MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413427553 · doi:10.4103/jiad.jiad_19_25

North South Dialogues on Inclusive Education: A Move Away from Colonialism

2025· article· en· W4413427553 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Varsha Hooja

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Inclusion and Disability – Research Neuro Rehabilitation and Empowerment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican cultural and philosophical studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismPolitical scienceHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND ADAPT, previously known as The Spastics Society of India, has played a pivotal role in the advancement of disability services in India, guided by the visionary leadership of Founder President, Dr. Mithu Alur. After over 25 years of focusing on special education, the organization pivoted toward inclusive education, a change informed by Dr. Alur’s doctoral research, “Invisible Children: A Study of Policy Exclusion” (Alur, 1999) which highlighted the exclusion of children with disabilities (CWD) from essential services such as education and health care in India. To further the cause of inclusive education, the National Resource Centre for Inclusion India (NRCI) was established in collaboration with Canada’s Roeher Institute and supported by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). The center aimed to advocate for social and economic reforms in India through a human rights lens. Inclusive education promotes diverse learning needs, extending beyond only CWD to all who face barriers to learning. Nonetheless, many policymakers still reference Western models as an inspiration (Kalyanpur, 1994; Alur, 1998; Miles, 1995). It is important to dismantle these lingering colonial legacies and empower nations to cultivate indigenous models of inclusive education. THE NORTH-SOUTH DIALOGUES The North-South Dialogs (NSDs) on inclusive education, conceptualized and initiated by Dr. Alur, comprised four international conferences, held in India, aimed at presenting cost-effective inclusive education models from Southern nations while discussing culturally relevant inclusion frameworks. The intent of the dialogs was to amplify the diverse voices of individuals from both economically developed and developing nations in an accessible and nonesoteric manner. Delegates from 26 nations (Australia, Bangladesh, Brazil, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, China, Denmark, Egypt, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Mongolia, Nepal, Norway, Pakistan, Portugal, Russia, South Africa, and Tajikistan), alongside representatives from influential organizations such as the World Bank, UNESCO, UNICEF, CIDA, the Government of India, and various civil society organizations, participated to share insights on diverse cultural contexts, resources, and policies for inclusive education. NORTH-SOUTH DIALOGUE I ON INCLUSIVE EDUCATION, 2001, MUMBAI The inaugural dialogue focused on identifying culturally relevant models of inclusive education. Representatives from various nations discussed the multidimensional nature of inclusion concerning policy, human rights, and community participation, aligning with the NRCI mission to enhance awareness surrounding inclusion while fostering community participation in the process. Recommendations There was a consensus that inclusive education ought to be an intrinsic component of the broader campaign to achieve education for all (EFA) The Education Bill should explicitly include provisions for CWD The term “Education for All” should have a positive statement clarifying that “all” encompasses CWD To promote a cohesive approach to EFA, educational policies should be consolidated within the Ministry of Education rather than being relegated to the Ministry of Welfare. As a consequence of the inaugural NSD, an All India Regional Alliance for Inclusive Education was established. NORTH-SOUTH DIALOGUE II ON INCLUSIVE EDUCATION, 2003, KOCHI: FROM RHETORIC TO REALITY The second dialogue aimed to shift inclusive education from rhetoric to action, focusing on practical implementation challenges. It sought to analyse various policy-making processes with attendance from professionals, government officials, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). The discussions highlighted existing barriers to inclusive education despite commitments made through initiatives like the Dakar Framework and Salamanca Statement. The dialog attracted participation from prominent professionals and representatives from both Northern and Southern countries, as well as government officials at both State and Central levels, NGOs, activists, and other stakeholders engaged in educational services. The conference aimed to emphasize how the ideology and philosophy underlying political commitments could be realized through transformative change at three levels: Micro-level, pertaining to classroom and school values, cultures, policies, and practices Mezzo-level, involving community engagement and involvement Macro-level, addressing policy development, legislative frameworks, and the political culture at local, state, national, and global levels. One of the significant objectives of Dialog II was to document the identified issues and incorporate them into a code of practice that was being developed by the NRCI, referred to as Culturally Appropriate Policy and Practice (CAPP). THE KOCHI DECLARATION, KERALA 2003 The outcomes of the conference, including the recommendations from the dialog, the accompanying policy statement, and the plan of action necessary to operationalize policy, were consolidated into a document known as the Kochi Declaration, Kerala 2003. This declaration was unanimously endorsed by the 170 delegates in attendance, emphasizing that all developmental initiatives must be “disability sensitive.” NORTH-SOUTH DIALOGUE III ON INCLUSIVE EDUCATION, 2005, NEW DELHI: TOWARDS A GLOBAL ALLIANCE The third iteration of the NSD centred on promoting inclusive educational environments. The dialogue’s focus was also on advocacy strategies to foster the inclusion of marginalized groups, particularly individuals with disabilities and their families. The dialog sought to foster collaboration with key national and international decision-makers, aiming to enhance the international alliance and support localized campaigns aimed at eliminating the exclusion of specific groups from educational settings. The target audience encompassed individuals with disabilities, alongside marginalized youth and adults, their families, practitioners, academics, government representatives, and like-minded allies committed to promoting inclusive practices. It was affi that individuals with disabilities, their families, and other segregated groups must take an active role in advocating for inclusive education. Objectives To initiate the CAPP framework for inclusive education, facilitated by the National Resource Centre on Inclusion – India To establish a global alliance for inclusive education To highlight effective advocacy initiatives and methodologies for inclusive education at both national and global levels. NORTH-SOUTH DIALOGUE IV ON INCLUSIVE EDUCATION, 2012, GOA: IMPLEMENTING TOOLS OF CHANGE FOR INCLUSION The fourth chapter of the NSD aimed to consolidate and share experiences and insights. It specifically addressed the challenges faced by developing countries in their eff to include CWD and other marginalized groups, who are excluded from educational institutions due to systemic barriers. The discourse encompassed these concerns under the umbrella of “Tools of Change,” showcasing various intervention models from countries such as Nepal, Tajikistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Indonesia, Mongolia, and Vietnam, as well as sharing pertinent experiences from developed nations. The conference also celebrated 40 years of ADAPT’s contributions to the fi of disability and recognized a decade of partnership with the Women’s Council, UK, for the Community Initiatives in Inclusion course, which has successfully trained over 350 participants from 22 countries (Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Papua-new Guinea, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Government of Tibet in Exile, Tonga, Vietnam, and India). Outcomes: Publications “Inclusive Education: Proceedings of NSD I,” edited by Dr. Mithu Alur and Professor Tony Booth, published by UBS publishers and distributors, New Delhi, 2005 “Inclusive Education: From Rhetoric to Reality, The North-South Dialogue II,” edited by Dr. Mithu Alur and Dr. Michael Bach, published by Viva Publications, New Delhi, 2005 “The Journey for Inclusive Education in the Indian Sub-Continent,” by Dr. Mithu Alur and Dr. Michael Bach, published by Routledge, New York, USA, 2009 “Inclusive Education Across Cultures: Crossing Boundaries, Sharing Ideas,” co-edited by Dr. Mithu Alur and Vianne Timmons, published by Sage, 2009 Three volumes of resource material CAPP, were also published. CONCLUSION The NSDs played a crucial role in moving the conversation on inclusive education beyond theoretical commitments to practical applications, emphasizing the need for locally relevant solutions. By bringing together diverse international stakeholders, these dialogues fostered collaboration, shared learning, and actionable frameworks that address the unique needs of CWD and other marginalized groups. They dismantled colonial legacies by empowering countries to develop and adopt indigenous models of inclusive education that resonate with their cultural contexts. The success of these dialogues underscores the importance of continued collaboration in shaping inclusive educational practices, emphasizing that achieving equity in education is a shared global responsibility. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0350.043
Scholarly communication0.0150.016
Open science0.0020.034
Research integrity0.0070.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.350 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Inclusion and Disability – Research Neuro Rehabilitation and EmpowermentSame topicAfrican cultural and philosophical studiesFrench-language works237,207