Theory And Practice Of Modern Inclusive Education

Abstract

The theory and practice of modern inclusive education is an intensively developing region. Modern inclusive education is increasingly aware of itself as an education in which axiological aspects are leading. Solving spiritual and moral dilemmas and preventing the emergence of new problems and barriers allows to harmonize relations between individuals with HIA and persons without HIA, not only to optimize and improve the success of interaction and relations. Solving spiritual and moral dilemmas and preventing the emergence of new problems and barriers allows to experiencing and understanding of people, to harmonize relations between their social effectiveness and self-efficacy, not only to achieve self-fulfillment and social success, but also to improve society as a whole. The improvement of society begins there when people build mutual aid, mutual service, freedom and respect for the dignity, weaknesses and success of everyone. In Russia, the education of students with disabilities can be organized jointly with other students, as well as in individual classes, groups or in separate organizations that carry out educational activities, and the state undertakes to provide training for pedagogical personnel who have special professional approaches and methods of teaching and upbringing students with disabilities. Thus, the problem of forming readiness for the implementation of inclusive education of students with disabilities, the professional training of teachers at the present time requires the solution at the theoretical, methodological and practical levels.

Keywords: Disabilisminclusive educationhealthy societyinnovationparticipationsocial serviceparticipation

Introduction

The theory and practice of modern inclusive education is an intensively developing region. Modern inclusive education is increasingly aware of itself as an education in which axiological aspects are leading. Solving spiritual and moral dilemmas and preventing the emergence of new problems and barriers allows to harmonize relations between individuals with HIA and persons without HIA, not only to optimize and improve the success of interaction and relations. Solving spiritual and moral dilemmas and preventing the emergence of new problems and barriers allows to experiencing and understanding of people, to harmonize relations between their social effectiveness and self-efficacy, not only to achieve self-fulfillment and social success, but also to improve society as a whole. The improvement of society begins there when people build mutual aid, mutual service, freedom and respect for the dignity, weaknesses and success of everyone. Inclusive education as an innovation has, nevertheless, deep historical roots: caring, custody, mutual assistance, social service, participation and participation. However, in the modern world, inclusions are hampered by stereotypes regarding persons with HIA, called disabilism or disability. Disabilism prescribes people with HIA inability to overcome natural limitations associated with the characteristics of their health status, body features, as well as many negative and ineffective features. These negative characteristics give rise to alienation, stigmatization and other consequences, impeding inclusion. At the same time, the healing, developing potential of inclusion as the curly for mutual relations of all people, is very great: the culture of joint being, of common life is the basis of a healthy society. One of the main problems of the psychology of limited opportunities, defectology, requiring its solution is the destruction of stereotypes about disability and the creation of a new social image of people with HIA.

Integration of people with HIA into society, into education, has become very important and relevant for communities and peoples throughout the world. In Russia this process ant its results is not at an adequate level from the development positions (Stepanova et al., 2018). This is due to a number of inconsistency:

• between the recognition of a major portion of the civil communities of the relevance and actuality of the problem of social, psychological and pedagogical integration of individuals, especially children, with HIA in society and the unwillingness and inability of the societies and counties to include this category of persons, as well as other categories of the queers;

• between the growing number of people with HIA and low understanding of the society about their personal and social needs, as well as the lack of an development environment for their prosperous socialization, education;

• between the needs of persons with HIA in education and the insufficient preparation of the educational environment of the mass school, educators and psychologists, social workers and other specialists engaged in the educational process to the creation and provision of educational services;

• between the need of persons with HIA in active and deployed, general and special support and scarce development of psychological, pedagogical and other technologies and strategies of social and pedagogical coaching, supervision and support for different category of persons;

• between the need of persons with HIA in the social and pedagogical support and incompetence of a major part of modern pedagogues and parents in its organization and perfection (upgrade).

However, recently in the inclusive education researchers and practitioners have noted the new trends related to the development of madia technologies and biotechnologies, include different level and stages of training specialists for such activities, and for prepare and improvement people with disabilities.

Problem Statement

Inclusive education is the process and results of joint education and training of persons with disabilities and persons who do not have manifested physical, mental and other significant limitations (features). In the science, only the there is still a discussion about the content of the concept “inclusive education” (Stepanova et al., 2018). Active application in the Russian scientific and practical field of this concept start only at the end of the XX century and the beginning of the XXI century. The introduction of the concept of inclusive education by the Salamanca Declaration of Persons with Special Needs (1994) and the adoption of the UNESCO Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2001) were almost simultaneous. Both documents marks not only the reflection of the heterogeneity of societies, but and changing the position in different societies towards its diversity. These declarations are an understanding, reflection and prospection of value of differences, acceptance as admission and humility, as well as the pleasure and joy of living in a world of human differences (Afanasyeva, Bratkova, Eremina, & Titov, 2014; Deppeler, 2013; Mardakhayev, 2005; Muller, Raskaskov, & Rotova, 2016). Recently, sociocultural and, in particular, the educational situation is changing intensely in Russia. Now the general tendency of democratization of various spheres of human life and society as a whole is progressing. International and state legislative acts declare the equality of people and their rights, but often the implementation of these rights, as well as the implementation of duties related to rights, goes against the content of normative documents. There is no necessary and sufficient legal and material basis for people to exercise their rights and obligations as independent, free, full-fledged citizens. In addition, there are shortcomings in the theory and practice of holistic education, education of a citizen of democracy, a family man and a future specialist. This problem is particularly noticeable in relation to persons with HIA, in practices of inclusive relations. The willingness to implement inclusive education for people with disabilities by educators, psychologists and managers is not sufficiently developed to date. The main reason is the absence of attempts at a purposeful comprehensive, systematic solution of this problem in the theory and practice of vocational education of future teachers, social workers, psychologists, managers, etc. Inclusive or included education is a term used to describe the process of teaching people with special needs general (mass) and higher schools. The basis of inclusive education is ideology, which excludes any discrimination that ensures equal treatment for all people but creates special conditions for children with special educational needs. Inclusive education - reflects both the innovation process and the result of the development of general education. It implies the accessibility of education for all, in terms of adapting to the various needs of all children. Inclusive education is designed to provide access to education for children with special needs (Liventseva, 2012). Teachers and other professionals who are not narrow specialists in working with students of this category have difficulty in adopting such a model of education at the psychological, theoretical and methodological levels. Undoubtedly, it is necessary to consider training of specialists of different profiles for the implementation of inclusive education and other inclusive practices for people with disabilities and for other people in difficult life situations that limit their opportunities and / or specific needs, at all levels at all levels stages, including undergraduate, master's, postgraduate and postgraduate courses. The system of inclusive education integrates educational stages of secondary, professional and higher education. Its aims are to create and develop a material, physical, socio-economic and spiritual-psychological barrier-free environment in the different types of training (vocational and other) of people with disabilities. This set of measures implies both the technical and technological re-equipment of educational institutions that train such specialists, changing attitudes about the mission and values of education, the mission and values of working with persons with HIA, their families, as well as perceptions of human life and relations in general (Arpentieva, 2018b; Demchuk, 2010; Derkach, 2004; Eremina & Afanasyeva, 2016; Khutorskoy & Khutorskaya, 2016; Korchagina & Arpentieva, 2017).

Research Questions

The theory and practice of modern inclusive education is an intensively developing region. Modern inclusive education is increasingly aware of itself as an education in which axiological aspects are leading. Solving spiritual and moral dilemmas and preventing the emergence of new problems and barriers allows not only to harmonize relations between individuals with HIA and persons without HIA, not only to optimize and improve the success of communication, experiences and perceptions of people about their social effectiveness and self-efficacy, not only to achieve self-fulfillment and social success, but also to improve society as a whole. The improvement of society begins there when people build mutual help, mutual service, freedom and respect for the dignity, weaknesses and successes of everyone.

It is also necessary to develop special educational programmers and courses for specialists in different professional and careers stages and for students aimed at developing their collaboration, engagement and different relationships with people with disabilities. In addition, special programs are needed to facilitate the adaptation of children and young people with disabilities in a general education institution and the establishment of higher university education (Liventseva, 2012). Article 3 of the Declaration of Principles on Tolerance adopted by the United Nations states that “tolerance is more important than ever in the modern world”. The Declaration regards tolerance as a condition for the successful integration of a person into the system of social relations. It provides an opportunity to solve the tasks of increasing the social activity of people as members of the community, the task of overcoming (self) isolation of disabled people and negative attitude (stigma, prejudice) towards them. It provides an opportunity to achieve an increase in the level of social cohesion and social stability in society. Experience shows that out of any rigid educational system, some of the children and young people drop out, because the system is not ready to meet the individual needs of such children in training. This ratio is usually about 15% of the total number of children in secondary schools, at least 5% – boys and girls in higher education. Thus, retired children and young people become isolated and excluded from the general system. It is necessary to understand that not children and young people fail, but the system excludes children. Inclusive approaches can support such children and young people in achieving success in education, work, family relationships, which will give people with HIA the chances and opportunities for a better life (Liventseva, 2012).

For individuals, especially for children with disabilities, moral and psychological problems, social and other types of deficiency are typical, caused in most cases, by multiple types of disability, including readiness for integration into society. This is exacerbated by the insufficient formation of professional tolerance among professionals working with this category of people. According to the United Nations and the World Health Organization, approximately 10-15% of people on Earth have abnormalities of mental and physical development. They can be called people with disabilities. Moreover, the tense situation in the country / region increases the disability and disability., As well as other forms and causes of violations leading to exclusion.

Purpose of the Study

Currently, there is an active formation of infrastructures that functionally support the education and rehabilitation of people with disabilities, but integrated training of healthy children and disabled people is introduced in the educational process, but interned and individual forms of instruction are more often used. In different departments (health, education, social protection, etc.), rehabilitation centers of different types are created for people with limited physical and functional capabilities. However, the system, ways, forms and conditions for the formation of professional readiness of specialists to work with such people and their families, the development of tolerance and skills of proper educational work for future social, medical, managerial and pedagogical workers and workers in Russia and the world have not been sufficiently developed. H to the end aware and the moral and psychological roots of disability as a result of the unproductive choice of a person or his family in relation to development or failure to develop in conditions of intense social stress, etc. It is worthwhile to study the experience of foreign countries, where inclusive education of people with disabilities with a strong theoretical-methodological and methodological base (United States of America, Great Britain, Sweden, Finland, etc.) successfully functions (De Boer, Pijl, & Minnaert, 2011; Cagran & Schmidt, 2011; Mattson & Hansen, 2009; Polat, 2011; Schmidt & Cagran, 2006). In the Russian Federation, this experience is also gradually accumulating, including in the context of scientific and practical research (Arpentieva, 2018a; Kassymova e al., 2018; Panyukova, Saitgalieva, & Sergeeva, 2018; Rimmerman, 2014; Stepanova et al., 2018).

Studies of the specific features of vocational training of pedagogical and other personnel for work in inclusive groups and inclusive contexts in education and other spheres have several directions. One of them is the reorganization and modification of programs of general vocational education, caused by the idea of inclusion (Kim, 2011). Kim (2011) identifies three types of vocational training programs in higher education: combined, separate, general professional. Combined type of training combines courses of general and special pedagogy; At the completion of the training, the graduate is assigned a qualification with the right to work in general and special education. Separate type of training presupposes the preservation of general and special pedagogy programs separately at the relevant faculties, however students can get a diploma with a dual specialty, additionally having listened to certain courses at the required faculty. The general professional type of training does not provide an opportunity to obtain additional qualifications for special pedagogy. As a result of the study it was found out that students of combined type of training demonstrate the most positive attitude towards inclusion and readiness for inclusion (Liventseva, 2012). In addition to compiling theoretical courses of general and special pedagogy, interactive methods of teaching future teachers are effective, which enable students to be included in activities that model real life situations with their natural difficulties (Scorgie, 2010). Specialists apply a virtual course in the training of students, based on an interactive set of exercises that reproduces the family with a child / youth / adult disabled (Liventseva, 2012). In Russia, the education of students with disabilities can be organized jointly with other students, as well as in individual classes, groups or in separate organizations that carry out educational activities, and the state undertakes to provide training for pedagogical personnel who have special professional approaches and methods of teaching and upbringing students with disabilities. Thus, the problem of forming readiness for the implementation of inclusive education of children with disabilities, the professional training of teachers at the present time requires the solution at the theoretical, methodological and practical levels.

In addition to training specialists, it is important to transform the system of relations in different organizations. One of the strategic objectives of the development of the Russian education system until 2020 is to update the content and technologies of education, taking into account the specifics of institutions. In modern conditions of reforming education in Russia, one of the conditions for the realization of citizens' right to quality education is the effective operation of educational institutions in its various aspects: value, organizational, content, legal and financial. The intensive development of the theory and practice of psychological and pedagogical support in recent years is associated with the expansion of ideas about the aims of education, including the goals of development, education, and ensuring the physical, mental, psychological, moral and social health of children. With this approach, psycho-pedagogical support can no longer be regarded as a “service sphere”, “service service”, but acts as an integral element of the education system, an equal partner of structures and specialists of a different profile in solving the problems of training, education and development of a new generation.

Research Methods

The selection of the principles of designing a system of psychological and pedagogical support is determined by the general conceptual provisions of the development of the regional education system. The selection of the principles of designing a system of psychological and pedagogical support is taking into account the specifics of the institution's activities:

• the principle of continuity, which is aimed at the development of interaction between educational organizations of all levels in psychological, pedagogical and medico-social support;

• the principle of differentiation, based on the satisfaction of various educational needs of clients through the provision of a range of psychological, pedagogical and medico-social services;

• the principle of continuity, aimed at forming a system of continuity of preschool, primary general, basic general, basic general, secondary (complete) general and additional education;

• other principles;

Findings

The project activity of the institution is aimed at the prevention of deviant forms of behavior and disadaptation of children and adolescents who find themselves in difficult life situations. The project activity of the institution also is aimed at the formation of a healthy lifestyle, and the professional competence of specialists in psychological and pedagogical support services for educational institutions of all types and types for the preservation and strengthening of mental and physical health children and adolescents. Therefore, the strategic task of the institution's specialists, accompanied by such children, is focused, firstly, on the early detection of abnormalities in development, as risk factors for the occurrence of a particular pathology, and secondly, to establish their structure, with outwardly similar manifestations such deviations may have a completely different psychological basis. Only on a complex basis, prerequisites can be created not only for the prevention of serious violations of mental development, but also for the purposeful correction of existing deviations.

The basic activities of the institution of psychological and pedagogical support for persons with HIA are: 1. Development and dissemination (in accordance with existing educational conditions) of the methodology for supporting the system of psychological and pedagogical support and scientific, methodological and methodological materials for accompanying all subjects of the educational process. 2. Development and constant correction (in accordance with changes in the legal framework, financing and the organization of the educational process), the organizational and coordinating component of the institution's activities, the creation and implementation in educational space of pedagogical technologies of psychological and pedagogical support in educational institutions. 3. Organization of educational activities in general education programs (basic, additional) in accordance with the age and individual characteristics of children, their physical and mental health. 4. Development and approval of local acts, provisions for the creation of a unified system of psychological and pedagogical support in the education system of the region, introduction of principles and forms of reporting documentation, monitoring and analysis of community community conditions and community work results. 5. Implementation of predictive and analytical activities, monitoring studies, formation of psychological services rating on the quality of psychological and pedagogical support of the educational environment, examination of adaptive educational programs, projects, methodological recommendations for the implementation of psychological and pedagogical support of educational institutions, relevant services. 6. Organization and coordination of the system of psychological and pedagogical support of education: the dissemination of best practices, the results of activities achieved in educational institutions, the organization of training, further training, attestation and methodological support of the pedagogical staff of the institution, support of competitions, events (seminars, round tables, Coordination Council, PMPC) 7. Organization of interaction with public organizations, foundations, parents' associations interested in effective promotion of the system of psychological and pedagogical support of education: coordination of activities at the planning level, participation in events, attraction of educational institutions upon request, etc. As an organizational basis, a request (social order) for services to provide psychological and pedagogical support from parents, educators, the students themselves, or other interested persons (Korchagina & Arpentieva, 2017; Stepanova, 2002a; Stepanova, 2002b; Winzer & Mazurek, 2010; Yarskaya-Smirnova & Loshakova, 2003).

Conclusion

The necessary managerial support for psychological and pedagogical activity within the framework of this model is implemented through the introduction of diagnostic, developmental and training activities of teachers, psychologists, and speech therapists in the plan of measures. There is necessity creation of conditions for the implementation of cooperation between teachers and psychologists (organization and support of managerial decisions of the work of psychological seminars, round tables, control over the implementation of decisions of the council, commissions). There is necessity creation of the concept of cooperation with social partners; Providing opportunities to engage other professionals in dealing with difficult cases.

References

1. Afanasyeva, Yu. A., Bratkova, M. V., Eremina, A. A., & Titov, O. V. (2014). Development of inclusive education in the city of Moscow. Moscow: Logmag Publ.
2. Arpentieva, M. R. (Ed.) (2018a). Foresight Education: Values, Models and Technologies of Didactic Communication of the XXI Century. Сanada, Toronto: Altaspera Publishing & Literary Agency Inc.
3. Arpentieva, M. R. (Ed.) (2018b). Psychology and pedagogy of the future: youth foresight .Youth and psychology: ideas and projects. Сanada, Toronto: Altaspera Publishing & Literary Agency Inc.
4. Cagran, B., & Schmidt, M. (2011). Attitudes of Slovene teachers towards the inclusion of pupils with different types of special needs in primary school. Educational Studies, 37(2), 171- 195.
5. De Boer, A., Pijl S., & Minnaert, A. (2011). Regular primary schoolteachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education: a review of the literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(3), 331-353.
6. Demchuk, A. V. (2010). Analysis of the results of experimental work on the formation of professional tolerance among future teachers of children with disabilities. Herald of the Chelyabinsk State Pedagogical University, 10, 45-51.
7. Deppeler, J. D. (2013). Developing equitable practices in schools: Professional collaboration in research. In P. Jones (Ed), Bringing insider perspectives into inclusive teacher learning: Potentials and challenges for educational professionals (pp. 178-189). New York, USA: Routledg Publishing.
8. Derkach, A. A., (2004). Acmeological basis of professional development. Moscow: Moscow: Publishing House of the Moscow Psychological and Social Institute; Voronezh: MODEK Publishing House.
9. educational environment in the northern city. World of Science, Culture, Education, 2(57), 29-35.
10. Eremina, A. A., & Afanasyeva, Yu. A. (2016). Ensuring an inclusive education in institutions with the status of a “resource center”. Innovations in Education, 5, 5-18.
11. Kassymova, G. К., Stepanova, G. A., Stepanova, O. P., Menshikov, P. V., Gridneva S. V., Arpentieva, M. R., & Merezhnikov, A. P. (2018). Self-development management in educational globalization. International Journal of Education and Information, 12, 171-176.
12. Khutorskoy, A., & Khutorskaya L.N. (2016). Educating a student in learning. Lectures and laboratory works: Teaching manual. Moscow: Publishing house "Eidos"; Publishing Institute of Human Education.
13. Kim, J.-R. (2011.) Influence of teacher preparation programmes on preservice teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(3), 355-377.
14. Korchagina, N. S., & Arpentieva, M. R., (2017). Personal readiness of students of the faculties of social work and professional activities. North Carolina, USA: Lilu, Si-press.
15. Liventseva, N. A. (2012). The problem of practical realization of inclusive education in the USA and European countries. Modern foreign psychology, 1, 20-29.
16. Mardakhayev, L. (2005). Social pedagogy: a textbook. Moscow: Gardariki Publishing.
17. Mattson, E. H., & Hansen, A. M. (2009). Inclusive and exclusive education in Sweden: principals’ opinions and experiences. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 24(4), 465- 472.
18. Muller, O. Yu., Raskaskov, F. D., & Rotova, N. A. (2016). Cluster approach to creating inclusive
19. Panyukova, S. V., Saitgalieva, G. G., & Sergeeva, V. S., (2018). Network interaction in resource educational and scientific centres with collaborating universities for education disabled people. Psychological science and education, 23(2), 7-18. https://dx.doi.org/10.17759 / pse.2018230202.
20. Polat, F. (2011). Inclusion in education: A step towards social justice. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1), 50-58.
21. Rimmerman, A., (2014). Social Inclusion of People with Disabilities. National and International Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Schmidt, M., & Cagran, B. (2006). Classroom climate in regular primary school settings with children with special needs. Educational Studies, 32(4), 361-372.
23. Scorgie, K. (2010). Powerful glimpse from across the table: reflections on a virtual parenting exercise. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(7), 697-708.
24. Stepanova, G. A. (2002a). Professional pedagogical readiness of students for physical rehabilitation of children. Monograph. Surgut: RIO Surgut SPU Publ.
25. Stepanova, G. A. (2002b). Professional readiness of pedagogical students for system rehabilitation of children with HIA. Moscow, Surgut: Surgut State Pedagogical Institute Publ.
26. Stepanova, G. A., Tashcheva, A. I., Stepanova, O. P., Kassymova, G. К., Tokar, O. V., Menshikov, P. V., & Arpentieva, M. R. (2018). The problem of management and implementation of innovative models of network interaction in inclusive education of persons with disabilities. International Journal of Education and Information, 12, 156-162.
27. Winzer, M. A., & Mazurek, K. (Eds.). (2010). Special Education in the 21st Century. Washington: Gallaudet University Press.
28. Yarskaya-Smirnova, E. R., & Loshakova, I. I. (2003). Inclusive education of disabled children. Sociological research, 5, 100-106.