www . ICEVI - Europe . org
Report

3rd Workshop
on
Training of Teachers of the Visually Impaired in Europe

[ Previous: Opening session ] [ Table of Contents ] [ Next: Report on theme 1: Communication ]

5 Definition of Integration and Inclusion

Because the subject of the workshop is related to integration and inclusion, the workshop began with a discussion about the definition of these concepts.
Dr Heather Mason, Birmingham, UK, presented the following definitions:

Integration

Integration traditionally refers to the education of children with special needs in mainstream settings.

Inclusion

The fundamental principles of 'inclusion' are far deeper. Inclusion in education involves the process of:

Increasing the participation of students with disabilities in, and reducing their exclusion from, curricula and communities of local schools;
restructuring the cultures, policies and practices in schools so that they respond to the diversity of students' needs;
accepting diversity as normal and as a rich source for all students;
responding to the diverse needs of all students;
accommodating both different styles and rates of learning;
ensuring the quality of education to all students through appropriate curricula, support and teaching strategies;
accepting that inclusion in education is one aspect of inclusion in society.

This presentation was followed by the first discussions in the five discussions groups. This yielded the following results, additions and conclusions:

From discussion group 1:

All the participants in group 1 agreed unanimously with the above mentioned points about the inclusion. With the aim to look deeper into the subject they discussed each point in teams of two or three and came to the following conclusions;

Generally the number of handicapped students in mainstream education is increasing, so the inclusion at schools has already started. However, their inclusion in the society seems much more complicated; as although they do have the appropriate background education after graduation from schools, it is still difficult for them to find job, for the society is not prepared to treat them on an equal basis.
The participants all confirmed the necessity of adjusting the environment to the diversity of special needs of the handicapped. On the other hand they pointed out that the impaired should also be trained to get adjusted to the surrounding in which they are functioning.
Acquiring positive approach to any diversity might turn out beneficial for sighted students, as they learn tolerance, sensitivity and how to support those in need. This attitude could also be motivating for the teachers in mainstream schools, who have to deal with a new situation of having a handicapped child in their class. The social aspect of it is also positive for it teaches socialising.
The main responsibility of responding to diverse needs of students is with the itinerant teacher. He has to define the needs for an individual child and inform teachers about them, which, in the opinion of the group 1 members, is generally easy at primary level as there is only one teacher that works with the class. The higher the level of education, the more complicated it becomes. At secondary level, for example, there are several subject teachers. Thus there's in fact the whole team of teachers to be informed about the child's special needs. .
There is a need to adjust the styles and rates to suit the individual. Here again the itinerant teacher should be supportive.
Appropriate curricula should respect a child as an individual, also those with special needs. At the same time they should be oriented at the whole class of students. Individual programmes of education are needed as long as they are incorporated into the overall curriculum.
Schools are reflection of society, so inclusion at schools lays the foundations for its further process in the society. Nevertheless, it's much easier to introduce it in a small community of a school. Mainly because inclusion is the question of feelings/ attitudes as well as the knowledge.

What are the possibilities of inclusion?

If started at the early stage of education it is easier to be introduced later on in the society. In fact it should be introduced at the pre-school stage by early intervention teams.
Teachers' training also contributes to the process of inclusion, so every teacher should get the general knowledge of inclusion as the foundation for his/her further specialisation- i.e. working with the visually impaired.
In all societies, no matter their nationality there is acceptation for normality not diversity, which leads to social exclusion. There is still a long way to go to apply the process of inclusion in the societies. All those involved in it, though, should have the optimistic attitude to future prospects, for as every process, it is time consuming and even the smallest step forward should be encouraging.

From discussion group 2:

No report available with respect to this item.

From discussion group 3:

Integration begins with early intervention.

A system based on assistant/itinerant teachers may be a tool leading to inclusion, whereby the classroom teacher is not responsible for the vi child, and the whole classroom procedure does not have to be tuned to the needs of that child.

If you slow down the speed and rate of progress in a class be cause of a vi child, this clearly is no integration.
Inclusion has to happen in a regular environment rather than in a segregated one.
The teacher must remember that his/her goal is to adapt the vi child to the classroom environment, not the other way round; if there are problems with parents or other students because of a vi child in a class, there may be something wrong with integration in that particular class.
The sight of a crowd of children gathered around the one blind child using a computer in a classroom is very much inclusion stimulating.

From discussion group 4:

The group agreed that the statement from Heather Mason's handout with her views on integration and inclusion should be the guiding principle for the discussion, namely:
Inclusion in education involves the process of accepting that inclusion in education is one aspect of inclusion in society.
One of the participants proposed the following working definitions and differentiation: integration consists of fitting the child into the society whereas inclusion is fitting the society to the child. Integration was viewed more as placement in an mainstream educational setting whereas inclusion was said to involve social integration, to require restructuring of the person's environment. Early intervention was mentioned as a major prerequisite for successful integration and then inclusion.

Both integration and inclusion were juxtaposed to physical/mechanical placement of the child in a mainstream school. The latter does not involve the necessary support, either from the system or from the parents. One of the participants felt that that such terms as 'planned process' and 'policy' are characteristic of the two processes (integration and inclusion). Another participant disagreed stating that it is not the policies but the actually provided support that counts. The group agreed that adequate pressure and support from the parents may result in effective integration, even despite the lack of legislative/systemic provisions.

Other key phrases that were mentioned in relation to integration and inclusion processes were acceptance, access to the same curricula and materials, and equal expectations.

The group agreed that the child should be provided with the most favourable conditions for development and education. This brought the group to a short discussion on whether special schools should be retained. Several participants expressed the opinion that full inclusion was not for children with multiple impairments. The group agreed that special schools should continue as settings providing the most favourable conditions for some children. In a broad sense, special school was seen as a means of integrating some children in the community/society.

Conclusion: Inclusion was viewed by the group as un ultimate social goal, still beyond our reach, and integration - as a step towards inclusion in the area of education.

From discussion group 5:

The discussion of the notions of integration and inclusion concerned the importance of the difference between the two terms. The participants agreed that the problem of inclusion vs. integration in many countries constituted still an open question, and that there was a need for further broad discussion. There seems to be no equivalent notion underlying the English term inclusion in some Central and Eastern European languages, and it is not used in some countries as its meaning is unclear. This was attested to by the fact that the participants tried to arrive at the proper meaning of the notion of inclusion as opposed to that of integration via a strictly semantic exercise, consisting in the use of antonyms for the approaching of this problem: integration vs. segregation, inclusion vs. exclusion. Segregation meaning taking active physical steps towards eliminating the child from the regular society, exclusion being rather a mental attitude, consisting in that the child may stay in the same environment but does not fully participate in the social exchange.
The suggestion to use the somewhat synonymous term of acceptance instead of inclusion, resulted in arriving at the conclusion that it is not sufficient, as its meaning does not comprise perceiving the needs of individuals, but mentioning acceptance led the participants to another coonclusion, namely that the two terms discussed differ in that integration denotes simply placement of a person in a given setting - a mainstream classroom, for instance, while inclusion denotes acceptance of the given person as a member of the overall society, and acting accordingly. A shift is needed from merely equipping the child with some means to cope with his or her special situation onto endowing the teacher with appropriate capabilities and educating the society as to its overall responsibility for the impaired child's welfare.
In spite of obvious difficulty to clearly understand the difference between the notions of inclusion and integration, the participants agreed that having two different terms is important for both theoretical and practical reasons, for instance, to enable one to properly understand subject literature or for legislative purposes. It is the task of the subject professionals to promote new notions, because human knowledge is changing, and there is the need of the use of precise and adequate terminology.