When it comes to cultural diversity the British have always been viewed as being quite tolerant of differences. We generally enjoy and appreciate the many qualities and advantages which come from the sharing and the merging of different ways. I am not talking about the self-conscious 'P.C.' type of diversity for this rarely, if ever, works in the long term. We can all benefit by celebrating dissimilarities, taking the very best of another country or person and adding it to what we already have. The most obvious example of this is the range of cuisine that has now become such an integral and welcome part of British culture. Mixing, diluting and enjoying variety helps to narrow the divide that can, if we let it, come from difference.
I am the mother of a child who is gifted and has Asperger's Syndrome - a child of difference. I am also a research psychologist and, as such, wanted to discover how other parents of children with Aspergers experienced the education system. To this end I spoke with over 200 parents. It is felt that those with physical disabilities are generally well catered for as, in these cases, what is required is easily identified and fixed by modifications to a building. It is not so easy to cater for children with sensory and communication problems. It seems to many parents that when it comes to psychological differences the onus is on the child to adapt; variety is actively discouraged. This seems to be for two reasons. Large institutions can only function if most of its members toe the line. Additionally, current thinking would have us believe that the best and quickest way to equalise us all is to give everyone the same. If we were all born the same then this philosophy would be ethically sound and would create a more equal society. However, wanting nature to be fair and compassionate, does not make it so. The unpalatable fact is that nature is not concerned with equality - not all people are good-looking, highly intelligent, extroverted etc. We all have a different mix of abilities and disabilities - many of our personality traits and individual aptitudes pre-wired and largely fixed. This means that it is perhaps misguided to believe that a single school environment can ever give us all equal opportunities. Take the city academies; on the surface they make sense. Large academies, it is reasoned, enable more children to enjoy better and more extensive facilities but such an environment does not afford all its members equal opportunities. An introvert, for example, may well feel absolutely overwhelmed by the sheer number of students and the resultant 'hustle and bustle' - to such an extent that they cannot function - whereas an extrovert would in all probability thrive on the very things which the introvert experienced as negative.
The ideology of inclusion, all too frequently, has the opposite effect of what is intended. In order for a bigger establishment to run smoothly, more conformity is needed and individual needs become harder to accommodate. Those with Aspergers often can't follow the rules because the rules are at odds with their wiring. If you are unable to conform in these settings, then you become disadvantaged. The best way a society can encourage diversity is to accept individuality and to cater for each person's needs. I am cynical about the ability of any large educational unit to achieve this end. If I ran a small school of say, one hundred students, I could probably accommodate an individual child with Aspergers who needed to learn alone; inclusion could under these circumstances be achieved. But we must not delude ourselves that inclusion equates with a child actually feeling as though they fit in. If we only provide large schools then for many children with Aspergers the only alternative is a special school. For special schools to be truly successful they need to specialise rather than offer a one-size-fits-all solution which does a great disservice to many. My son for example has an IQ of 147 and severe Aspergers; no special school that I know of could even begin to meet his needs. A school that specialised in Aspergers might just stand a chance.
In essence, if society wishes to meet each person's needs, allowing them to reach their full potential, then we need to provide a suitable environment for them to do so. If a child is utterly miserable and therefore disadvantaged by one setting then maybe inclusion is not the answer. If we genuinely wish them to achieve their full potential then we must give them what they need not what we wish them to have.
Ironically, in our desire to be inclusive it can mean that we disadvantage children of difference. The ideological philosophy of inclusion encourages children to be together, irrespective of the cost to an individual. We are in fact disadvantaging the very children we are desirous of helping. I, for example, am introverted by nature and seek out jobs where I do not have to be part of mainstream society. I do not seek out inclusiveness as this actually makes me feel more alien and alienated. My entire education from primary to university was a trial for me because of my introversion.
Even though I experienced mainstream education with its many opportunities to integrate, in my case it did not work. It actually lowered my self-esteem because despite great efforts, I never felt that I belonged. As someone of difference, I was tolerated but not embraced, so I had a very lonely and stressful sixteen years. Beware of politically correct philosophical theories guiding the practices of education. The concept that inclusion is good for everybody and encourages tolerance is, I believe, built on shaky grounds.
The education system we now have does not use, cherish or encourage the acceptance and appreciation of difference. Those with special needs - the truly gifted, children with Aspergers, anxious children, behaviourally challenging children - often experience school as an alien and highly stressful environment. A place which they must endure and which offers them few, if any, opportunities to excel and use their very individual assets. In encouraging conformity schools are giving a very strong and unpalatable message that difference is not to be tolerated. If we fail to encourage and appreciate difference then society will ultimately lose out. Geniuses, by definition, are different and without them most of the great advances that civilisation enjoys - beautiful music, exceptional art, even the television so many of us take for granted, all come from difference. Difference, whether genius or not, tends to challenge the way we view life and that, surely, is a good thing. If our education system rejects differences, then children grow up with a narrow view of normality. When we instil a cultural rejection of the unusual, we ultimately straitjacket creativity and individuality. We ignore difference at our peril.
Anna van der Post
HTML Comment Box is loading comments...