Marieta Ashikyan. Inclusive Education in the context of the differential pedagogy

Abstract

This article examines the dual dimensions of inclusive education in the post-Soviet context: (1) developing an inclusive civil society and (2) addressing the specific needs of children with disabilities. Through analysis of current practices, we identify key challenges including resource limitations, and societal attitudes. The study proposes a hybrid model combining the strengths of traditional correctional education with inclusive approaches, emphasizing phased integration, peer support systems, and teacher training. Findings suggest that successful inclusion requires balancing societal transformation with individualized educational pathways, while investing in modern correctional pedagogy. The article contributes to ongoing discussions about inclusive education implementation in post-Soviet educational systems.

Keywords: inclusive education, special educational needs, correctional pedagogy, hybrid integration model, post-Soviet education system

When examining the challenges of inclusive education in post-Soviet society, it appears productive to distinguish two fundamental dimensions:

1. The interests of developing and nurturing a civil society capable of incorporating people with special needs as an integral part;
2. The interests of people (primarily children) with special needs who often cannot independently meet their needs or defend their rights.

While recognizing the absolute priority of the first dimension - which finds its expression in the concept of "inclusive education" as reforming the existing education system to accommodate special educational needs - we will focus in more detail on the second dimension.

In our view, it is inappropriate to unequivocally link the realization of a special needs child's rights solely to their inclusion in the general education system. An absolute separation between

integrative education (where special schools have accumulated vast experience) and inclusive education (which represents an innovation) is equally unproductive and impractical. What's needed is a flexible combination of different educational approaches and possibilities, along with comprehensive consideration of all interests.

Within this flexible approach, a multi-level expert assessment (such as pedagogical commissions in schools) is necessary to dynamically determine each child's needs and, considering parents' wishes and medical recommendations, develop an individualized education, development, and upbringing plan. Combinations are possible: for example, initial education in special correctional schools (integration), followed by inclusive education at later stages (as the child matures). Reverse cases are also possible: transitioning a child from inclusive forms of education to specialized correctional education at certain stages (for underperforming children or those from disadvantaged backgrounds).

It's important to recognize that inclusive education forms require mutual readiness from both sides of the process: the willingness of the child being included in mainstream education, and the tolerance, goodwill, and acceptance from students and parents in mainstream schools.

Prospects according to the two mentioned dimensions:

• The main work in the general education system should focus on raising a future generation of citizens prepared to include people with special needs in society. Simultaneously, children being included in this system should have carefully developed individual plans to ensure their full development and prevent missed opportunities for compensating for specific learning challenges in mainstream education. Apparently, it's necessary to limit the percentage of children with individual development plans in a class to no more than 15-20%. This undoubtedly requires both personal tutors and class supervisors who would monitor and shape the general atmosphere, promptly addressing psychological issues within the class community.

Special emphasis should be placed on active peer assistance, where classmates should substitute for tutors when and to the extent possible. This represents a natural educational process of mutual aid and solidarity with special needs children. It's crucial that all stakeholders - parents, children, teachers - are convinced that helping with special needs children doesn't contradict (and certainly doesn't harm) the educational process. The complexity lies in the fact that with the current education system focused on metrics, results, scores, and success, implementing inclusive education methodologies won't be simple. Inclusion implies mutual movement toward each other: society toward special needs people to the same extent as vice versa. This requires well-considered activities and incentives for engaging and including special needs children in class life. Otherwise, these risks become not inclusive education for special needs children, but an unnecessary appendage to the school and class - a burdensome addition harmful to both sides.

• Integrative forms of education inherit our existing system of correctional education. It should aim at carefully developing special needs children's ability to live in modern society. Here, new

approaches and developments in correctional pedagogy - which in our case is quite outdated - are most relevant. What's needed are not only new methods of working with children but also new teaching staff. Accordingly, the primary tasks here are expanding the material-technical base and improving staff quality. Necessary measures include seminars, conferences (including distance video conferences, open video lessons, and other school events from different regions of the country), discussions of working methods and challenges at all levels (from directors to teachers, tutors, and specialists), as well as staff exchange programs, internships, and temporary assignments to other educational institutions. On one hand, this prevents burnout and ensures dynamism and psychological rehabilitation; on the other, it builds experience. All these measures will enhance the status of correctional school staff, giving importance and social recognition to their challenges.

We consider certain forms of "mentorship" and "volunteer" friendship with general education schools effective (and actively use them in our work). Joint celebrations, mutual visits, even short-term exchange programs help children from both general and correctional schools overcome fear of each other, learn to live together, grow as citizens of a common community, and take responsibility for one another. This represents the primary educational task not only for schools with inclusive education forms but for the entire education system.

Differential diagnosis and differential pedagogy. For successful integration of children with special needs, it's crucial to precisely identify and determine the nature of their specific challenges: whether the primary difficulties are pedagogical, medical (including physiological), psychological, intellectual, social, or related to adaptation. More accurate tests are needed to identify problem areas hindering socialization, understanding, and material assimilation, as well as variable textbooks designed for different levels of intellectual and social development and for developing different competencies in children. Children with special needs represent a diverse group with non-standard forms of intellectual and consciousness disintegration, uncorrelated delays, and fundamentally insurmountable (physiologically or intellectually-psychologically) defects. It's important to invest effort and financial resources in developing correctional pedagogy and expanding opportunities for correctional schools, including those preparing their students for subsequent transfer to schools with inclusive education forms.

Thus, we must acknowledge both the dual nature of the inclusion process (from society and from families with special needs children) and the multi-stage nature of integration processes: from correctional work in the correctional education system to inclusion, and further to comfortable growth and development of individuals in the general civil sphere.

1. Inform rather than compete with inclusive practices, creating a continuum of
2. Implements phased integration models - Gradual transitions between correctional and inclusive settings, guided by expert assessments, prove more effective than abrupt

3. Invests in systemic support structures - From tutor programs to teacher training, successful inclusion demands comprehensive infrastructure development.

As noted by Alekhina (2014), inclusive education represents "not just a methodological change, but a cultural transformation of the entire educational system." Our findings align with international research (Mitchell, 2015) demonstrating that hybrid models often achieve better outcomes than pure inclusion approaches in transitional educational contexts. Future success will depend on policy flexibility, sustained funding, and most importantly - building genuine acceptance within school communities.

References

1. Alekhina, V. (2014). Principles of Inclusive Education. Moscow: National Research University Press.
2. Mitchell, (2015). What Really Works in Special and Inclusive Education. Routledge.