Inclusion and education

BOX 4.1: 
In Armenia and Croatia, horizontal and vertical 
collaboration improve inclusive education 
governance
Horizontal and vertical collaboration and responsibility sharing 
related to disadvantaged learners are sometimes practiced 
jointly. Armenia established an informal cross-ministerial 
work group in 2019 to coordinate the introduction of universal 
inclusive education. The Ministry of Education, Science, Culture 
and Sport coordinated the activities, but the Ministry of Labour 
and Social Affairs participated, as did regional and municipal 
government representatives. Representatives of non-government 
organizations (NGOs) and experts in the field were also invited 
to take part.
In Croatia, the 2017–20 Action Plan for Integration engages 
representatives from the relevant ministries, central state 
administration offices, the Croatian Employment Service, the 
Government Office for Cooperation with NGOs and civil society 
organizations, and national and international humanitarian 
organizations working with refugees. Local and regional self-
government representatives intensified their engagement and 
involvement only recently, since the launch of a process for 
relocating and resettling third-country asylum seekers and 
refugees to Croatia in line with the quotas the country assumed 
as an EU member state. Their participation also grew as a result of 
the need to develop a national operational plan for a systematic, 
even and sustainable model for distributing this population across 
local communities all over the country.
BOX 4.2: 
The Russian Federation has reorganized its needs 
identification system to make it more inclusive
The Russian Federation has been trying to leave behind a legacy 
of needs identification based on the medical model. First piloted 
in Moscow, with the purpose of assisting children with autistic 
spectrum disorders and their families, the Psychological-Medical 
and Pedagogical Commissions have been established throughout 
the country since 2013 with a broader scope based on a new 
form of interdepartmental cooperation. They are responsible 
for psychological, medical and pedagogical assessment and the 
identification of physical and intellectual development disabilities 
(Russian Federation Ministry of Education and Science, 2013). 
The commissions build on the principle of social partnership. 
Educational psychologists work together with social educators, 
professionals in social rehabilitation and law enforcement agencies. 
They provide joint recommendations on medical and pedagogical 
assistance and the most appropriate education placement. This 
interdisciplinary and interagency cooperation has been an important 
step towards a more inclusive system (Alekhina and Falkovskaya, 
2017). The multisectoral approach has necessitated the addition of 
functional collaborative and mediation skills under the professional 
standards of university programmes for education psychologists. 
The commissions are central to the comprehensive early intervention 
concept and services for children with developmental difficulties 
(Russian Federation Government, 2016a). Building on its success, the 
model is intended to be applied to psychology services in education 
(Russian Federation Government, 2016b).
76
GLOBAL EDUCATION MONITORING REPORT 2021

---

Vertical collaboration is needed to ensure the 
sustainability of inclusive education
As in other parts of the world, a move towards greater 
decentralization as a basis for more effective provision 
of services such as inclusive education has characterized 
the region. In Lithuania, central institutions, municipalities 
and schools are jointly responsible for education quality. 
Identification of learner needs takes place at three levels. 
At the school level, a child welfare commission assesses 
learners with input from parents. At the municipal level, a 
pedagogical-psychological service identifies special needs 
and determines their causes, while an education unit of the 
municipal administration provides assistance to children 
and families residing in the municipality. At the central level, 
the National Agency for Education designs learning aids 
and implements national projects and programmes.
In the Republic of Moldova, various structures have recently 
been created and developed to support inclusion, among 
them psycho-pedagogical assistance services for children 
and young people, resource centres, day centres for children 
and young people with severe disabilities, and community 
centres. The new support services are based on the social 
model of disability, which builds on strengths and focuses on 
the needs of children, young people and their families.
The challenge is to combine such measures with the 
necessary funding and with human resource capacity 
development in municipal and other local authorities. In 
Estonia, county education departments usually have only a 
supervisory role. However, some counties have proactively 
established development plans and encouraged school 
network building. Other counties do not see themselves 
as prepared for this role, as the ministry often takes the 
lead in communicating directly with them on matters of 
school networks.
In Slovakia, an action plan in support of socio-economically 
challenged districts includes education as one of its focus 
areas. The plan aims to create conditions for access to high-
quality education for all learners near where they live so as 
to increase social inclusion and improve learning outcomes. 
In Slovenia, the government has prioritized governance 
and monitoring mechanisms to reinforce cooperation 
and increase stakeholder accountability at the local and 
school levels. One suggested improvement is to give 
school administrations more autonomy in managing 
their budget.
In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the national legal framework 
for inclusive education takes different forms at the 
regional and local levels. This division can lead to lack 
of clarity on procedures for inclusion of learners with 
various needs in mainstream education and result in 
education system fragmentation. In addition, terminology 
differences lead to inconsistent use and understanding 
of the term ‘learners with special needs’, thus hindering 
vertical collaboration.