Xxii республикалық студенттер мен жас ғалымдардың ғылыми конференция материалдары

471 
alongside a wide range of students in their primary school сlasses. This is an important change 
from as little as ten years ago. There are inherent challenges in inclusive education but there are 
also significant opportunities for students with additional learning needs to achieve their 
potential. The New Zealand Curriculum and Te Marautanga o Aotearoa underpin education in 
Aotearoa New Zealand. Inclusion of all students in learning is one of the foundation principles of 
the curriculum. Effective pedagogy and the cycle of inquiry teaching are used in this document 
to strengthen school leaders’ understanding of how they can include all learners in their school. 
In the education context, ‘inclusive education’ describes the wide range of educational needs 
experienced by students in New Zealand classrooms. Some of these students have special 
education needs and require additional support to learn and achieve. It is a phrase that aims to 
focus people’s attention on a student’s educational or learning needs, rather than that student’s 
disability or medical diagnosis. It is important to recognise that students with additional support 
needs are not a homogenous group. They may have a range of educational needs – some needs 
may be short term, others may be long lasting. Students needing additional support come from 
all ethnic and social backgrounds. They live in the city, in rural areas and in all communities. 
Overall, it’s important to know:sometimes a student’s disability has an impact on their ability to 
learn but sometimes it doesn’t students with the same diagnosis experience their disability in 
different ways and may differ hugely in their personality, temperament, skills, interests and 
capacities : a disability diagnosis will tell you something about a student but it may not tell you 
much about his or her educational needs. Students who are funded by the Ongoing Resourcing 
Scheme (ORS) or the Intensive Wraparound Service make up the 1% at one end of a continuum. 
There are also students in a much larger and more diffuse group, typically including 12% to 15% 
of students at any one time. This is not a static group but rather a dynamic group with a fluid 
membership of students. Most students may find themselves needing additional support at some 
time. For many the supports are needed for a short time only. 
The Inclusive Practices Tools (IPTs) will give you a thorough understanding of where 
your school community thinks you are in terms of inclusive practices and belonging at school. 
The IPT process is a significant and valuable exercise. This involves surveying your community, 
students and staff to inform the school review team as it works through a comprehensive review 
process. Schools will consider many factors in deciding when it is the right time for them to 
engage with this. Some people prefer quantitative data and others prefer stories, examples and 
anecdotes about different perspectives and experiences. Plan for times where staff can share this 
information. You will have some teachers who are early adopters of new ideas who are prepared 
to share their stories and experiences. This may encourage the teachers who want to see more 
evidence first, to give a new approach a try. 
Inclusive education has become so controversial because it involves a fundamental 
paradigm shift in the approach to education: “Inclusive learning communities assume 
significantly different learning outcomes than those generally accepted by the existing education 
community.” Inclusive classrooms seek to actively engage all students within a community to 
participate to the fullest of their ability. In many respects, this approach to education attempts to 
unify children, parents and the community by bridging the gap between disabled children and the 
community as a whole.
In 2009, the Ministry of Education and Science in Kazakhstan presented the first 
Concept on Inclusive Education that outlined the major steps in the reform implementation. By 
2020, 70% of all schools in Kazakhstan are expected to become inclusive. In 2015, a revised 
Conceptual Approach to Inclusive Education was suggested by the National Academy of 
Education named after Altynsarin with its amendments on the terminology and timeline of 
inclusive education development. Overall, the state direction towards inclusive education has 
been supported at international as well as state levels. According to the data for 2015, in 
Kazakhstan, there are 141952 children before 18 years old who have developmental disabilities, 
which constitutes 2,8% of the total number of children (MOES & National Academy for 
Education, 2015). This indicator is significantly lower than the world average of 7-12%, which 

472 
implies an underdeveloped system of early diagnosis. Currently, 30,5% of schools have 
conditions for inclusive education, yet how this number was calculated and what conditions were 
implied remains unclear. To date only 27% of children with disabilities study in mainstream 
schools and only 1% in higher education (MOES & National Academy for Education, 2015). 
Whether these percentages reflect how many children with disabilities are included and their 
learning supported with appropriate resources rather than merely placed in the classrooms is 
questionable. Therefore, the window of opportunities for further improvement and growth could 
be exceptionally wide.
When it comes to recognition of the rights of the minority groups, advocacy has long 
been a central mechanism for change. This mechanism operates on several levels. The formally 
recognized one is the governmental arena, where state-level policy-making, legislation, and 
budget allocation take place (Scott, Lubienski, & DeBray-Pelot, 2009). Another level that is 
growing in influence and with a capacity to shape educational politics is at the institutional level 
presented by think tanks and philanthropies. For example, organizations such as the Gates 
Foundation or Open Society Foundation now play a valuable role in policy-making and 
promotion of reform movements internationally. Although governmental and institutional arenas 
serve as tradition sites for educational advocacy, community-based and grassroots organizations 
increasingly bring a significant contribution to advocacy. The activities of these civil society 
organizations (CSOs) are important areas for research, as scholars and policymakers often leave 
out of account their capacity “to directly shape or indirectly influence policy at the federal, state, 
judicial, and institutional levels” (ibid, p.10), yet their contribution to social and educational 
reform goes largely unnoticed by researchers. The so-called third sector or civil society includes 
all associations and networks, both formal and informal which reflect distinct interests and points 
of view in modern society and often help mobilize people to participate in politics (Boulding, 
2014). The literature mentions at least two important contributions of civil society movements to 
educational reform. The first refers to advocacy. For example, international experience in 
inclusive education reform often highlights the open protest of the public against segregation in 
education (Adayeva & Satkaliyeva, 2016). The second refers to resource provision. Thus, 
educational systems often do not get all the necessary means from the state budget, therefore 
relying on additional sources of financing from donors such as NGOs and business or industrial 
community groups. The interactive and transparent relationship between the public government 
and NGOs is a key to a stronger civil society. The legal status of NGOs allows for a better access 
to funding and decision-making processes because such formally registered entities are more 
likely to be recognized by the donors and the state. In contrast, informal associations such a 
clubs prove less credible that an NGO. As much of this work is independent and fragmented, 
little is known regarding the actual impact or the way in which civil society activism plays a role 
in shaping and influencing educational policy and practices in Kazakhstan. Therefore, to fulfil 
the aims of the present research, this study will predominantly focus on NGOs as representatives 
of civil society. Other terms for ‘NGOs’ are the ‘third sector’ and ‘non-profit’; these alternative 
concepts will also be used throughout the present study. 
It is a common discourse in Kazakhstan that policy-making and reform are top-down 
processes, and society serves as implementers or executors of the laws and policies prescribed by 
the centralized government (Kassymova, Knox, & Mashan, 2008). For example, scholarly work 
on inclusive education in Kazakhstan often starts with listing international and national agendas 
such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, the Salamanca 
Statement, and the Law on Education in the Republic of Kazakhstan of 2007 with its 
amendments. A significantly smaller portion of discourse focuses on grassroots bottom-up 
movements that advocate for inclusive education reform. Whether the process of reformation is 
entirely top-down is what this research aims to challenge by exploring the activism of non-
governmental organizations. The assumption is that as policies need to be approved by the 
centralized Ministry of Education; most of the civil activism informing these policies remains 
unrecognized. To challenge this assumption, the present study aims to answer an overarching 

473 
research question: “In what ways and to what extent does the civil society contribute to inclusive 
education reforms in Kazakhstan, as perceived by NGO representatives? Framework of 
Analyzing Inclusive Education Development In order to understand and to assess the impact of 
NGOs in inclusive education development, a conceptual framework provided by Booth and 
Ainscow (2002) was chosen. This framework known as The Index for Inclusion was developed 
by Booth and Ainscow as a research-based tool 12 created specifically to analyze the 
development and the implementation of an inclusive model of education. The conceptual 
framework has been often used in the research regarding inclusive education development (Nes, 
2009; Duke, 2009; Carrington & Duke, 2014). The Index consists of three dimensions which are 
creating inclusive cultures, producing inclusive policies and evolving inclusive practices. Each of 
these dimensions has further sections and guiding questions that cater for a variety of responses 
across different educational contexts. The first dimension of ‘inclusive cultures’ refers to the 
values and the principles that guide decisions about policies and practices. The second, inclusive 
policies include those policies and laws that welcome the diversity of learners and minimize 
exclusionary pressures. Lastly, inclusive practices reveal what methodological materials and 
resources exist and how the learning process is orchestrated. Although mostly used in schools, 
the authors suggest it could be applied more broadly across other educational contexts as an 
analytical framework indicating systemic strengths and challenges across each of the three 
dimensions. In order to form a holistic understanding of the role of civil society organization in 
developing inclusive education and to answer the research question, this framework was applied 
throughout the study. Importance of the Research The politics of education has long been a 
neglected and an underestimated field in educational research (Jakobi et al., 2010). Unveiling the 
contribution of grassroots movements to transforming education in Kazakhstan is significant in 
challenging current political assumptions concerning educational reforms in policy and practice. 
It opens up a transparent discussion on the politics of inclusive education. The present study 
aims to give credit to the leadership potential of social groups and individuals in empowering 
civil society in Kazakhstan. The study is important for civil society activists and organizations to 
learn about potential ways and tools to promote their agendas on policy and political levels. This 
research also sheds lights on how the state and CSOs can build cooperative relationships to have 
a more powerful impact on educational reforms. Finally, the study contributes to enriching 
academic knowledge concerning civil activism in educational policy-making in Central Asia and 
in a post-soviet context which to date is under-researched. Conducting a large-scale study 
incorporating quantitative methodologies basing on the set of themes developed in this research 
would be a logical next step from here, allowing to generate more representative results. More 
themes might emerge from studying the experiences of other regional and, possibly, rural civil 
society associations and groups. However, what cannot be easily refuted now is that the 
movement towards inclusive education does have a wide bottom-up support, and this is the key 
finding of the present research.
References :
1) Adayeva, N. & Satkaliyeva, T. (2016). The innovative management in the field of 
inclusive education and its Iipact on the public health in the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues; 
2) Atanesyan, K., Batra, G., York, N. & Heider, C. (2015). Kazakhstan - Country 
program evaluation; 
3) NGOs, political protest, and civil society. New York: Cambridge University Press; 
4) Educational reform and internationalization: the case of school reform in Kazakhstan. 
Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 
5) Learning about inclusion from developing countries: Using the index for inclusion. 
International Perspectives on Inclusive Education, 3, 189 – 203. 

474 

жүктеу/скачать 8,13 Mb.

Достарыңызбен бөлісу: