Inclusion with continuity: bridging the gaps

Dr Colin Brock of the University of Oxford reviews last year’s National Conference for Special Educational Needs held at
Robinson College Cambridge’s Executive Centre, Wyboston, Bedfordshire

The 2002 Conference, ‘Inclusion with continuity: bridging the gaps’, followed on from ‘Inclusion: is it working?’ in 2001. The idea clearly was to follow the objective of inclusion through from primary school to post-school as well as to include components of the meeting that illustrated essential connections between formal schooling and other agencies and services with an essential interest and contribution, such as NGOs and architects involved in SEN related work.

Review
In opening the Conference, Professor David Galloway emphasised that ‘inclusion’ has a long history. It is not new, but changing definitions - official and intellectual - of what constitutes SEN may make it appear to be so. More recent recognition of SEN and legislation related to it, have made it more structurally visible. While this is essentially a good thing it does lay ‘inclusion’ open to more political manipulation at all levels.

The legacy of the 1998 Education Act, with its emphasis on market-oriented competition, frequent (indeed excessive) testing and obsession with league tables, has been to increase disparities between schools in the public sector. In so doing it has engendered some anti-SEN discrimination, for example in respect of admission to some schools, and generally increased the pressure on students and teachers alike. This has lead, inter alia, to more referrals and more vulnerable students. It has put the spotlight on individual schools. Indeed, classrooms do make a difference. Teachers have to be responsive to individual needs, and there is a sense in which, in the inclusive school, every student has some kind of special need. This has always been so - inclusion is not new.

In such a situation teachers face a really testing challenge, a theme picked up by Dr. Jenny Corbett in her keynote address. In viewing inclusion in terms of useful links that bridge various gaps that have to be fixed, Dr Corbett focused on bringing about the best possible ‘teaching practices’. She emphasised the core objective of empathy with each individual student in terms of: celebrating the differences; affording dignity to all; recognising cultural needs; starting from where they are; making personal educational development plans; and creating thoughtful materials. All this means careful preparation and planning so as to avoiding inclusion being too taxing in the classroom itself and to effect a ‘happy transition’ from primary to secondary school. Among the good practices identified by Dr Corbett were: enlightening peers as to the issue of inclusion; establishing ‘circles of friends’; engaging the ‘mind reading’ (ie secondary learning from primary and vice versa); including ‘social stories’ in non-literal English; and promoting structured routines for all, because the mainstream majority are just as equal a part of inclusion as anyone else. One was reminded at this point of the (now) politically incorrect but nonetheless relevant title of Valentine’s book of the 1960s, The Normal Child and His Abnormalities!

Jenny Corbett then identified the genuine engagement of the Senior Management team as being vital to achieving inclusion, because this requires the ‘climate’ of the whole school to be positive about it. The ideal situation she identified as ‘connective pedagogy’, where respect, flexibility and recognition of the needs of the learner were paramount. This requires all involved to be reflective, collaborative and well trained both initially and in-service. Not least in importance would be the educating of the majority which includes the Senior Management team and the parents overall.

The significance of involving the entire network of participants was a theme taken up by Tony Grimwade and Colin Smart in their workshop on School Design: Accessibility, Inclusion and Special Needs. They too urged collaboration between the whole range of interested parties so as to consult widely as well as abide by regulations. There is a need to initiate a creative discussion across an even wider spectrum of participants than might be the case with more traditional buildings. That is to say, with mainstreaming and inclusion as priority, the ‘conventional’ school needs to accommodate the total needs of all students. This is not only a question of design, but also of contracts, which place strict financial control and therefore rigorous mental discipline on the design and construction of all school building. It is very informative, they said, to view the issue of SEN from this perspective, which in turn resonated with Chris Dark’s initial challenge in his preliminary speech on From Adolescent to Adulthood: School Inclusion.

From the outset, Chris Dark emphasised the complexity of the issue of mainstreaming, and challenged the ‘Treasure View’ of seeing education investment only in respect of returns. He advocated instead a ‘culture of learning’ within any mainstream school: a matter of positive attitude not only within schools but between them, and between school and community. He painted a broad canvas of inclusion – a kind of ‘dream’ if you will, but one which he and his colleagues are evidently realising in a difficult context. Chris also mentioned the flexibility of thinking inherent in a ‘multiple intelligences’ approach and the international dimension, but one wonders is it possible to replicate this achievement in all schools? It will likely require a generation of ‘super heads’!

All this related well to Michael Farrell’s workshop on Continuity, Standards and Inclusion in which participants were encouraged to identify why school-age students were out of formal education, how they could be brought in through a range of strategies, and what implications this has for the issue of standards in mainstream schools. This is one of the key areas of potential confrontation between different government policies (ie raising standards versus more inclusion).

Simon Hopper (Dyslexia) and Ron Weinstein (ADHD) both provided insights into issues that are widespread in relation to underachievement. Both highlighted the complicated contextual situations that promote such conditions, and approaches that can alleviate or even resolve them. These are widespread phenomena that may be heightened by stressful circumstances but can, however, be alleviated by training and new skills acquired by teachers and others. This would, though, require a much greater input into teacher training programmes than exists at present in all aspects of special education needs.

The issue highlighted by Ann Raymond in her workshop on Protecting Children with Special Education Needs in the context of abuse illustrated the alarmingly high incidence of destructive forces unleashed by some human beings on others. SEN students/pupils are clearly more vulnerable not only in the wider community, but also within the institutional setting. She highlighted the need for greater engagement with this very significant problem and stated (à la Corbett and Dark) that a key element of successful inclusion was full engagement on the part of all concerned. She emphasised that inaction in the face of abuse is also a form of abuse in itself. In a way it has some resonance with Roger Kidd’s research into Links between SEN and Employment where, although abuse was not an issue, clearly engagement was. He was able to show how, despite the opportunities, experience and training, very few of the SEN young people on his project succeeded in gaining and holding jobs. Most relapsed into solitary lifestyles, sedentary activities and enjoyed little or no assistance from the career services. This was despite great effort on the part of SEN workers to support and encourage these young people. But the career services were clearly not engaged. These were disturbing findings, illustrating that at an institutional level inclusion is much more easily achieved than at a societal level.

In an effort to encourage wider inclusion and connectivity, the government has developed a national coverage of Regional SEN Partnerships. These are eleven in number for England, each comprising a number of Local Authorities. The development of these partnerships and operations was described and analysed by Pat Bullen, Facilitator of the East Midlands Partnership based in Nottingham. The project arose from a 1997 Green Paper which was one of the first initiatives of New Labour in trying to overcome the disparities in SEN provision created by the ‘postcode lottery’. From five pilot projects commencing in 1999 there are now in all 150 LEAs in England involved.

Pat outlined the system of management and accountability involved as well as the ongoing evaluation of the earlier project phases. She was able to show that the pilot projects had evolved successfully into real partnerships. There are several new national aims, namely: to develop more inclusive policies and practices; to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of SEN processes and services; to respond to government initiatives impacting upon SEN; to improve inter-agency working regionally and locally. These are leading to a widening focus so as to include more children than would traditionally be regarded as having special education needs. This is in response to the realities of mainstreaming and inclusion. She then proceeded to detail of the work of the East Midland partnership and discuss of the fact that all such networks dealt with the whole age range from five to nineteen and not just the years from compulsory schooling. In short, this major initiative has provided an essential strategic parameter for encouraging interaction, collaboration and partnerships at all levels – bridging the gaps implied in the title of the Conference.

Conclusion
It is not for this review to evaluate the Conference – that will be evident in the document arising from the returns from the participants. Nonetheless, it would appear to the reviewer that in general the Conference managed to address the issue it set out to cover, though how effectively would depend on individual interest and expectations among those involved.

Click here to search for special needs schools.
Click here to promote your school or company.
Click here to purchase the guide.