Inclusive education for all: Principles of a shared inclusive ethos

被引:4
|
作者
Kohout-Diaz, Magdalena [1 ]
机构
[1] Bordeaux Univ, Natl Inst Educ & Teaching INSPE, Cultures Educ & Soc Lab LACES, UR 7437, 160 Ave Verdun, F-33700 Merignac, France
关键词
diversity; inclusive education; paradoxes; professional practices; reflexivity; teachers;
D O I
10.1111/ejed.12560
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
This article discusses paradoxes that, in theory and in practice, hinder the deployment of inclusive education. The first type of paradox is related to the confrontation between the humanist ideals conveyed by inclusive approaches and contemporary political discourses. These difficulties are linked to (1) the very concept of inclusion; in which the universal, particular, and singular dimensions are dialectically articulated. The paradox is also linked to (2) the orientation of contemporary political discourses in Europe; notably, deinstitutionalisation, intentions to stop specialised care and support, and the deployment of standardised software to assist assessment and learning at schools. The second type of paradox confronts the situational approach to special education needs with the contemporary trend towards homogenisation of nomenclatures and reference categorisations. Extremely vague definitions of guiding concepts lead to the devaluation of pedagogical approaches. This in turn contributes to the maintenance, or even domination, of biotechnical approaches. This comes at the cost of less attention to cooperative multidisciplinary approaches which have proven their effectiveness. These paradoxes can and should be addressed both (1) at the level of the individual ethical responsibility of professionals in the field and (2) in the context of teaching and learning practices. The article formulates four principles to enable teachers, as interpreters of diversity, to move towards an ethic that does not deny the unpredictability and uncertainty inherent in the infinite variety of forms of learning and education, but which on the contrary makes it a genuine source of innovation and pedagogical creation.
引用
收藏
页码:185 / 196
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Towards Inclusive Education for all
    Barrio de la Puente, Jose Luis
    REVISTA COMPLUTENSE DE EDUCACION, 2009, 20 (01): : 13 - 31
  • [2] Making education for all inclusive: Where next?
    Ainscow M.
    Miles S.
    PROSPECTS, 2008, 38 (1) : 15 - 34
  • [3] Policy of Inclusive Education for Education for All in Indonesia
    Mulyadi, Asal Wahyuni Erlin
    Kusumasari, Bevaola
    Keban, Yeremias T.
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PUBLIC POLICY, SOCIAL COMPUTING AND DEVELOPMENT 2017 (ICOPOSDEV 2017), 2017, 141 : 43 - 47
  • [4] Moving forward: Inclusive education as the core of education for all
    Opertti R.
    Brady J.
    Duncombe L.
    PROSPECTS, 2009, 39 (3) : 205 - 214
  • [5] Preparing teachers for inclusive education: using inclusive pedagogy to enhance teaching and learning for all
    Florian, Lani
    Linklater, Holly
    CAMBRIDGE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, 2010, 40 (04) : 369 - 386
  • [6] Inclusive education and the arts
    Allan, Julie
    CAMBRIDGE JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, 2014, 44 (04) : 511 - 523
  • [7] PRINCIPLES OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION THROUGH THE THEORY OF SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM
    Brcic, M. Karamatic
    Luketic, D.
    Petani, R.
    EDULEARN15: 7TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON EDUCATION AND NEW LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES, 2015, : 1645 - 1651
  • [8] PURSUIT OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION: INCLUSION OF TEACHERS IN INCLUSIVE EDUCATION
    Baranauskiene, Ingrida
    Saveikiene, Diana
    SOCIETY, INTEGRATION, EDUCATION, VOL. II, 2018: SCHOOL PEDAGOGY PRESCHOOL PEDAGOGY, 2018, : 39 - 53
  • [9] The Education for All and inclusive education debate: conflict, contradiction or opportunity?
    Miles, Susie
    Singal, Nidhi
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION, 2010, 14 (01) : 1 - 15
  • [10] The Dilemma of Inclusive Education: Inclusion for Some or Inclusion for All
    Leijen, Ali
    Arcidiacono, Francesco
    Baucal, Aleksandar
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2021, 12