China Disability and Sustainable Development Forum and UNESCO’s work on inclusive education in China

In 29-30 June 2017, invited by colleagues at the UNESCO Beijing Office, I participated in a round table discussion on UNESCO’s recent research on inclusive education in China, and also a sub-forum focusing on inclusive education as part of China Disability and Sustainable Development Forum, hosted collectively by ILO, UNDP, UNESCO and UNICEF.

Kohrman (2005)’s ethnography ‘Bodies of difference: experiences of disability and institutional advocacy in the making of modern China’ has provided a fascinating account of the significant role played by the UN in China in 1980s after Opening-up, not only pressuring issues of welfare for disabled people, but also initiating a massive process of identifying, categorising and regulating disability population. Although referred to as the most difficult country to engage with in early days to promote the agenda of inclusive education (Saleh 2015), over the years China often quickly responded to the international campaign of inclusive education and disability rights, as reflected in its continuous policy change. Today UN agencies are actively working with local academics, DPOs and schools to strengthen a commitment to include disabled children in education as part of the country’s 2030 sustainable development plan. The ‘Imagining Inclusive Schooling’ research thesis was consulted by an UNESCO education officer Ms Hongyan Li. She commented that the research had been the first resource ever that was able to clearly discuss the macro and micro issues involved in China’s inclusive education development, which would be of great value to inform their future work in China.

At the event, confusions around the concepts of inclusive education and special education were debated as well as what the best approach would be like in practice to support disabled children’s inclusion in mainstream settings. While many local academics and education authority officers justify the opening of resource classrooms as a practical local approach, this was challenged by disabled people representatives as its segregated nature might act as a potential violation to the UN CRPD. In addition, consensus was reached among all groups of representatives on the need to support teachers’ professional development and reform teacher education. Good practice such as organising public and key stakeholders’ consultation when revising national policies was widely recognised.

In the concluding speech, I reported the various issues that came up in the two-day’s discussion, and the challenges for moving forward. I also reflected on the importance of re-understanding disability and tackling the problematic divide between the disabled and non-disabled. As also commented by Mr Zhen Ni, who is a blind activist, in local research and projects, disabled people’s voices and experiences have been largely overlooked – decisions should not be made without listening to whose lives would be affected the most. After all, why would disabled people have to always make an argument that they should be also treated as human beings?

The Forum had a very high representation of disability community. This way of organising conferences and events is still rare in the country. Talking to disabled people in the audience, I learned about how much they valued such opportunity to be invited to participate. Such gathering was empowering and differences were celebrated rather than rejected. Overall, the Forum has successfully delivered a message for the importance of working together.

To learn more about the Forum, you could read the news covered by China Daily: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2017-07/02/content_29962584.htm

Kohrman, M. (2005) Bodies of difference: Experiences of disability and institutional advocacy in the making of modern China. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Saleh, L. (2014) A memoir. In Kiuppis, F & Hausstätter, R. S. (Eds.) Inclusive education: Twenty years after Salamanca. New York: Peter Lang. 23-40.