Los intersticios del “no-lugar”: Primeros encuentros y desencuentros con el Estado

While many governments across the world have adopted the philosophy of inclusion, inclusive education manifests itself differently in each context. In relation to the definition of the term inclusive education, the literature shows how diverse and conflicting definitions of the concept of inclusive education have developed historically. There is no accepted 'universal definition' (Pearson, 2005). Many different countries define inclusive education from their distinct cultural and social perspectives (Mitchell, 2005). So whilst a number of studies, researchers, authors and educators identify similar key issues and components in relation to inclusive education others focus upon different aspects of its meaning and understandings of its benefits. Perspectives include those which focus on human rights, social inclusion, the school's environment and broader perspectives on inclusion as a governmental issue. For example, according to Artiles and Dyson (2005; Mittler, 2005) inclusive education involves acknowledging deaf children’s human rights which includes being accepted and taught together with their

peers in a general classroom/school. It can be defined as the inclusion of students with deafness in general education classrooms regardless of their ability or disabilities (Loreman et al., 2005). This type of definition is supported by Ainscow (2007) where he sees inclusive education as including all students with different abilities in one school. Creating inclusive education involves a process of widespread change through which students’ diverse needs are catered for by altering things such as teaching practices, facilities and curriculum activities. This should eventually lead to building the capacity of mainstream schools to accept all learners in the same class or school regardless of their strengths or weaknesses.

These views of what constitutes inclusive education and of how to bring it about are important when we come to consider the Saudi Arabian context. Janney et al., (1995: v) confirm the view that it is a process involving whole school change by stating that inclusive education is ‘a move towards extending the scope of ordinary schools so they can include a greater diversity of children’. Similarly, Smith et al., (2004) also see inclusive education as a process that refers to students with special educational needs becoming part of the general education school/classroom, delivering a meaningful curriculum with essential support for all students regardless of their needs and all students being taught with effective strategies. Corbett and Slee (2000: 134) argued that inclusive education ‘is about establishing access for all people. It is not conditional, nor does it speak about partial inclusion’. In addition, Ballard (1997: 244) pointed out that ‘inclusive education means education that is non-discriminatory in terms of disability, culture,.. or other aspects of students or staff that are assigned significance by a society’. This implies including every student in mainstream schools without any exceptions such as children’s intellectual, physical, or other differences. In other words, inclusion denotes having equal rights to access for education of all children in the society as full time valued members in appropriate general schools/classrooms.

Within different national contexts and with different groups of children in many countries, including Saudi, it is partial rather than full inclusion that is operating. Loreman and Deppeler (2001; cited in Loreman et al., 2005) mention that full inclusion means the inclusion of students with diverse abilities in all elements of a school day. They should be able to enter and enjoy such schooling with other children. Additionally, Cambra and Silvestre (2003) mentioned that nowadays there is a general consensus

about inclusive education, which is not simply an issue of placing students with special needs in general schools; rather it is to appropriately develop all aspects of the school to meet their requirements for a successful education. For example, students with deafness require the school curriculum to be adapted by school staff. Such changes include issues such as how best to physically organise the school's structure and encourage all students to work together.

When inclusive education is defined from a social perspective it focuses on integrating students with special needs into societies and communities. This is clearly more than just adapting classrooms and teaching. For example, Uditsky (1993: 88) described inclusive education as ‘set of principles which ensures that the child with a disability is viewed as a valued and needed member of the community in every respect’. Likewise, Farrell (2004) defined inclusive education as:

‘the extent to which a school or community welcomes pupils as full members of the group and values them for the contribution they make. This implies that for inclusion to be seen as ‘effective’ all pupils must actively belong to, be welcomed by and participate in a general school and community- that is they should be fully included’ (p.7)

So inclusive education not only has to increase the process of students' participation inside schools it has also to decrease exclusion from social settings (Booth, 1996; Booth et al., 1998; Armstrong et al., 2000). This view of inclusive education is not distinct from having a focus on learning, for example, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority in the UK (Wade, 1999: 81) argues that inclusive education is ‘securing appropriate opportunities for learning, assessment and qualifications to enable the full and effective participation of all pupils in the process of learning’. Qualifications enable participation and inclusion beyond schools. Moreover, as O'Brien (2001: 48) put it ‘inclusive schools must offer more than inclusive placement (being there) and focus upon the provision of inclusive learning ‘learning there’’; this in the context of seeing schools as learning communities. Inclusive learning therefore recognises and connects with the individuality of the learners (O'Brien, ibid), it is a ‘universal human right’ and it requires the 'removal of all barriers' that might affect children with special needs in school and in society at large (Bayliss, 2003). Villa and Thousand (2005) point out that inclusive education is more than a set of strategies, it is a belief system, it also ‘involve

attitudes, values and beliefs that extend beyond schools to the wider community’ (Mentis et al., 2005: 76). This broad view of inclusion clearly involves complex change which is quite far-reaching, indeed as is suggested in chapters seven to ten, it could be argued that, the views of interactional model are most suitable for this complex view of inclusive education as they take into account the education, the support provided in school, student's strengths and needs, and the social and environmental influences (Frederickson and Cline, 2002).

This view of inclusion is consistent with the perspective that an inclusive school should represent the ethos of community involvement (Bayliss, 1995; McConkey, 2002; Reid, 2005). A school represents the community and thereby asserts the notion of ‘belonging’ and ‘identity’, appropriate to the context. Bayliss (2003) implies this means an egalitarian society when he claims inclusive education requires interdependence, mutuality and reciprocity to develop relationships between children across dimensions of gender, ethnicity and disability. Visser et al., (2003) add if schools are to be more effective in meeting the needs of students, which includes those with deafness, they need to be open, positive and diverse communities, not selective, exclusive or rejecting. In this sense, inclusive education is seen as an essential, dynamic process of change rather than an end-product (Booth, 1996; Ainscow, 1999; O'Brien, 2001). Additionally, Ainscow (ibid) argued that inclusive education is a school culture where the values of students’ diversities and differences is a process of a never-ending search for learning to live with, and learn from difference. It could be argued that good inclusion produces a feeling of membership for both teachers and students. Furthermore, Al-Rossan (2003) mentioned that one of the primary meanings of inclusion, which has led to social and educational inclusion for children with special needs in general schools and classes, requires the availability of two conditions. First, those students should be in the classroom for at least part of the school day. Second, those social arrangements should be followed through in the rest of the schools activities.

Based on such conceptualisations, also inclusive education has looked from the perspective of what governments (including local government) should be doing. Definitions of inclusion have been broadened to refer to a process in which Local Educational Authorities and governments strive to reduce barriers to the participation and learning for all citizens. In this respect Barton (1998), who believes in the social

model of disability, believes that governmental organisations have to strive to remove all forms of exclusionary practice towards all children and young people. Inclusive education is thus about responding to diversity, it is about listening to unfamiliar voices, being open and empowering all members, through school cultures, which receives and respects differences as well as recognises individual needs (Corbett, 2001) and acknowledges learners who have complex, multiple identities (Hall et al., 2004). According to Cheminais (2001) ‘inclusion is the keystone of current government education policy’ and in this respect the role of the Local Educational Authorities in supporting schools to remove all barriers to learning for students with special educational needs (Booth et al., 1998) is seen as important. The issue of local government’s role arises in the analysis of the Saudi Arabian data.

It can be seen that key to understanding inclusive education is a grasp of the range of issues and activities involved: from creating active participation in inclusive schools; to active participation in all aspects of life in the society; from a set of principles that organise work in schools; to a social, political and ideological commitment to equal human rights. These conceptions reflect a broader understanding of inclusion rather than providing technical definition of the process. In this regard, it could be argued that students with special educational needs need not be asked how to study in inclusive education placements, rather how the situation in these school settings can be arranged to suit every student possible for their educational development. Additionally, it has been argued that inclusion is not about placement in the mainstreaming school only but it is also about the experience of learning and the quality of life experienced in the school. In addition, it has been argued that inclusive education is seen as a ‘universal human right’; the aim of inclusion is to accept all people regardless of disability or other needs. Inclusion requires the ‘removal of all barriers’ that might affect students, including those with deafness which is the focus of this study, in school and in society at large (Bayliss, 2003). What this all implies is that in order for schools today to become inclusive, they are required to change past ideas regarding a ‘medical model of disability’ which understand ‘disability’ as the problem in a child, and focuses on their differences, to a ‘social model of disability’ and\or an ‘interactional model’ which leads to the recognition of the characteristics of the child, the school environment, the learning strategies and the attitudes which would lead to children with deafness gaining

To sum up, the above definitions show that inclusive education remains a broad concept that is open to interpretation in terms of what aspects are crucial to achieving it and how it should be brought about. Educators and researchers continue to engage in discussion about it. Nevertheless, most definitions and conceptualisations reflect common points of views which highlight the way that inclusive education involves the introduction of essential modifications through which general schools reorganise themselves to embrace all students. The notion of human rights underpinning inclusive education means that schools should be working to meet students with diversity. This involves considerable work and commitment by schools and governments as it has to include a consideration of overall organisation, schools’ environment, curriculum, and classroom practice, staff development and training. Moreover, inclusion is not only related to education, but also to society at large. This viewpoint is clearly confirmed by the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994) which asserted that inclusive education is largely effectual at structuring solidarity to people with special needs and their peers in general schools. Inclusive education is clearly extremely hard to achieve for most societies which are essentially unequal and it should be seen as a process not a state (Ainscow, 1997; Daniels and Garner, 1999; Cornwell, 2001; O'Brien, 2001; Rieser, 2012). It is not simply a question of placement in the same groups and institutions as others, but it is a process which involves whole school re-organisation in order to develop inclusive schools. This perspective on inclusive education leans on the social model which is based on the view that school and society should remove all obstacles in education and community that may lead to the isolation of students with special needs (Campbell and Oliver, 1996; Villa and Thousand, 2005).