LESSON II

FOUNDATIONS OF SPECIAL AND INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

TOPICS
1. Historical Foundations
2. Philosophical Foundations
3. Legal Foundations

LEARNING OUTCOMES
At the end of the lesson, you should be able to:
1. Trace the foundations of special and inclusive education
2. Discuss the philosophy behind special and inclusive education
Time Allotment – 6 hours

Time Allotment -

TOPIC 1: HISTORICAL FOUNDATIONS

YEAR MILESTONE
1972 Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania and Mills v. Board of Education (District of Columbia). These
cases established the right to education for students with disabilities and
found that denial of education violates the 14th Amendment.

1973 Vocational Rehabilitation Act (VRA) is a civil rights law prohibits

discrimination of individuals with disabilities in any program receiving federal
funding. This applies to students in public and publicly supported schools

1974 Educational Amendments Act cleared the way for increased Federal spending
for education of handicapped children

1982 Board of Education v. Rowley (New York). The Supreme Court defined “free
and appropriate education” and directed that public schools must provide
appropriate special education services.

1984 Perkins Act 10% of all vocational education should be provided in the LRE
secondary support is provided to students with disability

1990 American's with Disabilities Act (ADA)  gives civil rights protections to

individuals with disabilities similar to those provided to individuals on the
basis of race, color, sex, national origin, age, and religion

2006 IDEIA regulations for school age youngsters implemented

2011 IDEIA regulations for babies and youngsters implemented

1965 The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was signed into law in
1965 by President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who believed that "full educational
opportunity" should be "our first national goal."

1975 – Education for All Handicapped Children’s Act (EAHCA) was enacted and
required all public schools accepting federal funds to provide equal access to
education and one free meal a day for children with physical and mental
disabilities. Public schools were required to evaluate handicapped children
and create an educational plan with parent input that would emulate as
closely as possible the educational experience of non-disabled students.

1986 Education of the Handicapped Act Amendment

1992 Oberti v. Board of Education of the Borough of Clementon School District

(New Jersey).  A federal district court ruled that a self-contained special
education class was not the LRE for a student with Down syndrome. The court
ruled that school districts were obligated to consider regular class placement
first, with supplementary aids and services, before considering alternative
placements.

2004 - the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA)

 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act advances equity by upholding critical protections
for America's disadvantaged and high-need students.

TOPIC 2: PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS

Philosophical Foundations of SPED

Inclusive education is a widely accepted pedagogical and policy principle, but its genesis has
been long and, at times, difficult. For example, in 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
included statements about rights and freedoms that have, over the decades, been used to promote
inclusive educational practices. Article 26 of the Declaration stated that parents “have a prior right to
choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.” This declaration later helped some
parent groups and educators to advocate for equal access to schooling in regular settings, and for
parental choice about where their child would be educated.

Following the widespread influence of the human rights-based principle of normalization, the concept of
inclusive education received major impetus from the Education of All Handicapped Children Act in the
United States in 1975, the United Nations (UN) International Year of Disabled Persons in 1981, and the
UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2006. A major focus of the UN initiatives has
been the right of people with a disability to participate fully in society. This focus has obvious
consequences for the way education is provided to students with a disability or other additional
educational needs. For many years, up to the last quarter of the 20th century, the major focus for such
students was on the provision of separate specialized services, with limited attention to the concept of
full participation in society. Toward the end of the 20th century and into the 21st century, there has
been increasing acceptance, through parental action, systemic policy, and government legislation, of
inclusivity as a basic philosophical principle.

Both the type of instruction that should be provided to students with a disability and the  location of that
instruction in regular or specialized settings have been topics for advocacy and research, sometimes
with mixed and/or controversial conclusions.

5 PRINCIPLES OF SPECIAL AND INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

Principle 1: Diversity in the classroom enriches and strengthens education

Every student is unique and every group of students is different. Diversity in schools is a given.
Learners have different experiences, cultures, beliefs and values.
 This diversity is something all teachers come across. It can present challenges for teachers,
students and their parents. It also creates opportunities for growth and better connection in personal,
social and academic achievement.

Two central questions to ask are:

 How can schools and teachers create welcoming and focused environments that include,
motivate and challenge all learners?
 Do teachers have high expectations of learning, effort and engagement for all their students?

Inclusive educators are those who draw on the knowledge and experiences of their students. They
question their own beliefs about student learning. They are flexible and ready for a challenge. And most
of all, they embrace diversity in their classroom.

Principle Two:    A strength-based and personalised curriculum

Strength-based approaches are a key principle of inclusive education. They recognise each student has
inherent strengths and talents. These strengths, as well as a student’s specific needs, should be placed
at the centre of curriculum planning and implementation. This optimises opportunities for both teachers
and student learning.

A strength-based and personalised curriculum improves:

 student engagement
 motivation
 academic outcomes for all students.

This approach celebrates diversity and difference, and facilitates opportunities for personalised learning.

Principle Three: Student engagement, agency and voice

Seeking the perspectives of students ensures they make a meaningful contribution to their
schooling and educational experience. The ability to have a voice influences both student participation
and agency. Student roles are often consultative, rather than active, even when matters directly affect
them. The key to listening well is to have a belief in students’ capabilities, and to develop relationships
of trust and respect. It’s not one-sided: students need to trust their teacher too.

When students are given a platform to share their voice, schools gain insider knowledge and better
understand the student experience. It sends a clear message that student engagement is important.

But how do you make this authentic?

 Facilitate multiple different ways for young people to be heard, regardless of their ability.
 Consider tools such as drawing, writing, talking, paintings, photographs, and videos to express
agency.
 Ask students, as critical stakeholders, to identify indicators of what an inclusive school looks like
and measure the school against them.
Principle Four: Engaging with all your critical stakeholders

An inclusive education is one where all students of all capabilities have the opportunity to grow
and learn. This means providing each student and parent with access to accurate information on their
learning through ongoing formative and summative assessment of each student’s progress.

Schools can also model positive behaviour and feedback, while still offering areas of
improvement. For example, low reading confidence can be turned around with sharing positive stories
of school success where students have improved or progressed.

Over time, this approach creates a positive community perception of the school and raises
awareness about a positive school culture.

Principle Five: Inclusive teachers need commitment, knowledge and practical skills

Good teaching is good teaching for all not just for some.Teaching in inclusive classrooms
requires teachers to have the 3Hs: the heart (commitment), the head (critical knowledge) and hands
(practical strategies).Teachers must be fully committed to include all learners. They need to understand
inclusive practices benefit all students, regardless if they have additional needs.

Inclusive education also benefits teachers. Strategies are used that make classrooms more
engaging, and it can lead to improved professional satisfaction.Inclusion requires teachers to
acquire critical knowledge and skills to teach students who differ in their abilities and their learning
styles.

It does not require teachers to become superhuman but it does require them to know about some of
the most powerful evidence-based teaching strategies that engage learners across the board:

 assessment for learning

 peer tutoring
 co-operative learning.

A teacher with the heart, head and hands of an inclusive teacher will be effective for all learners, not just
for those who need additional support. We must not forget that a teacher with all 3Hs need to be
adequately supported by the school leadership team to use and sustain inclusive practices.

TOPIC 3: LEGAL FOUNDATIONS

LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF SPECIAL AND INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

The Right to Inclusive Education: The International Policy Framework

 The shift towards an inclusive approach to education was reflected at the 1990 World
Conference on Education for All, by which the problem of the exclusion of students with disabilities
from school systems was acknowledged. Following the Conference, the World Declaration on
Education For All: Meeting Basic Learning Needs (Jomtien Declaration) declared that ‘steps need to be
taken to provide equal access to education to every category of disabled persons as an integral part of
the education system.

The adoption in 1993 of the Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons
with Disabilities provided for integration in mainstream schools affirming that education for persons
with disabilities should form an integral part of national educational planning, curriculum
development and school organization  and that education in mainstream schools presupposes the
provision of interpreter and other appropriate support services and adequate accessibility and
support services, designed to meet the needs of persons with different disabilities.  However, it also
recognized that in situations where the general school system does not yet adequately meet the
needs of all persons with disabilities, special education may be considered’ but should be aimed at
preparing students for education in the general school system.

It was not until the UNESCO World Conference on Special Needs Education: Access and
Equality in 1994 that, for the first time, specific attention was paid to the right to inclusive education
in particular. Signed by 92 Governments, the resulting Salamanca Statement required mainstream
schools to provide quality education to all students, including students with disabilities, without
discriminating on the basis of the higher requirements of support thatthey may need. The Salamanca
Statement proclaimed that every child has unique characteristics, interests, abilities, and learning
needs and provided that ‘those with special educational needs must have access to regular schools
which should accommodate them within a child-centred pedagogy capable of meeting these needs’. It
also asserted that ‘regular schools with this inclusive orientation are the most effective means of
combating discriminatory attitudes, creating welcoming communities, building an inclusive society
and achieving education for all.

Subsequently, the Dakar Framework for Action on Education for All adopted in 2000 a World
Declaration on Education for All affirming the notion of education as a fundamental right and
establishing the new millennium goal to provide every girl and boy with primary school education by
2015. To this end, the Declaration stressed that education systems must be inclusive and respond
flexibly to the circumstances and needs of all learners. Children with disabilities were not explicitly
mentioned in this framework but implicitly included in references to most vulnerable and
disadvantaged children. However, it has been noted that the lack of reference to particular minority
groups by name, without consequently articulating strategies most appropriate for their inclusion,
may have led to a lesser response by governments than has been the case when addressing the needs
of more clearly stated groups.

SPECIAL AND INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES

An integrated legal and policy framework covering inclusive education should address all educational
sectors and levels. It needs to be comprehensive, coordinated and comprehensively address issues of
flexibility, diversity and equity in all educational institutions for all learners. Key elements to be
addressed are that its provisions:

• Comply with international human rights standards

• Include a clear definition of inclusion and the specific objectives it is seeking to achieve. Inclusion
principles and practices need to be considered as integral to reform, and not simply an add-on
programme. Provisions, for example, which define certain categories of children as ‘uneducable’ need to
be repealed.

• Guarantee children with and without disabilities the same right to access mainstream learning
opportunities, and assure access for individual learners to mainstream education and necessary support
services within all levels.

• Develop a policy framework for inclusive education at the central level that supports the policy,
practice and culture of inclusion across all levels of the mainstream education system.

• Ensure that policy, provision and support are consistent throughout the country.

• Introduce accessible monitoring mechanisms to ensure that policy, together with the requisite
investment, is actually implemented.
• Recognize the need for reasonable accommodations to support inclusion, based on human rights
standards, rather than on the efficient use of resources.

• Ensure that all legislation that potentially impacts upon inclusive education within a country should
clearly state inclusion as a goal.

• Provide a consistent framework for the identification, assessment and support required to enable
children with disabilities to flourish in mainstream learning environments.

• Introduce an obligation on local authorities to plan and provide for all learners, including children with
disabilities, within mainstream settings and classes, including in the most appropriate languages, modes
and means of communication.

• Provide guidance to education institutions on how to fulfil their duties through increased inclusive
education provision.

• Require the creation of partnerships and coordination between all stakeholders, including different
agencies, development organizations and NGOs, and specifically with parents and individuals with
disabilities