An ‘inclusive and equitable’ education
is at the core of the
SDG 4 ambition. Defining equitable education requires
distinguishing between equality and equity, two terms
that are occasionally misunderstood. In a cartoon that
has appeared in various versions, a panel labelled ‘equality’
shows children of varying heights standing on identical
boxes trying to write on a blackboard, the shortest ones
struggling. In the ‘equity’ panel, they stand on boxes
of different sizes and all are able to write comfortably.
However, this representation is misleading (
Figure 1.1
).
In fact, equality is present in both panels:
equality of
inputs in the first, equality of outcomes in the second.
Equality is a state of affairs (what): a result that can be
observed in inputs, outputs or outcomes, for example
achieving gender equality. Equity is a process (how):
actions aimed at ensuring equality.
Inclusion is more difficult to define. As used in this report,
it mirrors equity. It is a process: actions and practices that
embrace diversity and build a sense of belonging,
rooted
in the belief that every person has value and potential
and should be respected. Yet inclusion is also a state of
affairs, a result, with a multifaceted nature that makes it
difficult to pin down.
While SDG 4 envisions inclusive education as
encompassing all children, youth and adults, such
education has historically been associated with, and often
conceptualized as, education for children with disabilities.
The struggle of people with
disabilities has therefore
shaped the understanding of inclusion.
The experiences of people with disabilities have
helped shape perspectives on inclusion
Education was recognized as a human right in 1948.
In 1960, the UNESCO Convention against Discrimination
in Education specified what governments must do to
prevent ‘nullifying or impairing equality of treatment
in education’ (Article 1). It focused on ensuring that
all learners enjoyed equal access to, and quality of,
education with respect to
human dignity but did not
include disability among characteristics that could
lead to ‘distinction, exclusion, limitation or preference’
in education. In 1994, the Declaration of the World
Conference on Special Needs in Salamanca, Spain,
made a strong and clear case for inclusive education.
The 2006 UN Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities (CRPD) guaranteed the right to
inclusive education. Article 24, aiming to realize the
right to education of people with disabilities ‘without
discrimination and on the basis of equal opportunity’,
committed countries to ‘ensure an inclusive education
system at all levels and lifelong learning’.
The article’s first paragraph captured its spirit:
Inclusive
education would ensure the development of the ‘sense
of dignity and self-worth’ of people with disabilities and
of ‘their personality, talents and creativity, as well as their
mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential’ to
enable them to ‘participate effectively in a free society’.
The second paragraph contained the key means of
fulfilling the right, including access to education ‘on an
equal basis with others in the communities in which they
live’ and ‘support required, within the general education
system’ (United Nations, 2006).
Although absent in earlier drafts, the
commitment to
inclusion in school placement not only broke with the
historical tendency to exclude children with disabilities
from education altogether or to segregate them in special
schools, but also distinguished inclusion from integration.
Ensuring access to mainstream schools but placing
children with disabilities in separate classes for much of
the time, not providing them with needed support or
expecting them to adapt to available services is at odds
with the goal of inclusion, which
involves changes in
school support and ethos (de Beco, 2018). This approach
reflected radical changes in perception of disability over
the last 50 years that led to the social model of disability,
which the CRPD takes as its foundation (
Box 1.1
).
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
