Current Discourses on Inclusion and Special Educational Needs - Literature review Example

Current Discourses on Inclusion and Special Educational Needs and My Position within This Discussion Student’s Name Institution Affiliation Course Date Introduction The incorporation of learners that have special needs Socially, Emotionally, and Mentally (SEMH) in the public education system has become a significant topic in the current days. Consequently, this has led to the need for awareness regarding the special needs of these learners to help with the adaptation of correct and incorporating teaching methods (Jacques & Risby, 2016, p. N.p). In most cases, social, emotional, and mental health issues are often overseen mainly because they are hard to identify compared to physical disorders. However, these social, emotional, and mental health issues of learners are major contributors to the general well-being of the children and thus there is the need for a careful monitoring. Nonetheless, despite this knowledge, the question regarding the possibility of a fully inclusive mainstream school system remains debatable. According to MacBeth et al. (2006, p. 2), learners despite their specific needs or educational disabilities are expected to be together with others of their age group in the learning mainstream. This is according to the principle of the landmark Warnock Report generated in 1978 (MacBeath, et al., 2006, p. 2). Therefore, from this argument, inclusive mainstream learning for children with SEMH needs is possible through the development of inclusive practices that include teacher approaches, parental approaches, nurture group approaches, and entire school approaches. History of SEMH and Its Changes over the Years In 1945, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was implemented by the League of Nations. Within the education section, the Declaration indicated that each individual had the right to a suitable learning in spite of his or her color, gender, race, and religion (Kisanji, 1999, p. 2). The history of special needs has evolved over the years beginning the time when persons with the disability were perceived as a social threat in Europe. Consequently, philanthropists argued that it was imperative for individuals with special needs to have custodial care and thus those will disabilities were put in an asylum where they would get fed and clothed. These asylums were not used as education facilities but rather as institutions for those with intellectual and physical impairments (Bender, 1970). Thus, special schools first started in the 15th century where those with sensory impairments were the first lot to be considered as a group with special needs. Other groups of different types of disabilities were put into consideration when mainstream schooling was expanded. The curriculum offered to these students was different from that offered in mainstream schools and these schools were run by private philanthropic entities (Kisanji, 1999, p. 7). In the 1950s, this separate categorization of individuals with special needs started to be questioned which then as a result led to the ideology of normalization. Moreover, after the normalization concept, the special educational needs (SEN) code of conduct has seen continued changes over the years where Behavior, Emotional, and Social Difficult (BESD) has been changed to Social, Emotional, and Mental Health (SEMH) (Jacques & Risby, 2016). SEMH has thus been formed as a result of removing the term “behavior” and substituting it “mental health” which is considered as more appropriate for the targeted group of children with these underlying health challenges. Therefore, it is evident that SEMH has evolved from being perceived as a threat to the society, to behavioral difficulties and now as a mental health issue. New Government Initiatives/Legislation on SEN Inclusion In 2014, the United Kingdom (U.K.) government introduced new legislations regarding SEN inclusion. These legislations include that coordinators involved in special educational needs should possess prescribed qualifications as well as experience required of them to deal with children with special needs. The other legislation is for instructors to carry out appropriate authority roles and duties that relate to Special Educational Needs Coordinators (SENCO) especially concerning the management and leadership of mainstream schools (SEN and Disability Regulations, 2014, p. 23). These roles include informing the parents or guardians about the SEMH state of their children and identifying the child’s SENs and working together with the school and the parent to ensure that there is adequate provision to help facilitate the needs. The other role is to ensure that records of all students with special needs together with their educational provisions created are maintained as well as continuously updated. The third legislation includes selecting and supervising as well as training learning support assistants who will help in working with those children that have special educational needs. The fourth newly introduced legislation is the need to advise teachers within schools regarding differentiated teaching methods that are effective for individual children with special educational needs. The fifth initiative is for mainstream school administration to participate in in-service training for instructors at the school, which will help them carry out the SEN coordinator roles in an effective manner (SEN and Disability Regulations, 2014, p. 23). The sixth legislation is that of involving children with special needs together with their parents as well as young people during preparation and appraisal of offers given at authorities’ local levels. ADHD in the Social and Medical Model Within the social model, it has been argued that ADHD lacks no particular neurological, cognitive, or metabolic and medical tests. According to genetic studies, ADHD has been evidenced to be associated with being male whereby boys are more often than not likely to get ADHD diagnosis in practice (Timimi & Taylor, 2004, p. 8). Moreover, there have been no studies that have proved ADHD to be as a result of a clinically abnormal brain or different ways of thinking. Moreover, within the social model, ADHD is treated using the French Classification of Children and Adolescent Mental Disorders (CFTMEA), which relies on the psychopathological approach in treating the patient (Vallee, n.d., p. 8). Thus, the CFTMEA approach heavily relies on the social context of ADHD. On the contrary, in the medical model ADHD is perceived as a neurological disorder that results from the chemical imbalance of the brain (Wright, 2012, p. 8). When treating ADHD, the approach used is the Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM) commonly used by the American Psychiatry. From a medical perspective, ADHD symptoms are classified such that they offer a profound understanding of the issue as a mental illness. Through the use DSM approach, ADHD symptoms are viewed as a manifestation of fundamental biological disorder despite the social context (Vallee, n.d., p. 9). Furthermore, from a medical context, ADHD treatment encourages the adoption of a reductionistic approach, which is characterized by narrowing the focus to one that classifies a patient’s obvious symptoms. For and Against Special Education The ability to provide suitable educational resources and services for learners with special needs in mainstream schools for a long time has been a common source of controversy. Arguments have sprouted revolving around appropriate policies on ways to educate as well as cater for children that have special needs. For example, according to Wang (2009, p. 154), a segregation system is beneficial to children that have special needs because the segregated classrooms are particularly designed to help cater for the learners’ particular incapacities. Similarly, learners that have SENs gain from segregated classrooms because of the setting’s aspect of going to class with other students who have similar issues, which in return boosts the children’s confidence and their self-esteem (Wang, 2009, p. 154). However, despite these perceived benefits of segregated special education for children with disabilities, inclusion is much more beneficial to the learners and the society as a whole. Through the use of inclusive practices such as teacher approaches, parental approaches, nurture group approaches, and entire school approaches, children with special needs are comfortably accommodated within mainstream schools and they feel as a part of the society (Gulliford & Upton, 2002, p. 44). Moreover, the exposure of these children in mainstream school setting has been evidenced to be an effective approach of equipping learners with special needs into adults that are better well supportive in the future (Jenkinson, 1997, p. 44). Moreover, the inclusive approach allows teachers to be familiar with this kind of scenario thus enhancing their teaching competencies. In addition, an inclusive classroom offers a more stimulating environment to children with special needs compared to a traditional special needs education setting (Berg, 2004, p. 8). Consequently, this kind of environment led to an enriched and enhanced growing as well as learning for learners with SENs. Pupil Voice With the recent inclusive approaches for children with SENs into mainstream schools, their views have been perceived as an important aspect of the strategy that should be put into consideration. In the past, these children’s perspectives were neglected mainly due to various social constructs that perceived them as incapable of offering applicable, dependable, and demonstrative evidence (Mills, 2004, p. 31). However, the neglect has changed over the recent period with the enactment of legislations that increasingly require the views of children with learning difficulties to be sought and an action implemented. An example of such legislation is “Every Child Matters (DfES 2003)” (Bishton, 2007, p. 4). These practices have been put into use and student’s perspective and feelings about the inclusive system of education are being taken into account. In placing the voice of students with disability at the heart of the institution’s work, the pupils are then involved in every activity of the school that then, as a result, has had a positive influence on their social, academic, and personal progress (Gov.UK, 2014). Assumptions and the Implications Inclusive learning in mainstream schools operates using various assumptions. The first assumption is that schools are resources for fixing the deficiency in children. The second assumption is that learning occurs within the mind of the learner and not the entire body. The third assumption is that every child should be subjected to the same way of learning. The fourth assumption is that learning happens within the classroom and not in the outside world. The last assumption is that there are children who are fast learners while others are slow (Carrington & Robinson, 2006, p. 324). The implications of these assumptions is that there is a possibility of inclusive school systems being held back “with discourses of deficit and disadvantages” (Carrington & Robinson, 2006, p. 324) may be evident in the categories that have been used to sort the children. Additionally, these assumptions give teachers more influence on the learning as well as skill development that happen outside classroom contexts. Consequently, this leads to a mismatch between school values, culture, and the practice (Carrington & Robinson, 2006, p. 325). Labelling Children’s Needs There exist conflict and confusion regarding definitions, diagnosis, as well as treatment of special educational needs. Thus, one of the most common barriers that is present in children’s needs is that of definition that has over time led to surprisingly heated debates. The other barrier is the diverse ways in which these learning disabilities manifest making it hard to diagnose them (Osterholm, et al., 2007, p. 2). Consequently, due to the lack of physical symptoms or signs that can be associated with learning disability, this poses another challenge of an invisible disability. Another barrier in labeling children’s needs is the society’s perspective on the invisible educational disabilities as illegitimate excuses why these children fail to conform (Ong-Dean, 2005, p. 148). However, diagnosis help in identifying the specific needs that the child requires and thus help parents and teachers to offer appropriate provisions to meet the needs. Consequently, the diagnosis leads to improved outcomes among the children academically and socially because provisions are designed to fit their needs (Koegel, et al., 2014, p. 52). Moreover, diagnosis help parents in saving money that can be invested to create a more comfortable life for the children with special needs. In addition, being able to diagnose a child’s need enhances individual’s perception about that child from a lazy and unmotivated child to one that needs special care. How well can we Support Learning and Welfare in Mainstream Learning and welfare in mainstream schools can be effectively supported through the use of particular service delivery for those children with learning disabilities. One approach is through the use of Learning Support Teachers also known as Special Education Teachers who are specialists that offer services to children with extra educational needs (Todd, 2010, p. 2). The support is achieved through direct instructions for the support specialist or indirectly by way of consultations with the children’s classroom teacher. Furthermore, the utilization of assistive technology in mainstream schools ensures that learning and welfare for children with educational needs are effectively supported thus creating room for their diverse needs (Ahmad, 2015, p. 64). Examples of these Issues in Schools Children that have SEMH challenges are characterized by a wide range of emotional as well as social difficulties. Examples of special educational needs in schools include anxiety, a child being withdrawn, low self-esteem, ADHD, daydreaming, inability to make or maintain friendships, physical aggression, lack of empathy, restlessness, depression, and absconding among others. Critical Analysis of Observations From the above observations, it is evident that learners with SEMH and learning difficulties should be included in public schools, which will help boost their confidence and self-esteem. Moreover, putting these students in mainstream learning settings gives teachers an exposure to dealing with similar scenarios thus enhancing their competency. Additionally, in order to understand properly the behaviors of a student, it is important for the parents and teachers to come together and ensure that the educational need is diagnosed which then will help in designing the provisions required to cater for the specific needs in a customized manner. Moreover, it is also evident that SEMH are not necessarily biological from a medical model and thus can be handled from a social context. References Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations, 2014. The Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 , U.K.: Crown. Ahmad, F. K., 2015. Use of Assistive Technology in Inclusive Education: Making Room for Diverse Learning Needs. Transcience, 6(2), pp. 62-73. Bender, R., 1970. The Conquest of Deafness. Cleveland: Western Reserve University. Berg, S. L., 2004. he advantages and disadvantages of the inclusion of students with disabilities into regular education classrooms, s.l.: University of Wisconsin-Stout. Bishton, H., 2007. Children's voice, children's rights: what children with special needs have to say about their variously inclusive schools, U.K.: National College for School Leadership. Carrington, S. & Robinson, R., 2006. Inclusive school community: why is it so complex?. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 10(4-5), pp. 323-334. Gov.UK, 2014. Giving pupils with special educational needs a voice. [Online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/giving-pupils-with-special-educational-needs-a-voice [Accessed 17 Jan 2017]. Gulliford, R. & Upton, g., 2002. Special educational needs. London: Routledge. Jacques, W. & Risby, L., 2016. Identifying Social, Emotional & Mental Health (SEMH) and knowing what to do. Contemporary Issues in Teaching and Learning. Jenkinson, J. C., 1997. Mainstream or Special? Educating Students with Disabilities. London: Routledge. Kisanji, J., 1999. Historical and theoretical basis of inclusive education, Windhoek, Namibia: Inclusive Education in Namibia: The Challenge for Teacher Education, 24-25 March 1999.. Koegel, L. K., Koegel, R. L., Ashbaugh, K. & Bradshaw, J., 2014. The importance of early identification and intervention for children with or at risk for autism spectrum disorders. International journal of speech-language pathology, 16(1), pp. 50-56. MacBeath, J. et al., 2006. The costs of inclusion. Cambridge: University of Cambridge. Mills, J., 2004. Research with children, a contradiction in terms?. Primary Practice, Volume 36, pp. 29-34. Ong-Dean, C., 2005. Reconsidering the social location of the medical model: An examinationof disability in parenting literature. Journal of Medical Humanities, 16(2/3), pp. 141-158. Osterholm, K., Nash, W. R. & Kritsonis, W. A., 2007. Effects of Labeling Students “Learning Disabled”: Emergent Themes in the Research Literature 1970 Through. Focus on Colleges, Universities, and Schools, 1(1), pp. 2-9. Timimi, S. & Taylor, E., 2004. ADHD is best understood as a cultural construct. The British Journal of Psychiatry,, 184(1), pp. 8-9. Todd, N. A., 2010. Support teachers, learning difficulties and secondary school culture, s.l.: Queensland University of Technology. Vallee, M., n.d. ADHD: Biological disease or psychological disorder?, Berkeley : University of California. Wang, H. L., 2009. Should All Students with Special Educational Needs (SEN) Be Included in Mainstream Education Provision?--A Critical Analysis. International Education Studies, 2(4), pp. 154-161. Wright, G. S., 2012. ADHD Perspectives: Medicalization and ADHD Connectivity. Australian Association for Research in Education (NJ1), pp. 1-18. Read More