Sunday, 26 January 2014

‘To be or not to be’





I thought I would share my Sunday lunchtime read –

1 comment:

Andrew said...

Phew, what a story. Thank you so much for drawing this wonderful report to my attention. So many thoughts it generated. Here are a couple that might seem at first sight appear to contradict each other – though I do not think that in fact they do or are in any way paradoxical.

First, the report is a vivid reminder that the primary cell of 'inclusion' has to be the family – and not least the children of the family. How many times does one hear and see vivid, concrete examples of this? What might happen in the school system and 'in the community' are all very well but perhaps attract more than their fair share of the limelight. In contrast, how many times does one find specific, explicit recognition to the vital force in personal development of being just 'one of the kids' at home – and correspondingly how little attention is given to this in the context of professional intervention? One finds it in the reminiscences of so many disabled adults, and in so few textbooks. Ah well, upbringing in any of its aspects does seem a hard nut for so many professionals...

Secondly, I find it interesting that an essential part of this very inclusive narrative was that a major developmental step was associated with a bold intervention (a parental initiative, of course, how else?), formation of a drama group that inclusionist die-hards might castigate as exclusive, even segregationary. Nobody in this report, however, seemed to experience tension between the two themes, on the one hand a total inclusion and on the other an arena for activities that are separate – special one might say. No problem in real life because each has proceeded according to its own time and in its own place, with its own role in the story.

One other thought I had. Oh, wouldn't Vygotskii have liked this!