The first webinar on inclusion was organized for the project partners, and facilitated by the BERT-project experts Hanna Laitinen and Aychesh Nigussie Koski. While ‘inclusion’ is used as a crosscutting approach and concept in the projects, it was important to discuss and clarify those aspects of ‘inclusion’ that were used in the different contexts.
Kaija Peuna-Korpioja (Jamk) held a presentation on inclusion to introduce her perspective to inclusion. She introduced three perspectives broadly used in the academic discussion since 1990s (‘Dyson conceptualization', ‘Index for Inclusion’ and ‘Historical development of inclusion’) – and equally debated as lacking the perspectives of the global South. In smaller groups, the discussion continued. The main discussion points are gathered below:
- ‘Inclusion’ is mainly connected with disability and ‘special educational needs’ while there is a recognition that many societal factors such as gender, language, ethnicity, lack of awareness, and school- and education system -based factors, such as poor quality of education, teachers’ disaffection with the system, huge turn-over of trained staff, etc. produce marginalization, discrimination, and barriers to learning.
- Segregation is still a typical response to education for children with disabilities although some forms of integration are emerging. A big barrier to disability-inclusion is generally the lack of all kinds of resources.
- Pro-inclusion attitudes need continuous strengthening at schools, higher education institutions and work places.
During the second part of the webinar there were introductions to the four HEP projects and their key experiences, insights and lesson learnt. One significant takeaway from the discussions was the potential for collaboration on fostering inclusion. The College of Education and Rwanda Polytechnic, involved in HEP-TED and HEP-BERT, have tentatively proposed conducting a student survey to delve into issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. This initiative could also be expanded to other projects, creating value not only for the participating institutions but also by enabling comparative insights across the region, thus enriching the understanding of inclusion challenges and opportunities.
Additionally, there is enthusiasm for continuing conversations on inclusion as a means of facilitating mutual learning and idea-sharing among partners. This is equally relevant for Finnish institutions, which stand to benefit from engaging in a collaborative dialogue to refine and advance inclusive practices in their respective contexts.