scholarly journals Promoting Inclusive Education for Social Justice in Indonesia

Author(s):  
Dwi Sri Astuti ◽  
Sudrajat
Education ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Underwood ◽  
Gillian Parekh

Inclusive education as a model of service delivery arose out of disability activism and critiques of special education. To understand inclusive education in early childhood, however, one must also engage with broader questions of difference, diversity, and social justice as they intersect with childhood studies. To that end, this article contains references that include other critical discourses on childhood and inclusivity as well as critiques of inclusive education. Inclusive education has a much deeper body of research in formal school settings than in the early years. School-based research, however, often examines social relationships and academic achievement as outcome measures. This research has established that education situated in a child’s community and home school is generally more effective than special education settings, particularly when classroom educators have access to appropriate training, resources, policies, and leadership. Schools, of course, are part of the education landscape of the early years, but they are not inclusive of the full spectrum or early years settings. The early years literature on inclusion is different in focusing more attention on development, family, and community (as described in the General Overview of Early Childhood Inclusion). A critique of early childhood education research has focused on school readiness and rehabilitation and the efficacy of early identification and early intervention. This research is largely informed by Western medical research, but this approach has led global institutions to set out priorities for early intervention without recognizing how our worldview shapes our understanding of childhood and difference. The dominant research domain, however, has also identified that family and community contexts are important. This recognition creates a fundamental difference between inclusion research in school settings and such research in early childhood education and care. Early childhood education and care has always focused on the child and their family as the recipients of services, while educational interest in the family has been viewed as a setting in which the conditions for learning are established. Support for families is at the center of early childhood inclusive practice, both because families are largely responsible for seeking out early childhood disability services and because families are critical in children’s identity. Inclusion in schools and early childhood education and care can both be understood through theories of disability, ability, and capability. In both settings, education and care have social justice aims linked not only to developmental and academic outcomes for individual children, but also to the ways that these programs reproduce inequality. Disability as a social phenomenon has its historical roots in racist and colonial practices, understood through critical race theory, that are evident today in both early childhood and school settings. Understanding the links between disableism and other forms of discrimination and oppression is critical both for teaching for social justice broadly and for better understanding of how ability, capability, and critical disability theory and childhood studies are established through practices that begin in the early years.


Author(s):  
Dan Goodley ◽  
Rebecca Lawthom ◽  
Kirsty Liddiard ◽  
Katherine Runswick-Cole-Cole

This paper articulates our desire for new humanisms in a contemporary cultural, economic and global context that has been described as posthuman. As researchers committed to modes of radical, critical, politicised and inclusive education, we are mindful of the significance of social theory and its relationship with articulations of social justice. Whilst sympathetic to the potentiality of posthuman thought we grapple with the imperative to embrace new humanisms that historicise and recognise global inequalities that concurrently exist in relation to a myriad of human categories including class, age, geopolitical location, gender, sexuality, race and disability. We focus in on the latter two categories and draw on ideas from postcolonial and critical disability studies. Our argument considers the problem of humanism (as a product of colonial Western imaginaries), the critical responses offered by posthuman thinking and then seeks to rearticulate forms of new humanism that are responsive to the posthuman condition and, crucially, the political interventions of Postcolonial and Critical Disability Scholars. We then outline six new humanist projects that could productively feed into the work of the Journal of Disability Studies in Education.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila Riddell ◽  
Elisabet Weedon ◽  
Eva Hjörne

This Special Issue examines Swedish and Scottish education through the lens of social justice and citizenship. Each paper has a slightly different take on these central concepts, but all recognise that social justice has multiple dimensions relating to (re)distribution, recognition and participation. The multi-dimensional nature of citizenship is also recognised, encompassing civil, political and social rights. This introductory chapter highlights the central concerns of the papers, which compare and contrast the educational systems of Sweden and Scotland. While the achievements of comprehensive and inclusive education are recognised, future challenges are also noted, in particular, the extent to which education may be used as a means of achieving social justice and supporting citizenship rights at a time when economic inequalities are increasing.


2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
David F Philott

This paper will explore the place of assessment in a culturally defined paradigm of inclusive education. Given the global trend towards inclusive classrooms, defi ned by a social justice view of learner diversity, the diagnostic/prescriptive medical view of special education is becoming increasingly antiquated. What is emerging is a growing preference towards empowering the classroom teacher with the knowledge and skills to identify the authentic needs of students and to differentiate instruction to respond to those needs. In a contemporary Canadian society characterized by shifting demographics, and increasing linguistic and cultural diversity, this perspective holds particular relevance. In fact, the history of inclusive education parallels, in many ways, the history of aboriginal1 education, as typifi ed in the territory of Nunavut where a stated commitment to establishing a broader view of diversity is creating a system in which children celebrate difference. This paper explores the wealth of literature on this issue and establishes a Canadian context to present Nunavut’s model as being exemplary within this global debate.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 21-39
Author(s):  
Brittany A Aronson ◽  
Racheal Banda ◽  
Ashley Johnson ◽  
Molly Kelly ◽  
Raquel Radina ◽  
...  

In this article, we share the collaborative curricular work of an interdisciplinary Social Justice Teaching Collaborative (SJTC) from a PWI university. Members of the SJTC worked strategically to center social justice across required courses pre-service teachers are required to take: Introduction to Education, Sociocultural Studies in Education, and Inclusive Education. We share our conceptualization of social justice and guiding theoretical frameworks that have shaped our pedagogy and curriculum. These frameworks include democratic education, critical pedagogy, critical race theory, critical whiteness studies, critical disability studies, and feminist and intersectionality theory. We then detail changes made across courses including examples of readings and assignments. Finally, we conclude by offering reflections, challenges, and lessons learned for collaborative work within teacher education and educational leadership. 


Author(s):  
David Connor ◽  
Louis Olander

Ideological disputes about what human differences constitute disabilities undergird two very distinct positions that are known as medical and social models of disability. The positions significantly impact how inclusive education is envisioned and enacted, with proponents of each model holding fast to what they believe is “best” for students. Related areas of significant dissension among the two viewpoints include: (a) the concept of disability and “appropriate” placement of students deemed disabled, (b) the purpose of schools, (c) the nature of teaching and learning, (d) a teacher’s roles, (e) the notion of student success and failure, and (f) perceptions of social justice and disability. These interconnected and sometimes overlapping areas convey how medical or social models of inclusive education can vary dramatically, depending upon an educator’s general ideological disposition toward disability or difference.


Author(s):  
Bethany M. Rice

Disability studies seeks to promote equitable education for all students through inclusive education. According to Goodley, disability is multifaceted—being political, cultural, and social in nature. Inclusive education is often underrepresented in teacher preparation. Teacher candidates need experience in providing instruction to all students, not just those considered “normal.” In their research on the use of autoethnography with teacher candidates, Rice and Threlkeld identified that while candidates saw a need for social justice, they lacked the necessary skills to take action. Combining autoethnography with action research would fill a void in the field of inclusive teacher preparation. The critical reflection used in autoethnography would potentially identify areas of social justice needed to improve inclusive practices in the classroom. Candidates would then have an opportunity to engage in action research to explore their identified topic. This chapter proposes a method to combine autoethnography and action research to impact social change among teacher candidates.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document