For two decades the inclusive proposal has put at hand a promising model on which we can build psycho-pedagogical advice. But for this it is essential that it be translated into policies and consistent practices.
When deployed as a proposal, it was seen as a promising model, with the capacity to move away from psychopedagogical interventions in which we focus attention on the students’ deficit. This would allow us to move from a model focused on students with special educational needs to a model that emphasizes attention to diversity.
After a decade, the feeling we have is that almost everything is yet to be done. And we ask ourselves what we should do to stop focusing psycho-pedagogical intervention on the deficit, to systematize our work in ordinary classrooms, to help systematize current methodologies adjusted to the needs of students, to collaborate in the planning, application and evaluation of work In the classrooms, in the effective work and with a good atmosphere of the faculty, and to accompany processes of general improvement of centers.
We also ask for effective strategies that allow us to rationalize once and for all the procedures of documents that in practice do not serve, that enable us to simplify insignificant protocols, to leave the role of diagnosing deficits. We wonder even when we will remain faithful to a model that does a disservice to improving the ability to adjust the what, the how and when of the processes of teaching and learning to diversity and in ordinary contexts. A model that we recognize as obsolete, myopic, ungrateful, stressful and perpetuates an anachronistic education. This requires, of course, adequate training that will enable us to intervene in ordinary classrooms, advising on work methodologies, improving teamwork of teachers and accompanying processes of general improvement of centers.
In this sense, the inclusive proposal opens up excellent possibilities to help, from advice, schools and institutes, to their improvement as educational institutions.
If we are honest we cannot reduce inclusion to the inclusion of students with special educational needs, because this reduction is perverse. If we are coherent we cannot leave aside that inclusion, in the end, points to social inclusion: the inclusion of those excluded from the world of social, political and economic welfare. And if we are consistent, too, this inclusive model that we applaud from the outset, we must deploy it in policies that really make it possible, which must also translate into practices, action projects that are applied and applied well.
This means a change of advisory model to help a change in the educational model, and points to a real change of social model, sensitive to inclusion understood in broad terms of educational, economic and social inclusion.
Adviser in the Psychopedagogic Equip d’Assessorament (EAP)