ED 384 189 EC 304 029 World Conference on Special Needs ... · the Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action. These texts are available separately inArabic, English, French, Spanish

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 384 189 EC 304 029

TITLE World Conference on Special Needs Education: Accessand Quality (Salamanca, Spain, June 7-10, 1994).Final Report.

INSTITUTION Ministry of Education and Science, Madrid (Spain).;United Nations Educational, Scientific, and CulturalOrganization, Paris (France).

REPORT NO ED-95/WS/2PUB DATE Jun 94NOTE 113p.

PUB TYPE Collected Works Conference Proceedings (021)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC05 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Access to Education; Agency Role; *Change

Strategies; Conferences; Cooperative Planning;Coordination; *Disabilities; Edvcational Change;Educational Legislation; *Educational Policy;*Educational. Quality; Elementary Secondary Education;Foreign Countries; Government School Relationship;*Inclusive Schools; International Cooperations; ParentRole; Parent School Relationship; Public Policy;Regional Cooperation; Teacher Education

IDENTIFIERS *UNESCO

ABSTRACTThis report of a 1994 World Conference on Special

Needs Education affirms the principle of "Education for All" and thespecific concept of inclusion of students with special educationalneeds in schools throughout the world. The conference was representedby 92 governments and 25 international organizations. The text of the

Salamanca St:.;.ement and Framework for Action is provided, along with

background information which addresses new thinking in special needseducation and guidelines for action at the national, regional, andinternational levels. Conference summaries are presented on thefollowing conference themes: policy and legislation, schoolperspectives, community perspectives, and partnership and networking.Specific topics include: legislation to ensure rights of individualswith disabilities; policy regarding integration and separateprovision for education for students with disabilities; policies oncurriculum; funding and organizational support for inclusioneducation; teacher education for inclusion; the role of parents andorganizations; partnerships between government and organizations; andthe role of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organization (UNESCO). Appendices include: two opening addresses byFederico Mayor and Gustavo Suarez Pertierra, a list of conferencecommittees and conference papers and authors, and a list ofconference participants by country. (SW)

***********************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

***********************************************************************

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and improvemeni

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

This document has been reproduced asreceived horn the person or organizationoriginating ,1

C Minor changes have teen made to improvereproduction cluatity

Points of view or opinions stated in this documen, do net necessarily represent officialOERI position or policy

WORLD CONFERENCEON SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION:

ACCESS AND QUALITY

Salamanca, Spain, 7-10 June 1994

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

N

United Nations Ministry ofEducational, Scientific and Education and Science

Cultural Organiiation Spain

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

2._cn f\u.k-k-(

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

./.?44.

WORLD CONFERENCEON SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION:

ACCESS AND QUALITY

Salamanca, Spain, 7-10 June 1994

-deo

United Nations Ministry ofEducational, Scientific and Education and Science

Cultural Organization Spain

Preface

This Final Report of the World Conference on SpecialNeeds Education: Access and Quality is intended

to present a concise summary of the deliberations ofthe Conference. It draws mainly on the presentations madein plenary and concurrent sessions and on the groupdiscussions which ensued.

For easy reference , we have included the integral text ofthe Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action. These

texts are available separately in Arabic, English, French,Spanish and Portuguese.

The background document has also been integrated into thereport (Annex 3) in order to provide in a more detailed formthe conceptual framework of the Conference as well as someof the organizational aspects related to its preparation.

The Salamanca Conference provided a platform to affirmthe principle of Education for All and to discuss the practiceof ensuring that children and young people with specialeducational needs are included in all such initiatives andtake their rightful place in a learning society.The Conference documents are informed by the principleof "inclusion", recognizing the need to work towardsschools for all. The key messages that emanated from theConference constitute a worldwide concensus and providea forward-looking agenda on future directions for specialneeds education.

5

Contents

1

Special Needs Education:The Salamanca Statement an Overview

New opportunities 15Definitions and concepts ISBuilding on EFA initiatives 16

Background toSalamanca Conference 17UNESCO andSpecial Needs Education 18

2The Conference

Opening 22Closing session 24

3Summary of Thematic Presentationsand Discussions

Theme I: Policy and LegislationSpecial needs education:conceptual framework, planning and policy factorsLegislation issues 28Special educational needs arid educational reform:the case of Spain 30Responses 31Summary of discussion groups 32

Theme 2: School PerspectivesServing students with special educational needs:equity and access 35Organisation of schooling:achieving access and quality through inclusion 36Rethinking teacher education 37Response 40Summary of discussion groups 4()

Theme 3: Community PerspectivesCommunity-based rehabilitation 45The role of parents 46The role of voluntary organizations 47The role of donor agencies 48The role of organisations of disabled persons 49Summary of discussions groups 49

5

4Framework for Action

1. New Thinking inSpecial Needs Education 61

II. Guidelines for Action27 at the National Level 65

III. Guidelines for Actionat the Regionaland International Level 79

Theme 4: Partnership and NetworkingPartnership between non-governmental organisationsand governments and grass roots organizations 54

5Annexes

1. Programme 832. Addresses at the Opening Session:

The Director-General ofUNESCO 87The Minister of Education,Spain 93

3. Working Document 964. Conference Committees:

Bureau of the Conference 103Drafting commitee 103Programme Committe 103Organization commitee 104

5. List of Plenary and ConcurrentSession Papers 105

6. List of Participants 1087. List of organizations 119

THE SALAMANCASTATEMENT

THE SALAMANCA STATEMENT 9

Reaffirming the right to education of every individual, as enshrined in

the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and renewing the pledge

made by the world community at the 1990 World Conference on Educationfor All to ensure that right for all regardless of individual differences,

Recalling the several United Nations declarations culminating in

the 1993 United Nations Standard Rules on the Equalization ofOpports..nities fo,r Persons with Disabilities, which urges States to ensurethat the education of persons with disabilities is an integral part ofthe education system,

Noting with satisfaction the increased involvement of governments,advocacy groups, community and parent groups, and in particularorganizations of persons with disabilities, in seeking to improve accessto education for the majority of those with special needs still unreached;and recognizing as evidence of this involvement the active participationof highlevel representatives of numerous governments, specializedagencies and intergovernmental organizations in this World Conference,

1.We, the delegates of the World Conference on Special Needs Education representing

ninety-two governments and twenty-five international organizations, assembled

here in Salamanca, Spain, from 7-10 June 1994, hereby reaffirm our commitment

to Education for All, recognithig the necessity and urgency of providing education

for children, youth and adults with special educational needs within the regular

education system, and further hereby endorse the Framework for Action on Special

Needs Education, that governments and organizations may be guided by the spirit

of its provisions and recommendations.

9

10 THE SALAMANCA STATEMENT

We believe and proclaim that:

every child has a fundamental right to education, and must be given the opportunityto achieve and maintain an acceptable level of learning,

every child has unique characteristics, interests, abilities and learning needs,

education systems should be designed and educational programmes implementedto take into account the wide diversity of these characteristics and needs,

those with special educational needs must have access to regular schools whichshould accommodate them within a childcentred pedagogy capable of meetingthese needs,

regular schools with this inclusive orientation are the most effective meansof combating discriminatory attitudes, creating welcoming communities, buildingan inclusive society and achieving education for all; moreover, they providean effective education to the majority of children and improve the efficiency andultimately the cost-effectiveness of the entire edut...tion system.

3.We call upon all governments and urge them to:

give the highest policy and budgetary priority to improve their educationsystems to enable them to include all children regardless of individual differencesor difficulties,

adopt as a matter of law or policy the principle of inclusive education, enrollingall children in regular schools, unless there are compelling reasons for doingotherwise,

develop demonstration projects and encourage exchanges with countries havingexperience with inclusive schools,

establish decentralized and participatory mechanisms for planning, monitoringand evaluating educational provision for children and adults with special educationneeds,

10

THE SALAMANCA STATEMENT

encourage and facilitate the participation of parents, communities andorganization of persons with disabilities in the planning and decisionmaking

processes concerning provision for special educational needs,

invest greater effort in early identification and intervention strategies, as.well

as in vocational aspects of inclusive education,

ensure that, in the context of a systemic change, teacher education programmes,both preservice and inservice, address the provision of special needs education

in inclusive schools.

4.We also call upon the international community; in particular we call upon:

governments with international cooperation programmes and international fundingagencies, especially the sponsors of the World Conference on Education for All,

the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO),the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), United Nations DevelopmentProgramme (UNDP), and the World Bank:

to endorse the approach of inclusive schooling and to support the development

of special needs education as an integral part of all education programmes;

the United Nations and its specialized agencies, in particular the International

Labour Of (ILO), the World Health Organization (WHO), UNESCO and

UNICEF:

to strengthen their inputs for technical cooperation, as well as to reinforce their

cooperation and networking for more efficient support to the expanded and

integrated provision of special needs education;

non-governmental organizations involved in country programming and service

delivery:

to strengthen their collaboration with the official national bodies and to intensify

their growing involvement in planning, implementation and evaluation of

inclusive provision for special educational needs;

12 THE SALAMANCA STATEMENT

UNESCO, as the United Nations agency for education:

- to ensure that special needs education forms part of every discussion dealingwith education for all in various forums,

to mobilize the support of organizations of the teaching profession in mattersrelated to enhancing teacher education as regards provision for specialeducational needs,

- to stimulate the academic community to strengthen research and networkingand to establish regional centres of information and documentation; also,to serve as a clearinghouse for such activities and for disseminating the specificresults and progress achieved at country level in pursuance of this Statement,

- to mobilize funds through the creation within its next Medium-Term Plan(1996-2001) of an expanded programme for inclusive schools and communitysupport programmes, which would enable the launching of pilot projectsthat showcase new approaches for dissemination, and to develop indicatorsconcerning the need for and provision of special needs education.

5.Finally, we express our warm appreciation to the Government of Spain andto UNESCO for the organization of the Conference, and we urge them to makeevery effort to bring this Statement and the accompanying Framework for Actionto the attention of the world community, especially at such important forumsas the World Summit for Social Development (Copenhagen, 1995) and the WorldConference on Women (Beijing, 1995).

Adopted by acclamation, in the city of Salamanca, Spain,on this 10th of June, 1994.

I 2

SPECIAL NEEDSEDUCATION:

AN OVERVIEW

13

New opportunities

The Salamanca conference marked a new pointof departure for millions of children deprivedof education. It provided a unique opportunityto place special needs education within thewider framework of the Education for All (EFA)movement, launched in Jomtien, Thailand in1990 and it came at a time when the world'sleaders and the United Nations system as awhole were adopting a new vision and takingthe first steps to its realization.

The goal is nothing less than the inclusion of allthe world's children in schools and the reformof the school system to make this possible.This in turn calls for a major policy andresources shift in most countries of the world,the setting of national targets, and a partnershipbetween all the national and internationalagencies involved.

The Salamanca Conference provided a platformto affirm the principle and discuss the practiceof ensuring that children with special educa-tional needs be included in these initiatives andtake their rightful place in a learning society.Experience has demonstrated that their needscan all too easily be overlooked.

Definitions and concepts

Among the 200 million children who are deniedaccess to education throughout the world,a significant number have special educationalneeds.

In the past, special education was defined interms of children with a range of physical,sensory, intellectual or emotional difficulties.During the last 15 to 20 years, it has becomeplain that the concept of special needseducation has to be widened to include all

SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION AN OVERVIEW 15

children who, for whatever reason, are failingto benefit from school.

In addition to children with impairments anddisabilities who are prevented from attendingtheir local school, there are millions morewho are:

experiencing difficulties in school, whethertemporarily or permanentlylacking interest and motivation in learning

only able to complete one or two years ofprimary education forced to repeat grades

forced to work

living on the streetsliving too far from any schoolliving in severe poverty or suffering fromchronic malnutritionvictims of war and armed conflict

suffering continuing physical, emotionaland sexual abuse, orsimply not attending school, whatevermay be the reason

14

All these children are being denied theopportunity to learn and to gain theknowledge, understanding and skillsto which they are entitled. It is clearthat the origins of their difficulties lienot just in themselves but also in thesocial environments in which theyare living. The task for the future isto identify ways in vvhich the schoolcis part of that social environment cancreate better learning opportunitiesfor all children and by this meansto address time challenge that 'the mostpervasive source gleaming difficul-ties is the school sv.vtein itself'.

16 SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION: AN OVERVIEW

Building on EFA initiatives

How is the world community respondingto this challenge? What priority is given by thenations of the world and by the internationalcommunity to fostering the growth and deve-lopment of its children and ensuring that theygain full access to schools?

1990 provided the first signs that the challengeof exclusion from education was being taken upby the world's leaders. The World Conferenceon Education for All: Meeting Basic LearningNeeds (Jomtien, Thailand 1990) and theWorld Summit for Children (New York, 1990),adopted the goal of Education for All by theyear 2000.

Access to schools and educational institutionswhich formed the main focus of the Salamancadiscussions should be seen as an essentialcomponent of the wider opportunities for life-long education which were identified in theJomtien discussions.

Three inter-related processes can be identifiedin these initiatives:

setting clear targets to increase the numberof children attending school,taking steps to ensure that they remain inschool for long enough to derive real benefit,and

initiating major school reforms to ensure thatwhat the school offers through its activities,its curriculum and its teachers matches theneeds of all its pupils, as well as those ofparents and of the local community, and thenational need for educated and responsiblecitizens.

Although children with disabilities are brieflymentioned in the Final Report from the JomtienConference, as well as in the World Declarationon Education for All, little information isavailable on new initiatives to include themin the implementation of national plans forEducation for All (EFA). There is also verylittle reference to the needs of disabled childrenin the Education for All Summit of Nine High-Population Countries (New Delhi, December1993) or in the International ConsultativeForum on EFA (New Delhi, September 1993).

The Salamanca Conference thus providedthe first significant international opportunityto build on these initiatives and to ensure thatchildren with special educational needs,however defined, are included from the outsetin national and local plans to open schoolsto all children and to ensure that schoolsbecome enjoyable and challenging learningenvironments.

Progress in reaching targets, whether in relationto EFA or the inclusion of children with specialneeds, is beset by major financial and otherobstacles. Delegates to the Jomtien Conference,and the follow-up conferences, while reaffir-ming their full support for the EFA initiatives,repeatedly emphazised that such reforms mustbe seen in the wider context of the economicsituation of their countries.

The Jomtien report included the following starkstatistics:

More than 100 million children,including at least 60 milliongirls, have no access to primaryschoolingMore than 100 million childrenand countless adults fail to completebasic education programmes;millions more satisfy the attendancerequirements but do not acquireessential knowledge and skills.More than 600 million adults,two thirds of whom are women,are illiterate.The world's population of school-age children will rise from508 million in 1980 to 724 millionby 2000. By the year 2000, ifenrolment rates remain at currentlevels, there will be more than160 million children without accessto primary education, simplybecause of population growth.UN estimates suggest that of the600 million disabled people inthe world, 150 million are childrenunder 15 years of age. Less than2 per cent of these children receiveany education or training

SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION: AN OVERVIEW 17

Background toSalamanca Conference

In preparing for the Salamanca conference,UNESCO was able to build on the impetusand commitment created by Jomtien and theEducation for All policy, and to work to ensurethat special needs issues were not overlookedbut brought centre stage.

Similarly, UNESCO was able to take advantageof a number of other recent and current majorUnited Nations initiatives. These include theInternational Year of Disabled Persons (1981)and the subsequent Decade of Disabled Persons(1983-1992), the World Programme of Actionin Favour of Disabled Persons (United Nations1983), the Convention on the Rights of theChild (1989), the Asian Decade of DisabledPersons (1993-2002) and the recent adoptionby the United Nations General Assemblyof the Standard Rules on the Equalisation ofOpportunities for Disabled Persons.

All these initiatives have educational implica-tions. In addition, they all encourage amulti-disciplinary, multi-sectoral approach tothe planning and delivery of services to enabledisabled people of all ages to become fullcitizens of their society.

The same principle applies to initiatives wherethe lead has been taken by other United Nationsand international agencies, in co-operation withUNESCO. These include Community-BasedRehabilitation (page 45), Vocational Training(International Labour Organisation (page 49)and the work of inter-governmental bodies suchas the European Union (page 54) and theOrganisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment (page 42).

6

18 SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION: AN OVERVIEW

An important element in the preparation forthe World Conference has been a series of fiveregional seminars organized by UNESCOin 1992-1993, with the support of the Swedishgovernment. These were held in Botswana(eight countries), Venezuela (five countries),Jordan (six countries), Austria (five countries)and China (twelve countries).

The seminars brought together senior educationdecision-makers from the region, includingofficials with the lead responsibility for primaryand for special education. The purpose of theseminars was to mobilize policy and professio-nal support for pupils with special educationalneeds within the regular school system. Thepublished seminar reports provide an invaluablesource of information on trends at national,r.:zional and global levels. They will constitutea useful baseline against which to monitorand evaluate progress over the next decade Idbeyond.

The key themes which recurred in all seminarswere the following:

1. The creation of inclusive schools whichcater for a wide range of pupil needshould be given high priority. This could befacilitated by:

having a common administrative structurefor special and regular education

providing special education supportservices to regular schools and

adapting the curriculum and teachingmethods

2. Teacher education must be adapted topromote inclusive education and to facilitatecollaboration between regular and specialeducation teachers. This is a concern bothfor general pre-service and in-service teachereducation and for specialist in-serviceeducation.

3. Pilot projects based on inclusive educationshould be established and evaluatedcarefully in the light of local needs,resources and services. Such evaluativeinformation can guide policy and practicein key ways and should be disseminatedboth within countries' and to other countriesthat share similar circumstances.

UNESCOand Special Needs Education

UNESCO has itself contributed in no smallmeasure to these developments. Working withinlimited resources, UNESCO has done muchnot only to disseminate information on goodpractice but to encourage member states,non-governmental organizations and othermembers of the United Nations family toinitiate new policies and practices in specialneeds education. Many publications andvideo training-packages have been producedand disseminated.

Most recently, UNESCO has carried out aninternational study of legislation (page 28)and designed, field tested and launched SpecialNeeds in the Classroom, an innovative projectfor teacher education (page 42). The TeacherEducation Resource Pack and the materialswhich accompany it aim to help teachersto develop their thinking and practice on waysin which school systems and individual teacherscan better meet the needs of all pupils experien-cing difficulties in learning, including pupilswith disabilities.

17

THE CONFERENCE

13

The World Conference on SpecialNeeds Education: Access andQuality was set within the frame-

work laid down by the World Conference onEducation for All. Two over-arching concernsinformed the planning of the Conference:

I. Guaranteeing every child, including thosewith special needs, access to educationalopportunities, and

2. Working to ensure that these opportunitiesrepresent quality education.

The main purposes of the Conference were to:

present new thinking on learningdifficulties and disabilities and onthe relationship between specialeducational provision and generalschool reform;review recent developments inprovision for children and youngpeople with special educationalneeds;highlight breakthroughs andsignificant experiences in key areassuch as legislation, curriculum,pedagogy, school organization,teacher education and communityparticipation; andprovide a forum for sharing expe-riences at international, regionaland bilateral levels, and an oppor-tunity for negotiating on-goingcollaboration.

THE CONFERENCE 21

Within this broad framework, four majorthemes were identified and around these theConference programme was structured(Annex 1)

policy and legislation

school perspectives

community perspectivespartnership and networking

A working document, prepared by Dr. SeamusHegarty, served as a starting point for theparticipants, setting the conceptual frameof reference and the guiding principles againstwhich the above themes were discussed.

The conference programme, which extendedover a period of four days, was structuredaround plenary sessions and concurrent groupdiscussions to which specialists from differentcountries were invited to present papers.Plenary papers introduced the debate on eachof the major themes. Concurrent sessions hadbrief accounts of country experiences focusingon the theme of the day.

A draft Framework for Action prepared byUNESCO was sent out to all participants priorto the Conference and a drafting committeewas constituted at the Conference to reviewand revise it in the light of proposals andamendments put forward by the participants.

The Conference was organized on the initiativeof the Government of Spain which issuedinvitations to the participating countries andgenerously and efficiently attended to thecomplex logistics of preparing and conductingan international conference. UNESCO wasinvited to cooperate with Spain in thisimportant endeavour and gladly acceptedresponsibility for the professional preparationof the conference, including the establishmentof the programme, which was done inconsultation with Member States, and the

22 THE CONFERENCE

preparation of the main working documents.Both an organizing committee and aprogramme committee were constituted toguide the preparation of the conference.The members of these committees are listedin Annex 4.

More than 300 participants, includinghighlevel policymakers, administrators andspecialists representing 92 governments and25 international organizations participatedin the Conference. While those concerned withspecial education were well represented,the majority of participants were, by intentiongeneral educators. As the challenge that theConference was convened to address was thatof guaranteeing all children including thosewith special needs, access to education ofquality, it was essential that those concernedwith general educational policies in MemberStates be present.

Opening

The opening ceremony was held at theSalamanca Palace of Congress and Exhibitions,in the presence of the Her Highness PrincessElena de Bourbon, who officially openedthe Conference after the official statements bythe President of the Deputation of Salamanca,the Mayor of Salamanca, the Representativeof the Director-General of UNESCO and theMinister of Education of Spain.

As Federico Mayor, Director-General ofUNESCO, was prevented from attending theConference by urgent matters that did notpermit him to leave Headquarters, his speechfor the opening session was read byVictor Ordoiiez, Director of the Divisionof Basic Education and Representative of theDirector-General at the Conference.

Mayor noted that although education for all wasa basic human right, children and adults withspecial needs have had a low priority and haveall too often been ignored. He estimated thatonly about 1 per cent of children and adultswith disabilities were receiving adequate provi-sion. Each participant to the conference shouldtherefore ask themselves what more should andcould be done to narrow the gap between policyand practice, between rhetoric and reality.

"What this means, in the simplest terms,is thinking and doing, then thinking aboutwhat we have done and how we mightdo it better".

On the positive side, Mayor emphasized thegreater awareness not only of the needs but ofthe capabilities of disabled people. These capa-bilities need to be fostered through educationand training.

"We have begun to recognise the disablednot as people with problems but as peoplewith untapped potential".

UNESCO had sought to play a catalytic role inencowaging new developments: "providing thepinch of yeast rather than the pound of flour".

Special needs education was not an approachsuited to the needs of the few but a pedagogycapable of improving education for the many.New thinking places less emphasis on thedeficits of the learner than on the ways in whichthe learning environment might be betterunderstood so that obstacles to learning whichmay arise from an inappropriate or inaccessiblecurriculum could be removed. By the sametoken, much more could be done to harnessthe resources of the family and to forge strongerbonds between home and school.

Mayor emphasized that a sense of what can beachieved in special needs education must becommunicated to the World Summit on SocialDevelopment (Copenhagen, March 1995).

The time for action is now. We shouldbe asking ourselves 'How many youngpeople and adults with disabilities havemastered the skills and competenciesrequired to function effectively insociety? How many have found goodand rewarding jobs?'

Gustavo Sudrez Pertierra, Minister of Education,then took the floor. In his speech Pertierrahighlighted the objectives of the Conferencewhich go beyond special needs education,namely calling for the improvement of thequality of education, noting that the educationsystem must respond to the diversity inthe school population. Moreover, he underlinedthat changes in education are not enough forthe transformation of society into a caringcommunity. Social change is not only neededin the schools but also in the labour market,in families, in society at large. The challengeis to defend the right to education, to workand to integration in society. (Annex 2).

Introductory addresses were also delivered bythe president of the Deputation of Salamancaand the Mayor of Salamanca.

The delegates then elected the bureau of theConference. Alvaro Marchesi, Under-Secretaryof State, Ministry of Education, Spain, waselected President of the Conference, with thefollowing four vice-presidents: Pierre Kipre,Minister of Education, Cote dilvoire;Bounthong Vixaysakd, Director of GeneralEducation, Laos People's Democratic Republic;Maatouk Maatouk, Minister of education,Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and Bolivar ArmuellesHernandez, Vice-Minister of Education

THE CONFERENCE 23

Panama. Peter Mittler form ManchesterUniversity was elected Rapporteur-General.

Throughout the Conference, UNESCO andSpain organized an exhibit of documents,materials and publications relating to variousissues covered. UNESCO presented videosfrom its collection on experiences in the fieldof special needs education.

Before embarking on the theme of the first dayVictor Ordoriez gave a visual presentation withcommentary, putting forward a comprehensiveoverview of special needs education within theframework of Education for All. This helpedin setting the scene for the conference debate,as well as for the future. Drawing on UNESCOstatistics and surveys, he detailed the scaleand scope of the tasks of implementing specialneeds initiatives throughout the world.

He particularly drew attention to the following:

Children with special educational needsinclude:

those who are currently enrolled inprimary school but for various reasons donot progress adequately,those who are currently not enrolled inprimary schools but who could be enrolledif the schools were more responsive, andthe relatively smaller group of children withmore severe physical, mental or multipleimpairments who have complex special edu-cational needs that are not being met.

He presented graphic illustrations of theshortfall in provision worldwide. A UNESCOsurvey conducted in 1986-1987 found thatthirty-four out of fifty-one countries from allregions had fewer than 1 per cent of their pupilsin special educational provision of any kind.The figure was less than 0.1 per cent for ten ofthese countries. A further UNESCO survey

24 THE CONFERENCE

due to be published shortly would show a littleimprovement on this situation.

Closing session

The closing session was chaired by the Presidentof the Conference. The Rapporteur-Generalwas invited to present a synthesis of the procee-dings and conclusions of the Conference whichconsisted of the two documents, the SalamancaStatement and the Framework for Action.After minor corrections and modificationsthe two documents were adopted unanimously,including the proposal that the SpanishGovernment presents this document to the28th session of the General Conferenceof UNESCO.

This was followed by closing statements.Deng Pufang, President of China DisabledPersons' Federation, stated that the conceptualframework put forward at the Conference,namely that of "inclusive education", had theunanimous understanding of the participants asto the goals that they should set ahead of them,and that each has to try and find out their wayto bringing these goals to reality. He underlinedthe role of governments at all levels in takingthe initiaitve and responsibility, by providingthe necessary legislation. policy and support.

Victor Ordonez, on behalf of the Director-Generalof UNESCO, thanked the Spanish authoritiesand the organizers for their generous effortsin convening this Conference. He underlinedthat the Conference represented a turning pointin the approach to special needs educationworldwide it took place at a strategic timewhen the approach of inclusive education hasbeen successfully, though not uneventfully,introduced in a few countries, and whenthe rest of the countries were ready and eagerto learn how to implement similar approaches.The issue of special needs education, heemphasized, is one of the few in Educationfor All that equally concerns countries of theSouth and North.

The President of the Conference Alvaro Marchesi,then closed the meeting, expressing his gratitudeto the participants, speakers, and rapporteurs.He thanked UNESCO for its active collaborationwith Spain in the holding of the Conference.He stressed the importance of the Conferenceconclusions to developments at the internatio-nal and national level. He further added thatit will give added impetus to the work that hasbegun in Spain.

22

Theme 1: Policy and Legislation

Special Needs Education:Conceptual framework, planningand policy factors

The opening paper for this theme was presentedby Bengt Lindqvist.

Lindqvist identified a number of stages inthe evolution of assumptions about attitudestowards disabled people.

The stage of caring for and helping disabledpeople to cope with their situation and tolive a protected life. This led to the creationof special institutions for living, learningand occupation.Advocates of normalization and integrationcriticised this approach for its isolationand marginalization of disabled people. Incontrast, normalization theory emphasizedthe right of disabled people to live withtheir family and in the natural environment,and to be prepared and supported in copingwith the difficulties which they might facein doing so.For a long time, however, the focus of reha-bilitation and service planning and delivery,as well as of staff training, remained onthe individual, with relatively little attentionto ways in which social institutions andattitudes imposed obstacles on disabledpeople and therefore needed to be changed.

The 1960s saw a growing realizationthat rehabilitation, though important, wasinsufficient and that a new strategy wasneeded. The social model of disabilityemphasizes ways in which existing policiesand legislation need to be fundamentallymodified to ensure the removal of physicaland institutional barriers to the full andequal participation of disabled people inthe life of the community.

The disability movement inevitably becamemore political as it worked for new policiesand new laws. At the international level,the World Programme of Action ConcerningDisabled Persons particularly emphasizedequalization of opportunities which was&fined as:

24

"..the process through which the varioussystems of society and the environment,such as services, activities, informationand documentation are made availableto all."

It is obvious. therefore, that access toordinary schools and educational establishmentis an integral element of equalization of oppor-tunities.

To redress the situation the Standard Rules onthe Equalisation of Opportunities for Personswith Disabilities was prepared and adoptedby the United Nations General Assemblyin december 1993.

States should recognise theprinciple of equal primary, secon-dary and tertiary educationalopportunities ,for children, youthand adults with disabilities. Theyshould ensure that the educationof persons with disabilities isan integral part of the educationsystem.

Article 6 of the Standard Ruleson the Equalization of opportunitiesfor Persons with Disabilities.

28 SUNIMARY 01- THEMATIC PRES'''. T \ 'DONS \ \I) DISCUSSIONS

The challenge now is to formulaterequirements of a 'school for all'.

All children and young people of the world 1.4 havethe right to education. It is not our education .systemsthat have a right to certain types of children.It is the school system of a country that must beadjusted to meet the needs of all children.

LINDQVIST

Lindqvist raised some key issues for the future:

Who is responsible for making standardsystems and structures accessible andavailable to disabled persons'?

How do we distribute responsibilitybetween the legislative hod\ of a country.and the organizers and providers ofservices'?

How do we obtain and disseminatethe necessary knowledge which will makeit possible for us to make accurate plans'?

Legislation issues

UNESCO has recently undertaken a stuck' ofspecial education legislation in member states.Maria-Rita Saulle. who was involved in thestudy, presented some of the findings.

By way of introduction to the main findings.she outlined a number of general issues arisingfrom legislation.

Legislation is usually needed to ensurethe rights of disabled persons to equal rightsand equal opportunities.

"Many countries experience problems inimplementing legislation in ways that affectthe day to day life of the people it is meantto serve. As far as people with disabilitiesare concerned, legislation is not just a reflec-tion of society's attitudes: it is an effectivevay of producing necessary changes in theallocation of resources and in shaping humanbehaviour. At hest, the law recognizespersons with disabilities as potentialcontributors to the socio-economic fabricof a country, rather than merely passiverecipients of special services and financialbenefits ".

Compulsory education

Many changes in legislation had been made inthe past ten years. particularly in relation tocompulsory education. Although thirty-five outof the fifty-two countries which replied to theenquiry claimed to have compulsory educationfor all pupils, it was also clear that this law wasnot always literally enforced and that therewere many exceptions. due to lack of resources.Very few countries stated that no children were

nr40

excluded on grounds of disability or not evenable to enter schools in the first place. Therewere also references to 'degrees of disability'which suggested that children with severe disa-bilities often could not be admitted to schoolsfor practical reasons. Half the countries referredto categories of special education.

Policy as regards integrationReports on integration policy were difficultto interpret, as this term is used very loosely.Some countries that expressed a strong commit-ment to integrated education still plannedto retain special schools and classes. Elevenof the fifty-two countries envisaged nothing butmainstream education while the others optedfor a continuum of provision including bothspecialist and supported mainstream education.Seven countries appeared to opt for separateprovision, while still supporting the principleof integration.

An example of principles and philosophy isprovided from the State of Victoria, Australia:

Theme I: POLICY AND LEGISLATION 29

Every child has the right to beeducated in a regular school.Provision should he organizedaccording to student need ratherthan disability.Resources and services shouldbe school-basedDecision-making should hecollaborativeAll children can learn and betaughtIntegration is a curriculum issue

INVIIIII111111111111111111111111111111111MIN

Curriculum

Countries adopted varying policies on curricu-lum. Specialist curricula for specific groups arestill common; in a few countries, the generalcurriculum for all pupils is adapted accordingto the needs of specific categories.of children orin relation to the needs of individual children,regardless of category. In these situations,attempts are made to make the general curricu-lum accessible to groups or individuals bybreaking the work down into smaller steps, bythe use of microtechnology or through supportteachers.

Parental involvement

The documentation provided made relativelylittle mention of parental involvement in assess-ment and decision-making concerning theirchild.

30 SUMMARY OF THEMATIC PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

Teacher training

More than half the countries reported thatspecial ed cation was covered in the initialtraining of all teachers, but this was not alwayscompulsory, and the scope and nature of thetraining were unclear.

Separate (h integrated legislation?In conclusion, Saulle raises a fundamentalquestion on whether there should be separateand specific legislation for disabled people(as in Italy) or whether legal provision shouldbe incorporated in general legislation(as in most Scandinavian countries).She concludes in favour of the second optionon the following grounds:

MialaiiMMMONMEMOMENSeparate legislation might betoo vague or non-specificThere would be a risk thatregulations might be tightenedand more exclusiveThere is a further risk ofmarginalization, especially iffluids to support disabilitylegislation are not forthcoming

1111111111111111111111111.1111.111111111111111111111111

In any case, clear monitoring mechanisms areessential. These include regular inspections.nominating an Ombudsperson and respondingto complaints and representations made byindividual disabled persons. their families orby pressure groups.

Special educational needsand educational reform:the case of Spain

This issue presented by Alvaro Marchesi focu-sed on the case of Spain. The Spanish reformsoriginated in a law passed in 1985. Thisenvisaged an eight-year programme in thecourse of which major changes of curriculumand organisation were planned for ordinaryschools. In 1990, a new law guaranteed aquality education for all students throughoutthe entire education system.

At the heart of the Spanish policylies the realization that reform ofspecial education and the fullinclusion of all children in onlinaryschools can come about onlyas a result of a rePrm of the schooland of the education system asa whole.lt is the t'hole educationsystem, and not lust one aspect ofit which should be t-efi.med tomake inclusive education possible.

Curriculum reform and attention to studentdiversity arc essential at every level. Teachersare given considerable autonomy in adaptingthe curriculum to the needs of their students.to develop common criteria for assessmentand to have access to technical and humansupports.

The reforms made in the education systemshould facilitate the development of suitablecurricula for children with special educationalneeds, planning with care, adapted to thelearning rhythm of the children, and developedby competent and motivated teachers.

The twin aims of the Spanish integrationprogramme have involved:

opening up mainstream schools to pupilscurrently in special schoolsimproving the education of the 15 to 20 percent of students already in mainstreamschools who experience learning difficultiesby providing them with greater resourcesand support.

The scheme had a number of key elements:

Early education: multi-disciplinary teamswere created to identify and assess youngchildren with special educational needs,and to encourage and plan their integrationinto schoolsGradual and voluntary introduction of inte-gration to a sample of schools, beginningwith pre-school and the first year of primaryeducationGuaranteed reduction in class size andaccess to a support teamInclusion of a special needs element inteacher trainingCreation of a national resource centrefor special education to develop curriculummaterials, methods of assessment andinterventionSpecial schools to admit only childrenwith the most severe disabilities and to share

their expertise with mainstream schoolsMedia campaign to enlist public and profes-sional support for the reforms.

One of the most important events of the integra-tion programme has been the increasinglypositive attitude of the educational communityand that of society towards the incorporation ofdisabled students into mainstream schools.


Responses

Responses to the main presentations underTheme I were given by representativesof Colombia and Botswana in the form of asummary of policy and service developmentsin their respective countries.

This was followed by a presentation byDr James Lynch of the World Bank who provi-ded a summary of the Asia Regional Studyon Children with Special Educational Needs.This study was concerned with the inclusion ofchildren with special educational needs withinuniversal primary education in the Asia Region.The study employed case study and documen-tary survey research techniques in fifteencountries in the region. An attempt was madeto distil the essence of 'good practice' in inclu-ding children with special educational needswithin ordinary primary schools with the aimof identifying those policies, approaches andinterventions which are desirable if fully inclu-sive primary education is to he achieved.

The paper aims to provide a rationale for thosemaking decisions to support the inclusion of the

vast majority of children with special educatio-nal needs into the regular school systems.

The World Bank study considers three waysin which a more inclusive approach to primaryeducation may he justified:

In humanitarian terms, as a basic human

rightIn economic terms, within greater economicand social development and nation building

In utilitarian terms. on a broader scale byempowering people to take control over their

own lives.

23


There are personal, social andeconomic dividends to educatingprimary aged children with specialeducational needs, whereverpossible in mainstream schools.Most children with special educa-tional needs can be successfullyand less expensively accommodatedin integrated than in fully segrega-ted settings.The vast majority of children withspecial educational needs canbe cost-effectively accommodatedin regular primary schools.Changes towards more inclusiveprimary education may alreadybe perceived in policy and practicein many countries at all levelsof economic development in theAsia region.The costs of continuing family,community and social dependenceare far greater than the investmentsnecessary to educate such children.A combined health, nutrition andeducational strategy is desirableif all children are to benefit fromprimary education.

James Lynch, World Bank

Summary of discussions groups

Four small discussion groups examined keyquestions in greater depth and reported theirfindings to a plenary session where furtherdiscussion took place.

The following were among the main issuesdiscussed:

1. What are the main reasons for the exclusionof children with special educational needsfrom ordinary schools?

Parallel systems of provision and catego-ries of handicapping conditions exist.Costs to the education system andto individual schools; the nature of the

assessment and decision-makingin schools; costs to family, religion,gender, local attitudes and culture;lack of political and professional will;and cultural factors, parental choice.

Changes in terminology are needed to reflectchanges in policy and practice; a specificexample is the shift from 'special' to'inclusive'.

2. What are the obstacles to inclusion?Lack of teacher training

Lack of human and material resourcesLack of co-ordination betweenregular and special education systemsand schools

Lack of acceptance and/or understandingby society and its representatives.

3. How can special needs education befinanced and is funding an obstacle tointegration?

If separate funding is provided for specialneeds education, then special schoolswill want to take more pupils. This wouldconstitute an obstacle to integration.All relevant ministries should contributeto fundingIncreases in birth rate and in child survi-val will lead to higher levels of demandfor special needs education

4. Is separate legislation on special needsnecessary?

There was general agreement that speciallegislation was not necessary but thatprovision should be made within generallaws and regulations for children whoneed additional or separate provision.Separate legislation leads to marginaliza-tion and stigmatization.

5. Is it helpful or necessary to have formalcategories of special needs education?

The general consensus appeared to bethat the move away from categories basedon medical classification systems wasa positive one. The focus should be on theunique needs of individuals, regardless ofmedical or other labels. However, it isimportant for teachers to be aware of andto understand medical information.The view was expressed that the needsof gifted children were being overlookedand that they too had special educationalneeds which were not being met byschools or government departments.


6. Strategic solutionsPolitical will at every levelPlanning strategies that call for ordinaryand special systems to work togetherwithin a single administrative frameworkParticipation of non-governmentalorganizations concerned withdisability in policy-making, planningand decision-making

A general issue which arose concerned the need

to find an acceptable definition of inclusiveeducation and to distinguish this from integra-tion or mainstreaming. It was suggested that anessential element of the concept of inclusionwas concerned with systemic changes atthe level of the school and the school district,as well as in the planning of educationalprovision at the level of local and centralgovernment. In contrast, mainstreaming wasconcerned with individuals or small groupswithin the present system, without anynecessary assumption that this system neededto he changed to make inclusion possible forother children.

Theme 2: School Perspectives

papers presented within thesecond of the four major conferencethemes are broadly concerned

with the planning and delivery of education inmainstream schools, using current knowledgederived from good practice and publishedresearch. This leads naturally to the fundamen-tal challenge of the nature of the knowledge,skills and understanding required of all teachersin all schools in order to achieve inclusiveeducation and how this can be provided througha planned but participative strategy for staffdevelopment.

Serving students withspecial educational needs:equity and access

There is no lack of knowledgeabout what to do and how to do it.The central issue in implementingthe vision of educational equityis how to tie together resources(teacher expertise, curricularaccommodations, administrativeand organizational supportfbr progrannne implementation)and outcomes in ways thatsimultaneously achieve equitygoals and accountability.

Margaret Wang

This hold quotation captures the spirit ofMargaret Wang's optimism that we alreadyhave the knowledge to assure a higherquality of schooling and classroom success

31

for students with special educational needs.The challenge is one of disseminatingand adapting such knowledge to the needsof teachers and students in specific schoolcontexts.

Her presentation draws on a large body ofresearch on school and instructional effective-ness. and seeks to highlight some key principleswhich could be applied outside the NorthAmerican context within which the researchwas carried out. Underlying all the suggestionsis an attempt to identify aspects of the learningenvironment which can be modifiedby teachers. This is in contrast to traditionalapproaches in which attempts are made to com-pensate for alleged deficits and 'risk factors'in individual children by the introductionof additional programmes. The emphasisis on improvements in the quantity and qualityof the achievements of students involved inthe same curriculum as their fellow students.

if schooling success is recognizedas possible for everyone through instruc-tional accommodation, the major taskof the schools is the creation of learningenvironments that uphold a standardof equity in educational outcomesfor all students. The focus should beon identifying practices that deny equalaccess to curriculum and to practiceswhich promote it.

'Provision of equality of opportunity foreducational success can be characterized.therefore. in terms of the use of schooltime, the quality of instruction, thecontent of instruction and instructionalgrouping practices.

'Whether student diversity is addressedthrough the adoption of innovativeinstructional approaches or through some


organizational restructuring approach, oneprinciple should remain paramount: allstudents can achieve the educational goalsof basic education if properly supported.LI Achieving educational equity willrequire using the best of what we current-ly know about effective instruction andschooling effectiveness'.

Organization of schooling:achieving access and qualitythrough inclusion

Gordon Porter also starts from the assumptionof inclusive education but focuses sharplyon the nature of the support needed by studentsto become successful learners and membersof the school community. His perspectiveis that of an educational planner and managerwith responsibility for fourteen schoolsand 5,000 students in one of eighteen schooldistricts of New Brunswick, Canada.

The starting point is not seen in terms ofstudents with defects and disabilities and howthese might be remediated but rather in termsof how we can improve our practiceas educators to meet their needs within aninclusive system.

He stresses that true inclusion will requiresignificant change to what has becometraditional educational practice. In areas whereinclusion has been successfully pursued,significant effort to support the change processhas been present. What is required aboveall is a vision of what the positive outcomeswill he: leadership and co-ordination andsupport programmes and processes.

Some of the essential characteristics of theapproach are as follows:

Funding is based on the same grant perspecial needs student, regardless of thenature or severity of the disability or need.

`The result is less focus on disabilityand greater focus on support services toteachers and all students with specialneeds.' Such a funding system 'assumesthat every school and thus every districtwill need r :ertain level of support ser-vices, simply because the school serves aheterogeneous population of students.'

À school system that hands overall students with learning problemsand disabilities to a separate educationstructure undermines it's ability tobe a holistic unit that serves all students.'

The service that used to be known as specialeducation is now called student services andsupports not only all students but also theclassroom teacher and the school principalin achieving the goal of inclusive education.Student services teams operate at local levelto clusters of schools.

Porter further highlighted the critical factorsin organizing school-based support thatmake inclusion possible for teachers andstudents:

A new role for the special educator

Multi-level instruction

Co-operative learning

Classroom and student management

Collaborative problem-solving

Peer support groups

Peer tutoring skills

Staff development

32

Theme 2: SCHOOL PERSPECTIVES 37

pecial needs education cannot advancein isolation. It must be part of an

overall educational strategy and, indeed, of newsocial and economic policies. This requires a reviewof the policy and practice in every subsectorwithin education, from pre-school to universities,to ensure that the curricula, activities and programmesare, to the maximum extent possible, fully accessibleto all.

Multi-level instruction

'Multi-level instruction involves identi-fying the main concepts to be taught in alesson: determining different methods ofpresentation to meet the different learningstyles of students: determining a varietyof ways in which students are allowedto express their understanding: and deve-loping a means of evaluation thataccommodates different ability levels.'

It follows that organizational supports forinclusive education must he in place at theprovincial or state level, the regional orschool district level and at the level of theschool itself. These structures. programmesand policies must deliver the support neededby classroom teachers and their students.

FEDERICO MAYORDirector General. UNESCO

Rethinking teacher education

If inclusive education is to become a reality.the need for teacher education involves everyteacher in every school. as well as all thosetraining to be teachers. It calls for the changingof attitudes and levels of awareness in profes-sional staff and volunteers working in relatedfields, such as pre-school and post-schooleducation, staff of agencies in the related fieldsof health. social welfare and employment,as well as planners. administrators anddecision-makers, whether elected or appointed.

N.K. Jangira's presentation provides an encou-raging example of what can be achieved by wayof a national strategic plan in a large developingcountry such as India. Although policy anddecision-making in relation to education arelargely devolved to the state level, theGovernment of India has established nationalstructures such as the National Council for


Educational Research and Training (NCERT)which facilitates strategic planning at nationaland international levels but which worksthrough regional centres as well as throughselected individual schools.

The approach can be described under a numberof headings but it is important to stress thatthese are inter-related and complementary.

Pre-service teacher trainingIt is axiomatic that every student teacher mustbe provided with a special educational needscomponent as a compulsory element of initialtraining.

A UNESCO survey of teacher training forspecial needs in 1986 established that severalcountries were beginning to include specialneeds component into the initial training of allteachers. Although considerable progress hasbeen made since that time, there is a lack ofclarity on how this goal is to be achieved andthe resources required to do so.

Professor Jangira's paper illustrates twocontrasting approaches. One alternative is todesign a focused tailor-made course or module,relevant to local conditions. This has the advan-tage of concentrating attention on special needsissues and providing an opportunity to assessstudent knowledge and perhaps competence.

A second alternative is to ensure that eachcomponent of initial training includes appro-priate attention to the needs of all children.particularly those with special educationalneeds. It acquires the same status in curriculumtransaction as any other element. All teachereducators receive a basic orientation to specialneeds and in the process special educationis demystified.

In-service training

The aim of in-service training is to developwhat has been termed 'pedagogical intelligence'.This involves, in the words of Wedell'scommentary on this symposium, the extent towhich 'the teacher and the school can thinkthemselves into the pupil's view of the learningtask [...] and are given the time to attend todifferences in their pupils' learning needs.'

Jangira summarizes experience in India andfrom published research which lead to anumber of 'guiding principles' on effectivein-service training.

For systemic change, training should beprovided to actors in the game

Training should be continuous instead ofa single shot affair

Training should be relevant and meetthe unique needs of individuals in theworkplace

Training should be provided in as similara situation as possible to that in the workplace

Provide for demonstration, practice andfeedback to ensure mastery over knowledgeand skills

Provide for individuals an opportunityfor constant reflection and review of newknowledge and skills in the context ofpractice in the workplace

Individuals should be encouraged toplan action research to transfer and finetune skills to practice demands in theworkplace.

Plan support and collaboration in the work-place as integral components of the trainingdesign to ensure transfer of knowledge andskills, and to institutionalize the change.

Education and traininggrspecial school teachersJangira envisages a key role for special schoolteachers in the future. but one that will requireconsiderable reorientation and training.In particular. the role of special schools isincreasingly to support integration for exampleby outreach work, acting as a resource andcurriculum development centre to schools andindividual teachers. Consequently, a numberof changes are occurring in this field:

Single disability training programmes arebeing modified to include a core course onall disabilities and specialization in one.

Support teachers are being trained in more

than one disabilityTraining programmes now focus on theskills required to work with other teachers(consultancy). and to plan and delivertraining programmes for them.

Theme 2: SCII001. PERSPECTIVES 39

Networking.* changeA notable feature of the Indian strategy asdescribed by Jangira involves nationaland international networking and the use ofexisting institutions and. infrastructures.

A 'worked example' is provided of how theUNESCO Teacher Education Resource Packwas introduced into India through the Multi-Site Action Research Project (MARP). Thisinvolved 33 co-ordinators from 22 agencies.Two specialists from each institution wereselected to provide training and practicein the use of the Resource Pack material andto develop action research proje-ts in

pre-service and in-service training contexts.The project involved 338 experiencedteachers, 248 pre-service students and some10,000 children in 115 sites spread over23 different sites across the whole country.A detailed evaluation of the project yieldedpositive results in terms of teacher attitudes.pupil participation in learning, classroom

Reform in special education 1.4represents just about all the issues

involved in bringing about educational reform.The solutions to inclusion are not easily achieved.It is complex both in the nature and degreeof change required to identify and implementsolutions that work. Given what change requires

persistence, co-ordination, follow-up, conflict resolu-tion and the like leadership at all levelsis required.'

MICHAEL FULLAN


drawings (teachers and pupils) and a learningpreference questionnaire.

Response

In his response to the three papers in Theme 2,Klaus Wedell highlighted the contrasts betweenthe visions of excellence produced by thethree speakers and the day-to-day classroomand systemic realities of provision in manycountries. How can the gulf between them benarrowed and eventually closed?

The education systems of most countries werenot designed with the aims of inclusion inmind. It should not surprise us therefore thatmost still respond to the challenge of diversityand curriculum differentiation by varioussimple expedients, all involving some form ofexclusion either from the school as a whole,from parts or all of the curriculum, or frommixed ability teaching through streaming andpartial segregation within the ordinary school.

Ìnclusive education implies startingwith children and young people asthey are in all their diversity and thendesigning a system which is flexibleenough to be responsive to individualdifferences.'

Wedell highlights the current inclusion paradox,namely that pupils' human rights to inclusionin their local school can be frustrated by thefrequent inability of those schools to meet theirindividual needs or to respond appropriately topupil diversity.

Progress towards inclusion involves a numberof elements. At the macro level, this involvesfundamental reforms in the ordinary school andat a systemic level it involves:

Restructuring of curriculum accessand differentiation,An effective and non-exclusivesystem of assessment and recordingof curricular targets and achieve-ments,

New forms of partnership withparents and other family memberssuch as brothers and sisters,The development of group andco-operative learning,Peer teaching,Creative use of microtechnologyand computer-assisted learning.

Summary of discussion groups

The discussion groups were able to dwell ingreater depth on the issues presented in plenary.Furthermore, twe specific projects werepresented and discussed: the UNESCO TeacherEducation Project Special Needs in theClassroom and the Project Active Life forDisabled Youth: Integration in the School ofthe Organisation for Economic Co-operationand Development (OECD). Both drew onthe country experiences of their respectivepartners.

Access to the curriculumWhere children with severe cognitiveimpairments are concerned, the 'subjectsto be learned' are very different from thecurriculum of the ordinary school.The curriculum should therefore be adapted

to include activities for daily living andfunctional skills, such as cooking a simplemeal, taking a bus alone, etc. These skillsshould be taught in partnership with parents.

The crisis in secondary education is

reflected in huge numbers of drop-outs and

marginal behaviour (early pregnancy, drug

abuse and court convictions). Can schoolsmeet the needs of 'angry youth' as wellas students with disabilities? Should we bethinking of alternatives to traditional schoo-

ling, including supported employment?

Access to the curriculum depends on:legislative and administrative support

availability of resources

parental and public support

training of personnelteacher motivation and incentivesmulti-disciplinary support groups

adequate evaluation criteria for pupils

and projects

Obstacles include:attitudinal barriers

poor motivation of teachers

fears of unemployment by special school

teachersinadequate training and materialsinappropriate methods of assessmentleading to exclusionexperiences of developed countriesnot necessarily relevant or transferable

to developing countries

J7


Case studies were also presented from Canada,

Spain, and United States.

Organization of schooling

A number of issues were considered in thediscussion groups. Country reports werealso provided by Austria, Peru, Spain and

Zimbabwe.The quality of the learning experiencesavailable to students with special needs inthe ordinary classroom needed to be assured.

There are real fears in some countries thatspecial-school teachers will lose their jobs as

a consequence of integration policies.

For integration to succeed, there has to be

a real transfer of knowledge, skills andexperience from specialists to generalistteachers. Furthermore, knowledge hasto be reviewed and renewed.There should be an international exchangeof ideas and experiences on integrationand school organization, with the support ofUNESCO, so that developed and developingcountries can learn from one another.

Teacher trainingSpecial education included in the initial trai-

ning of pre-school, primary and secondaryteachers should be generic and broad-based.

Built on the above, there should be orsome the opportunity to develop afurther broad-based training to develop

a 'master level' of regular teacher.

A third level would involve specialization,but the development of an elite spk cial

education teacher group should be avoided.

A general policy of in-service trainingshould be in place in order to prevent the

gulf between regular field teachers and

--a --a-- ---- V--42 SUMMARY OF THEMATIC PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

new graduates exposed to special needseducation just entering the field. Incentivesfor in-service should be available.

Training should be available foradministrators.

Disabled persons should be givenopportunities to participate in curriculumplanning and delivery of training.

Training should reflect due recognitionto diverse cultural contexts that call forcontext-appropriate approaches.Distance education programmes need tobe developed which will include materialsfor self-study. audio-visual materialsand face-to-face tuition by locally appointedtutors.

Special needs in the classroom

On the UNESCO Project introducedby Lena Saleh and Mel Ainscow, a team ofresource persons presented examplesof teacher education initiatives and changingpractice in schools from Ghana. India. Italy,and Latin America.

The aim of the UNESCO teacher-educationproject Special Needs in the Classroom isto develop and disseminate a resource pack ofideas and materials for use by teacher educatorsto support teachers in mainstream schoolsin responding to pupil diversity. Followingconsultation. a pilot version was field tested in1990 and 1991 by a team of resource peoplein nine countries Canada. Chile, China. IndiaJordan. Kenya. Malta, Spain and Zimbabwe.

The pack was then rewritten to include themanual and associated video programmes.Data collected indicate that the content of thematerials is appropriate for teachers in each ofthese national contexts. focusing on issues that

they find meaningful and relevant, and helpingthem to develop their thinking and practice.

The pack has been introduced to groups in overforty countries and is now the basis for regionaldevelopment projects in Africa, Asia. LatinAmerica. the Caribbean and Arab States and,more specifically, is part of a major nationalinitiative in China. India and Tahiland. Thepack has been found to be useful in in-service.pre-service and school improvement contexts.The UNESCO Resource Pack is now availablein fifteen languages (Arabic. Chinese. English.French. German, Hindi. Hungarian. Italian,Japanese. Lao, Polish, Portuguese. Spanish.Thai. and Vietnamese).

Active life for disabled youth:integration in school

Peter Evans summarized two reports fromcurrent OECD studies involving twenty-onemember countries. both concerned with thedesirability and feasibility of educating childrenwith special educational needs alongside theirpeers in ordinary schools.

The first report deals with differences betweenmember states in the ways in which disabilitiesare recognized and provided for. Governmentpolicies support the view that many of thechildren now being educated in separate specialschools could and should benefit from attendanceat ordinary schools. With the principle ofinclusion agreed. the emphasis has now shiftedto determining the most effective method ofachieving it.

The report reviews developments in the trainingof teachers and in the involvement of parentsin their children's schooling. It suggeststhat integrated placements are likely to he lessexpensive than segregated ones. It also outlineskey features which any integration plan should

consider, whether at the level of a country.region or district.

The second report is based on sixty-onecase-studies and summarizes what appear tobe the main features of good practice inintegrated education.

Success is associated with teachers

Being in supportive schools

Having positive attitudesBeing skilled at teaching mixed abilitygroupsHave periodic extra teaching help

Having time to plan their work and discusswith specialists, andHaving access to in-service training.


The study concludes that while integrationwas found to provide academic benefitsfor disabled children, it sometimes left themsocially isolated. Some suggestions were madeon how such isolation could be reduced.

This was followed by the presentationof country experiences from each of Belgium.Canada. Frarce, Germany, Ireland, Iceland,Italy and the United States. All relatedto integration on the school: however, eachreflected on a specific aspect of their country'sexperience.

39

Theme 3: Community Perspectives

Community-Based Rehabilitation

Special needs education does not exist in isola-tion. It can only be understood and developedin the context of its community. This includesparents, the neighbourhood in which the schoolis situated and the attitudes of local peopleto schooling in general and to the local schoolin particular.

Community-based rehabilitation (CBR) andEducation for All have common roots. Both arebased on a commitment to the empowerment oflocal pc ople to work together to secure accessto basic human rights whether to educationor health. Both arise from the failure of existinginstitutions and traditional services to deliverhealth, rehabilitation or education servicesin ways that meet the needs of those they aremeant to serve. New ways have to be foundof empowering local people to acquire some ofthe skills which have hitherto been the preserveof expensively trained and often inaccessibleprofessionals.

Brian O'Toole's paper shows how CBR andEFA must in future be seen as complementaryat every level from the village school toMinisters for health, education, social welfareand employment. Collaboration at grassrootslevel can be achieved without high-levelpolitical initiatives, but they are greatlystrengthened by a national commitment to ajoint approach. Sustainability depends on this.

Today, there is a greater realization of theprime importance of a joint approach amongthe responsible Ministries at all levels. Theartificial barriers dividing different agenciesand different professionals are beginningto he dismantled at every level but the pace ofprogress is still slow.

O'Toole's paper summarizes experience froma number of countries that are successfullydeveloping CBR projects not just for a fewcommunities but on a large scale. He describessuccessful outreach programmes in Burundi,Ghana, Jamaica, Kenya, M:..xico, thePhilippines, Viet Nam and Zimbabwe, andprovides a more detailed account of how theGuyana CBR project has developed.

CBR is not a panacea. nor does it providea universal template for the future. On thecontrary, unrealistic and sentimental relianceon CBR can do a dissrvice to its aims bydiscounting the serious social and economicobstacles to successful implementation.These include poverty, overwork and exhaus-tion on the part of families, professional vestedinterests, lack of official support and aboveall the severe risk that CBR projects find itdifficult to survive after the ending of externalfunding from government or an internationalaid agency.

Despite many positive examples of success.O'Toole concludes that the real test ofCBR has yet to come'. He asks`Can CBR expand beyond a relativelysmall-scale, home-based teaching programmeinto a nationwide community care programme?'

One way of doing so is to join forces withsimilar initiatives in education, specifically themovement for EFA and inclusive education.At local level, this would mean, for example,that CBR workers would liaise with the localschool at an early stage, discussing waysin which a pre-school child could he preparedfor and finally he admitted to the school.and anticipate any changes which might needto he made and any additional supports whichmight he needed.

40


The family provides a natural link betweenCBR activities and school. But, as alreadyindicated, sot -c families lack the confidenceto approach sc.tools, just as not all schoolswelcome parents of children with disabilities.

O'Toole comments encouragingly thatsome of the most creative examples of paren-

tal-professional partnerships have come fromthe poorest nations. It may be a case of thedeveloped world looking south for innovativeapproaches to meeting the challenge of workingwith disabled persons.

As we move towards a new centurythere is a growing realisationof the need for a new conceptof development. A top-down modelof service delivers' is becomingincreasingly discredited.There is growing recognitionthat if the subjects of innovationdo not participate actively in therelationship with those who wouldpromote the development process,change will be impossible. Oneof the basic questions now becomeshow we can guide individuals who,for so long, have traditionally beenled by others, to take charge oftheir own affairs. We need to moveaway from regarding rehabilitationas a product to be dispensed, tooffering rehabilitation as a processin which villagers are intimatelyinvolved.

O'Toole, 1990

The role of parents

Just as parents are at the heart of CBR, so theymust be at the centre of the inclusive educationmovement for their own children and for others.Indeed, parents provide a single focus both forCBR and for inclusive education.

Alain Parvilliers' presentation draws on hisfamily's experience and sets out a wide range ofroles and tasks which parents might undertake.He is convinced of the value of partnership, andoptimistic and confident about the outcomesof collaboration. Parents and professionals needeach other, and neither can make significantand sustainable progress alone.

He stresses that the first need of parents isfor information which is honest and accurate,and which contains positive suggestionsfor action. It is at the stage of implementingsuggestions for action, whether they comefrom professionals or from the parents' ownsense of what can be done, that parents firstneed partners.

Parvilliers describes a journey taken by manyparents with a child who has a severe disability.At first, they conscientiously followedthe suggestions for assessing and stimulatingdevelopment made by the professionals.But after a while, they grew more confidentin making their own observations and inmaking their own decisions about teachingand developmental objectives, as well inassessing priorities about what were the mostimportant tasks for their child to reach.

The confidence and competence which arosefrom his successful experiences of partnershipled him to another level of contact with profes-sionals that of trainer. He joined forceswith other parents, first at local, then motionaland finally international level through the

41

International League of Societies for Personswith Mental Handicap.

Initially, the aim of local parents was to reducethe 'element of chance' in obtaining supportand appropriate help for themselves and fortheir child. He sees the role of national bodiesin terms of pioneering innovations and asguardians of the quality of public services and.occasionally, as direct service providers.

Parvilliers' contribution raises some challen-ging issues for all parents and professionals.One thing is certain: even the largest and mostsuccessful of national parents' organizationsstarted from very small beginnings perhaps afew parents meeting in one anothers' homes,moving on from there to setting up a smallprogramme for pre-school or school-agechildren, a vocational training centre or grouphome. From these origins they developedtowards a national and international advocacyrole.

The fundamental lesson to be drawn is thatnothing should be done without theparticipation of families and that families needsupport and recognition in their task.

The role ofvoluntary organisations

In looking back over the development of non-governmental organisations, William Brohiertraces three phases.

The original charity modelTechnical assistance which transplantsconcepts and services from one country,culture and set of social conditions toanother this has elsewhere been calledthe culture-immune deficiency syndrome'

(C1DS).

Theme 3: COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES 47

A partnership model which has at least someof the following elements:

1) The programme should he developmen-tally based and should have sustainabilityhui1t in from the start.

2) The receiving partner should have owner-ship of the programme which shouldbe needs-based and needs-led. In otherwords, donors should not impose theirideas and practices. subtly or otherwise.

3) Organizations of disabled people mustbe empowered through positions ofresponsibility and leadership to makedecisions and be given whatever supportis necessary to enable them to do so.

4) Assistance must be appropriate to localconditions and complement locallyavailable resources.

Because many non-governmental organisationscontain elements of all four stages, it is impor-tant for the executive hoards to develop a clearsense both of their mission and of their metho-dology for implementation. This implies thatboard members must be able to rethink theiraims and mode of operation in the light of bothnew developments and the social and culturalcontexts in which they are or will be working.It is also essential for such hoards to includemembers with personal experience of disability.

Brohier stresses that a non-governmentalorganisation should be dynamic and move withthe times, but that changes should be welltbunded and relevant. For example, a successfulnon-governmental organisation can be seducedinto the role of service provider by offers ofsubstantial government funding either forspecific projects (for instance schools) or forthe general running of the organization

42


(such as payments for salaried staff and travelexpenses of executive committee). While suchoffers are tempting and may provide servicesfor disabled people, they allow governments toescape from the responsibility of providingsuch services themselves which in turn can leadto further isolation and marginalization.

At the international level, the larger consultativeinter-governmental organisations have since1981 worked together to act in an advisorycapacity to the United Nations organizationsconcerned with disability. These includeDisabled Persons International, theInternational League of Societies for Personswith Mental Handicap, RehabilitationInternational, the World Blind Union, the WorldFederation of the Deaf, the World VeteransAssociation and the International Council onDisability, the last now representing manynon-governmental organisations for whomdisability is only one element of their work(such as Red Cross) and the main professionalassociations (such as Occupational Therapy,etc.).

The NGO decision-making bodymust include the parents of childrenwith disabilities and/or adultswho are themselves disabled, notbecause the disability automaticallyqualifies theni for membershipbut in view of the valuable insightsthey can share from personalexperience and the crucial inputsthey have a right to providefor planning and programmingof special needs educationand rehabilitation services.

Brohier

Role of donor agencies

Kerstin Rosencrantz gave an account of thework of the Swedish International DevelopmentAgency (SIDA), one of a number of govern-ment aid agencies playing a catalytic andstrategic role in international disability work.SIDA works largely through mainly SwedishNGOs working with NGOs in developing coun-tries, mainly for capacity-building purposeswithin these organizations. The most usefulcontribution we can make is through financinginstitutional co-operation with institutionsin Sweden rather than through recruitment ofindividual experts.'

SIDA also works directly with United Nationsagencies, including WHO, UNICEF, ILO andUNESCO, strongly supports community-basedrehabilitation and inclusive education, and

seeks to stimulate the necessary changes in stafftraining to realize these goals.

Rosencrantz outlined the gradual increase inSIDA's involvement in disability in developingcountries. At present, SIDA co-operates bilate-rally with fifteen countries and is funding thedevelopment of teaching materials, includingmaterials in braille and large print, as well asrelevant microtechnology.

Role of organizationsof disabled persons

Deng Pu Fang, Chairman of the China DisabledPersons Federation (CDPF), drew a parallelbetween the emancipation of disabled peopleand the struggle for emancipation by nationsand by women.

`Today, the human society has progressedto such a stage that, like the emancipation ofnations and women, the emancipation ofdisabled persons has become an urgent andarduous task facing the internationalcommunity [...] Facts have demonstratedrepeatedly that people with disabilities candefinitely become creators of the wealthof mankind, so long as they are provided withproper education and employment opportuni-ties, with their values respected and theirpotential fully tapped. The key to reachingthis goal lies in the improvement of thequalifications of disabled persons themselves,which means that the right to education ofdisabled persons must be fully protected. Webelieve that organisations of disabled persons[...] should play an important role in realisingthe objective of Education for All.'

Deng Pu Fang provided an account of thedevelopment of services for disabled persons inthe People's Republic of China and particularlyCDPF's role.

44

Theme 3: COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES 49

CDPF is a semi-governmental organizationand integrates functions of representation,service planning, and delivery and administra-tion. It has local branches all over the country,operating at all levels, including the neighbour-hood. In 1993, the State Council establisheda National Co-ordinating Committee onDisability.

CDPF gives high priority to campaigns toimprove public attitudes to disabled people,making full use of journalists, tht' mediaand the press to publicize the achievementsof disabled people and to portray them in apositive light.

China is also active in providing internationaland regional leadership in the field of disability.China is one of the eight countries taking partin UNESCO's Special Needs in the Classroomproject (see p.42). Beijing also hostedthe launch of the Asian Decade of DisabledPersons in 1992.

Summary of discussions groups

The theme of community perspectives wasfurther explored in group discussions withfocus on vocational education and preparationfor adult life, schooling as a component ofCBR and the role of parents

Preparation for adult life

Reference to the importance of continuityof planning of provision between school andpost-school provision was made by severalspeakers throughout the conference.

The contribution by Luis Reguera of theInternational Labour Office (ILO) developedthis theme in greater detail. He stressed thatpreparation for adult life is one of the principalaims of schooling for all students and that

SO SUMMARY OF THEMATIC PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

disabled students had even more need thanothers of a period of structured and targetedpreparation for employment and for becomingcontributing citizens of their community.

However, vocational preparation and trainingfaced major obstacles. These included:

high rates of unemployment and theeconomic recession

failure to apply and enforce employmentquotas

underestimation by teachers, parents andthe public of the abilities of disabled peopleto take up competitive paid employment

a lack of appreciation by schools andeducationalists of the importance of vocatio-nal preparation

Examples from Spain and Argentina illustratedsome of the elements of successful practice.

The foundations of pre-vocational educationneeded to be laid in schools

Work experience had to he provided whilestill at school to introduce young people tothe world of work

Co-ordination was needed between educa-tion and employment authorities at local andnational level

Vocational training must be related to localemployment potential

NGOs should be encouraged to createsheltered work opportunities

Better working relationships need to beestablished with families. communityagencies, trade unions and organizationsof disabled people

Schooling as a component inCommunity-Based Rehabilitation

Ture Jonsson's (United Nations DevelopmentProgramme UNDP) introductory remarkshiglighted the fact that CBR and inclusiveeducation should be seen as two complemen-tary approaches both are reachingthe unreached in different ways. The twoapproaches should converge once the childis old enough to go to school.

The discussions was enriched with concretefield experiences from Ghana and Benin.Ghana provides a rare example of a nationalinitiative and a concerted multi-sectoralapproach of joint working by differentMinistries Education, Health, Employmentand Social Affairs (the latter assuming leadingand coordinating role). This was matched atthe level of the United Nations organizationsUNESCO, WHO and ILO, with UNDP as thefacilitating funding agency. Norwegian andSwedish NGOs are equal partners providingfinancial and technical support (NAD, SHIA).The Ghana Federation of the Disabled playsan action role in the development of the project.

Collaboration between different agenciesand at the different levels is perhaps the maindistinctive feature of the CBR programmein Ghana. A great deal of attention was alsopaid to publicity and awareness raising inthe general population and among staff of allthe organizations and agencies involved.

Careful attention to staff training was anotherimportant feature of the project. A managementteam was created which underwent a six-weeksensitization and preparation course, with finan-cial support from Norway. Two pilot projectareas were selected, some peripatetic teachersselected who were given two courses oftraining, one lasting for four weeks, the second

45

for three-weeks. A group of social welfareofficers were also given a three week trainingin CBR and related topics. The training wasnon-categorical, emphasizing elementscommon to all disabilities. Use was also madeof WHO's CBR training manual TrainingDisabled Persons in the C01111111111ity, as well

as the UNESCO teacher Education ResourcePack: Special Needs in the Classroom.

In Benin, the CBR programme was initiatedby the Ministries of Labour and Health, inco-operation with WHO and a French NGO(Comite National Francais de Liaison pour laReadaption des Handicapes). Unlike theGhana project, the programme started in asmall locality.

Ìn Benin, disabled children are viewed aseither a curse or as a gift from God.'

Consciousness-raising at community level wastherefore fundamental. Other essential elementsinclude:

preparation of the child before startingschoolanticipate need for physical changes toclassroomregular meeting with parentsplanned transportation of children

The scheme was judged successful, despitevery large classes (seventy to ninety children)and an absence of legislation to supportinclusion. After a pilot period of two years(1989-1991), positive results were notedin the attitudes towards the participation ofdisabled people in the life of the communityand a greater use of ordinary schools byparents. Financing and administration arelocated at both national and local levels.13y 1992, sonic 450 people with disabilitieswere included in the programme and there

----------- --__Theme 3: COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES 51

are plans to extend the programme to other partof the country.

In open discussion, further examples of linksbetween CBR and inclusive education weregiven by participants. In Madagascar, emphasiswas also on training peripatetic teachers and onchanging schools to meet individual needsrather than the reverse. This includes broade-ning the role of specialist teachers.

Uganda is developing Child-to-Childprogrammes in over 100 schools. Children passon key points about disability to other children,to their families and to teachers. An accountof the use made of the UNESCO Pack SpecialNeeds in the Classroom (page 42) was providedby Anupan Ahuja, one of the co-ordinatorsof the UNESCO training programme in India.She highlighted teacher training initiativesin Ghana and India aiming at improving schoolsfor all children in their local communities.

Parents as partners

In introducing this session, the chairperson,Maria Luisa de Ramon Laca, stressed that wehad hardly made a start in harnessingthe potential of parents and families in workingin partnership with teachers and other profes-sionals, and that there was much to be learnedfrom examples of good practice in both develo-ped and developing countries.

Trijnte de Wit Gosker (Netherlands) suggestedthat as parents were the first experts on theirchild, it was time to begin talking about profes-sionals as partners, rather than the reverse.The key foi co-operation is mutual respect and

acceptance: human rather than professional

relationships.

Teachers need information from parentsin order to do their job. 'This calls for equalpartnership, based on trust and respect as

r ?, 4 6


fellow human beings, rather than on hierarchi-cal differences. Parents must have the right tochoose which school their child should attend.This means that they must be given enoughinformation to enable them to decide on therelative merits of special or ordinary schoolsfor their child.

The goal of equal partnership frequentlyencounters obstacles. Just as some parents wereafraid of teachers, the reverse was also quitecommon. There was a history of ignorance andmistrust: the subject of parents and parentalinvolvement was hardly ever mentioned in theinitial or even the later training of teachers. Inthe Netherlands, there are now opportunities forparents and teachers to undertake joint training.Discussion emphasizes the contribution of allmembers of the family, not just the mother,

fathers, brothers and sisters, and grandparents.

Dr Dawn Hunter (United States) referred to theincreasing role of parents in the United Statesin affecting both the planning and the quality ofservices. Professionals needed training inlearning to listen to parents and giving themtime and space to communicate and participatein their own way.

Inclusive schools employ a co-ordinatedservice delivery model in which teachers, parentsand related service personnel for instancepsychologists, speech and language therapists,physical therapists, occupational therapistsand health professionals) work collaborativelyto assess student needs and provide appropriateinterventions in naturally occurring contexts.

Theme 4: Partnership and networking

0 ne of the greatest benefits ofregional and international confe-

rences lies in the opportunitiesprovided to learn from the experiences of othersand to think about possible lessons to be learnedfrom such experiences. Unfortunately. therenever seems to be enough time at conferences todiscuss such experiences or to pursue specificquestions.

The final theme of the conference was there-fore devoted to a description of a numberof opportunities which now exist to developnew collaborative networks or to make betteruse of existing networks. The session provideda few illustrative examples of partnership andnetworking possibilities but many others existwhich are not being used to the best effect.

Victor Ordoilez, representative of theDirector-General of UNESCO at the Conference,concluded this session by highlighting a numberof general principles:

(i) To be efficient, partnership and networkingmust be considered as a means rather thanas an end. The aim is to develop andstrengthen inclusive education. It is resultsthat count.

The essence of networking is the sharingof information. But even more important ishow the information is understood andinterpreted, and the use to which it is put.It helps to collect and use information forspecific projects or purposes in a short-term and mission-oriented context. Largebureaucracies tend to absorb but not digestor assimilate incoming information.

(ii) Networking and partnership work bestat the local level. Bridges need to he builtbetween the macro and the micro levels.For example, networks are needed invol-ving schools, local authorities and thenational level.

Four main elements are involved inmoving from the international to the locallevel:

Capacity building

Information exchangeClarifying (special needs) policy

Economies of scale that suit localconditions

(iii) Use existing networks and initiatives.

Education for All is the most relevant examplein the present context where monitoring andfollow-up mechanisms already exist which canall be used to promote special needs educationand the outcomes of this conference. Theseinclude the EFA Forum and regional initiativessuch as APEID and APEAL.

Ordotiez stressed that this was a good momentto work for significant change and that networ-king represented one way to make progres.

Three elements were essential:

Means and moneyCapacity-building and know-how

Political will

But networking should not involve only educa-tionalists. In order to succeed, there has tobe a much wider involvement of the media,representatives of the community and of localauthorities, and above all accredited representa-tives of organizations of disabled persons.

UNESCO can help to unlock the doors to betternetworking. For example, regional officesof UNESCO can actively facilitate networkingand collaboration between and within countriesand also with regional offices of other UnitedNations organizations, such as WHO, ILOand UNICEF, as well as with the relevant inter-national NGOs.

43


European Union(Socrates and Helios programmes)

Domenico Lenarduzzi summarized currentEuropean initiatives in the field of special needseducation and transition to work. These includea computerized database (HANDYNET), possi-bilities of exchange and information sharingamong exemplary programmes in the memberstates and contributions to evaluation.

The action of the European Union is conductedat three levels:

co-operation between education and trainingsystems

quality promotion through pedagogical andtechnological innovation

specific direct actions at community level

The above is realized through the creation oftransnational partner networks, physicaland intellectual mobility and exchange, andelaboration of common trasnational projects.

One example of these actions is the Heliosprogramme for the integration into the educationof young people with special needs.

Partnerships betweennon-governmental organisationsand governments and grass rootsorganisations

Jez Stoner of Save the Children Fund (UK)gave a presentation on partnerships betweenNGOs and community-based-organisations.He stressed that the strength of NGOs liesin their value base, their independence frompolitical or other interests, their small size andflexibility. NGOs are able to work more closelywith communities and to do so in a more sup-portive manner. Their flexibility and size enablethem to respond faster and more flexibly, toexperiment with new ideas and to take risks.

International NGOs such as Save the Childrenhave the added advantage of being able toexchange and move ideas and networks acrossnational boundaries. In terms of lobbyingand influencing, they also have much greaterfreedom of access to policy-and decision-makers,in developed countries. They can lobby forchanges at the global level with bilateral andmultilateral donors and governments. NGOs arealso able to use the experience of staff acrossdifferent regions of the world.

By way of example, Stoner described the workof Save the Children in Thailand in influencinggovernment policy on the implementation ofinclusive education within the frameworkof universal primary education. The policy isto strengthen all relevant sectors includingthe Ministry of Education, primary education,teacher training and special education,as well as NGOs through lessons learnedfrom pilot projects, advocacy, trainingand co-ordination. Save the Children has alsosupported implementation of the UNESCOpi-eject Special Needs in the Classroom.

49

Theme 4 PARTNERS/111' AND NETWORKING 55

hat is required is a commitmentand political will to bring about

change change in human attitudes and behaviour,and the modification of development strategies.Through Education for All, it should be possibleto enable all human beings including the disabledto develop theirfull potential, to contribute to societyand, above all to be enriched by their differenceand not devalued. In our world constituted of differencesof all kinds, it is not the disabled but society atlarge that needs special education in order to becomea genuine society for all.

FEDERICO MAYORDirector General, UNESCO

FRAMEWORKFOR

ACTION

58 FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION

Table of Contents

Introduction 59

I. New thinking in special needs education 61

II. Guidelines for action at the national level 65

A. Policy and organization 65

B. School factors 67

C. Recruitment and training of educational personnel 70

D. External support services 72

E. Priority areas 73

F. Community perspectives 75

G. Resource requirements 78

III. Guidelines for action at the regional and international level 79

Introduction

1. This Framework for Action on Special Needs Education was adopted by the

World Conference on Special Needs Education organized by the Government of

Spain in co-operation with UNESCO and held in Salamanca from 7 to 10 June 1994.

Its purpose is to inform policy and guide action by governments, international

organizations, national aid agencies. non-governmental organizations and other

bodies in implementing the Salamanca Statement on Principles, Policy and

Practice in Special Needs Education. The Framework draws extensively upon

the national experience of the participating countries as well as upon resolutions,

recommendations and publications of the United Nations system and other

intergovernmental organizations, especially the Standard Rules on the Equalizationof Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities'. It also takes account of the

proposals, guidelines and recommendations arising from the five regional seminars

held to prepare the World Conference.

2. The right of every child to an education is proclaimed in the Universal Declaration

of Human Rights and was forcefully reaffirmed by the World Declaration on

Education for All. Every person with a disability has a right to express their wishes

with regard to their education, as far as this can be ascertained. Parents have

an inherent right to be consulted on the form of education best suited to the needs,

circumstances and aspirations of their children.

3. The guiding principle that informs this Framework is that schools should

accommodate all children regardless of their physical, intellectual, social, emotional,

linguistic or other conditions. This should include disabled and gifted children, street

and working children, children from remote or nomadic populations, children from

linguistic, ethnic or cultural minorities and children from other disadvantaged or

marginalized areas or groups. These conditions create a range of different challenges

to school systems. In the context of this Framework, the term 'special educational

needs' refers to all those children and youth whose needs arise from disabilities

or learning difficulties. Many children experience learning difficulties and thus have

special educational needs at some time during their schooling. Schools have to find

ways of successfully educating all children, including those who have serious

disadvantages and disabilities. There is an emerging consensus that children and

youth with special educational needs should be included in the educational

arrangements made for the majority of children. This has led to the concept of the

inclusive school. The challenge confronting the inclusive school is that of developing

a child-centred pedagogy capable of successfully educating all children, including

'United Nations Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities, A/RES/48/96,

United Nations Resolution adopted by the General Assembly at its 48th session on 20 December 1993.

53


those who have serious disadvantages and disabilities. The merit of such schoolsis not only that they are capable of providing quality education to all children; theirestablishment is a crucial step in helping to change discriminatory attitudes, increating welcoming communities and in developing an inclusive society. A changein social perspective is imperative. For far too long, the problems of people withdisabilities have been compounded by a disabling society that has focused upontheir impairments rather than their potential.

4. Special needs education incorporates the proven principles of sound pedagogy fromwhich all children may benefit. It assumes that human differences are normaland that learning must accordingly be adapted to the needs of the child rather than thechild fitted to preordained assumptions regarding the pace and nature of the learningprocess. A child-centred pedagogy is beneficial to all students and, as a consequence,to society as a whole. Experience has demonstrated that it can substantially reducethe drop-out and repetition that are so much a part of many education systemswhile ensuring higher average levels of achievement. A child-centred pedagogycan help to avoid the waste of resources and the shattering of hopes that isall too frequently a consequence of poor quality instruction and a 'one size fits all'mentality towards education. Child-centred schools are, moreover, the training groundfor a people-oriented society that respects both the differences and the dignity of allhuman beings.

5. This Framework for Action comprises the following sections:I. New thinking in special needs education

II. Guidelines for action at the national levelA. Policy and organizationB. School factorsC. Recruitment and training of educational personnelD. External support servicesE. Priority areasF. Community perspectivesG. Resource requirements

III. Guidelines for action at the regional and international level.

New Thinking inSpecial Needs Education

6. The trend in social policy during the past two decades has been to promote integrationand participation and to combat exclusion. Inclusion and participation are essential

to human dignity and to the enjoyment and exercise of human rights. Within the fieldof education, this is reflected in the development of strategies that seek to bring about

a genuine equalization of opportunity. Experience in many countries demonstrates

that the integration of children and youth with special educational needs is bestachieved within inclusive schools that serve all children within a community. It is

within this context that those with special educational needs can achieve the fullesteducational progress and social integration. While inclusive schools provide afavourable setting for achieving equal opportunity and full participation, their successrequires a concerted effort, not only by teachers and school staff, but also by peers,

parents, families and volunteers. The reform of social institutions is not only atechnical task.. it depends, above all, upon the conviction, commitment and good

will of the individuals who constitute society.

7. The fundamental principle of the inclusive school is that all children should learn

together, wherever possible, regardless of any difficulties or differences they mayhave. Inclusive schools must recognize and respond to the diverse needs of

their students, accomodating both different styles and rates of learning and ensuringquality education to all through appropriate curricula, organizational arrangements,teaching strategies, resource use and partnerships with their communities. There

should be a continuum of support and services to match the continuum of specialneeds encountered in every school.

8. Within inclusive schools, children with special educational needs should receivewhatever extra support they may require to ensure their effective education.Inclusive schooling is the most effective means for building solidarity betweenchildren with special needs and their peers. Assignment of children to special schools

or special classes or sections within a school on a permanent basis should

be the exception, to be recommended only in those infrequent cases where it is clearly

demonstrated that education in regular classrooms is incapable of meeting a child's

educational or social needs or when it is required for the welfare of the child or that

of other children.

9. The situation regarding special needs education varies enormously from one country

to another. There are, for example, countries that have well established systems of

-pecial schools for those with specific impairments. Such special schools can

represent a valuable resource for the development of inclusive schools. The staff

------- ------62 FRAME WORK FOR ACTION

of these sp cial institutions possess the expertise needed for early screening andidentification of children with disabilities. Special schools can also serve as trainingand resource centres for staff in regular schools. Finally, special schools or unitswithin inclusive schools may continue to provide the most suitable education forthe relatively small number of children with disabilities who cannot be adequatelyserved in regular classrooms or schools. Investment in existing special schools shouldbe geared to their new and expanded role of providing professional support to regularschools in meeting special educational needs. An important contribution to ordinaryschools, which the staff of special schools can make, is to the matching of curricularcontent and method to the individual needs of pupils.

10. Countries that have few or no special schools would, in general, be well advisedto concentrate their efforts on the development of inclusive schools and thespecialized services needed to enable them to serve the vast majority of childrenand youth especially provision of teacher training in special needs educationand the establishment of suitably staffed and equipped resource centres to whichschools could turn for support. Experience, especially in developing countries,indicates that the high cost of special schools means, in practice, that only a smallminority of students, usually an urban elite, benefit from them. The vast majorityof students with special needs, especially in rural areas, ar?, as a consequenceprovided with no services whatsoever. Indeed, in many developing countries,it is estimated that fewer than 1 per cent of children with special educational needsare included in existing provision. Experience, moreover, suggests that inclusiveschools, serving all of the children in a community, are most successful in elicitcommunity support and in finding imaginative and innovative ways of using thelimited resources that are available.

11. Educational planning by governments should concentrate on education for allpersons, in all regions of a country and in all economic conditions, through bothpublic and private schools.

12. Because in the past relatively few children with disabilities have had accessto education, especially in the developing regions of the world, there are millionsof adults with disabilities who lack even the rudiments of a basic education.A concerted effort is thus required to teach literacy, numeracy and basic skills topersons with disabilities through adult education programmes.

NEW THINKING IN SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION 63

13. It is particularly important to recognize that women have often been doublydisadvantaged. bias based on gender compounding the difficulties causedby their disabilities. Women and men should have equal influence on the designof educational programmes and the same opportunities to benefit from them.Special efforts should be made to encourage the participation of girls and womenwith disabilities in educational programmes.

14. This Framework is intended as an overall guide to planning action in special needseducation. It evidently cannot take account of the vast variety of situationsencountered in the different regions and countries of the world and must, accordingly,be adapted to fit local requirements and circumstances. To be effective, it must becomplemented by national. regional and local plans of action inspired by a politicaland popuiar will to achieve education for all.

57

II Guidelines for Action atthe National Level

A. Policy and organization

15. Integrated education and community-based rehabilitation represent complementaryand mutually supportive approaches to serving those with special needs. Both arebased upon the principles of inclusion, integration and participation. and representwell-tested and cost-effective approaches to promoting equality of accessfor thosewith special educational needs as part of a nationwide strategy aimed at achievingeducation for all. Countries are invited to consider the following actions concerningthe policy and organization of their education systems.

16. Legislation should recognize the principle of equality of opportunity for children,youth and adults with disabilities in primary, secondary and tertiary education carried

out, in so far as possible, in integrated settings.

17. Parallel and complementary legislative measures should be adopted in the fieldsof health, social welfare, vocational training and employment in order to support and

give full effect to educational legislation.

18. Educational policies at all levels, from the national to the local, should stipulatethat a child with a disability should attend the neighbourhood school that is,the school that would be attended if the child did not have a disability. Exceptionsto this rule should be considered on a case-by-case basis where only educationin a special school or establishment can be shown to meet the needs of the individual

child.

19. The practice of 'mainstreaming' children with disabilities should be an integral partof national plans for achieving education for all. Even in those exceptional caseswhere children are placed in special schools, their education need not be entirelysegregated. Part-time attendance at regular schools should be encouraged. Necessaryprovision should also be made for ensuring inclusion of youth and adults with specialneeds in secondary and higher education as well as in training programmes.Special attention should be given to ensuring equality of access and opportunity

for girls and women with disabilities.

20. Special attention should be paid to the needs of children and youth with sr, re

or multiple disabilities. They have the same rights as others in the communityto the achievement of maximum independence as adults and should be educatedto the best of their potential towards that end.

J8

(6 FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION

21. Educational policies should take full account of individual differences and situations.The importance of sign language as the medium of communication among the deaf,for example, should be recognized and provision made to ensure that all deaf personshave access to education in their national sign language. Owing to the particularcommunication needs of deaf and deaf/blind persons, their education may be moresuitably provided in special schools or special classes and units in mainstreamschools.

22. Community-based rehabilitation should be developed as part of a global strategyfor supporting cost-effective education and training for people with specialeducational needs. Community-based rehabilitation should be seen as a specificapproach within community development aimed at rehabilitation, equalizationof opportunities and social integration of all people with disabilities; it shouldbe implemented through the combined efforts of people with disabilities themselves,their families and communities, and the appropriate education, health, vocationaland welfare services.

23. Both policies and financing arrangements should encourage and facilitatethe development of inclusive schools. Barriers that impede movement from specialto regular schools should be, removed and a common administrative structureorganized. Progress towards inclusion should be carefully monitored through thecollection of statistics capable of revealing the number of students with disabilitieswho benefit from resources, expertise and equipment intended for special needseducation as well as the number of students with special educational needs enrolledin regular schools.

24. Co-ordination between educational authorities and those responsible for health,employment and social services should be strengthened at all levels to bringabout convergence and complementarity. Planning and co-ordination should alsotake account of the actual and potential role that semi-public agencies andnon-governmental organizations can play. A particular effort needs to be madeto elicit community stinport in meeting special educational needs.

25. National authorities have a responsibility to monitor external funding to special needseducation and, working in co-operation with their international partners, to ensurethat it corresponds to national priorities and policies aimed at achieving educationfor all. Bilateral and multilateral aid agencies, for their part, should carefully considernational policies in respect of special needs education in planning and implementingprogrammes in education and related fields.

GUIDELINES FOR ACTION Al THE NATIONAL LEVEL 67

B. School factors

26. Developing inclusive schools that caterfor a wide range of pupils in both urbanand rural areas requires: the articulation of a clear and forceful policy on inclusion

together with adequate financial provision an effective public information effort

to combat prejudice and create informed and positive attitudes an extensive

programme of orientation and staff training and the provision of necessary supportservices. Changes in all the following aspects of schooling, as well as many others,

are necessary to contribute to the success of inclusive schools: curriculum,buildings, school organization, pedagogy, assessment, staffing, school ethos and

extra-curricular activities.

27. Most of the required changes do not relate exclusively to the inclusion of childrenwith special educational needs. They are part of a wider reform of educationneeded to improve its quality and relevance and to promote higher levels of learning

achievement by all pupils. The World Declaration on Education for Allunderscored the need for a child-centred approach aimed at ensuring the successful

schooling of all children. The adoption of more flexible, adaptive systems capable

of taking fuller account of the different needs of children will contribute both

to educational success and inclusion. The following guidelines focus on points to

be considered in integrating children with special educational needs into inclusive

schools.

Curriculum flexibility

28. Curricula should be adapted to children's needs, not vice-versa. Schools shouldtherefore provide curricular opportunities to suit children with different abilities

and interests.

29. Children with special needs should receive additional instructional supportin the context of the regular curriculum, not a different curriculum.The guiding principle should be to provide all children with the same education,providing additional assistance and support to children requiring it.


30. The acquisition of knowledge is not only a matter of formal and theoreticalinstruction. The content of education should be geared to high standardsand the needs of individuals with a view to enabling them to participate fullyin development. Teaching should be related to pupils' own experience andto practical concerns in order to motivate them better.

31. In order to follow the progress of each child, assessment procedures shouldbe reviewed. Formative evaluation should be incorporated into the regulareducational process in order to keep pupils and teachers informed of the learningmastery attained as well as to identify difficulties and assist pupils to overcomethem.

32. For children with special educational needs a continuum of support should beprovided, ranging from minimal help in regular classrooms to additional learningsupport programmes within the school and extending, where necessary,to the provision of assistance from specialist teachers and external support staff.

33. Appropriate and affordable technology should be used when necessary to enhancesuccess in the school curriculum and to aid communication, mobility and learning.Technical aids can be offered in a more economical and effective way ifthey are provided from a central pool in each locality, where there is expertisein matching aids to individual needs and in ensuring maintenance.

34. Capability should be built up and research carried out at national and regionallevels to develop appropriate support technology systems for special needs education.States that have ratified the Florence Agreement should be encouraged to usethis instrument to facilitate the free circulation of materials and equipment relatedto the needs of people with disabilities. Concurrently States that have not adheredto the Agreement are invited to do so in order to facilitate the free circulationof services and goods of educational and cultural nature.

School management

(WIDELINES FOR ACTION AT TILE NATIONAL LEVEL 69

35. Local administrators and school heads can play a major role in making schools

more responsive to children with special educational needs if they are given necessaryauthority and adequate training to do so. They should be invited to develop moreflexible management procedures, to redeploy instructional resources, to diversify

learning options, to mobilize child-to-child help, to offer support to pupilsexperiencing difficulties and to develop close relations with parents and the

community. Successful school management depends upon the active and creativeinvolvement of teachers and staff, and the development of effective co-operationand team work to meet the needs of students.

36. School heads have a special responsibility in promoting positive attitudes throughoutthe school community and in arranging for effective co-operation between class

teachers and support staff. Appropriate arrangements for support and the exact role

to be played by various partners in the educational process should be decided through

consultation and negotiation.

37. Each school should be a community collectively accountable for the success

or failure of every student. The educational team, rather than the individual teacher,

should share the responsibility for the education of special needs children.Parents and volunteers should be invited to take an active part in the work of the

school. Teachers, however, play a key role as the managers of the educational

process, supporting children through the use of available resources both within

and outside of the classroom.

Information and research

38. The dissemination of examples of good practice could help to improve teaching

and learning. Information on relevant research findings would also be valuable.

Pooling of experience and the development of documentation centres shouldbe supported at national level, and access to sources of information broadened.

39. Special needs education should be integrated into the research and development

programmes of research institutions and curriculum development centres. Particular

attention should be given in this area to action-research focusing on innovative

teaching-learning strategies. Classroom teachers should participate actively in both

the action and reflection involved in such inquiries. Pilot experiments and in-depth

studies should also be launched to assist in decision-making and in guiding future

action. These experiments and studies could be carried out on a co-operative basis

by several countries.

62

"0 FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION

C. Recruitment and training ofeducational personnel

40. Appropriate preparation of all educational personnel stands out as a key factorin promoting progress towards inclusive schools. Furthermore, the importanceof recruiting teachers with disabilities who can serve as role models for childrenwith disabilities is increasingly recognized. The following actions could be taken.

41. Pre-service training programmes should provide to all student teachers, primaryand secondary alike, positive orientation toward disability, thereby developing anunderstanding of what can be achieved in schools with locally available supportservices. The knowledge and skills required are mainly those of good teaching andinclude assessing special needs, adapting curriculum content, utilizing assistivetechnology, individualizing teaching procedures to suit a larger range of abilities, etc.In teacher-training practice schools, specific attention should be given to preparingall teachers to exercise their autonomy and apply their skills in adapting curriculaand instruction to meet pupils needs as well as to collaborate with specialists andco-operate with parents.

42. The skills required to respond to special educational needs should be taken intoaccount during assessment of studies and teacher certification.

43. As a matter of priority, written materials should be prepared and seminars organizedfor local administrators, supervisors, headteachers and senior teachers to develop theircapacity to provide leadership in this area and to support and train less-experiencedteaching staff.

44. The major challenge lies in providing in-service training to all teachers, takinginto account the varied and often difficult conditions under which they serve.1n-service training should, wherever possible, be developed at school level bymeans of interaction with trainers and supported by distance education and otherself-instruction techniques.

45. Specialized training in special needs education leading to additional qualificationsshould normally be integrated with or preceeded by training and experienceas a regular education teacher in order to ensure complementarity and mobility.

G3

IOR ACTION AT TI NATIONAL. LEVEL 71

46. The training of special teachers needs to be reconsidered with a view to enabling

them to work in different settings and to play a key role in special educational needsprogrammes. A non-categorical approach encompassing all types of disabilitiesshould be developed as a common core, prior to further specialization in one or more

disability-specific areas.

47. Universities have a major advisory role to play in the process of developing specialneeds education, especially as regards research, evaluation, preparation of teacher

trainers, and designing training programmes and materials. Networking amonguniversities and institutions of higher learning in developed and developing countries

should be promoted. Linking research and training in this way is of great significance.

It is also important to actively involve people with disabilities in research and training

roles in order to ensure that their perspectives are taken fully into account.

48. A recurrent problem with education systems, even those that provide excellent

educational services for students with disabilities, is the lack of role models for such

students. Special needs students require opportunities to interact with adults withdisabilities who have achieved success so that they can pattern their own lifestyles

and aspirations on realistic expectations. In addition, students with disabilities should

be given training and provided with examples of disability empowerment andleadership so that they can assist in shaping the policies that will affect them

in later life. Education systems should therefore seek to recruit qualified teachers

and other educational personnel who have disabilities and should also seek to involve

successful individuals with disabilities from within the region in the education

of special needs children.

G4

72 I R AMEWORK FOR ACMON

D. External support services

49. Provision of support services is of paramount importance for the success of inclusiveeducational policies. In order to ensure that, at all levels, external servicesare made available to children with special needs, educational authorities shouldconsider the following.

50. Support to ordinary schools could be provided by both teacher-education institutionsand by the outreach staff of special schools. The latter should be used increasinglyas resource centres for ordinary schools offering direct support to those childrenwith special educational needs. Both training institutions and special schools canprovide access to specific devices and materials as well as training in instructionalstrategies that are not provided in regular classrooms.

51. External support by resource personnel from various agencies, departmentsand institutions, such as advisory teachers, educational psychologists, speech andoccupational therapists, etc., should be co-ordinated at the local level.School clusters have proved a useful strategy in mobilizing educational resourcesas well as community involvement. Clusters of schools could be assigned collectiveresponsibility for meeting the special educational needs of pupils in their areaand given scope for allocating resources as required. Such arrangements shouldinvolve non-educational services as well. Indeed, experience suggests that educationservices would benefit significantly if greater efforts were made to ensure optimaluse of all available expertise and resources.

(WIDELINFS FOR :\ ("HON AI THE NATIONAL LEVEL 73

E. Priority areas

52. Integration of children and young people with special educational needs wouldbe more effective and successful if special consideration were given in educationaldevelopment plans to the fallowing target areas: early childhood educationto enhance the educability of all children, girls' education and the transition fromeducation to adult working life.

Early childhood education

53. The success of the inclusive school depends considerably on early identification,assessment and stimulation of the very young child with special educational needs.Early childhood care and education programmes for children aged up to 6 yearsought to be developed and/or reoriented to promote physical. intellectual and social

development and school readiness. These programmes have a major economicvalue for the individual, the family and the society in preventing the aggravationof disabling conditions. Programmes at this level should recognize the principleof inclusion and be developed in a comprehensive way by combining pre-school

activities and early childhood health care.

54. Many countries have adopted policies in favour of early childhood education,either by supporting the development of kindergartens and day nurseries

or by organizing family information and awareness activities in conjunctionwith community services (health, maternal and infant care), schools and local

family or women's associations.

Girls' education

55. Girls with disabilities are doubly disadvantaged. A special effort is required

to provide training and education for girls with special educational needs. In additionto gaining access to school, girls with disabilities should have access to informationand guidance as well as to models which could help them to make realistic choicesand preparation for their future role as adult women.

60

74 FRAMEWORK FOR ACFION

Preparation for adult life

56. Young people with special educational needs should be helped to make an effectivetransition from school to adult working life. Schools should assist them to becomeeconomically active and provide them with the skills needed in everyday life, offeringtraining in skills which respond to the social and communication demands andexpectations of adult life. This calls for appropriate training technologies, includingdirect experience in real life situations outside school. Curricula for studentswith special educational needs in senior classes should include specific transitionalprogrammes, support to enter higher education whenever possible and subsequentvocational training preparing them to function as independent, contributing membersof their communities after leaving school. These activities should be carried outwith the active involvement of vocational guidance counsellors, placement offices,trade unions, local authorities, and the different services and agencies concerned.

Adult and continuing education

57. Persons with disabilities should be given special attention in the design andimplementation of adult and continuing education programmes.Persons with disabilities should be given priority access to such programmes.Special courses should also be designed to suit the needs and conditionsof different groups of adults with disabilities.

67

FOR (TION Al THE NATIONAL LEVEL

F. Community perspectives

58. Realizing the goal of successful education of children with special educational

needs is not the task of the Ministries of Education and schools alone. It requiresthe co-operation offamilies, and the mobilization of the community and voluntaryorganizations as well as the support of the pyblic-at-large. Experience from countries

or areas that have witnessed progress in equalizing educational opportunities forchildren and youth with special educational needs suggests several useful lessons.

Parent partnership

59. The education of children with special educational needs is a shared task of parentsand professionals. A positive attitude on the part of parents favours school and socialintegration. Parents need support in order to assume the role of a parent of a childwith special needs. The role of families and parents could be enhanced bythe provision of necessary information in simple and clear language; addressingthe needs for information and training in parenting skills is a particularly importanttask in cultural environments where there is little tradition of schooling. Both parentsand teachers may need support and encouragement in learning to work together

as equal partners.

60. Parents are privileged partners as regards the special educational needs of their child,

and to the extent possible should be accorded the choice in the type of educationprovision they desire for their child.

61. A co-operative, supportive partnership between school administrators, teachersand parents should be developed and parents regarded as active partners indecision-making. Parents should be encouraged to participate in educational activities

at home and at school (where they could observe effective techniques and learnhow to organize extra-curricular activities), as well as in the supervision and support

of their children's learning.

62. Governments should take a lead in promoting parental partnership, through both.statements of policy and legislation concerning parental rights. The developmentof parents' associations should be promoted and their representatives involvedin the design and implementation of programmes intended to enhance the educationof their children. Organizations of people with disabilities should also be consultedconcerning the design and implementation of programmes.


Community involvement

63. Decentralization and local-area-based planning favours greater involvementof communities in education and training of people with special educational needs.Local administrators should encourage community participation by giving supportto representative associations and inviting them to take part in decision-making.To this end, mobilizing and monitoring mechanisms composed of local civiladministration, educational, health and development authorities, community leadersand voluntary organizations should be established in geographical areas smallenough to ensure meaningful community participation.

64. Community involvement should be sought in order to supplement in-school activities,provide help in doing homework and compensate for lack of family support.Mention should be made in this connection of the role of neighbourhood associationsin making premises available, the role of family associations, youth clubs andmovements, and the potential role of elderly people and other volunteers, includingpersons with disabilities, in both in-school and out-of-school programmes.

65. Whenever action for community-based rehabilitation is initiated from outside,it is the community that must decide whether the programme will become part ofthe ongoing community development activities. Various partners in the community,including organizations of persons with disabilities and other non-governmentalorganizations, should be empowered to take responsibility for the programme.Where appropriate, government agencies at both the national and local level shouldalso lend financial and other support.

Role of voluntary organizations

66. As voluntary associations and national non-governmental organizations havemore freedom to act and can respond more readily to expressed needs, they shouldbe supported in developing new ideas and pioneering innovative delivery methods.They can play the roles of innovator and catalyst and extend the range of programmesavailable to the community.

67. Organizations of people with disabilities i.e., those in which they themselves havethe decisive influence should be invited to take an active part in identifying needs,expressing views on priorities, administering services, evaluating performanceand advocating change.

(1 IDELINES FOR AC liON AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL 77

Public awareness

68. Policy-makers at all levels, including the school level, should regularly reaffirmtheir commitment to inclusion and promote positive attitudes among children, among

teachers and among the public-at-large towards those with special educational needs.

69. Mass media can play a powerful role in promoting positive attitudes towards theintegration of disabled persons in society, overcoming prejudice and misinformation,

and infusing greater optimism and imagination about the capabilities of personswith disabilities. The media can also promote positive attitudes of employers toward

hiring persons with disabilities. The media should be used to inform the public

on new approaches in education, particularly as regards provision for special needs

education in regular schools, by popularizing examples of good practice and

successful experiences.

7g FRAMEWORK FOR A('IION

G. Resource requirements

70. The development of inclusive schools as the most effective means for achievingeducation for all must be recognized as a key government policy and accordeda privileged place on the nation's development agenda. It is only in this Way

that adequate resources can be obtained. Changes in policies and priorities cannothe effective unless adequate resource requirements are met. Political commitment,at both the national and community level, is needed both to obtain additionalresources and to redeploy existing ones. While communities must play a key rolein developing inclusive schools, government encouragement and support is alsoessential in devising effective and qffordable solutions.

71. The distribution of resources to schools should take realistic account of thedifferences in expenditure required to provide appropriate education for all children,bearing in mind their needs and circumstances. It may be realistic to begin bysupporting those schools that wish to promote inclusive education and to launch pilotprojects in some areas in order to gain the necessary expertise for expansionand progressive generalization. In the generalization of inclusive education, the levelof support and expertise will have to be matched to the nature of the demand.

72. Resources must also be allocated to support services for the training of mainstreamteachers, for the provision of resource centres and for special education teachersor resource teachers. Appropriate technical aids to ensure the successful operationof an integrated education system must also be provided. Integrated approachesshould, therefore, be linked to the development of support services at central andintermediate levels.

73. Pooling the human, institutional, logistic, material and financial resources of variousministerial departments (Education, Health, Social Welfare, Labour, Youth, etc.),territorial and local authorities, and other specialized institutions is an effective wayto maximize their impact. Combining both an educational and a social approachto special needs education will require effective management structures enabling thevarious services to co-operate at both national and local levels, and allowing thepublic authorities and associative bodies to join forces.

III Guidelines for Action at the Regionaland International Level

74. International co-operation among governmental and non-governmental, regionaland interregional organizations can play a very important role in supporting the

move towards inclusive schools. Based on past experience in this area, internationalorganizations, intergovernmental and non-governmental as well as bilateral donoragencies, could consider joining forces in implementing the following strategic

approaches.

75. Technical assistance should be directed to strategic fields of intervention with

a multiplier effect, especially in developing countries. One important task

for international co-operation is to support the launching of pilot projects aimed

at trying out new approaches and at capacity building.

76. The organization of regional partnerships or partnership among countries with similar

approaches in special needs education could result in the planning of joint activitiesunder the auspices of existing regional or other co-operative mechanisms.Such activities should be designed to take advantage of economies of scale, to draw

upon the experience of participating countries, and to further the development

of national capabilities.

77. A priority mission incumbent upon international organizations is to facilitate

exchange of data, information and results of pilot programmes in special needseducation between countries and regions. Collection of internationally comparableindicators of progress in inclusion in education and employment should become

a part of the worldwide database on education. Focal points might be established

in sub-regional centres in order to facilitate information exchanges. Existing

structures at the regional and international levels should be strengthened and theiractivities extended to such fields as policies, programming, training of personnel

and evaluation.

78. A high percentage of disability is the direct result of lack of information, poverty

and low health standards. As the worldwide prevalence of disabilities is increasing,

particularly in the developing countries, there should be joint international actionin close collaboration with national efforts to prevent the causes of disability through

education which, in turn, would reduce the incidence and prevalence of disabilities,

thereby further reducing the demands on the limited financial and human resources

of a country.

79. International and technical assistance to special needs education derives from

numerous sources. It is, therefore, essential to ensure coherence and complementarity

among organizations of the United Nations system and other agencies lending

assistance in this area.

SO FR AMEW OR K FOR ACTION

80. International co-operation should support advanced training seminars for educationalmanagers and other specialists at the regional level and foster co-operation betweenuniversity departments and training institutions in different countries for conductingcomparative studies as well as for the publication of reference documents andinstructional materials.

81. International co-operation should assist in the development of regional andinternational associations of professionals concerned with the enhancement of specialneeds education and should support the creation and dissemination of newslettersor journals as well as the holding of regional meetings and conferences.

82. International and regional meetings covering issues related to education shouldensure that special educational needs are addressed as an integral part of the debateand not as a separate issue. As a concrete example, the issue of special needseducation should be put on the agenda of regional ministerial conferences organizedby UNESCO and other intergovernmental bodies.

83. International technical co-operation and funding agencies involved in supportand development of Education for All initiatives should ensure that special needseducation is an integral part of all development projects.

84. International co-ordination should exist to support universal accessibilityspecifications in communication technology underpinning the emerging informationinfrastructure.

85. This Framework for Action was adopted by acclamation after discussion andamendment in the Closing Session of the Conference on 10 June 1994.It is intended to guide Member States and governmental and non-governmentalorganizations in implementing the Salamanca Statement on Principles, Policy,and Practice in Special Needs Education.

ANNEXES

"4

Annex 1 Programme

TuesdaY, 7 June 1994

08:30 09:30 Registration of participants09:30 10:15 General Presentation of the Conference10:15 11:15 Opening session Mr Jose Davila Rodriguez, President of Deputation of Salamanca

Mr Jesus Malaga Guerrero, Mayor of SalamancaMr Victor Ordwiez, Representative of the Director-General of UNESCOMr Gustavo Suarez Pertierra, Minister of Education, SpainHer Royal Highness Infanta Elena de Espana

11:45 13:30 Plenary SessionTheme 1: Policy and Legislation

Moderator: Dr Seamus HegartyDirector, National Foundation for Educational Research (UK)

1. SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION:CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK, PLANNING, POLICY FACTORS

Mr Bengt LindqvistMember of Parliament (Sweden)

2. LEGISLATION ISSUESProf. Maria Rita Saul leProfessor of International Law (Italy)

3. SPECIAL NEEDS AND SCHOOL REFORMMr Alvaro MarchesiSecretary of StateMinistry of Education (Spain)

Respondents: Mr Antonio Jose Lizarazo OcampoVice-Minister of National Education (Colombia)Mrs Phelelo MaroleSenior Education Officer, Ministry of Education (Botswana)Mr James LynchEducation Specialist, Asia Technical Department, World Bank

15:00 16:30 Concurrent sessions

Moderators: Mr C. GineInspector, Ministry of Education (Spain)Mr J. KisanjiCourse Director, University of Manchester (UK)Dr C. J. W. MeijerCoordinator, Programme on Integration (Netherlands)Mr Z. ZakariaCounselling Consultant, Baccaulaureatte School (Jordan)

84 ANNEX I

.

Wednesday, 8 June 1994

09:30 11:30 Plenary sessionTheme 2: School Perspectives

Moderator: Ms Marcelina MiguelDirector of Education,Ministry of Education (Philippines)

1. ACCESS TO THE CURRICULUMDr Margaret WangDirector, Temple University,Centre for Research in Human Development (USA)

2. ORGANIZATION OF SCHOOLINGDr Gordon PorterDirector of Student Services, New Brunswick (Canada)

3. TEACHER EDUCATIONProf. N. K. JangiraProfessor and Head, Department of Teacher Educationand Special Education NCERT, New Delhi (India)

Respondent: Prof. Klaus WedellProfessor, Institute of Education, London University (UK)

12:00 13:30&15:00 16:30 Concurrent sessions

Sub-theme A: ACCESS TO THE CURRICULUMModerator: Mrs A. M. Benard da Costa

Institute of Educational Innovation, Ministry of Education (Portugal)Country experiences: Canada, Spain, USA

Sub-theme B: ORGANIZATION OF SCHOOLINGModerator: Prof. Andrea Canevaro

Professor, University Degli Studi, University of Bologna (Italy)Countiy experiences: Austria, Peru, Spain, Zimbabwe

Sub-theme C: ACTIVE LIFE FOR DISABLED YOUTHINTEGRATION IN THE SCHOOL PROJECT

Moderator: Mr Peter EvansProject Director (OECD)

Country experiences: Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, USA

PROGRAMME 85

Sub-theme D: TEACHER EDUCATIONModerator: Ms Lena Saleh

Senior Programme Specialist UNESCO

UNESCO Project: SPECIAL NEEDS IN THE CLASSROOMProject Director: Mr Mel Ainscow

Institute of Education, University of Cambridge (UK)

Country experiences: Latin America (UNESCO), China, India, Italy, Spain

Panel: Distance Teacher Education. (Denmark, UK)School-Based Teacher Education. (India. Chile)Special Education Teacher Training, (Norway)

Thursday, 9 June 1994

09:30 11:30 Plenary sessionTheme 3: Community Perspectives

Moderator: Mrs Eloisa Garcia de LorenzoConsultant,Organization of American States (Uruguay)

1. COMMUNITY BASED REHABILITATION PROGRAMMESDr Brian O'TooleCBR Programme Director (Guyana)

2. ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONS

Role of Voluntary OrganizationsMr W. Brohier(President ICEVH, Malaysia)

Role of Donor AgenciesMrs Kerstin Rosencrantz(SIDA. Sweden)

3. ROLE OF PARENTSMr Alain Parvillers(France)

4. ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONS OF DISABLED PERSONSMr Deng PufangChairman, Disabled Persons' Federation (China)

86 ANNEX I

1 2:00 13:30 Concurrent sessions

Sub-theme A: PREPARATION FOR ADULT LIFEModem/or: Mr Luis Reguera

Vocational Rehabilitation Specialist (ILO)Country experiences: Argentina, Spain

Sub-theme B: EDUCATION WITHIN COMMUNITYBASEDREHABILITATION PROGRAMMES

Moderator: Mr Ture JonssonSenior Programme Officer, (UNDP/IRPDP)

Country experiences: Benin, Ghana

Sub-theme C: PARENTS AS PARTNERSModerator: Ms M. Luisa Ramon -Lava

Vice-President (ILSMH)Country experiences: Parent/Professional Partnership (USA)

Parents as Innovators (Netherlands)

Friday; 10 June 1994-

10:00 11:00 Plenary sessionPartnership and Networking

1. CHOICES AND CHANNELS FOR PARTNERSHIPS AND NETWORKINGMr Victor OrdonezRepresentative of the Director General of UNESCO

2. SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION WITHIN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITYMr Domenico LenarduzziDirector TFRHThe European Community

3. PARTNERSHIPS IN SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION:NON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS. GOVERNMENTS AND PEOPLE

Mr. Jez StonerThe Save the Children Fund (UK)

12:0() 13:30 Closing Session

Report of Rapporteur GeneralAdoption of Conclusions and RecommendationsClosing Statements

78

Annex 2 Addresses at the Opening SessionAddress of Mr Federico MayorDirector-General of UNESCO

Your Highness.

Mr Minister of Education and Science,

Air Mayor of Salamanca,

Mr President of the Castilla-LeonA utonomous Communitv.

Ministers,

acellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen.

How fitting it is that this Conference onSpecial Needs Education should he held

in this city, Salamanca, renowned not onlyas an ancient centre of learning, but also forknowledge in the service of humanity.The purpose of our meeting is fully in keepingwith this honourable tradition. The UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights proclaims theright of everyone to education. Too often, alas,between this right and its effective exercisea shadow has fallen. The millions of childrenand adults who have special needs and require-ments have, in particular, been seriouslydisadvantaged. Far too often, they have beenthe left-outs, the drop-outs and the push-outs ofour education systems. We have come to meetin Salamanca to address their problem and,by so doing, to take an important step towardsmaking education for all a reality, not merelya distant aspiration or a reassuring slogan.Our hosts, the Spanish Government, with theco-operation of the City of Salamanca, haveprovided excellent arrangements for ourmeeting and have welcomed us in a warmspirit of friendship and hospitality. I am certainthat I speak for all of you in expressing toSpain and to Salamanca our deep gratitudeand appreciation.

The subject of special education is one inwhich Spain, I am proud to report, has playeda leading role. Thus, in the International Yearof Disabled Persons, observed in 1981, Spain,working in close co-operation with UNESCO,hosted the World Conference on Actionsand Strategies for Education, Prevention andIntegration. It was my privilege to preside overthis Conference, the results of which continueto guide the development of special needseducation.

The task of this distinguished group is toreview what has happened since 1981 regardingthe world's most vulnerable children and toask itself two searching questions: 'How canone do more? How can one do better?' We musteach look critically at his or her individualexperience and seek to draw lessons and inspi-ration from it. We must then compare theseindividual experiences and seek to draw widerand more general lessons from them. Our goalis to build a common understanding, a sharedvision, a consensus on the further actions thatare required and, ultimately, a collaborativeprogramme to pursue the initiatives thatwe will launch here. The mission of UNESCOis intellectual co-operation. What this means,in the simplest of terms, is thinking and doing,then thinking about what we have done andhow we might do it better.

This meeting in Salamanca is certainlybeginning under the most favourable auspices.The more than 80 countries represented here,many at ministerial level, have a wealth ofexperience to share. For nearly a decade, ourhost country, Spain, for example, has beenimplementing a project to integrate studentswith special educational needs into regularclasses. These efforts have been carefullystudied and have recently culminated in the

t 79

S8 ANNEX 2

adoption of legislation to ensure that allchildren have equal access to education.During the course of this Conference. we canlook forward to hearing more about the Spanishexperience from the Minister of Educationand Science and his colleagues. Many othercountries, from both the developed and develo-ping worlds, will also report on their actionsand efforts, their achievements and successes.their frustrations and setbacks and their futureplans for moving forward in this area. ThisConference is also being attended by more than20 intergovernmental and non-governmentalorganizations. The common purpose that bringsus together is to pursue the vital goal of educationfor all proclaimed in the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights and reaffirmed by the internationalcommunity in the World Declaration adopted inJomtien. Thailand in 1990.

The record of the past decade is a mixed one.On the positive side. there is clearly a greaterawareness, understanding and recognition notonly of the needs. but also of the capabilitiesand potential of disabled people. We havebegun to recognize the disabled not as peoplewith problems. but as people with untappedpotential. We are, at the same time, more alertto the possibilities for the prevention ofdisabilities and better prepared to respond tothose with special needs in ways which assistthem in leading independent and active lives.Finally, we have come to recognize that anymeaningful programme to assist disabledpeople and what is equally important, toenable the disabled to assist themselves mustbe based on education and training. The publicneeds to he better informed and made awarethat the disabled often suffer as much fromthe lack of understanding of those around themas from their infirmities themselves. And,of course, for the disabled even more so thanothers appropriate education and training are

the keys to living productive and rewardinglives. Knowledge and skills can compensatefor disadvantages, just as their absence cancompound and complicate them.

Yet, we must frankly admit, that while muchhas been done. vastly more remains to beachieved. Important aspects have still not beentouched on. Others have been obscured bythe actions undertaken, which are frequentlylacking in scientific rigour and adequateresources. The situation is especially seriousin the developing countries. There are, to becertain, many good projects and promisingbeginnings and these are the proof that thereare affordable and workable solutions evenin circumstances of extreme austerity. They are.nevertheless, the exception to the overridingrule of need. In many developing countries.it is estimated that not more than 5 per centof children and adults with special needs arereceiving adequate education. This musthe of grave concern, not only to the peopleand countries directly affected but tothe international community as a whole.One cannot build the culture of peacethat our planet so urgently requires in a worldindifferent to the plight and suffering ofmillions of innocent people.

The World Declaration and Frameworkfor Action adopted at the World Conferenceon Education for All make explicit a numberof principles that will form the basis ofour discussions and recommendations:

the inherent right of all children to a fullcycle of primary education:

2) the commitment to a child-centred conceptof education in which individual differencesare accepted as a source of richness anddiversity. not viewed as an educationalproblem:

3) the need to improve educational qualityin order to make universal access meaningfuland advantageous:

4) greater parental and community participationin education: and

5) a greater effort to offer instruction inliteracy, numeracy and basic knowledge andskills to adults, including those with specialneeds, the vast majority of whom weredenied the benefits of a primary education.

UNESCO. working in close co-operation withpartner agencies, has sought to advancethe vision and message of Jomtien. We havebeen particularly concerned that the recommen-dations of Jomtien for special needs educationshould be taken fully into account. The Organi-zation's programme in special education, begunin the 1960s, has been strengthened, stream-lined and focused on the promotion of two keyprinciples: equality Of opportunities andparticipation.

In this as in other areas. UNESCO endeavoursto play a catalytic role, providing the 'pinchof yeast' which is necessary for the flourto become bread. In special needs education,this has implied doing selective 'upstream workcapable of having a significant downstreameffect'. We have entered into fruitful dialogueswith key partners engaged in policy-making,financing and teacher education. Our aim hasbeen to get special education out of the ghettoand into the mainstream. We have argued thatspecial education is not an approach suited tothe needs of a few, but an approach to teachingcapable of improving education for all.We have stressed that the essence of specialeducation is a focus on the needs of the child:that a one-size-fits-all approach doesa disservice not only to a minority of children.but to the majority of them. We have sought

to build bridges between existing systems of

31

-- , -------- -__-ADDRESS BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAI. OF UNESCO 89

special and regular education and to encouragea rethinking of future educational plans to avoid,wherever possible, the creation of dual systems.We have urged that legislation and practiceshould be reviewed in the light of recent researchand evaluation findings.

Of all these diverse efforts. none has receivedgreater attention or produced more promisingresults than the 'Special Needs in the Classroom'project. This has been an example of'front-line' work intended to test innovationsand demonstrate and spread approaches thatprove effective. At the same time, the projectboth develops national capacity in special needseducation and actively promotes networkingat both the regional and international levels.This Conference will provide the opportunityfor those of you who are not already awareof it to learn about this project and. in particular,how you can participate in it and benefit from it.

I should add, in parenthesis, that while educa-tion is at the heart of UNESCO's actionin favour of the disadvantaged, it is supportedby activities in other fields, particularly cultureand communication. The way in which culturesperceive and interpret disadvantages of diffe-rent sorts is of obvious importance as is the wayin which information bearing on disadvantageis presented and transmitted. In many Africansocieties, for example, there is a sense ofsolidarity and participation that ensures thatspecial education measures will be wellreceived. In the industrialized countries, theextensive use of subtitles on television and in

films enables the deaf to follow the mainstreammedia. while the availability of books and evennewspaper stories on audio cassettes meansthat those with impaired vision are included.All of these developments, of course, ultimatelydepend upon forceful and effective advocacyby and on behalf of those with disabilities.

90 NN NEN 2

As our subject is extensive and time is short.I should simply like to highlight a numberof important developments and key issues. Mycolleagues and I will he listening attentivelyto your discussion of these and other mattersthroughout this Conference in an effort to learnfrom your experience and to profit from youradvice.

An obvious question to ask at a Conferencesuch as this is: 'What is new in specialeducation?' There are many answers. As inmost fields, progress tends to be incrementalrather than dramatic. There are exceptions.of course. We have, for example. made majoradvances in the prevention of disabilities andmay he on the threshold of dramatic newbreakthroughs based on new discoveries andinsights deriving from genetics and relatedfields. Over the past two decades. there hasalso been a profound change in our perceptionof why children or adults experience difficultiesin learning. The traditional view was to blamethe learner. The problem was seen to derivefrom his or her limitations or defects.The solution involved overcoming what wastermed 'the learning deficit. Fortunately.our thinking has evolved a good deal in recentyears. We now recognize that problems oftenarise out of environments that pose physical,cultural or social harriers to learning.The answer, accordingly. is not to he foundin correcting a defect in the child or adult, butrather in understanding the obstacles he or sheis facing and. in so far as possible, removingor reducing them. It is the interaction betweenindividual resources and limitations andthe constraints posed by the environment thatwill ultimately determine the acuteness ofa handicap and the consequences it imposes.

Another point that it seems to me necessaryto stress is that special needs education cannot

advance in isolation. It must he part of anoverall educational strategy and. indeed, of newsocial and economic policies. To give full effectto special needs education requires a reviewof the policy and practice in every subsectorwithin education, from pre-schools to univer-sities. to ensure that the curricula, activitiesand programmes are, to the maximum extentpossible, fully accessible to all.

In this International Year of the Family. it isfitting to highlight the role of the parents andfamilies of disabled children. Experiencedemonstrates that programmes that involveparents and families consistently achievebetter results than those that treat the childin isolation. In addition, parents and familieshave proved themselves eager. motivated andresourceful in contributing to the educationof the disabled child. Parents often possessskills that can be valuable to teachers as wellas to other parents and children.

It is. of course, not only the family. but societyas a whole that must contribute to the successof special needs education. People with disabi-lities have for far too long been ignored ormisunderstood. They have often been regardedas inherently dependent. whereas their mostearnest desire is to he independent andproductive. Fortunately, disabled people havenow formed their own organizations andhave become far more assertive of their rights.Above all. they want greater control overprogrammes intended to serve them.They want the right to make decisions thataffect their lives. Clearly, improved accessto education is an essential condition forempowering the disabled and enabling themto participate fully in the social, economic.political and cultural life of their society.Education. as already noted. is also the key topromoting greater understanding. respect and

solidarity between all members of the commu-nity. Ultimately, it is only in this broaderframework that special needs education candevelop and flourish.

'Disability', understood in its social context, isnot simply a condition. It is far more than that.It is an experience, an experience of difference.but all too often also an experience ofexclusion and often of oppression. It is not theindividual with the disability who is responsiblefor this, but society's indifference, intoleranceand, in some cases, even hostility. It is onlyin acknowledging this that we can fully com-prehend the issues facing us and, especially,those faced by disabled people. An analysis thatrecognizes only the problem but not the contextin which it arises can never result in a full andsatisfactory solution.

Difference is a fact of life. What matters is ourattitude towards differences. As one disabledperson wisely stated: 'Attitudes are moreimportant than facts, more important thancircumstances, than failures, than successes.Attitudes will make or break a company.a home. Bet ... we have a choice every dayregarding the attitude we will embrace.Life is 10 per cent what happens to us and90 per cent how we react to it. We are incharge of our attitudes'.

How true that is and how important that weshould not miss the critical opportunity tochange attitudes that will shortly be offeredus. The World Summit on Social Development.planned for Copenhagen in March 1995. willtake up the issue of inclusion and. by impli-cation. exclusion as one of three priority areasto he examined. This is an important opportu-nity to put the concerns of this Conferencebefore the world's leaders. Working in closeco-operation with a network of organizationsof disabled people. UNESCO is preparing a

ADDRESS BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF UNESCO 91

report to the Summit on 'ignorance, intolerance,prejudice and other obstacles to be overcomein order to integrate disabled people fully intosocial and national life'.

Salamanca will not be a turning-point in specialneeds education. We do not require that. Wehave an accurate sense of direction. We knowwhat needs to be done and, to a considerableextent, how it can be achieved. WhatSalamanca can provide is a forum for reflectionand exchange and, above all, a rallying pointfor action. We need to examine critically bothour shortcomings and our strengths. Then, wemust transform our thoughts and plans intoconcrete action. To do so, we need to bothenhance and unify our efforts. No country canclaim that it has done all it could do to improvethe quality of life for people with disabilities.either within its own borders or beyond them.We have only begun the vast task before us.

The time for action is now. We cannot enter thetwenty-first century asking the same questionsas we did in the 1970s. How many disabledchildren are there? Have we identified them all?Have we established procedures for includingin the education system all people withdisabilities who can be included? We should,of course, be able to reply affirmatively to allthese questions. But we have to go beyond that.We should. by now, he asking ourselves howmany young people and adults with disabilitieshave learned the skills and acquired the know-ledge required to function effectively in society.How many have found good and rewardingjobs? These are the questions that definethe challenges to which we must respond in thetwenty-first century. The key questions we mustanswer in the years ahead do not concern whatwe are aiming for so much as what we areachieving. Our answers to these questions willhe the measure of our success or failure.

83

92 ANNEX 2

Your Highness,

Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The future is not fixed in advance. It will befashioned by our actions and deeds and willreflect our thoughts and values. When we lookaround us here in this splendid city, we seethe monuments and rich heritage of a peoplewho cared deeply about the pursuit of know-ledge and the well-being of humanity. It wasnot self-interest that made the splendours ofthe University of Salamanca, but the realizationthat humankind is never so great as when it actsout of benevolence and goodwill. It is, I amcertain, possible to make a persuasive economicargument for special needs education. But it is,in my view, both more worthy and compellingto make a human argument. The merit of asociety be it that of a city or a planet canbe best judged by what it does to brightenthe lives of those stricken with disadvantagesand disabilities. This Conference, I fervently

hope, will long be remembered as an occasionon which the international community roseto the challenge and affirmed that educationfor all must mean for all and most particularlyfor those who are most vulnerable and mostin need. In doing so, we will affirm our betterselves and begin to tap the potential within us.For we, as a global society, are in fact severelydisabled by pessimism, by differences,by disagreements and even by despair. Whenwe analyse things, we lose heart, but whenwe compare them, we take courage. We mustalways look around us, that is, see the worldin its entirety and act on the basis of overallcriteria. We need to take our destiny into ourown hands and begin te ring down the barriersthat divide, weaken and distract us. The wayto build a global society is by collectivelytackling the great moral and ethical challengesbefore us. This is how we shall stir the spiritand conscience of the international communityand give life and vitality to the institutionsthat serve it. Our problem, too, is 90 per contattitude.

Thank you.

Address by Mr Gustavo Suarez PertierraMinister of Education, Spain

Your Roval Highness

In my capacity as Minister for Educationand Science, it is a great pleasure for me

to be here with you all at the opening of theWorld Conference on Special Needs Education.

May I begin by thanking you. Your RoyalHighness, for agreeing to act as Presidentof Honour and for your presence here on thisoccasion. I also wish to thank UNESCO.and its Director-General, Mr Federico MayorZaragoza. for giving its patronage to thisConference, which it helped to arrange andorganize, and for accepting the offer madesome time ago by Spain to provide the venue.We are honoured by the support which thisevent implies for the education policy pursuedby the Ministry for Education and Sciencein regard to special needs pupils, in particular,and for our education policy in general.

I should now like to place on record myappreciation for the kind welcome given to usby the President of the Council and the Mayorof Salamanca as representatives of thisbeautiful and historic city, and also for theinterest shown by them in the organizationof this event. Last but not least. may I sayhow grateful we are to all the countries.organizations and institutions which madethis Conference possible.

We are gathered here to analyse, from amulticultural and plural standpoint, the newchallenges facing education on the eveof the twenty-first century. Those challengesconcern all our pupils and, in particular. thosewho have special educational needs tbr bothpersonal and social reasons.

A

In my brief address, I shall endeavour tooutline the problems., the debate and process ofreflection over the next few days should thenhelp to identify the possible solutions that willneed to be found in the next decade.

In the final analysis. all this work will pursuethe essential objective of any education system.namely. to improve the quality of education.

No universally valid definition of educationcan be put forward because its content dependson the social context, the particular historicaljuncture and also on the specific objectivesassigned to education by a given society. It isno easy task to determine the key indicatorswhich enable the quality of an education systemto be assessed. Be that as it may, I think everyonewill agree that one of the key indicatorsof the quality of education is the ability of theeducation system to serve pupils of every kindand, in particular, those who have specialeducational needs.

The adoption of that approach required afundamental change in the concept of specialeducation within the education system.The planning of an education system will differgreatly, depending on whether special educationis conceived as a system parallel to ordinaryeducation or. on the contrary, understood as aset of additional resources placed in the serviceof the system as a whole.

Equal importance attaches to a decentralizedand flexible curriculum enabling the centresand teaching staff to adapt their educationalpractice to the specific features of the pupilsconcerned and to benefit from the presenceof motivated teachers who have beenadequately trained to perform their difficulttask successfully.

85

94 ANNEX 2

In recent years. the Span'sh Ministry forEducation and Science has been working toadvance the cause of this school model andthis quality concept.

In 1985. d-e Royal Decree on the Organizationof Special Education already laid the basisfor the effe.;-tive integration of boys and girlswith psychological, physical and sensoryproblems into the school system. Many ofthese children were then admitted to ordinaryschools, which accepted them voluntarilyand were granted the necessary staff andmaterial resources. To do them justice, it musthe acknowledged that the centres whichput in hand the Integration Programme havepursued the most attractive educational projectsto the highest quality standard in recent years.

Nevertheless, a process of transformationdesigned to attain the quality of education towhich we are all committed cannot he confinedto a single group of centres, however admirablethe work done by them may he. On thecontrary, it necessitates a response by the wholeof the education system. In our particular case.that response has been set out in a law. theLaw on the General Organization of theEducation System which was promulgated inOctober 1990. In the area of special education,that new legal framework set the same goalsin teaching for pupils with special educationalneeds as for all other schoolchildren andestablished the principle of the adaptation ofteaching methods to their special features.

Education itself must therefore he adaptedin such a way as to enable each individual pupilto progress as a function of his or her aptitudesand in the light of his or her particular needs.

The most significant advance brought aboutby this new regulation of the education systemresides essentially in the fact that its main thrustconsists in taking care of the different needsof all our pupils. The school must adapt to theirparticular features and differences by promotingmodels of action. school organization andcurriculum flexibility which are consistent withthe notion of education for all.

However, we must not lose sight of the factthat educational changes are not sufficient ifwe are to achieve the necessary socialtransformation for the benefit of persons withspecial educational needs. That transformationcannot he confined to schools alone, but mustalso encompass the world of work and thefamily and social environment in general.The work done by the Ministry for Educationand Science would he incomplete unless thesepupils found continuity in their occupationaltraining and integration into work and societyat large. But those objectives lie beyondthe capacity of an educational authority aloneand we need the cooperation not only ofother authorities but also of society in generalthrough associations, non-governmentalorganizations and international agencies: allof these institutions are represented at thisConference.

The task of involving the whole of societyin the defence of the rights of these persons tolearn, work and establish relationships withothers must he assumed collectively througha tenacious and persevering approach.

I therefore wish to lay emphasis on theimportant need for this process of reflection totake place at a World Conference of this kind

with the participation of I(X) countries in whichcustoms, cultures and races differ. The jointconclusions which are arrived at must thenserve as a point of departure for the educational.employment and social policies of manycountries.

I am convinced that all who are present hereshare a wish to turn the principle of equalopportunities for these pupils into reality.Education is the privileged path open to us

ADDRESS BY THE MINISTER OF EDUCATION 95

if we are to change the direction of the valuesby which today's world is guided and createa more equitable world based on greatersolidarity in which individual differences willhe respected. A school open to diversity isthe first nucleus in which these values must heput into practice: that is the only way in whichit will be possible to achieve widespreadrespect and solidarity among the peoples andcitizens of the world.

67

Thank you very much.your Royal Highness.

Annex 3 Working Document

1. Introduction

National education systems fail millions ofchildren. They do this either by making inappropriateeducational provision for them or by excludingthem from schooling entirely. Traditionally.attention has focussed on those children and youngpeople labelled 'handicapped' or 'disabled', withan emphasis on those having physical or sensoryimpairments. In fact, these labels have limitedusefulness so far as education is concerned. andcountries such as New Zealand. Norway. the UnitedKingdom and Spain no longer define categoriesof handicap in their educational legislation.

There is. however, a much larger group of childrenwho give cause for concern. These arc the verymany children who, for various reasons. havedifficulty in learning at school but do not cometo official notice. They constitute the hiddenpopulation with special needs. To the extent thattheir educational needs are not identified orresponded to, they fail to realise their educationalpotential and many drop out of school duringthe course of the primary cycle.

Estimates of the size of the problem vary and areimprecise in any case because of differences indefinitions and in national statistics. A conservativeestimate is that ten per cent of all pupils havesignificant difficulties in learning at school.It' we add to this the very large number of childrenwho receive no schooling, we arrive at a figureof somewhere between one and two hundredmillion children that are failed by our educationsystems.

While these global estimates serve to indicatethe magnitude of the problem. they ignore theenormous diversity between countries. Universalschooling is a long established fact in somecountries whereas in many others large numbersdo not complete primary education. Likewise, somecountries have made great strides in reformingschools so that they meet the particular needs ofpupils with learning difficulties. while others havebarely begun to recognise these needs or respondto them in outmoded and inappropriate ways.

Paradoxically. this diversity of provision offershope for the future. Those countries makingexcellent provision demonstrate what can heachieved and their experience can be instructivefor others, particularly in showing pitfalls to avoidand how to secure appropriate development morequickly. Countries differ in the amount of resourcesthey can commit to education and this is aconstraining factor where special educationalprovision is concerned. Economic factors must nothe ignored hut, equally, their power must not heoverestimated. The relationship between a nation'swealth and its education system is not a linear one.as is demonstrated by the enormous differencesin the nature and extent of provision that canbe found in countries which are at a similar stageof development.

The World Declaration on Education for All`Meeting Basic Learning Needs' offers aframework for progress but it does not guaranteethat progress will he made. It can give a stimulusto the enhancing of basic learning opportunitiesfor the entire community. and this providesthe best context for developing special educationalprovision. There is a risk, however. Extending orreforming basic education presents many challengesand puts pressures on budgets which are alreadyconstrained. In some cases the danger is thatchildren and young people who have difficultyin learning will come low in the priority order.Every effort must he made to ensure that this doesnot happen so that the young people in questionparticipate in educational opportunities alongsidetheir peers and within their community.

2. Guiding principlesMany countries have made great strides in providingfor children and young people with specialeducational needs but much remains to he done.There are two distinct challenges. The first is tomaintain the resource base for special educationalprovision, where it has been established, in theface of the constant pressure on public expenditure.If advances are secured in other areas of educationor in other public services !his must not heat the cost of expenditure od special educationalprovision. The second challenge is to improve

the general level of provision everywhere so thatit matches best current practice. In particular, thismeans bringing about reform in the primary schoolto highlight the hidden population with specialneeds and make appropriate provision for them.Given the different situations of countries, this willremain an aspiration for many years to comebut it is important for those who would bring aboutchange to have a vision of what is possible.

The need for action draws on three main setsof principles: moral: political: and economic.The moral argument refers to basic human rights.It is widely recognised. and enshrined in manydocuments, that all children have the right toeducation and that this right holds regardless ofdisability or learning difficulty. If as a consequencesome children need special steps to be taken forthem to have effective access to schooling, thenequity requires that such special educationalprovision he made. Treating people as equals whenthey are not is neither equitable nor is it to offerequality of opportunity. The latter can only heachieved by unequal treatment, which in the schoolsector means special educational provision.

The political argument flows from this:if a nation does cherish all its citizens equally.it must ensure that everybody has effective accessto social goods. including education. This dutyis reinforced by the numerous national andinternational declarations committing governmentsto providing a free, appropriate education for everychild. Fine rhetoric without commensurate actiondebases the political process. and it is incumbenton governments to fulfil the promises madewith regard to educating all children. This is relatedto the coherence of a society's value system:if a nation prides itself on its equitable regard forall its citizens, it can hardly tolerate the existenceof a subgroup deprived of educational opportunitiesor relegated to a marginal position within theeducation system.

The economic argument is based on the fact thateducation fosters self-sufficiency and reducesindividuals' dependence on the state. This is widelyaccepted for the mainstream population hut.increasingly, it is being demonstrated to hold true

WORKING DOCUMENT 97

for those with disabilities as well. Poverty and/ordependence on welfare when available have beenthe norm for adults with disabilities. Education andtraining can liberate them, however, especiallywhen linked to changes in society and the labourmarket. A growing body of experience in developedand developing countries alike testifies to thepossibilities for people with disabilities to becomeproductive members of their communities.If a lifelong perspective is taken, education isan investment with a positive economic pay-offeven for those with pronounced disabilities orlearning difficulties.

3. New thinking inspecial needs education

A world conference held thirty years ago wouldhave inhabited a very different conceptual climatefrom today. It would have concerned itselfwith the handicapped and their care. It would haveassumed that those who were capable of beingeducated would be educated in segregated specialschools. The mainstream school system would havehad very limited involvement: indeed, at nationallevel health and social services ministries wouldhave as likely to he involved as educationministries. The role of parents and their relationshipwith professionals would have been conceived quitedifferently from today. Parents would have beenregarded as peripheral to their children's education;they were given little information on theirdifficulties or the educational programmes offeredto them, and certainly could not expect to have aformal role in the assessment and education of theirhandicapped child.

Thinking about children and young peoplewho have difficulty in learning has changed a greatdeal since then. The changes draw partly onthe comprehensive school debate and the widerexpectations of ordinary schools, partly ondissatisfaction with what were perceived to he thelimited achievements of special schools and partlyon the growing currency of key ideas developedin various parts of the world. Chief among thesewere the principles of normalization first expoundedin Sweden. the civil rights movement in the UnitedStates, the British insistence on the educability

_ .

98 ANNEX 3

of every child and the anti-institutionalisationmovement in Italy.

Two of the key changes, which underpin manyof the others, relate to our understanding of whychildren have difficulties in learning at schooland to the ways in which school systems shouldrespond to these difficulties.

The traditional view of children who have difficultyin learning at school is that they are handicappedin various ways obviously so in the way of thosewho have physical or sensory impairmentsand by inference in the case of the mentallyretarded. We now know that this is at best a partialaccount and is seriously misleading in key respects.Quite apart from the fact that it overlooks the verylarge number of slow and disaffected learners.it attributes an explanatory power to handicappingconditions that is not supported by the evidence.Pupils with similar handicaps may have verydifferent educational needs. Thus, pupils who fallinto the partially hearing category vary g:catlyin the amount of useful hearing they possess and inthe extent to which they learn to make use of it.Even though special education and special schoolsin particular have been based on the categoriesof handicap for many years. these categorieshave strictly limited relevance to the planning anddelivery of educational provision.

Children have difficulty in learning for mart'reasons. These can he grouped into three broad butinterlocking sets: innate factors of the kindassociated with the traditional view of handicap:environmental factors: and school-related factors.

Innate factors such as overt physical handicapor inferred brain damage must not he ignored. Thatwould he as much a mistake as ascribing too muchimportance to them. The fact that there is not adirect or invariant link between a given impairmentand a particular kind of learning difficulty doesnot mean that there arc no links. Children manifestdifferences in learning rate and emotional resiliencewhich affect how they learn, and these differencesmay well reflect innate factors even if the precisecausal link cannot be established.

The child is a social being as well as an individualand is a member of various social groupings

family. neighbourhood. ethnic group, languagecommunity and so on. This is the arena in whichenvironmental factors come into play. These factorsare not in themselves the direct cause of learningdifficulties but rather provide a context in whichcertain development should take place withinthe child. If this development does take place.the child is set to grow in learning in a way that willhe regarded as normal: it' it does not, the child islikely to experience learning difficulty.

The most pervasive source of learning difficultiesis the school system itself. This is where innateand environmental factors interact to create learningdifficulties. Schools define the activities andstandards by which pupils' achievement is marked.By the same token, they set the benchmarksfor failure. Unless schools have the pedagogicalsophistication to match the wide-ranging demandsthey make on pupils to their very different learningsituations. failure is the inevitable outcome formany pupils.

It should come as no surprise that schools createlearning difficulties in this way. Research on schooleffectiveness has shown that schools do make adifference: pupils receive a better education in someschools than they would in other schools. If thisis so. it follows that some schools make poorerprovision than others. Regrettably. this provision isoften poorest where pupils with special educationalneeds are con':erned: they have to cope withinappropriate curriculum content and unsuitableteaching approaches, and their sense of failure isconstantly reinforced by rigid assessmentprocedures and an insensitive school ethos.

The second strand in the new thinking relates tothe way in which the school system should respondto pupils who have difficulty in learning.The traditional view, following on from conceptsof handicap and inherent limitations in learningcapacity. was that ordinary schools were not wellsuited to handicapped children. Neither architecturenor curriculum nor school ethos was conduciveto their receiving an appropriate education,and moreover their presence in the ordinary school

interfered with the education of the non-handicappedchildren. If they were to be educated, it wouldhe better on all counts for segregated provision tohe made for them.

The contemporary notion is based on schoolreform. It assumes that the ordinary school shouldhe the first option for every child and thatalternative. segregated schooling should he soughtonly as a last resort. It claims that the numberof those for whom special schooling is necessaryis very much smaller than much practice wouldsuggest. It also finds that integrated provisioncan he significantly cheaper than the equivalentsegregated provision.

All this calls for major reform of the ordinaryschool. If a principal reason for excluding particularpupils in the first place was that the ordinary schoolwas failing to meet their needs. it makes no senseto bring them back unless changes are made.The requisite changes extend to all aspects of theschool's life curriculum, pedagogy. academicorganisation. assessment. staffing. school ethos.extracurricular activities, buildings and must hepursued in a whole-school way since they are linkedin the organic unity of the school. The goal isan inclusive school where all pupils belong, whereall work on appropriate educational programmesdevised within a common curriculum frameworkand where all receive the particular help requiredby their individual learning needs.

WORKING DocumENT 99

4. UNESCO andspecial needs education

From a modest beginning in 1966 special educationhas become a significant part of UNESCO'sprogramme. The International Year of DisabledPersons in 1981 marked a turning point, and thework gathered momentum throughout the eightiesin terms of both budget allocations and range ofactivities supported. While the amount of resourcesremains modest in absolute terms. UNESCO hascapitalised on extensive networking and its uniqueglobal position to enhance numerous nationaland regional initiatives in special education. Itslinks with other UN agencies, national developmentagencies and non-governmental organisations haveenabled a small secretariat to become a significantforce in special needs education worldwide and tocontribute to the development of special educationalprovision in many countries.

The programme during the eighties consisted ofthree main strands:

1 Elaboration of guidelines and strategies fornational and international action in the field ofspecial needs education. This included expertmeetings and consultations. a study of teachertraining. and a world conference in Torremolinos.Spain in November 1981 organised jointly withthe Spanish Government on Actions andStrategies for Education. Prevention andIntegration.

1. Information: compilation, dissemination andexchange. UNESCO receives numerous requestsfor information on special needs education frommember states, non-governmental organisationsand practitioners. In order to respond to theseit has studied various issues and compiledinformation and training materials. These aredisseminated widely, with many available in fourlanguages (English, French. Spanish and Arabic)and some in Chinese and Russian as well. Thesematerials include:

1(X) ANNEX 3

i) Guides for Special Education nine bookletsaddressed to teachers, parents and communityworkers presenting basic information on theeducation and training of children and youngpeople with disabilities.

ii) Review of the Present Situation in SpecialEducation. 1988.

iii) Directory of Special Education. 1986

3. Technical Co-operation. This consists of nationalor regional projects funded by extra budgetaryresources (UN bodies, aid agencies. non-governmental organisations and special funds).These are focussed on the developing regions.Most have been at national level but therehas been a major project covering 15 countriesin Eastern and Southern Africa (1981 to 1989).

More recently, UNESCO's programme has beenset explicitly within an integrated educationframework. The major activities here related to:

i) Planning educational provision for specialneeds. A policy document on the principlesunderlying special educational provision andthe review of practice has been distributed.Regional and sub-regional seminars havebeen held to introduce policy orientationsand discuss planning and management issues.

ii) Special Needs in the Classroom: a teachereducation project. This has been designed tohelp teachers develop their thinking andpractice with respect to the ways in whichthey can respond to all pupils who experiencedifficulties in schools. those with particulardisabilities as well as others who do not makesatisfactory progress. The main elementsare a Teacher Education Resource Pack,with accompanying videos and a Guide forTeacher Educators. The pack has been pilotedin eight countries by an international resourceteem and is in widespread use. It willbe described in detail at the conference.

iii) Childhood disabilities: the young child andthe family environment. This has entailedthe preparation of video training packagesaimed especially at parents and communityworkers in developing countries forintervention with children vulnerable todevelopmental handicaps.

iv) Legislation for special education. Informationhas been collected on national legislationin 57 countries. This has been analysed andwill be described at the conference.

5. Purpose of the ConferenceThe World Conference on Special Needs Educationwill address the shortfall in special educationalprovision globally and the ways in whichimprovements can be made. It will be set withinthe framework laid down by the World Conferenceon Education for All (Jomtien, 1990) regardingthe measures to be taken for the education of thosewith special educational needs.

The main purposes of the Conference are to

present new thinking on learning difficultiesand disabilities and on the relationshipbetween special educational provision andgeneral school reform

review recent developments in provisionfor children and young people with specialeducational needs.

highlight breakthroughs and significantexperiences in key areas such as legislation,curriculum, pedagogy, school organisation,teacher education and communityparticipation.

provide a forum for sharing experiences atinternational, regional and bilateral levelsand an opportunity for negotiating ongoingcollaboration.

9 2

The conference will also help to shapeUNESCO's further work in special needseducation.

6. Regional seminars

An important element of the preparation for theWorld Conference has been a series of five regionalseminars organised by UNESCO with financialsupport from the Swedish government. These wereheld in different parts of the world over 1992/93.These grew in part out of the new climate createdby the Jomtien conference and the reappraisalof educational strategies and commitments itstimulated. National governments became moreaware of the need for policy initiatives to tacklegaps in educational provision, especially for thosesuffering educational disadvantage, and manycountries are renewing their efforts to enhanceservices for children and young people with specialeducational needs.

The seminars brought together senior educationdecision makers from different countries, includingpersons holding national responsibility for primaryand for special education. The purpose of theseminars was to mobilise policy and professionalsupport for developing educational opportunitiesfor pupils with special educational needs and toensure that these occur within the regular schoolsystem to the greatest extent possible.

The first seminar was held in Botswana in August1992 and involved delegates from nine countriesin the region along with representatives of non-governmental organisations. This was succeededby seminars in Venezuela (six countries), Vienna(five countries). Jordan (six countries) and China(12 countries). The seminars followed a commonformat: presentation of international and regionaltrends, country reports, focussed discussions,a study visit and future planning. A report on eachseminar is available from UNESCO.

Numerous recommendations and action plans wereformulated as a result of these seminars, and a fullaccount can he obtained by referring to the seminarreports and. for specific country details, the nationaldelegates. Some of the key themes that recurredthroughout may be noted here:

WORKING DOCUMENT 101

i) The creation of inclusive schools whichcater for a wide range of pupil need shouldbe given high piority. Steps to facilitate thisinclude having a common administrativestructure for special and regular education,providing special education support servicesto regular schools, and adapting thecurriculum and teaching approaches.

ii) Teacher education must be adapted tofurther inclusive education and to promotecollaboration between regular class teachersand special education teachers. This is aconcern both for general teacher educationand for specialist in-service education.

iii) Pilot projects based on inclusive educationshould be established and evaluatedcarefully in the light of local services. Suchevaluative information can guide policyand practice in key ways and shouldbe disseminated both within countries andto other countries that share similarcircumstances.

7. Conference programmeThe overall aim of the Conference is to assistin improving educational provision for childrenand young people with special needs whereverthey live. There are two overarching themes:guaranteeing every child access to educationalopportunities, and working to ensure that thoseopportunities represent education of high quality.These provide a framework for examining,through keynote addresses, small grouppresentations, discussion and plenary reports.the three substantive themes of the conference:policy and legislation: school quality factors;and community perspectives.

The .first theme Policy and Legislation has todo with the framework within which specialeducational provision is made at national level.The keynote speakers will address the policychallenges posed by moving special education intothe mainstream; traditional policy and legislativeframeworks are no longer sufficient but newframeworks are not easily established and must

93

102 ANNEX 3

take account of the particular situation of eachcountry. Details on the UNESCO study ofdevelopments in special education legislationwill he presented for the first time. There will alsobe a presentation on the national school reformin Spain which has achieved major successin incorporating special educational provisioninto the ordinary school system. Particular aspectsof policy development will be addressed byrespondents from Botswana, Colombia and theWorld Bank Asian Study team.

The second theme is concerned with SchoolQuality Factors. Keynote speakers will addressthe curriculum and the factors governing accessto it for students with special educational needs,teacher education at both initial and in-servicelevels, and school organisation in the context ofmeeting special educational needs. The UNESCOteacher education project on Special Needsin the Classroom will be described in detail, withexamples of practice based on the training packfrom Chile, China, India, Italy and other countries.There will also be presentations on distance teachereducation and school-based education.The project on Integration in the School organisedby the Organisation for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment will be described, and examplesof practice from seven different countries presented.In addition, all the sub-themes of the day willbe illustrated by a wide range of innovative practicedrawn from many different countries.

The third theme groups a number of related topicsunder the heading Community Perspective.The keynote speakers will cover, respectively,community-based rehabilitation programmes; theroles of voluntary organisations and donor agencies:parents; and disabled persons. In addition to countryexperiences illustrating the various topics, theInternational Labour Organisation will presenta session on preparation for adult life covering thetrair,ition from school to adulthood and workinglife, skills training and vocational training.

The final session of the conference will be devotedto Partnership and Networking. An important aimof the conference is to provide a forum for sharingexperiences at different levels and building uppartnerships for the future. Countries can learna great deal from each other; even though nationalcontexts are never identical, lessons can be learnedfrom experiences in one country that can informpractice in other countries. It is intended thatthe conference as a whole will provide opportunitiesto share information on innovative practice, boththrough the formal sessions and the many informaldiscussions which it will facilitate. However,it is important also to give explicit attention to thistheme of sharing, and that is the purpose of thefinal session.

UNESCO's work in special needs educationwill be described. This work is based oninternational co-operation and to that extent isheavily dependent on the inputs made by membercountries. It is hoped to put forward concreteproposals to build on the successful work to date.Wherever possible, collaborative projects willhe sought that capitalise on and enhance countries'own programmes. In this way positive experiencesfrom one place can contribute to the improvementof educational opportunities for all children andyoung people.

94

Annex 4 Conference Committees

Bureau of the Conference

PRESIDENT Marchesi, Alvaro SpainSecretary of State, Ministry of Education

VICE Lain America: Armuelles Hernandez, Bolivar Panama

PRESIDENTS Vice-Minister of EducationAfrica: Kipre, Pierre

Minister of EducationAsia: Vixaysakd, Bounthong RPD Laos

Director of General Education, Ministry of EducationArab States: Maatouk Maatouk, M. Libya

Minister of Education

Ivory Coast

RAPPORTEUR GENERAL Mittler, Peter United KingdomDean, Faculty of Education, University of Manchester

Drafting Committee

Resource Persons:

Dr N. K. JangiraMr Joseph KisanjiMr Zuhair ZakariaMr Ramiro CazarDr Dawn HunterDr James LynchMr Jorgen Hansen

IndiaTanzaniaJordanEcuadorUSAWorld BankDenmark

Prouamme Committee

COORDINATOR

Mr Peter Evans Paris, FranceOrganization for Economic Co-, gyration and Development (OECD)

Mr Jorgen Hansen DenmarkMinistry of EducationMr 'Pure Jonsson Geneva. SwitzerlandUnited Nations Development Programme (UNDP/IRDP)Mr Joseph Kisanji TanzaniaManchester University. UKMr Alvaro Marchesi SpainSecretary of State, Ministry of EducationMs Danielle Van Steenlandt Belgium(Previously UNESCO / Latin America)

Ms Lena Saleh UNESCO

CONSULTANT Dr Seamus Hegarty United KingdomDirector, National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER)

; 95

104 ANNEX 4

Oraan izati on Committee

Sr. D. Alvaro Marchesi Ullastres

Sr. D. Juan Antonio Menendez Pidal-- 's -- 7. _

Sra. Da. Catalina Ramos

Sr. D. Eloy Hernandez

Sr. D. Fernando Pampin Vazquez

Sra. Da. Lena Saleh

Sra. Da. Ana Cortazar

Sr. D. Jesus Parra Montero. Coordinator

Sra. Da. Md Jesus Cano

Sr. D. Luis Caiiadas Taravillo

Sra. Da. Julia Conde Asore,)

Sra. Da. Enedina Gonzalez Fernandez

Sra. Da. Sara Gutierrez Gallego

Sr. D. Luis Gutierrez Lopez

Sra. D". Amparo Herrero Villanueva

Sra. D". Carmen Medrano Soria

Sra. D". NI" Angeles Ortiz Blazquez

Ministerio de Educitekin v ('iencia

Secretario de Estado de Educacion. M.E.C.' Espana

Delegado de Espana en la UNESCO-- - '- ----

Subdirectora General de Cooperacion International. Espana- ---- --- ` _ -

Subdirector General de Educacion Especial. Espana

Directoi Provincial del M.E.C. de Salamanca. Espana .

Educacion Especial. UNESCO

Ministerio de Educacion y Ciencia. Espana_ . _ _ _ _Ministerio de Educacicin y Ciencia. Espana

SubdirecciOn General de Educacion Especial. M.E.C. Espana. _

Centro Nacional de Recursos para la EducaciOn Especial.M.E.C. Espana

Subdireccion General de Educacion Especial. M.E.C. Espana

Subdireccion General de EducaciOn Especial. M.E.C. Espana

Secretaria de Estado de Educacion. M.E.C. Espana

Centro de Proceso de Datos del MEC. M.E.C. Espana

Centro Nacional de Recursos para la Educacion Especial.M.E.C. Espana

Subdireccion General de Educacitin Especial. M.E.C. Espana

Organizacion de Exposiciones y Congresos. Espana

96

Annex 5 Plenary and Concurrent Session Papers

MIIIMMIN1111

List of Plenary Papers

Theme 1: Policy and Legislation

Mr Bengt Lindqvist

Prof Maria Rii Saul le

Mr Alvaro Marchesi Ullastres

Dr James Lynch (respondent)

Special needs education:Conceptual framework, planning & policy factors.

Legislation issues.

Special educatiOnal need and educational reform.

Asia regional study of children with special educational needs.


Dr Margaret Wang

Dr Gordon Porter

Prof. N.K. Jangira

Prof. Klat Wale ll (respondent)

Serving students with special needs: Equity and Access.

Organization of schooling:Achieving access and quality through inclusion.

Rethinking teacher education.

Respondent to issues on theme 2: School perspectives.


Dr Brian O'Toole

Mr William Brohier

Mr Alain Parvilliers

Mr Deng Pufang

Partnership and Networking

Community-based rehabilitation programmes.

Role of voluntary organisations.

The role of parents.

Role of organizations of disabled persons.

Mr Jez Stoner Partnerships in special needs education:Non-governmental organisations, governments and people.

87

106 ANNEX 5

i_ist or Concurrent Session Papers


A: ACCESS TO THE CURRICULUM

Elena Martin Ortega

Katherine D. Seelman

Spain

USA

B: ORGANIZATION OF SCHOOLING

C: OECD

Mary Galvez EscuderoVolker RutteManuel Fernandez Perez1. M. Sibanda

Dr HubnerDarlene E. PernerA. Dens & E. HoedemaekersLiam O'hEigearta

Lucia de Ana

Kolbran Gunnaridattir

Dawn L. Hunter

PeruAustriaSpainZimbabwe

GermanyCanadaBelgiumIreland

Italy

Iceland

USA

ps

El acceso al curriculo delos alumnos con necesidadeseducativas especiales.Access to curriculumfor children with special needs.

OrganizaciOn escolar.Austrian integration models.OrganizaciOn escolar.Organization of schooling:The Zimbabwe experience.

Special education in Berlin.Multi -level instruction.Integration through cooperation.The integration of pupils withphysical and/or communicationdisabilities in ordinary classesas a consequence of introducinggrant-aided computers toprimary schools.Vie active pour les adolescentshandicapes. Integration a recole.Active life for disabled youth:Integration in the school.The ultimate goal:Inclusive education for all.

PLENARY AND CONCURRENT SESSION PAPERS 107

D: TEACHER EDUCATION

Mel Ainscow UK The UNESCO Teacher EducationProject.

Jorgen Hansen Denmark A European modelfor in-service training.

Monica Da len Norway Special education teacher trainingin Norway.


A: PREPARATION FOR ADULT LIFE

Mariano A. de Paz Argentina Integracion en el programade educaci6n y fromacion tecnicaen la rep6blica Argentina.

Rafael Mendia Gallardo Spain Una experiencia desde la comunidadautonorna del pais Vasco.

B: EDUCATION WITHINCOMMUNITY-BASED REHABILITATION PROGRAMMES

L. Ofori AddoConstance Facia

C: PARENTS AS PARTNERS

Ghana Country experience Ghana.Benin L'education dans le cadre

des programmes de readaptationa base communautaire.

1'. de Wit-Gosker Netherlands Parents as partners.

99

Annex 6 Participants/ParticipantesIncluding Invited Resource Persons / Y compris les specialistes invites /Incluyendo Especialistas Invitados

A

ALGERIA/ALGERIE/ARGELIA

Benamar, AichaDirector of Education TrainingMinistere de l'Education Nationale8, avenue de Pekin Le GolfArgel 1600

ANDORRA/ANDORRE

Rey Escobi, RobertoTechnical AdviserPrincipado de AndorraAvenida Dr. Mitjavila 5, 3°Andorra la Vella

-,--_-_--_-ANGOLA

Josefa de Matos, OlindaChiefDepartment of Special EducationMinisterio da EducacaoLuanda N. 1281Luanda

ARGENTINA/ARGENTINE

Espada, PatriciaFirst SecretaryDelegaciOn Permanente de Argentinaen UNESCO1, rue Miollis75732 Paris Cedex 15

Lus, Maria AngelicaCoordinatorPrograma de Transformacian DocenteMinisterio de EducacionParaguay. 956 - 1° EBuenos Aires 1057

Paz, Mariano A.PresidentComision Nacional Asesora para IaIntegraciOn de Personas DiscapacidadasDiagonal Julio A. Roca 782, 4Buenos Aires 1067

Valassina, SaraCoordinator. Special RegimeMinisterio do EducacionBrazil 123 Dep. 28Buenos Aires-Capital Federal

AUSTRIA/AUTRICHE

Eiterer, OthmarResponsibleSpecial Schools & IntegrationLandessculrat fur SalzburgMozartplatz, 8-10Salzburg 5010

Gruber, HeinzDepartment of Special EducationMinistry of EducationMinoritenplatz, 5Vienna A-I014

Rutte, VolkerCounsellorZentrum far integrative BetrenungKlusemannstrasse, 21A-8053 Graz

B

BANGLADESH

Mostafa, GolamExecutive DirectorBangladesh Distributor FoundGPO Box 3046Dhakar

BARBADOS/BARBADE

A ndwelle, JacquelineSupervisor of Special EducationMinistry of Education &CultureFire hill -Rock hallSaint Thomas

Walcott, ClaudineSupervisor of Special EducationMinistry of EducationJemotts laneSaint MichaelBridgetown

BELGIUM/BELG1QUE/BELGICA

Graeve, ChristianDirector GeneralDepartment of EducationMinistry of EducationKoningstraat, 138 -3Brussels B-1000

100

Dens, AugustDirectorPMS Centre Special EducationC. Meunier strait, 49Leuven B 30(X)

Olivares Font, Maria-XimenaResearch psychologistCEFES University Libre de BruxellesAvenue Franklin Roosevelt, bat. D-30Brussels 122

BENIN/BENIN

Facia, ConstanceCoordinatorProgramme ReadaptationMinistere des Affaires SocialesB.P. 06-02 PK3Cotonou

BOLIVIA/BOLIVIE

Reynolds Lopez, DemetrioDeputy Minister of EducationMinisterio de EducacionAvenida Arce 408La Paz

BOTSWANA

Marole, PheleloSenior Education OfficerMinistry of EducationP/Bag (X)5Gaborone

BULGARIA/BULGARIE .

Radulov, VladimirHead of Special Education DepartmentSofia UniversitySH/PCH Enskiprohod str. 69 ASofia 1574

CAMEROON /CAMEROUN /CAMERUN

Essola Etoa, Louis RogerAttache;Services du Premier MinistreYaounde

Mvondo Née Manga Ndongo, HenrietteDirectorMinistere des Affaires SocialesYaounde

CANADA

Perner, DarleneConsultant Policy DevelopmentNew BrunswickDepartment of EducationP.O. Box 6000Fredericton N.B.

Porter, GordonDirector of Student ServicesP.O. Box 1483Woodstock N.B.- EOJ 2B0

CHILE/CHILI

Meza Luna, Maria LuisaTeacherSpecial EducationCPEIP Ministerio EducaciOnVilla Nueva 391, Dipartamento 10Santiago de Chile

Perez Mellado, Jorge AntonioNational Coordination inSpecial EducationMinisterio de EducaciOnAlameda O'Higgins N 1371Santiago de Chile

CHINA/CHINE

Tang, ShengqinProfessorEast China Normal University3663 Zhongshan Rd. N.Shanghai 200062

Wang, XiaopingChief of SectionState Education Commission of China35 Damucang Hutong, XidanBeijing 100816

Zhao, Yong PingDirector of DivisionState Education Commission of China35 Damucang Hutong, XidanBeijing 100816

COLOMBIA/COLOMBIE

Lizarazo Ocampo, Antonio JoseDeputy MinisterMinisterio de EducacionCentro administrativo NacionaleSanta fe de Bogota

COSTA RICA

Gonzalez Trejos, FloryChief of SectionMinisterio de EducacionDepartamento de Educacion EspecialAparatado 10087-1000San Jose

CYPRUS/CHYPRE/CHIPRE

Leontiou, NicosDirectorPrimary EducationMinistry of EducationNicosia

CZECH REPUBLIC/REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUEJ

REPUBLICA CHECA

Soucek, JanSpecial SchoolsMinistry of Education & YouthKarrnelitska, 7Praga 118 12 1

I)

DENMARK/DANEMARK/DINAMARCA

Hansen, JoergenGeneral InspectorMinistry of EducationFrederick Holms Kanal 26Copenhaguen 1220

Knudsen, HolgerDeputy Permanent SecretaryMinistry of EducationFrederick Holms Kanal 26Copenhaguen 1220

101

PARTICIPANTS/PARTICIPANTES 109

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC/REPUBLIQUE DOMINICAINEJ

REPUBLICA DOMINICANA

Pena Paula, Rosa HerminiaDirector of Special Education DepartmentEducacion EspecialMinisterio Educaci6nMaximo GomezSanto Domingo

ECUADOR/EQUATEUR

Hipatia Albuja Vasco, BlancaDirector of DepartmentDepartamento NacionaleEducacion EspecialBuenos Aires 136 Y 10 de AgostQuito

EGYPT/EGYPTE/EGIPTO

Abdel-Karim, GamalCultural AdvisorEmbajada de EgiptoFrancisco Asis Mendez Casariego, 128002 Madrid

EL SALVADOR/LE SALVADOR/EL SALVADOR

Castro de Perez, AbigailNational Director of Planing EducationAvenida Baden PowelEdificio T.V.Santa Tecla

EQUATORIAL GUINEA/GUINEE EQUATORIALE/GUINEA ECUATORIAL

Bivini Mangue, SantiagoGeneral SecretaryMinisterio de EducaciOn y CienciaPatio Gepsa IMalabo 478

Buchanan Garcia, Maria VermidiaAdviser of MinisterMinisterio de Educacion y CienciaPatio Gepsa 1Malabo 478

110 ANNEX 6

Nguema Nlang, AntolinGeneral Director of PlanningMinisterio de Educacion y CienciaPatio Gepsa 1Malabo 478

Obama Nfube, Ricardo MangueMinister of EducationMinisterio de Education y CienciaCarretera LubaMalabo

ETHIOPIA/ETHIOPIE/ETIOPIA

Gebreselassie Doori, TaddesseSpecial Education Section ExpertMinistry of EducationP.O. Box 33306Addis Abeba

F

FINLAND/FINLANDE/FINLANDIA

Kivi, TaruPrincipalOstoskatu 3Lahti 15500

Nurminen, EeroCounsellor of EducationMinistry of EducationP.O. Box 293Helsinki 00171

FRANCE/FRANCIA

Couteret, PatriceTeacherCNEFEI58-60 Avenue des LandesSuresnes 92150

GABON/GABON

Mebale, LeontineInspector of EducationMinistere de rEducation NationaleB.P. 06Libreville

Medza Minko of Koumpta, RoseMinistere de l'Education NationaleB.P. 06 Libreville

Moupila Cassat née Sougou, Lea MandeMinistere de l'Education NationaleB.P. 06 Libreville

Rekoula, AngeleChief Inspector of Primary EducationMinistere de l'Education NationaleB.P. 2299Libreville

GAMBIA/GAMBIE/GAMBIA

Badji, Alhadji A.E.W.F.Minister of Education1, Bedford PlaceBanjul

Bayo, KaliluPermanent SecretaryMinistry of EducationBedford Place BuildingBanjul

GERMANY/ALLEMAGNE/ALEMANIA

Hubner, PeterSuperintendent for SchoolsJohn Locke Strasse 44Berlin D-12305

GHANA

Kwadade, Doris DinaAssistant Director of EducationSpecial Education Division/G.E.S.Box K 451Accra New Town

Kyere, KwabenaDeputy Minister for EducationPermanent delegation to UNESCOI, rue MiollisParis 75015

Ofori-Addo, LawrenceCommunity-Based RehabilitationProgramme (CBR)P.O. Box 230Accra

102

GREECE/GRECE/GRECIA

Porpodas, ConstantinosProfessor of Educational PsychologyUniversity of PatrasDepartment of EducationPatras 26110

GUATEMALA

Ramirez Barillas, Olga VioletaDirectorEdificio el secteo, 4 nivelM.E. 6 avenida 5-66, zona IGuatemala

GUYANA

O'Toole, BrianDirectorCommunity-Based RehabilitationProgramme (CBR)Guyana South AmericaP.O. Box 10847Georgetown

H

HAITI/HAITI

Pierre-Jean, IdalbertCommissionerEmbajada de HaitiGeneral Martinez Campos, 33Madrid 28010

HUNGARY /HONGRIE/HUNGRIA

Csanyi, YvonneProfessorCollege for Special EducationBethlen ter 2Budapest 1071

Zsoldos, MartaPsychologist Special TeacherBarczi CollegeBethlen ter 2Budapest VII

ICELAND/ISLANDE/ISLANDIA

Gunnarsdottir, KolbrunChief of DepartmentMinistry of EducationSolvholsgot 44Reykjavik 150

Marinosson, GretarAssistant professorLjosalandi 25 StakkahlidReykjavik 108

INDIA/INDE

Ahuja, AnupanLecturerIndia National Council for EducationalResearch and Training (NCERT)SriAurobindo MargNew Delhi 11016

Jangira, N.K.ProfessorIndia National Council for EducationalResearch and Training (NCERT)Sri Aurobindo MargNew Delhi 110016

Passi, B.K.Director AVRCDavi A Ya UniversityA B Road BhanwakkuwaIndore 452001

Subba Rao I.V.DirectorMinistry of Human ResourcesDevelopment213 C Wing Shastri BhawanNew Delhi 110001

IRELAND/IRLANDEARLANDA

O'Heigearta, LiamDivisional InspectorDepartment of Education - CorkIrish Life Bdg. 1 A South MallCork

IVORY COAST/COTE D'IVOIRFJCOSTA DE MARFIL

Kipre, PierreMinisterMinistere de l'EducationB.P. V 120Abidjan

Manouan A. A., AnnaSecretary GeneralNational Commission of UNESCO01 B.P. 297Abidjan

Zinsov, Jean VicentAmbassadorEmbajada Costa de MarfilMadrid

ITALY/ITALIE/ITALIA

Cannevaro, AndreasTeacher TrainerDipartimento Cienci & EducazioneUnivcrsita degli studiVia Zamboni 34Bolonia 40126

Comuzzi, NovelaTeacher trainerWale Miramare 23Trieste 34135

De Anna, LuciaProfessorLabour Comparative EducationUniversita di Roma IIIVia Castro Pretorio 20Roma 00128

De Gasperis, AntonioDirectorSection MainstreamingMinistero Pubblica IstrucioneVia Ippolito Nievo 35Roma 00153

Saulle, Maria RitaFull ProfessorUniversita di Roma La SapienciaViale Aeronautica, 61Roma 00144

103


J

JAPAN / JAPAN/ JAPAN

lshihara, KatoshiAssistant professorHigashi Osaka Junior College3-1-1- Nishitutumi Gakuen-ChoHigashiosaka

Shinohar, YoshinoriHead of SectionNational Institute for Special Education5 -1 -I Nobi Yokosuka KanagawaYokosuka 239

Suzuki, AtsushiSenior Curriculum SpecialistMinistry of Education, Science & Culture3-2-2 KasumigasekiChiyada-Ku Tokyo

Suzuki, YokoProfessorWaseda UniversityNishiwasedaTokyo

JORDAN/JORDANIE/JORDANIA

Zakaria, ZuhairConsultantAmman Baccalaureate SectionMinistry of EducationP.O. Box 3343Amman 11181

KUWAIT/KOWEiT/KUWAIT

Abul Hassan, LamiahHead Office Books SectionMinistry of EducationP.O. Box 102Al Sorra

Al Sharaf, AdelProfessorKuwait UniversityP.O. Box16320Kuwait

112 ANNEX 6

Aljassar, SalwaDirector of CurriculumMinistry of EducationP.O. Box 7 .

Safat 13001 H

Altammar, JasemDirector of EducationKuwait UniversityCollege of EducationP.O. Box 39695Kuwait/Wuzha

AI-Saleh, SulaimanDirector of Special EducationMinistry of EducationP.O. Box 6076Hawally 32035

LAO PEOPLE'S DEM. REP./REP. DEM. POPULAIRE LAO/

REP. DEM. POPULAR DE LAOS

Phommabouth, ChandyVice Director, Teacher TrainingMinistere de l'EducationB.P. 67Vientiane

Vixaysakd, BounthoungDirectorMinistere de l'EducationB.P. 67Vientiane

LEBANON/LIBAN/LiBANO

Sayegh Batruni, AssaadEmbajada del LibanoPaseo de la Castellana 178Madrid 28046

LESOTHO

Pholoho, MochekeleAssistant InspectorSpecial EducationMinistry of EducationP.O. Box 1126Maseru 1(X)

LIBYAN ARAB JAMAHIRIYA/JAMAHIRIYA ARABE LYBIENNE/

LIB1A

Abdallah, Salem M.Director of Minister's OfficeMinistry of Education & SciencesInvestigationP.O. Box 1091Tripoli

Al Hodairi, ShoaibDirectorMinistere de l'Education NationaleP.O. Box 1091Tripoli

Bushaala, MustafaSecretary GeneralNational Commission for UNESCOP.O. Box 1091Tripoli

Maatouk, M. MaatoukMinisterMinistry of EducationP.O. Box 1091Tripoli

Shebani, Omar TumiProfessorP.O. Box 1091Tripoli

LITHUANIA/LETTONIE/LITUANIA

Valantinas, AntanasDirectorShool Psychology Service CentreArchitektu 112-44Vilnius 2049

LUXEMBOURG/LUXEMBURGO

Puetz, MichelDeputy DirectorMinistere de l'Education Nationale29. rue AldringenLuxembourg L-2926

Pull, JohnDirectorMinistere de l'Education Nationale39, avenue de la Porte NeuveLuxembourg L-2227

104

MADAGASCAR

Djivadjee, TaibalyElementary Education DivisionMinistere de l'Education NationaleB.P. 267Antananarivo 101

Ravatomanga, JulesDirectorEcole Normale Nationale IIB.P. 668Antananarivo

MALAWI

7<hoko Alumenda, BerioDirector of Deaf EducationMonfort T.T. CollegeP.O. Box 5554Limbe

MALAYSIA/MALAISIE/MALASIA

Ahmad, Hussein DrDirector of Educational PlanningMinistry of EducationBlock J. Pusat BandarKuala Lumpur

Matnor, DaimDeputy Director GeneralMinistry of EducationPusat Bandar DamansaraKuala Lumpur 50604

MALI/MALI

Dicko, spouse Traore, AissataChief of Di.,isionDirection Nationale de l'EducationPrescolaire SpecialeMinistere de l'Education NationaleBamako B.P. 71

Maiga, BonaventureDirection Nationale de l'EducationPrescolaire Sp&ialeMinistere de l'Education NationaleBamako B.P. 71

MALTA/MAL TE

Sammut, PaulineAssistant Head of Schools79, Palm StreetPaola P.L.A. 03

MAURITANIA/MAURITANIE

Ould Baagga, MohamedDirector of Planification & CooperationMinistry of National EducationB. P. 227Nouakchott

Ould Haye, MoctarMinister of National EducationMinistry of National EducationB. P. 227Nouakchott

Ould Tolba, MohamedHead of ServiceMinistry of National EducationB. P. 227Nouakchott

MAURITIUS/MAURICE/MAURICIO

Venkatassamy, Deivant 411 (Devi)Adviser Al NoordMinistry of Education & ScienceJacinthes Avenue 5Quatre Bornes

MEXICO/MEXIQUEIMEXICO

Guajardo Ramos, EliseoGeneral Director of Special EducationLucas Alaman 122 Colonia ObreraMexico, D. F.

Villareal Gonzalez, SalvadorDirector of Special ProjectsLucas Alaman 122 - Colonia ObreraMexico, D. F.-06800

MOROCCO/MAROC/MARRUECOS

El Bourkhissi, MohamedSpecial TrainerMinistere de l'Emploiet des Affaires SocialesP.O. Box 4070Rabat

El Khoutabi, MohamedCoordinatorMinistere de l'Education NationaleB. Oulad Ouyih 272Kenitra

Hddigui, El MostafaChief of DivisionMinistere de l'Education NationaleAnnexe I, Rue MonralitineRabat

Wazzani, TouhamiaChief of SectionMinistere de l'Education NationaleBab RouaRabat

N

NAMIBIA/NAMIBIE/

Mayne, Elize N.Chief School PsychologistMinistry of Education & CultureP.O. Box 5317Windhoek

Wentworth, BuddyDeputy Minister of EducationMinistry of Education & CultureP. Bag 13186Windhoek

NETHERLANDS/PAYS-BAS/PAISES BAJOS

De Wit. TryntjeTeacher TrainerVIMMeester Koolenweg 3Zwolle 8042 G.B.

Meijer C.J.W. CorResearch CoordinatorIntegration Programme in NetherlandsZilvcrschoon 25Zuidhom 9801 LM

1 0 5

PARTICIPANTS/PARTICIPANTES 1 13

Ms Rauws-Biennendijk, DorothyAvenue Hardegarijp 9254 (FR)De Horst IANetherlands

Van Eyck, Anne-MargotPolicy AnalistMinistry of Education & ScienceP.O. Box 25000Zoetermeer 2700 LZ

NICARAGUA

Gurdian de Lacayo, AuroraGeneral Director of EducationMinisterio de EducationApartado Postal 108Managua

Roman Stadthagen, Desiree,Advisor Special EducationMinisterio de EducationApartado Postal 108Managua

NORWAY/NORVEGE/NORUEGA

Dalen, MonicaDean/ProfessorUniversity of OsloGranasen 4Hosle 1347

Dugstad, Bodil SkjaanesLeader National BoardSpecial Pediatric CentreMinistry of EducationResearch & Church AffairsP.O. Box 3027Trondheim 7002 Charlottenlund

Paulsrud, KariState SecretaryMinistry of EducationPostboks 8119 Dep.Oslo 0182

1)

PALESTINE/PALESTINA

Atalla, M. HalaAssistant ProfessorP.O. Box 745Birzeit University West BankRamallah (West Bank)

114 ANNEX 6

PANAMA/PANAMA

Armuelles Hernandez, BolivarDeputy Minister of EducationMinisterio de EducationEdificio PoliPanama 2440 PMA

Griffith Saenz, Silvia ClotildeDirector of Elementary EducationM.E. Edificio Poli / Apart. 2440Avenida Justo Arosamena Y Calle 27Panama

PAPUA NEW GUINEA/PAPOUASIE- NOUVELLE GUINEE/

PAPUA NUEVA GUINEA

Leach, GraemeMember of National SpecialEducation CommiteeCallan Services for Disabled PersonsP.O. Box 542Wewak PNG

Modakewau, PatrickAssistant SecretaryDevelopment/TrainingEducation department WaiganiP.O. Box 446Port Moresby

Tamarua, JenniferCoordinator Special EducationDepartment of EducationP.O. Box 446 Waigani PNGPort Moresby

PARAGUAY

Amarilla Gonzalez, Lidia EdithDirector Special Education DepartmentM.E. Departimento Education EspecialGrupo Hab. Aeropuerto N° 270Asuncion

Romero Caballero, RodolfoDirector GeneralInstitute Nacional de Protection aPersonas excepcionales (INPRO)Yeruti y primeraFernando de la MorafNorte

PERUIPEROU/PERO

Aguilar Medina, Rigoberto AlfredoCoordinator EducationTelevision EducativaDean Valdivia, 503Arequipa

Galvez Escudero, Mari JuliaCoordinator,Special Needs-Child ProjectMinisterio de EducationVan de Velde 160 Pab 2 P1.2 212San Borja Lima-29

Munares Tapia, Marina ElizabethNational Director for Promotion,Participation & DevelopmentVan de Velde 160San Borja Lima

PHILIPPINES/F1LIPINAS

Inciong, Teresita G.Chief of Special Education DivisionDepartment of EducatiCulture&SportsUI. Complex Meralco Avenue PasigMetro Manila 1600

Miguel, MarcelinaDirectorBureau of Elementary EducationMinistry of EducationMetro Manila 16900

PORTUGAL

Bernard da Costa, Ana MariaSpecial Education Research WorkerInstituto de Inovacao EducacionalRua Gago Coutinho, 6Sintra 2710

Do Cev Martins Faria, MariaDirectorInternational Liaisons DepartmentMinisterio da EducacdoAvenida 5 Octubro, 107 6Lisboa 16')0

Paiva Campos, BartoloPresidentInstituto inovacao educational (11E)Tray. Terras de Santana, 15Lisboa 1200

PUERTO RICO/PORTO RICO

Caranza de Leon, NormaSenatorSenado de Puerto RicoApartado Correos 3431 / SenadoSan Juan 00901

ROMANIA/ROUMANIE/RUMANiA

Vrasmas, TraianDiector of International LiaisonsMinistere de l'EnseignementBertholot Street, 30Bucharest

RUSSIAN FEDERATION/FEDERATION DE RUSSIE/FEDERACION DE RUSIA

Kruchinin, VladimirHead of Department PsychologyUnivrsity of Psychology603005 Ultanov Street. INizhny Novgorod

Nazarova, NataljaChief Expert of Special EducationMinistry of EducationChistoprudnij B-Z, 6Moskow

SAUDI ARABIA/ARABIE SAOUDITE/ARABIA SAUDI

A xlullah Al-Muslat, ZaidGe,:eral Secretary of Special EducationMinistry of EducationP.O. Lox 59095Riyadt 11525

SIERRA LEONA/SIERRA LEONE

Kanu, CatherineDeputy Head TealwrSt Joseph School/Department EducationSt Joseph School forHearing & ImpairmentMakeni

Thorpe-Under, ChristinaUnder Secretary of State EducationMinistry of EducationP. Bag 562 New EnglandFreetown

SLOVENIA/SLOVENIEIESLOVENIA

Molan, NivesSenior AdviserMinistry of Education & SportsZupanciceva, 6Ljubljana 61000

SPAIN/ESPAGNE/ESPASIA

Alduan Guerra, MarianoVice CounsellorEducaci6n, Cultura y DeporteCarlos J.R. Hamilton. 14Santa Cruz de Tenerife 38071

Apraiz de Elorza, JavierSpecial Education Resource CentreEducaci6n EspecialDuque de Wellington. 2Vitoria 01011

Arellano Hernandez, SantiagoGeneral Director of EducationDireccion Generalde Educaci6n y CulturaArcadio Larraona, 1Pamplona 31008

Bella Salom. SalvadorChief of EducationConsejeria EducaciOn y Ciencia /Junta de AndaluciaAvenida Republica Argentina. 21-3Sevilla 41011

Benitez Herrera, AntonioTechnical AdviserConsejeria EducaciOn y Ciencia /Junta de AndaluciaBenito Mas y Prat 7 Bajo ASevilla 41005

Camunas, IgnacioGeneral Sec-tetchy of Spanish NationalCommission for UNESCOMinisterio EducaciOn y CienciaP. Juan XXIII, 5Alcala, 34Madrid 28040

Echeita Sarrionandia, GerardoTechnical CoordinatorCentro Nacional de Recursos parala EducaciOn Especial (CNREE)General Oraa 55Madrid 28000

Fernandez Perez, ManuelManagement of Education ProgrammeAvenida Diagonal 682-3 pl.Barcelona 08034

Fernandez Shaw, FelixPermanent Secretary for UNESCOUNESCOI, Rue de MiollisParis 75015 Cedex 15

Garcia Diaz, NicolasTechnical AdviserInstitute de Servicios Sociales(INSERSO)Avenida de Iiustracion S/NMadrid 28029

Garcia Fraile, Maria LuisaTherapeutic Pedagogy TeacherCentro de EducaciOn EspecialReina SofiaAvenida Portugal 101-6 F37008 Salamanca

Gil Garcia, Maria JoseLanguage & Audio TrainerMinisterio EducaciOn y CienciaTransportistas 25 4 ISalamanca 37006Gine y Gine, ClimentInspector, Main InspectionMinisterio EducaciOn y CienciaMallorca, 278Barcelona 08037

Gonzalez Alvarez, Ana MariaChief of ServiceMinisterio EducaciOn y CienciaLos Madrazo 17Madrid 28014

Gonzalez Estremad, Maria Dels AngelsGeneral DirectorDirecciOn Generalede Ordenacion educativaAvenida Diagonal 682Barcelona 08034

Gonzalo Ugarte, Maria LuisaChief Oriental ServiceMinisterio Educaci6n y CienciaLos Madrazo, 15-17, 3Madrid 28071

10


Gortazar Azaola, AnaTechnical CounsellorMinisterio EducaciOn y CienciaAlcala, 34Madrid 28014

Hellin Tarrega, Juan JoseGeneral Director,Education, Youth & SportsConsejeria Educaci6n y CulturaTrinidad. 8Toledo 45002

Heraandez de Los Dolores, Maria AngelesTherapeutic Pedagogy Teacher,Avenida de Borneo 28-30Salamanca

Hernandez Gila, M. LuisaTechnical AdviserMinisterio Educaci6n y CienciaGeneral Oraa, 55Madrid

Hernandez Sanchez, EloyDeputy Director, Special EducationMinisterio Educaci6n y CienciaLos Madrazo, 17Madrid 28014

lbaiiez Pascual, FaustinaRegional Direction of YouthConsejeria EducaciOnCalvo Sotelo 5Oviedo 33007

Ibanez Sandin, CarmenInspectorDireccion Provincial MinisterioEducaci6nGran Via, 55Salamanca

Jimenez Abad, AndresAdviser, General Direction of EducationDireccion General EducacionArcadio M. Larraona 2Pamplona 32008

Jimenez Sanchez, JestisChief of CabinetGabinete Consejeria EducaciOn y culturaPlaza Marfa Agustin, 36Zaragoza 50004

116 ANNEX 6

Leon Lima, JestisGeneral Director of EducationDireccion General PromociOn EducativaLeon y Castillo, 57-6Las Palmas 35003

Lopez Andueza, IsaiasCulture and Tourism CouncellorAvenida Puente Colgante S/NMonasterio del PradoValladolid 47071

Lopez Gonzalez, SantiagoGeneral Director of Education,Avenida Puente Colgante S/NMonasterio del PradoValladolid 47014

Luengo Latorre, Jose AntonioChief of Orientation DepartmentConsejeria EducaciOnComunidad de MadridAlcala, 31Madrid 28013

Marcote Vazquez, Maria GloriaDirector Psychopedagogy TeamJuan Florez 36Xunta de GaliciaLa Coruna 15004

Marcotegui Ros, Jesus JavierDirection General Educacion y CulturaComunidad Autonoma de NavarraAvenida de Carlos III. 2

Implona 31002

Marchesi Ullastres, AlvaroSecretary of StateMinisterio EducaciOn y CienciaLos Madrazo 1528014 Madrid

Martin Garcia, JoseChief of Programme UnitMinisterio Educacion y CienciaGeneral Oraa, 55Salamanca 37001

Martin Martin, Maria del MarTechnical AdviserMinisterio Educacion y CienciaGeneral Oraa, 55Madrid 28006

Martin Ortega, ElenaGeneral DirectorMinisterio EducaciOn y CienciaAlcala, 34Madrid 28014

Masia Gonzalez, PascualGeneral Director of Ordinaryand Educative InnovationConsejeria EducaciOn y CienciaAvenida Campanar. 32Valencia 46015

Mayoral Cortes, VictorinoCounsellor of Education.Consejeria de Educacion y JuventudSanta Julia. 5Merida 06800

Mendia Gallardo, RafaelResponsible, Special Needs EducationDepartamento de EducacionUniversitaria e InvestigacionAndalucia, 1 Entrepl. Tras.Bilbao 48015

Menendez-Pidal y Oliver, Juan AntonioEducation AdviserUNESCO1, Rue MiollisParis 75372 Cedex 15

Miguelez Chana, PedroCouncellor, Education and CultureAyuntamientoPlaza Mayor, 1Salamanca

Ordonez Marcoa, Julio JoseJunta de ExtremaduraConsejeria de Educacion y JuventudSanta Julia, 5Merida 06800

Otero Suarez, Juana MariaChief of Special Education CabinetDirecciOn Administrativa San CaetanoSantiago de Compostela

Ozcariz Rubio, M. AntoniaHead ofPedagogyDepartamento deEducacion Universitaria y InvestigacionDuque de Wellington. 2Vitoria Gasteiz 01011

108

Pampin Vazquez, FernandoProvincial DirectorDireccion ProvincialMinisterio de Educacion y CienciaGran Via, 55Salamanca

Paniagua Valle, GemaTechnical Departamento PedagogyCentro Renovation Pedag6gicoLos LujanesGeneral Ricardos, 177Madrid

Pareja Corzo, JuliaCouncellor of Social AffairsAyuntamiento SalamancaPlaza Mayor, 1Salamanca

Perez Marrero, AntonioSpecial Education TechnicianDireccion General Promotion EducativaLeon y Castillo. 57-65Las Palmas 35003

Rodriguez Andres, Jose MariaGeneral Sec -etary of EducationSecretaria General para la Educaci6nVara del Rey, 3Logrono 26071

Rodriguez Fernandez, JoaquinPsychopedagogy TrainerMinisterio Educaci6n y CienciaAvenida Los Cedros. 53Salamanca

Rodriguez Munoz, Victor ManuelTechnical AdviserMinisterio Educacion y CienciaCamino des Bosque, 71ArroyomolinosMadrid 28939

Rosco Madruga, JuanAdviserConsejeria EducaciOn y JuventudSanta Julia, 5Merida 06800

Ruiz Gonzalez, AuroraGeneral Director ofEducationConsejeria de Educacion y CulturaCaballero de Gracia, 32-4Madrid 28013

Sabate Mur, JosefinaTechnical AdviserMinisterio Educacion y CienciaGeneral ()ma. 55Madrid 28006

Samper Cayuelas, ImmaculadaChief of Section, Special EducationConsejeria de EducaciOn y CienciaAvenida Campanar, 32Valencia 46015

Sanchez Hernandez, JuanAdviserCentro de Educacion EspecialReina SofiaAvenida Carlos i 64-67Salamanca

Sanchez Mellado, CastoGeneral Director of Vocational TrainingConsejeria Educackin y Ciencia/Junta de AndaluciaAvenida Republica Argentina 21-3 PSevilla 4101 1

Sanchez Sanchez, SerafInTechnician, Inspection S,..r.iceDireccion ProvincialMinisterio de Educacion y CienciaGran Via, 5537001 Salamanca

Sanchez Valiente, J. CarlosAyutamientoPlaza Mayor. ISalamanca

Santos Asensi, CarmenTechnical AdviserDireccion Provincial de EducackinGran Via, 55Salamanca 37001

Santos Preciado, AnaTechnical AdviserDireccion Provincial de EducacionGran Via, 41 EntreplantaLogrono 2607 I

Sola I Montserrat, PereDeputy General DirectorSubdireccion Generalde Ordenacion CurricularAvenida Diagonal 682Barcelona 01;034

Sotorrios Fernandez, BenignaTechnical AdviserMinisterio de EducaciOn y CienciaPasaje de la Fundacion, 9Madrid 28028

Valdelomar Sola, IsabelChief Special EducationComunidad Autonoma de NavarraPedro I, 27Pamplona 31007

Velasco Gonzalez, CarmelaDirector, School of LogopedagogyUniversidad Pontificia SalamancaCompaiiia, ISalamanca 37008

Verdugo Alonso, Miguel AngelDirector Master on IntegrationFacultad de PsicologiaAvenida de la Mercedes 109-131Salamanca 37005

Viu Morales, JesusChief of Service, Special EducationMinisterio de Educacion y CienciaLos Madrazo, 15-17- 3Madrid 28071

-_-_-_,--SRI LANKA

Herath, Uku BandaGeneral Director of EducationMinistry of Education & Cultural AffairsIsurupaya sri JaycwardenepuraBattaramula

SWAZILAND/SWAZILANDIA

Dludlu, Elmoth N.Chief InspectorPrimary EducationMinistry of EducationP. 0. Box 39Mbabane

109

PARTICIPANTS / PARTICIPANTES 117

Simelane, Solomon N.Director of EducationMzipofyP. 0. Box 39Mbabane

SWEDEN/SUEDE/SUECIA

Eklindh, KennethHead of DepartmentNational Swedish Agency SpecialEducationP. O. Box 1100Harnosand 87129

Lindqvist, BengtMember of ParliamentSwedish ParliamentStockholm S-10012

Martinson, MonicaSenior Administration OfficerUntbildningsdepartmentStatdsradet Beatrice Ask.Stockholm 1033?

SWiTZERLAND/SUISSE/SU1ZA

Burli, AloisDirectorSecretariat suisse de pedagogic specialeOhergrundtrasse 61Lucema CH-6003

Jonsson, TureSenior Programme OfficerUNDPPalais des NationsGeneva CH-I211

Rosenberg, SonjaHead of Sectionfor Special Needs ResearchMinistere d'Education Canton ZurichHaldenbachstrasse 44Zurich 8090

THAILAND/THAILANDEJ. TAILANDIA

WinaiDirector, Planning DivisionMinistry of EducationDuhitBangkok 103(X)

118 ANNEX 6

_ .

TUNISIArfUNISIEJTUNEZ

Khovini, MohamedDirector, Elementary EducationMinistere de ('Education & SciencesBd. Bab Benat 1030Tilnez

- --UGANDA/OUGANDA

Lutalo-Bosa, Albert JamesPrincipalInstitute of Teacher EducationKyambogo P. 0. Box 1Kampala

Onek, Servi SamAssistant Commissioner fur EducationMinistry of Education & SportsP.O. Box 7063Kampala

UNITED KINGDOM/ROYAUME-UNI/RENO UNIDO

Ainscow, MelTutorInstitute of EducationUniversity Cambridge. Shaftshury RoadCambridge CB2 2BX

Chorley, DianeHead of Special EducationOfsted, Elizabeth HouseYork RoadLondon SEI 7PH

Hegarty, SeamusDirectorNational Foundationfor Educational ResearchThe Mere Uptown ParkBerks Slough SL I 2DQ

Kisanji, JosephInternational Course DirectorUniversity of Manchester/School ofEducationOxford RoadManchester MI3 9PL

Minter, PeterDean Faculty of EducationUniversity of ManchesterSchool of EducationManchester SK8 7SA

Wedell, KlausProfessorDepartment of Child Development &Educational PsychologyUniversity of London,Institute of Education24-27 Woburn SquareLondon WC1H OAA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA/ETATS -UNIS D'AMERIQUE/

ESTADOS UNIDOS DE AMERICA

Hunter, DawnChiefSevere Disabilities BranchUnited States Department of Education330 C ST. S.W.Washington, D.C. 20202

Seelman, KatherineDirector NDRRUnited States Department of Education400 Maryland Avenue. SWWashington. D. C. 20202-2572

Wang. MargaretProfessor & DirectorCentre for Researchin Human DevelopmentTemple University933 Ritter Hall AnnexPhiladelphia 004-00Pensylvania

URUGUAY

Estevez Alonso, FernandoSecretary GeneralMinisterio de EducaciOn y CulturaReconquista 535Montevideo I 1000

V

VENEZUELA

Nunez de Baez, BeatrizDirector, Special EducationMinisterio de EducaciOnEsquina de Salas Piso 12Caracas

-_ --ZAMBIA/ZAMBIE

Kalabula, Darlington MwambaSenior InspectorMinistry of EducationP. 0. Box 50093Lusaka

----------ZIMBABWE

Mukurazhizha, Muranganwa JonathanDeputy SecretaryZimbabwe EducationP. 0. Box CY 121 CausewayHarare 2634

Oderinde, Bongie Joyce SibongileDeputy Chief Education OfficerMinistry of EducationP. O. Box 133 MP (Mount Pleasant)Harare

Annex 7 Organizations/Organisations/Organizaciones

A

ASOCIACION DE PSICOMOTRICISTASESPAROLES

Pascual, CarmenPresidentBayonaMadrid 28028Spain

ASOCIACION ESPAI'01..A PARA

LA EDUCATION ESPECIAL (AEDES)

Ortiz Gonzalez, CarmenDelegateTorres Villarroel. 6-8 6 I

Salamanca 37006Spain

BANGLADES IRISCHTRIHIN FOUNDATION

Mostafa, ShahidaVolunteerBangladesh Irishtihin F.GPO Box 3046Dhakar 1207Bangladesh

CONFEDLRACION NACIONAI.DE SORDOS DF. ESPAFIA (CNSE)

Pinedo Peydro, Felix JesusHonorary ChairmanAlcala, 160 -- I FMadrid 28028Spain

Moreno Rodriguez, AnaDirectorAlcala, 160 -1 FMadrid 28028Spain

Canon Reguera, Luis JesusPresidentAlcala, 160 -I FMadrid 28028Spain

Espinosa, AlmuderiaSign Luzguage InterpreterAlcala, 160 I FMadrid 28028Spain

CONFEDERACION DE LA COORDINADORAESTATAI. DE MINUSVAI.IDA (COCEMFE)

Carrio Gracia, NuriaSocial WorkerGran Via, 562 pral. 2Barcelona 08011Spain

CHINA DISABLED PERSONS' FEDERATION(CDPF)

Pufang, DengChairman44, Beichizi StreetBeijing 100006China

YizhiChief Liaison Officer44, Beichizi StreetBeijing 100006China

Guo, FurongDeputy Director44, Beichizi StreetBeijing 100006China

I)

DANISH INTERNATIONAL.DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (DANIDA)

Mortensen, KnudSpecial AdviserAsiatisk plads 2Copenhaguen DK-1448 KDenmark

F

EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION FORSPECIAL. EDUCATION

Wenz, KlausPresidentReutlinger Strasse, 31Stuttgart 70597Germany

FINISH INTERNATIONALDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (FINNIDA)

Maki, OnervaConsultantUniversity of JyvaskylaJyvaskylaFinland

FEDERACION ESPANOLA DF.

ASOCIACIONES PRO-SUBNORMALES(RAPS)

Gomez Nieto, JustinoPresidentEnrique IV, 2-2 AValladolid 47002Spain

FEDERACION IBERICA DE ASOCIACIONESDE PADRES Y AMIGOS DE Los SORDOS

(FIAPAS)

Arlanzon Frances, Jose LuisMember of FIAPASNunez de Balboa, 3-1 .nt.28001 MadridSpain

INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR PEOPLE

WITH VISUAL IMPAIRMENT (ICEVI)

Brohier, Wiliam G.President37, Jesselton CrescentPenang 10450Malaysia

120 ANNEX 7

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE(ILO)

Reguera, LuisProfessional Rehabilitation Service4, Route des Mori lions OitGeneva 22 CH 1211Switzerland

INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE OF SOCIETIESFOR PERSONS WITH MENTAL HANDICAP

(ILSMH)

Ramon Laca, M. LuisaVice President of FCEEMiembro del ConsejoClaudio Coello, 20Madrid 2800Spain

Wahlstrom, VictorPresident248 Avenue Louise Box 17Brussels B-1050Belgium

Eigner, WalterVice-PresidentShonbrunerstrasse, 179Vienna A -1 120Austria

Parvillers, Alain30 bis, Rue Brisout de BarnevilRouen 76100France

Bolander, LarsShia SwedenP.O. Box 30261Val Ida S-43403Sweden

O_ORGANIZACION DE LOS

ESTADOS AMERICANOS (OEM

Garcia de Lorenzo, Maria EloisaConsultant Departement of EducationBuschental 3347MontevideoUruguay

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMICCO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT

(OECD)

Evans, PeterProject Head OECD2. rue de Conseiller CollignonParis 75016France

ORGANIZACION NACIONALDE CIEGOS ESPANA (ONCE)

Escanero Martinez, IgnacioChief of Education Se,:gonPrado, 24Madrid 28014Spain

Gaston Lopez, ElenaTechnical Education SectionPrado. 24Madrid 28014Spain

112

R

REHABILITATION INTERNATIONAL (RI)

Merceron, AnneDirectorEuropean Communities AssociationSquare Ambiorix, 32BruxellesBelgique

S

SAVE THE CHILDREN FUND

Stoner, JezDirectorRua Cardeal Arcoverde 142Recife 6120Brazil

SWEDEN DEAF ASSOCIATION

Wikstrom, Anne-MarieGranvagen, 9Leksand 793 33Sweden

SWEDISH INTERNATIONAL.

DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (SIDA)

Rosencrantz, KerstinSenior Programme OfficerEducational DivisionStockholm 10525Sweden

Nunes Sorenson, EwaProgramme OfficerStockholm 10525Sweden

U

UNION E1'ROPEENNE (UE)

Soriano de Gracia, VictoriaEducation Expert (Hellos Programme)Avenue Cortenherg, 79Brussels 1040Belgium

Lenarduzzi, DomenicoDirector TFRHRue Joseph II. 37Brussels 1040Belgium

Henningsen, GeorgiaMain AssistantRue Joseph II. 37Brussels 1040Belgium

UNDP

Jonsson, TureSenior Programme OfficerUNDP-IRPDPPalais des NationsCH-I211 Geneva 10Switzerland

UN RELIEF AND WORKS AGENCYFOR PALESTINE.: REFUGEES (UNRWA)

Touq, MuhyieddeenDeputy DirectorEducation DepartmentP.O. Box 484Amman 11942Jordan

w--- ---WORLD BANK

Lynch, JamesEducator1818 High Street N.W. Room 9043Washington, D. C. 20433United States

WORLD FEDERATION OF DEAF

Jokinen. MarkkuExpert Senior Lecturer Sign LanguagesP. 0, Box 57Helsinki (X)401Finland

ORGANIZATIONS/ORGANISATIONS/ORGAN1ZACIONES 121

UNESCO SECRETARIAT

Ordofiez, VictorDirector of Basic EducationRepresentative of the Director-Generalof UNESCO7. Place Fontenoy75352 Paris 07 SPFrance

Ryan, JohnDivision of Basic Education

Saieh, LenaSpecial Education.Division of Basic Education

Fernandez Lauro, SoniaEducation Sector

Erstad, OlaSpecial Education

Montana, ConstanzaU''ESCO Press

Garcia Benavides, Maria VictoriaSpecial Education

113

Oulai DramaneIntematicnI Institute forEducational Planning (IIEP)/UNESCO7. rue Eugene DelacroixParis 75116France

Bekker, MoniqueSpecial EducationUNESCO Subregional Office forEducation in Southern AfricaP. 0. Box 110-43578Kenthworth RoadHarareZimbabve

Oyasu, KiichiUNESCO Principal Regional Officefor Asia & PacificP. 0. Box 967 PrakanangBangkok 10110Thailand

Duk CynthiaAdviser. OREALCUNESCO Oficina Regional de Educationpara Am6rica Latina y CaribeCalle Enrique Delpiano 2058Santiago de ChileChile

Gambardella, AgataConsultor, OREALC

Documents

ED 384 189 EC 304 029 World Conference on Special Needs ... · the Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action. These texts are available separately inArabic, English, French, Spanish