It’s that time of year again—the time of year when, by wearing a pin or ribbon, or by engaging in “what it’s like to be disabled” simulations, schools and businesses seek to promote disability awareness month. But the big question remains unanswered: of what exactly are we becoming more aware? It cannot merely be that different types and varying degrees of severity of disability exist. The month of October, then, is really framed in the wrong context. Activities should be geared more toward propagation of the fact that disability is a natural part of life, and that a culture that promotes and actively implements an inclusive philosophy is ideal.
Although the federal government does not define the term “inclusion,” it is defined in the Dictionary of Developmental Disabilities Terminology, Second Edition. The definition effectively says that “inclusion” is an educational model for students with disabilities that mainly occurs in the general education setting and employs collaboration between special and general educators. Implementation can entail redefinition or reorganization of educational goals.
But in my view, a good basis for decisions on whether or not a given student should be included and for raising awareness cannot be developed strictly from that definition. Fundamentally, the decision as to whether or not to include and how to do it is based on, as Harvard Law Professor Martha Minow puts it, the “dilemma of difference,” which manifests itself when professionals have to answer two questions at once: "when does treating people differently emphasize their differences and stigmatize or hinder them on that basis? And when does treating people the same become insensitive to their differences and likely to stigmatize or hinder them on that basis?" (Minow, M. (1990). Making all the difference: Inclusion, exclusion, and American law. London: Comell University Press. p. 20).
It is on this basis that I was included—meaning that some courses were switched, but I was fully mainstreamed-- and came to realize that for inclusion to be successful, special and general educators must:
- Analyze the maturity and tolerance levels of their student bodies so that they can adequately prepare them for the real world by, aside from focusing on academics, providing the life-skills necessary to be full-fledged members of society.
- Avoid lowering work standards unless absolutely necessary.
- Engage in deliberations about whether a particular class, even if required, has relevance in the daily life of a particular student.
What’s important here is that inclusion can only be successful if the whole theme of celebration of differences is toned down, so that while the differences are recognized and adapted to by educators in such a way as to not emphasize them and contribute to the stigma associated with disability. If teachers automatically accommodate students with special needs without giving off the vibe that doing so takes extra effort or is against their will, then the students will do the same and come to recognize that disability is a multifaceted, ordinary part of our society; in other words, they will be fully aware of the nature of disability.
About David A. Kuriniec
Blog guest author David A. Kuriniec is studying political science and communications at Lake Forest College. He is a nationally recognized advocate for people with disabilities and has spoken to organizations such as the Council for Exceptional Children and Snap-On Tools about how able-bodied people can better interact with people with disabilities. In January, he is slated to present a new approach to special education to the Louisiana State Board of Education. For more information on his activism, please feel free to visit his website, Different Ability or email him at breakthewall2004@yahoo.com.
This is an awesome article! The writer seems like a really great guy!
Posted by: Sarah | October 22, 2005 at 12:52 PM
Why not have exclusion.
Special Education is bureaucracy at its worst.
Posted by: Pablo | June 05, 2006 at 08:23 PM