, poverty and isolation confronting deeply entrenched centers of concentrated wealth and power accumulated historically and perpetuated in times of coloniality" (Grech, 2015, Terminology section, para. 3). Third, I use people-first language (i.e., students with disabilities) interchangeably with the term "disabled" which is favored in the social model of disability. This way, I acknowledge representations of this population that recognize individual, societal and historical dimensions of ability differences. A foundational assumption in need of scrutiny is that inclusive education is only concerned with the education of learners with disabilities. Another tenet of the inclusion orthodoxy is the reliance on a technical standpoint to effect change-e.g., train teachers, make accommodations in the curriculum and assessment procedures, adjust classroom spaces-which disregards longstanding structural inequalities that perpetuate stratified educational systems. Over time, these and other canonical ideas have become broken promises, unwittingly forged new inequalities and contributed to neocolonial developments in the global North and South. In the age of global norming, population displacements and cultural intermingling that simmers in deepening socioeconomic injustices, it is imperative to disrupt inclusion's common sense. For this purpose, I contextualize the articles in this issue by identifying a few primary tenets in the inclusive education scholarship that are problematic. The goal of this overview is not to present an exhaustive critique of the literature (see Artiles & Kozleski, 2016; Artiles et al., 2006). Rather, I highlight a few core notions in need of revision noting contextual similarities and differences between the global North and South. Of significance, I assume "there is not one global South, but there are indeed many global 'Souths. ' Furthermore, the global South is not only present in, but it also lives within the global North" (Grech, 2015, Terminology section, para. 3). Where appropriate, I indicate how the authors' contributions speak truth to inclusion's power. Keep in mind the scaffold of the following discussion is constituted by two interlocking themes, namely the fact that inclusive education has been intensely contested and it has expanded at different rates across the global North and South. Indeed, conceptual ambiguities
The purpose of this collection of manuscripts is to interrogate assumptions about inclusive education that are generally regarded as stable or even canonical, particularly in the global North. My expectation is that this special issue will pose uneasy questions and cause epistemic distress as a means to animate a new generation of inclusive education scholarship (Grech & Soldatic, 2016). Before I describe the rationale and goals of the special issue, I explain my use of certain key terms. First, although there are differences in the conceptualizations of "inclusive education" and "inclusion, " I use these terms interchangeably for style purposes. In addition, I do not use the terms global North and South as expressions of a binary logic. I make this distinction "to delineate power, resource, epistemological and other differentials, that though not unshiftable, and though not localized, embrace a substantial portion of the world living in a scenario of profound geopolitical asymmetries, poverty and isolation confronting deeply entrenched centers of concentrated wealth and power accumulated historically and perpetuated in times of coloniality" (Grech, 2015, Terminology section, para. 3). Third, I use people-first language (i.e., students with disabilities) interchangeably with the term "disabled" which is favored in the social model of disability. This way, I acknowledge representations of this population that recognize individual, societal and historical dimensions of ability differences. A foundational assumption in need of scrutiny is that inclusive education is only concerned with the education of learners with disabilities. Another tenet of the inclusion orthodoxy is the reliance on a technical standpoint to effect change-e.g., train teachers, make accommodations in the curriculum and assessment procedures, adjust classroom spaces-which disregards longstanding structural inequalities that perpetuate stratified educational systems. Over time, these and other canonical ideas have become broken promises, unwittingly forged new inequalities and contributed to neocolonial developments in the global North and South. In the age of global norming, population displacements and cultural intermingling that simmers in deepening socioeconomic injustices, it is imperative to disrupt inclusion's common sense. For this purpose, I contextualize the articles in this issue by identifying a few primary tenets in the inclusive education scholarship that are problematic. The goal of this overview is not to present an exhaustive critique of the literature (see Artiles & Kozleski, 2016; Artiles et al., 2006). Rather, I highlight a few core notions in need of revision noting contextual similarities and differences between the global North and South. Of significance, I assume "there is not one global South, but there are indeed many global 'Souths. ' Furthermore, the global South is not only present in, but it also lives within the global North" (Grech, 2015, Terminology section, para. 3). Where appropriate, I indicate how the authors' contributions speak truth to inclusion's power. Keep in mind the scaffold of the following discussion is constituted by two interlocking themes, namely the fact that inclusive education has been intensely contested and it has expanded at different rates across the global North and South. Indeed, conceptual ambiguities