inclusive education: affected by the political view

• what should universities do for inclusion?

  1. the concept of inclusion must be integrated into pedagogical courses

  2. practical applications may be difficult but the concept must be introduced

  3. it can be practiced in courses such as community service practices or through workshops or databases

  4. it should be discussed by decision-making bodies of higher education

  5. student clubs and student council

  6. improving physical and digital access

  7. bringing academicians, administrative personnel, and students together

• it is mostly viewed as the inclusion of people with disabilities and refugees

• There are inclusion projects for refugees

• Do we discuss inclusion at the international level and/or local decision-making processes?

• project about preschool education opportunities for children from disadvantaged groups

• regulations for inclusion and diversity by MoNe and CoHE

The consensus is we see confusion about the meaning of inclusion.

2. I believe that inclusion can be practically implemented.

It will be implemented, we can't imagine that it won't be. There will be clouds of situations where it will have to be.

3. Teachers are trained to effectively manage diversity in classrooms.

They are not enough. Students need to be taught the procedure, what to do, who will help, where to find specific information, professional help. Teachers often grope and solve intuitively.

4. My university is committed to increasing diversity awareness and providing equal opportunity for all participating students and staff.

It is set, on paper it is. We don't know what the university-wide practice is.

5. I have concerns about the practical implementation of inclusion

Most are trying and doing their best. But... related to point 3.

Maybe “confusion within society”: not ready to see that “inclusion” is not only about “disabled”: e.g. gender equality, cultural equality. Calabria has developed very rapidly: UNICAL has been a catalyst for social change. 

Also interpretation of “inclusion” as individual “expression” : freedom of expression.

At UNICAL: established with “inclusion” as objective = social inclusion.  

power of knowledge and culture should increase inclusion: UNICAL has many opportunities, e.g., enrolment “alias”. Can ask to not declare gender F/M.  However, institutional email does not accept “non-M/F”, because from Fiscal Code, which clarified biological gender. (one aspect of “inclusion”)

YES. e.g. enrollment at local University. 

SCHOOL teachers - yes.  University faculty, less so: if “aware” = self-trained.  However, now we at university need to make declarations on our “official teaching modules”, but we have not “received training on inclusion”.  

However, we are informed of particular needs only before the exam; If we were notified earlier, we could modulate how we teach in class.

In schools, there are “institutionalized procedures” for each student who has a special needs, so teachers are informed at the start and can therefore help during the learning phrase.

School teachers receive specific training on “inclusion”: Italian Law is very aware of inclusion, e.g. in IT schools, students with learning disabilities are inserted in “regular” classrooms and accompanied by a “support teacher”. 

Statement 1
- No consensus about inclusion : he/she is in the class so he/she is included but no interactions with others pupils or teacher
- Put pupils with similar problems together is inclusion
Statement 2
- Inclusion is widely accepted but not evident to put in practice (lack of time, trainee, personnel, money to buy tools,...)
​Statement 3
-There is a need for more training hours and more concordance between theory and practice

- a feeling of opposing didactics and pedagogy

Not convinced by statement 4: on paper, the university is committed, but it's difficult to put into practice (timing, administration, etc.). There's a gap between theory and practice.

2. The question of marginalization, different methods and strategies of work opens up, i.e. a systemic solution is necessary.

3. Depending on the faculty, there are more or less subjects in the education of students, and teachers mostly have LLL, but more practice is needed for students.

4. The university promotes diversity and an inclusive environment, but it is an open process.

5. There are a lot of high-quality examples in BiH, but they need to be further promoted and work on quantity and quality.

YES.

YES!  e.g. university should inform us earlier: we will try to do something within our Department (Chemistry) to “institutionalize the sharing of information as early as possible”.  We, as teachers can, without impinging on “privacy issues”, offer support.

- Pas de consensus sur l'inclusion : il/elle est dans la classe, donc il/elle est inclus(e), mais pas d'interactions avec les autres élèves ou l'enseignant.

- Erreur sur le sens car certains pensent que mettre ensemble des élèves ayant des problèmes similaires, c'est de l'inclusion

--> Affirmation 2 / Affirmation 5

- L'inclusion est largement acceptée mais sa mise en pratique n'est pas évidente (manque de temps, manque de formation, manque de personnel, manque d'argent pour acheter des outils,...)

--> Affirmation 3

- Il est nécessaire d'augmenter le nombre d'heures de formation et d'améliorer la concordance entre la théorie et la pratique

- Les formateurs/enseignants ont le sentiment d'opposer la didactique et la pédagogie - oublier ses objectifs d'apprentissage pour prendre en compte la diversité

--> Affirmation 4

Pas convaincu par l'affirmation 4 : sur le papier, l'université est engagée, mais il est difficile de mettre l'inclusion en pratique (des temporalités trop longues, des procédures administratives qui deviennent des obstacles, etc.). Il y a un fossé entre la théorie et la pratique