|
 Turning
Point For Special Needs?
Mike Baker, BBC News, June 11, 2005
For more articles like this
visit
https://www.bridges4kids.org.
The issue of
special needs is rising up the political and educational agenda
in England again.
We may even be at another turning point: after almost 30 years
of movement in one direction, the pendulum could be about to
swing back from inclusion towards segregation.
First, we had the unusual sight of special needs education
becoming an election issue. Tony Blair was tackled by a mother
who felt her son's special school was under threat from a
government policy, which was tilted in favor of educating
children in mainstream schools.
Then the Conservatives picked up the issue of the closure of
special schools and have kept pushing it since the election.
The most significant event, though, came this week with the news
that Lady Warnock, the architect of the current policy of
inclusion, has changed her views.
She now believes that, although it may have been right at the
time, inclusion has been taken "too far", driven by political
correctness rather than a judgment of what is always best for
the child.
Some of the media reaction to Lady Warnock's about-turn
seemed unfair
Until recently special needs was more likely to make the news if
a child was being denied mainstream schooling. Now it is the
other way round: the protests are more often about the threat to
special provision.
Some of the media reaction to Lady Warnock's about-turn seemed
unfair. The Daily Mail derided her as a "monstrous ego" who had
established the principle that all children, however disabled,
"should be taught in mainstream schools".
Yet she has never said all children should be taught in
mainstream schools. Her Committee of Inquiry, and the subsequent
legislation, said that provision should be in the mainstream
"wherever possible".
That recommendation needs to be set against the situation at the
time. When the Warnock Committee was considering this issue in
the late 1970s, the widespread view was that some children were
"uneducable'.
Limitations
To see how much things have changed since then, you need
look only at the language. The Warnock Committee was asked to
inquire into the education of "handicapped" children.
Of course, political correctness can be a straitjacket for
common-sense thinking, but the label "handicapped" did indeed
limit horizons and expectations.
Campaigners for inclusion see it as a basic human rights
issue
However what was a necessary corrective in the 1970s may no
longer be appropriate for the early 21st Century.
Lesser people may have sat back on their laurels (or
prejudices), but Lady Warnock was courageous enough to examine
her own past thinking and declare it inadequate for today's
circumstances.
She has also stepped into a minefield. Campaigners for inclusion
see it as a basic human rights issue and are, understandably,
passionate about it.
Some even believe all special schools should be closed: the 2020
Campaign, organized by the Alliance for Inclusive Education,
wants the closure of all special schools by that date.
For the most part, though, a more pragmatic approach seems
appropriate.
When inclusion fails it is sometimes because it is just wrong
for the child. Other times it is because the mainstream school
has not tried hard enough, or lacks the resources, to make it
work.
Physical needs are (with the right resources) more easily met
than emotional and behavioral needs.
The former need not impact negatively on other children, the
latter often does.
Integration problems
Indeed a recent Ofsted report into special needs found that it
was provision for pupils with social and behavioral difficulties
that most tested the inclusion policy.
It identified a 25% increase in the numbers of pupils in
referral units - to which children can be removed from
mainstream classes - between 2001 and 2003.
Over a slightly longer period, the Audit Commission noted an
increase in the numbers of pupils identified with emotional and
behavioral problems, particularly in the autistic spectrum.
Perhaps now parental choice will be extended more widely to
parents of children with special needs
These are children for whom inclusion often does not work
because they can find social integration difficult.
So total inclusion or total segregation seems unwise. In
response to Lady Warnock's criticism that inclusion has gone too
far, the government insists that it is neither pro- nor
anti-inclusion.
Certainly, the key legislation - the 1981 Act - gives a number
of opt-outs from inclusion. These include: parental wishes, the
efficient use of resources, and the effect on other children.
Nevertheless, successive governments have come down firmly on
the side of inclusion.
Whatever it may say today, the government's Green Paper in 1997
explicitly stated its aim of getting "more children with special
educational needs in mainstream schools'.
The Special Needs and Disability Act 2001 strengthened the right
of children with special needs to attend mainstream schools.
The Conservatives now highlight the closure of special schools
under Labor, but the statistics show that they also steadily
closed them when they were in power.
In 1984 there were 1,548 special schools serving 118,500 pupils
in England.
Since then the number of special schools has fallen by 400 (just
over 90 of these have closed since 1997) and they now serve
29,600 fewer children than 20 years ago.
Fewer special schools, and fewer places, means a decline in the
choices available to parents.
Parental choice has been the mantra of politicians when they
talk about children without special needs.
Perhaps now parental choice will be extended more widely to
parents of children with special needs, allowing them to make
the choice between special or mainstream schools.
back to the top ~
back to Breaking News
~ back to
What's New
|
