Inclusive Education: The Case for Equity in Systemic Reform
Expanding Our Understanding of Inclusive Education: The Case for Equity in Systemic Reform
In the review of "Ability, Equity, and Culture; Sustaining Inclusive Urban Education Reform", I indicated that "a sustainable, scalable, successful systemic educational reform is attainable, provided that all stakeholders are committed to cultural responsivity and inclusivity for all students. In order to achieve this goal, reform needs to combat discrimination based on socially constructed notions of difference, such as gender, race, ethnicity, ability, class, and sexual orientation" (Fallah et al., 2018).
Most people concerned with the state of education in the
United States would agree that our schools are failing a large portion of the culturally
and linguistically diverse, socio-economically disadvantaged, minority and
immigrant students, as well as students with disabilities. There is a pronounced
and pervasive achievement gap between English Language Learners and non-ELL
students, for example. The latest data
from the Nation’s Report Card shows that “only 3 to 4 percent of ELL eighth
graders [are] demonstrating proficiency in math or reading” (National Education
Association (NEA), 2015, p. 3). The
graduation rate for ELLs is also substantially below the national average at
only 61.1 percent compared to 8.4 percent (NEA, 2015). The date on students with disabilities are
also deeply troubling. Consider the U.S. Department of Education’s four-year high
school graduation rate data for the 2010-2011 school year, which showed that
students with disabilities in California graduated at a rate of 59%, while the
overall graduation rate of California’s students was 76% (Stetser & Stillwell,
2014, p. 7). Some of these lower-performing students deal with
multiple forms of “otherness”, and are therefore, multiply-marginalized.
Despite legal mandates, such as
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA), which require equal opportunity
to students of all abilities, we continue to struggle with issues of equity in
education. The
disparity in access to resources and educational support has a striking impact
on the future of these students. For example, quality education facilitates
social and economic mobility. When this is
out of reach for many students in poor urban communities, a large portion of
the population will continue to experience staggering levels of economic,
political, and social inequality. Consider the fact that “[d]ropouts suffer higher rates
of unemployment, poverty, incarceration, depression…” (Faircloth, Toldson, & Lucio,
2014, p. v).
The reaction to these
significant educational issues has been to advocate for a variety of reform
efforts. Some, such as The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), was billed as a direct
response to the staggering achievement gaps between dominantly situated
students and those at the margins. Educational
scholars and activists, such as Jonathan Kozol and Diane Ravitch,
have written scathing reviews of these reform efforts. According to these advocates, most reform
initiatives have continued the trend of serving some, rather than all,
students. Touting “parental choice”, “accountability”, and
“autonomy from bureaucracy”, reformers have ultimately pushed for policies that
have led to high-stakes testing without the adequate support schools and
educators need to reach and lift up the most vulnerable students. On the other hand, smaller and more locally
focused reform efforts that actually showed promising results were not easily
scalable and sustainable due to a lack of structural support (Ravitch, 2010). Students who are performing poorly simply
continue to fall behind. More
disturbingly, in the last two decades, many change initiatives have led to a
corporate model in managing education. Consequently,
stakeholders are not as deeply connected and invested in the local public
schools (Ravitch, 2010). Rather than
serve the poor, minority, and low performing students with disabilities, many reform
initiatives have simply led to more exclusionary practices.
If
the goal of systemic reform is to improve education for all students, then a
critical analysis of how
educators are responding to diversity among students need to take place. While each book focuses on unique aspects of
systemic reform and challenges faced by educational leaders, the overall project
of both books is to guide practitioners and policy makers towards a more
equitable education system; one that works to actively undermine explicit and
implicit forms of ableism, racism, sexism, and other forms of exclusionary
practices.
Read more:JSARD-Summer-2018-final-book-review.pdf
I'm Helena Julio from Ecuador,I want to talk good about Mr Pedro on this topic.
ReplyDeleteMr Pedro and his loan company gives me financial support when all bank in my city turned down my request to grant me a loan of 500,000.00 USD, I tried all i could to get a loan from my banks here in Ecuador but they all turned me down because my credit was low but with god grace I came to know about Mr Pedro on a loan platform so I decided to give a try to apply for the loan. With God willing they granted me a loan of 500,000.00 USD. The loan request that my banks here in Ecuador have turned me down for, it was really awesome doing business with them and my business is going well now. Email/ Contact if you wish to apply for a loan from them.
pedroloanss@gmail.com