Inclusive Education

The term inclusion in an educational setting is defined as the absolute participation of every
student in every aspect of schooling, irrespective of differences (Loreman, Deppeler & Harvey,
2011). It is an attempt to eliminate segregated school settings such as special schools and
classrooms for these students who may have differences (Loreman et al. 2011). Cologon (2015)
defines inclusive education in a similar way as it involves the inclusion of all children where no
student is segregated. This paper aims to highlight the changing views of inclusion by discussing
legislation which supports students in an educational setting. The Disability Discrimination Act,
1992 and Disability Standards for Education, 2005 provides standards which society including
educational systems abide by to eliminate discrimination. The paper also illustrates Universal
Design for Learning (UDL) as an effective framework for inclusive education. This essay states
how stakeholders including educators, parents and other associates assist to successfully provide
an inclusive environment for students with disabilities particularly, those with Autism Spectrum
Disorder (ASD) through development of personal and professional skills.

In the 1940s and 1970s, education in Australia began to create many segregated ‘special’ schools
in an attempt to accommodate to students with disabilities. During this time, students who were
classified as either ‘educatable’ or ‘trainable’ in public schools were only accepted in the education
system. It was considered the ‘norm’ at the time for students with profound support needs to be
excluded from regular education and special needs schools (Loreman, Deppeler & Harvey, 2005).
The Karmel (1973) report, Schools in Australia, suggested Governments to support integration of
special needs students into regular classes. This report resulted in funding being allocated to
Government schools in 1974 which expanded to private schools in 1975. Following from this, the
Anti-Discrimination Act, 1977 was enforced in New South Wales (NSW) which made it unlawful to
discriminate on a number of grounds including disability but only applying to government schools
(Australian Human Rights Commission, 2014). This act addressed discrimination broadly among
NSW hence, the implementation of the Disability Discrimination Act, 1992 was enforced as a
nation-wide legislation focusing on disability more specifically (Australian Human Rights
Commission, 2014).

The Disability Discrimination Act, 1992 aim to protect people who have temporary and permanent
disabilities including physical, intellectual, sensory among others against discrimination in society
(Australian Government Department of Education and Training, 2012). In education, this act
prohibits discrimination on the basis of enrolment, educational benefits including subject selection,
camps or excursions and expulsion on the grounds of a disability (DET, 2012). The Disability
Discrimination Act includes the involvement of equity and equality in the attitudes and
opportunities of people with disabilities (DET, 2012). The introduction of this act brought on
significant change in the placement of students in regular classes. The Lemos Report (1994)
identified around 62,000 children diagnosed with disabilities in Australia in 1992. It was found that
27% of those attended special schools, 24% were enrolled in special education units and 49%
attended regular schools (Department of Employment, Education and Training, 1994). More
specifically, in NSW 1988, the Report found about 13,000 students with disabilities placed in
special education and approximately 1,000 were in regular classes. This is in comparison to 2002
where an increase was seen in enrolments of students with disabilities in special education
(~18,000) and in regular classes (~16,000). Better diagnosis and population increase could
explain the rise in children recognised with a disability (Vinson, 2002). It can be implied that due to
the Disability Discrimination Act, it enhanced the number of enrolments of students with disabilities
in regular classes as discrimination was made unlawful.

Although changes had begun to take place in Australia, it was after the implementation of the
Salamanca Report where more positive and recognisable improvements were made towards
inclusive schools and classrooms. In 1994, a world conference held by UNESCO was put in place
to endorse practical and strategic changes in inclusive schools (United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organisation, 1994). The representatives of governments and organisations
agreed to a new statement based on the education of all disabled children which would make
inclusion the ‘norm’ (UNESCO, 1994). As well as this, a Framework for Action was designed with
the notion that regular schools accommodate for all students regardless of physical or mental
disability (UNESO, 1994). Therefore, the Salamanca Report was the first step in the inclusion
movement within schools.

Another legislation provided by the Australian Government was the Disability Standards for
Education, 2005 which was developed under the Disability Discrimination Act, 1992 (DET, 2012).
The reason for the standard is to give students with disability the equal right to education as
students without disability. Unlike previous acts and legislation which address discrimination
broadly, the Disability Standards for Education, 2005 are specifically designed for educational
institutes which ensure curriculum, pedagogy and assessment reasonably accommodate to the
individual needs of students and are accessible (DET, 2012). The impact of the standards was to
enhance accessibility in teaching and learning areas. It was the beginning for staff awareness and
improvement in the accessibility of courses (Australian Government Department of Education,
Employment and Workplace Relations, 2012). Furthermore, the introduction of the standards
showed a decreased amount of discrimination experienced by students (Australian Government
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, 2012).

The current legislations and standards mentioned above provide the necessary framework
educators are required to abide by within schools and classrooms to minimise discrimination and
maximise inclusion of all students. It is partly the teacher’s responsibility to develop their skills in
order to reasonably accommodate and create inclusive environments for students with and without
disabilities. They become accountable for this through the Australian Professional Teaching
Standards which educators must comply with (Australian Institute for Teaching and School
Leadership, 2011). The teaching standards compliment the legislations and Disability Standards
for Education, 2005 as they set out explicit elements of high quality and effective teaching in the
21st century (AITSL, 2011). The aims of the standards are to improve the educational outcomes for
all students. Within Standard 1, it focuses on differentiation of learning to cater to specific learning
needs of individual students across a range of abilities (AITSL, 2011). More specifically, it
mentions teachers are to focus on strategies to support contribution of students with disabilities
(AITSL, 2011). This coincides with the Disability Standards for Education 2005, as it ensures
curriculum, pedagogy and assessment are reasonably accommodated for students with
disabilities. Differentiation is a professional skill which assists teachers to build inclusive
classrooms (Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth, 2013). This is achieved by
adjusting learning materials to suit the individual needs of all students. For example, teachers can
accommodate for gifted and talented students by modifying content through acceleration, variety
or use of advanced concepts (ARACY, 2013). In contrast, accommodations can be made for
students who have a particular disorder such as Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) where visual
aids to communicate information can be used to simplify content (National Research Council,
2001). Therefore, differentiated teaching strategies targets the strengths of the students to achieve
the same learning outcomes.

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework which integrates differentiation through
flexible goals, methods, materials and assessments which meet the specific needs of individuals.
It encompasses three principles which support the framework (National Center on Universal
Design for Learning, 2014). The first principal includes multiple representations of information, the
second principal provides means of action and expression and the third is about the means of
engagement (National Center on Universal Design for Learning, 2014). In each principal it
emphasises the fact that teaching strategies need to be flexible to accommodate to the individual
needs of students, therefore, assists to support inclusion (National Center on Universal Design for
Learning, 2014). To effectively deliver UDL or any strategy for inclusive education, positive teacher
attitudes must be developed and encouraged. According to Hobbs and Westling (1998) the
success of inclusion can be guaranteed by the positive attitudes of the teacher. A relationship
between negative attitudes and low expectations of students with disabilities shows a negative
impact on the performance of students (Forlin, Tait, Carroll, & Jobling, 1999).

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a lifelong disorder where individuals present a wide range of
abilities and disabilities. The areas which individuals struggle with are social interaction,
communication of feelings and ideas and interpreting how others feel or think (National Research
Council, 2001). A continual rise of students diagnosed with ASD is evident in Australia.
Consequently, the number of students with this disorder placed in regular classes is increasing.
Teachers are faced with the challenge of accommodating to these students as well as other
individuals in the class for inclusion and equitable success.

As teachers it is important to build personal and professional skills to accommodate for students
with ASD as well as all students. Research has recognised essential components to support the
learning for students with ASD. It has been noted that there is not one collective support approach
or program which suits all students with ASD (Dunlap & Fox, 2002). Some students with ASD may
only require minor modifications of the curriculum while others may need major differentiation
(Dunlap & Fox, 2002). Strategies of modifications and be in the form of visual cues, having
consistent routines, demonstrations and simplistic instruction. These are determined by knowing
your students and how they learn which is an Australian Professional Teaching Strategy that
teachers need to comply with (AITSL, 2011). Communicating with the student’s family to
understand which methods of instruction or goal setting strategies to use can be beneficial for
inclusion (Dunlap & Fox, 2002). Furthermore, incorporating the students interests and assessing
their strengths and weaknesses helps to determine the level of instruction which is appropriate to
meet their individual goals can motivate the student (National Research Council, 2001).
Comprehensive and systematic instructional approaches have been successful when used with
ASD students (Westling & Fox, 2000). By identifying educational goals, outlining, implementing
and evaluating instructional procedures for teaching as well as adjusting instruction based on
research will assist teachers to develop effective programs for students with ASD (Hurth, Shaw,
Izeman, Whaley & Rogers, 1999). Collaborating with the student’s family members in the
education plan is proven to contribute to the effectiveness of teaching strategies.

Even though inclusive education is advantageous for students with disabilities, challenges may still
inhibit total success of inclusion in the classroom (Konza, 2008). Attitudes in resistance of
teachers to employing inclusive behaviours in the classroom leads to segregation (Konza, 2008).
These attitudes can arise from a lack of confidence in instruction and minimal support offered on a
whole school level (Konza, 2008). Teachers lacking in the relevant training necessary may
perceive themselves as not having the required skills to teach students with different abilities
(Konza, 2008). Larger class sizes also pose as a challenge to effectively promote an inclusive
classroom as it does not support individualised attention some students require (Konza, 2008).
According to Westwood and Graham (2003), time restrictions and demands were also a challenge
associated with inclusion. Juggling supervision, development of individualised programming while
accommodating to the needs of the whole class diminished the will of teachers to include students
with disabilities in their ‘regular’ classrooms (Konza, 2008). It is evident that with all these
challenges it should not be the sole responsibility of the teacher to enforce inclusive education.
Support is needed from a whole school level to provide the necessary resources and training as
well as collaboration with communities and families (Konza, 2008).

In conclusion, legislation such as the Disability Discrimination Act, 1992 and Disability Standards
for Education, 2005 has enabled students with disabilities to be included in a ‘regular’ classroom
setting. As a result, support from stakeholders including whole school approaches advocating
inclusive education, collaboration with student’s families and the wider community need to be
effective to successfully implement inclusive education. Not only this but teacher attitudes need to
be positive in order to ensure every child is included in their classroom.
References:

Australian Government Department of Education and Training (DET). (2012). Disability Standards
for Education 2005. Australian Government. Retrieved April 1 2018,
from https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/disability_standards_f
or_education_2005_plus_guidance_notes.pdf

Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (2012).

Report on the review of Disability Standards for Education 2005. Retrieved April 1 2018, from
http://auspeld.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Report_on_the_Review_of_DSE.pdf

Australian Human Rights Commission, 2014. A quick guide to Australian discrimination laws.
Australian Human Rights Commission. Retrieved April 1, 2018 from
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/employers/good-practice-good-business-factsheets/quick-
guide-australian-discrimination-laws

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2011). Australian professional
standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/apst-
resources/australian_professional_standard_for_teachers_final.pdf

Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth (ARACY). (2013). Inclusive Education for
Students with Disability: A review of the best evidence in relation to theory and practice.
Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth. Retrieved April 2, 2018, from
https://www.aracy.org.au/publications-
resources/command/download_file/id/246/filename/Inclusive_education_for_students_with_d
isability_-_A_review_of_the_best_evidence_in_relation_to_theory_and_practice.pdf

Cologon, K. (2015). Inclusive education means all children are included in every way, not just in
theory. The Conversation. Retrieved April 1, 2018, from
http://thespoke.earlychildhoodaustralia.org.au/inclusive-education-means-all-children-are-
included-in-every-way-not-just-in-theory/

De Lemos, M.M. (1994). Schooling for students with disabilities. Canberra: Australian Government
Publication Service

Department of Employment, Education and Training. (1994). Schooling for students with
disabilities. Retrieved from https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/434830

Dunlap, G., & Fox, L. (2002). The challenge of autism from a large systems perspective.
Unpublished manuscript, University of South Florida, Tampa

Forlin, C., Tait, K., Carroll, A., & Jobling, A. (1999). Teacher education for diversity. Queensland
Journal of Educational Research, 5
Hobbs, T., & Westling, D. L. (1998). Promoting successful inclusion through collaborative problem
solving. Teaching Exceptional Children, 31(1), 12-19.
Hurth, J., Shaw, E., Izeman, S. G., Whaley, K., & Rogers, S. J. (1999). Areas of agreement about
effective practices among programs serving young children with autism spectrum disorders.
Infants and Young Children, 12(2), 17-26.

Karmel, P.H. (1973). Schools in Australia: Report of the interim committee of the Australian
Schools Commission. Canberra: Australian Government Printers.

Konza, D. (2008). Inclusion of students with disabilities in new times: Responding to the challenge.
In Kell., P, Vialle., W, Konza., D and Vogl., G (eds), Learning and the learner: exploring
learning for new times (pp. 38-64). University of Wollongong.

Loreman, T., Deppeler, J., & Harvey, D. (2005). Inclusive education: A practical guide to
supporting diversity in the classroom. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

Loreman, T., Deppeler, J., & Harvey, D. (2011). Inclusive education: Supporting diversity in the
classroom (2nd ed.). Crows Nest, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

National Center on Universal Design for Learning. (2014). What is UDL? National Center on
Universal Design for Learning. Retrieved April 2, 2018, from
http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/whatisudl/3principles

National Research Council. (2001). Educating children with autism. Committee on Educational
Interventions for Children with Autism. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and
Autism. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). (1994). The
Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Retrieved
from http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_E.PDF

Vinson, T. (2002). Inquiry into the provision of public education in NSW. Sydney: NSW Teachers
Federation & Federation of P & C Associations of NSW.

Westling, D. L., & Fox, L. (2000). Teaching students with severe disabilities (2nd ed.). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Westwood, P., & Graham, L. (2003). Inclusion of students with special needs: benefits and
obstacles perceived by teachers in New South Wales and South Australia. Australian Journal
of Learning Disabilities, 8(1), 3-15.