“DIVERSITY IN CHILDREN UNBRINBRING”

First of all, I would like to express a non formal thank you to the President for inviting me to the CIF International Congress.  I am here to develop a work about a subject that the parents association, led by myself for 20 years, cares very much about.

In fact, since the 80’s, the Democratic Parents’ Coordination (CGD) was involved in treating and discussing during the International Meetings in Castiglioncello (Tuscany) all themes related to the social, economic, ethnic diversity and children and adolescents’ physical and psychological health.

The attention was turned not only to parents, but also to teachers and social workers and we are firmly convinced the analysis of differences is not only fundamental to the whole educational process, but also because is the necessary condition of the democratic and civil development of our society.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DIVERSITY AND IDENTITY

The subject is so wide that I can summarise only few concepts.

First of all, it is necessary to consider that discussing about diversity in education means talking about the process of forming children identity from both personal and social points of view.

Throughout our life we tend to investigate about our personal identity, but certainly the period from birth to adolescence has a fundamental role inn such a complex process.

The term “identity” contains a big contradiction: it expresses – at the same time – either the concept of “equality” (a thing is equal when it is exactly the same as an other one) either the concept of “diversity” (a person is unique because different from any other one).  The process of building the identity consists of two stages: the first (referring to the first of the two meanings of the term) it is based on the identification with the other (the meeting of the child with the mother); the second is based on differentiation from the other.  In other words, at the beginning, children need a bench to refer to and later, when they have developed personal abilities they tend to be different from it.

There is a process of continuous change in the period that goes from birth to adolescence.  In this sense, the education given by parents and by the scholastic system has the difficult commitment of helping in developing an independent personality, but also to encourage and strengthen his/her relationship with the society.

The main difficulty for parents and teachers is trying to adapt themselves continuously, year after year, to all different (growth) exigencies of children in their way to the creation of a personal and social identity.

It is important to underline two parents’ prevalent negative attitudes.  On the one hand, there is the parents’ behaviour in make the children a copy of themselves (the father is usually the example for boys, the mother for girls).  It is easier to think that in the growth process a son/daughter should adapt him/herself to adults’ rules and principles instead of follow an autonomous process of personal identification.  On the other, today likely more common, there is the behaviour that imply the refuse of the educator’s role, in contrast with the repressive system of the previous generations.

But a child in pre-scholar age cannot be free to do whatever he/she wants.  The today omnipotent children will be tomorrow weak and insecure adults and will always be searching for a parental reference role.

I would like to point out that in both parents’ attitudes there is a lack in differentiation in a positive way: in the first case, constraining the child to the equality in roles and behaviours; in the second, removing the role of reference, necessary for the process of creating and adult identity, because the role is real and different and able to create the alternation between acceptance and refusal.

It is obvious to consider the negative consequences of a non solved process of personal identity like underestimation of oneself, sexual identity process, anorexia and bulimia, psychic iperfragility, etc… can be a heavy burden for all the people involved in the educational system like teachers and social workers.

From what I have said, I would like to express two important concepts;  first : the educator’s role is strictly related to the child’s process of creation his/her personal and social identity that hold the acceptance and the refusal of the “diverse” from oneself; second: diversity is not an abstract concept (like paternity, sexuality, religion, a kind of handicap, ethnic group) but it is evident and real through people who bring different and unique diversities (that father, that boy/girl, that Muslim child, that child affected with Down’s syndrome…).

Diversity and diversities

Diversity and gender

It’s even too obvious to state the importance of the sexual and gender difference aimed at the personal identity processing.  It’s linked to three major items to be necessarily included into the educational programme addressed to boys and girls at all school levels , from primary to high one.

The first item is linked to the relationship with their own body. This relationship has been historically lived in an opposite key by boys and girls to the point that in the past the reasons of feminine subalternity were linked right to the body conditioning.  Nowadays it’s possible to realize how much the virility and femininity schemes have been socially influenced and variable during the historical ages , in the different geographical areas and social classes.

The second item is linked to the relationship with the others. The culture stating the relationship with the others as following the individual autonomy and independence achievement, considered the basic elements establishing the identity process, is actually male marked. On the other side, the historical development of female identity, probably influenced by a background exclusively focused on taking care of children and daily surviving, does consider fundamental the relationship itself, highlighting all expertise and competencies raising exactly from the experience of this relationship.

The third item is linked to the position within the public responsibilities and in the world of work.. In this field the division of roles is still prevalent even though the major on going changes leading a greater amount of women more and more to assume political and social responsibilities at each level.

This epochal scenario, marked by rising of the woman’s figure and by bringing up for discussion the male sense of self-confidence and self-sufficiency, will completely revolutionize the traditional educational behaviours. It is not possible yet to give a well-established interpretation of the pedagogic effects raising from changing of male and female roles and from spreading of new father and mother figures. In Italy school had a core role in the past  because through the mass educational process following the sixties and the generalization of mixed classes it enabled boys and girls to face the same experiences and to reach the same objectives.

I am strongly convinced that, during this deep changing phase, school, more than any other organization, can arrange the right context to let boys and girls reflect on their own respective male and female roles .

Diversity and ethnical group

It's commonly known that an individual develops his/her own identity by distinguishing himself/herself from others (through the elaboration of diversity) and, by maintaining continuity with his/her own.  At the same time, the person needs to feel accepted by others/has a strong need for acceptance by others. The identity of a individual, both in the personal aspect and social one, is formed in this continuous comparison between diversity and equality, between what is considered expression of individual experience and what is suggested by the social environment.

In the very few years of a child's life, the family contributes to create the "primary" socialisation. In the following stage of "secondary" socialisation other elements come into the picture, often in conflict with the family influence. We are thinking of the community where each of us lives and, generally, of the ethnical group. It's well known that the conflict between the cultural situation of the origin's family and the new community, where the child lives, can influence the educational process of a immigrant child's identity. We refer to school as the most important place where the second phase of socialisation can take place.

In Italy, the number of immigrants has become significant during the 80's. It is in this period that early regulations on entering primary schools were issued and these were very different from regulations adopted in other European countries where immigration begun some decades before (Germany, France and Switzerland). In Italy, the Government didn't resort to special classes but preferred to have foreign pupils included directly in common school's classes. This choice was due to the memory of school's segregation suffered by Italian immigrants and to the typical Italian culture that is against special classes. In particular, this last conviction was wide spread in the 70's when the Italian Government made arrangements for handicapped children to enter the school system.

I would like to mention the ministerial rule of 1993 (No. 32) that gave rights to minors without residence permit, abandoned minors or kids who had entered the country illegally, to participate into school activities or qualify for professional training.

I remember this particular rule because the Democratic Parents Co-ordination movement, as a conclusion of the 1989's “Coloured child” Congress, worked steadfastly for this solution in name of the protection and the right to study for every minor living in Italy.

Some data can help us to describe the Italian situation. In school year 1999/2000, the number of foreign pupils in Italian schools was 112, 924 (one hundred and twelve, nine hundreds and twenty-four). It represents 1,5% (one point five per cent) of all Italian pupils. The annual increase of foreign pupils is more significant than any other value. In the last five years the rate of growth is always been about 26% each year (twenty-six per cent). Moreover, we noted that Italian schools with more than 10 foreign pupils are only 1.000 and these schools are located only in big city (Milan, Rome, Florence, Turin). This point confirms that in Italy the immigration is evident especially in big cities.

The growth of the consistent multiethnic presence in schools swiftly developed in Italy an intercultural pedagogy and a great production of programs and didactic paths for each educational level, according to some guide-lines, such as:

1)         Those who works in an educational context should contribute to create relations of interaction between people who came from other countries and who live permanently in the arrival place .

2)         An effective interaction between host community and immigrants can be positively established if both parties consider themselves as an open system.

3)         It's necessary to move above and beyond the concept of tolerance. It's important to admit the positive value of cultural differences and of movements of cultures toward other cultures or people towards other people.

4)         The intercultural pedagogy has to acknowledge and oppose any position that claims  purity and superiority of race.

These general principles, actually adopted by hundreds of educational programs in Italian schools, will have to deal with even greater problems and will be subject to many chances for failure. We can analyse some of the causes.

The situation of conflict between the cultural background of family origin and the arrival's country background, in contrast for language, values, mutual prejudices, imposes on the foreign minor a very difficult search for identity. That's because the minor has to face two different models of social identity: the first one from the family, distant from the modern way of thinking and very often only symbolic; the second model is provided by the society of arrival, which in one way is closer and more involving, but at the same time excluding.

In this reality, the foreign minor works out one of the four solutions that we would like to mention and that explain some of difficulties faced by teachers and social assistants social workers.

1)      the first solution can be defined as cultural opposition. The child chooses the parents ethnic identity: the ways of one’s own traditions are deeply rooted and interactions with other-than fellow countrymen are reduced. It's evident that the strength of the original identity should not lead to isolation of these minority. To avoid this isolation, the Italian society should deeply restructure itself toward a truly multiethnic and widely differentiated model. If this change doesn't occur, the risk is that young people consider themselves foreigners for ever in the new country. Some indicators are the low rate of academic success in school and the high risk of deviation.

2)      The second solution can be considered the assimilation. The foreign minor follows completely the cultural models of the new society in which he has arrived. He/she quickly learns the language and makes news friends. The risk linked to this process is the conflict with the parents, who are perceived  as losers by the children

3)      The third solution can be called the marginality. This is the condition that more often is verified. When young people remain out of both the culture of origin and the culture of the arrival society, we can notice a great confusion, frequently revealed from an imperfect bilingualism. The risk  is that the long marginality could become a pathology, preventing the developing of a clear, specific identity.  forming of any identity.

4)      The last solution is the double identity. This happens when children are well integrated in the new society, while still maintaining some aspects of their socio-cultural background. This solution, which would be the best one, is frequently noted among children of mixed couples, but is implemented with much greater difficulty in children whose whole family has moved to the new country.

In conclusion, the family and the society should offer children the real possibility to choose which solution can be adopted. We consider this as the best to create a sense of dual/double "belonging" without any conflicts.

Diversity and handicap

School, together with family is the environment where handicapped children find better educational opportunities and possibilities to establish relations with others.

Integration of handicapped children in public school, carried out in Italy in the last 30 years, represents a unique experience in the world. Starting from the Seventies, Italy abolished special schools, following a more general process of de-Institutionalisation which referred to the Basaglia movement against psychiatric hospitals.

Applying rules ever more adequate, Law n. 104 came into force in 1992.

For the first time, on the legislative front, definitions of disability and handicap proposed by WHO where introduced; the person in its entirety is put in the centre, regardless of the condition and the type of handicap carried, with an innovative approach which considers the disabled person in its Unitarian development from birth, in the presence of the family, at  school, at work and in time of leisure. With these rules, the passage from charity State to social State was sanctioned, putting forward instruments and conditions offering adequate answers to persons who find themselves in difficult situations.

Some number of integration. Scholarity of disabled youngsters is almost the same as that of their contemporaries: between the age of 6 and 14 participation equals 87% (participation of contemporaries; 88%), in the upper age-frame participation equals 62,4% (participation of contemporaries: 64%), for a total of almost 7.590.0000. Interesting is also the figure of support teachers: national average is one support teacher per 2,13 handicapped children (year 1998), which comes to almost 55.000 support teachers.

Here are soma considerations on 4 critical points after 30 years’ experience:

1)      Number of students in classes where there is an handicapped child. At present the higher number is 25. We are convinced that this number should not exceeds 20.

2)      Only one handicapped student per class

3)      Task of the support teacher. After years of discussion, whether the support teacher should work separately or together with the class teacher, finalized research has evidenced that the best choice is to increase common work in class.

4)      Quality of overall teaching. Didactics for all the children in the class improve when problems of integration of handicapped children are solved.

I think this last point is the central point of our deliberation on diversity in children’s education.

Studies on individual differences, on plurality of cleverness, on individuality of styles of learning and thought, confirm that the heterogeneity is the rule and the formative offer for all children, including those known as “normal”, has to be sorted out. It should be appropriate to remember that among non-handicapped children an average of 10-15% go through difficulties in learning and in establishing relationships. In any case, this does not mean that 20 different styles are needed for 20 different children. The policy that improves the overall quality of teaching is for all children to use different cognitive abilities: analytical, practical and creative in such a way that student may find his own proper cognitive style, but also earn flexibility in other site of thought.

Experience in school integration has clearly shown the necessity to activate a process which should not be “vertical”, teacher-student, but “horizontal”, capable of activating in synergy resources of other participants besides the support teacher: i.e. other teachers, class-mates, family, social workers, etc. In order to accomplish this horizontal dimension new didactic strategies have been develop which have indeed improved the theory of “doing school” to all student.

  I would like to mention, at this point, an important example of synergy among various actors of school integration. Due to the low quality level of preparation lectures/courses aimed at support teachers, my Association, called Democratic Parents Coordinating Group, was asked, during a meeting on disability, to provide higher level lecture/courses. This request was effectively satisfied by creating an absolutely unique precedent in Italy: a Parent’s Association has come up with very good lectures for support teachers. This may be the conclusive lesson: facing diversity has the power to change us, and this goes for our personal destinies as well as the evolution of collective life. And now, I wish to conclude this deliberation on children’s education diversity by quoting Jean Paul Sartre:

“…to obtain whatever truth on my account, it has to be obtained from another person. The other person is indispensable to my existence, as well as to the knowledge that I have of myself”.