Neutrality as a moral standpoint, conceptual confusion and the full inclusion debate

By: Gallagher, Deborah J.
Series: Disability & Society 16 (5) 2001: 637-654.Publisher: 2001Content type: text Media type: unmediated Carrier type: volume Subject(s): INCLUSION | INCLUSIVE EDUCATION | SPECIAL EDUCATION | THEORYSummary: Opposing perspectives on the full inclusion debate reveal a fundamental disjuncture between underlying conceptual frameworks. Advocates contend that full inclusion is a moral issue that cannot be resolved from a supposedly netural scientific stance. Defenders of the traditional continuum of placements argue, to the contray, that scientific research should be the dominant factor in arbitrating between separation and inclusion. In this paper, the author examines the concept of scientific neutrality and its lack of tenability as a foundation for sorting out the full inclusion debate. [AJ].
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Status Date due Barcode Item holds
Article Research IHC Library Article (Browse shelf(Opens below)) Available (Article available on request) 14386
Total holds: 0

Opposing perspectives on the full inclusion debate reveal a fundamental disjuncture between underlying conceptual frameworks. Advocates contend that full inclusion is a moral issue that cannot be resolved from a supposedly netural scientific stance. Defenders of the traditional continuum of placements argue, to the contray, that scientific research should be the dominant factor in arbitrating between separation and inclusion. In this paper, the author examines the concept of scientific neutrality and its lack of tenability as a foundation for sorting out the full inclusion debate. [AJ].

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.

Powered by Koha