Inclusion and education

particularly for learners with disabilities or from the 
Roma community (Albania, Croatia, Poland, Serbia), 
adapting learning environments and providing additional 
equipment to enable access to mainstream education 
(Estonia, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, the Russian Federation) 
and providing guidance for teachers (Georgia, Kazakhstan, 
Latvia, Lithuania).
Few countries make special reference to learners 
with multiple disabilities, including severe intellectual 
disabilities, who have the most complex support 
needs and may be in institutions or special schools or 
educated at home. Hungary’s 2015–25 National Disability 
Programme is intended to improve support for children 
with severe and multiple disabilities. Children with 
severe disabilities in Montenegro are rarely included 
in mainstream classrooms. Referrals to special school 
or home education are seen as legal exemptions from 
compulsory education. In North Macedonia, some 
students with complex needs attend classes in primary 
schools with a resource centre. In the Republic of Moldova, 
children with disabilities are being deinstitutionalized and 
the funds used to create community and support services 
for children with severe or multiple disabilities and autism. 
Other countries focusing on deinstitutionalization 
include Belarus and Ukraine. As learners with multiple 
disabilities are particularly vulnerable to segregation and 
exclusion, they should be central to any strategy for 
inclusive education.
Inclusive policies need to balance compensation 
with intervention and prevention measures
There are three approaches to inclusive education 
policies (European Agency, 2018). First, those focusing 
on compensation address omissions in the system 
that exclude learners, using measures such as separate 
provision, support to failing schools and second-chance 
programmes. Second, those focusing on intervention 
provide high-quality, flexible support for mainstream 
schools. Third, those focusing on prevention of exclusion 
in education and in the longer term introduce anti-
discrimination legislation that promotes a rights-based 
approach, and avoid policies leading to gaps in provision 
and qualification acquisition.
Instead of providing compensatory support to learners 
who do not benefit from existing education opportunities, 
legislation and policy must enable schools to reorganize 
their provision, teaching approaches and classroom 
environments so as to respond equitably to all learners.
Policies and measures in Bulgaria’s 2013–20 strategy 
on early school leavers fall into all three approaches: 
measures to compensate for the effects of early school 
leaving include programmes on reintegration and 
validation of competences gained through informal 
training; measures related to intervention include 
initiatives to increase parental involvement; and 
preventive measures include attention to school climate 
and relationships. Similarly, Latvia’s 2014–20 Education 
Development Guidelines support both preventive and 
compensatory measures for learners to continue their 
education in general and vocational schools where they 
can finish their studies and obtain a qualification. The 
action plan of the Strategy for Development of Education 
in Serbia establishes a system of early identification of 
learners at risk of leaving education or at high risk of not 
being included in education and envisages a system of 
prevention, intervention and compensation measures in 
case of early dropout.
A clear sign of commitment to inclusive education is 
emphasis on prevention and early intervention measures, 
with compensation measures used in specific instances 
Strategies or action plans for inclusive 
education exist in 21 of the 30 education 
systems reviewed
2 
References to Kosovo shall be understood to be in the context of Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999).
44
GLOBAL EDUCATION MONITORING REPORT 2021

---

and as a last resort. Systems moving away from special 
provision (compensation) to develop resource or support 
centres in mainstream schools are taking an intervention 
approach. Eight countries are developing such centres, 
often building on existing special schools. In Kosovo
3
and 
Turkey, resource or support rooms are designed to 
improve support to learners in mainstream schools.
The gap between policy and practice needs to be 
addressed through stakeholder involvement
Even where laws are enacted and policies announced, 
follow-up actions to achieve inclusion depend on national 
context; political will to include disadvantaged groups; 
action to overcome resistance to new forms of education 
provision; development of positive attitudes; and capacity 
in terms of resourcing, coordination and workforce 
development. Policy planning that lacks a strategic 
approach can result in inconsistency across the system 
and inability to implement plans. In Albania, despite a 
high level of commitment, implementation lags due to 
capacity and resource gaps in curriculum development, 
school organization and teacher education. In Turkey, 
despite a comprehensive legislative framework supporting 
inclusion in education, implementation challenges include 
negative attitudes, deficient infrastructure and teachers’ 
lack of knowledge and skills (Hande Sart et al., 2016).
Inclusive education practice depends on changes in 
culture and in how society views education (De Beco, 
2016). Actions must overcome exclusionary factors 
embedded in systems, structures and practice that lead 
to the marginalization, non-recognition and alienation of 
certain groups in schools (MacRuairc, 2013).
Including the voices of hard-to-reach groups in all 
consultations on laws and policies is essential. Stakeholder 
involvement is crucial to secure ownership and a 
clear view of the link between underlying principles or 
assumptions and long-term aims. Without coherent 
policy and strategic planning that considers cause and 
effect and communicates clear aims and tasks to all 
involved on realistic timescales, the chance of success 
will be significantly reduced. As noted earlier, lack of 
conceptual clarity on inclusive education remains a 
significant obstacle. Belarus and Kosovo are working to 
improve stakeholder involvement. In Mongolia, disability 
and other NGOs and parents’ associations are active in 
promoting rights-based and participatory policy to be 
reflected in decision making and monitoring.
Bringing equity and inclusion principles into education 
policy and practice also requires engaging other sectors, 
such as health, social welfare and child protection, 
not least to ensure a common legislative framework 
(UNESCO, 2017). Cross-sector collaboration at all 
system levels and clear policies, plans and protocols 
are particularly important in the case of poverty. 
Montenegro’s 2019–25 Strategy for Inclusive Education 
is one attempt to achieve such collaboration, intended 
to improve cooperation of relevant public agencies and 
civil society.
Monitoring and evaluation strategies need to have a clear 
view of how success should be judged at national, regional 
and local levels, within education and across other sectors 
that contribute to an inclusive education system. If 
monitoring mechanisms are narrowly constructed it 
can impede development of a more inclusive education 
system. Some countries, including the Republic of 
Moldova and Serbia, have developed or plan to develop 
standards taking a broader view.