This article was downloaded by: [Florida Atlantic University]On: 11 November 2014, At: 08:07Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Educational Psychology inPractice: theory, researchand practice in educationalpsychologyPublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cepp20

Discussion Paper—WorkingTowards Inclusion: "I am anotherother"Hat RosenthalPublished online: 01 Jul 2010.

To cite this article: Hat Rosenthal (2001) Discussion Paper—Working Towards Inclusion: "Iam another other", Educational Psychology in Practice: theory, research and practice ineducational psychology, 17:4, 385-392, DOI: 10.1080/02667360120108990

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02667360120108990

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressedin this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content shouldnot be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly

forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:07

11

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Educational Psychology in Practice, Vol. 17, No. 4, 2001

Discussion Paper—Working TowardsInclusion: “I am another other”HAT ROSENTHALEducational Psychology Service, Education Leeds, The Blenheim Centre, CrowtherPlace, Leeds LS6 2ST, UK

Everyone is a foreigner to someone else (Simon Fanshawe, Radio 4, 2000)

SUMMARY It is argued that the most basic discrimination is between same and different.It is one of the earliest concepts that humans learn. It is socially transmitted from carer toinfant—me and not-me. Variations between people present a mixed blessing. Whetherpeople get on peaceably or war with one another is highly related to the differences theyperceive between them. Dominant and powerful humans often choose to include or excludeweaker individuals on the basis of similarities or differences. Thus, two of the the mainsources of divisions in our society, racism and sexism, can be said to be caused by theemotional impact human discriminations have upon ordinary life. This paper reasons that,to address discrimination and move towards more fully promoting the inclusion agenda, wehave to provide regular meaningful dialogues between pupils and teachers, and we have toindividually examine and adjust our own less-social perceptions, values and actions. All ofus need to experience and hear each other’s points of view, and the differences between ushave to be acknowledged and explored, rather than ignored and denied.

Inclusion—What is it?

The Government is exhorting us towards ‘inclusion’. This principle is now en-shrined in law. But do we know what this means and are we really aware of theprocesses by which this notion may be best operationalised or even put into practiceat all? Inclusion is normally de� ned as ‘containment of something’ or ‘subordinatepart of a larger whole’ (Webster’s Dictionary, 1961). If people are included, it isabout them being seen as necessary, important, signi� cant members of a group,whatever that group is … nation, institution, class, choir, football team.

The most recent education Green Paper states the Government’s principle ofinclusion:

Inclusion is a process, not a � xed state. By inclusion we mean not only thatpupils with SEN should wherever possible receive their education in amainstream school, but that they should fully join with their peers in thecurriculum and life of the school. For example, we believe that—takingaccount of any normal arrangements for setting—children with SEN

Manuscript submitted April 2000; accepted after revision, March 2001.

ISSN 0266-7363 (print)/ISSN 1469-5839 (online)/01/040385-08Ó 2001 Association of Educational PsychologistsDOI: 10.1080/02667360120108990

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:07

11

Nov

embe

r 20

14

386 H. Rosenthal

should generally take part in mainstream lessons rather than be isolated inspecial units. (Department for Education and Employment, 1999, p. 44).

For the purposes of my argument, I stress that by the term ‘inclusion’ I am not onlyreferring to people with Special Educational Needs or disabilities as taking part inthe mainstream. I intend ‘inclusion’ to mean involving and recognising the broaduniverse of differences that pupils present; of gender, of ethnicity, of culturalheritage, of religion, of language, and of sexuality.

Uniqueness

Humans are diverse and each is also unique. Uniqueness signi� es ‘single, sole, beingwithout like or equal, very rare and uncommon’ (Webster’s Dictionary, 1961).Verma (1999) refers to human uniqueness as being ‘a never-to-be-repeated productof nature and nurture’ (p. 7) and, although it seems to be a dif� cult term to applyto humans, it is an important concept when considering issues of equality. Giventhat we may look at the process of education as a way of ensuring pupils reach theirpotential regardless of their genetic inheritance and the circumstances of theirupbringing, it seems crucial to consider humans to be unique in some ways and tobe similar in others.

Sameness

Human qualities come in many shades. To the subjective mind, other people maybe seen in terms, for example, of strong/weak, warm/distant, aggressive/passive. Asprofessionals, we view others in less personal, possibly more objective ways. We referto the difference between people as being of: ethnicity/cultural heritage, gender,abilities to learn, whether pupils are disabled or able-bodied, and differencesaccording to socio-economic class, differences in sexual orientation, differences inlanguages used. Although we vary, we each occupy a position somewhere along thecontinuum of each quality.

Difference

Whether we need to assert our differences or sameness depends on the context we� nd ourselves in, as well as our own inner needs and experiences.

Thus, when in a foreign land, we meet someone who looks like us, we mayattempt to discover how much we share. Should the environment be hostileit may be enough that we are ‘Asians’ together, or we may choose to unitewith other people of colour as ‘black’. On the other hand if one haspainfully acquired a measure of accommodation to the host culture … onemay wish to distance oneself from black groups or to ‘pass’ as white.(Maitra & Miller, 1996, p. 112)

The notion of difference is further elaborated by Farhad Dalal, who refers to ‘the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:07

11

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Discussion Paper 387

stereotype as an experience, (imagined or otherwise), of the other’. He explains thestereotype as ‘an attempt to simplify the world, a way of trying to reduce theterrifying variety of humanity’ (Dalal, 1993, p. 281) to manageable proportions.

Difference frequently evokes hostile, aggressive and paranoid responses in people.A young person who differs in any noticeable way from the rest is mocked, deridedand sometimes physically attacked (e.g. the red-head among the fair and darkhaired, the fat or bespectacled among the slender or good-sighted). The differencemay even stretch to the frankly behavioural; having an unusual accent for the areayou live in, not being interested in football in the class where everyone else is,interested in something else and so on.

Consider fashion. The kinds of clothes people within a given age bracket wear isa crude language. Wearing the current gear sends the message ‘I am your kind ofperson’ to others of around the same age. On the other hand, wearing different sortsof clothes, says ‘I am nothing like you’ and probably courts loneliness and isolation,because the message is illegible to others.

In some parts of the world, in some areas of society, everyone who differs fromoneself may be seen as abnormal. People who differ from me may be identi� ed asminorities … enemies. This force appears to exploit a ‘natural’ or at least spon-taneous human willingness to stigmatise difference. Hutus condemn Tutsis asdifferent (cockroaches), yet both tribes are the same (Rwandan); some Indians aredifferent (‘untouchable’ by other sects), yet of the same faith (Hindhus); Jews weredescribed as ‘vermin’ in the 1940s by others who were of the same nationality.

Difference is experienced as threat and humans are often prepared to go to warover it, to kill and be killed because of it. The argument runs that it is fear thatdrives us to various kinds of group conformity and sameness.

The Need for Others and Groups

The individual is part of a social network … and cannot be consideredarti� cially in isolation, like a � sh out of water. (Foulkes & Anthony, 1957,p. 234)

It has been argued since the beginning of time, and is seen as a self-evident truth,that people need people; people need friends and family relationships. It is also clearfrom the psychological literature that an individual’s academic, moral and sociallearning are shaped not only by character and temperament, but also by immediatesocial context and relationships with others. Another way of putting this is to saythat humans are essentially social beings. They learn through, with and from others(Wright, 1971).

Placed against the need to be with others, there is also a reaction against beingwith them. The differences that others bring with them seem to be the source ofboth threat and thrill. It appears to be at the heart of quarrels, battles, and evenwars, as well as featuring in attraction and romance. Love and hate. We long forboth, being with and being separate from, the ‘other’ [1].

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:07

11

Nov

embe

r 20

14

388 H. Rosenthal

Difference as Thrill

Where the epithet ‘opposites attract’ applies, practitioners and theorists oftensuppose that the process of projection is at work. In their book about marriage,Clulow and Mattinson (1989) describe a couple neither of whom successfullyhandle their anger, yet both have different ways of dealing with their dif� culties.

(His) internal volcano was heavily repressed, (hers) regularly exploding. Healways had to be the one to calm her down. However, the expression ofanger kept him in touch with that unrecognised part of himself, just as hiscontrol gave her a much needed boundary. (Clulow & Mattinson, 1989,p. 54)

The authors describe how sensible, unconsciously wise, it is for people such as theseto fall in love and marry, because this keeps both of them in touch with theirproblems and ‘provides them with a chance of doing something about it—repairinga bit of the past’ (p. 55). Although this complementarity may not be thrilling exactly,it is positive and suggests unconscious motivation to value someone who is different.

Sometimes, that there is so much variety is exhilarating. It can be the source andinspiration of creative endeavours. Artists, composers, writers, may be interested inpursuing and producing the novel, the never-before-seen and the hitherto unimag-ined.

Yalom (1931), a group psychotherapist, probably talks in bolder terms about theway some people need to encounter difference. He describes a situation where it isa delight for such a person not to have to think about himself/herself as rare orunusual. He states that many people who enter group therapy hold the unhappybelief that they are unique in their wretchedness, and often express relief atdiscovering that they are not alone and that others share their qualities and attributesas well as their dilemmas and life experiences.

As people in a group perceive their differences from one another and sharetheir deepest concerns with one another, they bene� t from the accompany-ing catharsis and the ultimate acceptance of essential sameness. (Yalom,1931, p. 59)

Difference as Threat

Dalal (1993) explains that we construct our identities from a jigsaw of similarities toand differences from those around us, some bits chosen, some bits imposed; itbecomes clearer that some bits of me are like you and some bits of me are not likeyou. Dif� culties only arise according to context. He illustrates this beautifully withthe following example:

Imagine a dinner party in South Africa attended by whites. There is onevegetarian in a room full of meat-eaters. To the vegetarian perhaps thisidentity is painfully primary during the meal. To another guest, perhaps themen/woman is the signi� cant division. A few minutes later a hostile white

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:07

11

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Discussion Paper 389

waiter comes in. A new marker is introduced, which has potential to createnew division and alliances in which the old differences between guests canbecome insigni� cant as they face the intruder. The new division can beseen along class lines. A black walking in a few minutes after that wouldresult once again in a reshuf� ing of allegiances; this time along colour lines.(Dalal, 1993, p. 284)

There is a dialectic that ensures movement to and from the ‘other’ and this processof approach and withdrawal is in all of us. While as an educational psychologist (EP)I may wish to advocate one-to-one work with a child, I also note that there is greatvalue for that child working with a group, where all pupils have to encounter the‘other’.

Diversity and Inclusion

The process of simpli� cation (stereotyping), although useful and necessary in somerespects, and perhaps inevitable, is counter-inclusive in � avour. The other dif� cultywith accepting and celebrating the differences between us is the duality with whichwe greet this fact; it is good and bad news, it excites and terri� es us, it cansimultaneously inspire and make us feel vulnerable. It is important to arrive at aview, both at the personal and corporate levels, regarding the answer to thequestions: Is inclusion served or hampered by diversity?, and How can I, as an EPand the Educational Psychology Service organisation, work towards promotinginclusive practice?

Promoting Inclusive Practice

The practices of both teachers and students need attention. (Sewell, 2000,p. 187)

There are two main avenues to working with difference. The � rst is about havingconversations in order to clarify and hear about the ‘other’s’ position, so thatdifferences can be described and better understood. I can stand in the ‘other’s’ shoesso to speak. The second avenue involves doing some private work inside oneself,looking at, owning and re-appraising, if necessary, one’s perceptions, beliefs andvalues.

Conversations with ‘Others’

To start accepting the differences between us, we � rst have to notice them, pointthem out, talk about them, explore them. With this in mind, it is not our responsi-bility to talk or act ‘colour-blind’. A story from a white teacher of black, white,Hispanic and Asian students serves to illustrate:

I asked my African–American friend, under the protection of darkness,questions I had never dared ask anyone before: ‘How can I help the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:07

11

Nov

embe

r 20

14

390 H. Rosenthal

African–American boys in my class? They don’t respect me. But I treatthem all like I treat my white kids. I try not to look at their skin colour. Ilike all my students. I treat them all the same’ … Tangye almost stoppeddead in her tracks … she said ‘that’s the problem. We don’t want to betreated the same. We are different’. We want you to acknowledgethat … (Diller, 1999, p. 821)

The � rst step is to register the differences between us. We then have to hold regularconversations about diversity (e.g. in PSE lessons, or bringing the subject into thecurriculum in general, see Sewell, 2000, p. 194). But this is not just a school agenda,it has to be taken up by parents too. Below is a father’s moving advice to hisdaughter on how to be successful:

Travelling the world as a tennis player, I discovered that friendships withan in� nite variety of people are not only possible but can de� nitely enrichone’s life beyond measure … This practice (of Black students sitting sepa-rately at a table with only other Black students) is usually a waste oftime … This mixing is an essential part of education, not something ex-traneous to it. (Ashe, 1993, p. 321)

Another opening for these conversations arises if teachers and other educational staffare willing and able to exploit every opportunity that spontaneously arises. German(1996) mentions an example of an African–Caribbean student who was excluded fora number of misbehaviours, among which was that she would not do a task whenasked to do so by her teacher, a white woman of Australian origin.

She refused to do so and added ‘Slavery � nish’. The confrontation contin-ued and the girl challenged her teacher about the mistreatment of theaboriginal peoples of Australia … How much better it would have been ifthe teacher had put her pupil’s sense of self and history to good account ingetting her to present her views as part of developing debatingskills … Instead, an opportunity was lost because of a knee-jerk reaction toa situation perceived as a challenge to constituted authority rather than anoccasion for dialogue and exploring relationships. (German, 1996, p. 53)

Changing Oneself

The exhortation ‘change how you feel by changing the way you think’ is the sub-titleof a well-used manual for cognitive-behavioural practitioners. The theory is thatthere are � ve components to any problem situation: the environment, the physicalreactions, the behavioural reactions, the thoughts and the moods of the personinvolved. The potent notion of this type of therapy is that a small change in any ofthese areas can lead to changes in any of the other areas. Cognitive-behaviouraltherapy seems to be an optimistic therapy. It suggests that feelings can be altered,attitudes can be changed, and behaviours can be challenged.

Hardiman and Jackson (1996), whose study is cited by Sewell (2000) suggest thatteachers may be able to be helped ‘to evaluate their own individual strengths and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:07

11

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Discussion Paper 391

shortcomings on the issue of social justice and race’ (p. 196). Both adolescents andadults can use this model, either alone or with guidance, when confronting the crisesand anxieties in their lives. The purpose of this way of working is to deconstructthose labels or ‘masks’ that make us feel comfortable, but which are essentially‘empty’.

All these labels connote two meanings. For example, the � rst, most obviousmeaning of the word ‘Black’ is the visible racial genotype. ‘Gay’ refers to the sexualpreference, and ‘Muslim’ to the religion. The second, less obvious meaning, refersto ways of acting, thinking, being, and it suggests that choice is involved and scopefor change is possible. So, regarding ‘Black’, this may be a certain way of walking,talking, dressing; with ‘Gay’ in mind, it might refer to frequenting a particular cluband with ‘Muslim’, it might amount to adherence to particular behaviours.

Acting ‘Black’ or ‘Gay’ is a choice. It can be changed—it is not immutable. It ispossible to reject these labels, ‘white’, ‘Jewish’, and soon, as ontological categoriesor ways of being, and adopt or learn new and different ones. Regulating one’sbehaviour, whether you are adult or child, is a very necessary pro-social skill. Oneof my EP colleagues calls it ‘navigation’. It is a skill that seems an essentialingredient in inclusive practice.

Finally, it seems important to state that whilst inclusion is a laudable goal for oureducation system to embrace, indeed, for our society to hold and promote, we needto aim for a broader discussion than we have had so far—one that encompasses anddeals in the core concepts of sameness and difference. If we are to live and worktogether, we need to get to know each other. The proposal inherent in this paper isthat in order to get to know one another, we need to debate and acknowledge ourpoints of similarity to and difference from one another. Only in this way will weminimize and perhaps extinguish the misunderstandings and disharmonies we haveseen so much of in our schools and communities. In my view more work is needed!

Notes

[1] By ‘other’ I mean any other person—parent, relative, friend, partner, acquaintance,stranger.

References

ASHE, A. (1993). Days of Grace. London: Heineman.CLULOW, C. & MATTINSON, J. (1989). Marriage Inside Out—Understanding problems of inti-

macy. London: Pelican Books.DALAL, F. (1993) ‘Race’ and racism: an attempt to organise difference. Group Analysis, Vol 26

(pp. 277–293). London: Sage.DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT (1999). Excellence for All: meeting special Needs:

a programme of action. London: DfEE.DILLER, D. (1999). Opening the dialogue: using culture as a tool in teaching young African

American children. The Reading Teacher, 52 (8), pp. 820–827.FOULKES, S.H. & ANTHONY, E.J. (1957). Group Therapy—the psychoanalytic approach. Har-

mondsworth: Penguin.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:07

11

Nov

embe

r 20

14

392 H. Rosenthal

GERMAN, G. (1996). Anti-racist strategies for educational performance. In K.N. DWIVEDI & V.P.Varma (Eds) Meeting the Needs of Ethnic Minority Culture. London: Jessica KingsleyPublishers.

GREENBERGER, D. & PADESKY, C. (1995). Mind over mood. Change how you feel by changing theway you think. New York: Guilford Press.

MAITRA, B. & MILLER, A. (1996). Children, families and therapists; clinical considerations andethnic minority culture. In K.N. DWIVEDI & V.P. VARMA (Eds) Meeting the Needs of EthnicMinority Children. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

SEWELL, T. (2000). Black Masculinities and Schooling. How Black boys survive modern schooling.Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books.

VERMA, G.K. (1999). Inequality and education; implications for the psychologist. Educational andChild Psychology, 16(3), pp. 6–16.

WRIGHT, D. (1971). The Psychology of Moral Behaviour. Harmondsworth: Pelican.WEBSTER’S DICTIONARY (1961). Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, Spring� eld, MA: G &

C Merriam Co.YALOM, I. (1931). The Practice of Group Psychotherapy. USA: Harper Collins.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Flor

ida

Atla

ntic

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:07

11

Nov

embe

r 20

14