On 21 March 2018 the NSW Government provided its Response to the report of the NSW Legislative Council Portfolio Committee No.3 into “Education of students with a disability or special needs in New South Wales” (Report).

At that time All Means All noted that the Report was:

“… highly problematic as it reveals a fundamental inconsistency between the principles of inclusive education, which it purports to support, and the recommendations that it makes, ostensibly in pursuit of those principles.”

While Recommendation 1 of the Report was that “the NSW Government formalise a presumption applicable to all New South Wales schools that a child is to be educated in an inclusive mainstream setting”, Recommendation 10 sought that “the NSW Department of Education increase [segregated] support classes in mainstream schools to adequately meet student need.”

As expected, the NSW Government’s Response unequivocally “supports” Recommendation 10:

“Support class establishments will increase in 2018 at a greater rate than general enrolment growth, consistent with trends in recent years.  The trend since 2012 is for the majority of new support classes to be established in mainstream schools.”

This means the continuation of the accelerating increase in students with disability being placed in segregated classes and settings, rather than in inclusive general education classes.  It is accordingly not surprising that the NSW Government could only suggest that its support for Recommendation 1, the presumption that students with disability were to be educated in an inclusive mainstream setting, would be “in principle”.  Further, the response to Recommendations 11 and 12 which provide for the collection of data of the number of students denied enrollment in segregated support classes, appears to be tailor-made to justify future growth of segregation on the basis of “demand” and notwithstanding the complex factors that drive such demand being based on poor implementation of inclusive education, including discriminatory gate-keeping, poor practices and denial of reasonable accommodation, lack of training and support for teachers, school culture, etc.

While there are some steps in the right direction and the sentiment of the Report and the Response to advance the educational experience of students with disability is welcomed, as we previously noted, at its core the Report invited, and has now received, a NSW Government response for the “entrenchment of the status quo and a direction away from human rights and best evidence”.

As defined in the UN’s   General Comment No. 4 (the guidance instrument for Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities, released in 2016 and not even acknowledged in the Report):

“Segregation occurs when the education of students with disabilities is provided in separate environments designed or used to respond to a particular or various impairments, in isolation from students without disabilities.” [para 11]

The fundamental issue with Recommendation 10 is that the Parliamentary Committee appears to have accepted, contrary to the clear definition of “inclusive education” in international human rights instruments, the submissions of disability advocacy organisations and basic logic, the position advanced by some groups that segregated education settings for students with disability are not incompatible with inclusion.  We note for example, the statement from the NSW Primary Principals Association stating that “there is in fact a place – and a need – for support units and special schools, and that the presence of such settings can be reconciled with an inclusive approach to education”.  Similarly, the Committee reported that “many representatives of the special education sector, maintained that students with disabilities should not be subject to a ‘one-size fits all’ approach and need access to the educational setting that can draw the best learning outcomes”.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding and convenient distortion of the principles of inclusive education and the adoption of universal design for learning frameworks in general education schools.  Fundamentally, inclusive education is about ensuring that the general education system itself is not built on a “one size fits all” assumption and instead, through appropriate design, differentiation and individual adjustments where necessary at the general education classroom level, equitable access and authentic participation by every student in general education classrooms can be achieved. As noted by NSW inclusive education academic expert and researcher Dr. Ilektra Spandagou “The aim is to take decisive step to restructure the education system to be inclusive for all students.  Support classes is a Trojan horse.”

It is particularly disappointing that the Committee, and now the NSW Government have chosen to give weight to the views of vested interests over the moral and human rights imperative of inclusive education.  It is worth noting the recent candid comments from the European Human Rights Commissioner in the context of European countries that identified the role that “vested interests” play in the entrenchment of segregated education and the resistance to inclusive education:

“Strong vested interests in the area of education can explain a certain passivity on the part of states in tackling segregated education. Decision-makers and political leaders, school administrations, teachers and families can sometimes actively resist changes that may alter situations of relative privilege in education.  The capacity of these actors to articulate their demands and to raise their criticism of government policies is much higher than the ability of vulnerable families to fight for the right of their children to education.”

Inclusive education is a human rights matter defined under a UN Convention that has been ratified by Australia; its character is not a matter to be determined by individual Principals associations or parent advocates or political representatives.

The rise of segregated education for students with disability in Australia has already been raised by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the context of its review of Australia’s report on its compliance with the International Convention of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights:

“As for persons with disabilities and inclusive education, there was evidence of a rise in segregated education.  What measures … [is] the Government taking to ensure inclusive education across the country?”

As Australia’s most populous State, the NSW Government Response threatens to further compromise any national attempt to arrest the systemic growth in segregated education in Australia.

In that regard it is noted with interest that the Introduction to the NSW Government’s Response states:

“Enrolment [as to setting] should primarily be a matter of well-informed parental choice.”

All Means All acknowledges that within Australia this is a positive shift in governmental position – for too long parents have been left to “choose”  without proper information, without regard to the research evidence and without any understanding that their child, over and above Australian and State statutory rights, has a human right at international law to receive an inclusive education alongside and together with their same-age non-disabled peers.

On that point, it is a convenient coincidence that on the same day that the NSW Government Response was tabled, All Means All, together with a number of associations in Australia and around the world, and with the support of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, released an international video campaign to promote the human right to an inclusive education and the impact of segregated education on life-long outcomes.

You can read our Media Release about the “Lea Goes to School” video and the #IncludeUsFromTheStart campaign. The campaign website www.includeusfromthestart.com provides further information about the global effort for the promotion of inclusive education.

[Cover photo © Sacha Styles]

Thank you for visiting our website.  You can also keep up with our mission by liking our Facebook page or following us on Twitter @allmeansallaus

All Means All  participates in International World Down Syndrome Day 2018 Video Campaign

“Lea Goes to School”

All Means All – The Australian Alliance for Inclusive Education is proud of its participation in this year’s international World Down Syndrome Day (21 March) #WDSD18 video campaign led by CoorDown, Italy’s national Down syndrome association.

With the creative and communications talent of Luca Pannese and Luca Lorenzini of Publicis New York, together with the support of Down Syndrome International, Down Syndrome Australia, Down’s Syndrome Association (UK), Movimento Down (Brazil) and All Means All, and with the the patronage of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, CoorDown has delivered yet another powerful video advocacy campaign to advance the rights of people with Down syndrome.

This year’s video takes the form of an animated children’s book story entitled Lea goes to school – read by Grace, a 10 year old child with Down syndrome.

The video can be viewed here.

The core message of the campaign is that inclusive education is a human right and that it is time to remove the systemic and cultural barriers to students with Down syndrome and other disabilities realising this critical human right.

The goal of the campaign, reflected in the hashtag #IncludeUsFromTheStart and supported by the information website www.includeusfromthestart.com, is to highlight the importance for students with disability of accessing an inclusive education from the beginning of their educational experience in determining academic and social life-long outcomes, influencing acceptance and respect for diversity and maximising their future participation in the community and life generally.

This goal is in alignment with the work of All Means All in progressing the implementation of an inclusive education system and the removal of the barriers that limit the rights of some students, including many students with disability, to access a quality inclusive education in Australian schools.

A children’s story with a powerful message

The story of Lea Goes to School is short but in its simplicity it presents a number of important themes and messages:

• In being narrated by a young girl with Down syndrome it recognises that the right to inclusive education is a fundamental human right of the child – as recognised by Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (to which Australia is a party) and UN General Comment No. 4 on the Right to Inclusive Education. The story book is the creative “device” that allows this serious message to be delivered through the voice of a child.
• The opening statement that the child protagonist is at a “cross roads” introduces the fact that for many children around the world the direct path to an inclusive education in a regular classroom amongst their same-age peers is crossed by a diversionary lower trajectory “special” education path that, as research demonstrates, more often leads to social isolation and segregated work and living settings.
• The talking sign-post that stands at the fork in the path and recommends the separate segregated education path through life represents the systemic and cultural barriers to students accessing a genuinely inclusive education.
• The statement by the child protagonist to the sign-post, “I’m not special. I’m Lea!” challenges the euphemistic foundation and logic of the “special” path and emphasises the importance of educational settings and teachers seeing and responding to each child for the individual that they are.
• The young protagonist’s intuitive rejection of the “easier” low-expectations “special” path underscores the artificiality of the “special” path and the importance of students with disability being academically challenged and held to high expectations.
• The simplicity of the story is also reflective of the simplicity of inclusion as a cultural concept and goal – ultimately inclusion is about being a valued part of one’s community. The achievement of that goal is incompatible with segregation of people with disability, in education, employment or other settings.

Over 40 years of research-based evidence shows that inclusive education – a system in which every student is welcomed and supported and where all students learn together in regular classrooms – maximises academic and social outcomes for all students, not just students with disability.

Inclusive education does not happen by itself – students must be properly supported to access the classroom curriculum and teachers and school staff must also be supported, trained and resourced.  It requires the progressive systemic and cultural transformation of our “dual pathway” general and special education systems into a single genuinely inclusive, fully accessible and properly resourced system.  That transformation – the removal of the systemic and cultural barriers – begins with acknowledging the right of every child to receive an inclusive education.

Dr Robert Jackson, co-Founder and a Director of All Means All: “We know that children with Down syndrome are among the most excluded and segregated in Australia’s education system and society and World Down Syndrome Day is an opportunity for us to champion their educational rights and to raise consciousness about inclusive education as a fundamental human right of every child.  The message of the video reflects what we know from decades of research, that educational experiences are critical in determining the life-long trajectory for children with disability and that an inclusive education is the most direct path to a better future for them.”

Ms Catalina Devandas, UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities: “Access to quality education is essential for children with disabilities to be able to effectively participate in the community. It is a fundamental human right, and one of the keys for ending poverty and making our societies more just. We must all be committed to ensure that schools are inclusive of children with disabilities.”

All Means All – The Australian Alliance for Inclusive Education is a nationwide multi- stakeholder alliance working together for the implementation of an inclusive education system in Australia. You can read more about us here:  www.allmeansall.org.au

World Down Syndrome Day is an international event – officially ratified by a UN resolution – created to raise greater awareness and understanding about Down syndrome, usher in a new culture that embraces human diversity and promotes respect and inclusion in society for all people with Down syndrome.

Thank you for visiting our website.  You can also keep up with our mission by liking our Facebook page or following us on Twitter @allmeansallaus

By Lisa Bridle

The day after my son Sean was born, my mother-in-law (undoubtedly a force of nature!) said to me: “I have called the Down Syndrome Association and he can go to a regular school you know”.  At that stage, our precious baby boy was barely clinging to life in the neonatal intensive care unit so I thought she was getting a little ahead of herself.

My next stroke of luck was that the new parent support person from the local Down Syndrome Association who we met when Sean was 8 weeks old shared her stories of her son’s inclusion.  Her life (and her son’s life) did not seem like the isolating tragedy I was imagining, so I decided I might do well to follow her example and learn more about school inclusion.

From this start, even though we didn’t know it yet, my husband, Terry, and I were questioning the idea that Sean’s life path had to be a “special” path determined by his diagnosis.  We were resisting our own misguided stereotypes and starting to see Sean without the filter of dreaded fantasies.

When we really saw Sean as he was – we fell utterly under his spell.  Sean was charming, sociable, funny and determined.  While we felt that he deserved the same life opportunities as his bigger sister, Milly, we came to realise that this is made harder by histories of prejudice, institutionalisation and inferior treatment. But we were stubborn enough to believe that not only was this his right, but that we would be doing others a favour by ensuring his presence.

Inclusion is, of course, not just about “rights”.  It is about being known and belonging in a local community so it was obvious to us that he needed to be included — in childcare, kindy, pre-school and then school.  Mostly entry was easy, but along the way we needed to challenge the “one hour a week” enrolment in preschool initially offered to us and to resist the kindly pressure by guidance officers to enrol in a special school many suburbs away from our home.

This first test of our commitment made us realise that Sean’s participation was not guaranteed but very much “conditional”.   Knowing though that separating children with disability was a historical habit helped us feel stronger in our advocacy; we chose a school without a special education unit and insisted that Sean be really included (not just placed in the classroom) by being challenged to learn.

Sean’s primary years were not a perfect replica of our vision for him – at times, he was groomed to be dependent on teacher aide support rather than included alongside his peers, and sometimes we saw the impact of low expectations.

Despite the gap between a truly inclusive model and what we experienced, the school community was overwhelmingly welcoming.  Sean was a full member of his classes and was loved and embraced by students, parents, and staff.   He participated fully in the life of the school and left primary school with real enduring friendships– friends that he still phones, Facebooks and sees regularly for parties, lunch, movies, and more.

Looking back, I would say that sometimes the people who were meant to support Sean’s inclusion were the biggest barrier. Mostly the classroom teachers got it right, while the “specialist” teacher brought forward unhelpful conversations about the “widening gap” and later scuttled chances for Sean to attend the high school of our choice.

When Sean’s enrolment was rejected at the school we wanted, and we met dead ends elsewhere, we reluctantly agreed to enrol in a regular school with a special education unit some distance from home. When the school started talking about Sean participating in shopping and “life skills” on a Friday and work experience in a sheltered workshop, I knew we had to get out!  Sean was able to move to a new school in walking distance from our home and where some boys from his primary school had gone. With an exceptional teacher at first, I thought we had arrived at inclusion nirvana but she moved on and testing times arrived.

In Years 9 and into Year 10, we were called to a series of school meetings where it was patiently explained to us that our chosen school was not right for Sean, and so they would provide a list of appropriate alternative schools – “special protective environments designed for children like these”.  When we resisted, we were judged as hopelessly unrealistic parents. The school’s determination to force us out included a threat to just suspend Sean for longer and longer periods until we had no choice but to give up.  At this point, we cited disability discrimination laws and reminded the Principal that we would fight to ensure our son’s rights were upheld.

Strangely, through this time I never re-thought the choice about inclusion – and despite these struggles, Sean strode into that school with a stubborn confidence. While disappointed with the school, I understood that this was a steep learning curve for them and recognised that, after centuries of exclusion, the inclusive path is not always easy – but always worth taking.

Once we established that Sean was not going anywhere, the school finally agreed to focus on how Sean could develop stronger roles and connections.  He had some wonderful teachers, favourite subjects and great friends. He took his friend, Harriet, to the Senior formal and post-formal party and Terry and I were so very proud to see him at his Graduation ceremony – as he confidently walked across the stage in his Senior shirt, tie and blazer. He left school with a strong sense of himself, a pride in his school and loyalty to his tribe!

Sean is revelling in life after school.  He works three mornings a week as a valued member of the “operations team” in a large NGO and has a second part-time job at the local Convention Centre.    Both jobs are paid at above award wages.  He is a leader at his church youth group, and is a recreational boxer, gym member, swimmer, and enjoys catching up with friends, learning new skills, and heading to the pub. He has studied hospitality and last year attended the University of Queensland studying Australian history.   He has travelled extensively and will move into his own unit later this year.

I have no doubt that his school inclusion – imperfect as it was – has helped Sean to build a strong sense of self built on being in the real world and high expectations based on the role models which surrounded him through school.  The most important legacy of his school inclusion, however, is the rich foundation of friendship he has built – the friendships and social life – based on shared history and fun childhood memories.

Two years ago now, Sean turned 21 – and more than half his primary school year turned up to celebrate and more than 30 of his high school friends – not to mention all the other friends accumulated along the way.   He has gone on to celebrate those friends’ birthdays and other ordinary rites of passage.  These young people (some of whom he met when he was 5) value Sean’s company, particularly his sense of humour and fun, but also the different perspectives they have from knowing someone like Sean – they are convinced that inclusion is natural, “right” and something that has enriched their life.

We have a choice about which side of history we want to be on.  Trying to build inclusive communities, while separating children on the basis of disability, is untenable – illogical, unnecessary, damaging and out of step with fundamental obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

As parents we need to play our part in resisting the harmful habits of the past.  I don’t underestimate the challenge of this or judge parents for their choices in the face of exclusionary systems, but I would encourage parents of children with Down syndrome to stand strong for their children’s rights.

By standing together as families we can stubbornly resist our children being pushed to the margins.   We need to focus not on “special needs” but on what our children have to offer and equally we need to trust in the capacity of the community to offer friendship and welcome.  Achieving inclusion won’t be perfect or without challenges; we are, after all, still at the start of a social transformation, but Sean’s life, in its rich ordinariness, tells me that an included life is both possible – and absolutely worth it!

Thank you for visiting our website.  You can also keep up with our mission by liking our Facebook page or following us on Twitter @allmeansallaus

5 February 2018  

MEDIA RELEASE  

SUMMARY: The new Victorian Education Department’s “Students With A Disability” policy is a welcome development along the road to an inclusive education system but falls short of meeting Australia’s international human rights obligations and the interests and expectations of students with disability and their families.

While purporting to support inclusive education in Victoria, funding is increased for segregated education initiatives and there is limited apparent awareness of the distinction between inclusive education as internationally defined, and common educational practices that exclude, isolate and segregate students on the basis of disability.  Segregation is contrary to decades of research, the interests of students with disability, the wishes of many parents and Australia’s human rights law obligations.

The Victorian Government’s new policy falls far short of addressing these issue although it is an encouraging start.

Victoria’s New “Students With A Disability” Policy – A Mixed Review 

All Means All – The Australian Alliance for Inclusive Education  welcomes the Victorian Government’s initiative to publish a new  “Students With A Disability” education policy.

We are encouraged by the Victorian Government taking steps in support of inclusive education in its new policy, which begins with the following statement. 

“The Department is  committed to  embedding inclusive education in all school environments for students with disabilities and additional needs.” 

We also congratulate the Victorian Government’s acknowledgement of the need for a human rights focus, the importance of legal obligations and the need for approaches to be evidence-based.

We are pleased to see Victoria’s “Students With A Disability” education policy alongside a range of recent initiatives in other States that seek to move towards the implementation of an inclusive education system. 

However, we are concerned that the policy is too nebulous to effectively support its intent, and that it should be strengthened by providing clarity about what is “inclusive education” and supplemented with guidance about implementing the change it seeks to drive. 

In this regard, for over a decade now, Australia has receded as segregation of students with disability has in fact increased across our education system, despite the apparent commitment by our governments at international law, domestic law and policy levels  (Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2013, view here showing 17% disproportionate increase in segregated special schools between 1999-2013; see also Disability in Australia: changes over time in inclusion and participation factsheets: community living, education and employment).

A range of factors are consistently identified, including the self-preserving impact of vested interests within our segregated ‘special’ education system and the general ‘mainstream’ education system resisting the necessary change to include students with disability – in effect a systemic reluctance to fully transform our education system so that it respects, offers and implements inclusive education rather than minimalist and largely ineffective “adjustments” to our system.

Minor adjustments ostensibly justified on the basis that parents, disillusioned by the limited ‘inclusion’ on offer, prefer segregated ‘special’ education options. Segregation is not  usually  the ‘first choice” of parents of students with disability,  but a response to discriminatory and poor inclusive  practices in general  schools.    In fact, recent Australian research (2017)  confirms alarming levels of “gatekeeping” (resistant ‘informal’ practices to mainstream enrolment), with 70% of participants reporting discrimination, including denial or discouragement of enrolment or restrictive practices.   

The principal function of policy is to give government officers and relevant stakeholders a clear direction on which to base everything, from day-to-day operations to major planning initiatives.  For this to occur, a policy document needs to be very clear and comprehensive enough that, on the one hand it can’t be misunderstood, and on the other hand it is flexible enough to allow initiatives within the appropriate framework.   

We believe that the current expression of Victoria’s policy should be amended to insert a definition of inclusive education consistent with Article 24 and   General Comment No. 4.    

Relevantly, Article 24 states that in respect of the right to inclusive education that: 

“[i]n realizing this right, State Parties shall ensure that: 

a) Persons with disabilities are not excluded from the general education system on the basis of disability, …; 

b) Persons with disabilities can access an inclusive, quality and free primary education and secondary education on an equal basis with others in the communities in which they live; 

c) Reasonable accommodation of the individual’s requirements is provided; 

d) Persons with disabilities receive the support required, within the general education system, to facilitate their effective education; 

e) Effective individualised support measures are provided in environments that maximize academic and social development, consistent with the goal of full inclusion.” 

We are also concerned that the announcement of “$61 million for a suite of inclusive education initiatives including new equipment and programs” would seem to earmark substantial funds for segregated ‘special’ education schools and initiatives that cannot be properly characterised as inclusive education.  In this regard, two of the three schools named to receive $7.5 million to run after school hours care and school holiday programs are segregated “special” schools (i.e. Yarrabah School  and Kalianna School Bendigo.  While this funding is intended to support students with disability and their families, it is not appropriate to characterise this as an inclusive education initiative and it calls into question how much of the proposed $61 million will support genuine inclusive education for students with disability. 

We also note that this funding seeks to support scholarships for postgraduate studies in “special education” and in a Master of Education (Applied Behaviour Analysis) at a Victorian University.  While studies in inclusive education at tertiary level are sometimes loosely categorised as “special education”, in many cases this refers to the delivery of educations services to students with disability in segregated settings and we would hope that the scholarships initiative is used exclusively to support the upskilling of educators in the delivery of education to students with disability in general education settings using best inclusive practices.  

In addition, the delivery of Applied Behaviour Analysis, which highly contentious among many Autistic self advocates, is also not recognised as inclusive practice. 

The term “inclusive” is not a euphemism for “disability” and an education initiative relating to students with disability should not simply be characterised as “inclusive” unless it in fact legitimately supports the inclusive delivery of education services to students with disability.  

Initiatives that support the delivery of education services in education environments separate or segregated from the disabled students same-age ‘typical’ peers cannot be characterised as “inclusive”. 

All Means All believes that the Victorian Government should provide greater information and transparency about how and the extent to which its $61 million package supports the inclusive delivery of services for students with disability.  

The Victorian Government’s new policy should also be strengthened by providing: 

• Clarity about the meaning of ‘inclusive education’ and the human rights imperative that underpins it. 
• Explicit guidance about the legal framework that applies in accordance with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth). 

• A clear goal to achieve de-segregation, by ceasing to build more segregated school, units and programs and set a goal for the shutting down of current segregated settings. 
• Acknowledgement of the barriers to inclusion and direction about how they can be overcome or circumvented. 
• A commitment to invest in upskilling teachers and education staff about inclusive education.  This should include pre-service and in-service training, including cultural training. 
• A commitment to develop pathways to involve families in the inclusive education process at a systemic, school and class level. 
• Clear goals for monitoring achievement, including a commitment to transparent processes of evaluation.   

We commend Premier Daniel Andrews’ statement that: 

“This is about giving every child every chance to succeed. It’s what’s right, it’s what’s fair – and we’re getting it done.”  

However, we also call on the Premier to recognise that 40 years of research has shown that students with disability are disadvantaged by segregated education and that they have a fundamental human right to receive a quality and genuinely inclusive education – and urge the Premier to lead the implementation of a genuinely inclusive education system in Victoria, consistent with the principles applicable under the  UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and   the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities  (as clarified by    General Comment No. 4 ) ,  reflected in the   Disability Discrimination Act 1992  (and the  Disability Standards for Education 2005  established under it) and in alignment with the priorities of the  National Disability Strategy 2010-2020  for an inclusive Australian society.

___________________________________________________________

All Means All  is the  The Australian Alliance for Inclusive Education.  We are a multi-stakeholder alliance of people and organisations working together for the implementation of an  inclusive  education system and the removal of the legal, structural and attitudinal barriers that limit the rights of some students to access an  inclusive education in regular Australian classrooms. 

You can visit our website for more information at  www.allmeansall.org.au 

For media queries contact  hello@allmeansall.org.au 

Submission  

Draft General Comment No. 6 on Article 5 (Equality and Non-discrimination) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)  

30 November 2017

You can read this Submission on the United Nations Human Rights – Office of the High Commissioner here.

INTRODUCTION

1. All Means All is the Australian Alliance for Inclusive Education, a nationwide multi-stakeholder alliance working together to implement an inclusive education system and remove the legal, structural and attitudinal barriers that limit the rights of some students to access full inclusive education.
2. All Means All commends the work of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (the Committee) in seeking to develop General Comment No. 6 as guidance for State Parties in implementing their obligations under Article 5 of the CRPD and to clarify the inter-relationship between Article 5 of the CRPD and the other more subject-specific Articles of the CRPD.
3. All Means All thanks the Committee for the opportunity to make a submission on Draft General Comment No.6, and in particular to comment upon the relevance of Article 5 (Equality and Non-discrimination) to the right to an inclusive education under Article 24 (Education), as recently clarified by the Committee in General Comment No. 4 (Right to Inclusive Education).

COMMENTARY

4. All Means All has had the opportunity to consider, in particular, the following submissions in relation to Draft General Comment No. 6:

–        Australian Government – submission dated 15 November 2017;

–        Children and Young People with Disability Australia – submission dated November 2017; and

–        Queensland Advocacy Incorporated – submission dated 14 November 2017.

5. All Means All endorses generally the submissions of Children and Young People with Disability Australia and Queensland Advocacy Incorporated. In particular, All Means All, with a focus on inclusive education, agrees that:

(a)          Draft General Comment must recognise the obligation of State Parties under Article 5 to replace Medical Deficit Model-based laws and policies

The medical deficit model in relation to disability, which as the Australian Government submission acknowledges continues to underlie a number of Australian Commonwealth and State laws and policies (including in the education context), perpetuates continued inequality and discrimination against people with disability and reinforces attitudinal barriers to inclusion, equality of opportunity and full participation of people with disability.  The medical deficit model, being inconsistent with the human rights model of disability and the principles of inclusive equality and substantive equality of opportunity, upon which the CRPD and in particular Article 5 is based, is counter-productive to the extent it continues to underlie the form or operation of domestic laws, policies and practices and must be systematically and immediately removed and replaced by State Parties in discharge of their obligations under Article 5.

This requirement for systemic review and replacement of medical deficit model concepts should be clearly and positively incorporated into the General Comment.

(b)          The General Comment should contain Specific and Fuller Articulation of Exclusionary and Segregating Education Practices as being Discriminatory

The failure of State Parties to provide access to genuinely inclusive education in general education classroom settings and equality of educational opportunity and to implement effective is discriminatory and not only a breach of Article 24, but also a breach of Article 5.

Although the Draft General Comment in paragraph 72 “calls on State Parties to be guided by … General Comment No. 4” on the Right to Inclusive Education in fulfilling their obligations under Articles 5 and 24, All Means All submits that the final General Comment should itself identify and articulate the full cross-section of segregating education practices, from segregation in separate “special” schools or units to micro-segregation or micro-exclusion within the walls of a regular classroom, as well as specifying that the use of restrictive practices in the education context is itself a form of discrimination and amounts to denial of equality of opportunity.

In Australia, following its ratification of the CRPD, the education of students with disability in segregated settings has in fact increased relative to education in general education classroom settings[1] and segregated settings and segregated education practices are being rebranded as “inclusive education centres” and “inclusive education practices”[2].

These developments are not specific to Australia.  Given that the research evidence has demonstrated for many decades that segregation in education and restrictive practices mark the commencement of the low-expectations pathway to social and economic exclusion, discrimination and the denial of equality of life-long opportunities[3], the interaction between Article 5 and segregating and exclusionary education practices warrant specific and more comprehensive treatment in this General Comment.

(c)          Domestic Law tests for “Discrimination” are too narrow, limited and focus on formal equality of treatment of individuals, rather than substantive and systemic                           equality in opportunity

Australian federal and State anti-discrimination laws purport to support the equality and non-discrimination of students with disability in education.  However, despite repeated reviews of the Disability Standards for Education 2005 made under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth), recent research suggests the discrimination of students with disability is pervasive and lacks effective complaint mechanisms and sanctions to be responsive to grievances of individuals, and even less so to systemic issues[4].

All Means All repeats the succinct and accurate description by Queensland Advocacy Incorporated [para 12] of the key failings of Australian anti-discrimination laws that purport to further, amongst others, the provisions of Articles 5 and 24 of the CRPD:

“a)          A predominantly individualistic approach to a systemic problem;

b)          an inappropriate test (the comparator test) is used to identify discriminatory action;

c)          the model aspires to achieve formal, rather than substantive, equality;

d)          there is a focus on negative, rather than positive or affirmative, action;

e)          the lack of effective sanctions or remedies; and

f)          the exceptions, exclusions and exemptions narrow the scope of the laws.”

All Means All also repeats the submission of Children and Young People with Disability Australia [para13] for the Draft General Comment to emphasise the need for the focus to be on the substantive “effect” of domestic laws, policies and practices on discrimination against and equality of opportunity of people with disability, including students.

It is critical to recognise the vulnerabilities of students with disability who suffer discrimination, and their families. These vulnerabilities can mean that it is more difficult for them to assert rights and complain about discrimination under the current system. In particular, many parents are reluctant to bring complaints if they want to maintain a relationship with the discriminator, whether a school, school Principals or educators. Further, the costs and time periods involved in achieving redress through legal means are significant roadblocks.  Too often, parents are not made aware of their children’s educational rights and are not in a position to identify that discrimination has occurred in the first place.

Appropriate mechanisms that provide for independent, effective, accessible, transparent, safe and enforceable complaints mechanisms and legal remedies in respect of discrimination in the provision of education to students with disability must be made a priority for reform.

Further, advocacy organisations should be provided with the ability to bring complaints of systemic discrimination, to remove the burden from individuals and address systemic and repeat incidents of discrimination.

(d)         The Draft General Comment must strongly emphasise the relevance of the framing of broader governmental and health policy and the media’s portrayal of people with disability to the entrenchment of cultural attitudinal barriers to the realisation of equality and non-discrimination under Article 5

All Means All supports the submission of Children and Young People with Disability Australia [paras 5 and 8] that it would be instructive and beneficial for the Draft General Comment to include positive guidance on framing laws policies and media discussion concerning disability in a manner:

–        conducive to a rights-based or ‘rights-holders’ approach;

–        consistent with the human rights or social model of disability and principles of substantive inclusion, non-discrimination and equality of opportunity; and

–        respectful of disability as part of human diversity.

Inclusion and belonging in education depends upon positive and systemic cultural acceptance of people with disability as ‘rights-holders’ and equal members of our diverse human family.

______________________________________________________

[1] See Australian Bureau of Statistics 2013, view showing 17% disproportionate increase in segregated special schools between 1999-2013 http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/4221.02013 ; see also Disability in Australia: changes over time in inclusion and participation factsheets: community living, education and employment: www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/34f09557-0acf-4adf-837d-eada7b74d466/Education-20905.pdf.aspx

[2] For example, vested interest in segregated education continue to seek to characterise the idea of a single, universally accessible inclusive education system as “utopian” and advance the position that segregating practices are compatible with inclusive education:

“This misconception that inclusion refers to a place and not a process is very pervasive. The current Australian view is restricted to the concept of an inclusive school as a place where everyone belongs, is accepted, and where special education needs students are supported and cared for by their peers and other members of the school community. This is a Utopian view, where there are no references to the processes and learning environments needed to achieve authentic educational outcomes for all students.” (“Towards inclusion: an Australian perspective” by F Forbes (2007))

[3] See “Inclusive Education – What Does the Research Say?”, All Means All (2017) https://allmeansall.org.au/research/

[4] See “Gatekeeping and restrictive practices with students with disability: results of an Australian survey” (2017), Shiralee Poed, Kathy Cologon and Robert Jackson: https://allmeansall.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/TIES-4.0-20172.pdf

___________________________________________________________

You can visit our website for more information at  www.allmeansall.org.au 

For queries contact  hello@allmeansall.org.au

20 November 2017 

MEDIA RELEASE 

Queensland Election: Inclusive education means investing in regular schools – not more investment in segregated special education  

All Means All – The Australian Alliance for Inclusive Education welcomes the bi-partisan public commitment to inclusive education for Queensland’s students with disability, made on Friday 10th November, Day 13 of the election campaign, by Queensland Education Minister Kate Jones and Shadow Education Spokesperson Tracy Davis speaking to ABC Radio.  We are pleased to note that this commitment also included implementing the 17 recommendations of the Deloitte Review into Education for Students with Disability.  

We also commend the important work and reform that the Queensland Government has been undertaking to support implementation of an inclusive education system, including establishing the Disability and Inclusion Branch and the Autism Hub and Reading Centre, employing inclusion coaches, a program of inclusive education Masters scholarships for school Principals and investing in training and resource development across the board.  

The State of Queensland can also be proud of schools such as Thuringowa SHS that show how schools can plan for and move from segregated to fully inclusive models and achieve better outcomes for all their students.  

It is reassuring that the major political parties appear to be committed to ensuring the right to quality inclusive education for students with disability, recognised in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 24 of the United Nations  Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities  (as clarified by UN  General Comment No. 4 on the Right to Inclusive Education) and Sustainable Development Goal 4, and reflected in the the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (and the Disability Standards for Education 2005 established under it).  This right also aligns with the priorities of the National Disability Strategy 2010-2020 which states “The shared vision is for an inclusive Australian society that enables people with disability to fulfil their potential as equal citizens” and the NDIS goal of full social and economic participation. 

In this context, All Means All is disappointed that, on the same day as the bi-partisan pledge was made in the media, Queensland Labor Leader and Premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, promised funding for a new $32 million Special School in the Caboolture area.  This comes in addition to government investment in the new Cairns Special School that reportedly cost $26 million and is anticipated to enroll 60 students for the commencement of 2018.  This is very significant resource expenditure that could have been utilised to support teachers to better support students with disability in regular classrooms.  

As UN General Comment No. 4 states, Governments should be transferring resources from the segregated special education system to implement inclusive education in the general schooling system (paragraph 68). 

There is an overwhelming body of more than 40 years of research supporting superior academic, social, economic participation and independence outcomes for students with disability in regular schooling and that has never demonstrated better outcomes from segregated education. That objective evidence underlies a moral and human rights mandate and duty for Australia to progress towards a universally accessible and genuinely inclusive general education system.  

The maintenance of a segregated special system alongside the general system diverts critical funds that should be used in the general school system to support better inclusive practice, undermines the will to include and support students with disability and facilitates “gatekeeping” – usually informal and insidious practices intended to discourage enrollment of students with disability within the general system.  

It is concerning that Australia, against international trends and its own domestic policy commitments, has steadily increased the proportion of students with disability in segregated “special” education over the last 12 years (Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2013, view here showing 17% disproportionate increase in segregated special schools between 1999-2013; see also Disability in Australia: changes over time in inclusion and participation factsheets: community living, education and employment).

This regression was queried in May of this year by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and should be seen in light of international trends away from segregation.  For example, Italy which has an education system recently ranked by UNICEF well above Australia, abolished segregated special education in the 1970s and has educated all students with disability in regular classrooms for the last 40 years.   

While many politicians, policy makers and school administrators say that there is demand from parents for segregated special settings and that they are only responding to that demand, it is important to note that: 

• Many parents of students with disability do not have access to  adequate information, research evidence and advice regarding inclusive education versus segregated special settings.  Accordingly, many parents, no doubt hoping to do the best for their children, are not making reasonably informed decisions. 
• UN General Comment No. 4  on Article 24 is unequivocal that the right to an inclusive education is a fundamental right of the child, a right that transcends the parental “right to choose” (paragraph 10(a)). It is the role of government to protect children from harm, including by taking an active role in educating parents about the longer-term consequences of particular choices. 
• Segregation is not usually the ‘first choice” of parents of students with disability, but a response to discriminatory and poor inclusive practices in general schools.  In fact, recent Australian research (2017) confirms alarming levels of “gatekeeping”, with 70% of participants reporting discrimination, including denial or discouragement of enrolment or restrictive practices.  Many families that have experienced discrimination and harm flee the general education system, not because of inclusive education but because of the lack of it.   

The challenges faced in the general education system to educate the diverse body of learners representing Australian school children are real and require strong leadership and commitment to the implementation of inclusive school reform, such as upskilling teachers, education assistants and school leaders. The denial of education rights to students with disability, even when dressed up as “parent choice”, can never be the appropriate response. 

While we understand that during an election campaign there is a strong incentive to make commitments in order to bring support from particular groups, we call on all parties in the Queensland State election to continue the great bipartisan work on inclusive education that is occurring and commit to ensuring a single, universally accessible, quality inclusive education system for all students in Queensland, consistent with the best evidence and respect for the fundamental human right of every child to an inclusive education alongside their same-age peers, as the foundation of life-long inclusion and full membership of our communities.  We also call on all parties to reconsider any campaign promises to invest in segregated education for students with disability and invest instead in making Queensland a more inclusive State.

___________________________________________________________

All Means All  is the  The Australian Alliance for Inclusive Education.  We are a multi-stakeholder alliance of people and organisations working together for the implementation of an  inclusive  education system and the removal of the legal, structural and attitudinal barriers that limit the rights of some students to access an  inclusive education in regular Australian classrooms. 

You can visit our website for more information at  www.allmeansall.org.au 

For media queries contact  hello@allmeansall.org.au 

6 November 2017
MEDIA RELEASE
National Survey: Discrimination against students with disability in schools is widespread

A national survey of students with disability has revealed that discrimination against children and young people with disability in our education system is rife.

Students, families and teaching staff across Australia participated in the survey conducted by academics at the University of Melbourne, Macquarie University and CurtinUniversity.

The results released publicly today in a paper titled, “Gatekeeping and restrictive practices with students with disability: results of an Australian survey”, by Dr Shiralee Poed, Dr Kathy Cologon and Dr Robert Jackson, and delivered at the Inclusive Education Summit, Adelaide, October 2017, reveal that more than 70% of students have experienced one or more instances of disciminatory “gatekeeping” or restrictive practices in schools and education systems.

Click here to read IN FULL the joint Media Release by All Means All – The Australian Alliance for Inclusive Education and Children and Young People With Disability Australia.