@article{10.11648/j.edu.20190806.22,
  author = {Christian Wevelsiep},
  title = {Fundamentals and Limits of the Inclusive Culture and Inclusive Practise},
  journal = {Education Journal},
  volume = {8},
  number = {6},
  pages = {320-326},
  doi = {10.11648/j.edu.20190806.22},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20190806.22},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.edu.20190806.22},
  abstract = {Inclusion is an ideal: Belonging to the educations system is not a question. The children with disabilities are all part of a group, of a class, a school and of a community. This idea is great, but it needs to be grounded. Before describing in concrete terms which possibilities open up inclusive practices, the negative must be taken in account. The negative is intrusive: for the claim - to "integrate" everyone - can fail at certain moments. The idea of promoting and not "selecting" ends with a disturbing insight that affects a certain group: children with emotional and social developmental disorders. An interesting but difficult group, if we allow ourselves a few cliché-like exaggerations. A group that will be described in the following. The following article therefore covers a very wide range of objects. First, it aims to recall the foundations of inclusive theory; in this respect, it primarily aims at social-theoretical idealizations for which there is no exact equivalent in reality. First of all, abstract norms and values are at stake, ideals that always receive a resonance in pedagogical reality. But this resonance is not a measurable effect that can be exactly reproduced with the means of empirical social research. On the other hand it is a question of a group of people who may not be able to correspond to the described ideal: Children and adolescents with social and emotional developmental disorders. This group is trivially a factual component of a larger social group. But to what extent their integration and promotion is feasible within an inclusive framework would be questionable. Accordingly, the methodology must remain related to phenomenological perspectives. For it is not just a question of asking who may be a victim of exclusion, who is successfully integrated into a system and who is excluded. Rather, it is about the social-theoretical consequences of an irreversible tension: between a reality in which educational subjects do not correspond to the expectations, in which children are "sorted" and "classified" - and a theory that would have to draw conclusions from this situation. The aim of the following considerations would therefore be to start from the perspective of those subjects that we describe as inferior and marginalized, and to what extent observing the preconditions of this group should be a constitutive (and hitherto overlooked) component of the theory of inclusion.},
 year = {2019}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Fundamentals and Limits of the Inclusive Culture and Inclusive Practise
AU  - Christian Wevelsiep
Y1  - 2019/11/25
PY  - 2019
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20190806.22
DO  - 10.11648/j.edu.20190806.22
T2  - Education Journal
JF  - Education Journal
JO  - Education Journal
SP  - 320
EP  - 326
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2327-2619
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.edu.20190806.22
AB  - Inclusion is an ideal: Belonging to the educations system is not a question. The children with disabilities are all part of a group, of a class, a school and of a community. This idea is great, but it needs to be grounded. Before describing in concrete terms which possibilities open up inclusive practices, the negative must be taken in account. The negative is intrusive: for the claim - to "integrate" everyone - can fail at certain moments. The idea of promoting and not "selecting" ends with a disturbing insight that affects a certain group: children with emotional and social developmental disorders. An interesting but difficult group, if we allow ourselves a few cliché-like exaggerations. A group that will be described in the following. The following article therefore covers a very wide range of objects. First, it aims to recall the foundations of inclusive theory; in this respect, it primarily aims at social-theoretical idealizations for which there is no exact equivalent in reality. First of all, abstract norms and values are at stake, ideals that always receive a resonance in pedagogical reality. But this resonance is not a measurable effect that can be exactly reproduced with the means of empirical social research. On the other hand it is a question of a group of people who may not be able to correspond to the described ideal: Children and adolescents with social and emotional developmental disorders. This group is trivially a factual component of a larger social group. But to what extent their integration and promotion is feasible within an inclusive framework would be questionable. Accordingly, the methodology must remain related to phenomenological perspectives. For it is not just a question of asking who may be a victim of exclusion, who is successfully integrated into a system and who is excluded. Rather, it is about the social-theoretical consequences of an irreversible tension: between a reality in which educational subjects do not correspond to the expectations, in which children are "sorted" and "classified" - and a theory that would have to draw conclusions from this situation. The aim of the following considerations would therefore be to start from the perspective of those subjects that we describe as inferior and marginalized, and to what extent observing the preconditions of this group should be a constitutive (and hitherto overlooked) component of the theory of inclusion.
VL  - 8
IS  - 6
ER  - 

Copy | Download