Dear Mrs Lana Lincoln of Lanalinks Primary School,

I am writing in regards to the unlawful and unjust refusal of my son

Lancaster to Lanalinks Primary. Lancaster is a strong and persistent
individual whos always doing his best to learn. Despite his disorder
causing difficulty using and understanding language, Lancaster thrives
socially and is brilliant at sports, especially basketball. He is a respectful
child who is always willing to help others where he can. Through his
strengths, positivity, kind-heartedness and different learning styles
Lancaster would benefit those within your school community by providing
a different perspective on learning and teaching. Through his development
in your school community, he will provide Lanalinks with credibility in
being a supportive environment for all children.

I am sure that your school takes the philosophy and principles of inclusion
into consideration within your learning framework. Unfortunately, by
refusing my son entry, you are denying the principle of normalisation that
states that all children should have the opportunity of attending their local
school (Foreman & Arthur-Kelly, 2014). Looking at these principles the
concept of the least restrictive environment stood out. This principle
relates to normalisation and refers to the movement of children with
disabilities into regular schools (Foreman & Arthur-Kelly, 2014). It states
that students should be placed into environments that provide more
choices for students to learn and develop rather than those with many
restrictions, with which I viewed your school given its programs and
activities provided (Ashman & Elkins, 2012). By integrating Lancaster into
a classroom with inclusive education not only does it benefit him but also
his classmates. It has been proven that inclusive education promotes
social interaction, increasing social competence and development of social
skills, which would impact both my son and other students (Ashman &
Elkins, 2012; Foreman & Arthur-Kelly, 2014). Students with disability do
not compromise the learning of other children, in fact they can provide
them with different views, perspectives and ways of approaching learning
(Tomlinson & McTighe, 2006).
The National Safe Schools Framework is a framework that aims to ensure
all schools are a safe and supportive environments as I am sure you are
familiar with (National Safe Schools Framework, 2003). As a parent I can
only hope that the school my child attends will be supportive and assist in
preventing difficulties he faces such as bullying. Due to Lancasters
difficulties with communicating his thoughts, feelings and understanding
what others are saying, he has faced many situations where he has been
bullied and faced difficulties in feeling safe. The framework involves a
focus on school culture, professional learning, behaviour management,
engagement with safe school curriculum and student well-being where
both students and teachers learn to embrace the partnership with families
to create a safe environment (National Safe Schools Framework, 2003;
Standards: AITSL, n.d.). It is important for schools to have this relationship
and be able to create the ideal environment in order for families to be
comfortable with their children attending school and students to be
effective learners within the classroom (Protecting Children is Everyones
business, 2012). By Lancaster attending Lanalinks, the school community
will learn to embrace differences and consider students with a disability
when striving to be a safe school, which is a step in the right direction.

How are children intended to develop positive values if they are not
experiencing values in action, not exposed to a broader community in
which would assist them in the development of those values or treated
unfairly? Values education refers to the importance of schools building
students character through developing values alongside equipping
students with skills to live justly within society as they grow (Lovat, 2010,
National Framework for Values in Australian Schools, 2005). The National
Framework for values outlines 9 values for Australian schools with how
they are approached being the individual schools decision (National
Framework for Values in Australian Schools, 2005). An important aspect of
the values framework is displaying values in action (Values Education,
n.d.). One of the values; understanding, tolerance and inclusion involves
being aware of others, accepting diversity and inclusion of both yourself
and others which is a value that is not being followed if my son is denied
entry to the school (National Framework for Values in Australian Schools,
2005). The value fair go revolves around the ideology of the common
good where all individuals are treated fairly (National Framework, 2005).
By attending a special school Lancaster would not be exposed to the same
variation that exists within a typical school and would be treated as
another student with a disability, he deserves a fair go. If Lanalinks
primary is truly promoting these values, by accepting Lancaster into the
school you would be displaying to the entire school community what the
values look like in action.

Every child has the right to learn and by denying Lancasters acceptance
into this school you are denying that basic right (Convention on the rights
of the Child, 1989). Article 23 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child
(1989) states that a mentally or physically disabled child should enjoy a
full and decent life, in conditions which ensure dignity, promote self-
reliance and facilitate the child's active participation in the community.
Attending a school such as Lanalinks would support Lancasters
development to learn to actively participate within the community through
his learning alongside typical students. Article 23 of childrens rights
indicates that as an individual with a sever language disorder, Lancaster
has the right to attend your school. Article 23.3 highlights the right for a
child to be educated achieving the fullest possible social integration
and individual development, considering Lancasters difficulties and
giving his fantastic social cognition, this article specifically relates to him
and why he should be accepted into your school (Convention on the Rights
of the Child, 1989). In reference to social justice, the Australian way of life
focuses of equality and fairness to all which is devised from basic human
rights and found within our laws (Foreman & Arthur- Kelly, 2014). Although
Lancaster is more of a kinaesthetic learner given his disability and
affliction to learn through bodily movement, being part of a typical school
would be giving him the opportunity to be treated equally (Mcgrath &
Noble, 2005).

According to the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, under Division 2, It is

unlawful for an education authority to discriminate against a person on the
ground of the persons disability: (a) by refusing or failing to accept the
persons application for admission as a student) It is also stated that it is
unlawful for an education authority to discriminate against a student on
the ground of the students disability: (a) by denying the student access,
or limiting a students access, to any benefit provided by the educational
authority. Therefore according to law Lancaster cannot be refused entry
to your school on the basis of having a disability. The Disability Standards
for Education (2005) were formed under the Disability Discrimination Act
(1992) by the Attorney-General. The Standards for Participation within the
Disability Standards outline that a school must take reasonable steps and
ensure students can not only participate in programs but utilise the
services and facilities provided by the school without discrimination
(Disability Standards for Education, 2005). It is important for you to
consider this standard when thinking about the enrolment on my son
because it also states that the school must consult with the student or
carer about how the disability may affect the participation and usage of
facilities and given this consult, how they may be adjusted to suit the
individual (Disability Standards for Education, 2005). I believe it would be
in your best wishes to follow the law before refusing my son entry.

Despite an individual having a disability, school teachers are already

catering for the differences between individual students learning styles
and abilities. Not only does this allow students to learn the best way they
can but it also allows teachers to learn and develop their teaching styles
and skill sets to cater to all differences in children (McGrath & Noble,
2005). I believe your school would benefit tremendously by having
Lancaster there. Not only will people view Lanalinks as a school that
provides a welcoming, inclusive and safe environment to all individuals but
my son will have the opportunity to develop his strengths and recieve
education from an environment which strives to benefit him not simply as
someone with a disability, but as another human being.

I look forward to hearing from you,

Yours sincerely,

Lucy Lightwest
References
Ashman, A., & Elkins, J. (Eds.). (2012). Education for inclusion and
diversity (4th ed.). Frenchs Forest, Australia: Pearson Australia.

Convention on the Rights of the Child | Australian Human Rights

Commission. (1989).Humanrights.gov.au. Retrieved 27 March
2016, from https://www.humanrights.gov.au/convention-rights-
child
Department of Education, Science and Training. (2005). National
framework for values in Australian schools. Prepared by the
Student Learning and Support Services Taskforce Canberra. [Held
as part of a kit]
Department of Education, Science and Training. (2003). National safe
schools framework. Prepared by the Student Learning and
Support Services Taskforce Canberra.
Disability Discrimination Act 1992. (1992). Legislation.gov.au.
Retrieved 27 March 2016, from
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2010C00023
Disability Standards for Education. (2005). Accessed from
www.dest.gov.au/

Foreman, P., & Arthur-Kelly, M. (2014). Inclusion in Action (4th ed., pp.
10-32). South Melbourne, Australia: Cengage Learning.

Information concerning Australia and the Convention on the Rights of

the Child. (2011) (1st ed., pp. 26-27). Retrieved from
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/legal/s
ubmissions/2011/201108_child_rights.pdf

Lovat, T. (2010). Synergies and Balance between Values Education

and Quality Teaching. Educational Philosophy And Theory, 42(4),
489-500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2008.00469.x
McGrath, H., & Noble, T. (2005). Eight ways at once. Multiple
intelligences and revised Blooms taxonomy: Over 200
Differentiated Classroom Strategies (2nd ed.). Sydney, Australia:
Pearson Education.
Protecting children is everyone's business: Second 3 year plan.
(2012) (2nd ed.). Retrieved from
https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/07_2014/fac
s_42647_nfpac_action_plan_text.pdf

Standards | Australian Institute for Teaching and School

Leadership. Aitsl.edu.au. Retrieved 27 March 2016, from
http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-
teachers/standards/list?c=graduate
Tomlinson, C.A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated
instruction and understanding by design. Alexandria, VA, USA:
ASCD.

Values Education | National Values Education

Forum/Conference. Curriculum.edu.au. Retrieved 27 March 2016,
from
http://www.curriculum.edu.au/values/val_national_values_educati
on_forumconf,33490.html