Inclusion

Underlying all these conventions and sections of law is the philosophy of inclusion.

Difference is relative and a social constructed concept. (Väyrynen 2001:24) Inclusion strives for social and cognitive justice and equality. Inclusion is not an unambiguous phenomenon. Moreover, characteristic of it is flexibility and being multidimensional. It should always be viewed from the point of the time and place where people are living. (Lakkala 2008)

Inclusion means that all children are learning in the same school and the same class despite disabilities and the support needed is provided there. Different educational goals are not a hindrance for being taught in the same class. (Kochhar et al 2000: 8) Learning at school happens in natural circumstances when peers, school environment and the environment of spare time are the same (Lakkala 2008:23). Prerequisite for the success of inclusion is successful differentiation and continuing pupil assessment in basic education. That way it is possible to meet the individual challenges of pupils. (Naukkarinen & Ladonlahti 2001: 98) Inclusive school aims to develop teaching in a mainstream class in the way that the attitudes of the staff and material resources are able to meet the heterogeneous group of learners. Concentrating to develop basic education stresses the idea of inclusion improving all learners’

possibilities of learning and increasing participation. (Naukkarinen & Ladonlahti 2001: 98-99)

Problems are defined from a learning environment, not from a pupil. The services received by a pupil are based on needs, not on location. The starting point is not that a group has difficulties, but how to get rid of learning hindrances. In inclusive school

there are not special education and general education, there is just basic education.

(Lakkala 2008:23)

Inclusion is based on the pedagogy of difference. The starting point of inclusive teaching is a flexible curriculum. (Lakkala 2008) The aim is not just teach contents, learning skills and strategies are more important for the learning. The teaching goals, methods and pupils’ products are different and teachers use different ways of grouping pupils. (Lakkala 2008:221) Teachers work cooperatively because one adult in a class is not able to teach a variety of different pupils and in an inclusive school there is a multidisciplinary staff (Lakkala 2008).

Inclusion does not mean that every one is treated similarly (Väyrynen 2001: 21), neither does it mean that every one should do the same things, “at the same time and in the same way” (Kochhart et al 2000: 8). The differences of pupils should be seen as a starting point for learning and teaching, not as an exception (Väyrynen 2001:

23). Teaching and learning methods which meet the needs of learners and exploit their knowledge and skills give teachers possibilities to support those who need more support. (Väyrynen 2001: 23) Pupils receive different instruction depending on whether they are working in their actual zone of knowledge or in their zone of proximal development. In teaching, progress is made according to the learning of children, not according to school books. (Lakkala 2008:217)

In Finland schools are still on the way towards inclusive school. Whether total inclusion is ever reached is another question. Total inclusion would require schools to be equipped with facilities and staff like hospitals or special institutes. (Lakkala 2008) The welfare of a child should not be forgotten. Whether the best place for a child with severe disabilities is in a regular classroom or not, and how true social inclusion is there, needs to be taken into account when deciding what is best for a child. Basic Education Act (2010: 642/ §17) states that special education shall be arranged taking into account the welfare of a child.

Inclusion should not be seen as a way to cut expenditure on special education (Lakkala 2008). Inclusion does not mean that children with special educational needs are placed in regular classrooms without the support they need. Neither does it

mean that regular teachers are asked to teach children with special educational needs in a regular classroom without the help they need to be able to teach all children effectively in the same classroom. (Kochhar et al 2000: 8) In fact, inclusion requires suitable physical facilities and classrooms, more teachers and other staff and the sizes of the teaching groups should not be too big. This will mean investment in basic education. Something new will not be created just by getting rid of something old. (Lakkala 2008) This is interesting in the economic situation where savings are needed everywhere. If children with special educational needs are just placed in regular classrooms without the support needed, it is very short sighted, and eventually results in increase in expenditure instead of decrease in expenditure (Lakkala 2008). However, the results of the questionnaire conducted by OAJ (2013) show that the number of pupils in teaching groups has not decreased despite the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs since the implementation of the new law. Thus, teachers report that much of their time is invested in teaching and guiding these pupils at the expense of other learners. Nearly two of three basic education teachers also report that resources of student welfare services are insufficient or highly insufficient and three of four basic education teachers report that pupils do not receive the support needed without delay. (OAJ 2013:12-17) What teachers have been worried about (Opettaja 2011: 37), has turned out to be the reality in many cases (OAJ 2013). Teachers have been worried about the fact that they will be left alone in the class with children with special needs saying that they do not have time to cater for every different learner. (Opettaja 2011: 37). That is true: in a 45 minutes’ lesson with 20 pupils, teachers have less than 2 minutes for individual attention. If a group of 20 or more pupils includes a few with learning difficulties and a few with challenging behaviour, it is quite obvious where most of the teacher’s attention is needed. This leads to the fact that the more able and gifted children are many times left to very little attention during the lesson. Another question is whether a teacher is able to recognise underachievers in large groups.

However, according to the new national core curriculum 2014 to be implemented gradually starting in autumn 2016, the needs of different learners should be acknowledged more profoundly. It remains to be seen how the requirements will be met in the future.

According to Lakkala (2008), setting conditions for inclusion does not tell about negative attitudes towards individual differences. Moreover, it shows that a teacher or a teaching assistant working daily with a variety of different pupils aims to safeguard the welfare of pupils and her/himself (Lakkala 2008). In addition, teachers, especially subject teachers, do not usually have enough knowledge of different learners and how to support them and teach them effectively. On the other hand, pedagogical documents affecting learners’ future can be composed by even non-qualified teachers (OAJ 2013), let alone they can teach pupils with or without special needs. Even today, teacher training does not include enough studies of different learners, especially not at practical level, how to take them into account in subject teaching. Actually, placing learners with special educational needs in regular classrooms in mainstream schools sets requirements for teachers which definitely should be acknowledged more intensively at practical level of subject teaching in teacher training as well. In addition, there is a need for in-service training for teachers.