Residential special schooling: the inclusive option!
Culham and Nind (2003) have argued that normalisation and inclusion are guiding philosophies which have a common end but radically different approaches to attaining that end. Whilst there is a shared desire to see people with special needs as valued members of the community, there is a fundamental d...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
CELCIS
2004-08-01
|
| Series: | Scottish Journal of Residential Child Care |
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Culham and Nind (2003) have argued that normalisation and inclusion are guiding philosophies which have a common end but radically different approaches to attaining that end. Whilst there is a shared desire to see people with special needs as valued members of the community, there is a fundamental difference. In normalisation, community presence and value are earned through minimising difference, whereas in inclusion, the person's difference is welcomed and valued. One way of eradicating that difference is through the process of assimilation (Allan, 1999). Assimilation, however, is at odds with the kind of empowerment strategies adopted by most other devalued groups (for example: ethnic minorities; women; people with physical and sensory disabilities) who celebrate their differences and welcome congregative identity and activity. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2976-9353 |