Memorandum submitted by Parent for Inclusion
POINTS ARISING FROM THE "YOU AND YOURS"
PROGRAMME—BBC RADIO 4 14 FEBRUARY 2006
Jo Cameron: Director of Parents for Inclusion
(and SEN Governor of Kings Avenue Primary School, Lambeth.)
Parents for Inclusion (Pi) is a national voluntary
organisation of 20 years standing. It runs a national helpline
and many local projects aimed at supporting parents and schools
to work collaboratively towards the development of inclusive policy
and practice. Pi informs all its work by continuous debate within
the disability movement and the views of young people.
I accompanied Micheline Mason to the "You
and Yours" debate in relation to the select committee. It
was useful and informative, but here are some comments.
We need to understand what lies behind Baroness
Warnock's assertion that the SEN System has become bureaucratic,
and stifles achievement.
— It is true that attitudes towards
the rights of young disabled children and children with the label
SEN have barely begun to shift, but any really radical change
in law and practice takes decades to evolve and it is this that
drives attitudinal change. Those of us who work closely in supporting
schools to be inclusive know that the barriers to developing inclusion
successfully remain immense. There are philosophical, social and
attitudinal barriers which are the legacy of this country's long
history of segregation. Ofsted has reported that it is teacher's
attitudes, which block good inclusive practice. When Micheline
Mason was discussing these barriers Peter White said he wanted
to discuss quality of education, not philosophy. These are NOT
mutually exclusive, rather inextricably linked. It is critical
that any discussion of quality of education is grounded within
a wider philosophical framework. This should value and respects
each individual child, take account of their individual needs
and support their right to self-determination.
— It is for this reason that disabled
people need to be involved in the debate about how the education
system can serve them to take up their rightful place as fully
valued citizens. It is they who know how a system that supports
segregation, undermines their own education and that of others.
No-one knows this better than disabled people themselves. It is
they who are campaigning for an inclusive educational system alongside
those parents who believe in equality for their children.
— The programme was not on long enough
for the full spectrum of views to be heard. I have no idea how
many parents sent emails. We feel it is most important for the
select committee to seek out schools who work together with parents,
and which have inclusion policies with adequate training, inset
days, and knowledge of disability equality alongside race equality.
These schools will talk with pride in their school's achievements,
knowing that value, respect and equality has remarkable benefits
for all children. It is well documented that disabled children
intrinsically support young people with emotional and behavioural
difficulties. There was not time on the programme for head teachers
to share their pride in this achievement, and to discuss the positive
aspects of inclusion. An excellent example of such a school is
Cleeves School in the London Borough of Newham.
— In the London Borough of Lambeth,
at the close of ILEA in 1989, there were 14 special schools bussing
children across London. There are now four special schools, and
three new build accessible primary schools. They have become centres
of excellence. For instance one mainstream school is a centre
for excellence for partially deaf and deaf children, and all children
attending the school are learning to sign which is a real tool
for inclusion. There is a diversity of SEN in all of these schools.
The teaching team says that inclusion and the principles behind
inclusion support all children. All around the country there are
excellent pre-school provision, nurseries, and schools, who are
doing excellent work in relation to the inclusion of disabled
children. These need to be showcased and become beacons of excellence
for all schools.
— The progressive green paper which
was overseen by David Blunkett in 1997, went a considerable way
towards developing inclusion further, but did not resolve the
resource issue. Baroness Warnock is quite right to say that the
system is bureaucratic, but it has been since the 1981 Education
Act, and many LEAs still take an inordinate length of time to
decide what funding they will provide -often woefully inadequate-
to support the child's needs. LEA's must take some responsibility
for this, and a new and simplified method evolved. Is it any wonder
that teachers get frustrated and disempowered? All this leads
to parents trying to find an individual external solution rather
than working collectively towards good inclusive practice. It
will be very important not to use parent's often justified discontent
in the slow progress of implementing inclusive practice successfully,
as an excuse to curtail the progress towards further inclusive
schools. We also recognise that much improvement is needed, but
we would put that into the context that it is the schools which
need to change, not the groups of children who have been excluded.
Italy has a very impressive inclusive system, where disabled children
are welcomed from birth. Their method was to close all special
schools down overnight!
— Barry Sheerman stated that this is
a passionate debate, with two sides of parents wanting different
systems. The important question to be asked is this: if schools
were properly resourced schools—if schools changed to accommodate
all children—if attitudes to disabled children were based
on equality as opposed to pity, rejection and containment—if
resources were placed at the school base—if disability rights
were as strong as race equality rights, would parents be opting
for segregated schooling?
— Perhaps more importantly than any
of this parental debate, young people have said that they want
to be in their mainstream schools and their communities.
— It is Pi's experience through our
inclusion helpline, training and work in schools that no parent
wants their child or children segregated. They want them to be
properly supported, and well educated. Ultimately they want what
all parents want for their children—a life. A life begins
at school, where the community comes together and friendships
begin. It is from that platform of security that educational achievement
is attained. As Micheline said, disabled children have been losing
out for centuries. A caller stated that there is nothing special
about special schools. It is important to recognise that educational
achievement is also stifled in special schools.
— We have had 26 years of steady progress
towards inclusion, what is needed is more of real inclusive practice,
not a return to the mistakes of the past. Why not look at the
whole of the education system as failing many young people, and
start from there, not just disabled young people and children
with special educational needs? We should be talking about all
schools as centres of excellence including all children. Barry
Sheerman was right to state that SEN must not remain on the sidelines
and that it must be part of the whole. That is the essence of
inclusive practice: that all young people whatever their race,
background, ability or impairment be valued. Inclusion is an equalities
issue, just like race, gender, sexuality and religion.
— Pi runs grassroots projects with
parents and schools and has built up a wealth of experience and
expertise that can help the committee to recognise how many parents
want to and do work with the educational system to improve inclusive
practice. Those parents opting for inclusion do so because of
the outcomes for their children, which go way beyond academic
achievement. They often also know of the perils of exclusion and
segregation, because they have listened to and learnt from disabled
people. We know how damaging it is for the perception to continue
that parents are divided into two camps, one for and one against
inclusion. All parents want inclusion. They all long for their
child to be welcomed, understood, educated and valued. It is true
many don't believe inclusion is possible and too many people in
and out of the system don't believe it either. The fact remains
that in this country alone, there is an example of a child with
every sort of impairment and difficulty successfully included
somewhere. The shame is that this remains so hidden and that there
is such a high level of tolerance of bad practice by law makers,
policy deliverers, educational professionals and parents. Too
much time has been devoted to debating the ifs and whys of inclusion
instead of listening to young disabled people, disabled adults
and committed teachers about the how's. Pi's experience is of
parents and schools successfully working together for change and
improvement, with people learning the art of the possible. That
is why we have such a valuable contribution to make to the Select
Committee's understanding of the issues.
— We hope that Barry Sheerman will
not be influenced by the Conservative interim report particularly
in relation to categories. This would be a retrograde step and
completely against what disabled people themselves are asking
for. Categories define the young person by their impairment. Disabled
people want people to see them as people first and recognise that
it is social and physical barriers, which prevent their educational
attainment, social inclusion and community involvement.
Our experience as parent allies in this field
makes us believe we should be called to give evidence to the select
committee.
September 2005
|
