As of 2019, the New South Wales (NSW) education system works under the education policy

of Inclusion. This means, the education providers must tailor how and what education is taught,

to meet the demands of disabled students. This is stated in the Disability Standards for

Education 2005 (DSFE), “The education provider must take reasonable steps to ensure that the

student is able to participate in the courses … provided by the educational system” (DSFE,

2005). This legislation means, it is my role as a teacher to redesign lessons, activities and school

programs; ensuring students who are disabled, are included within all aspects of high school.

This essay will examine my own teaching practices, through my Key Learning Area (KLA) of

English. I have included strategies, that I can use to teach students who are higher functioning

on the Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). This essay will also be an examination of the

changing legislation and attitudes surrounding disabled students. It is important to examine the

history of the legislation prior to Inclusion because, “It helps us recognise how institutional

inertia and deep-seated beliefs and assumptions block transformational change” (Grossberg,

2011, p. 732). For the past century, there have been major changes in the rights and attitudes

of disabled people; this essay will examine how the changes have made an impact on the current

policy of Inclusion.

During the early half of the 20th century, children with disabilities that needed a full-time care,

were not included in general education. Between 1940-1970 there were schools in Australia

designed to cater to the needs of students with specific disabilities (Forlin, 2006). However,

Jenkinson (1993) states it was a legal requirement for disabled students “to meet certain criteria

in order to progress to a more ‘normal’ environment with the severity of the disability usually

being associated with greater degrees of separation from the ‘regular’ education” (p. 321).

Therefore, it was difficult to enrol a disabled student into a public school, prior to the 1970’s.

In Australia, the term ‘Learning Disabilities’ was introduced in the 1960’s, along with the
creation of Learning Difficulties Australia. This organisation led to the recognition from

remedial teachers that students might be hindered academically and socially because of

physical, sensory and intellectual problems (Jenkinson, 2006). During the 1970’s, the

Diagnostic and Remedial Teachers Association of Victoria (DRTAV) introduced diploma

driven courses and journal articles to educate teachers in the learning difficulties of students

(Jenkinson, 2006). One of the biggest challenges in gathering research on children with

disabilities, was the Victorian Psychological Practices Act 1965. This prohibited teacher access

to research and psychological tests, which hindered the journal articles on disabled students

during the 1970’s (Jenkinson, 2006). For America, there was the introduction of the 1975

federal Education of All Handicapped Children Act. This policy had the belief that all students

are educable (Grossberg, 2011). This legislation was important as it was an accurate reflection

of the remedial teachers’ attitudes during the 1970’s (Jenkinson, 2006). At the beginning of

the 1980’s, the education policy of integration was introduced to Australia. This would mean

students who were considered abled enough to join general classes would be integrated into

schools. However, this policy had flaws, Jenkinson (2006) argues, “Integration teachers were

appointed without qualifications in special education” (p. 175). Jenkinson (2006) also suggests

disabled students were being integrated into a schooling system that was not designed for their

needs; it was an expectation that disabled students would assimilate into general classes. The

disadvantages of Integration led to the transition towards Inclusion in the 1990’s. In 1994, the

Salamanca Statement was released leading to the possibility of classrooms with incorporated

Inclusion. In 2005, the Disability Standards for Education was introduced. The difference

between the 2005 DSFE and the Salamanca Statement was the DSFE was more explicit in the

legal requirements of education providers. Forlin (2006) reinforces this statement, DSFE

“standards will establish more defined frameworks within schools and make clear the legal

obligations of authorities” (p. 268). Another important form of legislation is the Australian
Profession Standards for Teachers. All Graduate teachers must uphold to standard 1.6,

“Strategies to support full participation of students with disability” (AITSL, 2019). Standard

1.6 would have to include Inclusion as the teacher is remodelling the classroom to

accommodate the disabled student’s needs.

It could be argued Inclusive education borrows some of the best aspects of past legislation and

tries to create an environment void of past deficits. One example is how we label disabled

students. Grossberg (2011) talks to the shift in the labelling of disabled people during the

1920’s; during this time disabled people went from being referred to as defective, feeble

minded, to using the term handicapped. It is an incremental shift towards Inclusion, as the

label’s people use to describe disabled people can be damaging and perpetuate stereotypes.

Grossberg (2018) states shifting from feeble minded to handicapped suggests, “the greatest

harm to the handicapped child … stems from this socially engendered impairment of the daily

life … not from the functional impairments themselves” (p. 732). Within Inclusion today, there

is a push towards not labelling students. Loreman, Deppeler & Harvey (2011) suggest labelling

students via their disability makes it easier to argue for the exclusion of the labelled student. In

the 1950’s, there were social and political movements that fought for the equal rights of

disabled people; an argument they had was the “problems faced by intellectually disabled

children did not all stem from their handicaps. Instead, they contended, many of those problems

were caused by public indifference and ignorance, as well as failure to provide assistance”

(Grossberg, 2011, p.74). It is interesting to point out how public perceptions of disabled

students can be damaging towards disabled people. Instead, with this past deficit in mind, I

believe it is not enough to put all disabled students in an umbrella. Loreman, Deppeler &

Harvey (2011) have suggested that a disability should not define a disabled person. I believe

inclusion is a more refined version of integration. Freitag & Dunsmuir (2015) have suggested,
because disabled students are in a class with a mixed range of social and academic capabilities,

disabled students are able to gain social and academic capital through osmosis. Although

Integration suggested disabled students should assimilate to the class’s standards, the seeds of

what we know as Inclusion are present within this policy. In order to accommodate the disabled

students in my classes, it is my role as a teacher to empower them by creating high classroom

expectations. I need to be aware of the language that I am using, while also challenging the

stereotypes the student peers might have surrounding disabled students within the classroom.

In my scenario, the students who have been diagnosed with ASD have high functioning autism

and they are not part of Life Skills programs. Autism is a spectrum, where a student is placed

on that spectrum varies from student to student. Taylor (2005) states, “the particular needs of

each student with an autistic spectrum disorder need to be separately assessed” (p. 890).

Therefore, it is not enough to simply ‘pidgeon hole’ all students with the same characteristics

of Autism. Taylor (2005) has suggested higher functioning ASD students may show fewer

outward signs of autism, while other students might be more pronounced in their deficits.

Therefore, it would be beneficial to do research on the students within my class. One method

that was suggested was building a relationship with the parents. Parents regardless of the child’s

disability can sometimes feel ‘off-put’ in talking to teachers because of the educational jargon

and institutional agendas (Azad, Wolk & Mandell, 2018). Therefore, as a teacher I need to

remove any form of tension between me, the teacher and the parents of my students, I also need

provide opportunities for parents to ask for any clarification that is needed in regarding their

child’s education.
For a student with ASD, they might have difficulties making and keeping friends. This might

be because they have an inability to read other people’s social cues. People might dismiss an

ASD student as rude or unsocial, when the student is simply unable to read other people’s

social boundaries (Taylor, 2005). Winchell, Schultz & Screckovic (2018) have suggested that

it is more likely that students with ASD will be bullied and excluded from social groups because

of their social deficits. Bullying is contextual and I might not be aware of what is happening

outside of the classes that I teach. However, it would be my duty to act and do mandatory

reporting if I am made aware of it. One strategy that has been suggested in preventing bullying

is Positive Education, this involves building a student’s character, as well as their social and

emotional wellbeing. Vuorinen, Erikivi & Uusitalo-Malmivaari (2018) state, "positive

education provides tools to recognise the whole potential in all of us" (p. 47). Winchell, Schultz

& Screckovic (2018) have suggested that one way of combating bullying is having students

build quality friendships with the students around them. When you create a classroom that can

recognise the positive qualities amongst the peers, the teacher is "removing barriers to

understanding that similarities should be prioritized over difference" (Winchell, Schultz &

Screckovic, 2018, p. 248). Vuorinen, Erikivi & Uusitalo-Malmivaari, (2018) conducted a

research project where they included class exercises involving; reflection, active listening to

peers, empathy writing tasks, labelling emotions, resilience training exercises and writing

exercises on social and emotional wellbeing. After implementing the experiment there was a

reduction in aggressive behaviour and a stronger upstanding of empathy towards peers

(Vuorinen, Erikivi & Uusitalo-Malmivaari, 2018). As an English teacher, the outcomes for

stage 4 and 5 are flexible in what content I can include within my curriculum. For example,

Outcome 1, “responds to and composes increasingly sophisticated and sustained texts for

understanding, interpretation, critical analysis, imaginative expression and pleasure” (English

K-10 Syllabus, 2012, p.141). Within this outcome there is room for me to include a wide variety
of content. To meet this outcome, I could include texts that promote positivity, as well as

include texts that directly deal with bullying and/or social and emotional wellbeing. With some

of the Positive Education exercises that have been mentioned. I can align them to the content

points within the outcome. For example, this content point, “analyse and explain the ways

language forms and features … are used to shape meaning” (English K-10 Syllabus, 2012,

p.141). Here, I could include reflection exercises on the content that has been presented;

empathy writing tasks based on the characters within the texts I have chosen. Include active

listening exercises within class discussions based on the literature chosen. One criticism of my

strategy is some students with ASD might have difficulties thinking in abstract concepts

(Taylor, 2005). However, I believe fostering a positive environment so other students can

recognise the potential within other students, might reduce negativity towards ASD students.

For students of ASD, it is not uncommon for them to have difficulties with comprehension and

reading exercises. Davidson (2018) argues this is because they may have a deficit in decoding

language and thinking abstract concepts. Bishop & Isbester (2016) introduced a strategy where

they gave comprehension exercises to the classroom. However, the comprehension questions

where broken and reformatted in such a way, to allow Autistic children to see what was being

asked. For example, one question was, “How old is Lockie Leonard?” (Bishop & Ibsester,

2016, p. 57). They asked this question in addition with, “What type of question is this?” (Bishop

& Ibsester, 2016, p. 57). This suggests that the teacher was trying to tease out other ways of

answering the same question. For the more open ended and abstract questions Bishop & Ibester

(2016) suggested class discussions. When teaching Autistic students, it is also important to

make my lessons as routine as possible. Nuske et al., (2019) discuss how transitions can create

stress and even anxiety for autistic students. Therefore, it is my responsibility to maintain a
routine within my lesson planning and try to uphold it; to avoid unnecessary stress for ASD

students.

To conclude, this essay has explored the historical shift towards Inclusion. However, the

willingness for a teacher to embrace Inclusion within their classroom is contextual. Garrad,

Rayner & Pedersen (2019) reinforce this statement, “The extent to which the teacher embraces

inclusive policies appears to be dependant on the nature and severity of a student’s disability”

(p. 59). This is a problematic way of thinking because it leads to a deficit for both teachers and

students. As explored through the history of inclusive education, it is not enough for a teacher

to integrate instead, a teacher must adapt their lessons. In my practice as a teacher, I feel it is

important not to repeat the deficits of past beliefs and policies. Instead, this essay has led me

to consider why we have inclusion today. I have only provided some small strategies for the

inclusion of ASD students. However, as stated prior ASD is contextual and the deficits will

vary from student to student. Therefore, it is my job to continue to seek research on ASD, to

avoid a repeat of the past mistakes before Inclusion.

References

Department of Education and Training. (2019). Disability Standards for Education 2005.
Retrieved from https://docs.education.gov.au/node/16354
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2019). Australian Professional
Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from https://www.aitsl.edu.au/teach/standards
Azad, G., Wolk, C., & Mandell, D. (2018). Ideal Interactions: Perspectives of Parents and
Teachers of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. School Community Journal
28(2), 63 -84. Retrieved from
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/ehost/detail/detail?vid=11&sid=6dbb
ba61-395c-4c07-982b-
 dab3492db8fb%40sessionmgr4009&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT
1zaXRl#db=ehh&AN=134813991

Bishop, K., & Isbester, K. (2016). Teaching Reading: Junior Secondary ASD Students and
the Australia Curriculum: English. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years 24(3), 53 –
62.
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/ehost/detail/detail?vid=16&sid=7574
4eaf-3ab9-4476-804f-d2059284aa8b%40pdc-v-
sessmgr06&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=ehh&AN=1
18357199

Davidson, M. (2018). Reading Comprehension in Children with and Without ASD: The Role
of Word Reading, Oral Language, and Working Memory. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders 48(10), 3524-3541. Retrieved from https://link-springer-
com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/article/10.1007/s10803-018-3617-7

Forlin, C. (2006). Inclusive Education in Australia Ten Years After Salamanca. European
Journal of Psychology of Education 21(3), 265-277. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Chris_Forlin/publication/226863013_Inclusive_
education_in_Australia_ten_years_after_Salamanca/links/0c960537b16f10a00d00000
0/Inclusive-education-in-Australia-ten-years-after-Salamanca.pdf

Freitag, S., & Dunsmuir, S. (2015). The Inclusion of Children with ASD: Using the Theory
of Planned Behaviour as a Theoretical Framework to Explore Peer Attitudes.
International Journal of Disability, Development and Education 62(4), 405-421. doi
10.1080/1034912X.2015.1046818

Garrad, T., Rayner C., & Pedersen, S. (2019). Attitudes of Australian Primary School
Teachers Towards the Inclusion of Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders.
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs 19(1). 58 -67. doi 10.1111/1471-
3802.12424

Grossberg, M. (2011). From Feeble Minded to Mentally Retarted: Child Protection and the
Changing Place of Disabled Children in the Mid-Twentieth Century United States.
Paedagogica Historica 47(6), 729-747. Retrieved From
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=8&sid=1bf2c6eb-a311-4187-
898b-
07379983d682%40sessionmgr104&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT
1zaXRl#AN=67079918&db=ehh
Jenkinson, J. (1993). Integration of students with severe and multiple learning difficulties.
European Journal of Special Needs Education 8(3), 320 -335. doi
10.1080/0885625930080310

Jenkinson, J. (2006). A history of Learning Difficulties Australia: Part One – The Beginning.
Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities 11(1), 45-53. Retrieved from
https://www.ldaustralia.org/client/documents/ajld_jun06_p45_53.pdf

Jenkinson, J. (2006). A History of Learning Difficulties Australia: Part Four – Managing

Change. Australian Journal of Disabilities 11(4), 175 – 184. Retrieved from
https://www.ldaustralia.org/client/migrated/ajld_4_06_175_184.pdf

Jenkinson, J. (2006). A History of Learning Difficulties Australia: Part Five – The Journal
(Continued). Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities 11(4), 185-196. Retrieved
from https://www.ldaustralia.org/client/documents/History%20Part%20Five.pdf

Loreman, T., Deppeler, J., & Harvey, D. (2011). Inclusive Education (2nd Ed). Crows Nest,
Australia: Allen & Unwin

New South Wales Education Standards Authority. (2019). English Syllabus K-10, 2012.
Retrieved from https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-10/learning-
areas/english-year-10/english-k-10

Nuske, H. J., McGhee Hassrick, E., Bronstein, B., Hauptman, L., Aponte, C., Levato, L., …
Smith, T. (2019). Broken bridges—new school transitions for students with autism
spectrum disorder: A systematic review on difficulties and strategies for success.
Autism, 23(2), 306–325. doi 10.1177/1362361318754529

Taylor, M. (2005). Teaching Students with Autistic Spectrum Disorders in HE. Education
and Training London 47(6), 484-495. Retrieved from
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6&si
d=9d23be70-c483-4a5c-9539-3e3b8394158c%40sessionmgr101

Vuorinen, K., Erikivi, A., & Uusitalo-Malmivaara, L. (2019). A Character Strength

Intervention in 11 Inclusive Finnish Classrooms to Promote Social Participation of
Students with Special Educational Needs. Journal of Research in Special Education
 Needs 19(1), 45-57. Retrieved from
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=1bc44991-bb5c-44b2-
9c36-cf4580ac8a3e%40pdc-v-
sessmgr02&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=13425450
1&db=ehh

Winchell, B., Schultz, T., & Sreckovic, M. (2018). Preventing Bullying and Promoting
Friendship for Students with ASD: Looking Back. Education and Training in Autism
and Developmental Disabilities 53(3), 243-252. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2175248973/fulltextPDF/CE1EA16A69B14D78
PQ/1?accountid=36155