Introduction
The topic of inclusive education has gained traction from the public, policymakers, and scholars from different disciplines. Both developed and developing economies have struggled with issues of inclusive education such as handling and meeting the needs of learners with special needs and responding to challenges faced by minority and marginalized groups. While learners with special needs require special attention and resources to perform better, the international definition of inclusive education has emphasized the need for improving environments in mainstream classrooms to meet the needs of all students (Edwards, Cameron, King, and McPherson, (2019, p. 17). Policymakers in the United Kingdom (UK) have attracted attention from media and the public for failing to respond to the attention of learners with special needs in in mainstream schools. Inclusive education is a basic right for every child, regardless of gender, ethnic background, or physical ability, but the UK has failed to provide and meet this right. Inclusiveness in education is a direct determinant of future career success and equality in employment opportunities. Mainstream schools should be equipped with sufficient resources to meet and respond to diverse needs of all learners.
The presence of inequities in allocation of resources and access to basic education in primary and secondary schools predicts the same pattern in access to higher education, where only a few of learners with special needs and young people from communities of color remain disadvantaged. It is important for one to congratulate and celebrate the efforts that the UK has been making in addressing inclusion through policies in education such as the Equality Act (2010) and the Disability Discrimination Act (2005), but such policies can only have an impact when they are implemented. Inclusivity in education benefits both minority students with special needs education as well as the entire economy. Inclusive school and classroom environment is a basic right for black students just as it is a basic right for white learners. It is a basic right for children with disabilities, just as it is a basic right for children without disabilities.
The topic of inclusive education has gained traction from the public, policymakers, and scholars from different disciplines. Both developed and developing economies have struggled with issues of inclusive education such as handling and meeting the needs of learners with special needs and making mainstream schools accessible and suitable for learners with special needs (Paseka and Schwab, 2020, p. 256). Policymakers in the United Kingdom (UK) have attracted attention from media and the public for failing to respond to the attention of learners with special needs in the country. The international definition of inclusive education, according to Slee (2018, p. 6), is that it entails creating and implementing programs that do not exclude learners with special needs. Inclusive education is a basic right for every child, regardless of gender, ethnic background, or physical ability, but the UK has failed to meet the standards for inclusive education (Equality and Human Rights Commission, n.d., para. 3). Inclusiveness in education is a direct determinant of future career success and equality in employment opportunities.
The presence of inequities in allocation of resources and access to basic education in primary and secondary schools predicts the same pattern in access to higher education, where only a few of learners with special needs and young people from communities of color remain disadvantaged (Edwards, Cameron, King, and McPherson, 2019, p. 18). It is important for one to congratulate and celebrate the efforts that the UK government has been making in addressing inclusion through policies in education such as the Equality Act 2010 and the Disability Discrimination Act 2005, but such policies can only have an impact when they are implemented (The United Kingdom Government, n.d., para. 1). Inclusivity in education benefits minority students and those with special needs as well as the entire economy. Inclusive school and classroom environment is a basic right for black students just as it is a basic right for white learners. It is a basic right for children with disabilities, just as it is a basic right for children without disabilities.
The assessment in this paper seeks to determine how the UK government has responded to the international definition of inclusivity while also taking into consideration different theories such as Critical Race Theory (CRT), Intersectional Theory, Critical Disability Theory, and Advocacy Theory. The paper also utilizes the media Framing theory to explore how media responds to sensitive reports and influences attitudes and opinions of the audience. The analysis of the news reports will focus on two publications from The Independent (Busby, 2019) and The Guardian (Siddique, 2020) on the fight against support for children with special needs and exclusions of minority black groups in England respectively. The paper would conclude on the negativity of exclusions within our society and the detriment to the societal benefits.
Inclusive Education in England
Before delving into the theory of inclusivity in education and relevant policies and legislations affecting the topic in education, one ought to understand the definition of inclusivity and how the topic is sensitive in education. Gillborn (2019, p. 114) defined inclusive education as one that creates equal opportunities for all children to access education and learning. Different countries have had different interpretations of what constitutes inclusive education. According to Ainscow (2020, p. 5), the view of inclusive education presumes that the approach will respond to factors that promote social exclusion such as race, ethnicity, religion, and gender status. Furthermore, Tewksbury and Scheufele (2019, p. 55) emphasized that children with special needs deserve learning that accommodate their unique needs. The learning resources required in mainstream schools are always different from those required in special schools.
Inclusiveness in education has been cited in literature as an effective tool for fighting social determinants of health and poverty (Black, 2019, p. 9). According to Graham (2020, p. 25), educated individual develops knowledge to respond to social issues such as healthy living behaviours, high chances of access to employment opportunities, and high incomes from employment that can afford higher living standards. Statistical evidence has always indicated that poverty levels are more pronounced in marginalized groups and in populations where there is low level of education (Equality and Human Rights Commission, n.d., para. 3). Any attempt to deny children with special needs education and children of colour can deteriorate their living standards and future success in access to quality employment opportunities and quality of life. The best approach to addressing these potential challenges is to make mainstream schools accessible for all learners, regardless of the needs of learners.
Throughout history, England has been developing and implementing strategies aimed at meeting the needs of learners with Special Needs Education (commonly abbreviated as SEN learners) (Weale, 2022, para. 1). School funding has been cited in literature and practice as an effective strategy because the resources required by SEN learners are not similar to the ones required by learners in mainstream schools and classrooms (Weale, 2022, para. 3). Persistent shortages in funding at the local and national level have interfered with the quality of education enjoyed by SEN learners (Equality and Human Rights Commission, n.d., para. 4). Lack of funding and the recent intent by the government to do away with SEN schools is a direct interference with the special needs of learners, and is also an indication that the government is not ready to make mainstream schools accessible to students with disabilities.
The long history of colonialism and racism in the country has already had significant adverse impacts on black communities, where academic achievements of black learners are quite different from that of their white counterparts. Perennial inequalities have kept black children and their families languishing in poverty (Edwards, Cameron, King, and McPherson, 2019, p. 19) explicit inequality/exclusion (Physical and/or mental abuse, brutal violence, labour exploitation such as pay gap, slavery, blocking social mobility and economic opportunity (social disadvantage), biased justice system , de-skilling, and educational underachievement are among the social issues that inclusive education seeks to solve as explained by Maciver et al. (2019, p. 9). No one has a reason to justify or continue discriminating against these groups as they have already been marginalized in history.
Theories of Equality and Inclusive Education
The intersectionality framework is one of the approaches that one can use to conceptualize and analyze factors that affect inclusivity in education in the UK. Thomas and Macnab (2022, p. 273) defined intersectionality as an analytical framework that identify systems of inequality in society such as gender, ethnicity physical disabilities, identity, class, race, and other forms of discrimination such as sexual orientation and their role in creating dynamics in social effects. It encourages social inclusion in a multicultural society. Intersectionality theory brings into attention all the factors that can cause or increase marginalization of people in societies. The advantage of studying and understanding the effect and impact of overlapping of these factors is that it helps the society and policymakers to adjust and intervene to make sure that every member of society is protected from discriminatory practices However, the theory has been criticized by scholars for lacking a specific meaning and also reducing individuals to specific demographic groups (Esson 2020, p. 8). When summarized in simple terms, the theory of intersectionality asserts that all oppression is linked to one another. In the absence of understanding intersectionality as it applies to issues of oppression, the efforts and interventions aimed at addressing systematic issues may end up perpetuating the problem instead of addressing it (Black, 2019, p. 11).
The advocacy framework has also been cited by scholars as an effective approach for combating exclusion in education. Shabbir, Posetti, Simon (2022, para. 4) defined advocacy as a strategy for influencing the government to implement policies aimed at fighting social exclusion. The advantage of the advocacy lens cannot be underscored. It is an empowerment framework as explained by Love and Beneke (2021, p. 9). Inequities and injustices against marginalized groups can only be overcome when society advocates for change and when community is strengthened to the pillars of change such as policy changes and interventions aimed at suppressing discrimination. The framework helps stakeholders in identifying a range of social and political issues affecting marginalized groups such as black students who are suspected of being vulnerable to criminal offences and students living with disabilities. For instance, Love and Beneke (2021, p. 9) explained that intersectionality theory acknowledges that people are either advantaged or disadvantaged by variety of factors, where black students are expelled and students living with disabilities are denied sufficient funding, while their counterparts are accorded privileges.
The role of mainstream media in reporting and creating awareness about inclusive education cannot be underscored. Journalists can respond to the need of sensitizing the public and critiquing policymakers by applying the Media Framing Theory. Tewksbury and Scheufele, (2019, p. 55) defined media framing theory as a strategy used by news reporters to focus on sensitive topics to create meanings that can be understood by the audience. In this case, the sensitive issue lies within making the mainstream schools and classrooms accessible to all children.
Recent studies have investigated the effectiveness of the Critical Disability Theory in fulfilling the goal of inclusive education. Naraian (2021, p. 300) defined critical disability theory as a framework for understanding “ableism” in society. In this context, “ableism” has to do with the abilities of learners with special needs. The objective of critical disability theory is to transform the society to the extent that people with disabilities are allowed equal access to resources and opportunities in society. Naraian (2021, p. 301) explained that transforming learning environments to accommodate the needs of learners with special needs improves their learning experiences.
Critical Race Theory is another framework that helps one to understand the impact of racism in education. Zorn (2018, p. 4) defined critical race theory as a cross-disciplinary framework for understanding social conceptions of racism and ethnicity on individuals and society. The theory applies to the role of inclusion in education as it focuses on the role of media, policymakers, civil rights groups, and media in shaping or influencing changes on race and diversity.
The issue of diversity is directly related to the problem of inclusion in education (Hall, 2019, para. 2). It entails acknowledging and being aware that there exist varieties of people and groups within the system. When used in the context of education, diversity acknowledges that England is a diverse country with learners from diverse backgrounds and with diverse physical abilities (Hall, 2019, para. 1). People who are sensitive to diversity cannot engage or practice discrimination. Furthermore, governments that are sensitive to diversity often tend to allocate and distribute resources equally, regardless of the target beneficiaries or individuals who will benefit (Edwards, Cameron, King, and McPherson, 2019, p. 16). The government tends to consider the special needs and minority groups and focuses on accommodating and creating an environment that suits all learners. Diversity is both an advantage and a disadvantage, depending on how policymakers use it to respond to social issues (Shabbir, Posetti, Simon, 2022, para. 2). Acknowledging diversity encourages inclusion, while failure to acknowledge its existence undermines inclusion.
The Equality Act (2010) and the Disability Discrimination Act 2005
The UK government has put in place some policies and legislations, but unless these policies are implemented, the fate of marginalized and excluded groups remains unknown. Consider the Equality Act 2010, a legislation that sought to combat the inequities in education but has remained practically ineffective as discrimination and inequalities continue in the country. According to the first part of Chapter six, the legislation points out that pupils should not be discriminated against and should not be victimized (The United Kingdom Government, n.d). While the Act has dictated and explained what ought to happen, learners are still facing and experiencing incidents of discrimination that suppress their inclusion and future academic success. The fact that the government is currently considering reduction in funding due to budget constraints as noted in Busby (2019), as well as the fact that the number of learners that need special education has been rising brings into question the intent of policymakers.
Critical Assessment of Articles on Marginalized Groups
First Article: Busby (2019): Children with special needs and funding crisis
The article “Parents of children with special needs lose High Court fight against government over funding ‘crisis’” written by Busby (2019) reports on the recent High Court ruling in which parents of children with special needs (SEN) lost to the government. The command words used in this article are “lose,” “fight,” “funding crisis,” and “children with special needs.” The author has used the Media Framing Theory to create a picture that makes the reader to identify with and sympathize with the plight of marginalized SEN learners. The Media Framing Theory explains how news reporters frame events to bring out the meaning (Tewksbury and Scheufele, 2019, p. 55) In a direct quote placed below the headline, the author states that “We still believe thousands of children are being failed by system…” (Busby, 2019, para. 1). According to the news article, councils are starved, and they are no longer able to fulfil their legal obligation of funding SEN learners. While this should not be a debatable issue, it is evident that the government has failed to fulfill a legal obligation stated in the Equality Act of 2010 (para. 4).
Inclusiveness in education goes beyond the issue of SEN learners. It also has to do with the topic of racism and how discrimination in schools affects academic achievements for students from minority group, immigrants including the black communities. In the article written by Siddique (2020) and published in The Guardian, the news reporter points out how schools are discriminating against students from black communities and the potential impact that discriminatory policies could have on the future of marginalized learners, and indicate the role of critical disability theory in combatting exclusion in education. The rising exclusions of marginalized and minority groups through law enforcement and framing of people from minority group, immigrants, people of colour including black students as suspects is only intended to increase the gap between the white and people of color (Edwards, Cameron, King, and McPherson, 2019, p. 19). Mainstream schools should be reformed to remove these barriers and accommodate learners of diverse backgrounds. The decision by the government to reduce funding will only delay the intended purpose of making mainstream schools accessible for learners with special needs.
The target audience of the article is parents, policymakers, and non-governmental organizations championing or advocating for needs of children with special needs. Even though this article is intended to inform, the tone of the article is seeking to convince the reader to respond and act against the government for failing to meet its legal obligation. The author of the article uses command words and chooses strategic direct quotes from lawyers and other parties affected by the ruling of the High Court, where the rising demand for funding has been met by a reduction in budgeting instead of making appropriate increase to curb the demand. The author says, “They are treated in a fundamentally different way, both legally, and factually” (para. 4). It is evident from this article that the issue of discrimination and disability is examined by the author, advocating for immediate intervention to avert the consequences. This article fulfills the role of Media Framing Theory in bringing to light the topic of inclusion and exclusion in education, with the goal of influencing the government’s position on the issue. The tone of the article convinces the reader that the government is making a wrong decision and there is a need to critique the path that councils are taking.
The revolving subject in the article by Busby (2019) is the issue of funding crisis and education for learners with special needs. The law that seeks to provide for SEN learners is only theoretically available, but practically inactive (Black, 2019, p. 7). It is surprising that parents had put in place strong defence against the government, but the High Court failed to compel the government to fulfill its legal obligation. SEN children have equal right to access basic education just like any other child, but councils have taken an excuse of budget constraints to forego and avoid increasing the funding. The failed policy implementation as explained by Black (2019) has crushed the hopes and dreams of learners with special needs. Additionally, the misinterpretation of the policy on special needs has created barriers for SEN students. Morley et al. (2021, p. 410-411) explained that the UK policy on SEN is meant to force learners to fit into mainstream schools, unless otherwise required by parents. The policy is not specific on learners who qualify for special needs.
The Critical Disability Theory (CDT) outlines the consequences and factors that could have compelled the High Court to side with the government. Naraian (2021, p. 300) defined CDT as ableism and racism factors that impact inclusion and exclusion. It is evident that the court has placed children living with disabilities into the “other” category, where their special needs does not require immediate attention (Miller, 2021, p. 44). Maciver et al. (2019, p. 7) explained that discriminatory practices that target marginalized groups tend to increase the inequality gap between the marginalized group and other members in society. For instance, taking the issue of underfunding into consideration reveals government’s plan to exclude SEN from the educational curricula. Instead of fighting for their rights and defending them, the government has opted for an alternative path that will only increase the gap between children living with disabilities and their counterparts who are getting maximum support from the government.
Busby (2019) article is published in The Independent, a newspaper that is neutral in terms of content reporting. The author of the article may not have had a conflict of interest in the topic as seen in the manner that the content is framed and reported. According to the profile of the writer on the newspaper’s website, Busby is an education correspondent who has been working with the organization for more than five years.
Second article: Siddique (2020): Exclusion of black working-class pupils
The article “Black working-class pupils unfairly excluded in England, thinktank warns” written by Siddique (2020) reports on the rising cases of discrimination against the black youth in England. Throughout the article, the Siddique (2020) addresses the topic of racism and how marginalization and discrimination against black students undermines their progress in terms of access and equality in education. The command words used in this article are “Black,” “Pupils,” “unfairly,” and “Excluded.” These command words are directly related to the topic of inclusion and intersectionality in addressing and fighting racism, a strategy that is common in Media Framing theory as explained in Tewksbury and Scheufele (2019, p. 56). The subheading “Two-tier education system criminalises black youth, says Institute of Race Relations” (Siddique, 2020, para. 1) further expounds on the title using the word “criminalizes black youth…” This statement indicates that black youth are not responsible for being criminalized, but it is the system that has waged war against them.
The target audience of the article is parents of black youth, policymakers, and non-governmental organizations championing equality and anti-racism movements. This is the time of evaluating the policy at the evaluation stage and determining if it is working. It is evident from the article by Busby (2019) that the policy has failed and should be reconsidered. The author is more concerned about the issue of equality and how racism marginalizes black students in England (Miller, 2020, p. 1923). The choice of words and emphasis on statistical evidence pointing out how young black boys can be excluded compared to their white counterparts makes the article to assume the tone of an activist and advocate, rather than just reporting the message (Esson, 2020, p. 711). Despite the activist tone present in the article, Siddique raises a significant argument to support the theory of intersectionality and diversity. The statement “…teaching pupils about different cultures for mutual understanding and respect” shows that the author is intended to pass a new perspective about social change in tackling racism. This strategy is grounded in Critical Race Theory and Media Framing Theory where the author intends to challenge existing approaches in tackling racism while also influencing potential policy changes in meeting the needs of marginalized groups.
The theory of intersectionality is also evident in this article. Intersectionality deals with understanding how different factors work together towards having adverse impacts on marginalized groups (Besic, 2020, p. 113). In this case, criminalization of black youth denies them an equal opportunity to study and lead better lives in future. Migliarini and Stinson (2021, 75) explained that racism in education excludes learners who could have played a significant role in economic development of the nation. The black community has been marginalized throughout history, and it is only through proper policy change that the atrocities endured can be corrected (Zorn, 2018, p. 211). Slee (2018, p. 4) explained that inclusive education is not dead, but just fussy and can be revived. It only requires policy changes and determination to make policies effective.
Conclusion and Recommendation
Inclusive education is a basic right for all learners. However, England has ignored the plight of black students and SEN learners whose needs cannot be met by mainstream learning environments. The intersectionality theory used in this paper helps one to understand how the relationship within multiple factors perpetuates discrimination and exploitation of marginalized groups. The two articles by Siddique and Busby have highlighted the mistakes that the UK government is making when it comes to inclusivity in education. Acknowledging the role of diversity in education will help the government to fulfill its legal obligation stipulated in the Equality Act 2010 and the Disability Act 2005. All learners have the same basic right to education, and it is the responsibility of the government to ensure that relevant policies seeking to address racism, discrimination, marginalisation, and requirement of SEN are implemented and not just in theory.
References
Ainscow, M. (2020) Promoting inclusion and equity in education: lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1), pp. 7-16
Besic, E., (2020). Intersectionality: A pathway towards inclusive education? Prospects, 49 (3), pp.111-122.
Black, A., (2019). August. A picture of special educational needs in England–an overview. In Frontiers in Education, pp. 1-10
Busby, E. (2019). ‘Parents of children with special needs lose High Court fight against government over funding ‘crisis’’ Independent, UK. Web.
Edwards, B.M., Cameron, D., King, G. and McPherson, A.C., (2019). ‘How students without special needs perceive social inclusion of children with physical impairments in mainstream schools: A scoping review.’ International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 66(3), pp.298-324.
Equality and Human Rights Commission (n.d.). ‘Inclusive education – UK Government assessment.’ Web.
Esson, J., (2020). ‘“The why and the white”: Racism and curriculum reform in British geography.’ Area, 52(4), pp.708-715.
Florian, L., (2019). On the necessary co-existence of special and inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(7-8), pp.691-704.
Gillborn, D., (2019). ‘Hiding in plain sight: Understanding and addressing whiteness and color-blind ideology in education.’ Kappa Delta Pi Record, 55(3), pp.112-117.
Graham, L.J., (2020). ‘Inclusive education in the 21st century.’ In Inclusive education for the 21st century (pp. 3-26). Routledge.
Hall, M.C., 2019. Critical disability theory. Web.
Love, H.R. and Beneke, M.R., (2021). ‘Pursuing justice-driven inclusive education research: Disability critical race theory (DisCrit) in early childhood.’ Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 41(1), pp.31-44.
Maciver, D. et al. (2019). ‘Participation of children with disabilities in school: A realist systematic review of psychosocial and environmental factors.’ PloS One, 14(1). Web.
Migliarini, V. and Stinson, C., (2021). ‘Inclusive education in the (new) era of anti-immigration policy: enacting equity for disabled English language learners.’ International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 34(1), pp.72-88.
Miller, P., (2020). ‘Race discrimination, the politics of knowledge, and cultural inequality in England.’ Handbook on Promoting Social Justice in Education, pp.1913-1934.
Miller, P., (2021). ‘“System conditions”, system failure, structural racism and anti-racism in the United Kingdom: Evidence from Education and Beyond.’ Societies, 11(2), p.42-49.
Morley, D et al. (2021). ‘Including pupils with special educational needs and/or disabilities in mainstream secondary physical education: A revisit study.’ European Physical Education Review, 27(2), pp.401-418.
Naraian, S., (2021). ‘Making inclusion matter: critical disability studies and teacher education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 53(3), pp.298-313.
National Deaf Children’s Society (n.d.). The Equality Act and your child’s education. Web.
Paseka, A. and Schwab, S., 2020. Parents’ attitudes towards inclusive education and their perceptions of inclusive teaching practices and resources. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 35(2), pp.254-272.
Siddique, H. (2020). ‘Black working-class pupils unfairly excluded in England, thinktank warns.’ The Guardian. Web.
Slee, R., (2018). Inclusive education isn’t dead, it just smells funny. Routledge.
Tewksbury, D. and Scheufele, D.A., 2019. ‘News framing theory and research.’ In Media effects (pp. 51-68). Routledge.
The United Kingdom Government (n.d.). ‘Equality Act 2010.’ Web.
Thomas, G. and Macnab, N., (2022). ‘Intersectionality, diversity, community and inclusion: untangling the knots.’ International Journal of Inclusive Education, 26(3), pp.227-244.
Weale, S. (2022). ‘Government sets out plans to overhaul special educational needs system.’ The Guardian. Web.
Zorn, J., 2018. Critical race theory in education: Where farce meets tragedy. Academic Questions, 31(2), pp.203-211.