This paper reports children’s voices from a large inclusive school in India. The research was conducted in a mainstream-inclusive, privately funded school in Bangalore and investigated how the school defined inclusion, provisions made for inclusion and the leadership approaches in the school.

Context of Inclusive Education (IE) in India

IE has been defined in different ways: some establishing an emphasis on inclusion as a place, others as a process (Florian, 2014); the scope of inclusion widening from special educational needs (SEN) to including all children who may have a specific need (Ainscow et al., 2006); exclusion and participation as aspects of inclusion (Goransson et al., 2014) and special versus general education (Norwich, 2002).  

Inclusive Education has been a policy of the Indian government (IEDSS, 2009; RPWD, 2016), since the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994). In the Indian Constitution, the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPWD, 2016) describes IE as ‘students with and without disability learn together and the system of teaching and learning is suitably adapted to meet the learning needs of different types of students with disabilities’. Accordingly, there are many models of inclusion in schools across the country; including segregated special schools, schools with segregated classrooms, schools where children are pulled-out for some classes during the day for remediation. In this study-school, a 3-tiered system is followed – classroom (around 40 in each class), smaller groups (15 in each, remedial groups (around 5 children). Children were pulled-out from the main-classroom for English or Math. It has been argued, and I agree that, in the Indian context, ‘hybrid types of provision’ and ‘fluidity of spaces’ are important steps forward in IE (Johansson, 2014).

The conceptual framework for this study was derived from the Index for Inclusion (Booth and Ainscow 2002), the input-processes-outcomes model proposed by Loreman (2012) and ‘A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in education’(UNESCO, 2017).

Children’s voices: what does the literature say?

Inclusion involves children directly – it happens at the interface of children and teachers, children and environment and children and their peers. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN General Assembly,1989) states that children have the right to express their views freely on matters that affect them.

Children’s voices are absent in Indian studies says Singhal (2019); the few studies that have been conducted involving children say that they preferred studying in a segregated setting and that in mainstream-schools they faced isolation. On similar lines, Mieghem et al., (2020) have identified that one of the research gaps in IE is the lack of voices of children with and without SEN (CW&WOSEN). Sawhney (2015) reports that children in private-inclusive schools in Mumbai report social isolation, lack of self-perception and felt socially less acceptable. Elton-Chalcraft et al.,(2016) based on a study in Bangalore report that most CW&WOSEN said that children should not be educated together in mainstream-school; curriculum and mistreatment by peers being some of the main concerns. Devries et al.,(2018) report a study in Germany that CWSEN report lower levels of self-concept and socio-emotional inclusion in inclusive schools; however, there is a significant improvement when they move to Grade-7. On the contrary, Rose et al., (2017) report that CWSEN expressed a sense of acceptance owing to the in-school-support which enabled their participation in all aspects of school.

Hill (2006) suggests that core principles such as fairness (ensure as many viewpoints as possible), effectiveness (research benefits children), agency (take ideas on best ways to explore their world), and respect(recognize their rights and minimize power) can be developed based on children’s views.

A case study approach was developed, using a purposive sample from a single school. The school had been recognized for its inclusive nature as reported by other educators and parents. It enrolls children who generally come with a formal diagnosis of SEN. The school has 350 teachers for around 6500 children. Data were collected from teachers, coordinators (of all classes), vice-principals, principal and students using questionnaires, observations and interviews. Sample size, representativeness, and access to the sample were key factors considered to arrive at the sampling strategy employed. This school is divided into 3 levels: primary, middle and high. I had specifically requested that to interview some student leaders, and CW&WOSEN. The children I interviewed were randomly selected from this purposive sample. A total of 8 semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 19 children; 3 were one-on-one and 5 were as a group. 11 children from middle-school were interviewed, 7 (including 2 prefects) without and 4 with SEN. 8 children from high-school were interviewed, 6 (including 4 prefects) without and 2 with SEN. Research with students as participants has been described as a developing concept (Schwab, 2018). Standardized formats such as the Inclusion Climate scale (Schwab, 2018) and Perception of Inclusion Questionnaires and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaires (DeVries et al., 2018) were used as additional references for formulating questions for the semi-structured interview. The ethical principles of voluntary and informed consent, right to withdraw at any time during the research process, confidentiality, and welfare of the children were addressed throughout the research. There is a factor of imbalance between researchers and subjects in a research, and particularly more when it involves CWSEN according to Rose et al., (2017). I was conscious also of the fact that while children maybe willing to share experiences, they may have limited knowledge and understanding of the purpose of research. Keeping these in mind, the following were the key issues/questions that were considered: - How would the research benefit children? - Each student was informed that this was not a compulsory procedure or an assessment - Dissemination of information, especially with younger children was not an easy task - Option of having a familiar teacher during the interview was given to all children - Stopping the interview when children looked uncomfortable, or shared views beyond the scope of the research

Initial findings suggest that children did not apply labels for their friends with SEN, but recognized individual needs; and that amongst children there were varied levels of participation. Most CWSEN said they did not belong to any particular group; they liked to be with their class for all activities. The degree of inclusion varied, those who were pulled-out of the classroom said that it helped them learn better, because they got support in the smaller groups. Academic achievement was important to children because according to them getting good marks was important to ensure inclusion in a group. Children without SEN said that their friends went to the remedial-classes to improve their learning. Children from younger classes said when their friend ‘behaved badly’ they complained to their teachers, while the older children said they ignored it. Student leaders displayed maturity and said ‘we think everybody cannot be good at everything. They will be good at something. Instead of discriminating them, let’s respect their differences’ and ‘just because they are special they needn’t be in a special school. Everyone should get same opportunities to explore.’ Evidence-based feedback and assessments-for-learning that include strategies for improvement for teachers and children could be considered for enhancing achievement and participation. Taking a cue from what the student leaders said, by supporting teachers to plan the classroom activities in way that would be available to all, instead of differentiating for some, there will be a positive attitude and progress in all children on social and academic domains (Florian, 2019). This will also ensure that focus is on quality-of-provision and developing capabilities, which is in line with Sen’s capability approach (Reindal, 2016). Listening to children’s voices will help us gain insights into their lives, inform our practices and involve them as partners in building an inclusive school culture.

Ainscow M., César, M. (2006) Inclusive education ten years after Salamanca: Setting the agenda. European Journal of Psychology of Education 21 (3) pp.231-238 Booth, T and Ainscow, M. (2002) Index for Inclusion – Developing learning and participation in schools. Centre for Studies on Inclsuive Education DeVries, M. J., Gebhardt, S. (2018) Do learners with special education needs really feel included? Evidence from the Perception of Inclusion Questionnaire and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Research in Developmental Disabilities 83 pp.28-36 Florian, L. (2014) ‘What counts as evidence of inclusive education?’ European Journal of Special Needs Education 29(3) pp.286-294 Florian, L. (2019) On the necessary co-existence of special and inclusive education, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(7) pp.691-704 Göransson, K., Nilholm, C. (2014) Conceptual diversities and empirical shortcomings – a critical analysis of research on inclusive education. European Journal of Special Needs Education 29(3) pp.265-280 Hill, M. (2006) Children’s Voices on ways oh Having a Voice: Children’s and young people’s perspectives on methods used in research and consultation. Childhood. 13(1) pp.69-89 Inclusive Education for Disabled at Secondary Stage (IEDSS), 2009 https://mhrd.gov.in/iedss Johansson, S, T. (2014) A critical and contextual approach to inclusive education: perspectives from an Indian context. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 18(12) pp.1219-1236 Loreman, T. (2014) Measuring inclusive education outcomes in Alberta, Canada. International Journal of Inclusive Education 18(5) pp.459-483 Mieghem, A., Verschueren, K., Petry, K., & Struyf E. (2020) An analysis of research on inclusive education: a systematic search and meta review. International Journal of Inclusive Education 24(6) pp.675-689, Norwich, B. (2002) Education, Inclusion and Individual Differences: Recognising and Resolving Dilemmas, British Journal of Educational Studies. 50(4) pp.482-502, Rose, R., Shevlin, M. (2017) A sense of belonging: Children’s views of acceptance in “inclusive” mainstream schools. International Journal of Whole Schooling, Special issue pp.65-80 Right to People with Disablilities Act (RPWD)(2016) https://ncpedp.org/RPWDact2016 Sawhney, S. (2015) Unpacking the nature and practices of inclusive education: the case of two schools in Hyderabad, India. International Journal of Inclusive Education 19(9) pp.887-907 Schwab, S., Sharma, U., Loreman, T. (2018) Are we included? Secondary students' perception of inclusion climate in their schools. Teaching and Teacher Education 75 pp.31-39 Singal, N. (2019) Challenges and opportunities in efforts towards inclusive education: reflections from India. International Journal of Inclusive Education 23(7) pp.827-840 UNESCO (2017) A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in education. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002482/248254e.pdf