FROM SPECIAL EDUCATION TO INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN MOZAMBIQUE: METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES IN THEORY AND PRACTICE

FROM SPECIAL EDUCATION TO INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN MOZAMBIQUE: METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES IN THEORY AND PRACTICE

José Matemulane

PhD. in Psychology Assistant Professor Universidade Pedagógica de Maputo – Mozambique,

Mozambique, Maputo

Introduction

One of the greatest concerns of a society is the education of its members so that they can guarantee not only a decent civilizational continuity in an increasingly competitive world, but also a better quality of life for themselves and their contemporaries, as well as for future generations. The healthy development of all social groups, and especially the most vulnerable, is an indicator of maturity, responsibility and the level of fraternity of any society that values itself as humanist. Being the people with functional disorders part of this vulnerable social group, I propose, in this article, another reflection on the state of care and education for them in order to perceive the causal relationship between the methodological approach of Inclusive Education (having as reference the Special Education) and the measures and policies adopted in Mozambique, having in mind that these policies should determine the possibility for this group of citizens to effectively enjoy their safeguarded constitutional rights; to what extent this group of citizens has the possibility to fully develop their potential; to what extent the realization of the good ends up harming the beneficiaries of that same good. The reflection's main axes or theses cross-sectionally analyze i) the excessive focus on “inclusion and diversity” in the light of the humanist dictatorship of the 21st century, to the detriment of essential methodological and practical aspects; ii) Hyper fixation on “short term capacitation of education professionals” to the detriment of deep training specialists capable of working fruitfully and effectively with this group of people;

i) “Inclusion and diversity” in the light of the humanist dictatorship of the 21st century

The psychological and pedagogical peculiarities of children with functional disorders are the object of scarce scientific studies in Mozambique and this situation is due, in my view, to what I consider to be a systematic induction into the strategic error of planning Special Education not only in Mozambique, as well as in many other countries in the region. This situation, I believe, is due to the massive propagation of the rights of all kinds of social minorities that we have witnessed since the turn of the millennium, in which “inclusion” and “diversity” in communion with political correctness “in order not to hurt sensibilities” are the main losung of this democratic and humanistic avalanche that assumes, paradoxically, dictatorial contours. We are thus witnessing a deliberate and methodologically unfounded substitution of concepts that, in the end, do not help, in this particular case, the real inclusion of people with functional disorders, as ethnic, sexual and asexual minorities, feminist movements, gifted children, and others, are placed in the same socio-legal category in the name of “diversity” by inertia and in the wake of the various ministerial policies that are approved in their favor. Each ministry has a policy on people with disabilities. The special education subsystem ends up losing the focus on defining and hierarchizing priorities in the care, education and accompaniment of people with functional disorders, revealing their fragility, which resides in the asphyxiating lack of specialized staff for teaching and accompaniment of children with functional disorders.

When addressing the issue of staff training, in the analyzed national literature (CHAMBAL, 2012; SONIVA 2021; Lopes, 2020; Lehtomäki, 2020 and others), there is a relevant emphasis on training (understand "capacitation") of teachers of the National Education System (SNE) and, almost nothing is said about deep training of specialists who are, in fact, the key to the creation of a methodological identity of special education in Mozambique. The activities, according to Elina Lehtomäki, consist of short training actions aimed at training provincial coordinators (Lehtomäki 2020). Not that the systematic training strategy for SNE teachers is wrong. Quite the contrary: it is necessary, but as a complement to the core work carried out by specialists in the Special Education field. It is the specialists who must opine and propose, with scientific authority, the methodological foundation of the special education curriculum, thus allowing a unification and consolidation of special education curricula and programs, as they would be governed by the nature and patterns of psychopedagogical, biological and motor development specificities of children with functional disorders, putting an end to the current lack of versatility of curricula and programs, as SONIVA (2021) refers.

Another issue that poses methodological obstacles is the perception of inclusion as an end in itself. From my point of view, inclusion is a means of opening up the potential of people with functional disorders; inclusion is neither a science nor a scientific category, but rather a process that aims at the full social integration of all social categories through changing the attitudes of others (of the majority social groups); integration aims to provide these children with the possibility of enjoying a normal life, benefiting from education services at various levels (pre-school, school, basic, secondary, professional, higher), all cultural achievements and forms of active recreation ( Matemulane 2014) and the creation of material conditions and adaptive infrastructure. As long as we continue to fight blindly for inclusion, we will never have anyone who can unlock the potential of those who we so passionately want to include and, consequently, this “inclusion” will be nothing more than a mere cosmetic social arrangement. The success of a real inclusion also depends on the implementation of an interdisciplinary system of early diagnosis made up of specialist psychologists, doctors and pedagogues called the Psycho-Medical-Pedagogical Commission (CPMP)^[1]. This structure should be linked to the CREI^[2]s in a provincial and not a regional dimension. In each provincial CREI there must be a CPMP. The creation of CPMP would put greater pressure on the need for training specialists, as it is not a question of simply recruiting educational, clinical or social psychologists, but also special psychologists, typhlo psychologists and deaf psychologists; tiflo- and deaf pedagogues, social pedagogue, logopeda teacher, psychiatrist, neurologist and other specialists. The combination of specialists would be defined by local specificities and the availability of these same specialists.

ii) Hyper fixation on "short term capacitation of education professionals” to the detriment of training specialists capable of working fruitfully and effectively with this group of people

When I speak of “specialists in the area”, I am referring, among others, to Deaf and tyfloppedagogists, Deaf and tyflopsychologists, logopedes, special psychologists, neuro and patho- psychologists, psychiatrists. These are the specialists who should be part of the CPMP and not the contingent of the “humanist dictatorship” as “representative of civil society” or even worse – representative of each ministry for having a policy on the disabled person. As I am aware that the postulate above may have raised questions conditioned by “ethical issues” or, as I said before, by political correctness “not to offend sensibilities”, I will ground my politically incorrect position.

Conceptual definition and analysis as methodological determinants of Special Education

Political correctness “so as not to offend sensitivities”, as I have said before, brought new concepts into circulation, with the pair “Inclusive Education” and “Special Educational Needs” being highlighted, which, in fact, methodologically opposes the concept of “Special Education”, although they are intended to be used as synonyms or equivalents. Failure to clarify these concepts puts the education of people with functional disorders wrapped in problems of methodological uncertainty and imprecision that jeopardizes the correct and effective implementation of Special Education in Mozambique (Matemulane, 2015). The maintenance of “inhuman” designations, to which some authors refer to the detriment of Abstract Humanism (Yu. Matassov, 2009), for example in the Russian special school, is not linked to its “barbarity”, but to a sense of cold and accurate pragmatism. It is not the unbridled “humanization” of designations and concepts that will in itself improve the (social) quality of life of people with functional disorders; quite the contrary: the maintenance of the traditional conceptual framework (with occasional updates suited to contemporary reality) (i) allows us not to lose an entire historical legacy of study methodology and support for these children, (ii) allows us to have ever-increasing knowledge deeper into the psychopedagogical peculiarities of each child in their defect group; (iii) It allows working much more assertively in the development of children with functional disorders, since knowledge or the search for knowledge of the cognitive and personality potential, in communion with inclusive education (as an instrument of socialization and not mere school integration) generates, without a doubt, impressive results that lead to the transposition of objective barriers in the process of real social integration of these people. The figure of the oligofrenopedagogue is, in every way, banned, forgetting what his competences are. Let's see how the issue of intellectual defect has been addressed in the example of distinguishing mental retardation from mental backwardness: both one and the other are used as synonyms of intellectual or mental deficiency, witnessing a universalization of the characteristics and etiology of the two dysfunctional states, because the concept of intellectual disability or mental disability are more popular as they allow to circumvent the politically incorrect “backwardness” or “retardation”. The fact is that in this process, together with the “inhuman” concepts, methodological rigor is thrown into the dustbin. The exact characterization of each of the dysfunctional states is crucial for their understanding, competent and effective care to guarantee the full activation of the potential of children with intellectual disabilities. What, then, would be the distinction between the two dysfunctional intellectual states? retardation in mental development – is a concept that does not speak of a permanent and, fundamentally, irreversible underdevelopment of psychic underdevelopment, but rather of its rhythm, which is often discovered when the child enters school and stands out due to the insufficiency of the amount general knowledge, limitations of imagination, immaturity of thought, reduced intellectual focus, supremacy of playful interests, rapid saturation in intellectual activity. Mental backwardness is an expressed and irreversible mental underdevelopment in the form of oligophrenia or just a slowdown in the rate of mental maturation that mainly depends on the massiveness of the brain organic lesion. The causes of the organic-cerebral forms of mental retardation (pathology of pregnancy and childbirth, infection, intoxication, trauma to the nervous system in the first years of life), are to some extent similar to the causes of mental backwardness. This similarity is determined by organic damage to the central nervous system in the early stages of ontogenesis.

Conclusion

The methodological indiscipline that derives not only from the indiscrimination of the defect but also from the homogenization of all social groups and subgroups that consider themselves disadvantaged or discriminated against, causes the special education subsystem to lose focus on defining and hierarchizing priorities in service, education and accompaniment of people with functional disorders;

The dramatic insufficiency of specialized staff makes the inclusion of students with disabilities inefficient as teachers, who solely benefit from training programs in what is considered the area of Special Education Needs, are not in a position to respond to questions related to the nature or state of the defect which, in turn, are the basis for understanding the potential of these children in the process of truly inclusive education. It is the role of specialists not only to teach, but also to make the accompaniment of   children with functional disorders. It is important to emphasize here that it is not a matter of replacing teachers in the national education system with such specialists, but reinforcing cadres capable of working transversally in all educational regimes (regular, mixed and special). It is the specialists who must opine and propose, with scientific authority, the methodological foundation of the special education curriculum, thus allowing a unification and consolidation of special education curricula and programs, as they would be governed by the nature and patterns of psychopedagogical, biological and motor development specificities of children with functional disorders.

It is pertinent to create a national network (in all provinces) for early diagnosis based on the CREIs in symbiosis with the CPMP, which would materialize the provisions of Strategic Pillar 1 of the Strategy for Inclusive Education and Development of Children with Disabilities 2020-2029, under the designation of “Inclusion and Development”.

References:

1. CHAMBAL, L. J. Initial teacher training for school inclusion of students with disabilities in Mozambique (doctoral thesis). Sao Paulo: Pontifical Catholic University of Sao Paulo, 2012.
2. LEHTOMÄKI, E. Inclusive Schools in Mozambique: From policy to strategy. EENET, 2021. https://www.eenet.org.uk/enabling-education-review/enabling-education-6/newsletter-6/6-4/
3. LOPES, B. Inclusive Education in Mozambique: A Critical Look at Success Variables. Onis Ciência Magazine, Braga, V. VIII, Year VIII Nº 25, May/August 2020. – ISSN 2182-598X.
4. MATASOV YU. Inclusive education: preconditions and barriers. Social pedagogy. St. Petersburg, 2009. - No. 1. - pp. 22-24.
5. MATEMULANE, J. The peculiarities of the behavior of children and adolescents with functional disorders as a determining factor in the process of their social integration. In: Ussene, C. & Simbine, L. S., Special Educational Needs: Access, Equality and Inclusion (Orgs), Educar-UP, Maputo, September, 2015. pp. 16-43.
6. MATEMULANE, J. The peculiarities of the behavior of children and adolescents with functional disorders as a determining factor in the process of their social integration; In: I National Seminar on Special Educational Needs – UP Montepuez 2014.
7. SONIVA, R. Public Policies for Inclusive Education in Mozambique: Reflection on International and National Legal Documents. https://www.webartigos.com/artigos/politicas-publicas-de-educacao-inclusiva-em-mocambique-reflexao-dos-documentos-legais-internacionais-e-nacionais/167742
8. Strategy for Inclusive Education and Development of Children with Disabilities (EEIDCD). 2020-2029. Mozambique.