Regional Preparatory Conference on Inclusive Education ...

ReportRegionalPreparatoryConferenceon“InclusiveEducation:MajorPolicyIssuesintheAsiaPacificRegion"Bali,29‐31May2008

OrganizedbytheMinistryofNationalEducationofIndonesiainCooperationwithUNESCOandIBE

PREPAREDBY

MohammadReiza,RapporteurforthePlenarySessionsIndonesianNationalCommissionforUNESCO

MajorPolicyIssuesintheAsiaPacificRegion 1

ReportRegionalPreparatoryConferenceon“InclusiveEducation:MajorPolicyIssuesintheAsiaPacificRegion”

IBE/2008/RP/CD/01


Contents

Part1.PreparationDay:Wednesday,28May20081.1.ExpertMeeting 51.2.PreparationBriefing 81.3.NotesontheFacilitationofParallelSession 9

Part2.Day1:Thursday,29May20082.1.PlenarySession1 11 2.1.1.OpeningRemarks 112.2.PlenarySession2 13 2.2.1.KeynoteSpeech 13

2.2.2.ExpertsPresentation 142.3.PlenarySession3 21 2.3.1.Topic1:ChildrenwithDisability 21 2.3.2.Topic2:HIV/AIDSandHealth 232.4.ParallelSession1 24

2.4.1.Topic1:ChildrenwithDisability 25 2.4.2.Topic2:HIV/AIDSandHealth 25

Part3.Day2:Friday,30May20083.1.PlenarySession4 26 3.1.1.Topic3:Minority(Ethnic,Language,Religion) 26

3.1.2.Topic4:MigrantChildren/Refugees/IDP 293.2.ParallelSession2 30 3.2.1.Topic3:Minority(Ethnic,Language,Religion) 30

3.2.1.Topic4:MigrantChildren/Refugees/IDP 303.3.PlenarySession5 30 3.3.1.Topic5:SocialExclusion 30 3.3.2.Topic6:Gender 323.4.ParallelSession3 34

3.4.1.Topic5:SocialExclusion 34 3.4.2.Topic6:Gender 34

3.5.RapporteursMeeting 35

Part4.Day3:Saturday,31May20084.1.PlenarySession6 36 4.1.1.ReportsoftheParallelSession 364.2.PlenarySession7 40

4.2.1.Summary,SuggestionsandRecommendations 40 4.2.2.ClosingRemarks 42

Part5.Annex5.1.Declaration 43


Part1.PreparationDay:Wednesday,28May2008

1.1.ExpertMeetingTheRegionalPreparatoryConferenceon“Inclusiveeducation”MajorPolicyIssuesintheAsiaandPacificRegion,”fromtheexpertmeetingtotheclosingremarksallwereheldinseveralroomsintheareaofSanurParadisePlazaHotel,Bali,Indonesia.Thefirstsessionofthepre‐conferencewastheexpertmeetingthatwasattendedbysomeinternationalexpertsincludingMr.RenatoOperttiandMr.DaoyuWongofIBEOffice Geneva, Ms. Maria Malevri of UNESCO Headquarters Paris, Mr. JohanLindebergofUNESCOOfficeBangkok,Mr.AnwarAlsaidofUNESCOOffice Jakarta,Prof.AriefRachmanandMs.HasnahGasimof IndonesianNationalCommissionforUNESCO and Mr. Bambang Indriyanto of the Indonesian Ministry of NationalEducation, to prepare for the conference in the next three days. Some resourcespeoplefortheconference’splenarysessionswerealsosittingamongthem.After their self‐introduction, Mr. Renato presented the issue regarding inclusiveeducation;theimportanceofsystem,linksandtransitionsalsofewexamplesofthepracticesinsomecountriesatallschoollevels.Thewholeideaoftheconferencewasthatinclusiveeducationcouldworkalthoughpeople start talking about financial aspect. He emphasized that inclusion waspossible and important for the society. The expectation of the conferencewas toidentifykeypolicyissuesandpoliticalconcernsinAsiaPacificcountriesthatcouldbeaddressedandsharedwithothercountriesintheinternationalconference.Mr. Johan ofUNESCOBangkok highlighted the presentation ofMr. Renato,whichwas the balance of the issues; the links between inclusive education and EFA. Hementionedthatone issueoverlappedwithanotherduringthegroupdiscussions intheparallelsessions.Mr.BambangaskedabouttheresultsoftheconferenceiftheywouldbetheinputofthenextICEinGeneva–whatwastheexpectationoftheoutputsofthisconference.HeinformedthatIndonesiaactuallyalreadyhasdeclarationsoninclusiveeducation.Mr.RenatosaidthatalltheoutputdocumentsofthisconferencewouldbetheinputofthenextICE,alsootherdocumentslikerecommendationsanddeclaration,whichshouldsuitthecurrentsituation.SomemoreinputswerealsogivenbyotherexpertsincludingthesuggestionsofMr.Terje to have a look at the agenda to get the purpose of the working groupdiscussions.Ms.Maria said that shewould give contribution to the conference astherepresentativeofUNESCOHeadquarters.Mr.Johansaidthattheexpertshadtogive equal distributions, as Indonesia was overrepresented by its number of the

6 Report:RegionalPreparatoryConferenceonInclusiveEducation

participants.Mr.RenatosuggestedthatIndonesianparticipantsmightjoininoneoffoursub‐themesthatwererelevanttotheICEagenda.Ms.Mariasaidthatwecouldcomebacktothepractical issues;wehadtobringtothefactsofEFAgoals.Wealsorealizedthattherewasatendencyinthecountriestomakeefforts,goingtowardsbiggercommitments.Thegoalswerenotallconsideredandattained,evenindevelopedcountries.SheremindedtherolesofUNESCOinthisconferencetomakeadvocacyissues.She told Mr. Bambang that the big number of Indonesian participants could getimmediatetrainingandtogetadvocacyoftheissue.Comingtotheconcretepoint,she found difficult for this thing and she suggested that we had two layers toaccomplishthatwouldfitthisconferenceandICE.Whatwewantedtohearfromthepeoplewastofindoutwhattheywantedforeducationintheircountries,andwhatinclusionswereconsidered,tobeassociatedwiththeconference.Whatweneededwassynergy,politicalwillandcapacity.Mr. Johan teased out the grouping of the participants and that the issues of sub‐themesmightoverlap.Weshouldtakeintoaccountthenumbersoftheparticipantstogetrelevantresultsoftheconference.Mr.BambangidentifiedthecompositionoftheIndonesianparticipants,whichincludeduniversitystudents,NGOs,policymakersandeducators.Mr. Johan added a point about the composition of the participants and the sub‐themes;suggestedthatthediscussionwastogatherallpolicymakerstotalkaboutpolicyissues.Mr.Renatoaddedsomepointsregardingthekeypolicyissues,andtheopportunitytodiscussthesub‐themesamongtheparticipants.Mr. Daoyu said that there would be natural selection about the grouping, whichpeoplewillchosewhattheywereinterestedtojoinin.Theoriginalideawastohavethreeplenarymeetingsandthreeparallelmeetings, tochange itmeanttomake itmore complicated.Mr. Anwar said that the central issue was about policy; whengoingtoGenevathepolicymakerswouldbethere–howwecouldmakethemostoutofthosetothemostoutofthem.Ms.Aliceaddedapointregardingthegroupingthatwasbasedontheoriginoftheparticipants.Mr. Terje addedapointon languagebarrier, asnot all of Indonesianparticipants understood English. Mr. Bambang said that he was happy thatIndonesianparticipantscould takeparts in thisconference,ashewouldconductafollow‐upworkshopfromthisconference.Prof.Ariefaddedsomepointsonthebalancebetweenthetopicsandthecountriesas well as the number of participants. Regarding the Indonesian participants, wewere here to get the Indonesian government’s interest also what IBE wanted toachieve from the conference then we could talk about the mechanism of thegroupingforthegroupdiscussions.


Mr.Johanremindedthe limitationsofwhatwehadandtofigureoutthe issuesoftranslation and the room numbers; we had to accommodate all interests of theparticipants or parties. Mr. Bambang added that what was important for theIndonesian participants, was to join the conference regardless the languageproblems.Mr.Renatoexplainedfurtheraboutthemechanismofthegroupingwithregardsofthesub‐themes.Mr.Anwaroutlinedtheissueofgeographicand/orthematicbasis.Theparticipantsmostlyagreedtogrouptheparticipantsbasedonthematicconcernsnotgeographically.Ms.Anupamaddedpointsregardingthesub‐themesasshehadstudiedanothersimilar issuescarriedoutby theWorldBank.Prof.Arief remindedtheparticipantsoftheupcomingICEinNovember,thatitwassetsimilarlylikethis,andthisconferencewasthepreparationforit.Mr. Terje responded towhatMs.Mariahad said regarding theexpectationof theconference.Ms.Aliceaddedapointregardingtheimbalanceofthegrouping.Mr. Johanoutlined thebalanceof thegrouping, thenumberof theparticipantsaswellas thesub‐themes.Healsoemphasizedholisticapproachto the issuesandtolookatthefourdimensionsoftheissue.Mr.Renatoaddedapoint regarding thegroupingmechanism,whichwas togrouptheparticipantsintoeightgroups.Mr.Johansaidthatifwehadsmallergroups,thatcouldbebetterfortheresults.Ms.Viviansaidthattherewasnopointforextensionforthefirsttopic:childrenanddisability.Mr.Wangagreedwithher.Mr.ChristophealsoaddedhisperspectiveregardingtheissueraisedbyMs.Vivian.Ms.Maria said that inChina, the issuewashuge,especiallyafter thedisaster,butmoreimportantlythatitwasasocialissue.Mr.Johanurgedthatthegroupdiscussionstohavebroaderperspectivesduringtheparallel sessions. Mr. Simon gave two clarifications: the experts would givepresentations for the plenary sessions and short presentations during the parallelsessions.Mr.Johanrespondedthattherewasonlyonepresentationbyeachexpert,whileduringtheparallelsessions,memberspresentedbestpracticesorcasestudies.Mr. Renato added another point that should be very clear during the parallelsessions.Mr.Simoncontinuedhisclarificationonwhatweretherolesoftheexpertsin these four sub‐themes. Mr. Renato answered that we were aware of thecontinuity;therewasmuchdifficultytobuildseparationoftheissues–whatwasthescope of the conference – and to identify policy‐making regarding inclusiveeducation.Prof.Arief,Mr.AnwarandMr.RenatolefttheroomtoattendthepressconferencerepresentingUNESCOandIBE.


Mr.JohanrespondedtoMr.Simon’sclarifications:whatkindofkeymessagestobemaderegardinghisconcernsonHIV/AIDS.Wewerelookingforparticularpolicythatcouldbeincludedinthesystem.HealsoreferredtoMs.Alice’sconcernsonmotherlanguage.Ms.Alicewondered ifwehad to comeupwithpoints for the four sub‐themesandsuggestedthattheoutcomesshouldbeamixofrecommendationsthatcoveredthefoursub‐themes.Ms.Anupamadded another point regarding that issue.Mr. Terje asked about thecountrypresentationpositionintheoutcomes.Theycontinuedthediscussionofthemechanism of the grouping. Indonesian participants mostly were going to beobservers.Mr.Wangaddedapoint: to group thebignumberof Indonesianparticipants in aseparate big forum to discuss the issues. Ms. Hasnah also added some pointsregardingthemechanismofthegrouping.Mr.Johanraisedanotherpointofthepresentationoftheexperts.Ms.Aliceaskedapoint regarding the case studies. Ms. Vivian asked about the time for thepresentations and the issues raised. Mr. Johan said that experts should giveperspectivesintheirownsub‐region.They argue about the presentation timing.Ms. Vivian added another point aboutchildrenwithdisabilityandthepolicythatwasnotreallyimplementedyet.Mr.Terjeadded a point regarding the contents of the presentations of the experts; forexamplethetopicofHIV/AIDSandhealth.Ms.Hasnahconfirmedagainaboutthegroupingandwouldhelpdecidethegroupingwiththeissueof Indonesianparticipantsnumber.Ms.Aliceraisedanother issueofthebalancetodiscussthekeyconcerns.Mr.JohanrespondedtoMs.Alicethatwehad topayattention to thekey concernsof the issues.Mr. Terje recommendedapersontohelpwiththelanguagebarrier.The discussion continued: the grouping mechanism, the presentation timing, thecontentsdevelopmentof theparallelsessions,casestudypresentationmechanismand the outcomes – recommendations – or any other forms of outcomes of theconference.Mr.Johanwrappedupthediscussionandclosesthemeeting.

1.2.PreparationBriefingProf. Arief Rachman of Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO chaired thepreparation briefing that was attended byMs. Hasnah Gasim,Mr. Suryo andMs.RatnaofIndonesianNationalCommissionforUNESCO;Mr.AnwarAlsaidofUNESCOOffice Jakarta, Mr. Johan Lindeberg and Mr. Sheldon Shaeffer of UNESCO OfficeBangkok,Ms. MariaMalevri of UNESCO Headquarters Paris, Ms. Clementina, Mr.RenatoandMr.DaoyuofIBEGeneva.


Prof.Ariefchairedthebriefingandscannedthroughtheconferenceschedulefromday1to3—thatwassubjecttoadjust.Thediscussionoutlinedtherecentrundownagenda,whatneededtobeadjusted;theagendaoftheconferenceandcoveredthemechanism of the speaker presentations and theQ&A sessions. They determinedthefacilitatorsoftheworkinggroups.Mr.Johanexplainedthemechanismofthepresentations,thechairsofeachplenarysession and themechanismof theworking groups regarding the assistanceof thefacilitatorsaswellastherapporteursofeachworkinggroup.Ms. Hasnah explained about the rapporteur provision by Indonesian NationalCommission forUNESCOduring theplenary sessions, but for theparallel sessions,thegroupswoulddecidetherapporteursofeachworkinggroup.Mr. Renato suggested that there should be equal opportunity for everyone tocontribute to theconference.Hesaid thatweshouldgive theopportunity toLaosand the Philippines, for the chairpersons and the rapporteurs during the parallelsessions.Mr.JohansaidthatMr.Renatoandhecouldhelpmakethedraftfortheresultsofthe conference; it was not necessarily recommendations, it could be the keyconcerns of this conference. Informal discussion took place further: the detailedmechanism of the conference including plenary and parallel sessions. Prof. AriefclosedthepreparationbriefingandadjustedthenewconferencescheduleandwasassistedbyMs.Hasnah.

1.3.NotesontheFacilitationofParallelSessionThe steering committee of UNESCO and IBE assisted by Indonesian NationalCommission for UNESCO formulated the note on the facilitation of the parallelsessionsoftheRegionalPreparatoryConferenceforthe48thSessionofICE,InclusiveEducation:MajorPolicyIssuesintheAsiaandPacificRegionon29–31May2008inBali,Indonesia.The main purpose of the Regional Preparatory Conference was to make policycontributions from Asia and the Pacific to the 48th Session of the InternationalConferenceon Education on inclusive education to be held on 25 – 28November2008inGeneva,Switzerland.Three parallel sessions would be conducted, each in four groups and made byrepresentatives of participating countries, international organizations, NGOs andresourcespersonsinvitedtothisPreparatoryConferenceaswellasUNESCOstaff,todiscussthesixtopicsidentifiedforthispreparatoryconference,twogroupsforonetopicinasession.


Each group in parallel session was facilitated by three persons: one resourcesperson,onenationalrepresentativeandoneUNESCOstaff.The resource person should summarize the presentationmadeduring the plenarysessionon the topic concerned,highlighting thepoints related to the topic, and ifnecessary, adding extra points that should be given more emphasis and/or beclarified.TheUNESCOstaffmadesurethatthegroupdiscussionswereconductedwithanaimto contributing to the themes that would be addressed in the InternationalConferenceonEducationandwithinlimitedtimeslot.National representative should be the main facilitator of each group. One of thenationalrepresentativesamongthetwogroupsonthesametopicwouldservealsoas the rapporteur to a plenary session where discussions on all 6 topics weresummarized.The facilitators should bear in mind that the ICE was a worldwide forum foreducationministers to discussmajor policy issues. Discussions should better helpaddress or raise the concerns of the education ministers on inclusive education,particularlyfromtheperspectiveofAsianandPacificcountries.The6facilitatorsfromthetwogroupsonthesametopicshouldmeetduringlunchor dinner following the respective parallel session to exchange notes, elaborate acommonreportanddesignateanationalrepresentativeasrapporteurtodebriefthefirstplenaryonday3.Participating national representatives were required not to make a formalpresentationofnationalreportoninclusiveeducationintheirrespectivecountries.Instead, they could highlight cases where policies, programmes and practicesworkedwellinpromotinginclusiveeducation.Inorderthatmorepeoplecouldhaveanopportunitytoparticipateandexpresstheiropinionsandconcerns,eachparticipantshouldbesensitiveofthetimetakenwhenspeaking.Thefacilitatorsshouldfindawaytointerrupttheexcessivespeakers.


Part2.Day1:Thursday,29May2008

2.1.PlenarySession1MCwelcomedH.E.Prof.Dr.BambangSudibyo, theMinisterofNationalEducation,honorable guests, resource people, the participants of the conference; gaveintroductorysentencesandopenedthesession.

2.1.1.OpeningRemarksWelcome Address by Prof. Suyanto, Director‐General, Primary and SecondaryEducation,MinistryofNationalEducation,IndonesiaHe greeted the honorable Minister Bambang Sudibyo, Mr. Sheldon Shaeffer, Ms.BhaswatiMukerjee, Prof. Arief Rachman and all the participants. He thanked theparticipants for coming to the conference and mentioned the purpose of theconference,whichtheparticipantscouldformulatepolicyoninclusiveeducation.Topicstobediscussedintheconferencewouldembracethefoursub‐themes.Therewouldbeexpertpresentationsthatwouldfacilitatetheparallelsessions.Hebelievedthat the discussion would be progressive and beneficial for all participatingcountries.ItwasagreathonorforhimtoinvitetheMinisterofNationalEducationtoofficiallyopentheConference.WelcomeRemarksbyMs.ClementinaAcedo,Director,IBE‐UNESCOShe greeted the participants of the conference as well as people from the UNagencies also the distinguished guests. She would like to recognize the efforts ofIndonesianNationalCommission forUNESCOtoorganize theconference.Thiswasvery important because this would be the preparation for the InternationalConferenceonEducationwiththetopicofinclusiveeducationforthefuture.She thanked the committees for the endeavors of this conference and gave briefhistorical backgroundof Indonesia’smembership to IBE. Shewas very grateful forthis conference. The results of this conferencewould be important for the ICE inNovember. Inclusive education was the challenges for education towards theMillenniumDevelopmentGoals(MDGs).She explained further about learningneeds. Thereweremore teaching challengesthus hamper achievements. She thanked everyone for the participations and shehopedtherewouldbeinterestingdiscussionandfruitfulresultsoutofthis.


Opening Address by H.E. Prof. Dr. Bambang Sudibyo, Minister of NationalEducation,IndonesiaHe welcomed the distinguished international and Indonesian guests, participantsand observers. He thanked God for giving the opportunity to summon in theconferenceon inclusiveeducation.Themainobjectivewastoraiseawarenessthateducation should be inclusive in nature regardless of any backgrounds. Indonesiawasluckytohosttheconferenceanditwashisdecision.Hementioned the importanceof EFA, ESDand Lifelong LearningEducation. ThesewerethethreeprinciplesraisedbyUNESCO,whichwerealsoimportant.Thebiggestchallengewas in Indonesia. If UNESCO succeeded to apply those three principles,thatwouldbeeasierforUNESCOtoapplytheminothercountries.Therearemorethan50millionsofstudentsfromprimarytouniversitylevelsinIndonesia.Thisisnoteasy,aswearefragmentedbynaturegivingthegeographicconditionof Indonesiatodelivereducationservicestothepeople.HementionedthatIndonesiawasadoptingnationalpolicyforeducationforexamplethenationaleducation;wehadtodoitbecausenationalexamwastomeasurethecapacityof thestudentsandtocreateunityamongthestudents.OneproblemforIndonesiawastomanagemoreorlessnationalsystem;threewerethreeproblemsto be raised: youth problems of magnitude, diversity management and disparitymanagement. Indonesiawas life laboratory tomanage diversity and disparity.Wefacedbigchallengesforinclusiveeducation.Recognizingthattheproblemwashugeandchallenging,we,atthelegallevel,assuredthatEFAinIndonesiawasinprogress;thatqualityeducationwastherightsofeverycitizen.Anotherpointwasflexibility;inoureducationsystemtherewereformal,non‐formalandinformaleducationtracks.Thosethreewererelatedtotherigidness,standardandregulation.Multi‐exit and multi‐entry systems were used for the national education systemrelated to those three education tracks. It was guaranteed by the legal system.Another strategy was to use technology to deliver education devices. Indonesiastartedto install intranetsystem,socalledIndonesiaEducationNetwork. ICTcouldimprove the delivery and efforts to improve access to education; it could help toimprove quality education. The problemswere complex, thus the national budgetcan’t afford it, and thus ICThadbecome important in Indonesia towards inclusiveeducation. Fourth strategy was the role of teachers; we needed a lot of time ofteacherswhowereexpertsinteachingthedisabled,thosewithspecialneeds.Wealsotaughtstreetchildrenandthosewholivedinremoteand/orisolatedareas.Weneededtodevelopeducationservicesforchildrenwhoseparentswerelivingandworkingoverseas.The fourstrategieswere important: legal system, flexibility, roleofICTandspecializedteachersdevelopment.HebelievedthatIndonesiacouldcopewith theproblemsof inclusiveeducationbyembracing those strategies.Hewouldliketothanktheparticipantsandheofficiallyopenedtheconference.


MC invited some distinguished people of IBE Geneva, UNESCO Bangkok, and theNational Education to assist the Minister to strike the gong to inaugurate theconference. He invited everyone to take silencemoment to pray for the disastervictimsinMyanmarandChina.

2.2.PlenarySession2Prof. Arief Rachman, Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO, chaired theplenary. He opened the session, explained the procedures for the plenary sessionandintroducedthespeakersofthesession.

2.2.1.KeynoteSpeech:ARegionalPerspectiveMr.SheldonShaeffer,Director,UNESCOOfficeBangkokMr. Sheldon explained the excluded and the unreached groups; who were theexcluded. They were learners from remote and rural communities, learners fromreligious,linguisticandethnicminoritiesaswellasindigenouspeoplesandmembersof lower castes, and girls andwomenespecially form rural or ethnicminorities aswellasat‐riskboys.Furthermore,heoutlinedthecharacteristicsoftheexcludedthat included learnerswith disabilities or special needs and street andworking children. He showed thediagram of out‐of school children by region. Another information was thepercentages of children with and without disabilities not attending school. InIndonesia,2003therewas70.8%withdisabilitiesand11.5%withoutdisabilities;thedifference is pretty high of 59.3%. He showed another table of sub‐nationaldisparitiesinaccesstoeducation–nationalprimaryenrollmentratios.In2005therewas122.6regionalmaximumenrollmentratiosinIndonesia.He highlighted the ten components of quality that included healthy, safe andprotective learningenvironments,adequateevaluationofenvironments,processesand outcomes, participatory, school‐based management, respect for andengagementwithlocalcommunitiesandcultures.In school, childrenwere also learning, in regards of a child‐friendly school. It wasabout a child‐seeking school, to actively identify excluded children to get themenrolled in school and included in learning; to promote and help monitor theprocess.Itwasalsoachild‐centeredschool;includingallchildreninlearning.Aboveall,ithadanenvironmentofgoodquality.Itwaseffectivewithchildrentopromotegoodqualityteachingandlearning.Itwasalsohealthyandprotectiveforchildren–to ensure a learning environment of good quality and to provide life‐skills basedhealtheducation.Itwasresponsivetogenderequality;encouragingparticipationofchildren, familiesandcommunities, furthermore, itwas inclusiveofchildren. Itdidnotexclude,discriminateagainst,orstereotypeonthebasisofdifference.


Children preferred to homogenous classes; though it should respect andwelcomediversity. Inclusive education was to support education for all, with a specialemphasis on removing barriers to participation and learning for those excluded:thosewhowereenrolled in schoolbutwereexcluded from learning.UNESCOalsodefinedinclusiveeducationthatembracedtheprocessofaddressingandrespondingtothediversityofneedsofalllearnersthroughincreasingparticipationinlearning.Thepoliciesandpracticesoutlinedthestrategiestoremovebarrierstolearningandparticipationforallchildren,onlythenweachievededucationforall.Implementinginclusiveor child‐friendlyeducationat school levelhas toanalyze the situation, toset objectives and design strategies and to develop an integrated, inter‐sectoralapproachandtoensureparticipationaswellastoassessprogress. Ithadtoclarifythe concept, to raise awareness, to take legislative action, to provide high‐levelpoliticalsupport,tochangepoliciesandtoinformthecurriculum.Special consideration included ECCE, teacher training, and the policy‐maker“education.” National policy must have become fully committed to inclusiveeducation, despite the fact that identifying still‐excluded groups difficult. UNESCOBangkok provided a toolkit to promote inclusive, child‐friendly learningenvironments; to facilitate the process of making school environments moreinclusive,ofbetterqualityandfriendliertochildren.Inclusive education was a process, not only an outcome. Those excluded fromeducation were often simply not seen. If seen, they were often not counted. Ifcounted,theywereoftennotserved.Ifserved,theywereoftenservedbadly.ItwasaconstantprocessofschoolenvironmentstoensurethatEFAwasreallyforall.

2.2.2.ExpertsPresentation1. Inter‐regionalPerspectiveonInclusiveEducation:IssuesandChallenges

Mr.RenatoOpertti,IBE‐UNESCO

Mr. Renato presented regional perspectives and challenges in inclusive education:mainfindingsfromninemeetingsandoutlinedtheareasofdebate.Firstchallengewasspecialeducation,integrationandinclusiveeducation.Itlimitedtowhichspecialeducationalschoolsand institutionsshouldstillbemaintainedandimprovedinco‐existencewithmainstreamschool.Aquestiontoask,“howexpensivewasinclusiveeducation in comparison to existing models of special needs education andintegration?”Inmanyplacesandcountries,thereshouldbeplacementofequality.Toclarifythecharacteristics of inclusive education should adapt the curriculum, not onlyequipmentsandfacilities,totheparticularneedsofthechild.Itneedstoovercomethe integration or inclusion debate towards the generation of inclusive settings indifferenttypesofschools.


Anotherpointwasthedialecticalrelationshipbetweensocialinclusionandinclusiveeducation. Learning conditions and processes could only be developed of theconditionsallowit,itwouldleadtotherelationbetween,ontheonehandsuitablesocietal,communityandfamilyconditionsneededtoachieveanactiveparticipationin the educational process and on the other hand, educational conditions. Theknowledge society wasmore to inclusion.We had gaps in inclusive education, inAsia,AfricaandLatinAmerica.Furthermore,hehighlighted theparticipation in thedesignand implementationofinclusiveeducation. Itwasabout thepowerof thecommunity to removebarriers.Anotherpointwas the roleof inclusiveeducationwithina renovatedcommitmenttowards EFA goals. It was about how to conceptualize the quality education (EFAgoal6)inthelightofassumingtheconceptofinclusiveeducationasaguidingpolicyprinciple.Astrongchildhoodeducationpolicywouldsupport inclusiveeducation.Wehadtohave a coherent and integrated international framework to develop a broadenedconceptofinclusiveeducation.Thiswouldimplyastrongpoliticaldialogue.Thefifthareaofdebatewastopromoteandsafeguardtherighttoanequitable,high‐qualityeducation. Therewere a delicate and complex equilibrium between governments’and parents’ rights and responsibilities; also prejudice towards heterogeneouslearningenvironments.Diversitytooktimetolookforalternatives.Therewerealsoargumentsandpressureinfavorofhomogenousschool.Another point to consider was that if the curriculum mattered for achieving aninclusiveeducationalsetting.Theconceptualization,thestructureandthecontentsof the curriculum were sources of inclusion in or exclusion from the educationsystem.Thecommonperceivedandevidence‐basedproblemsincludingcurriculaareoverloaded, too academic and excessively exam‐oriented and development ofcompetency‐basedapproaches.The last point was to change teachers’ profile and role, and support teachers forprofessionaldevelopment. The commonlyperceivedandevidence‐basedproblemswerestrongteachers’resistancetocopewithschoolandclassroomheterogeneityaswellasthelackofcompetencesandknowledgeonhowtoaddressdiversity.Teachereducation curricula lacked conceptual frameworks and methodological tools toeffectivelyaddressthediversityoflearners’expectationsandneeds.Hefinallygavepointsofschool‐basedsupporttoteachersthatincludedinterdisciplinaryteamwork.Questions&AnswersSessionProf.FasliaskedMr.Renatoifwehadbestpracticeforthisissueinschoollevel.Didwehavecompletionintheregion?Giventhecondition,howcouldweapproachit,whatkindofmodelthatcouldbeusedtochangethemindsetofthesociety?


Prof. Suyanto asked Mr. Sheldon if there was any policy from UNESCO for theproblem solving regarding the access to education for children whose parentsworkedoverseas.Ms.FatimaAzizaskedbothspeakersaboutUNESCO’scontributiontoapplicationofinclusiveeducationinIndonesia.Indonesia asked Mr. Sheldon about the measure of the success of theimplementation;wasthereanybestpracticetoinstitutionalizeteachersininclusiveeducation?Mr.Sheldonsaidthatbestpracticewasdependentontheneeds; forexample,theneed for remote areas. Vietnam was the pioneer for the whole approach. 30%children in the world were in developing countries. If we looked at multilingualeducation, there were a lot of examples in the region.Wewould be hearing thepresentationofbestpracticesfromsomecountrieslater.Fromthepointofviewofsystem,itallowedflexibilitythatchildrenwereeducated.Which one was suitable for the community was dependent on the contents. Thebasicprinciplewasthatallchildrenhadtherightstoeducation.Aboutthechildrenwho lived inanothercountry, theproblemwas the languageused in the receivingcountry.Wewerelookingattheimportantcomponentsthatboostedinclusion.WeweresupportingIndonesianeducationincludinglanguageofinstructionandgenderequality.Mr.Renatosaidthatteachers’educationshouldusegoodmodels,asitprovidedthetendency to cooperate. In termsof the contents, it emphasizedon the curriculumframe.Teachers inprimaryandsecondaryschoolswere included in the trainingofinclusive education, to get the common understanding and framework. Inclusiveeducationwasaprocessbecauseitneededresponse.Mr. Sheldon added that one of the major questions was the pre service‐trainingprogramme; itwasgiventoyoungchildren; itwasalsooutliningtherecognitionofindividualneedsandproblems.Theproblemwasthatthesystemcouldnotdothat.It was not impossible to develop inclusive teaching and learning; arranging someassignmentsinsmallgroups.WorldBankaskedMr.SheldonaboutthelanguagebarriersinIndonesia.Mr. Sheldon said that there were ways to encourage mother tongue literacy toattract and to use them in the classroom; this could be resolved, underlying thewholeissueifthegovernmentencouragedtheuseofminoritylanguages.Prof. Arief invited the participants to write down their questions on papers thatcouldbediscussedduringtheparallelsessionslateron.


2. EnhancingLearningandInclusiveEducation,UNESCOPerspectiveMs.MariaMalevri(ED/BAS)

Ms.Maria presented the new idea tomake a change hoping to support the EFAgoals.Sheraisedaquestion,“whyto focusonenhancing learning?”Shemeasured“qualityasnotonlyaccess,notonlyaccesstoretention,notonlyaccess,retentionandlearning;itwasmore.”Thereweremanyfactorsinqualityincludingoutcomes,literacy, numeracy, other skills, creative and emotional development as well asvaluesandattitudes.SheelaboratedqualitymeasuredinGMR2008,EFAgoal6;itemphasizedonlearningoutcomes – all level (international regional and national) assessments. The focusshould be also on the balance of quality and quantity of teaching force. For thequalitymatter, thereshouldbeprovision foradequateTThireor retainor trainedteachersinregardsoffinancialmatter.Whileenrollmentshad increased in recentyears, thequalityof learning remainsaseriousissue.ShementionedaboutthegoalsoftheELprogrammethathighlightedthe contribution to MDGs goals by linking poverty and school learning. We haddefined three factors that were very important for the learning to take place:individuallearner,in‐schoolfactorsandout‐of‐schoolfactors.The factors that influenced individual learner were nutrition, mental health andsleeparchitecture that affected thedevelopmentof thebrain,whichhadmultipleinterconnected functions; not forget tomention alsomental dysfunctionor illnessimpedes learning. That was for absorbing the learning process. This idea was tochange the curricula and to introduce the new method of teaching. There weresome other factors including emotional factors that had a profound impact onsuccessfullearning.Thesecondpointwas in‐schoolfactors.Educationalsuccesswas inpartdependentupontheeducationalenvironment, learningwasbasedoncomprehension,mothertongueinstructiongavetothechildagreatdealofknowledge;moretomentionwasthattheschoolcurriculumshouldbedesignedtoenlargethechild’svocabularyandto let them use the language creatively; text books and school equipments wereother factors as well as other instructional materials. Other factors were thatteachersshouldbetrainedinmulti‐gradeteaching.The out‐of‐school factors covered the issue of poverty‐poor health‐malnutrition,violenceand learning,schoolgovernanceand learningprocessthatalso influencedthe learning in the school aswell as the parent’s literacy that contributed to thisfactor.The immediate objectives of the EL programme were to share information andmodels. The programme that could be done was to develop guidelines ormethodology to test learning for MS; to develop parameters or standards to beconsidered.Thenextstepwastoorganizeinterregionalmeetingstoidentifycountry


needs in the areasof enhancing learning, to continue the identificationof priorityareasforresearch.Whatwassuggestedbeingdonefor2008‐2009wastoadvocateresearchfindings,showcaseonthegoodpracticesandbuildsouth‐southsynergy?The objective of the conference was to agree on regional priorities to enhancelearning, to identify innovative best practices on enhancing learning, to selectthemestobefurtherdeveloped,toagreeonmethodologyforresearchandtocreatenetworks. There was synthesis of the research studies to find out some pointsincludinginequityarisingoutofexclusion.ThisfindingwillbebroughttoGenevatoadvocate the results thatwerebasedon the factorsdefinedby the researchersofeachcountry.Sheraisedtwoquestionsrelatedtothequalityandthemeasures.Therewerepointstobeconsideredfortheanalysisoftheresearchstudiesincludingthe context, methodology of research, the achievements of the learning and theachievementsmeasures.ShebrieflypresentedacasestudyofELthroughpoliciesinBangladeshonthereformofexamination;alsoanothercasestudy inChinaonthecase of migrant children. Another study was in France on EL for primary schoolchildrenwithsocio‐economicdifficulties,casestudiesinEstonia,IndiaandTanzania.ThereweresomestudiesthatweretakingplacecurrentlyinLatinAmericaandArabStates;thesewouldbepresentedinICE.ShementionedaboutthetemplateofthebestpracticesonELthat involvedmanystakeholders,fundsandthetargetgroups.Shefinallyurgedtoworkonenhancinglearning.3. DisasterRiskReductionEducation

Ms. Christel Rose of the United Nations International Strategy for DisasterReduction(UN/ISDR),AsiaPacific,Bangkok,Thailand

Ms. Christel presented “Disaster Risk Reduction Education as part of InclusiveEducation.”Sheshowedthetrendsofthedisasterreductioninmanygraphs.Therewasincreasedimpactofdisastersduetoclimatechange.Sheemphasizedthispointondisastersasconstantriseandclimatechangefrequency.DisasterRiskReduction(DRR)wasalong‐termdevelopmentactivity,recognizedasintegralpartofSD.Sheshowedtheframeworkofdisasterreductionthatcoveredthecontextandtherisk factors. UN/ISDR had Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) for 2005‐2015. Theexpectedoutcomewasthesubstantivereductioninlossesandlivesandinthesocial,economicandenvironmentalassetsofcommunitiesandnations.Thereweresomepriorities to include; toensure thatdisaster risk reductionwasanational and local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation, toidentify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning, to useknowledge,innovationandeducationtobuildacultureofsafetyandresilienceatalllevels.Toreducetheunderlyingriskfactors,tostrengthendisasterpreparednessforeffectiveresponseatalllevels.


ShegavethefactsoftherealitycheckthathappenedinAsianregion.BasedonNSET,studyfound60%schoolinAsiamadeofweakconstructionmaterialsandlocatedonfragile and low‐lying areas. These tragedies were no longer acceptable especiallywhen education was supposed to be a primary priority of the internationalcommunity through the following global processes. This was even less acceptablebecauseeducationwasabasicfundamentalhumanright.Thelong‐termdisasterriskreductioneducationcompliedtheconceptwithtwo‐foldparallel objectives – encompassed all measures that gave contribution to raiseawareness and knowledge building and community empowerment as well as theprotectionofeducationalassets.DRRwasbyessenceinclusive,groupedtogetherallkeystakeholdersatnationallevel,includinglocalauthorities,NGOsandcommunities– DRR was everybody’s business and inclusive of all concerns and expertise. TheconceptofEFAwouldberealisticonlywhentheprotectionofallschoolchildrenandteacherswouldbefullyensuredthroughdisasterriskreductioneducation.Childrenwereagentsforchange.ShefurtherexplainedtheprocessoftheDRReducationaswellasthecontentofthecurriculum.Thereweretwoways:separateDRRsubjectandmodule.Itwasalsotoinstitutionalizethecontent,thecapacity,community,childrenandthescale‐up.Shegave recommendation for action including to seek political commitment, torecognizeDRReducationasapre‐condition,toinvitetheministriesofEducationtomainstream DRR into education system through DRR education and to allocatenecessary financial, human and technical resources as well as to request theinternationalconferenceoneducation(ICE)toincludetheissueofDRReducationasanessentialtopicofinclusiveeducation.SheshowedtheexistingregionalprocessesandpartnershipsforDRReducationandultimately invited the governments from the Asia Pacific region to support theprogramme through the World Bank’s “One Million Safe Schools,” to seek otherpossible funding sources, to seek the endorsement of ICE’s recommendations onDRREducationandtoseeksupportsfromMinistriesofEducationandkeyactors.4. DisasterRiskReductionInformation

Ms. Sae Kani, Project Manager, Arbeiter Samariter Bund, Yogyakarta,Indonesia

She presented widening access to disaster risk reduction information: disability,rightsandinclusion–anexamplefromYogyakarta,Indonesia.Shegavethefigureofthenumberofdisabledpeople intheworld,which isover650millionspeopleand2/3ofthemareinAsiaandPacific.SheshowedtheBiwakoMillenniumFramework(BMF)for2003–2012aswellasBiwakoPlus5for2007–2012.Furthermore, she highlighted the Bangkok Action Agenda that complied fourrecommendations for childrenwithdisabilities, including thedesignofeducationalstrategies. She showed a picture of an existing programme in Yogyakarta –earthquake preparedness for students with disabilities. The aim was to provide


information on earthquake early warning system. How to teach disasterpreparedness education for deaf studentswas outlined to use sign language, oralmethodandreadingbasedlearning.Thesolutionhighlightedvisualbasedtotalandcommunicationmethod.She showed other pictures on the process of producing earthquake preparednessmaterialswithdeaf students, in the classroomandoutdoors. Theprogrammewasshowing film; teachers had to check the progress towards total communicationmethods.Studentsalsoshowedotherstudentswhatwasrightorwrong–whattodoandwhatnottodowhenearthquakeoccurred.They also conducted earthquake evacuation drill. Only covering special needsschools was not enough; there were still many disabled children who were notaccessing formal education. The reasons were lacks of information ormisinformationregardingspecialneedschildrentoattendspecialneedsschoolsandparents’misjudgmentregardingchildren’sdisabilitiesandphysicalcapacities.Anotherproblemtoconsiderwasthereisnotimeandnotransporttotakechildrentothenearestspecialneedsschools;thepossiblesolutionwastoprovidemorelocalschoolsthatacceptchildrenwithspecialneeds.TheissuetofocuswastheinclusiveschoolsneededmoreteacherswithexperiencesworkingwithspecialneedschildrenalsotheadministrativecomplicationsbetweenprovinceanddistrictgovernmentofIndonesia to make coordination between special needs schools and inclusiveschools. Inclusiveeducationwasnotonlyabout toget children into theclassroombutalsotoprovidequalityeducation.Sheconcludedwith theconcernsofaccess to information,whichcouldpotentiallysavelivesthatwastherightforallanddisabledchildrenhadarighttolearnhowtoprotecttheirownlives.Questions&AnswersSessionIndonesiaaskedMs.SaeaboutthechangesofpolicyinIndonesia;whenwelookedatspecialneedsschools,thiswasopportunityforus.Thiswasakeyissueonhowtomakespecialneedsschoolstobearesearchcenter.HelenKellerInternationalaskedaboutrecommendationforyoungpeopletogetintoteachingprofession.AquestionaddressedtoMs.Maria,aboutpolicyissuesonpilotprojectofinclusiveeducation.Ms.Mariahadnoadviceregardingtheprovision for teacher training inaddressingthemulti‐facetanddiversityissue,whethertheprofessionwasgivenvalues.Today,somecommunitysawitbutslowlywelostthatattitude;itneededtoberevitalized,toimprovethequalityofeducation,thegovernmentsneededtogivebettertrainingfortheteachersaswellasthecapacitydevelopmentfortheminordertoperform


better. Another point was about benchmark; at this level we could not give anybenchmark;thiswouldcomefromyourside.Ifthiswasademand,wecouldseeifitcouldbeincluded.Ms.Christeladdedthatallweneededwaspoliticalcommitmentbecauseitcouldnotbedonewithoutit.Ms. Sae said that it was amatter of centralization or decentralization to find outdifferentsolutions.

2.3.PlenarySession3Mr. Anwar Alsaid, UNESCO Office Jakarta, chaired the session. He opened thesession, briefly explained the agenda of the next plenary session, introduced thespeakersofthesessionandgavethetimetothespeakers.

2.3.1.Topic1:ChildrenwithDisabilityDr.VivianHeung,HongKongMs. Vivian firstly mentioned about her past experiences working with schools indifferentcountriesincludingIndonesiaandsaidthatdoinginclusiveeducationwasachallenge. Thepurposeof thismeetingwas to review the current status includingtheapproachesandcontent,publicpolicies,systemsandtransitionandlearningandteaching.Shewouldliketomakerecommendationsforfuturedevelopment.Regardinginclusiveeducation,sheraisedsomequestionsincludingthelearners,theroleoftheteachers,thepurposeofeducationandtheissueofunderclassofcitizensin the society. There were not somuch concerns on the learning outcomes. Thisgroupofchildrenmighthavenotexperiencedexclusiveeducation,althoughatfirsttheywereexcluded.Wehadtobethankfulbecauseofinclusiveeducation;wecouldbe inference in the inferential values. If these questions were asked in Asiancountries,theanswerswouldbedifferentfromwesterncountries.Furthermore,sheexplainedabouttheconceptthatembracedtheissuesofdisability,impairment and learning difficulty, system of identification, assessment andclassification. In this specific issue,we had to see,what these children needed tolearn. Sheexplained theprevalent thinking inmostAsian regions andasked somequestions to elaborate the issue further including the value of education to thesechildren and if they should be taken care of by socialwelfare agencies aswell astheirparticipationinschool.Anotherpoint that sheconcentratedwas theapproachesused in thisprogramme;special children required special methods, deficient model or medical model,correction and remedial work, changing the child to fit the system, specialcurriculumandschools.Sheasked ifweshouldgive themspecial treatmentorwe


should change the system to fit the children. Other approaches were to outlinespecialneedseducationandinclusiveeducationitself.Therewasadifference in theapproaches touse:wholeschoolapproachorwholecommunityapproach.Nextpointsheexaminedwasthepublicpoliciesissue.Thereweresomepointsthatshehighlightedincludingarangeofpoliciessetuptoprotecttheirrights.Thesepoliciesmighthavenotbeenimplementedinpractice;therewaslackofpoliciesregardingaccesstocurriculum,learningoutcomesandaccountability.TheUKhadinitiatedtheideaof“nochildleftbehind.”The rationaleof inclusiveeducationwas themosteffectiveeducation. It alsoheldthepre‐post1994(SalamancaStatement).Sheexplainedfurtheraboutthesystems,linksandtransitions;itwastogainaccesstoeducation,totransformthedualsystemofeducation:integratingstudentswithSpecialEducationNeeds(SEN)inmainstreamschools–therewerepoliciesregardingdiscrimination.Itupheldfullinclusion.There should be examination on the current statues including the enrollmentfigures, percentageof children in school andpercentageof children in segregatedprovision,whichremainsthesame.Inclusionwasaprocess,itshouldemphasizeonthecapacitybuildingprocess in schools, leadership, additional resources, changingcultureandtheprofessionaldevelopmentforteachers.Sheshowedadiagramoftheindicators for inclusionandschoolself‐evaluation, inHongKong.Thereweresomebarriers in participations, in the classrooms. She mentioned about the teachingpractices that enforced the issue of mixed ability teaching, homogenous orheterogeneousissues,theemphasisonacademicteachingandrespectfordifferentlearningstyles.Somepractices– case studies– inHongKongusedwhole school approaches. Sheexplainedthenewfundingmodeloftheprojectalsothethreedimensionsofserviceprovision;sheshowedthediagramofservicesofeducationalpsychologyservice(NT)sectionandexplainedabouttheresourcesdevelopmentandshowedtheexamplesofpublicationsandresourcesthatwereputinschoolstohelpthechildren.Finally,therewasalsomulti‐disciplinarycollaboration,issuesinteachertraining.Shementionedthatteacherswereagentforchange,changes intheschoolsystemandsupportmodels.Wehadtosupportdisabledchildrentolearndaybyday,ifwedidnotincludethemineverydaylessonhowtheycouldmakeprogress.Questions&AnswersSessionIndonesia asked why policies were important thing? Referring to some issues inseveralcountriesthatwerenotdiscussed.Policieswerenotwidelydisseminatedandtheparticipationofthechildrenwasnotcounted.Indonesiaaskedabouttheissueoflargenumberofteachersintraining;theeffectivewayoftrainingforteachersinIndonesia.


Ms.Viviansaidthatalltheteachersneededtobetrainedbutthenumberwastoobig.However,thiscouldbedonebyschool‐basedtraining,wecouldencouragethemtodoresearchtrainingbythemselves.

2.3.2.Topic2:HIV/AIDSandHealthMr.SimonBaker,ThailandMr.SimonoutlinedhispresentationonHIV/AIDS,butthismusthavebeenseen,asoneofmanydiseasesthataffectedinclusiveeducation.HIV/AIDSwasanobstacletoinclusiveeducation;itthreatenedtoputabreakonreachingtheEFAgoals.HegavetheestimationofpeoplelivingwithHIV/AIDSattheendof2005.InAsia;therewere8.3millionpeoplewerelivingwithHIV/AIDS,1.1millionadultswerenewlyinfected,225thousandchildrenlivingwithHIV,andoverhalfofmilliondiedfromAIDS.HeteasedoutthefocusofHIVandyoungpeople.Youngpeoplelackedofknowledgeand skills to protect themselves, young people especially in urban areas, wereincreasingly sexually active. Many adolescents were having sex younger thansuspected.Heshowedsomegraphsonthenumberofadolescenthavingsexbeforetheir15thbirthday,thefigureofyoungpeopleaged15‐24wholivedwithHIV/AIDSin2001. He shared the figure of HIV prevalence in Thailand and South Africa from1990‐2000.InThailand,thegovernmentwasveryproactiveinthisissuecomparedtothegovernmentofSouthAfrica.HIV stigmawas themain reasonwhy childrenwerebeingdenied their right to aneducation.Throughour failureswemadethesituationworse,stigma ledtohigherinfection rates because it prevented people from getting tested and protectingthemselves.HIVhadchallengedMOEs,teachers,parents,childrenandallofus–andtoooftenwehadfailed.Thepsycho‐emotionalimpactoutlinedtheissueofchildrenwholosttheirfamilyunitand‘safetynet.’Howcouldtheeducationsystemrespondto psycho‐emotional impact; involves the issue of teachers’ understandings andcurriculumaswellasteachingactivities?Thesocial impactofHIV/AIDSonchildrenwouldgivenegativereactions thatwereusually based on moral judgments. The education sector could respond to socialimpact by understanding and being sensitive to affected children’s needs. PovertyoftenhitfamiliesaffectedbyHIV/AIDSleadingtofewerresourcesforeducationandhealthcareforchildren.Stigmawasatwo‐waycrisis.Anotherwaywasscholarshipprogrammes for children in difficult circumstances that should be expanded toincludechildrenaffectedbyHIV/AIDS.Theimplicationtoaccesseducation;materialssocialandpsycho‐emotional impactswerebarrierstoaccess.Therewasaneedforeducationalpolicies,notonlypunitive.TheotherissuewastheimportanceofeducationinthefightagainstHIV.Educationwastheonlyvaccine;therewerenocuresorvaccinesforHIV.Currentlyeducationwastheonlywaytopreventinfection.ThemosteffectiveeducationtoHIV/AIDSwaseducation itself.He showeda diagramof a social vaccine in a ruralUganda–HIV


prevalencebyeducationcategory;howeducationprotectedagainstHIV,becomingliterate and numerate enhanced one’s potential to make discerning use ofinformation.Theimplications,wasthatthemostpowerfuleducationsectorresponsetoHIVwastosendchildrenintoschoolandkeeptheminschoolforasmanyyearsaspossible.Making the education responses more effective, it strengthened the educationresponse to HIVAIDS by enabling the entire school community to live responsiblysafely and productively in aworldwith HIV/AIDS. The curricula should reflect thelearningneeds related toHIV.Thecurriculumresponse toHIV/AIDSshouldensuretheintegrationtoclassroomactivities.WehadtomakeHIVaninherentpartofthenationalcurriculum.HIVpreventiveeducationworked.Research showed that young people well informed about sex and HIV, delayedstartingsexualactivity.HeraisedaquestionifAsianeducations’systemcoulddoallofthese.AfteraquarterofacenturyofHIVandAIDS,mostofourAsianschoolshadnot yet provided HIV and sex education. In conclusion, we had to developappropriate policies, ensured adequate planning and management, made HIV aninherentpartofthenationalcurriculum,focusedonpreventiveeducation,reducedvulnerability,introducedorupgradedlifeskillseducationandpromotedacultureofcompassionandcare.HeultimatelyurgedtheparticipantstoreadamagazinerelatedtoHIV/AIDSthatwasdistributed.Further,wewereallreadydoingit.ManychildreninfectedandaffectedbyHIVwere in school, teachers and studentsmightormighthavenot known thechild’sHIV status, the child and theparentsmight ormight havenot known theirstatus. Ifwecouldprovideeducationtosomanychildren infectedandaffectedbyHIV,whycouldnotwedoitforallsuchchildren?Questions&AnswersSessionIndonesiaaskedaboutthestigmadiscriminationtochildreninfectedandaffectedbyHIV/AIDS.Mr. Simon said that the community did not understand about HIV/AIDS, thus thestigmadiscriminationoccurred.

2.4.ParallelSession1Mr.Johanexplainedaboutthemechanismoftheparallelsessionandthegroupingoftheparticipantsaswellasthevenuesoftheworkinggroups.Heurgedthecountrydelegation to equally group themselves in theworking groups and asked them tobringtheircoffeetotheparallelsessiontosavethetimeconstraint.Participantsweredividedintofourgroupsinfourdifferentrooms.Therapporteurswereselectedfromcountryrepresentativesdecidedbythegroups.


2.4.1.Topic1:ChildrenwithDisabilityThe topic had two groups and each was facilitated byMs. Vivian Heung andMr.Johan Lindeberg, andMr. IanKaplan andMr. RenatoOpertti. Both groupshad37and19participantsrespectivelyincludingthefacilitators.Theyconductedinteractivedialogue,discussionandcasestudypresentationsonchildrenwithdisability.

2.4.2.Topic2:HIV/AIDSandHealthThe topic had two groups and each was facilitated by Mr. Simon Baker and Mr.DaoyuWang, andMr. TerjeWatterdal andMr.AnwarAlsaid. Both groups had15and17participantsrespectivelyincludingthefacilitators.Theyconductedinteractivedialogue,discussionandcasestudypresentationsonHIV/AIDSandhealth.


Part3.Day2:Friday,30May2008

3.1.PlenarySession4Mr.SheldonShaeffer,DirectorofUNESCOBangkokchairedtheplenaryandopenedthesessionbygreetingtheparticipantsandoutlinedthetopicsdiscussedyesterday.Ultimately, we were trying to put these policies in the larger frameworks. Heintroducedthespeakersofthesessionandgavethetimetothem.

3.1.1.Topic3:Minority(Ethnic,Language,Religion)Prof.Dr.H.M.AminAbdullah,Rectorof State IslamicUniversity SunanKalijaga,YogyakartaProf. Amin highlighted his presentation on “Inter‐subjective Religious ApproachContributiontotheDisseminationofInclusiveEducation(SpecialReferencetoEthnicand ReligiousMinority)”. He touched the issues of terrorism of Bali bombing fewyearsback;anditwasimportanttotalkaboutinclusiveeducationandreligionwasincludedhere.Religionwasveryseldomfoundinthepraxisofeducationingeneral.Itwas segregated to thedepartment of education, but generally itwas under thedepartment of education and religious affairs. Itwas the contemporary issue thathadtobedealtwith;otherwiseitwouldgetmoredifficultinthefuture.Itwasineducationwecoulddisseminatethenewvalues;religionandeducationhadtocontribute inthischangingworld.Therewerethreeapproachestoreligionformthepointofviewofeducation:subjective,objectiveandinter‐subjectiveapproach.Inthischangingworld,thechallengewashowtorespondtoit.Inthecommunity,itwas usually found that people were defensive not communicative. We had todescribeotherreligions,notto judgethem.Sometimeswehadtoputourselvesasoutsiders,notmerelyinsiders.Itwasimportanttothepeoplesothattheycouldbemoretolerant.Everyreligionperformedritualsandtheyhadtheirownhistory.Theyknewabouttheirowntraditionbuttheydidnotknowaboutothers’tradition.Furthermore, he explained about the inter‐subjective approach that outlined theunderstanding about other religious faiths and recognizing their right to exist andlive, the belief of common patterns. It also developed sympathy and empathy inorder to achieve perpetual peace and peaceful coexistence also it developed newmindset.Theimplicationtoinclusiveeducationwastherecognitionofothergroupsto exist and live as suggested by inter‐subjective approach, could be employed todisseminate. The core of the approachwas to develop sympathy and empathy toother religions. They omitted this to inclusive education within this domain. Themainquestiontoberaisedwasifschoolteacherscouldmakethesecivilityvaluesininter‐subjective approach in education; it couldn’t be found easilywithout talkingaboutsubjectiveorobjectiveapproachesaboutbeingreligious.


Tomakethishappenedinclassroom,itwasnecessarytochangethemindset,vision,andattitudeofteacherstowardsmoreinclusive,dialogical,partnership,participativeand critical. To his opinion, he had five points to implement this idea: first wasdialoguecenter(forundergraduateandgraduatestudentstodisseminatepluralismandmulti‐pluralism). National university also should have this center; secondwasthecenterfordifabelstudyfordevelopingissuesonpeoplewithspecialneeds;thirdwas the ICRS, the Indonesian Consortium for Religious Studies to conduct inter‐religious studies; the fourthwas center forwoman study thatwas responsible forgender mainstreaming; the fifth was center for language, culture and religion, acenter that was responsible for studying issues on those issues. Later we coulddiscussminorityeducationespeciallyinreligion.Mr.JohnCuster,SILIndonesiaHe presented “Including Ethnolinguistic Communities in Education for All: MajorPolicyIssuesintheAsiaandPacificRegion.”Heaskedtheparticipantstowritedowntheword‘language’intheirownlanguagesonapieceofpaperandcollectthem.HeshowedsomepublicationsrelevanttolanguageandthemapofAsiaEthnolinguisticHeritage,alsoshowedthechartofthenumberoflanguagespokeninCentral,East,SouthandSouth‐EastAsia.Therewere2,265languagesspokeninAsiabuteducationsystemsconcentratedonthe45officiallanguagesfoundintheregion.Heshowedanotherapictureofananalogyofmothertongueforchildren,whichwasneededforprimaryeducationwhilethesecondlanguageisintroduced.Heshoweda figureof testedsecuredfunctional literacyrates inLaobythe languagefamily inthe country; also the estimated percentage of country populationswith access toinitialeducationintheirmothertongue.Heshowedagraphofthelevelofrestrictiveand support of language‐in‐education policies. Mother tongue instruction wasessential instruction and literacy should be extended. He showed the phases of athree‐languageprogramme.The first phase was to build small children fluency and confidence in oral firstlanguage. He mentioned about the benefits and challenges that outlined theimproved self confidence, faster literacy acquisition, better comprehension ofcurriculumcontent, improvedcognitivedevelopment,andmoresuccessinlearningsecond language. The challenges were political will to accommodate diversity,perceived concerns for national unity, increased costs and administrativecomplexity. The most powerful actor in predicting the educational success ofminority learners was the amount of formal schooling they received in their fistlanguage.He elaborated the components of strongmultilingual education programmes thatincludedsupportivelanguageandeducationalpolicies.Hegaveissuesfordiscussion:how inclusive were your national policies regarding ethnic or local languages andeducation?Whatdifferencewastherebetweenpolicyandpracticeintheinclusionofethnolinguisticgroupsinyourcountry?


Mr.Sheldonwrappedupthepresentationsandgaveanalogythattherewerealotofchildren in the region that did not understandwhat the teacherswere saying.Hesaidmothertonguewasveryimportantforchildren.Questions&AnswersSessionIndonesiaaskedaboutthechallengeofbilingualeducationtobepresentedinschoolasIndonesiahadalotofethniclanguages.Whatisthestrategythatcanbeusedforthe teachers? Another question was for Prof. Amin about consideration of otherreligions tobe thebest religionamongothers,whatwas theactivityof thecentertowardsthereligiousdiversity.Timor Leste askedMr. Johnabout studentswhousedmother tonguewould learnfasterandhowthefindingwasappliedinthecountriesthathadalotofdialects.Prof. Amin said that it was the most difficult situation to be religious. In everyreligion, they had strong belief that therewas something non‐falsifiable alternaterealities;thiswasthesourceofdogma,ifwecouldnotcommunicatethistoothers,andthiswouldbethesourceof fanaticism.The issueof inclusiveeducationwouldconfront this.We had to find solution on how to give space for others. Inclusiveeducationwouldgiveroomforothers.Thedialoguecenterwasforrisingawarenessfor the students that therewere a lot of people that were different, diverse andplural.Heurgedtobeproficientforourreligionandworldcitizenship.Mr.Johnsaiditwasimportantthatteacherswereawareoftheirmothertongueandtheywerepresentedintheclassroom.Asiancountriesthathadalotofdialectshadchallengesinthesociety.HegaveagoodexampleofPapuaNewGuinea.Therewerea lot of success stories in Indonesia through local curricula that outlined locallanguages.Therewasaprocessthatwecouldgothroughtodevelop.Ms.AliceofSILIndonesiaaddedthatwehadcomplexsituationinthiscondition;wehadtobeflexible in thenationalcontext.Teacherscouldnotteach languagewhatthey could not speak, thuswehad tohire bilingual teachers.Anotherwaywas torecruit two teachers in one class, or volunteeror the locals as teachers’ assistant.Another issue was the materials. In Indonesia, the government sent graduatestudentsbacktotheirhometowntoteachliteracy.Ms. Bhaswati of India shared a religious education and thewhole issue of ethno‐languages and the policies. India was similar to Indonesia that had hundreds oflanguages and thousands of dialects. We used English and Hindi; we had three‐language formula. The India’s experience proved that it was important to learnmother tongueand itmadeuseasier to learn third language. Ina secular countrylike India, we had to recognize the atheists, not only the religious citizens. ShesuggestedthattheflowoftheconferenceshouldlinktheICE’smission.Onecountryand anothermight not be comparable, for example, therewasMadrasah in IndiaandPakistan.


3.1.2.Topic4:MigrantChildren/Refugees/IDPMr.RobertAshe,UNHCRMr.Robertstartedhisexplanationonthemigrantchildrenandrefugees.UNHCRhadbeendealingwith emergency situation. Refugeeswere spreadout but theydidn’tgetpropereducation.Theconditionsforcedthefamilieswithdrewthechildrenfromschool.Refugeesparentsweresometimesreluctanttohavetheirchildreneducatedinnationallanguages,seeingthattheywereonlytemporarilystayinginthecountry.TherewerealsorefugeechildreninIndonesia.HementionedsomecurrentsituationinsomecountrieslikeIndonesia,MalaysiaandThailand.The right to educationwas the fundamental right of every child. The provision ofeducationwasanobligationofthehoststatesandallorganizationstoprovideforallchild including refugees. In conclusion, there were two issues: legal and practicalthatwe had to consider. Therewere some challenges like financial concerns thatmustbeovercomeifeducationwantedtoincludechildreninmarginalizedgroups.Questions&AnswersSessionPakistan asked about the resources, as the country concernsmore onMDGs andother things. The countrywanted to talk about all sectors of education andwhatinclusive education should include; thosewith HIV/AIDS or thosewith disabilities.Weneeded to focusmore the specific issues.Referring to the commentsof India,Englishhadbecomecompulsoryas a languagenotmediumof instruction; a lotofprivateschoolswereusingEnglish.India followed the comments of Pakistan. It was impossible to teach hundreds oflanguages in the globalization.Wepreparedour children to get into globalization.India had similar issue as Pakistan. About migrant children, there were a lot ofmigrants to India from theneighboring country. Itwas also the issueof economicmigration.Mr.Robert said that children shouldnotbediscriminated. If theywere inanothercountrytheystillshouldgetpropereducation.Mr. Sheldon wrapped up the session and outlined that the discussion wouldfacilitatedeepdeliberationofwhatcouldbelinkedtotheICE.Hementionedaboutthe achievements of MDGs and EFA to deal with the conceptual framework andaboutevidence‐basedpolicyalsotheissueofmothertongue.Hesaidthatwehadtoseethepracticalityoftheuseofmothertongue.


3.2.ParallelSession2Participants are divided into four groups in four different rooms. The rapporteurswouldbeselectedfromcountryrepresentativesdecidedbythegroups.

3.2.1.Topic3:Minority(Ethnic,Language,Religion)The topic had two groups and each was facilitated by Prof. Amin Abdullah, Mr.Renato Opertti and Mr. John Custer, and Ms. Alice Eastwood and Mr. JohanLindeberg. Both groups had 19 and 19 participants respectively including thefacilitators. They conducted interactive dialogue, discussion and case studypresentationsonminority(ethnic,language,religion).

3.2.1.Topic4:MigrantChildren/Refugees/IDPThetopichadtwogroupsandeachwasfacilitatedbyMr.RobertAshe&Mr.DaoyuWang, and Mr. Bartholomeus Vrolijk. Due to the small number of the groupmembers,thetwogroupsmergedwith30participantsincludingthefacilitators.Thegroup conducted interactive dialogue, discussion and case study presentations onmigrantchildren/refugees/IDP.

3.3.PlenarySession5Ms. Bhaswati Mukherjee, Ambassador/Permanent Delegate of India to UNESCO,Chairedtheplenary,thankedfortheopportunityandgavebriefintroductionofthetopics of the session and introduces the speakers; andexplains themechanismofthe session including thequestionandanswer session. She thengives the time tothetwospeakers.

3.3.1.Topic5:SocialExclusionDr.AnupamAhuja,NationalCouncilofEducationalResearchandTraining(NCERT),NewDelhi,India,accompaniedbyMr.BudiofIndonesiaMs. Anupam delivered a presentation on “Social Exclusion: Some CriticalReflections.”ShebrieflyintroducedacurrentsituationofaschoolbuildinginLaos.Afemale teacher that shemet there said, “all for the children, for all the children.”Whatwasreallytherewasawill.Sheexplainedaboutthejourneytowardsinclusion.She referred to Indonesianmotto of “Bhineka Tunggal Ika” (Unity inDiversity) forthatjourneydiagram.Thepurposeof schoolingoutlinedsomepoints including tobesafeandsecure, todevelop a sense of self towards the shared intentions in formal and informaleducations.Anotherpointwasexclusionfromschoolbecausetheschoolwastoofar,notconsideredimportantforsomee.g.girls,amiserableplacewhereyoufailedand


got into trouble and the real cost of free educationwas toomuch. However, thequestions to askwere: did children choose to live away from school?Did familieschoosetobepoor?Didchildrenchoosetofail?Anddidchildren liketobesociallyexcluded?Sheshowedapictureaflockofsheep’sandaskedtheaudienceaboutwhattheysawfromthepicture.Sheaskedaquestionfromthatpicture,“didIhavetherighttobedifferent?” Social exclusion had often a social, lingual and financial base. She saidaboutchallengingstrugglethathighlightedvarietyofnational,regional,culturalandsocialcontextsexitthatledtonosinglesolution.Somepointsaskedaboutwhatourvalues and beliefs were about social exclusion; that outlined education learning,support in learning, difference, discrimination, responsibility for child learning andteachers. She explained about the understanding social exclusion and used someterminologies and labels about children with special needs; were we not stillconsideringthechildren“special”?The elaboration furthered on social exclusion and poverty and the term in socialexclusion. She explained about access to education,which touched the point thatsocieties lived foramillenniumbyvaluesystembasedondivisionhierarchyundercaste feudal society economic status, gender relations and cultural diversity;historicalexclusionfromformaleducation,educationaldisparities‐quantity,quality,teachinglearningprocessandlearningoutcomes;nomatterabouttheage,gender,placeof residence,etc.Socialexclusionwastheright toqualityeducationtowardssome critical reflection. She left some questions to the participants, “how couldschool increase achievement of disadvantaged learners?” “How did we look atchildrenatriskaschildrenwithpromise?”Next point was about social exclusion towards curriculum including the context,teaching‐learningmethods,examsandresources‐books.Sheshowedpicturesaboutagirlwhofailedanexam,yetshewas learningandworkingatthesametime.SheelaboratedaboutgenderbiasintheAsiancontextthatcontributedtoexclusion;sheshowed some examples in some countries about gender equality, which requiredaccesstoequalopportunitiestoattendschool.She requested a silencemoment to read some quotes regarding social exclusion,somevoicesfromchildrenandteachers.SheshowedpicturesofadaycarecenterinTajikistan.“Wedon’teatathome.WeeatattheDayCareCenter.”Shementionedabout the focus onNPAs, positive intents towardsCFS in someNPAs including SriLanka.SheexplainedabouttheemergingissueofNPAsincludingtheIEandCFSasnotarecurringtheme,thefocusprimarilyonthepoorormarginalizedratherthan‘all.’ She mentioned about inclusion that was not a utopian dream, which led toinclusivesocietiesovernight,thecurrenteffortjustmarkedthebeginningofjourneyand the challengewas towork collectively and find contextual options to addresssocialexclusionandmakeIEareality.


Mr.BudiHermawanMr. Budi introduced the traditional Balinese puppet show and invited the puppetplayer; Mr. Wayan Sudjana who would perform the puppet titled “SumantriSukarsana”aboutsocial inclusion issue.Mr.Wayanwasassistedbytwotraditionalmusic players while performing his puppets on the stage on social inclusion inrelationstoinclusiveeducation.

3.3.2.Topic6:GenderMs.NinaSardjunani,representedbyMs.SuhartiMs.Suhartipresented“InclusionofGenderResponsivenessinEducation:IndonesianExperiences.”FirstlyshementionedthatIndonesiahadimportantlegalbasisrelatedto gender: Law No 20/2003 about National Education system and PresidentialDecree No. 9/2000 about Gender Mainstreaming in National Development. Shementionedabouttheprogressingenderequalitythatcouldbemeasuredintermsofaccess,processandoutcomes(fromthepointofviewofeducation).Shementionedaboutthecurrentconditiontableofthemeanyearsofschoolingofpopulationage15yearsandaboveinurbanandruralareas.Sheshowedthetableoftheliteracyrateamongpopulationbyagegroupsformaleand female in urban and rural areas for the year 2006 andmentioned about thedisparity within the region – province. She showed the chart of the literacy rateamongpopulationandtheratiooffemaletomalenetenrollmentrate(NER)bylevelofeducationfortheyear1992‐2006,basedontheMDGIndonesiaReport2007.Sheshowed another table on the reasons for not continuing education amongout‐of‐schoolchildrenage7‐18yearsold in2006.Thereasonswerethattheydidn’thavemoney,theydidn’t liketogotoschool, theyhadtowork,etc.Shefurthershowedanother tableon thescoreofnationalexaminationat juniorandsenior secondaryschoolin2004onthesubjectsofIndonesianandEnglishandMathematics.Therewas tendency that girls chose subjects thatwere lesshard like tourism, sheshowed theproportionof girls andboys in vocational schools. The key issues andchallengeswere that national aggregate data hid disparities at sub‐national levelsand inversed gender gap phenomenon in some areas. She also talked about theprocess of gender equality in education. The trend showed that the teachers’knowledgeandawarenessofgenderresponsivenessandgenderresponsiveteachingmethodswasinadequate.Furthermore,another findingwas thatmostmethodsandother learningmaterialsimplicitly communicated differentiated gender roles. She showed pictures onexample of gender stereotype in textbooks. Another point was about thegovernanceineducation.Shethenshowedachartontheproportionofteachersinschoolsaswellastheproportionofheadmastersbysex–maleandfemalefortheyear2002.


She elaborated the challenges and key issues that outlined the data on qualityindicator were limited, concept of responsive gender school was not yetimplemented and unequal proportion of male and female in decision making atschool level. She explained about the outcomes of gender equality; laborparticipationofmalewashigherthanfemaleandthelevelofunemploymentaswellastheproportionofmaleandfemaleinparliament.She gave some policy recommendation on gender in education: to institutionalizegendermainstreaming in education system as integral part of inclusive educationstrategy, to ensure allocation of resources for promoting gender equality ineducation,toensuregenderresponsiveteachingandlearningmaterialsandprocessand to ensure the accessibility of education services and facilities, especially ofunreachedandat‐riskchildren(especiallygirls).Questions&AnswersSessionIndonesia askedMs. Suharti about thepossibility of quota in Indonesia on gendermainstreamingissues,sothatwomencouldtakemoreintegralroles.Ms.BhaswatigaveanexampleofthesimilarcaseinIndia,whichwasverydifficulttogivemorequotasforIndianwomentobeintheparliament.Indonesia asked about the cross cutting issue on gender equalitywith other issuelikeenvironment.Ms.Suhartisaidthattherewasnoregulationinthecivilserviceforthefemalestaffs.Inherofficetherewas‘fitandproper’tests,forexampleifthescoresbetweenmaleandfemalewerethesame,theMinisterwouldchoosethefemalecandidate.IntheMinistry of National Education, there was a regulation to give more attention tofemale teachers to be the headmasters of the school, still there was difficultyregarding the quality between male and female candidates. There was a crosscuttingissuesongenderequalityandotherissueinourofficetoo.Mr. Renato asked about social inclusion issue if it was an active foundation ineducation. When we were talking about social inclusion or exclusion; was it alsoaboutsocialdevelopment in thesociety towardsknowledgesociety?Howwas thediscussionofsocialinclusionintheregion?Prof. Arief asked about the social inclusion issue. The issue of gender equitysometimeswent to the cultural principle issues. In one area in Indonesia,womenwerehappier tostayathometododomesticactivities. Itwas the issueofgenderequity and social development;howwerewegoing toexplain aboutwhat genderequitywas?Ms. Bhaswati said that to answer that questionwe neededwomen teacherswhohadbeenempowered–fromtheirperspective.


Ms.Anujasaidthatsocialexclusionwasleadingtosocialinclusionanditcouldn’tbelimitedonlytoeducationissue; itwouldcontinuetoworkingenvironment.Noonehadanycontrolofus.Wewereherealsotalkingaboutsystemchange.Thishadtobeaddressedeverywhere.Wemighthavegoodsocial infrastructure inschool,buttheywouldbestillexcluded.Ms. Suharti said that gender equity did notmeanwomenhad towork out of thehouse;thereshouldbeanagreementbetweenhusbandandwife.Whatmatteredalotwasthatmaleandfemalehadequaleducation.Basedonthedata,theincreaseofeducationwoulddecreasetheleveloffertility.Ms.BhaswatisupplementedheranswersaboutthestereotypeofwomeninIndia;ithadbeenbannedbecausewomenhadtherightstochoosewhattheywishedtodoandtobe.Shebelievedthatstereotypeplayedimportantroleininclusiveeducation,andthiswaswhatweneededtobringtotheconference.AnnouncementsMr.Renatoannouncedthemechanismofthenextworkinggroupsandremindedtherapporteursofeachworkinggrouptoprepareareportofthediscussions.Prof.AriefannouncedthesubmissionoftheformofbestpracticestoMs.MariaofUNESCOHeadquartersParis.

3.4.ParallelSession3Participantsaredivided into fourgroups in fourdifferent rooms in thehotel area.TheRapporteurswillbeselectedfromcountryrepresentativesdecidedbythegroup.

3.4.1.Topic5:SocialExclusionThe topic had two groups and each was facilitated by Ms. Anupam Ahuja, Mr.Renato Opertti and Mr. Daoyu Wang, and Mr. Sheldon Shaeffer and Mr. AnwarAlsaid.Duetothesmallnumberofthegroupmembers,thetwogroupsmergedwith28participants includingthefacilitators.Thegroupconducted interactivedialogue,discussionandcasestudypresentationsonsocialexclusion.

3.4.2.Topic6:GenderThetopichadtwogroupsandeachwasfacilitatedbyMs.Suharti,andMs.YangxiaLeeandMr.JohanLindeberg.Duetothesmallnumberofthegroupmembers,thetwo groups merged with 14 participants including the facilitators. The groupconductedinteractivedialogue,discussionandcasestudypresentationsongender.


3.5.RapporteursMeetingMr.Renatoopened the sessionandexplained theproceduresof themeeting.Mr.Johanaddedapointonthecoordinationoftherapporteursoftheworkinggroupsforthepresentationsessioninthelastplenarysessionthenextday.Therewouldbesix rapporteurs for the six respective topics. The rapporteurs then groupedthemselves into six topic groupsandprepared thepresentations for the resultsofthegroupdiscussions.Topic1:ChildrenwithDisabilityRapporteur, Ms. Widya Prasetyati, Indonesia was assisted by the facilitator, Dr.VivianHeung to formulate the reportof thegroupdiscussion for the final plenarysession.Topic2:HIV/AIDSandHealthRapporteur,Mr.BudiHermawan,AUSAID,Indonesiawasassistedbythefacilitator,Mr. TerjeWatterdal to formulate the report of the group discussion for the finalplenarysession.Topic3:Minority(ethnic,language,religion)Rapporteur, Ms. Jennifer Tamarua, Papua New Guinea was assisted by thefacilitators,Mr.JohnCusterandMs.AliceEastwoodtoformulatethereportofthegroupdiscussionforthefinalplenarysession.Topic4:MigrantChildren/Refugees/IDPRapporteur, Ms. Sae Kani, ABS, Indonesia was assisted by the facilitators toformulatethereportofthegroupdiscussionforthefinalplenarysession.Topic5:SocialExclusionRapporteur,Dr. Leela,Nepalwas assistedby the facilitator,Ms.AnupamAhuja toformulatethereportofthegroupdiscussionforthefinalplenarysession.Topic6:GenderRapporteur,Ms.MonaAlianaDPHMAlimin,BruneiDarussalamwasassistedbythefacilitators to formulate the report of the group discussion for the final plenarysession.


Part4.Day3:Saturday,31May2008

4.1.PlenarySession6Ms.SengdeuaneLachanthabounechairedthesessionandgreetedtheparticipantsin Indonesian, “SelamatPagi!”She thanked theorganizers for theopportunityandexplainedabout themechanismof theplenary sessionaswellas thepresentationtimeandintroducedtherapporteursofeachworkinggroup.

4.1.1.ReportsoftheParallelSessionTopic1:ChildrenwithDisabilityRapporteur:Ms.WidyaPrasetyati,IndonesiaMs. Widya hoped that the summary could cover the voice of each participatingcountry.Firstpointsheoutlinedwaspublicpolicy.Therewasaneedofidentificationandassessmenttoolsforenrollmentofthechildrenwithdisabilitiestotheschools.Shementionedsomepointstobethekeyconcernsorpointofrecommendationsofthe topic. Further she gave the approaches that were used including themedicalmodelthatmighthavedeflectedattentionfromeducationintervention,whichwasimportantforchildrenwithdisabilities.Therewasaneedtoincreaseawarenessandempathyofparents,astheymighthavenotfullyunderstoodthevaluesofinclusion.Anotherpointwasaboutteachingandlearning that highlighted the pedagogies for inclusive teaching and learning andchild‐centered teaching that should be encouraged in supporting the inclusion ofstudentswith disabilities.While, the national standards valued by some countrieswereconsideredabarriertoinclusion.Somecountriesemphasizedthatsupportforthechildwithdisabilitiesininclusionshouldberendered.Topic2:HIV/AIDSandHealthRapporteur:Mr.BudiHermawan,AUSAID,IndonesiaMr.Budithankedthechairperson,explainedabouttheparticipatingcountriesinthegroup discussion and gave the key issues that come up. He explained about thestrategy possibly used including the developing community counseling board tointroduceHIV/AIDSandsexeducation.Hementionedaboutparentingprogramme(helpingparentstobecomemoreopenandwarmandembracefamilyenvironment).Topic3:Minority(ethnic,language,religion)Rapporteur:Ms.JenniferTamarua,PapuaNewGuineaMs.Jenniferthankedforthegroupcontributionandexplainedaboutthekeyissues,which included that parents might not want their children to be influenced by


anotherreligion,notacceptmemberofdifferentfaithteachingtheirchildrenaboutfaith issues. She gave the possible solutions for open dialogue on the subject ofreligiouseducationbetweentheschoolauthorities.Shetouchedthelinguisticissueandneeds.Therewaschoiceoflanguageforchildreninschool.Parentshadchoiceofthreelanguagesofinstructionbutmightchooseoneoveranother.ShegaveanexampleinAcehabouttheuseoflanguages;themediumofinstructionwas Indonesian but they also taught Acehnese. Another example was in India;mothertonguewasusedbeforeformalschooling.Englishmightnotbealmostafirstlanguageforsome,whereasinothercountriesitwasdefinitelynot.Shegavesomesuggestions and recommendations to consider including the development oradoptionofaNationalCurriculumthatwouldprovide flexibility inaccommodatingtheneedsoflocallanguage;teachlocallanguageattheearlystageofeducationandthen bridge into the national of official languages. Finally, there was a need forgovernmentstohavelegalframeworkininclusiveeducationforethnic,religiousandlinguisticissues.Topic4:MigrantChildren/Refugees/IDPRapporteur:Ms.SaeKani,ABS,IndonesiaMs.Saepresentedsocialexclusionissuethatcoveredmigrantchildren,refugeesandIDP.Migrantworkers’ childrenwere not getting equal access to education. Illegalworkers’childrenwerenothavingaccess toeducationbecause theirparentswereafraidtobearrestedbythelocalauthority.Illegalstatusofchildrenshouldnotaffecttheir entitlement to education. During the discussion, the group focusedmore onexternalmigrant issuebut also internalmigrant issue like inChina,whereparentswereworkinginbigcitiesandthechildrenwereleftbehindanddidnotgetpropereducation.Abouttherefugeechildrenincampschoolthatoutlinedthepsychosocialsupport for children shouldbeprovided inorder toadapt theirnewenvironment;their mother tongue should be taught and the refugee children should haveopportunitiestolearnhostnations’languages.While the mainstream schools in host nations highlighted the issues of refugeechildrenthatshouldhaveequalaccesstoeducationinhostnationsinordertoavoidbullying and discrimination from other children, teachers and parents; awarenessraising and sensitization about refugees should be conducted at schools and incommunities.Thiswasalsoabouttheprocessoflearning.FinallyaboutIDPchildrenas well as civil wars, natural disasters were identified as one ofmain reasons forchildren to be out of education, i.e. environmental refugees; effective temporaryschoolsolutionstobeimplementedimmediatelyafterdisaster.Governmentshouldcoordinatewithinternationalagenciesforrecoveringschoolassoonaspossible.Shegave an example of the case in Aceh after the Tsunami, thus disaster‐resilientschools should be built back, as they didn’t get proper education after disaster.Thereshouldbemoreawarenessofalreadyexisting international frameworksandguidelinesabouteducationinemergency.


Topic5:SocialExclusionRapporteur:Dr.Leela,NepalDr. Leela thanked for the time and mentioned the participating countries in thegroup discussion. She explained about the social exclusion as the emerging keyissues that outlined the clarification of meaning, scope and coverage of socialexclusion, social exclusion in both visible andhidden, social exclusion often led todiscrimination,socialexclusionneededtobefocusedonbothschoolsandbepartofongoingeducation‐bothformalandinformal.Anotheremergingkeyissueswerethatgovernments in many countries provided scholarships to the poor and themarginalizedstudents.SheelaboratedfurthertheimpactsofwarinAfghanistanthatmanychildrenwerenotattendingschools.Therewaslackofqualifiedteachers;dueto poor economic condition, parents did not want to send their children to theschool.Insomecountries,schoolagechildrenweresupportingparentsbyworking,sellingthenewspaper,etc.Social exclusionwas due to gender discrimination; children did notwant to go toschool due to non‐friendly environment of the school. She gave some workablestrategiesforsocialexclusionthatincludedawarenessofeducationbeingarightofthe children and responsibility of parents and community; identification of thesocially excluded school going children for support (financial) and recognition.Besidesthat,thereshouldbe involvementofparentsandcommunitymembersforsupporting excluded children, selection to appropriate income generatingprogramme.Anotherimportantpointwasguidanceandcounselingforthechildrenaswellasproperinstruction.Topic6:GenderRapporteur:Ms.MonaAlianaDPHMAlimin,BruneiDarussalamMs. Mona thanked the chairperson and presented the concerns and issuesrecognized and identifies in the topic of gender. The first pointwas the evidencebasedthatincludedtheneedfordatatogiveanaccuracyifnotindicationofcurrentsituation of gender in education specifically and in society in general; researchdesign or structure of questionnaire; sampling in information gathering. Anotherpointwasequity for female students;equity ineducation forgirlsaswellasboys.Accesstoeducationforallthechildrenshouldtheybeleftbehindduetosocietalorfamily pressure or systematic infrastructure. Lifelong education and continuingeducationwerealsoimportant.Shementionedaboutthespecificissueingendereducationthatoutlinedtheequityingenderineducation–approach,enrollment,curricula,teacher,pedagogy,needstoaddressdevelopmentalneedsandissues,genderresponsiveorsensitiveschools,management structure, teaching and learning materials, introduction of sexualeducation,preparationofreallifesituation.Theotherissuewasaboutsafetyofbothgenderswithineducationthatinvolvedviolenceinschool.Nationalcoordinationwasanotherpointthatoutlinedtheissueofinter‐ministerialorinteragencycollaborationtowardsenforcingandimplementingexistingpolicy/framework/initiatives/laws.


Sheexplainedaboutthepointof‘Guru’thatemphasizedtheimportanceofteachereducation, the dissemination of information regarding legislation, policies andframework about current and historic condition.Other point she mentioned wasabout the global village that touched the issue of sensitivity to gender issues incommunity,workplaceandsocietytowardsgendersensitivity.Therewasachangeinculturethroughunderstanding;anditshouldbedynamicsbetweenteachersandthestudents.Itshouldbeworkingwithintheboundariesofrespectofreligionandlocalvalues.Therewasalsoadilemmaoftheissue–thecrosscuttingpoints.Questions&AnswersSessionMr. Bambang Indriyanto of Indonesia appreciated the comprehensiveness of thepresentationsof the rapporteurs.Hewanted to learnsomegoodandbad lessons.Unfortunately,tohisperspective,hecouldn’tgetgoodnorbadexampleshappenedin other countries, so that we knew how to solve the problems effectively. Hementioned an example of religious teaching in education; the problem was hownational policy could facilitate the solutions. Therewereneeds for the regulationsandpoliciesandwecoulddiscussinhere.Thequestion:howisthepolicyfacilitated?The Philippines supported the comments of Indonesia regarding some issues ofinclusiveeducation.Shewould liketosuggestgivingmessages intheregion.Policymakersmightnotbeabletoabsorbthesecomprehensivepresentations.Shewouldlikealso to response the issueof inclusiveeducation towards thegoalofEFA.Thetwoconceptswould competeagainsteachother.Another issueswereabout classsizes. Shementioned the issueofHIV/AIDS; theexpectationof teachers todeliversexeducationandtheuseofmothertongueasthelanguageofinstructioninclasses;therewasaneedof communication to thepolicymakers regarding this issue; shementionedthecurrentconditionofmothertongueuseinthePhilippines.Chinaexplainedthatthecountryhadsufferedfromvariousnaturaldisasters;giventhe current condition and fact of the statistical data of the disasters outlined thepointsofDRRandgender.Thecountryneededmoredonations from internationalcommunitytosupportthechildrentomovetosafeplacesthatwouldenablethemto study again. The challenges are the DRR and Gender education to be the keyconcernsofthisconferencetotheICEinNovember.Thailand gave example of the current condition in the country of education forchildren with disability. There had been a project since 2004 on that issue. Thesuggestion was to create proper function at each level and cooperation amongministries. She outlined the issue of ICT in inclusive education for children withdisabilities.Anotherpointwasabouttheunderstandingandattitude issuesaswellasthegovernmentsupportsintheprogrammeimplementation.Ms. Sengdeuane thanked the six rapporteurs for the presentations and she urgedthe organizers to take those recommendations and suggestions into account thatwouldsupportthenextICEinNovemberinGeneva.


4.2.PlenarySession7Ms.ClementinaAcedoandMr.RenatoOperttichairedtheplenaryassistedbyMr.JohanLindeberg.

4.2.1.Summary,SuggestionsandRecommendationsMs. Clementina greeted the participants, “Selamat Pagi,” and informed on thecomposition of the participants that attended the conference. She gave someremarks of the conference andwould like to express gratitude to theMinistry ofNational Education, UNESCO Office Jakarta, Prof. Arief Rachman of IndonesianNationalCommissionofUNESCOteamandMs.MariaMalevriofUNESCOParis.Therewere general remarks from the discussions of the previous parallel session;theywerenot recommendations to thegovernmentsbut recommendations to thenext conference of ICE in Geneva. She suggested the participants to write downsomeoftheircommentsregardingthegeneralremarksthathadbeendistributedtothe participants, then collected them to Prof. Arief. She mentioned about themechanismofthe48thsessionofICEinNovemberinGeneva.Theconferencewouldbediscussingtransversaltopicwithintheconference.SheencouragedtheparticipantstoencouragetheMinistersofEducationtoattendtheconferenceanddonationalplanofthecountryandeachcountrysentanationalreportontheeducationalsystemanditshouldbefittingthetopicoftheconference:inclusive education. Besides that, it should refer to the globalmonitoring reports.Furthermore, she urged the participants’ countries to recognize educators fromdifferent countries in different regions, in terms of research and teachings –contributiontothecountry.Thedeadlineofthiswouldbeinthenextcomingweeks.She explained further about the detailed mechanism of the ICE and closed hergeneralremarks.Comments,Suggestions&RecommendationsHelenKeller International, Indonesiasaid that thedocumentwasexcellentbut thedocument was too long. She outlined three points: identification, importance ofearlyinterventionandcollaborationamongdepartments.Pakistan said that if he encouraged theMinister of the country thatwould be aninclusion. He thanked the organizers and the governments of Indonesia andPakistan.Hecommentedonthegeneralreportthatwasreallyfocusedanddigested;hehopedthateveryoneinthishallwouldbecommitted.Hementionedsomethingabout resources and collaboration; south‐south, south‐north collaboration.Something about resources could be added to the recommendations to theMinisters. He gave some comments on inclusion and exclusion and congratulatedtheorganizersfortheconferenceorganizations,arrangementsandhospitality.


Afghanistan thanked theorganizersof the conferenceand theparticipants for theactiveparticipation.Shegavesmallcommentstogivestrongerremarksforthenextconference; she wanted orphan and street children to be included. After thisconference,shehopedthatthemeaningofinclusiontobetakenverybroadinreallifeatalllevelofeducationaswellasinthesociety.The Philippines gave comments on the general crosscutting themes to be putforwardtotheMinisters’meetings.Anotherpointwascurriculumand localization,schoolandcommunityempowerment,excludedandmarginalizedfromthesystemandtheneedtocollaboratewithotherstakeholders.Ms. BhaswatiMukerjeeof India had some comments to consider. Firstwas aboutthedeclarationtobeimplementedineachcountry’sgovernment.ShegaveanothercommentonthedocumentthatcoveredonlyAsia,whichshouldalsoincludePacificregion,asthisisAsiaPacificconference.Shegavecommentsontheurgentnatureorthe documents; also comments on migrant children, which should be sharedinternationally.Ms.Clementinathankedforthecommentsandidentifiedthecommonpointraisedby India,PakistanandAfghanistan,whichwas the resource. She responded to thepoint of migrant children; that the drafting committee would reformulate thegeneral remarkson thatpoint. Shewouldalso like toaddress thecomments fromthePhilippinesthatwouldenrichthegeneralremarksofthedocuments(thebudget,localization of curriculum, supports to the marginalized and communityempowermentaswellascollaboration).Shesaidthetermsofmonitoringshouldbeincluded too.Thecommentsof Indiawouldbeacceptable regardlessof thestatusthatchildrenshouldbeincludedineducation.Indonesia gave some comments for thenextmeetings in the future regarding therespectof inclusion;apointof languagesthatwereused.Asuggestionwasontheprovisionofthematerialsinthelanguageofthehostcountry.Ms. Simon Baker, the experts representative, wanted to make one comment onHIV/AIDSissueregardingthepointofstigmadiscrimination,thathadbecomemajorissuethatdidnotallowchildrentogotoschool,thatneededtobeencountered.Ms. Clemetina said that she encouraged the Ministry of National Education andIndonesian National Commission for UNESCO to later provide the materials inIndonesian.Shethankedforallthecommentsandthesuggestionsforthesummaryoftheoutcomesthatwouldbetheconclusionoftheconference.Finally,shewouldliketothanktheparticipantsandinvitedthemtobethemembersofthecommunityofpractice.Sofar,IBE‐UNESCOhad700expertsin90countries.Sheagainthankedthe Ministry of National Education, Indonesian National Commission, UNESCOJakarta,UNESCOBangkokandUNESCOParisandalltheparticipantsforthefruitfulconference.


4.2.2.ClosingRemarksMr.BambangIndriyantothankedtheorganizingcommittees,Mr.EkoSudjatmikooftheMinistryofNationalEducationformanagingthisconferenceandhopedthatthisconferencewouldbethebenefitsoftheparticipatingcountriesandcouldfosterthevalue of inclusive education. Gratitude was also addressed to the staffs ofIndonesian National Commission for UNESCO and the conference participants fortheircommitmentstoinclusiveeducation.There were also many people that had been involved in this conference that hewouldliketothankto.Hewouldliketoseetheparticipantsinthe48thsessionofICEtodiscussfurtheroninclusiveeducationandthankedagaininsomelanguages.AnnouncementsProf.AriefremindedtheparticipantstoobtaintheirattendancecertificateandtheCD of thematerials of the conference; also to check their flight and name at thereceptiondesk.He invitedtheparticipantstodoa littleexerciseof ‘5Ss’:Senyum,Salam, Sapa, Sabar, Syukur (Smile, Greetings, Say Hi, Passion and Gratitude). Heclosedtheconferenceandinvitedtheparticipantsforgroupphotos.


Part5.Annex

5.1.Declaration

AsiaPacificRegionalPreparatoryConferenceforthe48thSessionoftheInternationalConferenceonEducation

29–31May,Bali,Indonesia1.Introduction160participantsfrom23countries–Ambassadors,Ministers,Viceministers,policy‐makers, educators, curriculum specialists and teachers trainers – andrepresentatives from inter‐governmental bodies, institutions of civil society andNGOs – attended the Asia‐Pacific Regional Preparatory Conference for the 48thSessionoftheInternationalconferenceonEducation(29‐31May,Bali,Indonesia).Proposed by the Indonesia government at the IBE (International Bureau ofEducation) inter‐governmentalCouncil (January2008)andsupportedbyall councilmembers, this conference is part of the consultative process among UNESCOmembers states with regard to the 48th session of the ICE entitled “InclusiveEducation:theWaytotheFuture”(25‐28November,Geneva,Switzerland).The participants expressed their deep gratitude to the Indonesian government –Ministry of National Education and Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO,the UNESCO Regional Bureau for Education in Asia (Bangkok) and to theInternational Bureau of Education (IBE), for organizing this regional conference,whichprovidedandprovedtobeanexcellentopportunityandaproductivesettingto discuss and exchange visions, strategies, practices and experiences aroundinclusiveeducation.2.SocialInclusion,InclusiveEducationandEFAGoalsAsia and the Pacific is a region with plentiful examples of diverse and fruitfulexperiences and strategies conceptualizing and implementing inclusive educationpolicies andprogrammes. Inclusive education is progressivelyunderstoodas a keyapproach towards the realizationof theEFAgoals, thusan issueofgrowingpolicyconcernthroughouttheregion.Inclusiveeducationasanapproachseekstoaddresstheindividuallearningneedsofallchildren,youthandadultswithaspecificfocusonthosewhoarevulnerabletomarginalizationandexclusion.It involves changes and modifications in content, approaches, structures andstrategies in education and responds to and celebrates difference anddiversity ofhuman beings. Inclusive education entails profound and progressive changes


throughouttheentireeducationsystem;thecurriculumobjectivesandcontentandassessment tools; school visions, principal leadership and relations with thecommunity; and teachers roles, education and practices. It is an on‐going processremoving barriers to learning, and of promoting the engagement, empowermentandparticipationofcommunities,schools,principals,teachersandlearners.Amongother relevant aspects, inclusive education refers to long‐termeducationalpolicies and their articulation with other social policies; the provision of lifelongopportunities through a flexible and adaptable inclusive education curriculum informal, non‐formal and informal learning environments; and the diversification ofteachers’practicestoeffectivelyaddresslearners’diversities.Inmoregeneralterms,thediscoursearoundinclusiveeducationimpliesaddressingthechallengestowardsattainingmoreinclusivesocieties(socialinclusion)bycopingwiththelackofaccesstobasicsocialservicesandtolearningopportunities.Inclusiveeducationimpliessocial inclusionandviceversa,asguaranteeingeffectivelearningconditions and opportunities means addressing the problems, among others, ofpoverty, marginality, ethnic and gender disparities, HIV‐AIDS, and residential andsocial segregation. The role of the government is essential to assure the effectiveprovisionofeducationasapublicgoodandfacilitateadynamicrelationbetweenthenationalandlocallevelsindevelopingandimplementingpolicies.It is recognized that the learning that takes place in school environments in theregion is far from satisfactory. Low achievement levels are reported despiteincreasedenrolmentstheminimal levelsof learningarenotacquiredasdefinedbyindividual countries. In an area of globalization, it is critical to enhance anddemocratize learning opportunities principally in environments where inequity,exclusionandmarginalizedgroupsaregreatrelevance. Intherapidlychangingandincreasingly competitive world, inclusive education is an essential approach toachievehigh‐qualityequitableeducation.Withinthebroaderconceptualizationoftheinterfacessocialinclusionandinclusiveeducation,theparticipantsacknowledgetheneedof:i)furtherspecifyingandgivingcontent to the role of inclusive education as a guiding principle within the EFAframework, ii) sharing and disseminating inclusive practices that prove towork atdifferentlevels–i.e.,educationalandcurriculastructure,schoolmodelsandteacherpractices, and iii) strengthening the role of UNESCO as providing intellectualleadershiponhowto fosterandcarryoutabroaderconceptualizationof inclusiveeducation,andexploringthecreationofaclearinghouseoneffectiveevidence‐basedinclusive practices. The participants strongly recommend that these issues can bebroughtupbytheAsianMinistersofEducationinthe48thSessionoftheICE.3.Topicsaddressedandinputsforthe48thsessionoftheICEThe regional conference addressed seven main topics – children with disability,HIV/AIDS and health;minorities (ethnic, linguistic and religious);migrant children,refugees and IDP’s; social exclusion; gender; and disaster risk reduction (DRR)education.Theseseventopicswereaddressedinrelationstothefoursub‐themesof


the48thsessionof the ICE:a)approaches,scopeandcontent;b)publicpolicies;c)systems,linksandtransitionsandd)learnersandteachers,fromtheperspectiveofgoingfromvisionstopractice.ChildrenwithDisabilityThe inclusionofchildrenwithdisability ineducationhasbeenon the internationalagenda formany years and is gaining increasing attention. They remain, however,the largestandmostsignificantgroupofchildrenbeingexcludedfrommainstreameducationinmanyAsiancountries.Itindicatesastrongneedtoformulatepoliciestoeffectivelymonitorthefull implementationof inclusiveeducationforchildrenwithdisability.ThefollowingissuesrequirefurtherdiscussionattheICE.• Theformulationofpolicythatwillhelptoclarifyanddefine inclusion inaway

thatisbroadenoughtotakeaccountofgender,ethnicity,classandotherissuesnot specifically disability related, but does not overlook the importance ofdisabilityandthespecialistskillsandknowledge,whicharenecessarytoincludechildrenwithdisability.

• Theformulationofpolicytoensurethatsegregationisnotpracticesininclusiveclassroom.

• There is a need to establish a database of children with disabilities both inschool an out of school in the Asian region so that the progress of inclusiveeducationcouldbeeffectivelymonitored.

• Classsize,examinationsandnationalstandardsareconsideredgreatbarrierstoinclusion

• Capacitybuildingofteachers,parentsandchildrenwithdisabilitythemselvesiscrucial.

• Equipment,resourcesandfacilitiesshouldbelookedattofacilitateinclusion.• Theroleofspecialschoolsinsupportinginclusionshouldbeaddressed.• Child‐centeredteachingshouldbeadopted.• Inclusiveeducationshouldbepracticedatall levels, fromkindergartenthough

tohigheducation.• Collaboration among different departments, agencies to ensure effective

inclusion.HIV/AIDSInclusiveschoolsmustwelcomeallchildren,andenablealchildrentoplay,learnandgrow up together with their siblings and peers. Discrimination and exclusion ofchildrenaffectedbyor infectedwithHIVmust thereforebeprevented.Protectionand anti‐discrimination laws, policies and regulations should be issued. Closecollaboration and coordination between all concerned ministries, authorities andcommunity based organizations and grouping will ensure that these areimplemented.ThefollowingissuesmustbefurtheraddressedintheICE.


• Access for children and youth affected and/or infected with HIV to qualityeducationintheirhomecommunities(inthenearestschooltogetherwiththeirsiblingsandpeers).

• Access to quality HIV prevention and response education for all children andyouth–thiswouldincludereproductivehealth,sexualityandsexeducation,aswellasdrugpreventioneducationinformalaswellasnon‐formalsettings.

• Access to child and youth‐friendly health services offering free and voluntarytesting,counselingandtreatmentforHIV,aswellasHIVandAIDSrelatedillness(amongothersopportunisticinfections).

• Media’sroletopromoteHIVpreventionandresponseeducation,toinformthepublicaboutHIV,aswellastohelpcorrectmisconceptionsandmyths.

• Confidentiality–educationandhealthinstitutionsmustguaranteethattheHIVstatusofchildrenandyouthistreatedwithconfidentiality ‐ it istheirdecisionwhotheywould like todisclose their status to,aswellashowandwhentheywouldliketosharethisinformation.

MinoritiesAsia and the Pacific contain thousands of ethno linguistic groups whose mothertongue is not an official language of the country in which they live. Language issometimes amajor barrier to quality education. It is recognized that the issue oflanguage is closely interlinked with issues relating to culture and religion and aholisticapproachshouldbeused.DependingonthecontextofindividualcountriesitisrecommendedtoexplorethefollowingissuesattheICE.• Developmentoflegalframeworksthatallowsforlocalflexibilityandadaptation.• Curriculaandcontentthatencouragelocaladaptationinordertoincreaselocal

relevance.• Proactive recruitment policies for teacher training in order to increase the

capacityofminoritygroups.• Theroleoftheeducationsystemininter‐cultural/religiousdialoguestopromote

increasedunderstandingandtolerance.• Theprogressiveintroductionofmothertongueinstructionintheearlyyearsof

primaryeducationasameansofgainingmasteryofnationaland internationallanguages.

• Provision should be made for incorporation of official, national and/orinternationallanguageinstructionalongsidethemothertongue.

MigrantChildren• Migrantworkers’childrenusuallydonothaveequalaccesstoeducation,

especiallyillegalworkerschildren,becausetheirparentsareafraidbeingarrestedbylocalauthorities.

• Theillegalstatusofchildrenshouldnotaffecttheirentitlementtoeducation.


RefugeeChildrenIncampschools• Psychosocialsupportforchildrenshouldbeprovidedinordertoadapttheirnew

environment.• Theirmother tongue should be taught anddependingon the context refugee

childrenshouldhaveopportunitiestolearnthehostnations’language.Inmainstreamschoolsinhostnations• Refugee children should have equal access to education in host nations, and

internationalsupportmayberequiredtomakethispossible• Inordertoavoidbullyinganddiscriminationfromotherchildren,teachersand

parents, awareness raising and sensitization about refugees should beconductedatschoolsandincommunities.

SocialInclusionThere isaneedtobuildawareness forunderstandingthenature, relevance,scopeand implications of social inclusion (faced by different marginalized groups) invariouscontextsatthenationalandregionallevels.ThefollowingissuesshouldbeafocusofdiscussionattheICE.• Continued efforts to address social exclusion for various marginalized groups

withinschoolandsociety.• Accesstoqualityeducationforchildrenaffectedbywar,civilstrifeandnatural

calamities.• Theneedtoreviewexistingnationallevelprovisionsformarginalizedgroups.• Monitoring mechanism so that the existing provisions, such as scholarships,

reachtherealtargetgroupormarginalizedchildren.• Establishmentofmechanism to ensure thequality of education in faith‐based

schoolssothatthecompetenciesdevelopedandsubjects taughtarepertinentandrelevanttotheneedsofnationaldevelopment.

• On‐going support to teachers and other stakeholders for providing equalopportunitiesforfullandmeaningfulparticipationofallchildren.

GenderIt is recognizedthatat thecoreof inclusiveeducationare issuesrelatedtogenderandeducation.Gender‐baseddiscriminationisamajorbarriertolearninginAsiaandthe Pacific. Gender awareness and sensitization is needed at all levels of theeducation system inorder tobecome inclusive.The following issuesdeservegreatattentionattheICE:• The need for gender disaggregated education data and additional qualitative

andgender‐sensitiveindicators.


• The development and/or implementation of supporting legal frameworks toprotect the right to education for all, specifically addressing the protectionagainstgender‐baseddiscrimination.

• Theintegrationofgenderawarenessandsensitizationintomandatorypre‐andin‐servicetrainingaswellaseducationmaterialcontent.

• Genderequalityintermsofenrolment,retention,survivalandcurricula.• Pro‐activerecruitmentstrategiestoaddressgenderimbalancesamongteachers,

principalsandeducationsystemofficials.• The role of the education system to actively challenge cultural, religious and

socialtraditionsthataregenderdiscriminatory.DisasterRiskReduction(DRR)EducationTheserecommendationsrequirefurtherdiscussioninthecontextoftheICE.• Natural disasters represent a major cause of exclusion from the education

systemforchildrenasitdeniestheiraccess.• Particularly marginalized children living in disaster –prone areas, as well as

children displaced as a result of a disaster, should be allowed an equitableaccess to education, effective temporary school provisions should beimplementedimmediatelyafterdisastersoccur.

• Governmentshavetheresponsibilitytoprovideallchildrenwiththenecessaryknowledge about disasters, risks and vulnerabilities to disasters and relatedcompetencies through the integration of disaster risk reduction into schoolcurriculumaswellasnon‐formalandinformaleducationsoastobetterprotectthemselves,theirfamilyandcommunityandgetproperlypreparedtodisasters.

• Inordertomeettheobjectivesof“EducationforAll”andtheHyogoFrameworkfor Action (HFA) by 2015 as well as the Millennium Development Goal ofUniversal Education, the Governments have to moral imperative of ensuringschoolsafetythroughtheenforcementofbuildingcodesandthedevelopmentofdisaster‐resilientschoolbuildings.

Regional Preparatory Conference on Inclusive Education ...

Documents

Transcript of Regional Preparatory Conference on Inclusive Education ...