Inclusion: a multi layered concept- are we ready

to cope with it?

Abstract

Introduction
Inclusion is a much talked about concept, especially in the 21st
century. We hear and read about it in social, educational and
psychological contexts. Most of us, "naïve" users, use it as a
synonym for acceptance, belonging, making room for- being
good people. Most of us are also not aware of the different
definitions the concept has in each subject matter ( such as
sociology, education & psychology) and even more so, we are
ignorant of the philosophical moral and culture issues involved
in inclusive principles and related acts.

This paper presents and discusses three definitions, from

different but close related subject matter, raising obvious but
not debated issues concerning the use and implementation of
concepts related to psychological, social and educational
inclusion.

Definitions of inclusion, especially social and educational one,

had changed and became more elaborated during the last
years, reflecting changes in western society culture. This paper
focuses on elements of inclusion definition that are dim and
their implementation raise social and ethical questions.
Social definitions of inclusion

Recent social definition of inclusion, as presented by Silver

(2015) is a "…multi-dimensional, relational process of
increasing opportunities for social participation, enhancing
capabilities to fulfill normatively prescribed social roles,
broadening social ties of respect and recognition, and at the
collective level, enhancing social bonds, cohesion, integration,
or solidarity. Social inclusion may refer to a process
encouraging social interaction between people with different
socially relevant attributes." (Silver, 2015, p. 2-3). Silver also
states that inclusion is context-dependent in at least three
senses: 1) location; 2) history, culture, institutions and social
structures; 3) and access to resources and opportunities. Thus,
she claims, social inclusion is spatially uneven. This statement is
important since it declares that inclusion needs to be
implemented by individuals and communities, while making
choices and decisions that are relevant to them (as individuals
and communities).

Allman (2013) presents a different, even opposite definition,

claiming that sociology complements biological and other
natural order explanations of social stratification. Allman
examined a variety of forms of social integration, trying to
prove that social inclusion and exclusion function as a mean
that problematize people on the margins, and contributes to
their governance and control.

A literature review, published by the European Agency (2018),

focused on the needs of people with disabilities, linking
inclusive education to social inclusion for people with
disabilities. It explained how inclusive education can promote
social inclusion, employment and living in the community. It
also showed that attending segregated settings minimizes these
opportunities.

Summarizing these three definitions, it seems that social

inclusion refers to: people with different socially relevant
attributes (Silver, 2015); people on the margins (Allman, 2013);
and people with disabilities (European Agency, 2018). Is this
really the purpose of social inclusion? This question will be
discussed based on current social, educational and
psychological definitions of inclusion, referring also to moral
and philosophical issues, such as the right of the individual to
choose social participation.

Educational definitions of inclusion

Educational inclusion in the last decade was defined by two

issues: the process that helps overcome barriers limiting
presence, participation and achievement of learners; and
equity , that focused on fairness towards all learners , seen as
having equal importance (Unesco, 2017;Braunsteiner&
Mariano-Lapidus, 2014). The term "inclusion", particularly in
educational settings, is based on a deficit view, similar to the
social inclusion definition that aims to help marginalized and
weak groups. This view is still predominant both in social and
educational settings.

The current view sees inclusive education as a system-wide

philosophy, dedicated to provide education for all (Slee, 2019).
Part of the problem is studies scarcity on the issue of inclusive
environments involving all pupils (Göransson and Nilholm ,
2014).

The Salamanca Statement (UNESCO ,1994) has been identified

as the international breakthrough for inclusive education
(Vislie ,2003). Special needs education was to be replaced by
inclusive education, segregated educational solutions were to
be avoided, and the mainstream classroom/environment was
to open up to diversity. The main obstacles that still prevent
inclusive practices are lack of knowledge of how to create
environments that are truly inclusive, the persistence of
segregated educational practices, and the diverse opinions
among teachers and parents about its appropriateness. In a
recent theme of the International Journal of Inclusive Education
(nr 7–8, 2019), these problems are still with us to a large
extent. Nillholm (2020), thinks that the need of such studies is
important for two reasons: inclusion is about changing
practices; and studies may provide evidence that inclusive
practices can be established. 

Research on educational inclusion has generated limited

theories that are too general and framed within a special needs
perspective that lacks a wide view on the whole educational
environment.
Psychological definitions of inclusion

Inclusion is defined by social psychology researchers such as

Wiebren et al., (2014; 2019), as a hierarchical, two-dimensional
concept, consisting of perceptions of belonging and
authenticity. In this process the group rather than the
individual has primary agency. Wiebren et al., (2019), tried to
improve understanding of how perceptions of social inclusion
unfold over time and relate to individual and group outcomes.
To do so they used the "Margini" model which proposes a
theory by which inclusion is a dynamic interplay between the
individual's motivation to be included in the group and the
group's willingness to accept / include the individual in the
group. In a longitudinal field study, they found that individual
and group inclusion goals are: a) mutually influenced by each
other over time; b) In conjunction, it determined group
members individual outcomes as well as overall group
performance.

Over the past decade, the inclusion

literature has grown rapidly.
A well‐establishe
The belonging definition, such as Shore et al., (2011) refers to
the personal feeling of the individual, “the degree by which
individuals experience treatment from the group that satisfies
their need for belongingness and uniqueness” (p. 1265). In this
context inclusion is seen as: 1) Satisfaction of individual needs
within a group; 2) Referring to belongingness and uniqueness;
3) A group decision.
People have different fundamental needs for belongingness
and uniqueness (Brewer & Roccas, 2001). To satisfy the need of
belonging, people need to have frequent and affectively
pleasant interactions in a temporally stable group (Baumeister
& Leary, 1995). Belonging is thought to consist of two
components: group membership and group affection. Whereas
group membership reflects the perceived strength of the bond
between an individual and the group, group affection indicates
the perceived positive valence of that bond (Allport, 1954).

The need for uniqueness requires distance from meaningful

others by downplaying one’s commonalities with others or by
defining oneself in terms of one’s idiosyncratic traits and
opinions (Turner, et al., 1987). ODT (optimal distinctiveness
theory) predicts that, as one feels more related to others, one
also tends to feel less distinct and separate ( Sheldon &
Bettencourt, 2002). This statement points to a problem in the
inclusive (social and educational) conception.

Kershner (2016) refers to a fundamental issue between

psychology and inclusion, due to psychology’s perceived
heritage in standardized testing that has been used to support
educational segregation. As a result, psychology has to some
extent been marginalized, especially in educational issues.

But psychological inclusion has also an additional meaning

related to containment. In this context, inclusion is perceived as
a protective and nourishing act (Bion, 1962). Bion claimed that
we need the mind of a significant other to give meaning to our
sensuous experience and that our cognitive abilities are
influenced from our ability to establish a stable link with a
significant other. Bion proposed the idea of container-
contained in order to convey this idea. In this context, inclusion
refers to relationships that are crucial to human self-
development , to the relations between mother and her child
and as an abstraction to all sorts of dynamic relationships
(Hafsi, 2011).

We aim to improve our understanding

of how perceptions of social inclusion
come
about, unfold over time, and relate to
individual and group outcomes. To do
so, we
draw on the MARGINI model, which
offers a novel theoretical account of
inclusion
by delineating that inclusion is the
result of a dynamic interplay between
the indi‐
vidual's motivation to be included in
the group (individual inclusion goal)
and the
group's willingness to include the
individual (group inclusion goal).
We aim to improve our understanding
of how perceptions of social inclusion
come
about, unfold over time, and relate to
individual and group outcomes. To do
so, we
draw on the MARGINI model, which
offers a novel theoretical account of
inclusion
by delineating that inclusion is the
result of a dynamic interplay between
the indi‐
vidual's motivation to be included in
the group (individual inclusion goal)
and the
group's willingness to include the
individual (group inclusion goal).
We aim to improve our understanding
of how perceptions of social inclusion
come
about, unfold over time, and relate to
individual and group outcomes. To do
so, we
draw on the MARGINI model, which
offers a novel theoretical account of
inclusion
by delineating that inclusion is the
result of a dynamic interplay between
the indi‐
vidual's motivation to be included in
the group (individual inclusion goal)
and the
group's willingness to include the
individual (group inclusion goal).

We aim to improve our understanding
of how perceptions of social inclusion
come
about, unfold over time, and relate to
individual and group outcomes. To do
so, we
draw on the MARGINI model, which
offers a novel theoretical account of
inclusion
by delineating that inclusion is the
result of a dynamic interplay between
the indi‐
vidual's motivation to be included in
the group (individual inclusion goal)
and the
group's willingness to include the
individual (group inclusion goal)

We aim to improve our understanding
of how perceptions of social inclusion
come
about, unfold over time, and relate to
individual and group outcomes. To do
so, we
draw on the MARGINI model, which
offers a novel theoretical account of
inclusion
by delineating that inclusion is the
result of a dynamic interplay between
the indi‐
vidual's motivation to be included in
the group (individual inclusion goal)
and the
group's willingness to include the
individual (group inclusion goal)
Linking inclusive education to social inclusion

Pandit (2017) claims that educational inclusion prepares

children and society to accept persons with different abilities,
by creating conditions to know them, accept and help them
become contributing and valued members in their community.
This requires a flexible attitude in education, by recognizing and
responding to diversity. It begins with learning together,
without isolating children with special needs and encourages
development of teaching and learning strategies that support
these notions.

file:///C:/Users/ditaf/Downloads/
Koutsourisetal_socialinclusion%20(1).pdf

HOW WELL DO WE UNDERSTAND SOCIAL

INCLUSION IN EDUCATION?
George Koutsouris et al, 2019
References

Allman, D. (2013). The Sociology of Social Inclusion. Sage, Open,

1-16.

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice.

Cambridge/Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong:

Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human
motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.

Braunsteiner, M.L. & Mariano-Lapidus, S. (2014). A perspective

on inclusion: Challenges for the future. Global Education
Review, 1 (1), 32-43.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1055217.pdf

Brewer, M. B., & Roccas, S. (2001). Individual values, social

identity, and optimal distinctiveness. In C. Sedikides, M. B.
Brewer, C. Sedikides, & M. B. Brewer (Eds.), Individual self,
relational self, collective self (pp. 219–237). New York, NY:
Psychology Press.

European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education,

(2018). Evidence of the Link Between Inclusive Education and
Social Inclusion: A Review of the Literature. (S. Symeonidou,
ed.). Odense, Denmark.
Hafsi, M. (2011). The container, contained and in between, A
review of the containment concept and its vicissitudes. Nara
University. Graduate school of sociology.

http://repo.narau.ac.jp/modules/xoonips/download.php/
AN10533924-20110300-1002.pdf?file_id=4321

Nillholm, C. (2020). Research about inclusive education in 2020

– How can we improve our theories in order to change
practice? European Journal of special needs education.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08856257.2020.1754547

Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., &

Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-
categorization theory. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell

Sheldon, K. M., & Bettencourt, B. A. (2002). Psychological need-

satisfaction and subjective well-being within social groups.
British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(1), 25–38.

Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Holcombe

Ehrhart, K., & Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work
groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of
Management, 37(4), 1262–1289.

Silver, H. (2015). The context of Social inclusion. UN,

Department of Economic & Social Affairs . DESA Working Paper
No. 144 ST/ESA/2015/DWP/144
https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2015/wp144_2015.pdf

Slee, R. (2019). Defining the scope of inclusive education Think piece

prepared for the 2020 Global Education Monitoring Report Inclusion and
education . Unesco: Think piece prepared for the 2020 Global Education
Monitoring Report.
Vislie, L. (2003). From Integration to Inclusion: Focusing Global Trends and Changes
in the Western European Societies. European Journal of Special Needs
Education 18 (1): 17–35. doi:10.1080/0885625082000042294. [Taylor & Francis
Online], [Google Scholar]

UNESCO, (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special

Needs Education. Paris: UNES. [Google Scholar]

UNESCO, (2017). A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in

education. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from:
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002482/248254e.pdf

Wiebren, J., Otten, S., van der Zee, K., & Lisen, J. (2014).
Inclusion: Conceptualization and measurement. European
Journal of Social Psychology, Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 44(4) ,
file:///C:/Users/ditaf/Downloads/Inclusion.ConceptualizationandMeasurement.%20(2).pdf

Wiebren, S.J., Meeussen, L., Jetten, J., & Ellemers, N. (2019).

Negotiating inclusion: Revealing the dynamic interplay between
individual and group inclusion goals. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.
2020:50, 520-533.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08856257.2020.1754547

‫מאמר‬

Pandit 2017
file:///C:/Users/ditaf/Downloads/2-5-465-833%20(2).pdf

‫חומרים תומכים‬

2017 ‫פנדיט‬
 International Journal of Academic Research and Development ISSN: 2455-4197
Impact Factor: RJIF 5.22 www.academicsjournal.com Volume 2; Issue 5; September
2017; Page No. 665-673 Philosophy of inclusion – problems and challenges Dr. Pallvi
Pandit

file:///C:/Users/ditaf/Downloads/2-5-465-833%20(2).pdf

The goal of an inclusive education system is to provide all students with the most “
appropriate learning environments and opportunities for them to best achieve their
potential.” (Alberta Education, 2010)

Pandit 2017

p/666
inclusion begins with recognising that all children and their families have the right to
access high quality early childhood education. This right is not affected by disability.
Inclusive practices are intended to identify and remove barriers to full acceptance,
participation and learning for all children. Inclusion recognises that many challenges
associated with disability are embedded in socio-cultural attitudes and practices.
Inclusive practices aim to alter policy, organisation, structure and pedagogy so
children with special needs can take their rightful place as full and valued members
of their education communities. Inclusion does not entail a one- sizefits- all
“mainstream” approach, but seeks to recognise and respond to diversity, without
isolating children with special needs and removing them from everyday activities at
the service. Inclusive practices allow educators to “support individual needs within
the regular context.” Inclusive educators think about the child as a learner

THE PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE RESEARCHES OF THE INCLUSIVE

EDUCATION HRYHORIІ VASIANOVYCH, OLENA BUDNYK, 2019

file:///C:/Users/ditaf/Downloads/3744-10833-1-PB_Budnyk_Vasianovych.pdf

the philosophy of personalism plays an important methodological role because it

helps clarify the essence of the uniqueness and originality of each child with special
needs and to determine the real ways of her spiritual and psychophysical
development. The philosophy of intuitionalism focuses on the study of issues related
to the formation of consciousness of a person with special needs. Therefore, the
authors proved the necessity of using the intuitive method of research, which allows
to promote the communication of subjects of interaction actively, to reveal their
spiritual potential, to perform the search for ways of forming thinking in children
with special needs, use the language, culture and art at the same time and in an
active way.

















