Docstoc
EXCLUSIVE OFFER FOR DOCSTOC USERS
Try the all-new QuickBooks Online for FREE.  No credit card required.

Assessment of National Situation and Progression of Inclusive

Document Sample
Assessment of National Situation and Progression of Inclusive Powered By Docstoc
					          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                     Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen     &   0271 / 740-2228     sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




  Assessment of National Situation and Progression
        of Inclusive Education in Germany
(Johannes Schädler, Carmen Dorrance, Thomas Franzkowiak, Ramona Hensch,
                           Albrecht Rohrmann,)




Structure

     1.        Introduction                                                                                            2

     2.        Assessment Part A: Statutory Legislation and Prescriptions                                              4
               2.1    Summary of Part A ………………………………….....                                                             11
               2.2    Barometer Part A ………………………………………                                                                 15


     3.        Assessment Part B: Practice of Inclusive Education ………..                                                16
               3.1    Summary of Part B …………………………………….                                                                24
               3.2    Barometer Part B ………………………………………                                                                 26


     4.        Assessment Part C: Progress towards Inclusive Education                                                 27
               4.1    Summary of Part C …………………………………….                                                                40
               4.2    Barometer Part C ………………………………………                                                                 44




          This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
          This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held
          responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.




                                                                   1
            Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &   0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Introduction:1

It is quite difficult to assess the national situation and progression of inclusive education in
Germany. This is due to the fact that Germany is a federal republic of 16 Länder (federal
states). Development in the different Länder of Germany is diverse. Each Land has its own
responsibility, including individual legislation according to the guidelines of the Basic Law,
which is the framework for the education system. Responsibilities are determined by the
Federal structure of government. The KMK (Standing Conference of the Ministers of
Education and Culture Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany) has produced a
framework of agreement to preserve the independence of each Land (Sovereignty of Culture;
Kulturhoheit).

Educational legislation and administration of the education system are primarily in the
responsibility of the Länder. This particularly applies to the school system, higher education
and the continuing education sector. Under the Basic Law and the constitutions of the Länder,
the entire school system is under the supervision of the State. The right of disabled pupils to
education and training appropriate to their needs is stated in the Länder constitutions and
more detailed provisions are set out in the educational legislation of the Länder. The right of
disabled children to education and training appropriate to their needs is stated in the Basic
Law (Grundgesetz, Art. 3), in Book Twelve of the Social Code (Sozialgesetzbuch XII –
Sozialhilfe) and in the Länder constitutions. More detailed provisions are set out in the school
legislation of the Länder. In 1994 the right to non discrimination of persons with disabilities
was formally introduced in the German Grundgesetz. Since then, Art. 3, contains the
sentence:

‘Nobody must have disadvantages due to his/her disability’.
(Niemand darf wegen seiner Behinderung benachteiligt werden).

Based on this Article in the Basic Law, in April 2001 the new Social Welfare Code IX
(SGBIX) has come into force. It summarises the legal bases of medical and vocational
rehabilitation. It should reflect the present change of the self-image of disabled people and the
basis of the policy of disabilities. The main focus is not only the welfare and care of disabled
people, but autonomous participation at the social level as well as the elimination of obstacles
and the establishment of equal opportunities. The law SGB IX focuses on ‘Rehabilitation and
Access’ and has two parts:

      1. Regulations for disabled people and people at risk of exclusion
      2. Special regulations to enable the participation of severely disabled people.

All Länder have changed their school laws in respect to a better integration in adapting them
to the recommendations of the KMK, from May 1994. These Recommendations on Special
Needs Education in the Schools of the Federal Republic of Germany (Empfehlungen zur
sonderpädagogischen Förderung in den Schulen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland,
1
    This introduction is partly based on a text about the legal system of Germany by the European Agency for
    Development in Special Needs Education; see
    http://www.european-agency.org/country-information/germany/national-overview/legal-system)
                                                                2
        Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &   0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Resolution of May 1994) still apply to pupils with special educational needs, regardless
whether support takes place at a mainstream school or at a special school (formerly:
Sonderschule now Förderschule).

The responsibility for early years education of children with Special Educational Needs
(SEN) resides mainly with the Ministry for Social Affairs, that has to cooperate with the Child
and Youth Welfare sector that is responsible for regular pre-school facilities. This is currently
discussed controversely in the perspective of inclusive education. In most Länder early
intervention is not part of the public school system.

‘Disabled children should, as far as possible, attend kindergarten and school together with
non-disabled peers’ (Source: Reference work for disabled people, Bundesministerium für
Arbeit und Sozialordnung, July 2001. Available at: http://www.bma.bund.de)

As far as the Transition period from school to vocational training is concerned legal
provisions for vocational training are contained in the Vocational Training Act
Berufsbildungsgesetz.      The        Vocational       Training       Promotion         Act
(Berufsbildungsförderungsgesetz) of 1981 governs the planning and statistics of vocational
training as well as the terms of reference and organisation of the Federal Institute for
Vocational Training (Bundesinstitut für Berufsbildung). According to the SGB III (Third
Volume of the German Social Welfare Code) the provision of career orientation is the duty of
the Office of Employment (Arbeitsamt).

It's important to notice that the German translation of the UN-Convention doesn't speak of
"inclusive education", but uses the term "Integration". That may cause some
misunderstanding according to the quality of political efforts towards changing the system of
education in the "Länder". Up to now, in many "Länder" "integration" just led to some more
cooperation between regular and special education systems. At the same time special
education in seperated institutions and early seperation into different types of schools is not
questioned. The following assessments of the legal situation, the practice and the
developments of progression of inclusive education in Germany are based on official or other
public documents and on available data. It was already mentioned between German federal
states there are significant differences in development of inclusive education of children with
SEN. Aggregated data do not always reflect very well the situation on the ground. But the
Federal Government in its official Disability Reports, German Institute of Youth (Deutsches
Jugendinstitut, DJI), The Conference of Ministers of Education (KMK) and the semi-official
Report on Education in Germany (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung) provide and
work with aggregated data. In the past years the data sets on educational systems have
become more systematic and precise. Therefore we also feel legitimated to use them for
analysis and barometer assessment.
All the websites used for the research and quoted in the references were checked in July 2010.




                                                            3
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                   Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &   0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Assessment Part A: Statutory Legislation and Prescriptions

A1 Consistency for the right to inclusive education

There is consistency across different laws on national and regional/federal state 0-Yes
level for the right to inclusive education (e.g. education law, antidiscrimination law, X No
disability laws, children’s rights law, etc.).

References:
Report about the legal basis of the German school system:
http://www.european-agency.org/country-information/germany/national-overview/legal-system).

Grundgesetz der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany):
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bundesrecht/gg/gesamt.pdf

Deutsche Landesverfassungen (Constitutions of the German Bundesländer):
http://www.verfassungen.de/de

Schulgesetze der deutschen Bundesländer (School laws of the Bundesländer):
http://www.bildungsserver.de/zeigen.html?seite=72

Comments:
Due to the various educational systems and school laws of the 16 Bundesländer there is no
consistency with regards to the right to inclusive education. Inclusive education is possible in all
German Länder, however rather than being top priority it is only one option whereas segregated
education is another one.


A2 Free primary inclusive education

By statutory legislation, primary inclusive education is free.                                                   X Yes
                                                                                                                 0-No
References:

Comments:
Education in general is free in all public schools. This applies to inclusive education in primary and
secondary schools as well; however, currently the school laws of the Länder include a so-called
Haushaltsvorbehalt, which means if the state’s budget is exhausted inclusive education can be
denied.


A3 Equal access to secondary inclusive education

By statutory legislation, persons with disabilities have access to secondary inclusive 0-Yes
education like others in their community.                                              X No
References:
Inclusive education in Northrhine-Westphalia:
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulsystem/GemUnterricht.html
§20 Abs. 7 and 8, Schulgesetz NRW

                                                               4
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &   0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Comments:
Although several variations can be found between the Bundesländer, it can be stated for Germany
that pupils with disabilities do not have access to secondary inclusive education like others in
their community. Pupils with SEN can enroll in a regular secondary school but only under certain
circumstances, i.e. the conditions at the school (e. g. group size of the class, enough teachers,
funding) must be facilitative. §20 Abs. 8 of the NRW school law for instance specifies this caveat
unambiguously: Currently, according to the school law pupils with SEN cannot claim a right to visit
a regular secondary school.


A4 Participation in decision making on inclusive education

By statutory legislation, children with disabilities rsp. their parents effectively 0-Yes
participate in the decision-making on inclusive education.                          X No
References:
AO-SF       (Ausbildungsordnung       Sonderpädagogische Förderung                    Northrhine-Westphalia):
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/APOen/AO_SF.pdf
See also http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/AO-SF

Koalitionsvertrag der Landesregierung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Juni 2010 (Contract of the government
coalition in NRW, June 2010):
http://www.gruene-nrw.de/fileadmin/user_upload/landesverband/gruene-
nrw/aktuelles/2010/koalitionsvertrag/Koalitionsvertrag_Rot-Gruen_NRW_2010-2015.pdf

Comments:
All German Länder have established procedures for assessing school children with SEN. In the state
of Northrhine-Westphalia (NRW) the assessment process is explained in detail in the AO-SF
prescription. During the process the Gutachter (i. e. the expert team of a special educator and a
regular school teacher who cooperatively write a report about the child’s needs) as well as the school
authorities must involve the parents at all stages. Giving the child in the focus a chance to actively
participate in placement and other important decisions affecting himself or herself is not mentioned
in the prescription. The parents’ expertise with regards to their child and their wishes concerning the
school placement are important parts of the decision making. However, AO-SF permits the school
board to take the final decision even if it differs from the parents’ will. Therefore children with
disabilities and their parents cannot participate fully effectively in the decision-making on
inclusive education.
The new government in NRW (on duty since July 15, 2010) is planning to strengthen the parents’
will. In the Koalitionsvertrag of the coalition of the SPD and Bündnis 90/Die Grünen it is stated that
parents will get the right to choose whether they prefer a segregated or an inclusive educational
setting for their child with SEN.


A5 Categorization and assessment

The procedures of assessment special educational needs support inclusive 0-Yes
education.                                                               X No
References:
AO-SF (Northrhine-Westphalia):
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/APOen/AO_SF.pdf

Richtlinien der Grundschule NRW (2008):
http://www.standardsicherung.schulministerium.nrw.de/lehrplaene/lehrplaene-gs
                                                                5
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &   0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Comments:
Currently, during assessment procedures facilitating inclusion is not the primary goal of the decision
making. As stated in the AO-SF as well as in the Richtlinien für die Grundschule (guidelines for the
primary school) in the state of NRW inclusive education is only one of several options and has no
priority.


A6 Equal access to community schools

By statutory legislation, it is assured that persons with disabilities have access to the 0-Yes
schools in their community on an equal basis with others.                                 X No
References:

Comments:
There is no statutory legislation in Germany which assures that persons with disabilities have
access to the schools in their community on an equal basis with others. If at the end of an
assessment procedure inclusive education is recommended this does not necessarily imply that a
child with SEN may enroll in the school in his or her neighbourhood. Sometimes the only option is
to go to a school in another part of town which has a special focus on inclusive education.


A7 Accommodation of the individual’s access requirements

By statutory legislation, it is assured that the architectural conditions are 0-Yes
accommodated to individual’s requirements                                     X No
References:
Building codes in Germany:
http://www.bauordnungen.de

Building code of Northrhine-Westphalia:
http://www.bauordnungen.de/html/nrw.html
§55 Abs. 6 (restrictions concerning barrier free buildings)

Information about laws, prescriptions and other regulations with regards to barrier free access:
http://nullbarriere.de/gesetze.htm

Comments:
Although in principle the building codes promote barrier free access to public buildings (this is
especially true for all new buildings) for persons with disabilities several restrictions can be found.
If, for instance, a building already exists or if it is constructed on an unfavourable ground it is not
necessary to guarantee access to the building for all persons. I. e., it is not mandatory that all
schools must be barrier free. Therefore, in many cases it is a matter of good will of the school
owner if the architectural conditions are accommodated to the individual’s requirements or not.


A8 Accommodation of the individual’s learning requirements

By statutory legislation, it is assured that staff to support the learning process is 0-Yes
accommodated to individual’s requirements                                             X No
References:
                                                                6
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &   0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Sozialgesetzbuch (SGB) IX and XII:
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_9 and http://bundesrecht.juris.de/sgb_12

Comments:
Generally, if a pupil with SEN attends a regular school he or she should receive the same educational
support as in a special school. However, currently there are not enough special educators in NRW
who are willing to work in inclusive school settings. Hence there is a lack of special education
teachers in regular schools.
The federal Sozialgesetzbuch regulates the procedures and financing of individual school assistants
for a child with SEN. Such personal assistants can be paid for by the local authorities (social welfare
office or youth office) under certain circumstances but depending on the individual special needs
financing of an assistant is often rejected. This means: There is no statutory legislation which
assures sufficient support of special educators and inclusion assistants for students with SEN in
inclusive schools.


A9 Accommodation of the individual’s learning requirements

By statutory legislation, it is assured that classroom sizes are accommodated to 0-Yes
individual’s requirements                                                        X No
References:
Gemeinde-Unfallversicherungsverband Hannover, Landesunfallkasse Niedersachsen. 13. Nov. 2008
http://www.ukh.de/fileadmin/Praevention/pdf/SUV/Raeumliche_Anforderungen_Klassenraum_Kass
el_13-11-2008.pdf

Comments:
Class sizes vary in German schools, depending on prescriptions of the various federal states. Usually
it is common practice to reduce the group size of inclusive education classes; however, this
accomodation of class sizes to individual requirements is not assured by law.


A10 Accommodation of the individual’s learning requirements

By statutory legislation, it is assured that adaptive technology is accommodated to 0-Yes
individual’s requirements                                                           X No
References:
Social Code Book (SGB V §33, Hilfsmittel)
http://www.sozialgesetzbuch-sgb.de/sgbv/33.html

Comments:
Statutory legislation in Germany does not assure that adaptive technology is provided to
accommodate the requirements of a pupil with SEN. In most cases parents must try to receive
funding for specialized technology for their child by their health insurance company. While this
individualized funding depends on the support of the parents` health insurance, adaptive technology
can also be paid for by the school owner if several pupils and/or the staff benefit from the technical
aid (e. g. a lift, hight adjustable furniture or a special sound system for hearing impaired pupils);
however, this is much more likely to happen in a special school for physically, visually or hearing
impaired pupils rather than in a mainstream school.




                                                                7
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &   0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




A11 Accommodation of the individual’s learning requirements

By statutory legislation, it is assured that functional assistance and care provision 0-Yes
are accommodated to individual’s requirements.                                        X No
References:
Sozialgesetzbuch (SGB) IX and XII:
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_9 and http://bundesrecht.juris.de/sgb_12

Comments: see A8

A12 Accommodation of educational measures

By statutory legislation, it is assured that educational measures are accommodated 0-Yes
to individual’s requirements (i.e. individual curricula, didactical adaption, teaching X No
methods, testing)

References:
AO-SF (Northrhine-Westphalia):
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/APOen/AO_SF.pdf

Richtlinien der Grundschule NRW (Guidelines for primary schools in NRW; 2008):
http://www.standardsicherung.schulministerium.nrw.de/lehrplaene/lehrplaene-gs

Lehrpläne NRW (Curricula in NRW):
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/RuL/index.html

Comments:
Educational measures for pupils with SEN depend on several prescriptions such as the Lehrpläne
(curricula), in NRW the AO-SF and other local regulations set up by the school authorities. Pupils
with special needs can be taught and graded on the basis of the same or different educational goals as
their classmates. This is true no matter whether a child attends a special or a mainstream school.
Statutory legislation cannot assure that educational measures are accommodated to all
individual requirements though.


A13 Facilitation of learning of Braille and sign language

By statutory legislation, it is assured that the learning of Braille and sign language is 0-Yes
facilitated.                                                                              X No
References:
AO-SF (Northrhine-Westphalia):
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/APOen/AO_SF.pdf
Deutscher Blinden- und Sehbehindertenverband (DBSV) about the demand for learning Braille:
http://www.dbsv.org

Comments:
In NRW the AO-SF describes the necessities for visually and for hearing impaired pupils. According
to the prescription those who are in need of learning Braille or sign language should receive
specialized training – in special schools as well as in regular schools. In reality this does not happen
in all schools in the same way and even special schools cannot always assure that Braille or sign
language is taught.
                                                                8
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &   0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




A14 Facilitation of learning of augmentative and alternative forms of
communication and orientation
                                                                              0-Yes
By statutory legislation, it is assured that the learning of augmentative and X No
alternative forms of communication and orientation is facilitated.

References:
ISAAC – Gesellschaft für Unterstützte Kommunikation:
http://www.isaac-online.de

Comments:
Augmentative and alternative communication is a non-mandatory part of the initial training of future
special educators at several but not all German universities. It is most likely that special education
teachers who had specialists in the area of physical disability or mental retardation have gained at
least some basic information about the needs of those who benefit from AAC. Other special
educators usually do not know much about AAC. Right now, statutory legislation in Germany
does not assure that AAC and orientation are accommodated to all individual requirements.


A15 Training of teachers and staff

By statutory legislation, it is assured that the training of teachers is oriented to the 0-Yes
requirements of inclusive education                                                      X No
(inclusive teaching methods, incorporation of disability awareness, the use of appropriate
augmentative and alternative modes, means and formats of communication, educational techniques
and materials to support persons with disabilities).

References:
Franzkowiak, Thomas (2009): Integration, Inklusion, Gemeinsamer Unterricht - Themen für die
Grundschullehramtsausbildung an Hochschulen in Deutschland? Eine Bestandsaufnahme.
Universität Siegen: http://bidok.uibk.ac.at/library/franzkowiak-integration.html.

Comments:
A recent survey has shown that less than 50 percent of the 43 German universities with teacher
training programmes for primary school teachers offered lectures or seminars which focus on
inclusion/inclusive education. When courses took place the content differed remarkably: in several
courses inclusion was only a minor topic amongst several others, some courses had a strong
theoretical bias and in most cases practical experiences in inclusive school settings where not a part
of the course curriculum. Not one German university could be found where an introductory course
on inclusion is mandatory for all primary school teacher students.
In special education studies the situation is quite similar, i. e. students are not obliged to sign up for
courses about inclusive education. With the exception of two universities (Bremen and Bielefeld)
where inclusive education is the central part of the study program of special education students,
studies in special education at German universities still mainly focus on different subject areas which
are related to certain types of deficiencies (e. g. mental retardation or blindness). Currently, neither
during initial teacher training nor during the second phase (Referendariat) it can be assured
that all teachers are prepared for the requirements of inclusive education.




                                                                9
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




A16 Employment of qualified teachers

By statutory legislation, it is assured that qualified teachers and staff are employed 0-Yes
to provide effective inclusive education.                                              X No
References:

Comments:
Statutory legislation does not assure that qualified teachers and staff are employed to provide
effective inclusive education. In the Bundesland NRW it is difficult to find enough special educators
who want to work in inclusive educational settings. Although the number of open positions for
teachers in such schools has slowly raised over the last years young special educators still prefer to
apply for a job in a special school. As a result of that often no special education teacher can be found
in the context of an offer of employment in a mainstream school or only a teacher who has not been
successful in finding a “better offer” in his or her point of view. While it is difficult to recruit enough
highly qualified special educators for inclusive education it is even much more problematic to enlist
regular school teachers who are not only willing to face the challenge of inclusive education but who
are also trained for this job.


A17 Equal access to tertiary education

By statutory legislation, it is assured that persons with disabilities have access 0-Yes
vocational to lifelong learning without discrimination and on an equal basis with X No
others.

References:

Comments:
Statutory legislation does not assure that persons with disabilities have access vocational to lifelong
learning without discrimination and on an equal basis with others.



A18 Monitoring of development of inclusive education

Numbers and percentages of pupils/students with SEN in mainstream classes, units X Yes
in mainstream schools, special learning institutions, excluded from the education 0-No
system, are collected and monitored at different levels of the system.

References
Kultusministerkonferenz der Länder (Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Culture
Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany):
http://www.kmk.org

Schulinformations- und –planungssystem (SchIPs) NRW:
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/SV/Schulmail/Archiv/2009/090316/index.html

Comments:
At this time there are several ways of monitoring the development of inclusive education;
however, there is no systematic approach.
                                                                10
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




The Kultusministerkonferenz (Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Culture
Affairs) regularly collects and publishes statistical data on the present situation and developments e.
g. with regards to the numbers of schools, teachers, pupils with SEN and pupils in special schools
and integrated settings. The state offices of statistics provide comparable figures on a Bundesland
level as well as the regional governments for the part of the state they are responsible of. In NRW the
ministry of schools has established SchIPs (Schulinformations- und –planungssystem), an internet
based information and planning system which has become an important source of state wide data
relating to school. Locally, it depends on the school authorities and the municipalities whether
inclusion related data are collected regularly.




Summary of Part A:

(A1) Due to the various educational systems and school laws of the 16 Bundesländer there is
no consistency with regards to the right to inclusive education. Inclusive education is
possible in all German Länder, however rather than being top priority it is only one option
whereas segregated education is another one.

(A2) Education in general is free in all public schools. This applies to inclusive education in
primary and secondary schools as well; however, currently the school laws of the Länder
include a so-called Haushaltsvorbehalt, which means if the state’s budget is exhausted
inclusive education can be denied.

(A3) Although several variations can be found between the Bundesländer, it can be stated for
Germany that pupils with disabilities do not have access to secondary inclusive education
like others in their community. Pupils with SEN can enroll in a regular secondary school but
only under certain circumstances, i.e. the conditions at the school (e. g. group size of the class,
enough teachers, funding) must be facilitative. §20 Abs. 8 of the NRW school law for
instance specifies this caveat unambiguously: Currently, according to the school law pupils
with SEN cannot claim a right to visit a regular secondary school.

(A4) All German Länder have established procedures for assessing school children with SEN.
In the state of Northrhine-Westphalia (NRW) the assessment process is explained in detail in
the AO-SF prescription. During the process the Gutachter (i. e. the expert team of a special
educator and a regular school teacher who cooperatively write a report about the child’s
needs) as well as the school authorities must involve the parents at all stages. Giving the child
in the focus a chance to actively participate in placement and other important decisions
affecting himself or herself is not mentioned in the prescription. The parents’ expertise with
regards to their child and their wishes concerning the school placement are important parts of
the decision making. However, AO-SF permits the school board to take the final decision
even if it differs from the parents’ will. Therefore children with disabilities and their
parents cannot participate fully effectively in the decision-making on inclusive
education.
The new government in NRW (on duty since July 15, 2010) is planning to strengthen the
parents’ will. In the Koalitionsvertrag of the coalition of the SPD and Bündnis 90/Die Grünen

                                                                11
        Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                 Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &   0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




it is stated that parents will get the right to choose whether they prefer a segregated or an
inclusive educational setting for their child with SEN.

(A5) Currently, during assessment procedures facilitating inclusion is not the primary goal of
the decision making. As stated in the AO-SF as well as in the Richtlinien für die Grundschule
(guidelines for the primary school) in the state of NRW inclusive education is only one of
several options and has no priority.

(A6) There is no statutory legislation in Germany which assures that persons with
disabilities have access to the schools in their community on an equal basis with others.
If at the end of an assessment procedure inclusive education is recommended this does not
necessarily imply that a child with SEN may enroll in the school in his or her neighbourhood.
Sometimes the only option is to go to a school in another part of town which has a special
focus on inclusive education.

(A7) Although in principle the building codes promote barrier free access to public buildings
(this is especially true for all new buildings) for persons with disabilities several restrictions
can be found. If, for instance, a building already exists or if it is constructed on an
unfavourable ground it is not necessary to guarantee access to the building for all persons. I.
e., it is not mandatory that all school must be barrier free. Therefore, in many cases it is a
matter of good will of the school owner if the architectural conditions are accommodated to
the individual’s requirements or not.

(A8, A11) Generally, if a pupil with SEN attends a regular school he or she should receive the
same educational support as in a special school. However, currently there are not enough
special educators in NRW who are willing to work in inclusive school settings. Hence there is
a lack of special education teachers in regular schools.
The federal Sozialgesetzbuch regulates the procedures and financing of individual school
assistants for a child with SEN. Such personal assistants can be paid for by the local
authorities (social welfare office or youth office) under certain circumstances but depending
on the individual special needs financing of an assistant is often rejected. This means: There
is no statutory legislation which assures sufficient support of special educators and
inclusion assistants for students with SEN in inclusive schools.

(A9) Class sizes vary in German schools, depending on prescriptions of the various federal
states. Usually it is common practice to reduce the group size of inclusive education classes;
however, this accommodation of class sizes to individual requirements is not assured by
law.

(A10) Statutory legislation in Germany does not assure that adaptive technology is
provided to accommodate the requirements of a pupil with SEN. In most cases parents
must try to receive funding for specialized technology for their child by their health insurance
company. While this individualized funding depends on the support of the parents` health
insurance adaptive technology can also be paid for by the school owner if several pupils
and/or the staff benefit from the technical aid (e. g. a lift, hight adjustable furniture or a
special sound system for hearing impaired pupils); however, this is much more likely to
                                               12
         Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                 Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




happen in a special school for physically, visually or hearing impaired pupils rather than in a
mainstream school.

(A12) Educational measures for pupils with SEN depend on several prescriptions such as the
Lehrpläne (curricula), in NRW the AO-SF and other local regulations set up by the school
authorities. Pupils with special needs can be taught and graded on the basis of the same or
different educational goals as their classmates. This is true no matter whether a child attends a
special or a mainstream school. Statutory legislation cannot assure that educational
measures are accommodated to all individual requirements though.

(A13) In NRW the AO-SF describes the necessities for visually and for hearing impaired
pupils. According to the prescription those who are in need of learning Braille or sign
language should receive specialized training – in special schools as well as in regular schools.
In reality this does not happen in all schools in the same way and even special schools cannot
always assure that Braille or sign language is taught.

(A14) Augmentative and alternative communication is a non-mandatory part of the initial
training of future special educators at several but not all German universities. It is most likely
that special education teachers who had specialists in the area of physical disability or mental
retardation have gained at least some basic information about the needs of those who benefit
from AAC. Other special educators usually do not know much about AAC. Right now,
statutory legislation in Germany does not assure that AAC and orientation are
accommodated to all individual requirements.

(A15) A recent survey has shown that less than 50 percent of the 43 German universities with
teacher training programmes for primary school teachers offered lectures or seminars which
focus on inclusion/inclusive education. When courses took place the content differed
remarkably: in several courses inclusion was only a minor topic amongst several others, some
courses had a strong theoretical bias and in most cases practical experiences in inclusive
school settings where not a part of the course curriculum. Not one German university could be
found where an introductory course on inclusion is mandatory for all primary school teacher
students.
In special education studies the situation is quite similar, i. e. students are not obliged to sign
up for courses about inclusive education. With the exception of two universities (Bremen and
Bielefeld) where inclusive education is the central part of the study program of special
education students, studies in special education at German universities still mainly focus on
different subject areas which are related to certain types of deficiencies (e. g. mental
retardation or blindness). Currently, neither during initial teacher training nor during the
second phase (Referendariat) it can be assured that all teachers are prepared for the
requirements of inclusive education.

(A16) Statutory legislation does not assure that qualified teachers and staff are
employed to provide effective inclusive education. In the Bundesland NRW it is difficult to
find enough special educators who want to work in inclusive educational settings. Although
the number of open positions for teachers in such schools has slowly raised over the last years
young special educators still prefer to apply for a job in a special school. As a result of that

                                                             13
        Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




often no special education teacher can be found in the context of an offer of employment in a
mainstream school or only a teacher who has not been successful in finding a “better offer” in
his or her point of view. While it is difficult to recruit enough highly qualified special
educators for inclusive education it is even much more problematic to enlist regular school
teachers who are not only willing to face the challenge of inclusive education but who are also
trained for this job.

(A17) Statutory legislation does not assure that persons with disabilities have access
vocational to lifelong learning without discrimination and on an equal basis with others.

(A18) At this time there are several ways of monitoring the development of inclusive
education; however, there is no systematic approach.
The Kultusministerkonferenz (Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Culture
Affairs) regularly collects and publishes statistical data on the present situation and
developments e. g. with regards to the numbers of schools, teachers, pupils with SEN and
pupils in special schools and integrated settings. The state offices of statistics provide
comparable figures on a Bundesland level as well as the regional governments for the part of
the state they are responsible of. In NRW the ministry of schools has established SchIPs
(Schulinformations- und –planungssystem), an internet based information and planning
system which has become an important source of state wide data relating to school.
Locally, it depends on the school authorities and the municipalities whether inclusion related
data are collected regularly.


Conclusion:
Inclusive education in Germany is slowly developing even though there is no broad legal
background for this process.




                                                            14
       Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
               Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228    sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




               ‘Barometer assessment’ to part A:
 Legal basis and prescription on inclusive education in Germany

The given legal
                                                                                  Rather
  basis for          Hindering for              Rather hindering                                          Supportive for
                                                                               supportive for
  inclusive           progressive                for progressive                                           progressive
                                                                                progressive
education can       implementation              implementation                                           implementation
                                                                              implementation
be assessed as



                                                       X




                                                           15
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                   Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Assessment Instrument Part B) Situation of Inclusive Education in Practice


B1 Priority of inclusive education on pre-school level (age 3 – 5/6)

Children with disabilities or SEN not in regular pre-schools or child care services percentage:

…………35………..%

This can be assessed as

                        1-------------- 2 ------------------ 3 ----------------------4
                       (Very high                                            very low)

References:
Dorrance, Carmen (2010): Barrierefrei von Kindergarten in die Schule? Eine Untersuchung zur Kontinuität von
Integration aus der Perspektive betroffener Eltern. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt Verlag, S. 18
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (Hrsg.) (2010): Bildung in Deutschland 2010. Ein
indikatorengestützter Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Perspektiven des Bildungswesens im demografischen
Wandel. Bielefeld: W. Bertelsmann Verlag
http://www.bildungsbericht.de/daten2010/bb_2010.pdf , S. 52, bzw. Tab. C2-14web
Bock-Famulla, Kathrin / Große-Wöhrmann, Kerstin (2010): Länderreport Frühkindliche Bildungssysteme 2009.
Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung
http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/cps/rde/xchg/SID-FA8ADAC7-
3F50AF0D/bst/hs.xsl/publikationen_95772.htm
Vhttp://www.laendermonitor.de/grafiken-tabellen/indikator-4c-mit-besonderem-foerderbedarf-
eingliederungshilfe/indikator/6/indcat/5/indsubcat/2/index.html


Comments:
The percentage of children with disabilities or SEN segregated from inclusive settings is much lower than in
school age. 3,2 % of all children below 6 years receive special education (without Vorschule). In 2009, 64,7% of
them were in inclusive settings, and 14,5% in special services, that vary between the Bundesländer. About 20,8%
attended special pre-schools or special child care services.


B2 Priority of inclusive education on primary-school level

Children with disabilities or SEN not in regular primary schools:

………………66,6…..%

This can be assessed as

                         1-------------- 2 ------------------ 3 ----------------------4
                       (Very high                                             very low)

References: Calculations: Dorrance on data from:
Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland (2011): Statistik der allgemeinbildenden Schulen. Statistik 21111-0005

                                                               16
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                   Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




https://www-
genesis.destatis.de:443/genesis/online;jsessionid=6DE3D49DC5AF1716CA7479BCE649C479.tomcat_GO_2_1
?operation=statistikAbruftabellen&levelindex=0&levelid=1296149866266&index=2
and
Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (2010):
Sonderpädagogische Förderung in allgemeinen Schulen (ohne Förderschulen) 2009/2010. IVC/Statistik, 1.
Tabelle (Sonderpädagogisch geförderte deutsche und ausländische Schüler (Integrationsschüler) nach
Schularten 2009/2010)
http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/pdf/Statistik/Aus_SoPae_Int_2009.pdf
and
Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (2010):
Sonderpädagogische Förderung in Förderschulen (Sonderschulen) 2009/2010. IVC/Statistik, 1. Tabelle
http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/pdf/Statistik/Aus_Sopae_2009.pdf

Comments:
In 2009/10 only 55.028 students with disabilities or SEN attended regular primary schools. This represents ca. 33
% of the whole amount of 164.629 with disabilities or SEN. 4,6% of all children in the age of primary school are
separated in special schools.


B3 Priority of inclusive education at secondary school level

Percentage of children with disabilities or SEN not in regular secondary schools:

……………87,5……..%

This can be assessed as

                         1-------------- 2 ------------------ 3 ----------------------4
                       (Very high                                                       very low)

References: Calculations: Dorrance on data from:
Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland (2011): Statistik der allgemeinbildenden Schulen. Statistik 21111-0005
https://www-
genesis.destatis.de:443/genesis/online;jsessionid=6DE3D49DC5AF1716CA7479BCE649C479.tomcat_GO_2_1
?operation=statistikAbruftabellen&levelindex=0&levelid=1296149866266&index=2
and
Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland
(2010):Sonderpädagogische Förderung in allgemeinen Schulen (ohne Förderschulen) 2009/2010. IVC/Statistik,
1. Tabelle (Sonderpädagogisch geförderte deutsche und ausländische Schüler (Integrationsschüler) nach
Schularten 2009/2010)
http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/pdf/Statistik/Aus_SoPae_Int_2009.pdf
and
Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (2010:
Sonderpädagogische Förderung in Förderschulen (Sonderschulen) 2009/2010. IVC/Statistik, 1. Tabelle
http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/pdf/Statistik/Aus_Sopae_2009.pdf

Comments:
In 2009/10 there were 317.915 students with disabilities or SEN of which 39.724 attended regular secondary
schools (15.621 attended regular Hauptschulen, 6.489 attended regular Integrierte Gesamtschulen). 5,8% of all
kids in the age of secondary school (4.487.238) are separated.


                                                               17
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




B4 In practice, inclusive education of children with SEN in primary schools is for their
parents related with

Direct costs               1-------------- 2 ------------------ 3 ----------------------4
                         (Very high                                               none)


Indirect costs             1-------------- 2 ------------------ 3 ----------------------4
                         (Very high                                               none)

References:
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/Gesetze/SchulG_Info/Schulgesetz.pdf , § 96, clause 3

Comments:
Unfortunately, there is no reference that explicitly says with how many costs parents are faced with. Parents of
children with SEN as well as parents of children without SEN may have to pay for some materials, books etc. up
to a certain amount, but they should not be confronted with any direct costs.


B5 Participation of parents in decision making on inclusive education

In decision making processes, if parents articulate a preference for inclusive education it is
followed.

                              1-------------- 2 ------------------ 3 ----------------------4
                            (Never          sometimes             often               always)

References:
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/APOen/AO_SF.pdf
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulsystem/Schulformen/Foerderschulen/FAQSonderpFoerderung/Ent
scheidung.html
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/Gesetze/SchulG_Info/Schulgesetz.pdf, § 19

Comments:
It is up to the Schulaufsichtsbehörde to decide about the type of school for students with disabilities or SEN. If
parents prefer an inclusive school setting for their child they have to apply for it explicitly. Lately, the parents’
wishes have not always been followed as the school laws as well as the Verordnung über die
sonderpädagogische Förderung, den Hausunterricht und die Schule für Kranke from 2005 are still in effect.


B6 Assessment procedures support inclusive education

 “The practiced procedures of assessment of special educational needs support inclusive
education”

                                             1            2             3       4
                                      (No        rather not          rather yes Yes)



                                                                18
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




References:
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/APOen/AO_SF.pdf, §3
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/Gesetze/SchulG_Info/Schulgesetz.pdf, § 19

Comments:
The school laws and the school authorities still promote special schooling for students with disabilities or SEN in
many cases and do not give inclusive education high priority. It is up to the parents to take action and to apply
for inclusive education explicitly.


B7 Equal access to community schools

Persons with disabilities or SEN have access to the schools in their community on an equal
basis with others.
                                  1     2        3      4
                               (None some        most      all )

References: There are no precise data available.

Comments:
Schools can still deny accommodating students with disabilities or SEN if, for example, their buildings are not
prepared for the needs of a child architecturally. In practice, this leads to the fact that there are no equal rights
yet. Persons with disabilities or SEN do not have access to all their community schools yet.


B8 Accommodation of the individual’s access requirements

In practice architectural conditions in schools are accommodated to individual requirements
of persons with SEN

                                        1      2                      3            4
                                      (No rather not             rather yes        Yes)

References: There are no precise data available.

Comments:
Not all schools allow barrier free access. Unsuitable architectural conditions still hinder many persons with
disabilities or SEN to have access to buildings or to parts of buildings.


B9 Accommodation of the individual’s learning requirements

In practice staff to support the learning process is accommodated to individual’s requirements

                                        1     2                        3            4
                                      (No rather not             rather yes        Yes)

References: There are no precise data available.
http://www.schulministerium.nrw.de/BP/Schulrecht/Gesetze/SchulG_Info/Schulgesetz.pdf, §92

Comments:
                                                                19
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




By law, staff to support the learning process should be assured. But due to the fact that the financial situation of
the federal states and many communities is rather bad, additional staff is not always approved, but rejected in
many cases.


B10 Accommodation of the individual’s learning requirements

In practice class sizes are accommodated to individual’s requirements

                                        1          2                  3            4
                                      (No rather not             rather yes        Yes)

References: There are no precise data available.

Comments:
Usually, integrative working schools reduce their class sizes. There are fewer students in an integrative class
than in a mainstream class.


B11 Accommodation of the individual’s learning requirements

In practice adaptive technology is accommodated to individual’s requirements

                                        1          2                  3            4
                                      (No rather not             rather yes        Yes)

References:
http://www.sozialgesetzbuch-sgb.de/sgbv/33.html

Comments:
Every insured person has entitlement to health care and therefore to adaptive technology. Persons with
disabilities or SEN are usually accommodated to their individual requirements.


B12 Accommodation of the individual’s learning requirements

In practice functional assistance and care provision are accommodated to individual’s
requirements.

                                        1          2                  3            4
                                      (No rather not             rather yes        Yes)

References: There are no precise data available.

Comments:
Costs for necessary assistance have to be paid by the offices for social welfare (Sozialhilfeträger) or youth
(Jugendämter). They should employ functional assistance and care provision, but the situation in practice shows
that this is often rejected by the Sozialhilfeträger and Jugendämter depending on the degree of disability of the
child.



                                                                20
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




B13 Accommodation of educational measures

In practice educational measures are accommodated to individual’s requirements (i.e.
individual curricula, didactical adaption, teaching methods, testing)


                                       1      2                         3           4
                                      (No rather not             rather yes        Yes)

References: There are no precise data available.

Comments:
There are individual curricula in the special system, but only very little in regular schools.


B14 Facilitation of learning of Braille and sign language

In case of demand, it is practice, that the learning of Braille and sign language is facilitated.


                                        1     2                       3            4
                                      (No rather not             rather yes        Yes)

References: http://www.isar-projekt.de/

Comments:
The learning of Braille or sign language is neither obligatory nor part of the teacher-training of all teachers. Only
special school educators who have specialized in these fields are such experts that they are able to teach and
facilitate the use of Braille or sign language.


B15 Facilitation of learning of augmentative and alternative forms of communication
and orientation
In case of demand, in practice the learning of augmentative and alternative forms of
communication and orientation is facilitated.

                                        1    2                         3            4
                                      (No rather not             rather yes        Yes)

References:
International Society for Augmentative Alternative Communication
http://www.isaac-online.de/cms/

Comments:
There are some high quality standards in the special school system, but the transfer to regular schools is limited.




B16 Training of teachers and staff

                                                                21
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                   Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen       &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Training of teachers is oriented to the requirements of inclusive education
(inclusive teaching methods, incorporation of disability awareness, the use of appropriate augmentative and
alternative modes, means and formats of communication, educational techniques and materials to support
persons with disabilities).


                                       1     2                           3            4
                                     (No rather not                 rather yes        Yes)

References:
“Die ‘inklusive Schule’ – mehr als seine Vision? by Thomas Franzkowiak, published in SI:SO 2/2009.

Comments:
Teacher-training does not prepare future teachers for inclusive education. It is not obligatory subject yet, only
very few universities offer courses that prepare and sensitize to inclusive education.


B17 Employment of qualified teachers

In practice qualified teachers and staff are employed to provide effective inclusive education.

                                       1     2                           3             4
                                     (No rather not                 rather yes        Yes)

References: There are no data available.

Comments:
In general, special education teachers are employed in schools that realize inclusive education. But usually they
are only employed for a certain amount of lessons each week, which makes effective inclusive education rather
difficult. Furthermore, applications for qualified teachers are sometimes rejected.


B18 Equal access to tertiary education

By statutory legislation, it is assured that persons with disabilities have access vocational to
lifelong learning without discrimination and on an equal basis with others.

                                        1                  2                  3                  4
                                      (No           rather not            rather yes            Yes)

References:
http://www.bmas.de/portal/3118/property=pdf/bericht__der__bundesregierung__
ueber__die__lage__der__behinderten__menschen__und__die__entwicklung__ihrer__teilhabe.pdf, p. 65

Comments:
Persons with disabilities or SEN do not have equal access to tertiary education. Only 32.000 students with
disabilities or SEN attend lifelong learning, which makes 2% out of all German university students. This is very
little and shows that they do not have equal access.



                                                                   22
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                   Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




B19 Monitoring of development of inclusive education

There is a systematic national data collection and monitoring on progress of inclusive
education.

                                       1     2                       3             4
                                     (No rather not             rather yes        Yes)

References:
http://www.kmk.org/statistik/schule/statistische-veroeffentlichungen.html
http://www.bildungsbericht.de/daten2010/bb_2010.pdf
http://www.institut-fuer-menschenrechte.de/de/monitoring-stelle.html

Comments:
In Germany, there are several statutory or semi-statutory institutions that systematically monitor on progress of
inclusive education. The Federal State Ministries of Education, The Kultusministerkonferenz (KMK), the
German Institute for Human Rights (DIMR).




                                                               23
         Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                 Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Summary Part B: Practice of inclusive education in Germany

Even though there seem to be positive changes towards a less segregating school system in
Germany, the situation in practice is still evident for the fact that there has not been a priority
of inclusive education so far. Recently, the KMK published a report that states that in 2008
only 18,4% of all pupils with disabilities or SEN were integrated in mainstream schools. This
means the percentage of all pupils with SEN excluded from regular education was almost
82%, which is 4.8% of all German pupils below 16 years. Compared to other European
countries and with regards to the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities this
is a very high amount. However, the percentage of segregation highly varies depending on the
different levels of the education system as well as on the different education systems of the 16
German federal states. The following data will be based on aggregated data for whole
Germany, examples will be given from the federal state North Rhine – Westphalia.

(B1, B2, B3) Whereas on pre-school level about 65% of all children with disabilities or
SEN have access to regular kindergarten or pre-schools settings in Germany, the
percentage of integration on primary level is only ca. 33%. The percentage of children in
special schools on primary education level has been constantly increasing and is now at 4, 6
%. The number of students with disabilities or SEN in regular secondary schools is less.
Only 12,5% have access to inclusive education, which means that almost 87,5% of disabled
students attend special schools on secondary school level. The percentage of all pupils in
special schools in 2009/10 was 5 % on secondary level

(B4) By law, there should not be any direct or indirect costs for primary inclusive
education in Germany. Neither parents of students without disabilities nor parents of students
with disabilities should be confronted with direct or indirect costs for their child’s primary
education. However, there are no data available that prove if the situation in practice
really sticks to this or if parents are in fact confronted with costs.

(B5) The decision making process highly depends on the local education authority and
the parents’ preferences are not always followed. The final decision is always based on the
authority’s judgment, no matter what parents would prefer for their children.

(B6) The AO-SF prescription of the school ministry in NRW as well as most school
authorities do not fully promote inclusive education yet. There are still recommendations
of the KMK that emphasize special schooling for students with disabilities or SEN. Therefore
it depends on the authorities what they promote and if they enable inclusive education. In
practice, this highly varies from community to community and from federal state to federal
state. Beside that, in North Rhine-Westphalia the school laws still promote special schooling.
As mentioned above the situation may be different in another federal state. In NRW parents
have to fill out a special form in order to apply for inclusive education for their children. Even
though assessment teams are obliged to inform parents about the process of applying for


                                                             24
        Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                 Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




inclusive education for children with disabilities or SEN, the realization very often depends
on their parents’ initiative.

(B7, B8) Another problematic aspect families of children with disabilities or SEN have to face
is the fact that not all schools in Germany allow barrier free access. In practice, many
schools are not architecturally and substantially prepared for inclusion. Many schools are not
provided with elevators, handicapped accessible doors, adapted bath rooms, appropriate
classroom sizes, adaptive technology and so on. Children with disabilities do not have equal
access to the same schools in their community like children without disabilities.

(B9, B12) Transport and personal assistance in the form of special education teachers /
integration assistance have to be available for students with SEN on an equal basis. The
school laws from NRW from 2007 assure that all costs for a special individual assistance have
to be paid by the institution for social welfare (Sozialhilfeträger) or the communal offices of
youth. Nevertheless, inclusive education is still problematic in practice as special education
teachers are usually only employed for a certain amount of lessons each week and not present
all day. Furthermore, the application for special staff is quite often rejected due to financial
constraints and depending on the degree of disability of a child.

(B10) In practice, if inclusive education is realized class sizes are usually accommodated
to individual requirements. In most cases, there are fewer students in an integrative class
than in a mainstream class.

(B11) Every insured person have entitlements to health care and thus, to adaptive
technology. Therefore, persons with disabilities or SEN are usually accommodated to their
individual requirements.

(B13) In NRW there are different curricula for each type of school. This means there are also
curricula for the special system. However, the problem is that mostly there are no individual
curricula for the individual needs of the children with disabilities or SEN in regular schools.

(B14, B15, B16) Not only the regular schools but also the teacher training programs are
not prepared for inclusive education yet. The teacher training differs remarkably between
the federal states. Following the idea of a ‘primary defect’ the training of special teachers is
still designed alongside the various types of special schools. Furthermore, it is not
obligatory for future teachers to learn Braille or sign language or other alternative forms of
communication and orientation. University students hardly get in touch with the issue of the
inclusion of pupils with disabilities or SEN in mainstream schools. Only very few universities
offer lectures concerning inclusive education and the sensitizing of students.
Nevertheless, there are some projects like the ISaR or efforts from the German ISAAC-
branch (International Society for Augmentative Alternative Communication), that offer
training units for teachers and others in order to learn Braille, sign language, or alternative or
augmentative forms of communication.



                                                             25
        Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                  Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen     &    0271 / 740-2228    sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




(B18) Persons with disabilities or SEN are not only faced with segregation in the German
school system but also in universities and other institutions of tertiary education. The
small number of disabled university students is a clear evidence for the fact that they do not
have equal access to lifelong learning.

(B19) In Germany, there are several statutory or semi-statutory institutions that
systematically monitor on progress of inclusive education and regularly publish data.
The KMK, the German institution for civil rights and others are commissioned to monitor the
realization of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.




                  ‘Barometer assessment’ to part B:
    ‘Practice of inclusive education in the participating country’
                             in Germany


  In practice
   inclusive                                              Rather not
                          Not realized                                             Partly realized             fully realized
 education can                                             realized
 be assessed as



                                                            X




                                                                26
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                   Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Assessment Part C: Progression towards Inclusive Education

C1 Development of inclusive education on pre-school level

Percentage of children not in regular pre-schools or child-care services on preschool level

1998*:       0,60% (places)
2002*:       0,24% (places)
2006:        0,40 % (children)
2008:        0,48 % (children)
2010:        0,45% (children)
This development can be assessed as

                                         1--------- 2 ------ 3 -----4
                                 (bad – rather bad - positive – very positive)

References:
Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland (2010): Kinder- und Jugendhilfestatistik: Kinder und tätige Personen in
Tageseinrichtungen und in öffentlich geförderter Kindertagespflege am 01.03.2010. Wiesbaden: Statistisches
Bundesamt
https://www-ec.destatis.de/csp/shop/sfg/bpm.html.cms.cBroker.cls?cmspath=struktur,sfgsuchergebnis.csp

Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2010): Bildung in Deutschland 2010. Ein indikatorengestützter
Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Perspektiven des Bildungswesens im demografischen Wandel,
http://www.bildungsbericht.de/daten2010/bb_2010.pdf, pp 52

Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Lage von Menschen mit Behinderungen für die 15. Legislaturperiode
(2005), p.16ff.

Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Lage von Menschen mit Behinderungen für die 16 Legislaturperiode,
(2009): p. 32ff.

Dittrich, Gisela (1998): Behinderte Kinder in Kindertagesstätten: Wie steht es mit der Entwicklung von
Integrationsplätzen in den Institutionen Krippe, Kindergarten, Hort? Welche Qualität braucht Integration? In:
Gemeinsam leben – Zeitschrift für integrative Erziehung Nr. 3-98, Hermann Luchterhand Verlag, Neuwied

Dorrance, Carmen (2010): Barrierefrei von Kindergarten in die Schule? Eine Untersuchung zur Kontinuität von
Integration aus der Perspektive betroffener Eltern, Klinkhardt Verlag, Bad Heilbrunn

Kron, M./Papke, B. (2006): Frühe Erziehung, Bildung und Betreuung von Kindern mit Behinderung. Eine Unter
suchung integrativer und heilpädagogischer Betreuungsformen in Kindergärten und Kindertagesstätten, Bad
Heilbrunn

Riedel, Birgit (2008): Kinder mit Behinderungen. Zahlenspiegel 2007. Kindertagesbetreuung im Spiegel der
Statistik, S. 141-157, verfügbar unter:
http://www.bmfsfj.de/bmfsfj/generator/BMFSFJ/Forschungsnetz/forschungsberichte,did=107256.html

Vorklassen: http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/xls/SKL_2008_Tabellenwerk.xls - B.I.2ab!A1, Zugriff: 11.07.2010
Vorklassen an Förderschulen: http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/xls/SKL_2008_Tabellenwerk.xls - B.I.2.1ab!A1;
Schulkindergärten: http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/xls/SKL_2008_Tabellenwerk.xls - B.I.3ab!A1;
Förderschulkindergärten: http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/xls/SKL_2008_Tabellenwerk.xls#B.I.3.1ab!A1


                                                               27
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Comments:
Due to differences in education systems between German federal states there are significant differences in
development of inclusive education of children with SEN in pre-school age. The Federal Government in its
official Disability Reports but also the German Institute of Youth (Deutsches Jugendinstitut, DJI) and the official
Report on Education in Germany (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung) offer data. There are no data that
aggregate children in pre-school services in the framework of Social Code Book VIII (SGB VIII) and SGB XII
on the one hand with data concerning children in special kindergartens (Förderschulkindergarten) in the special
school system. So the percentages given in C1 is only relatively valid.
In the context of a tradition of special kindergarten/pre-school provision starting in the 1960´s, now there are
three types of pre-school education for children with SEN in Germany:
Type 1: Special day services and special groups only for children with SEN (Sonderkindergarten)
Type 2: Integrative day services offering education and care for children with and without SEN, mostly on the
level of two third of children without SEN and one third with SEN (Integrative Kindertagesstätten/Kindergärten)
Type 3: Inclusive education of individual children in normal pre-school services with accommodated settings
(Einzelintegrative Maßnahmen).
Whereas integrative services (Type 2) and individual integration (Type 3) are subsumed as inclusive, type 1 is
seen as segregative. The number of integrative pre-school facilities has been continuously increasing from ca
.7.800 in 1998 to 14.300 facilities in 2009. Special day care facilities (Kindertagesstätten für behinderte Kinder)
have also increased since 2002 from 307 to 378 in 2008 (cf. Bericht der Bundesregierung 2009: 31,
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung 2010: 52, 66; Riedel 2008: 6). The problem is that statistics until
2006 provided data for ‘places‘ and not for ‘children’ in services. This makes it difficult to compare and assess
developments.
We assume that percentages of children with SEN in segregated services decreased from 1998 – 2002 to around
50 % and in the following years to ca. 30 % in 2009. But we also assume that the absolute number of children in
special kindergartens has not decreased in this period. By our calculations also the percentage increased from 0,4
% in 2006 to 0,45 % in 2010 of all children below 6 years. The explanation of this paradoxon is that the total
number of children being labeled as having SEN has increased. This is a familiar phenomenon in the
development of German disability services and can be called an “additive pattern of change”. (dt. ‘Additives
Veränderungsmuster’). This assumption is based on data on children in special services in the framework of
Social Code Books VIII and XII (SGB VIII/XII) and on those in special kindergartens in the framework of
special school systems (i.e. Förderschulkindergarten in Baden-Württemberg).


C2 Development of inclusive education on primary school level

Percentage of children not in regular primary schools

1998/99          3,4 %
2002/03:         4,4 %
2005/06:         4,4 %
2007/08:         4,4 %
2009/10          4,6 %

This development can be assessed as

                                            1----------- 2 ------ 3 -----4
                                         (bad – rather bad - positive – very positive)

References: Calculations: Dorrance on data from:

Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland (2011): Statistik der allgemeinbildenden Schulen. Statistik 21111-0005
https://www-
genesis.destatis.de:443/genesis/online;jsessionid=6DE3D49DC5AF1716CA7479BCE649C479.tomcat_GO_2_1
?operation=statistikAbruftabellen&levelindex=0&levelid=1296149866266&index=2
                                                                28
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                   Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2    57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




and
Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (2010):
Sonderpädagogische Förderung in allgemeinen Schulen (ohne Förderschulen) 2009/2010. IVC/Statistik, 1.
Tabelle (Sonderpädagogisch geförderte deutsche und ausländische Schüler (Integrationsschüler) nach Schularten
2009/2010)
http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/pdf/Statistik/Aus_SoPae_Int_2009.pdf
and
Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (2010:
Sonderpädagogische Förderung in Förderschulen (Sonderschulen) 2009/2010. IVC/Statistik, 1. Tabelle
http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/pdf/Statistik/Aus_Sopae_2009.pdf

http://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/pdf/Statistik/Dok184.pdf
http://www.european-agency.org/country-information/germany/german-files/GERMANY-SNE.pdf;
http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Presse/pm/2009/11/PD09__446__211,temp
lateId=renderPrint.psml (Bundesamt für Statistik: Pressemitteilung Nr.446 vom 24.11.2009)

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (2009): Grund- und Strukturdaten 2007 und 2008. Daten zur
Bildung in Deutschland, Berlin

Dorrance, Carmen (2010): Barrierefrei von Kindergarten in die Schule? Eine Untersuchung zur Kontinuität von
Integration aus der Perspektive betroffener Eltern. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt Verlag, S.146

Comments:
The percentage for 2003, 2005 and 2006 calculated on data offered by the Kultusministerkonferenz and the
Federal Ministry for Education and Science 2009 and on the basis of the referred European Agency file. In 2009
around 4 % of children in Germany started their school career in a special school.


C3 Development of inclusive education on secondary school level

Percentage of children not in secondary schools

1998/995         5,0 %
2002/03:         5,1 %
2005/06          5,5 %
2009/10          5,0 %

This development can be assessed as

                                                 1------- 2 ------3 -----4
                                            (bad – rather bad - positive – very positive)

References
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2010): Bildung in Deutschland 2010. Ein indikatorengestützter
Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Perspektiven des Bildungswesens im demografischen Wandel,
http://www.bildungsbericht.de/daten2010/bb_2010.pdf, 15.07.2010

Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Lage von Menschen mit Behinderungen für die 15. Legislaturperiode
(2005), p.16ff.

Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Lage von Menschen mit Behinderungen für die 16 Legislaturperiode,
(2009): p. 32ff.

                                                                29
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




http://www.kmk.org/statistik/schule/statistische-veroeffentlichungen/schueler-klassen-lehrer-und-absolventen-
der-schulen.html;

Comments:
The data refer to lower secondary level, i.e. pupils under 16.
Our assessment must be based on the aggregated data for pupils with SEN on primary and lower secondary level.
The percentage of children with SEN in integrative schools has increased from12,8 % in 2003 to 15,7 % in 2006.
The percentage of children with SEN in special schools increased from 4,4 % in 1998 to 4,8 % in 2006.


C4 Development of legal consistency and framework for inclusive education

Since 2003 (EYPD) developments of consistency in relevant sectors have taken place to
favour inclusive education

                               1          2            3            4
            (no initiatives – very few initiatives – some changes – important changes)

References:
Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft (GEW) (2008): Gutachten zu den völkerrechtlichen und
innerstaatlichen Verpflichtungen aus dem Recht auf Bildung nach Art. 24 des UN-Abkommens über die Rechte
von Menschen mit Behinderungen und zur Vereinbarkeit des deutschen Schulrechts mit den Vorgaben des
Übereinkommens, erstellt im Auftrag der Max-Traeger-Stiftung, Düsseldorf, cf. pp. 61

Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Lage von Menschen mit Behinderungen für die 16 Legislaturperiode,
(2009): p. 32ff.

Comments:
Since 2003 Federal States have changed their school laws. 11 out of 16 federal states (Bundesländer) have in
their school law a clear or rather clear priority to segregated education, which is on the other hand limited by cost
caveats or caveats concerning concrete conditions of environment and learning. The result was an additive
pattern of change: the percentage of children with SEN in integrative schools has increased from12,8 % in 2003
to 15,7 % in 2006. But the percentage of children with SEN also increased in this period from 4,4 % in 1998 to
4,8 % in 2006.


C5 Development of participation in decision making on inclusive education

In decision making processes, if persons with disabilities/their advocates (parents) articulate a
preference for inclusive education it is followed.

The development since 2003 (EYPD) can be assessed as

                                        1               2               3             4

                   (no development – very little – rather positive – very positive)

References:
Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft (GEW) (2008): Gutachten zu den völkerrechtlichen und
innerstaatlichen Verpflichtungen aus dem Recht auf Bildung nach Art. 24 des UN-Abkommens über die Rechte
von Menschen mit Behinderungen und zur Vereinbarkeit des deutschen Schulrechts mit den Vorgaben des
Übereinkommens, erstellt im Auftrag der Max-Traeger-Stiftung, Düsseldorf, cf. pp. 61, also see p.90f.)

                                                                30
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




http://bildungsklick.de/a/73000/inklusion-viele-modelle-statt-einer-schule-fuer-alle/ 17.07.2010

Comments:
According to the constitutional Art. 7 of German Basic Law it is the right of the state to decide on the school
form in which a child is educated. In cases of special educational needs this led to the situation that in most
federal states parents have had very little influence on which school type their SEN child was placed. In recent
years the degree of parents’s rights and influence on this decision making processes in all federal states has been
strengthened. When parents apply for inclusive education, their wish should be followed. But in most federal
school laws this is under the caveat that appropriate educational and material conditions can be provided by the
local school agency (i.e. cf. §§19 NRW-SchG).
To strengthen the rights of parents to choose between special and inclusive education is also in the focus of the
policies on inclusive education of the important Kultusminsterkonferenz (‘Conference of Ministers for
Education’).


C6 Development of inclusive orientation of assessment procedures

Since 2003 (EYPD) there has been a development of assessment procedures of special
educational needs to support inclusive education

                                1         2            3           4
                   (no development – very little – rather positive – very positive)

References:
http://www.european-agency.org/country-information/germany/national-overview/identification-of-special-
educational-needs,

Powell, Justin J. W. / Pfahl, Lisa (2009): Ein kontinuierlicher deutscher Sonderweg? Zur Schul- und
Berufsbildung von Schülerinnen und Schülern mit sonderpädagogischem Förderbedarf, in:
Behindertenbeauftragte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (2009): Welchen Beitrag leistet die schulische
Integration von Menschen mit Behinderungen auf dem Weg in den allgemeinen Arbeitsmarkt? Welche
ökonomischen Perspektiven sind damit verbunden?
Ergebnisse eines Expertenhearings, zusammengestellt von Sabine Knauer und Jörg Ramseger, Berlin 2009, pp.
61 -73

Comments:
There have been no effective changes in assessment procedures in recent years. Important were the
Recommendations on Special Needs Education in the Schools of the Federal Republic of Germany
(Empfehlungen zur sonderpädagogischen Förderung in den Schulen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland,
Resolution of May 1994). The recommendations of the Standing Conference apply to pupils with special
educational needs, regardless whether support takes place at a mainstream school or at a Sonderschule.




                                                                31
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




C7 Development of equal access to community schools

How do you assess the development of the possibilities persons with disabilities or SEN to
have access to the schools in their community on an equal basis with others since 2003
(EYPD)?

                                1         2            3           4
                   (no development – very little – rather positive – very positive)

References:
http://www.kmk.org/statistik/schule/statistiken/sonderpaedagogische-foerderung-in-schulen.html, 16.07.2010
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2010): Bildung in Deutschland 2010. Ein indikatorengestützter
Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Perspektiven des Bildungswesens im demografischen Wandel,
http://www.bildungsbericht.de/daten2010/bb_2010.pdf, 15.07.2010

Comments:
As inclusive education was still not practiced for ca. 5 % of pupils with SEN in 2008 like in the years before, we
can not state more than little progress in respect to equal access to community schools. When inclusive education
will be expanded in the future, there might be the risk that pupils with SEN will be offered centralized schools
with inclusive orientation but outside their community.


C8 Development of architectural barrier freeness of regular schools

How do you assess the development of architectural conditions in regular schools to realize
accessibility for persons with SEN since 2003 (EYPD)?

                                      1                2               3                4
                   (no development– very little – rather positive – very positive)

References:
There are no precise data available.

Comments:
In §4 BGG, the Act on Equal Opportunities of 2002 (BGG, Gesetz zur Gleichstellung behinderter Menschen)
prescribes the obligation to assure barrierfreeness of statutory infrastructure. We can observe a growing sensivity
for the importance of barrierfreenes of school buildings and other educational settings in the context of inclusive
education. The prescriptions in the Landesbauordnungen (federal state building laws) are not clearly demanding
accessibility (eg. § 55 Landesbauordnung NRW).


C9 Development of accommodation of staff to the individual’s learning requirements

How do you assess the development of availability of appropriate staff in respect to
individual’s requirements for learning of persons with SEN in inclusive settings since 2003
(EYPD)?

                               1         2             3          4
                   (no development– very little – rather positive – very positive)



                                                                32
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




References:
Heidenreich, Ruppert (2007): Der lange Weg von der Sonderschule zum Sonderpädagogischen
Kompetenzzentrum in Nordrhein-Westfalen, in Heilpädagogik online, 3/07, pp. 5 – 41
http://www.heilpaedagogik-online.com/2007/heilpaedagogik_online_0307.pdf, 16.07.2010

Preuss-Lausitz, Ulf (2009): Stellungnahme zur Anhörung des Ausschusses für Schule und Weiterbildung zum
Antrag der Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen im Landtag NRW, Drucksache 14/4860 am 25. März 2009, p. 11

Comments:
In nearly all federal states there are concepts to involve special school staff to support inclusive education of
pupils with SEN or to prevent segregation in cases of children at risk. In some federal states this has also led to
legal prescriptions eg. like in Northrhine-Westphalia the effort to implement ‘competence-centres for Special
educational needs’(cf § 20 Abs. 5 Schulgesetz NRW). The effects on supporting inclusive education have
remained very limited, this might be due to the fact that the dominant influence on the structure and organization
of competence centres lies with special schools and not with the regular schools involved. But one can state at
least little development and an increasing readiness of educational authorities to provide supporting conditions
for inclusive education.


C10 Development of classroom sizes

How do you assess the development of accommodation of classroom sizes in inclusive
settings according to individual’s requirements since 2003 (EYPD)?

                               1          2            3          4
                   (no development– very little – rather positive – very positive)


References:
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2010): Bildung in Deutschland 2010. Ein indikatorengestützter
Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Perspektiven des Bildungswesens im demografischen Wandel,
http://www.bildungsbericht.de/daten2010/bb_2010.pdf

http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Presse/pm/2009/11/PD09__446__211,temp
lateId=renderPrint.psml (Bundesamt für Statistik: Pressemitteilung Nr.446 vom 24.11.2009)

Comments:
The decisions of school authorities to reduce classroom sizes in inclusive settings have been handled very
restrictive in most Federal States. Due do demographic changes, now especially in rural areas classrooms in
preschool facilities and primary schools sizes become smaller, thus creating more favourable conditions for
inclusive education.


C11 Development of accommodation of adaptive technology

How do you assess the development of availability of adaptive technology in inclusive
settings according to individual’s requirements since 2003 (EYPD)?

                               1          2           3           4
                   (no development– very little – rather positive – very positive)




                                                                33
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




References:
http://www.kmk.org/statistik/schule/statistiken/sonderpaedagogische-foerderung-in-schulen.html, 16.07.2010
Preuss-Lausitz, Ulf (2009): Stellungnahme zur Anhörung des Ausschusses für Schule und Weiterbildung zum
Antrag der Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen im Landtag NRW, Drucksache 14/4860 am 25. März 2009, p. 6

Comments:
The provision with adaptive technology is regulated under the Health Care Law (§33 SGB V). Adaptive
technology is not restricted to special schools and in principle is also available in inclusive settings. But
knowledge, competence and creativity to apply, adapt and use technological means is still difficult to find in
inclusive education.


C12 Development of availability of functional assistance and care provision

How do you assess the development in respect to provide functional assistance and care in
inclusive settings according to individual’s requirements since 2003 (EYPD)?

                               1          2           3           4
                   (no development– very little – rather positive – very positive)

References:
http://www.behinderte-kinder.de/gesetze/urintegrhelf.htm ; 16.07.2010

Comments:
On the basis of §53 SGB XII parents or legal guardians of pupils with SEN can apply for an integration assistant
(‘Integrationshelfer’) to support their integration in schools. This opportunity is increasingly used in special
schools but is also available for inclusive education. There is a tendency to use this more frequently for inclusive
education. However, due to the financial strain of many school authorities personal assistants are frequently only
approved for pupils with rather severe physical or mental SEN.


C13 Development of accommodation of educational measures

How do you assess the development of accommodation of educational measures in inclusive
settings since 2003 (EYPD) (i.e. individual curricula, didactical adaption, teaching methods,
testing)?
                             1          2          3           4
                (no development– very little – rather positive – very positive)

References:
Preuss-Lausitz, Ulf (2009): Stellungnahme zur Anhörung des Ausschusses für Schule und Weiterbildung zum
Antrag der Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen im Landtag NRW, Drucksache 14/4860 am 25. März 2009, p. 11

Hinz, Andreas. (2007): Inklusion - Vision und Realität! In: Katzenbach, D. (Hrsg.): Vielfalt braucht Struktur.
Heterogenität als Herausforderung für die Unterrichts- und Schulentwicklung. Frankfurt: J. W. Goethe-
Universität (Frankfurter Beiträge zur Erziehungswissenschaft), S. 81-98

Comments:
Within the increasing process of inclusion the conditions for learning have changed. It can be assumed, that
schools and teachers increasingly practice concepts of more open and individual forms of teaching and learning.
These individualising teaching concepts are available. However, there is a strong demand for teacher training on
all levels of their education to improve knowledge and implementation of adequate educational measures in
inclusive settings.

                                                                34
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




C14 Development of facilitation of learning of Braille and sign language

How do you assess the development with respect to the facilitation of learning of Braille and
sign language in inclusive settings, if this is necessary because of individual requirements?

                                1          2            3          4
                    (no development– very little – rather positive – very positive)

References:
www.isar-project.de; 16.07.2010
www.Integrationskinder.org 16.07.2010

Comments:
Parents organizations indicate, that it is often very difficult for regular schools to provide reading facilities, hard
ware and Braille software. If necessary conditions are not provided, the principle of parent’s choice becomes a
bad joke. Since recently a very good impulse has come from the ISaR project at Dortmund University which
developed very helpful data bases and training concepts with regard to the integration of visually impaired
pupils. The very well structured web-site says that the information provided is increasingly used.


C15 Development of facilitation of learning of augmentative and alternative forms of
communication and orientation

How do you assess the development with respect to the facilitation of learning of
augmentative and alternative forms of communication and orientation in inclusive settings, if
this is necessary because of individual requirements?

                                1          2            3          4
                    (no development– very little – rather positive – very positive)

References:
http://www.isaac-online.de

Comments:
Augmentative and alternative forms of communication are very often crucially for pupils with severe disabilities
and complex needs. On national level and on level of federal state and regions there are networks of special
educators and therapists developing concepts for alternative and augmentative communication. These networks
are organized in the German branch of the International Society for alternative and augmentative communication
(ISAAC). The focus of these networks is mostly still on special schools settings, especially those for pupils with
mental or physical SEN.


C16 Development of teacher training

Has teacher training become more oriented to inclusive education since 2003 (EYPD)?

                                        1          2                  3            4
                                      (No rather not             rather yes        Yes)

References:

                                                                35
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Franzkowiak (2009): Integration, Inklusion, Gemeinsamer Unterricht – Themen für die
Grundschullehramtsausbildung an Hochschulen in Deutschland? Eine Bestandsaufnahme. Universität Siegen
2009. Online im Internet unter http://bidok.uibk.ac.at/library/franzkowiak-integration.html

Comments:
There are clear differences in teacher training orientations between the federal states. In general one can state
that most academic teacher training curricula still differentiate between the regular and the special school sector.
The education of teachers for children with SEN is still dominated by the special school’s perspective.


C17 Development of equal access to vocational training

How do you assess the development of equal access of persons with SEN to vocational
training since 2003 (EYPD)?

                               1          2            3          4
                   (no development– very little – rather positive – very positive)

References:
Behindertenbeauftragte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (2009): Welchen Beitrag leistet die schulische
Integration von Menschen mit Behinderungen auf dem Weg in den allgemeinen Arbeitsmarkt? Welche
ökonomischen Perspektiven sind damit verbunden?

Ergebnisse eines Expertenhearings, zusammengestellt von Sabine Knauer und Jörg Ramseger, Berlin 2009

Preuss-Lausitz, Ulf (2009): Stellungnahme zur Anhörung des Ausschusses für Schule und Weiterbildung zum
Antrag der Fraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen im Landtag NRW, Drucksache 14/4860 am 25. März 2009, p. 2

Comments:
While the percentage of pupils in specials schools has been increasing between 1997 and 2007, the percentage of
those that left the special school without a school certificate (Abschlusszeugnis) also increased from 54,6% in
1997 to 68,6% in 2007 (Preuss-Lausitz 2009: 2). This means an additional handicap for the access of individuals
to vocational training and labour market.
New concepts of vocational training for youngsters and young adults with intellectual disability have been
developed and are realized in some parts of Germany also to provide alternatives to employment in sheltered
workshops.


C18 Development of equal access to life long learning

How do you assess the development of equal access of persons with SEN to life long learning
service since 2003 (EYPD)?
                             1         2            3           4
                (no development – very little – rather positive – very positive)

References:
No statistical data available, but many examples of good practice, eg. Checklists for users and services:
http://bidok.uibk.ac.at/library/imp-35-05-impulse-checkliste.html




Comments:

                                                                36
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                   Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Life long learning has become an increasingly important issue for people with disabilities, especially for adult
people with intellectual disabilities. The ‘Volkshochschulen’ in many German cities and districts are clearly
more aware of learning interests and needs of disabled persons than in the decades before.


C19 Development of monitoring systems on inclusive education

How do you assess the development of the monitoring systems on inclusive education?

                                 1          2          3          4
                 (very negative – rather negative – rather positive – very positive)

References:
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2010): Bildung in Deutschland 2010. Ein indikatorengestützter
Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Perspektiven des Bildungswesens im demografischen Wandel,
http://www.bildungsbericht.de/daten2010/bb_2010.pdf,

Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Lage von Menschen mit Behinderungen für die 16 Legislaturperiode,
(2009): p. 32ff.

BMFSFJ (2009): Kinder- und Jugendbericht: Mehr Chancen für gesundes Aufwachsen. Berlin

Riedel, Birgit (2008): Kinder mit Behinderungen. Zahlenspiegel 2007. Kindertagesbetreuung im Spiegel der
Statistik, S. 141-157
http://www.bmfsfj.de/bmfsfj/generator/BMFSFJ/Forschungsnetz/forschungsberichte,did=107256.html

http://www.akjstat.uni-dortmund.de

Comments.
The monitoring instruments and results for inclusive and segregated education of children with SEN have been
remarkably improved and new instruments have been created. This is a positive development.



C20 Development of activities of professional associations to promote inclusive
education

How do you assess the development of commitment and activities of professional associations
(like associations of special teachers, special schools, teacher unions) to promote inclusive
education?

                                 1          2          3          4
                 (very negative – rather negative – rather positive – very positive)

References:
Verband Bildung und Erziehung (NRW) on inclusive education:
http://www.vbe-nrw.de/menu_id/288.html?session=01700f47fefe949acb49cdfb0753316b

Verband für Blinden- und Sehbehindertenpädagogik: Inklusion:
http://www.vbs-gs.de/index.php?page=inklusion, 16.07.2010

Verband Sonderpädagogik e.V. Position paper on inclusive education (2009):
http://www.verband-
sonderpaedagogik.de/con/cms/upload/pdf/schardt/Positionen_neu/Posi_Inklusive_Bildung_HV.pdf
                                                               37
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                    Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Bundesvereinigung Lebenshilfe / Offenbacher Erklärung:
www.inklusive-schule.de/wSchultagung/downloads/OffenbacherErklaerung.pdf, 16.07.2010

Comments:
The teacher union (GEW) very strongly supports inclusive education. Recent official statements from more
conservative professional associations have changed their ductus and are now more open and in favour of
inclusive education than in former years. But most statements also show scepticism and express fears that
inclusive education may be misused for spending cuts. They also show a certain hesitation to give up traditional
and familiar organizational settings. Positive statements come from national parents organizations like
Bundesvereinigung Lebenshilfe für Menschen mit geistiger Behinderung.


C 21 Development of measures for awareness raising of governments to promote
inclusive education

How do you assess the development of measures for awareness raising of governments to
promote inclusive education?

                                 1          2          3          4
                 (very negative – rather negative – rather positive – very positive)


References:
Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Lage von Menschen mit Behinderungen für die 16 Legislaturperiode,
(2009): p. 37.

Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft (GEW) (2008): Gutachten zu den völkerrechtlichen und
innerstaatlichen Verpflichtungen aus dem Recht auf Bildung nach Art. 24 des UN-Abkommens über die Rechte
von Menschen mit Behinderungen und zur Vereinbarkeit des deutschen Schulrechts mit den Vorgaben des
Übereinkommens, erstellt im Auftrag der Max-Traeger-Stiftung, Düsseldorf

http://www.unesco.de/3736.html?&L=0

http://www.gew.de/Bundespraesident_bringt_integratives_Schulsystem_auf_die_Tagesordnung.html

http://bildungsklick.de/a/73000/inklusion-viele-modelle-statt-einer-schule-fuer-alle/


Comments:
The Federal government in its last disability reports explicitly welcomes an expansion of inclusive education. In
2009 the ombudswoman of the federal government has created a prize contest for inclusive education (the ‘Jakob
Muth-Preis’) together with the German UNESCO commission and the Bertelsmann Foundation. The first prizes
went to inclusive schools in Berlin, Hessia and Lower Saxonia.
In a number of statements and public activities in the last years the federal president Horst Köhler has strongly
supported inclusive education. On federal state and local level the movement for inclusive education is
increasingly supported by politicians. Especially the new disability ombudsmen/women’s movement develops
supporting activities on different political level, also on local level.




C22 Perspectives on progression

                                                                38
          Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                   Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228     sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




In can be expected that by 2015 the percentage of persons with SEN that are not included in
regular schools


                                 1        2     3                                  4
              (Higher than 2010 – the same - lower -                              much lower than 2010 )

References:
Bericht der Bundesregierung über die Lage von Menschen mit Behinderungen für die 16. Legislaturperiode,
(2009): p. 32ff.
Kultusministerkonferenz 2010: Diskussionspapier zur Umsetzung der UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention vom
29.04.2010, verabschiedet am 22.06.2010
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2010): Bildung in Deutschland 2010. Ein indikatorengestützter
Bericht mit einer Analyse zu Perspektiven des Bildungswesens im demografischen Wandel,
http://www.bildungsbericht.de/daten2010/bb_2010.pdf
Riedel, Birgit (2008): Kinder mit Behinderungen. Zahlenspiegel 2007. Kindertagesbetreuung im Spiegel der
Statistik, 2008, 141-157
http://www.spiegel.de/thema/sonderschule/
http://www.lvr.de/app/Presse/?NNr=5982 (Integrationspauschale)
http://www.eine-schule-fuer-alle.info/politik/nordrhein-westfalen/ (local action plans for inclusive education in
Bonn and Cologne).


Comments:
There are serious indicators on different levels that give good reason to assume that the German education
system will become less segregating and more inclusive by 2015. On the one hand they are reflecting growing
sensitivity for human rights issues in German society: They result from strong campaigning for non-
discrimination and equal rights of people with disabilities e.g. supported by Aktion Mensch, Deutsche
Behindertenhilfe (‘Die Gesellschafter.de’), and of accuses to violate human rights by the special school system
set by the UN Commissioner of Human Rights Mr. Vernor Munoz Villalobos in 2006, and they are results of the
surprisingly intensive reception of the UN Convention on Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Germany
(ratified in March 2009). On the other hand the German educational system came under pressure by the “PISA-
shock”, showing that the effectiveness of the highly segregating German school system is comparatively weak
and can provide economic disadvantages for society as a whole. Also public criticism rose against costs and
concept of the special school system (see eg. the series of articles in the important political magazine ‘Der
Spiegel’ : ‘Teuer und erfolglos, (expensive and without success’, Spiegel-online 14.11.2009). In addition
professional debates have become stronger putting forward the argument that inclusive education brings better
results for pupils with SEN than segregating approaches.
Also demographic developments will contribute to more inclusiveness of the German education system because
the decrease in numbers of children will provide better school and classroom conditions.
There are also some very concrete policies recently started in some federal states to close or overcome the
special school system (eg. in Bremen, Schleswig-Holstein) and concrete initiatives of authorities for special
schools to give attractive financial incentives to regular schools ready for inclusion (eg. Landschaftsverband
Rhineland, LVR). Also local governments are increasingly willing to change their educational system for
children with SEN without being legally responsible (e.g. the city of Bonn and the city of Cologne have recently
decided to develop local action plans for inclusive education).
But nevertheless, in a mid term perspective both on preschool and school level there will probably be an
increasing inclusive and an over-extended special school system existing in parallel in most German federal
states.




                                                               39
        Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




Summary: ‘Progressive implementation of inclusive education in Germany’

(C1) Due to differences in education systems between German federal states there are
significant differences in development of inclusive education of children with SEN in
pre-school age. The Federal Government in its official Disability Reports but also the
German Institute of Youth (Deutsches Jugendinstitut, DJI) and the official Report on
Education in Germany (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung) offer data. There are no
data that aggregate children in pre-school services in the framework of Social Code Book VIII
(SGB VIII) and SGB XII on the one hand with data concerning children in special
kindergartens (Förderschulkindergarten) in the special school system. So the percentages
given in C1 are not very valid.
In the context of a tradition of special kindergarten/pre-school provision starting in the
1960´s, now there are three types of pre-school education for children with SEN in Germany:
Type 1: Special day services and special groups only for children with SEN
(Sonderkindergarten)
Type 2: Integrative day services offering education and care for children with and without
SEN, mostly on the level of two third of children without SEN and one third with SEN
(Integrative Kindertagesstätten/Kindergärten)
Type 3: Inclusive education of individual children in normal pre-school services with
accommodated settings (Einzelintegrative Maßnahmen)

Whereas integrative services (Type 2) and individual integration (Type 3) are subsumed as
inclusive, type 1 is seen as segregative. The number of integrative pre-school facilities has
been continuously increasing from ca. 7.800 in 1998 to 14.300 facilities in 2009. Special day
care facilities (Kindertagesstätten für behinderte Kinder) have also increased since 2002 from
307 to 378 in 2008 (cf.            Bericht der Bundesregierung 2009: 31, Autorengruppe
Bildungsberichterstattung 2010: 52, 66; Riedel 2008: 6).
We assume that percentages of children with SEN in segregated services decreased from
1998 – 2002 to around 50 % and in the following years to ca. 30 % in 2009. But we also
assume that the absolute number of children in special kindergartens has not decreased in
this period. The explanation of this paradoxon is that the total number of children being
labeled as having SEN has increased. This is a familiar phenomenon in the development of
German disability services and can be called an “additive pattern of change” (dt. ‘Additives
Veränderungsmuster’). This assumption is based on data on children in special services in the
framework of Social Code Books VIII and XII (SGB VIII/XII) and on those in special
kindergartens in the framework of special school systems (i.e. Förderschulkindergarten in
Baden-Württemberg). But again, it is important to be aware of big differences between federal
states especially on pre-school level.

(C2, C3) Government statistics for compulsory school education show for 2006 that 5.8 % of
all pupils from age 6 to 16 are identified as having SEN compared to 4,4 % in 1998. The
percentage of pupils in special schools rose from 4,4 % in 1998 to 4,8 % in 2006. The
‘segregation percentage’ remained stable on that level by 2008. In 2009 around 4 % of
children in Germany started their school career in a special school.



                                                            40
        Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




46,5 % of pupils in special schools were in special schools for slow learners, their numbers
increased as well as those in special schools for intellectual disabled children and for those
with language disorders.
(C4) The percentage of children with SEN in integrative school settings has increased
from 12,8 % in 2003 to 15,7 % in 2006. This can been seen on the background that in recent
years most federal states have changed their school laws. Now in 11 out of 16 federal states
school law gives inclusive education a clear or rather clear priority to segregated
education. The priority is on the other hand limited by cost caveats or caveats concerning
concrete conditions of environment and learning, which de facto excludes children with
more severe educational needs.

(C5) According to the constitutional Art. 7 of German Basic Law it is the right of the state to
decide on the school form in which a child is educated. In cases of special educational needs
this led to the situation that in most federal states parents have had very little influence on
which school type their SEN child was placed. In recent years the degree of parents’s
rights and influence on this decision making processes in all federal states have been
strengthened. When parents apply for inclusive education, their wish should be followed.
But in most federal school laws this is under the caveat that appropriate educational and
material conditions can be provided by the local school agency (i.e. cf. §§19 NRW-SchG).
To strengthen the rights of parents to choose between special and inclusive education is also
in the focus of the policies on inclusive education of the important Kultusministerkonferenz
(engl. ‘Conference of Ministers for Education’).

(C6) There have been no effective changes in assessment procedures in recent years.
Important were the Recommendations on Special Needs Education in the Schools of the
Federal Republic of Germany from 1994 (Empfehlungen zur sonderpädagogischen
Förderung in den Schulen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Resolution of May 1994). The
recommendations of the Standing Conference apply to pupils with special educational needs,
regardless whether support takes place at a mainstream school or at a special school.

(C7) As inclusive education was still not practiced for ca. 5 % of pupils with SEN in 2008
like in the years before, we can not state more than little progress in respect to equal access
to community schools. When inclusive education will be expanded in the future, there might
be the risk that pupils with SEN will be offered centralized schools with inclusive
orientation but outside their community.

(C8) In §4 BGG, the Act on Equal Opportunities of 2002 (BGG, Gesetz zur Gleichstellung
behinderter Menschen) prescribes the obligation to assure barrierfreeness of statutory
infrastructure. We can observe a growing political sensivity for the importance of
barrierfreenes of school buildings and other educational settings in the context of inclusive
education. The legal prescriptions in the Landesbauordnungen (federal state building laws)
are not clearly demanding accessibility (eg. § 55 Landesbauordnung NRW).

(C9) In nearly all federal states there are concepts and practice to involve special school
staff to support inclusive education of pupils with SEN or to prevent segregation in cases
of children at risk. In some federal states this has also led to legal prescriptions eg. like in
Northrhine-Wesfalia the effort to implement ‘competence-centres for Special educational
needs’(cf § 20 Abs. 5 Schulgesetz NRW). The effects on supporting inclusive education
                                                            41
        Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




have remained very limited, this might be due to the fact that the competence centres are not
organisationally under the management of regular, but up to now predominantly led by
special schools. But one can state at least little development.

(C10) The decisions of school authorities to reduce classroom sizes in inclusive settings
have been handled very restrictive in most Federal States. Due do demographic changes,
now especially in rural areas classrooms in preschool facilities and primary schools sizes
become smaller, thus creating more favourable conditions for inclusive education.

(C11) The provision with adaptive technology is regulated under the Health Care Law (§33
SGB V). Adaptive technology is not restricted to special schools and in principle is also
available in inclusive settings. But knowledge, competence and creativity to apply, adapt and
use technological means is still difficult to find in inclusive education.

(C12) On the basis of §53 SGB XII pupils with SEN can apply for an integration assistant
(‘Integrationshelfer’) to support their integration in schools. This opportunity is increasingly
used in special schools but is also available for inclusive education. There is a tendency to
use this more frequently for inclusive education, which is a positive and important future
option. However, budget constraints affecting the social welfare and youth offices currently
are a remarkable obstacle for the approval of individual inclusion assistants.

(C13) Within the increasing practice of inclusion the conditions for learning have changed. It
can be assumed, that schools and teachers increasingly practice concepts of more open and
individual forms of teaching and learning. These individualising teaching concepts are
available on high level. However, there is a strong demand for teacher training on all levels
of their education to improve knowledge and implementation of adequate educational
measures in inclusive settings.

(C14) Parents organizations indicate that it is often very difficult for regular schools to
provide reading facilities, hard ware and Braille software. If necessary conditions are not
provided, the principle of parent’s choice becomes a bad joke. Since recently a very good
impulse comes from the ISaR project at Dortmund University, which developed very helpful
data bases and training concepts with regard to integration of visually impaired pupils. The
very well structured web-site says that the information provided is increasingly used. Another
positive example are new practices in Schleswig-Holstein, where the federal state has created
support centres for assistive technology. But altogether, we can not state more than little
progress, development, professional experiences and creativity have been mostly restricted to
the special school system.

(C15) Augmentative and alternative forms of communication are very often crucially for
pupils with severe disabilities and complex needs. On national level and on level of federal
state and regions there are networks of special educators and therapists developing concepts
for alternative and augmentative communication. These networks are organized in the
German branch of the International Society for Alternative and Augmentative
Communication (ISAAC). The focus of these networks is mostly still on special schools
settings, especially those for pupils with mental or physical SEN.



                                                            42
        Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                 Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




(C16) There are clear differences in the teacher training orientations between the federal
states. In general one can state that most academic teacher training curricula still differentiate
between the regular and the special school sector. The education of teachers for children with
SEN is still dominated by the special school’s perspective. Inclusive education has not
become a mandatory topic for teacher training yet – neither for future special educators nor
for future regular school teachers.
(C17) While the percentage of pupils in specials schools has been increasing between 1997
and 2007 the percentage of those who left special schools without a school certificate also
increased. This means an additional handicap for the access of individuals to vocational
training and labour market. New concepts of vocational training for youngsters and young
adults with intellectual disability have been developed and are realized in some parts of
Germany also to provide alternatives to employment in sheltered workshops and additional
future options.

(C18) Life long learning has become an increasingly important issue for people with
disabilities, especially for adult people with intellectual disabilities. The ‘Volkshochschulen’
in many German cities and districts are clearly more aware of learning interests and needs
of disabled persons than in the decades before.

(C19) The monitoring instruments and results for inclusive and segregated education of
children with SEN have been remarkably improved and new instruments have been created.
This more systematic and more detailed data collection and statistical information is a
positive development.

(C20) The teacher union GEW very strongly supports inclusive education. Recent official
statements from more conservative professional associations like the Verband Bildung und
Erziehung (VBE) have changed their ductus and are now more open and in favour of
inclusive education than in former years. But most statements also show scepticism and
express fears that inclusive education may be misused for spending cuts. They also show a
certain hesitation to give up traditional and familiar organizational settings. Strong pro-
inclusion statements come from national parents organizations.

(C21) The federal government in its last disability reports explicitly welcomes an
expansion of inclusive education. In 2009 the ombudswoman of the federal government has
created a national prize contest for inclusive education (the ‘Jakob Muth-Preis’) together
with the German UNESCO commission and the Bertelsmann Foundation. The first prizes
went to inclusive schools in Berlin, Hessia and Lower Saxonia.
In a number of statements and public activities in the last years the federal president Horst
Köhler has strongly supported inclusive education. On federal state and local level the
movement for inclusive education is increasingly supported by politicians. Especially the new
disability ombudsmen/women movement develops supporting activities on local level.

(C22) There are serious indicators on different levels that give good reason to assume
that the German education system will become less segregating and more inclusive by
2015. On the one hand this is reflecting growing sensitivity for human rights issues in
German society: They result from strong campaigning for non-discrimination and equal
rights of people with disabilities e.g. supported by Aktion Mensch, Deutsche Behindertenhilfe
(‘Die Gesellschafter.de’), and of accuses to violate human rights by the special school
                                                             43
        Zentrum für Planung und Evaluation Sozialer Dienste (ZPE) der Universität Siegen
                  Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2   57068 Siegen   &    0271 / 740-2228   sekretariat@zpe.uni-siegen.de




system set by the UN Commissioner of Human Rights Mr. Vernor Munoz Villalobos in
2006, and they are results of the surprisingly intensive reception of the UN Convention on
Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Germany (ratified in March 2009). On the
other hand the German educational system came under pressure by the “PISA-shock”,
showing that the effectiveness of the highly segregating German school system is
comparatively weak and can provide economic disadvantages for society as a whole. Also
public criticism rose against costs and concept of the special school system (see eg. the
series of articles in the important political magazine ‘Der Spiegel’: ‘Teuer und erfolglos,
(expensive and without success’, Spiegel-online 14.11.2009). In addition professional
debates have become stronger putting forward the argument that inclusive education brings
better results for pupils with SEN than segregating approaches.
Also demographic developments will probably contribute to more inclusiveness of the
German education system because the decrease in numbers of children will provide better
school and classroom conditions.
There are also some very concrete policies recently started in some federal states to close
or overcome the special school system (eg. in Bremen, Schleswig-Holstein) and concrete
initiatives of authorities for special schools to give attractive financial incentives to regular
schools ready for inclusion (eg. Landschaftsverband Rhineland, LVR). Also local
governments are increasingly willing to change their educational system for children
with SEN without being legally responsible (e.g. the city of Bonn and the city of Cologne
have recently decided to develop local action plans for inclusive education).
But nevertheless, in a mid-term perspective both on preschool and school level there will
probably be an increasing inclusive and a still over-extended special school system
existing in parallel in most German federal states.



                   ‘Barometer assessment’ to part C:
            ‘Progression of inclusive education’ in Germany



 Progression of
   inclusive                                             slow                     Significant             very significant
                       No development
 education can                                        development                development               development
 be assessed as



                                                          X


                                                              44

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:11
posted:9/26/2011
language:German
pages:44