Whether education fosters equity and social justice, as it is said to do, is a matter of debate. Whatever the outcome of the debate, education has a better chance of succeeding in this process if it is delivered through a national system and through schools which are genuinely inclusive in nature—welcoming difference and diversity; attempting to fulfil the rights for education of good quality; and targeting both out-of-school children and children in school but not learning. But many education systems still have large numbers of children who are not achieving minimum expected levels of learning—usually because of neglect, disinterest, discriminatory policies, and/or a lack of resources and data about who are excluded, where they live, and why they are not in school. The concept of “inclusive education” now has a wider definition encompassing all obstacles to access and learning beyond a focus on children with disabilities and other special needs. It is therefore concerned with increasing enrolment, attendance, and completion; reducing repetition/drop-out/push-out rates; reducing disparities in provision and student; and celebrating diversity and promoting cohesion. This, in turn, requires an analysis of what causes exclusion; “sharing the blame” for failure; and the searching for, and targeted support to, those excluded. Exclusion can be based on many factors: e.g. migration and refugee status, conflict, natural disaster, income, linguistic/cultural status, location (e.g. remoteness), sex, and ability. A range of policies and practices, at both the school and Ministry level, can be put in place to make schools more inclusive: legislative mandates and whole-school reform; targeted responses to excluded groups; pedagogies which strengthen social-emotional learning and celebrate difference and diversity; the promotion of inclusive teaching–learning strategies and practices; and good quality, inclusive early childhood care and development (ECCD) programmes. In the best of worlds (where factors outside of education which sustain inequality are not insurmountable), and assuming that the education provided meets established standards of quality, children leaving an inclusive education system should be able not only to develop themselves to their fullest potential but also to play a useful role in local and national economic, social, and political development leading to a more just, equitable, and cohesive society.

中文翻译：

---

包容性教育：公平与社会正义的前提

据说，教育是否能促进公平和社会正义，尚有争议。无论辩论的结果如何，如果通过国家体系和真正具有包容性的学校提供​​教育，教育就更有可能成功地实现这一过程，欢迎差异和多样性；试图履行高质量教育的权利；并针对失学儿童和在校儿童，但不针对学习儿童。但是许多教育系统仍然有大量儿童没有达到预期的最低学习水平-通常是由于疏忽，不感兴趣，歧视性政策和/或缺乏关于谁被排斥，他们住在哪里以及为什么的资源和数据他们不在学校。现在，“全纳教育”的概念有了更广泛的定义，涵盖了获取和学习方面的所有障碍，而不仅仅是关注残疾儿童和其他特殊需求。因此，它与增加入学率，出勤率和完成率有关；降低重复/退出/退出率；减少提供和学生方面的差距；庆祝多样性并促进凝聚力。反过来，这需要分析导致排斥的原因；因失败而“责备”；以及寻找被排除在外的人并为其提供有针对性的支持。排斥可以基于许多因素：例如移民和难民身份，冲突，自然灾害，收入，语言/文化状况，位置（例如偏远地区），性别和能力。学校和部级的一系列政策和做法，可以到位，使学校更具包容性：立法规定和整个学校的改革；针对被排斥群体的针对性回应；加强社会情感学习并倡导差异与多样性的教学法；促进包容性教学策略和实践；高质量的包容性幼儿保育和发展（ECCD）计划。在最好的情况下（在教育之外，无法维持不平等的因素不是无法克服的），并假设所提供的教育符合既定的质量标准，离开包容性教育体系的儿童不仅应该能够充分发挥自己的潜力，而且应该发挥最大的潜力。在地方和国家的经济，社会和政治发展中发挥有益的作用，从而建立一个更加公正，公平和团结的社会。