Inclusive Education in the UK; Stumbling in the path.
1. CONTEXT.
Inclusive education in the United Kingdom can be traced back to the Education Act from 1981. This Act introduced students with Special Educational Needs (SEN) into the mainstream classroom settings from an inclusion perspective. Thus, the SEN reforms had been following the path toward inclusion for 30 years, leaving the idea of integration behind. Nevertheless, in 2010 the Conservative Party —who had expressed being against inclusive education— joined the Coalition Government, and the track on the road to inclusion was diverted since the subsequent legislations followed the antagonist position of this Party regarding inclusion (Greig & Lauchlan, 2015).
It is also important to highlight that inclusive education entered into the education agenda when the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) was already part of the National Curriculum. The GCSE dates back to 1838, and is a set of exams that students have to take when they are around 14 to 16 (Opposs, 2016). These exams include compulsory subjects such as English, Math, and Science. The problematization of GCSE in the context of inclusive education is discussed in depth further below.
As there is a growing emphasis in including and studying subjects to full course GCSE level in the national curriculum, the teaching of emotional intelligence is being neglected (Barber, 2012). Consequently, students do not develop the necessary tools to understand the importance of mental health. Furthermore, school members receive little or no training to address or raise awareness about this topic. Therefore, it is probable that mental health remains as another hidden element in the list of taboos, and that is the reason why students do not problematize the use of discriminatory language in relation to mental health.
2. PRESENTATION OF THE PROBLEM.
The first problem found is that the entrance of the Conservative Party into the Coalition Government led to the interruption and deviation of the path towards inclusion. Even before becoming part of the Coalition Government they had already promised to contribute to the provision of special schools in order to provide parents with a wider range of choices. As Debnath, Halder & Hasar (2018) suggested, to highlight the existence of a difference —such as separating children who have SEN, from the ones who attend mainstream schools— is not a solution, and goes against the principle of inclusion. The Conservative Party included their view towards inclusion in the new SEN Code of Practice in 2014, promoting the special schools (Greig & Lauchlan, 2015).
In spite of this, there are several teachers and non-governmental organizations who have been doing their best to achieve and deliver high quality education for every child through inclusion. Recently, the professor Ainscow (2019) stated that the British government was failing students with SEN, widening the segregation gap, and excluding students from educational opportunities. Here it is introduced the second problem found; the GCSE as a segregatory element. There is evidence that demonstrates that a person’s socio-economic class is directly related to the number of GCSE —part of the National Curriculum— achieved at the end of the compulsory schooling days (Topping & Maloney, 2005). For instance, a 16 years old child that leaves the school system at this age will only have reached the minimum skill level to develop himself/herself/themselves in society. This correlation reveals the existence of marginalization within the educational system of the UK, with respect to not only socio-economic background, but also to gender, ethnicity and location as exposed in Vignoles (2009).
In relation to the GCSE, the third problem found is now presented. In 2015, the Conservative Party manifesto stated that it will be required that students take GCSEs in English, math, science, some language, and history or geography (Long & Danechi, 2019). Besides, it was outlined that the schools that refuse to teach these subjects will not be able to reach nor receive the highest ratings of the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted). Hence, as Barber (2012) claimed, relevant subjects to learn how to manage and express emotions such as Civic Education are losing its position in the National Curriculum.
It is pivotal inside of the school community and classroom to generate situations prone to address topics such as mental health to counterpoint the use of discriminatory language by students or school members. From Save the Children UK (2006) it is said that no children should be discriminated against, and that teachers and students should be provided with support resources. Also, the curriculum should be accessible, count with teacher training programmes, and with a support environment. However, since the compulsory subjects of GCSE are being expanded, there will not be enough space in the curriculum to approach desired topics. Therefore, it is highly difficult to discontinue the normalization of violent and discriminatory language that contributes to the perpetuation of mental health as a stigma or taboo.
3. SOLUTION.
Structural changes in the governance of territories in bureaucratic societies take a few generations of people in order to see actual change. The best to do in this situation is to rethink what is relevant for each subject, and adapt the curriculum to reflect the learning priorities in both traditional and modern disciplines (Fadel, Biliak & Trilling, 2015). Also, as Save the Children UK (2006) points out, it is relevant to assess how and why systems are marginalizing children from receiving education, or within itself. Thus, teachers and policy makers should work together in order to bring inclusion back on track, and to give the curriculum a flexible character. This would allow teachers to address topics, for instance, related to mental health, to deal with certain collective classroom phenomena as it is to use discriminatory language.
In the actual Chilean context, the rewriting of a new Constitution would allow pivotal changes in education moving from the What (standards and evaluations) to the How (curriculum and professional development). It is urgent to think about what is education for in order to project the desired reality within a real democratic context. Besides, inclusive education should be at the top of the “to do” list, to universalize this principle and include it in the standards, evaluations, curriculum and professional development. As the Suvención Escolar Preferencial (MINEDUC, 2008) points out, everyone should have the same educational opportunities to maximize the quality of education. This can effectively be done through inclusive education, in the pursuit of the ideal for a more just and horizontal society.
References
Ainscow, M. (2019). The British government is failing pupils with special needs – here’s how
to change that. The conversation. Retrieved from
https://theconversation.com/the-british-government-is-failing-pupils-with-special-needs-heres-how-to-change-that-118143
Barber, S. (2012). Time to stop stigmatising mental health problems at school. The guardian.
Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2012/apr/14/mental-health-stigma-school
Debnat, D. Halder, U. & Hasan, M. (2018). Inclusive Education and Education for All.
Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327755398_Inclusive_Education_and_Education_for_All
Fadel, C., Bialik, M. & Trilling, B. (2015). Educación en Cuatro Dimensiones. Las
competencias que los estudiantes necesitan para su realización. Centro para el
rediseño Curricular, Boston. Chapter 2.
Lauchlan, F. & Greig, S. (2015). Educational inclusion in England: origins, perspectives and
current directions. Inclusive Education in England 30(1): 70-82,
doi:10.1111/1467-9604.12075
Long, R. & Danechi, Sh. (2019). English Baccalaureate. House of Commons Library.
MINEDUC. (2009). Ley No. 20248. ESTABLECE LEY DE SUBVENCIÓN ESCOLAR PREFERENCIAL. Publicado en el Diario Oficial, del 01 de febrero de 2008, Chile.
Opposs, D. (2016). Whatever happened to school-based assessment in England's GCSEs and
A levels? Perspectives in Education 34(4): 52-61, doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v34i4.4
Save the Children UK. (2006). Inclusive Education. A policy statement. Retrieved from
https://www.eenet.org.uk/resources/docs/SC%20UK%20IE%20policy%20English.pdf
Topping, K. & Maloney, Sh. (2005). The RoutledgeFalmer Reader in Inclusive Education.
Retrieved from https://silo.tips/download/the-routledgefalmer-reader-in-inclusive-education-edited-by-keith-topping-and-sh
Vignoles, A. (2009). Educational Marginalization in the UK. Reaching the marginalized.
United Nations: Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.