What is inclusion?

There are many ways to describe inclusion, and it is difficult to simply select one definition as it is such a complex concept. Thomas, Walker & Webb suggest that an inclusive school contains the following elements:

‘It is community based;

It is barrier- free; physically in terms of the building and grounds and educationally in terms of curricula;

It promotes collaboration; an inclusive school works with, rather than competitively against, other schools;

It promotes equality.’

(Thomas, Walker & Webb 1998: 15-16)

Inclusivity is also mentioned in policy. Part 2 of the Teachers’ Standards clearly states that teachers must treat pupils with dignity (TS Part 2: 1a) and show tolerance of and respect for the rights of others (TS Part 2: 1c). Though it is important to be aware of what inclusivity is, it only becomes meaningful when it is put in practice.

Reflection: UBT

In UBT, I have attended multiple lectures regarding inclusivity. Inclusion ‘… is based on a values system that welcomes and celebrates diversity’ (Education in Action, 2014), so inclusion is therefore a response to learner diversity. Instead of using labels such as Special Educational Needs and Disability (hereby SEND) to define a child, we should be welcoming and celebrating the diversity a child with SEND can bring to the classroom. As Collett suggests, ‘one of the most powerful barriers to the equal participation of children with SEND… is the prejudicial attitudes of others.’ (Collet 2018: 9) Therefore, it is extremely important for teachers – especially in their position as role models – to treat all children as equals to combat and potentially stop the prejudicial attitudes of others.

We also discussed the reconsideration of how pupils with SEND are supported in class. Dr Daniella Alexandra suggested that the ‘velcro Teaching Assistant’ (hereby TA) can have a negative impact on SEND pupils (Alexandra, 2019). This is supported by Blatchford & Webster’s study on the Deployment and Impact of Support Staff (DISS) which concluded that pupils receiving the most TA support made less progress than pupils who received little or no TA support. (Blatchford & Webster, 2012) This study illustrates a negative correlation between the use of a ‘velco TA’ and progress for SEND pupils. Jones (1987) also supports this:

‘…the child may become ‘over-dependent on the supporter socially. academically and/or physically. Second, it can prevent class teachers from getting to know children well enough to plan for their inclusion in curriculum activities. Third… the general use of support can be of significant benefit to the rest of the class.’

(Thomas, Walker & Webb 1998: 32)

This further supports the importance of having an inclusive classroom as both Blatchford & Webster and Jones’ research illustrate the negative features of utilising support staff in an exclusory way e.g. a child with SEND having a constant 1-1 Learning Support Assistant (hereby LSA). Though it is important to differentiate for children, particularly those with additional needs when planning lessons, it is also important to create a sense of equality and belonging in the classroom.

Reflection: SBT1

SBT1 allowed me to take what I had learned in policy and observe how it was used in practice. Interestingly, despite the negative research on ‘velco TAs’, I found that this was in place for pupils with SEND. These pupils had very limited contact with the class teacher and although were encouraged to join group activities, it was not compulsory to do so. I also noticed that there was a lack of differentiation in the planning for pupils with SEND – in fact, it tended to be the LSA that would alter activities so that pupils with SEND were able to complete the task at hand e.g. dotting letters for pupils to trace rather than writing freehand.

There was occasionally differentiation in lesson planning for ‘high ability’ and ‘low ability’ pupils, including intervention groups, but this in itself is problematic. I am surprised that teachers today are still using the labels of high- and low-ability for children as young as 4 years old. I was also surprised to notice that the pupils in the group labelled ‘low ability’ typically worked in intervention groups with the TA or myself, rather than the qualified class teacher.

Budden suggests that grouping and labelling pupils by ability is ‘pedagogically unsavoury’ (Budden 2017). This is because it limits the expectations of some pupils whilst also pressurising other pupils to achieve high goals. There should be a middle grounding, then, where there is an extension task available for all pupils to access, whether it is completed individually, with additional support from the class teacher, or with additional steps put in place for those pupils that may benefit from them. This will ensure that both differentiation and inclusivity occur in the classroom.

How can we incorporate inclusivity in our practice?

There are a variety of strategies that we as practitioners can incorporate into our teaching to ensure it is more inclusive. Sue Mitchell and Karen Thorpe suggest SMARTA targets – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time-scaled, Agreed targets – reflect the philosophy that ‘everyone involved plays a role in agreeing the targets’, emphasising a more holistic approach to teaching (Mitchell & Thorpe 2018: 44). Using SMARTA targets for all individuals will ensure an inclusive classroom as all pupils are aware of their own individual targets to achieve. It also ensures that all learning is personalised for each pupil, illustrating how differentiation and inclusion can work hand-in-hand.

Mitchell & Thorpe also suggest a variety of teaching strategies to engage with inclusivity. They suggest a variety of approaches for learning, including:

Task analysis; the process of breaking down tasks into achievable ‘chunks’;

Interactive/non-directive teaching; a responsive way of teaching that involves following the child’s lead;

Shaping; a teaching strategy which celebrates successful approximation of a target skill;

Errorless learning; which is useful for children who lack confidence or fear failure.

(Derived from Mitchell & Thorpe 2018: 45-48)

As Mitchell & Thorpe suggest, there are endless ways of supporting children in an inclusive way. It is important that teachers insure to use a variety of teaching strategies to attend to all pupils needs e.g. some pupils may not benefit from ‘task analysis’.

Final Thought

Overall, both inclusivity and differentiation are important for a holistic classroom environment since one cannot exist without the other. Effective teaching needs to ‘talk into account diversity’ (Corbett & Norwich 2005: 14) as well as inclusivity – learning should be personalised, but every child should feel a sense of belonging in the classroom. It is this holistic approach that I will carry forward in my own practice, and ensure every child is included in the classroom.

References

• Alexandra, D. (2019) Inclusion conference: Supporting the learning needs
• of pupils with SEND, University of Brighton, 9 January 2018
• Blatchford, W. & Webster, R. Challenging the Role and Deployment of Teaching Assistants in Mainstream Schools: The Impact on Schools. London: Institute of Education University of London
• Budden, B. (2017) ‘How to make mixed ability work: Let children take control of the lesson’. TES, April 2017 https://www.tes.com/news/how-make-mixed-ability-work-let-children-take-control-lesson. Date accessed 14/01/19
• Collett, C. (2018) Why include children with SEND? In C. Collett (Ed.) Disability and Inclusion in Early Years Education (pp. 9-25), London, Routledge.
• Corbett, J. & Norwich, B. Common or specialised pedagogy? In M. Nind et al. (Ed.) Curriculum and Pedagogy in Inclusive Education: Values and Practice (pp. 13-30), London, Routledge.
• Education in Action. Empowering Teachers: Empowering Learners http://www.inclusive-education-in-action.org/. Date accessed 07/01/19.
• Mitchell, S. & Thorpe, K. (2018) Assessment, early identification and individualised learning in C. Collett (Ed.) Disability and Inclusion in Early Years Education (pp. 26-56), London, Routledge.
• ‘Teachers’ Standards’. Department of Education, 2011 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/665520/Teachers__Standards.pdf. Date accessed 15/01/19
• Thomas, G. Walker, D. & Webb, J. (1998) The Making of the Inclusive School, London, Routledge.