Inclusive education and intellectual disability: a sociological engagement with Martha Nussbaum

Abstract

As a result of exclusionary tactics, social, cultural or economic disadvantage or disability, vast numbers of pupils have poor educational experiences and are either marginalised or demonised due to 'difficult differences'. In the context of Martha Nussbaum's capabilities approach, where she suggests that we ought to be who we want to be, this paper addresses intellectual disability, inclusion and inclusive education. It proposes that care, compassion, creativity and ethics are critical in understanding the education for all children and young people, rather than necessarily pedagogical process. In addition, it suggests that learning should take place within and through relationships and that these relationships are important in developing a healthy sense of self. Therefore politically, rather than following a path of blame whether it is the dysfunctional family, the deficit child or the economically deprived nation, this paper says that we require socially just practices, compassion and care as fundamental to human development, social inclusion and inclusive education. Ultimately, education is failing a large sum of children and young people and therefore needs to be radically reconsidered.

Equality of What? The Capability Approach and the Right to Education for Persons with Disabilities

“…In the last decade, scholars in the field of education studies have turned to the capability approach to analyse the theory and provision of education for those with special needs and/or disabilities (see, among others, Ainscow & Farrell, 2002;Florian, Dee, & Devecchi, 2008;Nind, Rix, Sheehy, & Simmons, 2005). Several scholars have written about inclusive education, with a particular focus on capabilities (see, among others, Norwich, 2014;Robeyns, 2003Robeyns, , 2006Rogers, 2013;Saito, 2003;Sarojini Hart, 2012;Terzi, 2005Terzi, , 2007Terzi, , 2014Toson, Burrello, & Knollman, 2013;Trani, Bakhshi, Ballanca, Biggeri, & Marchetta, 2011;Walker, 2006a;Walker & Unterhalter, 2007). Other scholars (Arnardóttir, 2011;Broderick, 2014;Broderick & Quinlivan, 2017;De Beco, 2014Della Fina, 2017;Waddington & Toepke, 2014) have addressed the right to education in Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD or Convention).…”

Care-less spaces and identity construction: transition to secondary school for disabled children

“…Yet the professionals' working environment is structured in such a way, for example, constraints around time, financial restrictions and the allocation of provision, that conflict seems inevitable. Despite all the documentation on 'inclusive' education (Rogers 2013b; Slee 2011), we reveal that for many children identified with SEN-D, their parents find 'inclusive' education an abstract notion and part of a care-less rhetoric. Negotiating this process is so difficult for parents and children that many return to, or are placed within, specialist provision by the time they reach secondary school at the age of 11, so at the period of just beyond transition in England and Wales.…”

Features of the Information and Communication Technology Application by the Subjects of Special Education

“…The computer technologies not only allow developing the pupils with the LPH, but also prepare them for the independent and fulfilling life in the information society, creating a kind of link in the integration process, which connects that category of children with the surrounding world (Bryant, 2008;Rogers, 2013). The implementation of capabilities of modern information technologies extends the range of training activities types, allows improving the existing and gives rise to the new organizational forms and methods of pedagogical accompaniment.…”