Approximation of Inclusive Education in Armenia to International Standards and Practice PDF
Preview Approximation of Inclusive Education in Armenia to International Standards and Practice
Approximation of Inclusive Education in Armenia to International Standards and Practices Arevik Anapiosyan, senior researcher Grigor Hayrapetyan, economist Sofia Hovsepyan, junior researcher The project has been conducted within the Open Society Foundations – Armenia Policy Fellowship Initiative Yerevan 2014 Table of Contents INSTEAD OF FORWARD INCLUSIVE EDUCATION: PERCEPTIONS, CONCEPTS AND REALITIES. ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................. 4 RESEARCH SETTING ........................................................................................................................................................... 4 DATA COLLECTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 4 5 POLICY CONCERNS FOR IMPLEMENTING INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN ARMENIA .................. 4 INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND ARMENIA’S COMMITMENTS. ............................... 5 INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND ARMENIA .............................................................................. 5 EDUCATION FOR ALL AND SALAMANCA STATEMENT ............................................................................................... 10 INCLUSIVE EDUCATION AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF ARMENIA ............................................... 10 FRAGMENTED COMMUNICATION AND EXCHANGE OF EXPERIENCE ......................................... 12 INCLUSION VS. QUALITY? REFORM PRIORITIES AND INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE. ............ 13 FIVE DIMENSIONS TO TACKLE QUALITY ....................................................................................................................... 13 ROLE OF SUPPORT TEAMS AND TEACHER ASSISTANTS ............................................................................................. 14 AGE-‐APPROPRIATE EXPOSURE ...................................................................................................................................... 16 PEDAGOGICAL-‐PSYCHOLOGICAL SUPPORT SERVICES ................................................................................................ 16 CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT AND TEACHER EDUCATION ................................................................. 17 INSTITUTIONAL AND IN-‐SERVICE TRAINING OF TEACHERS ...................................................................................... 18 WHY SHOULD PEDAGOGICAL INSTITUTIONS BE PRIORITIZED? ............................................................................... 19 WHO WILL BE ASSESSING THE EDUCATIONAL NEEDS? ............................................................................................. 19 FINANCING OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION ............................................................................................... 19 INCLUSIVE EDUCATION FUNDING MODELS ................................................................................................................. 20 PUBLIC FINANCING OF EDUCATION .............................................................................................................................. 22 FINANCING INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN ARMENIA ...................................................................................................... 23 THE EXPECTED MODEL OF FUNDING ............................................................................................................................ 24 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................... 27 ADVOCACY ACTION PLAN (DRAFT) ...................................................................................................... 28 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................ 30 APPENDIX 1 .................................................................................................................................................. 33 APPENDIX 2 .................................................................................................................................................. 34 2 Instead of Forward Inclusive Education: perceptions, concepts and realities. What is inclusion? Who are the beneficiaries of inclusion? And finally, why is there a need for inclusion, if at all? These are the questions that many politicians, field specialists, parents and children, students and professors, and society members wonder about, yet often covertly, and cautious of being mistaken. Inclusiveness is often perceived as a “tool” for incorporating subjective irregularities into seemingly “ordinary” communities. Unfortunately, this notion is prevailing in societies and countries based on positive law and seriously undermining natural rights of all persons. Meanwhile, artificial boundaries that diminish individualities first of all harm those with stereotypes. Inclusiveness is when each and every person, despite of the differences of identities, is considered a full member of a society enjoying the exact same rights and opportunities as other member of the society. Inclusiveness is when a child from a low-‐ income family has the same opportunity to study as a child of a wealthy family; it’s when a child with no special educational needs studies with a disabled person and learns to be kind, supportive and helpful. Inclusiveness is when a person with special educational needs (SEN) regains his/her importance as a society member and tastes the opportunities of finding a niche in life. The greatest benefit of inclusiveness is a cohesive society that values the diverse identities of its members and develops into a community that is mature and mighty to make our world a better place to live. The basic ideology behind the concept of inclusive education is that all students attend and are welcomed by their neighbourhood schools in age-‐appropriate, regular classes and are supported to learn, contribute and participate in all aspects of the life of the school. This implies that our schools, classrooms, programmes and activities need to be developed and designed the way to accommodate the needs of all students, and be conducive for studying and working together. A very important aspect is the quality of education: parents of all children, regardless the needs, express concerns that quality of education may suffer in inclusive schools. This is a key issue, as if we can ensure quality education, it will become extremely complicated to favour segregated school system no matter how different the hidden motivations could be. Although Armenia had its first inclusive school back in 2001, when school N27, named after D. Demirchiyan started to provided inclusive education with the support of the “Bridge of Hope” NGO and Ministry of Education, perceptions of inclusive education and attitude towards it in general public is twofold. A recent report of UNICEF Armenia falls to unveil this reality. More than 50% of the survey respondents consider that a child with physical disabilities should attend a special school. Moreover, 86% of respondents mentioned that a child with intellectual disabilities should go to special schools. Still, eighty-‐three percent of all respondents think that is will be acceptable for their child to have a classmate with physical disabilities. The percent of those who consider acceptable that a child with intellectual disabilities attend the same class with their child is considerably small – forty-‐eight percent of all respondents. The greatest problem with the Armenian perception of inclusive education lies in the absence of a genuine discourse regarding the importance of inclusive education, and 3 nowadays this discourse is substituted by political rhetoric. And the UNICEF report comes to witness the misperceptions that Armenian general public has vis-‐à-‐vis inclusive education and children with special educational needs. Absence of the discourse gives room for discretion, defines reform priorities that raise concerns, and finally, upholds the knowledge gap in the communities, which could support the reform if properly informed about. Methodology This policy research is predominantly based on content analysis of local and international legal framework, international best practices, and qualitative research methods. Data associated with research questions related to educational background of multidisciplinary team members, their training needs, as well as teaching methodologies employed by subject teachers and their training needs were collected with the application of quantitative research methods. Research setting The study was conducted in nineteen inclusive schools located in Yerevan, five schools in Shirak marz, two schools in Ararat marz, and two schools in Gegharqunik region. The complete list of schools is presented in Appendix 1. Data Collection During the phase of desk review a number of local and international documents were analyzed. Sampling of was done based on primary research of international conventional framework, guidelines of UN and its agencies, including UNICEF and UNESCO. Besides, based on inclusive education implementation country index, best practices of inclusive education implementation in Ireland, Israel, Norway, UK and Canada were studied. Complete list of studied documents can be found in Appendix 2. During field research the following activities were performed: focus groups, face-‐to-‐face interviews with semi-‐standardized questionnaires, and in-‐depth and expert interviews. 10 focus groups were conducted with multidisciplinary team members, 50 interviews were conducted with subject teachers, and 13 in-‐depth and expert interviews were conducted with field experts and reform implementers. Information on interviewees is provided in Appendix 2. 5 Policy Concerns for Implementing Inclusive Education in Armenia Based on our research we have identified seven major policy related issues that need to be addressed instantly in order to consider the implementation of inclusive education in Armenia a successful reform. First issue is that inclusive education is poorly defined in policies and legal framework, and it is primarily perceived in terms of disability and special needs. This was observed during the analysis of legislation and policies related to inclusive education. So, to address this policy concern we have conducted a comparative analysis of international legal framework, international commitments of the Republic of Armenia, and local legislation. 4 The second policy concern relates to the lack of holistic approach in the education system, which is conditioned by the lack of formal and practical mechanisms for information flow and exchange of experience among professionals. This matter was indirectly raised in 95% of our in-‐depth interviews with school principles, members of multidisciplinary teams and subject teachers. The third and rather salient policy concern is related to education quality vs. enrolment rates: increase of enrolment is prioritized over improvement of the quality of education. A number of experts we interviewed attached importance to the increase in the number of learners attending mainstream education schools. This tendency is also observed in the internationally funded projects, including those with UN. While absolutely seconding all the arguments that bringing a child into school is of utmost importance, we however, note that quality is reciprocal to inclusion. We have addressed this policy concern with the discussion of the multidisciplinary team approach to inclusive education, bluer definitions of learning outcomes, teaching and learning methods, as well as infrastructure and effective use of resources. The forth policy issue is about capacity building and enhancement in all the spheres and levels of education system related to inclusive education. This policy concern is closely linked to the previous concern, as quality hinges on the capacity of the system in general and education providers in particular. This matter has been addressed by evaluating current mechanisms of capacity development and analysis of the local potential for enhancing the quality of teacher education. Finally, the fifth policy concern is related to the funding schemes of inclusive education. As it became obvious during the research, funding of inclusive education is conditioned by a number of extra-‐budgetary factors, among which is the method of need assessment and choice of the funding model, level of corruption in the chain of the funding flow, and surely availability of the funds. This research refers to the funding issues in the light of the current reform narrative (full inclusion and needs based funding). All the abovementioned policy concerns set the frame of this policy paper, and they are individually discussed in respective chapters. International Legal Framework and Armenia’s Commitments. International Conventional framework and Armenia When addressing inclusive education, United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization refers to the right of education or Roma and street children, child workers, people with disabilities, and indigenous and rural people. Here we face the fundamental difference of how the international community sees inclusive education and how it is interpreted in the Armenian reality. Local interpretation is narrowed down to the educational rights of disabled persons, and thus, the insight of the whole spectrum is missing, which brings up distorted local discourse, incomplete legal framework and misconception of inclusiveness. Hence, this chapter aims to open up the essence of inclusiveness in education as it is articulated in international legal documents. 5 Various international human rights instruments have continuously promoted inclusive education ever since Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1946 (Dr. Charles Malik (Lebanon), et al. 1946). Article 26 of the Declaration says that: “(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace. (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.” UNESCO Convention against Discrimination in Education (1960) is another foundational international document for the promotion of inclusive education. This convention upholds the right of education for all persons regardless of their differences (race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic condition or birth) (UNESCO 1960). It also reaffirms that a parent/legal guardians has the right to choose the education institution best meeting the needs of a child (Article 5.b.). It is important to mention that Armenia is a party to the abovementioned two fundamental international human rights documents. As we can see, inclusion is never coined down to disability only: it is broader and wider. Inclusion is about everything that challenges exclusion. For instance, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination addresses exclusion based on race (United Nations 1965). “…States Parties undertake to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in the enjoyment of the … (v) The right to education and training” (Article 5.e. (v)). Armenia was accessed to this Convention on the 23rd of June 19931, and even though Armenia is largely a monoethnic country and exclusion on the grounds of race might not seem to be a salient issue, inclusive education is not perceived as antidiscrimination towards race, nation and ethnicity. Armenia has also ratified the First Protocol to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights2. The First Protocol involves the right to education (article 2): “No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of 1 Source of information – United Nations Treaty Collection Database (https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-‐2&chapter=4&lang=en accessed 20th October 2014) 2 Source of information – Council of Europe Treaty Office (http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/Commun/ListeTableauCourt.asp?MA=3&CM=16&CL=ENG accessed 20th October 2014) 6 parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.” A number of applications have been made to the European Court of Human Rights where parents alleged that the local authority’s segregation of their child in special school against their wishes represents a violation of the right to education under article 2, Protocol 1, and other Conventional rights. The right to education without discrimination is enshrined in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (United Nations 1966). Article 13 of the Covenant states that: “(1) The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to education. They agree that education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity, and shall strengthen the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. They further agree that education shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups, and further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.” The second part of the Article underlines the accessibility of education “by every appropriate means.” 162 countries, including Armenia are parties to this Covenant3. As mentioned in the opening of this chapter, the right of education of rural people is once of the foci of inclusive education. UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women addresses this issue from gender perspective (United Nations 1979). Part 2 of the Article 14 of the Convention mentions that: “States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in rural areas in order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, that they participate in and benefit from rural development and, in particular, shall ensure to such women the right: …(d) to obtain all types of training and education, formal and non-‐ formal, including that relating to functional literacy, as well as, inter alia, the benefit of all community and extension services, in order to increase their technical proficiency.” Armenia is among 188 countries party to the Convention4. UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in its exceptional sessions where Armenia’s periodic reports were considered concluded that women and girls in rural areas often become victims of prevailing traditional stereotypes prevail, and education is seen as a tool for changing the cultural context (United Nations 1999). A very important international document is the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Article 2 of the Convention mentions that there can be no discrimination towards 3 Source of information – United Nations Treaty Collection Database (https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-‐3&chapter=4&lang=en accessed 20th October 2014) 4 Source of information – United Nations Treaty Collection Database ( https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-‐8&chapter=4&lang=enn accessed 20th October 2014) 7 a child based on race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status of the child’s or his/her parent(s)/legal guardian(s) (United Nations 1989). It is important to notice several important key concepts that the Convention puts forward. The first thing that we have already mentioned is non-‐discrimination, and then comes the interests of the child. The later implies that the best interests of the child should be of primary consideration in all actions concerning children (Article 3). The next two key concepts refer to the optimal development and the voice of the child. Here we witness the underlying significance of giving each and every child an opportunity to grow up as an individual with distinct views and ability to be a full member of a society. The Convention Article 23 concerns disabled children understanding that they are vulnerable to segregation and discrimination. “(1) States Parties recognize that a mentally or physically disabled child should enjoy a full and decent life, in conditions which ensure dignity, promote self-‐reliance and facilitate the child’s active participation in the community.” It goes further and states that: “(3) Recognizing the special needs of a disabled child, assistance … shall be designed to ensure that the disabled child has effective access to and receives education… in a manner conducive to the child’s achieving the fullest possible social integration and individual development, including his or her cultural and spiritual development….” Thus, Article 23 implies that children who have disability should receive special care and support that they can live a full and independent life, and as we observe it is beyond the local understanding of the aim of inclusive education. Articles 28 and 29 cover the rights of children to education. First, education should be available and accessible to every child and it should respect human dignity of a child, and second, education should aim to develop each child’s personality and talents to the full. Armenia is surely a party to this Convention and should, ideally, respect its provisions5. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was an important advance for people with disabilities throughout the world and a huge step forward on recognizing the right to education of disabled persons (United Nations 2006). Article 24 states that: “(1)States Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to education. …[and] shall ensure an inclusive education system at all levels and life long learning directed to: …(b)the development by persons with disabilities of their personality, talents and creativity, as well as their mental and physical abilities, to their fullest potential;… (2)[states] shall ensure that (a)persons with disabilities are not excluded from the general education system on the basis of disability, …(b)can access an inclusive, quality and free primary education and secondary education on an equal basis with others in the 5 Source of information – United Nations Treaty Collection Database (https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-‐11&chapter=4&lang=en accessed 20th October 2014) 8 communities in which they live; …(d)persons with disabilities receive the support required, within the general education system, to facilitate their effective education:…” The significance of this article is that, in fact, it sets the rules of the game for all educational institutions from primary to tertiary level education and it reaffirms the concept that disabled persons are equal members of a society. It is important to notice the provision stating that people have the right to have access to education in the communities they live. This is an explicit message that all the community schools have to provide inclusive education. Armenia has ratified the Convention6, but has signed and not ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention7. The Convention establishes a Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which reviews periodic reports submitted by States on the implementation of the Convention provisions. The Optional Protocol enables individuals and groups in a state party to the Protocol to complain to the Committee that the country has breached one of its obligations under the Convention. Moreover, the Committee can undertake inquiries under the Optional Protocol if it receives reliable information indicating grave or systematic violations by a State of any of the provisions of the Convention. The Committee may also invite the State in question to respond to such information. Although a state ratifying the Optional Protocol may “opt out” of the inquiry procedure, it strengthens the commitment of a state to implement the provisions of the Convention. As a member of the Council of Europe, Armenia has committed herself towards implementing the provisions of the European Social Charter (1961) and the Revised Social Charter (1996). Based on these two treaties the Council of Europe developed Disability Strategy 2006-‐2015, which makes it clear that education for disabled children should be directed towards full inclusion. In the Council of Europe documents it is mentioned that the creation of opportunities for disabled persons to participate in mainstream education is not only important for disabled people, but will also benefit non-‐disabled people’s understanding of human diversity. To meet the strategy goals the member states, in line with a number of other responsibilities, are supposed to review the legislative framework to accommodate the reforms, develop unified educational system (including mainstream and specialized educational provisions, which promotes the sharing of expertise and greater inclusion), enable early appropriate assessment of special educational needs, within the mainstream educational system provide the required support to persons with special educational needs, and finally, make the general educational system and facilities accessible for disabled persons (Cuncil of Europe Committee of Ministers 2006). This strategy implies that Armenia is expected to meet the abovementioned goals by the end of the next year (2015). However, so far Armenia has not been championing the Committee recommendations, not even vis-‐à-‐vis the legal framework. 6 Source of information – United Nations Treaty Collection Database (https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-‐15&chapter=4&lang=en accessed 20th October 2014) 7 Source of information – United Nations Treaty Collection Database (https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-‐15-‐a&chapter=4&lang=en accessed 20th October 2014) 9 Education for All and Salamanca Statement World conference on Education For All, held in Thailand on 5-‐9 March 1990, was major milestone on the way to confirming the role of education in human development policy. The two major goals of the World Declaration on Education for All (1990) were the universalization of primary education and massive reduction of illiteracy by the end of the decade (UNESCO 1990). This goal was not met by the end of the time mentioned, and the World Education Forum, held in Dakar in 2000, adopted the Dakar Framework for Action which sets new goals to achieve by the end of 20158 (World Education Forum 2000). Meanwhile, in June 1994 in Salamanca, World Conference was held on Special Needs Education. During the Conference the participant adopted a Statement on the education of all disabled children, which called for inclusion to be the norm. The Framework for Action, adjunct to the statement, introduced guiding principles according to which ordinary schools should accommodate all children, regardless of their physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic or other conditions; all educational policies should stipulate that disabled children attend the neighbourhood school 'that would be attended if the child did not have a disability' (World Conference on Special Needs Education 1994). Referring to the benchmark set by the Salamanca Statement and the Framework for Action, countries were expected to develop their strategies towards ensuring inclusiveness. Armenia also developed its National Programme on Inclusive Education, and it is discussed in the following chapter. Inclusive Education and Legal Framework of Armenia Inclusive education in Armenia is regulated by the Republic of Armenia (RA) Constitution, Law on Education, Law on Mainstream Education, Law on Social Protection of Persons with Disabilities, Law on Rights of a Child, and a number of ministerial documents issued by the RA Ministry of Education and Science. It is important to mention from the very beginning that our research revealed that current legal framework, although having provided an opportunity to considerably develop the field of inclusive education in Armenia, fails to truly ensure inclusion and it is not in line with the internationally accepted guidelines and Armenia’s international commitments. However, a starting point of the discussion is that in 2012 the Government of Armenia developed two draft laws aiming to amend the RA Law on Education and the RA Law on Mainstream Education, thus, create inclusive-‐friendly legal framework. The policy change that the law will bring is that by August 1, 2025, Armenian mainstream educational system will become fully inclusive. This implies that all mainstream educational schools of the country will provide inclusive education, and we believe this will definitely become an achievement. 8 1. Expand early childhood care and education 2. Provide free and compulsory primary education for all 3. Promote learning and life skills for young people and adults 4. Increase adult literacy 5. Achieve gender parity 6. Improve the quality of education 10
Description:The list of books you might like
