Inclusive Education: Frameworks, History, and Global Impact Analysis

This essay provides a comprehensive overview of inclusive education, differentiating it from special education and emphasizing its core principle of enabling all children to learn together by acknowledging diversities in ability, culture, gender, and more. It highlights the significance of Article 24 of the CRPD in advocating for quality education for all students, focusing on removing barriers to access and participation. The essay references Ainscow and Miles' framework for inclusive education, emphasizing its applicability in various national contexts, including Bhutan, where inclusive education is a recent development. It also discusses the historical evolution of inclusive education, from the special education model to the social model of disability, and the influence of international conventions and statements like the Salamanca Statement and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in shaping global education policies. The essay concludes by highlighting the importance of understanding the historical development of inclusive education to address current challenges effectively.

2.1 Inclusive education
The definition of inclusive education provided in Chapter 1, section 1.5 provides a clear
understanding of the difference between inclusive education and special education. Booth and
Ainscow's (2011) argument states that inclusive education works towards accepting and
placing children with disabilities in regular classrooms with non-disabled peers when
necessary adjustments and appropriate modifications support learning in all students. The
following section will now examine closely how inclusive education facilitates the education
of all children harmoniously.
The basic premise of inclusive education is for all children to learn together. The focus
is on acknowledging the diversities that exist in ability, culture, gender, language, class and
ethnicity (Carrington, MacArthur, Kearney, Kimber, Mercer & Morton, 2012; UNESCO,
1994, 2016). With Article 24, Comment 4 of the CRPD providing the most authoritative
articulation of the human right of persons with disabilities to inclusive education, it is widely
accepted that inclusive education now encompasses the delivery of a quality education to all
students; not only to students with a disability but focusing on barriers to student access and
participation, and not just physical barriers (Anderson & Boyle, 2015; Graham, 2013,
Graham &Jahnukainen, 2011). Further, inclusion, in the Index of Inclusion by Ainscow, is a
principled approach to developing education, as it focuses on cultures, policies and practices
that affect everyone: children and adults, schools, families and communities (Booth,
Ainscow& Kingston, 2006). Therefore, apart from including children from all races,
disadvantaged groups and all cultures, inclusive education also recognizes that learning
occurs both at home and in the community and hence the support of parents, family and the
community is important.
The inclusive education approach began in the United States in the late 1980s and “was
started principally by advocates for learners with severe disabilities, who were not an
essential part of the regular education initiative” (Power-Defur&Orelove, 1997, p.3). In this
approach the focus was mainly placed on moving students with severe disabilities from
segregated schools to integrated environments. As the approach gained significant
momentum, the efforts became increasingly focused on educating children with disabilities in
mainstream classrooms — eventually known as inclusive education.
Inclusive education is where all students learn together irrespective of any difficulties
or differences they may have.Ainscow and Miles (2009, p.2) argued that inclusive education
1

is a process and that “inclusion has to be seen as a never-ending search to find better ways of
responding to diversity”. In their framework (prepared for the UNESCO International
Conference on Education in 2008) developed for inclusion, Ainscow and Miles identified
four themes that are simple and easy to understand. This framework is presented in figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1Framework of major themes explaining inclusive education structure
(Source: Ainscow& Miles, 2009).
The framework above is very relevant and can be applied to countries like Bhutan where
inclusive education has recently been established. According to Ainscow and Miles (2009,
p.6), the framework “can be used to review the stage of development within a national or
district education system” bearing in mind the involvement with statistical and qualitative
data including “student and their family views”. This framework will also enable the
2
Inclusive
Education
Process

development of plans for inclusive education to follow a process in moving policy and
practice forward. Inclusive schools will therefore be recognized and prioritized. As a result,
this will allow them to respond to the diverse needs of their students (Carrington & Elkins,
2002), accommodate different learning styles (Broderick, Mehta-Parekh & Reid, 2005; Duke,
2014), and ensure quality education for everyone through proper support such as:
appropriate/adapted curricula (Ainscow, Mara & Mara, 2012), organizational arrangements
and teaching strategies (Mills, 2013), use of teaching and learning resources and partnerships
with their parents and communities (Ainscow, 2005; Ballard, 2011; Loreman, Deppeler&
Harvey, 2011).
When discussing inclusive education in the Bhutanese context, it may be reiterated that
inclusive education means the inclusion of children with SEN and disabilities with their peers
without SEN in regular classrooms except for teaching children with visual impairment and
hearing impairment that are done in special schools (Dorji, 2015; MOE, 2011-2018; P.
Chhogyel1, personal communication, March 22, 2019). The Bhutan MOE has successfully
established 18 inclusive schools across the country, considering the benefits of inclusive
education, such as improved learning, better academic achievement, improved social and
communication through student involvement, and its cost-effectiveness in the long run
(Loreman, 2010). There are ongoing efforts to make the education system more inclusive,
based on the principles of GNH philosophy (Dorji, 2015). However, there are issues related
to inclusive education in Bhutan that are widely viewed as 1) barriers-lack of human resource
and infrastructure resources, lack of budget, 2) teacher preparation 3) inclusive attitudes and
4) lack of coordination in the implementation of inclusive education (Dorji, 2015; Dukpa,
2014; Jigyel, Miller, Mavropoulou& Berman, 2018; Kamenopoulou&Dukpa, 2018; MOE,
2016; Subba, Yangzom, Dorji, Choden, Namgay, Carrington & Nickerson, 2018). This study
has therefore closely examined data related to these issues and these are discussed and
explained in Chapters 4, 5 and 6 respectively.
2.1.1 The advent of inclusive education
The special education model moved towards the end of the twentieth century to the
concept of inclusive education that parallels the emergence of social models of disability. The
inclusive education model aimed at addressing oppression and discrimination of people with
disabilities resulting from institutional forms of “exclusion and cultural attitudes” embodied
1P. Chhogyel is the Deputy Chief Program Officer of the Special Education Section at the Ministry of Education
in Bhutan who provided ‘special education and inclusive education’ information to the researcher.
3

in social practices (Dorji, 2015, p.4). Inclusive education came for everyone (all) worldwide
due to numerous social movements and international conventions and statements about
education. In section 2.2.4 – History and development of special education, these movements,
conventions and statements were discussed. Therefore, to respond appropriately to the
challenges in an inclusive system, understanding the historical development of inclusive
education at the international and national level is important. Table 2.2 presents a timeline of
important international conventions and statements leading to the paradigm shift from special
education to inclusive education worldwide.
Table 2.1International conventions and declarations leading to inclusive education
worldwide.
Year Conventions/Declarations
1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
1959 Declaration of Rights of the Child
1975
1989
Declaration of Rights of Disabled Persons
Declaration of Rights of Disabled persons
1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child
1990 World Declaration on Education for All
1994 UNESCO’s Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on
Special Needs Education
2000 World Education Forum: The Dakar Framework for Action
(UNESCO)
2000 Millennium Declaration
2006 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
At that time when inclusive education was laying its foundation in the 20th century, a
concern arose globally that it should be a basic right of all children to have access to
essential, relevant and free education. Through its broad definition, UNESCO articulated:
Schools should accommodate all children regardless of their physical, intellectual, social,
emotional, linguistic or other conditions. This should include disabled and gifted children,
street and working children, children from remote or nomadic populations, children from
4

linguistic, ethnic or cultural minorities and children from other disadvantaged or marginalised
areas or groups (UNESCO, 1994, p. 3).
It is important to note that the education of all children has been greatly shaped by
social movements. For instance, within the global arena, UNESCO was created by the United
Nations (UN) and instructed to make sure that all adults, youngsters and children could
access basic and quality education. In broader terms, UNESCO stated that there was a need
for accommodation of all children in schools irrespective of their emotional, physical,
linguistic, social or intellectual conditions. Such children include street children, gifted
children, working children, children from remote areas, children belonging to underprivileged
groups, and children from different social, racial or dialectal minorities (Ainscow, Farrell, &
Tweddle, 2000).
One of the most important international policy documents about inclusive education is
The 1994 Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education:
We call upon all governments and urge them to adopt as a matter of law or policy the principle
of inclusive education, enrolling all children in regular schools, unless there are compelling
reasons for doing otherwise. (UNESCO 1994, p. ix).
The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education
stressed the importance of inclusion. As per the Salamanca Statement of 1994, in which 25
global firms and 92 countries participated, it was specified that all students must be educated
within inclusive classrooms. The statement highlighted, urged and required governments to
adopt and implement a legal policy based on inclusive education. It espoused the principle of
enrolling all children in regular schools until and unless there were existing convincing
motives for not doing so (Liasidou, 2016).
Following this, in 2000, when 164 governments met in Dakar, Senegal, at the World
Education Forum, they re-affirmed their commitment to achieving basic education to all
children, youth and adults as reflected in the Dakar Framework for Action. The forum
reviewed progress towards EFA and identified the following key challenge:
… to ensure that the broad vision of Education for All as an inclusive concept is reflected in national
government and funding agency policies. Education for All… must take account of the need of the poor
and the most disadvantaged, including working children, remote rural dwellers and nomads, and ethnic
and linguistic minorities, children, young people and adults affected by conflict, HIV/AIDS, hunger and
poor health; and those with special learning needs…’ (UNESCO, 2000).
5

Inclusion was the main component used with EFA, and the Dakar Framework for
Action recognized the urgency of addressing these learners’ needs.It identified and stressed
the need for inclusive education systems, actively seeking out children who are not enrolled
and responding flexibly to the circumstances and needs of all learners (UNESC), 2000).
In 2000, eight different Millennium Development Goals were set by the UN
Millennium Summit, one of which was to achieve universal primary education by 2015.
Through this objective, the UN reiterated its commitment to EFA as stated earlier through the
1990 World Declaration on Education for All, reinforced subsequently by the Salamanca
Declaration of 1994.
Another powerful influence that further promoted and ensured the educational aspects
of children with disabilities was the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (CRPD) and that came in 2006. CRPD had the highest number of signatories in
the UN history on the first day - 30 March, 2007 of its convention marking the official
paradigm shift in attitudes towards individuals with disability (Márton, Polk &Fiala, 2013).
The Convention aimed to protect the human rights of all persons with disabilities and to
promote respect for their inherent dignity by covering a broad range of areas including
discrimination, health, education, employment, justice and access to information. Article 24
of the Convention recognizes the right of persons with disabilities to education and it
specifically posits that;
States Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to education. With a view to realizing this
right without discrimination and on the basis of equal opportunity, States Parties shall ensure an inclusive
education system at all levels and lifelong learning. (UN, 2006, p.14)
To achieve this right, the UN proposed an inclusive education system at all learning
levels. Inclusive education here entails taking appropriate measures to hire teachers,
including teachers with disabilities, qualified in sign language and/or braille, and to train
professionals and staff who work at all levels of education (Márton, 2013). Such training is
supposed to include disability awareness and the utilization of appropriate augmentative and
alternative modes, means and forms of communication, educational techniques and materials
to support people with disabilities. The CRC therefore played an important role in the
development of inclusive education as it reinforced the principles, goals and concepts and
clarified various practices - issues in the development of inclusive schools.
6

2.3.2 The (contested) concept of inclusive education
Initially inclusive education was advocated for children with disabilities where students
with disabilities were included in mainstream schools (Bunch &Valeo, 1997; Hunt & Goetz,
1997). Their learning in inclusive classrooms was supported with appropriate teaching aids
and additional support. However, due to the lack of clarity about its meaning, inclusive
education means ‘different things to different people’ and the risk could be ‘that inclusion
may end up meaning everything and nothing at the same time’ (Armstrong, Armstrong
&Spandagou, 2010, p.29). Therefore, the right to inclusive education that applies to all
children with disabilities is authoritatively articulated in Article 24, Comment 4 of the CRPD
which the UN has urged all its signatories to comply. () has stated that inclusive education
will be successful only when the Government is able to appoint some special investigation
and implementation team. () has suggested in the similar context that no policy is successful
unless and until there is a proper feedback and evaluation undertaken. Though Government
and the other educational organizations are doing a good job by formulation new policies for
inclusion of the disabled students they gave to focus over the proper implementation as well.
Ainscow and Sandhill (2010); Graham and Jahnukainen, (2011) contest that inclusive
education is not exclusively for students with SEN, but rather encompasses the education of
all students. Countries like Australia, the UK and the US have implemented inclusive
education where students from all backgrounds, including children with SEN, are enrolled in
mainstream schools (Anderson & Boyle, 2015; Forlin, 2012; Gerber, 2012). However many
developing countries, such as Bangladesh, Bhutan, Ghana, India, Malaysia and Thailand,
focus their inclusive education efforts toward children with SEN (Chhetri, 2015), 2015; Deku
and Ackah-Jnr, 2012; Ibrahim, 2012; Sharma, Shaukat &Furlonger, 2015; Srivastava, Boer
&Pijl, 2015). Barro et al. (2017) stated that some reasons for this include constraints in
resource allocation, including inadequate budgets for implementing inclusive education,
poorly equipped teachers in terms of knowledge and skills about inclusive education, poor
government support towards inclusive education, and the absence of consistent government
policy on inclusive education. Hence Waitoller and Artiles’s (2013) observation that
inclusive education has different meanings in different countries is justified by how
differently inclusion is being implemented as educational reform.
In the past, inclusion has been a complex and contested concept. A very common
misunderstanding is that inclusion is a synonym for integration in which inclusion is simply
the presence of a child with SEN in a mainstream school (Cologon, 2015). Such a
7

misunderstanding contributes to a notion that inclusion is for some students only (instead of
everyone) where inclusion is viewed as a process of adjustment — mere placing of students
in classrooms instead of academic achievement. Carrington and MacArthur (2012)
highlighted four issues when considering education reform towards inclusive schooling. First,
there is a need for teachers to have a broad and deep understanding of what inclusion means.
Unless teachers are guided to become more aware of their assumptions and beliefs and the
implications for inclusion, they will find it difficult to think of alternative teaching practices
to support inclusive education (Whittaker, 2017). Second, the models for teacher education
need to be considered as teachers have a critical role to play in progressing inclusive
education. Many teachers are not informed about inclusive education policy and practice
(Graham &Spandagou, 2011). Teachers’ lack of knowledge can become a barrier to inclusion
education.
The third issue to be considered is the organization and resourcing of schools. As per
the opinion of Howell, McKenzie and Chataika, T. (2018) inclusive practices in schools can
be strengthened by expanding broader educational reform agendas that take care of the lack
of attention to students with disabilities and also promote deficit thinking models around the
disability of students (Williams, Shealey, & Blanchett, 2009). More and better support
towards inclusive practices can be provided by educational leaders who have greater
knowledge about resources to support inclusive education, knowledge of legal dimensions of
inclusive practice and in educating students with disabilities (Birnbaum, 2006), knowledge of
collaborative teaching and support arrangements (Carrington & MacArthur, 2012; Sailor,
2009; Zeretsky, 2005), and skills in professional development initiatives that support
inclusive practices (Hochberg & Desimone, 2010; USDOE, 2002) Finally, the social
implications of inclusion are another issue. Social and cultural contexts are fundamental for
the success of inclusion. Whittaker (2017) has argued it makes children suffer the same
context that the help and support systems must be developed in a proper way so that the issue
of stigmatization can be removed. Kruijsen-Terpstr et al. (2016) has agreed to the same
saying that the very method of segregation itself makes the disabled children suffer from a
feeling of isolation. Thus proper counselling sessions have to be arranged so that the children
do not suffer from any kinds of ill feelings or feelings of stigmatization. Barro et al. (2017)
has also stated that occupational therapists or the mental health social workers must be used
in this aspect. This will help in engaging these children into the different kinds of social
activities.
8

It is argued that segregation because of exclusion from society has a negative impact on
children who experience disability resulting in marginalization, stigmatisation, bullying and
abuse (Biklen & Burke, 2006). This calls for policies that respect the diversity of individuals
and families and acknowledge the rights of children to inclusive schooling. It is through such
policies and attention to inclusive practice that education leaders, teachers and school
administrators can understand the difference between the two paradigms of inclusive
education and special education.
Inclusive education may be understood differently especially when viewed from
different perspectives(Slee, 2001, 2008; Sharma &Sokal, 2015). In general, education is
framed by cultural and social contexts. Therefore, viewing inclusive education from cultural
and social perspectives is key to successful inclusion (Ainscow, Booth & Dyson, 2006).
When a culturally inclusive learning environment is created, it helps to develop personal
contacts which is important for individuals with disabilities. It also helps to develop effective
intercultural skills. This means all individuals – regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, religious
affiliation, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation or political beliefs are encouraged to
foster cultural inclusivity, mutual respect and genuine appreciation of diversity (Graham
&Spandagou, 2011). This in turn builds a harmonious society. Thus, considering culture as
an intrinsic part of each student’s life, schools play a crucial role in creating a culturally
inclusive classroom through which all children learn from each other and respect the culture
of each other (Howell, McKenzie & Chataika, 2018). The four strategies identified by
Barker, Frederiks and Farrelly to create a culturally inclusive classroom environment will
now be discussed in the following section.
Barker, Frederiks and Farrelly (u.d) recommended four important strategies to creating
a culturally inclusive classroom environment as discussed below.
9

Figure 2.2Recommended strategies to assist with creating a culturally inclusive classroom
(Source: Barker, Frederiks&Farrelly, n.d, p.1).
Positive interactions with students: In a culturally inclusive classroom both students
and teachers have the prospect of recognising and appreciating diversity, which in turn
develops the overall learning experience. According to Carrington, MacArthur, Kearney,
Kimber, Mercer and Morton’s (2012), teachers are agents of change who ‘can model
inclusion and social justice in schools’ (2012, p. 79). Therefore, teachers must engage
themselves in positive interactions with students to gain information, for example something
unique about students’ cultural backgrounds. Lately, ‘social inclusion’ has come to be
considered highly important, focusing attention on the interactions of teachers and students
within the classroom (Foreman, 2008). Social inclusion is the act of making all students in a
classroom feel valued and important which can be achieved through ‘peer acceptance,
friendships and participation in groups’ (Foreman, 2008, p. 207). Therefore, it is important
for teachers to display positive nonverbal cues like eye contact and inviting facial expressions
to make themselves approachable to students, which will allow students to participate in
classroom activities more inclusively. Since inclusion is based on justice and rights, teachers
working for inclusion also work for democratic education (Slee, 2011). Therefore, if teachers
do not facilitate or encourage students’ participation, ‘then this is exclusion and is against
democratic practice’ (Carrington, MacArthur, Kearney, Kimber, Mercer & Morton, 2012, p.
80).
Use inclusive language and appropriate modes of address: Social interactions are vital
for successful and productive participations in society (Loreman, Deppeler& Harvey, 2005).
Similarly, students should be motivated to participate in classroom discussions through
communication. The need to communicate effectively for students in an inclusive setting
includes the need to be accepted — to fit in, make friends and be liked (Shultz, 1988). Some
10

strategies that teachers can adopt to motivate communication among students are: 1) through
the use of ‘inclusive language that avoids ethnocentric tones – for example ‘family name’
rather than last name and ‘given name’ rather than ‘Christian name’ (Barker,
Frederiks&Farrelly, n.d); 2) referring to students by their names as much as possible and by
asking to address them in the way they prefer; and 3) correct pronunciation of names as it
demonstrates cultural awareness and respect. To enable teachers to apply these strategies,
Florian (2012) acclaims the need for teacher education to consider students’ increasing
cultural and linguistic diversity in classrooms. () is of the opinon that children from the non
native English speaking background are ofren then victims of bullying. Thus they often feel
neglected in their schools and their classroom set ups. They suffer from the feeling that they
are di8fferent and do not belong to the general accepted crowd of their classes. Good and
Lavigne (2017) has stated that school bullying and harassments are also due to the lack of
proper awareness among the students and also the class teachers. Thus efforts have to be
made to interact with the children freely and supporting them to overcome their problem.
Cross cultural competency developments must be initiated right from an early stage so that
students realize about the importance of embracing the cross cultural differences. Language
translators and interpreters are to be appointed in schools so that they can act as a bridge
between the native and the non native English speaking students. Horizontal communication
and interaction sessions must be developed so that students can understand each other and
help each other with proper cooperation and support.
Actively discourage classroom incivilities: Students are very sensitive to teacher’s
actions and teacher’s treatment of them. Teachers should be careful not to ignore or neglect
the needs of their students. For example, when answering questions, teachers should ensure
that every student’s response is considered and that teachers do not favour one group over
another. Priority should be given to protect against cultural exclusion and insensitivity
through effective communication to display mutual respect and support student diversity. An
effective way of providing support is ‘when practitioners (teachers) plan activities with all
children in mind, recognizing their different starting points, experiences, interests and
learning styles, or when children help each other’ (Booth, Ainscow& Kingston, 2006, p. 7).
One benefit of planning activities to support the participation of all children is to reduce the
need for individual support. Hence, when mass participation is encouraged, inclusion
becomes effective.
11

Encourage open, honest and respectful inclusive class discussion: Teachers can create
an inclusive atmosphere in the classroom by letting students take turns when expressing their
own opinions and also by encouraging them to consider listening to the views of others.
Another way to encourage class discussion is by inviting students to respond using open-
ended statements such as, would anyone like to give a different answer or opinion?
The above discussions make it clear how inclusive education can be influenced by
cultural perspectives. Research has shown that culture, specific to a place or a region has
always played a larger role in the conceptualization and implementation of inclusive
education (Booth and Ainscow, 2016; Webber and Lupart, 2011). Accepting children with
disabilities particularly in schools has never been an issue in Bhutan. A study on Bhutanese
teachers’ perception on inclusion and disability by Drukpa and Kamenopoulou (2017, p.10)
ascertained that Bhutanese teachers’ ‘understanding of inclusion was compatible with the
broader view of inclusion as the elimination of all forms of discrimination and with the
rights-based/social model approach’. Nevertheless, it needs to be pointed out that inclusion in
schools in Bhutan still focuses mainly on children with disabilities (Chhetri, 2015; Dorji,
2015) which is aligned with the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994).
Within every school there exists a culture that includes beliefs, values and the school’s
own ways of doing things within its community (Carrington, MacArthur, Kearney, Kimber,
Mercer & Morton, 2012). When such perspectives are respected, there is more support
towards inclusion and when inclusion becomes a practice, it encourages higher levels of
interaction than segregated settings (Cologon, 2013). For many countries in South Asia like
India (Antil, 2014; Sanjeev & Kumar, 2007; Singal, 2005) Nepal (Khamal, 2018; Regmi,
2017), Srilanka (Wijesekera, Alford &Guanglun Mu, 2018) Bangladesh (Ahsan, Sharma
&Deppeler, 2012) and Bhutan (Dorji, 2015; Kamenopoulou&Dukpa, 2018) where the
concept of inclusive education is still new, consideration of socio-cultural contexts remains a
challenge in the successful implementation of inclusive education.
To some extent, the term ‘inclusive education’ has been plagued by conceptual
confusion, ideological struggles, and a lack of national and local policies (Slee, 2008).
Despite the emphasis laid by Article 24 of CRPD in promoting education of children with
disabilities through inclusion, there are some draw backs and many countries continue to face
the challenges of defining the meaning, purpose and content of inclusive education. As
discussed, despite several international assertions that promote equal educational
opportunities, research has found that “the levels at which inclusive education is practised are
12