‘SENitizing’ migrant children in inclusive settings: exploring the impact of the Salamanca Statement thinking in Italy and the United States

Authors:
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
This paper emphasizes the aporetic nature of the Salamanca Statement on Special Needs Education (UNESCO, 1994 UNESCO. 1994. The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Salamanca : UNESCO. [Google Scholar] ), adopting a cross-cultural perspective. It draws on an intersectional perspective on inclusion (Connor, Ferri & Annamma, 2016; Artiles & Kozleski, 2016 Artiles, A. J. , and E. B. Kozleski. 2016. “Inclusive Education’s Promises and Trajectories: Critical Notes About Future Research on a Vulnerable Idea.” Education Policy Analysis Archives 24 (43): 1–29. [Google Scholar] ; Erevelles, 2014) to argue that although inclusion has been defined by such an international declaration as a transformative project to ensure access to quality education for all students, national inclusive policies are still focused on a pathological construction of student difference, slowly incorporating children from different linguistic and ethnic backgrounds. The focus on Italy and the United States is a response to examine the discourses and practices of inclusion in two countries that have been impacted by the Salamanca Statement thinking. To substantiate our argument concerned with the limitations embedded in the Salamanca Statement, data from two empirical studies conducted in Rome and in Upstate New York will be presented. The studies show how inclusion leads to overrepresentation of migrant students in Special Educational Needs. We conclude that the Salamanca Statement has been transferred into a tool to strengthen normality against difference, and that it should focus on interrupting micro-exclusions for groups sitting at the intersections of race, ability and other identity markers.
Funding Information
  • Italian Ministry of Education
  • University of Roma Tre
  • XXIX Cycle
  • the Commission for Educational Exchange
  • Fulbright-Schuman Program

This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit: