Inclusive education in mainstream school is helpful and effective for all the children with special needs. Agree...disagree? Justify...

Inclusive Education is undoubtedly better and more cost effective for children with special needs in the mainstream. There is no speical society after school and therefore it is crucial that children with speical needs interact with others whom they will have to interact with in the wider society.  It is also important for children without special needs to be exposed to children with special needs.  In this way you create a more humane society.  From a point of cost effectiveness, it is much cheaper for the education system to mainstream children with speical education needs.  The greatest threat to this reality is the special education model that created the conditons for children to be taken out of the mainstream. The knowledge and practices of the speical education model made people believe that inclusive education is not possible.  However, it is very important to train teachers in both the mainstream and develop support structures in the system to make it possible for children with special needs to flourish in the mainstream.  It is important to note that special education need is highly differentiated.  in other words with regard to children who experience visual problems, there are those that can see partially, some use large print and others are not able to see.  We need different responses for each time of challenge.  It is equally important to note that chidlren with special needs form a very small percentage of the overall pupil population.  For example, the children who experience visual challenges will make up0.30% of the learner population or even less. Therefore in this case and in other cases of disability the school population is small. Why then does one need to build a separate school with separate structures, policy and facilities when the population is so small.  As I had stressed earlier on one has to train teachers in the mainstream but also develop specialist teams according to the various categories of needs to provide on-going support to mainstream schools.  In this way one creates a more human system and it is far more cost effective.  Given the history of special education need many people when confronting a child who is different prefer to categorise the child and refer the child elsewhere.  What do parents do? They often struggle in the beginning but as they acquire more knowledge, they are able to help their children.  One of the consequences of the special education model is that there was not enough knowledge amongst the general population.  Knowledge was the preserve of the specialists.  We need to create possibilities for knowledge to be dessiminated widely to all people.  This includes parents, wider public, NGOs, teachers and children.  In this way more people will be able to respond in an informed way.  Teachers could be provided with more specific knowledge and others could benefit from more general information.   

At a more general level, most people have special education needs that are not very visible.  Even many adults in working environment that look totally capable and fine.  Everybody has special needs if you go beyond the surface in terms of their personality.  How many people are narcissistic? How many people have certain personality disorders etc etc.  So in the final analyses once people in general become aware of special education need, we will become more tolerant as a society. 

am no ascuse about this matter but i think you most absolutely this matter

"One Size does not fit all": Inclusive can be helpful and "on target" for many special needs children. Some will benefit from one-on-one instruction and get "lost in the sauce" when mainstream or inclusionary techniques are put in play. Inclusive education can answer the call, but there is a need for even greater flexibility and more adaptation - as it continues to evolve. 

Offcoarse  when students with special need have face to classmate or teachers and communicate among them undoubtedly is effectiveness.

yes. it is. but not in all subjects.only in non-academicly subjects.because all academic subjects need to be explained and given in  different ways and special educator has to answer the need of each student. also the group has to be maximum a group of 6 to 8 students per class.

I agree that inclusive education is very important for students with special needs. This gives them a sense of belonging and allows them to be involved in educational activities equal to that of their peers.  In saying this, there are times when a student's disabilities may cause harm to themself or others in given situations, and then it may be necessary to explore other options.

It will boost and motivate the students.

Inclusivity is tough to pin down as it is such a polymorphous term and is often interpreted by govt, NGO, teacher and commentator is a variety of ways. Here are a few of the problems 

1. What is the role of education? Academic attainment or social cohesion? There is evidence Kalambouka et al that% of mainstream pupils are negatively affected by the inclusion of SEN/disability pupils. So I guess the question here is, are you prepared for an approx one fifth of the class to be worse off to meet the needs of an inclusivity agenda.

2. Following on from1 what is the measured improvement of putting SEN/disability pupils in a mainstream classroom? The evidence suggests academic attainment is poor and thus some schools are reluctant to take SEN as it might adversely affect there league table score or their inspection results. On the other hand Special schools are less concerned with academic attainment in favour of personal and social development thats why I asked the first question.

3. When you say inclusivity there is the clear altruistic ideology and then there is the real world interpretation/funding/training that countries and governments offer as policy. Teachers need additional resources, time; TAs need training and we need more of them often begging another question of why is the least qualified in the classroom often looking after the most needy?

4. Why is a Special school so bad? I would argue and am support by UNESCO, various DfEE/DfES/DfE policies that not all children will benefit or can cope from/with mainstream education.

5. I mentioned training earlier with teachers but pupils both mainstream and SEN also need training. This in regard to understanding either how to cope with being SEN in a mainstream school or how to better understand a particular disability/pupil/situation as a mainstream student.

So inclusivity seems a good idea anecdotally but for me it needs a better support system to work in terms of placement, resourcing, training, funding, even how measure/inspect cohort A (no SEN) versus cohort B (% SEN) in terms of academic attainment. I don't have an answer other than there are too many holes in the manifestation of the ideology at present. I am sure it has merit its just not been realised fully as yet.