Optimización de la Cadena Productiva de Uva de Mesa en la Irrigación

Inclusive education was heavily influenced by Civil Rights movements of the 1960s. The goal of these movements was to gain equal opportunities and equal rights for all, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, or handicapping condition (Landorf and Nevin, 2007). Among the changes resulting from this broader civil rights movement in society was a change in the general conceptualization of disability towards a greater acceptance of individuals with a disability and an appreciation of social justice and human rights (Bunch and Valeo, 2004). In this view, people with disabilities should have the right to the same opportunities and options as other members of society, based on the belief that inclusion will result in stronger social and academic achievement, the advancement of citizenship and the development of a stronger community. Broadly, the human rights discourses represent a strong ethical rationale for inclusion.

This view is supported by the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994) which clearly illustrates that the foundation of inclusion lies in human rights and the rights of children. Indeed, the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994), itself an important part of an overarching human rights agenda, represented a major step forward for children with special educational needs. This Statement proclaimed the right of every child to education and recommended inclusive mainstream schools as “the most effective means of combating discriminatory attitudes, creating welcoming communities, building an inclusive society and achieving education for all” (UNESCO, 1994, p.11).

The Salamanca Statement proclaimed the following:

“• Every child has a fundamental to education, and must be given the opportunity to achieve and maintain an acceptable level of learning,

• Every child has unique characteristics, interests, abilities and learning needs,

• Education systems should be designed and educational programs implemented to take into account the wide diversity of these characteristics and needs,

• Those with special educational needs must have access to regular schools which should accommodate them within a child-centered pedagogy capable of meeting these needs,

• Regular schools with this inclusive orientation are the most effective means of combating discriminatory attitudes, creating welcoming communities, building an inclusive society and achieving education for all; moreover, they provide an effective education to the majority of children and improve the efficiency and ultimately the cost-effectiveness of the entire education system” (Salamanca Statement, Article 2).

Since the Salamanca Statement, to which more than 125 countries including Saudi Arabia have signed up, it has been increasingly argued that all students with disabilities should be taught completely within mainstream classrooms through full inclusion. Rather than

influencing understandings of inclusion in Saudi Arabia, signing to the Salamanca Statement has supported progress towards full inclusion and perhaps encouraged policy makers to distinguish between partial and full inclusion. Certainly, the development of the human rights agenda has contributed to the reduction in separate provision, although questions continue to be raised about whether separate education is effective for the learners. One of the key statements in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) is that of the human right to education:

“Everyone has the right to education... Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Education shall be directed to the full development of human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.” (Article 26).

Saudi Arabia is working towards full implementation of Article 7 of the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (1990) which states that:

“(a) As of the moment or birth, every child has rights due from the parents, society and the state to be accorded proper nursing, education and material, hygienic and moral care. Both the fetus and the mother must be protected and accorded special care.

(b) Parents and those in such like capacity have the right to choose the type of education they desire for their children, provided they take into consideration

the interest and future of the children in accordance with ethical values and the principles of Shari'a” (www.unhcr.org)

In keeping with these articles and article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) which states that “(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children”, there is provision for the co-existence of segregated education alongside mainstreaming. There is a paradox here regarding human freedoms; parents have a right to choose segregation in education and this is consistent with a democratic approach, but this does not necessarily give them the right to deny their children the opportunity to be educated with their peers who are not classified as having SEN. Wertheimer (1997) has argued that, in a framework for inclusion, parental preference should take second place to the rights of the child to inclusive education. This viewpoint, however, raises questions about who best represents the rights of the child – the parent, another adult, the child or the state. It also raises questions about whether another adult would accept the right of the child to attend a separate school if that were genuinely the child’s wish because in UK law, as in many countries, rights are granted to adults, not to children. In a situation where a child with severe learning difficulties was unhappy and unable to cope in an inclusive setting and where children without learning difficulties reject that child, it is difficult to see what rights the different children have, also the rights of adults involved in the situation. Whilst children in Saudi Arabia have a right to express opinions freely, provided these do not contravene ethical considerations or Shari’a law, in the choice of a school, the parents would make the decision, since they are charged with responsibility for the religious and moral upbringing of their children

until maturity (Cairo Declaration, 1990). A rights perspective on inclusion raises as many questions as answers.