Comparative_Perspective_Inclusive_Education_Uk_and_Austria

This assignment will take a critical look at the provision of compulsory education for children with intellectual disabilities in Austria. It will give a brief overview of the country, its legislative process, welfare provision and history of the education system and compare this to England. It will then look at education for all children paying specific attention to the provision of inclusive education for children with intellectual disabilities, including how Austria’s government plans to implement the changes required by the ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Disabled Persons (UNCRPD) (2006), Article 24, which states that: ‘States Parties shall ensure an inclusive education system at all levels Effective individualized support measures are provided in environments that maximize academic and social development, consistent with the goal of full inclusion’. (UNCRPD, 2009) Austria ratified the convention as a whole on 26th September 2008. With a general election due in England this year, both major political parties have chosen to make education one of their main campaign priorities (Baker, 2009, Telegraph, 2010). The present government has provided policy and legislation in favor of inclusive education over the past twelve years in office (DfES 2001a, DfES 2001b, and DfES 2004). In contrast, the major opposition party has promised to... ’..put a stop to special school closures straight away’ (David Cameron, 2009) In addition, according to Shepherd (2009), the next potential Prime Minister will challenge... ‘..the policy of inclusion’ (Shepherd, 2009) Austria has had a history of treating people with intellectual disabilities negatively (Beller, 2009, Rees, 2005, Neugebauer, 1990). However, David Cameron has also identified Austria as a country that England could learn from regarding the provision of services for children with disabilities and their families (Cameron 2009). For these reasons, this assignment will look at Austria’s education provision compared to that available in England. It will also look at how the countries rhetoric matches the reality for people with intellectual disabilities Austria is a small landlocked, neutral, middle European county of approximately 83.870Km2 with a population of 8.3million (CIA 2009). England is approximately twice the area with a population seven times larger (Race 2007). The Alps dominate the western and southern parts of Austria while the eastern provinces, including Vienna the capital, lie in the Danube basin, the later being the most densely populated areas of Austria (CIA 2009, Beller 2009, Country Studies, 2009). Until the end of World War 1, Austria had been the centre of the vast Habsburg Empire, which controlled most of central Europe for centuries, in 1920, it became a federal republic (Beller, 2009). Between 1939 and 1945, Austria as an independent country did not exist, as part of Hitler’s ‘Anschluss’(unification) the country was absorbed into, and became part of, the larger German Third Reich(Rees 2005, Beller 2009). At the end of the war 2nd Federal Republic of Austria was formed, consisting of nine autonomous federal states or ‘Lander’ which are Burgenland, Carinthia, Lower Austria, Upper Austria, Salzburg, Styria, Tyrol, Vorarlberg, Wien (Vienna) also the capital (CIA 2009). The Federal Constitution defines Austria as a bicameral parliamentary democracy, however, even though each of the nine Lander have their own written state constitutions and legislature, in most practical areas of importance they have little autonomy, with the Federal Government maintaining jurisdiction over many areas, including education. (History of Austria, 2009). Austria's parliament consists of two houses; the National Council (Nationalrat) and the Federal Council (Bundersrat), with members of the Nationalrat elected by nation-wide proportional representation and members of the Bundersrat elected by Austria's nine state legislatures under a statute allocating seats roughly proportional to state population size (Beller,2009, Country Studies 2009). Since 1945, Austria has prospered under the direction of either single or coalition governments, primarily between the Social Democratic Party (SPO) and the Austrian Peoples Party (OVP) (Beller 2009, Country Studies, 2009). Although both parties have different ideologies, the SPO being socialist and the OVP conservative, they have worked together with the consensus to build an economically strong Austrian nation (Beller, 2009). According to Beller (2009), this has been possible by various opportunities being grasped, having ‘neutral country’ status was the first, the economy was then boosted by aid from the Marshall Plan in 1947 (Lowe, 1998). Inherited German Industries were quickly nationalised and with the onset of the ‘Cold War’ Austria’s geographical location put the country in a position of mediator between west and east (Beller 2009), the subsequent positioning of the United Nations third seat in Vienna and Austria’s entry into the European Union have all aided the country in maintaining a successful... ..’Socialist-run mixed economy welfare state.’ (Beller, 2009 p273) Austria and England are both ‘welfare states’ with state funded education systems (, Lowe 1998 Country Studies, 2009). England funds its system by taxation, with services usually paid for and provided by government agencies at national or local level, although increasingly provision is by non-governmental agencies (NGO) (Wikepedia, 2009), in comparison, Austria uses taxation and employee/employer insurance contributions for funding, with provision mainly by NGOs which are overseen and regulated by the federal government (Hofmarcher and Rack,2006). The economy of both countries is similar according to World Bank figures, Austria had a GNI of 46260 in 2008 and England had GNI of 45390, yet England spent only 4% on education compared to Austria’s 10% (World Bank 2009). However England has a vastly larger number of pupils in compulsory education at 8,071,000 (National Statistics 2009) compared to Austria with only 837,228 (Statistics Austria 2009), England, obviously invests far less on education per pupil, The Austrian, state funded compulsory education system dates from 1774 (Country Studies, 2009), with schools for children with intellectual disabilities opening in Saltzburg in 1820 (Webber, 2006). According to Ramirez and Boli, (1987), the ideas behind this were to create a cohesive national identity in a tumultuous Europe, and to avoid loosing power in the growing industrialisation. These views are similar to Reisner (1927), earlier ones, and more recently, Heyneman (2000), that state action in education is an outcome of external stimuli on the state and European competitive processes. In 1869, the Imperial Primary Education Act extended compulsory education to eight years and created a uniform system across the empire (Country Studies, 2009,). In comparison, around the same time in England, Maynes, (1985), describes education as the privilege of the few, the elite in society, as a stable and powerful country there was no impetus to change the status quo. With the forming of the First Austrian Republic in 1920, so came education reform, the duel system of secondary and grammar schools was replaced with a common school for all 10-14 year olds, and the introduction of segregated special schools or ‘Hilfsschulen’ (Feyerer et al, 2008), for children with physical disabilities and ‘mental handicaps’ (Weber, 2006). This period also coincided with the rise of the eugenics movement around the world (Race 2007), which warned of the dangers to society of people with conditions such as intellectual disabilities (Tredgold, 1952). However, as part of the constitution, education had to be provided for all children in Austria (Weber, 2006). During the period 1939-1945, education for the majority of children stopped at age 10 due most teachers enlisting in the army (Rees, 2005). Children with any type of disability were subject to the T4 programme of euthanasia, begun in Germany in 1938, although this project was stopped in Germany due to public outcry in 1940 (Rees, 2005, Neurgebaur, 1990), it continued in Austria at Schloss Harthiem until the end of the war in 1945 (Neurgebaur,1990, Weber, 2006). Which according to Neurgebaur (1990), resulted in the death of almost all people with an intellectual disability, and overall approximately 200,000 disabled Austrians. According to Weber (2006) the education system began again as it was pre war, in 1955 including provision for intellectual disabled children, provided mainly by parents and charities, the few disabled children in the country were still required to have an education. In England the Education Act (1944) was passed, which provided a three tier education system of grammar, technical and secondary schools with all children going through a selection process at age eleven(Gillard,2007). According to Race (2002), the idea was that three types of ‘normal’ child existed, with special schools and children with intellectual disabilities not being considered in the plans and classed as ‘uneducable’. During the post war years to the early 1960s, along with inclusion, education for children with intellectual disabilities in both countries became a priority for parents for slightly different reasons (Race,2007, Bruckmuller, 2002). In England, parents were demanding the right to an education (Race, 2002), by contrast, in Austria, children had the right to education; parents wanted a better education to reflect the needs of their children (Bruckmuller, 2002). In both countries as with other parts of the world, there has been a rising consensus for inclusive education for all children (UNESCO, 1994, Inclusion International, 2009, CSIE 2009). Education is a fundamental human right (UNESCO, UNCRPD, 2006), and according to Inclusion International, inclusive education is also... ‘..essential to creating an inclusive society.’ (Inclusion International, 2009) Federal legislation plays a prominent role in Austria’s education system, educational laws have constitutional status and require a two third majority in parliament to change or amend them, according to Feyerer et al (2008), and this makes reform slow. However, in Austria it seems to have made reform consistently move forward (Bm:ukk 2003,2006,2007,2008,2009). In comparison, England’s parliamentary process is quicker and education laws can be swapped and changed by consecutive governments, as illustrated by Gillard (2007), which would seem to have the effect of ever changing goal posts in the English education system with little consistency for the education of children who are caught up in constant shifts in political thinking (Race 2007). In 1962, the new Austria School Law became the legal basis for provision of compulsory education (Feyerer et al, 2008), under the Federal Ministry for Education which is responsible for funding and supervising primary and secondary education in the country, it is then administered by the individual Lander (Bm:bmk 2008). This law states that ALL state schools must be open to ALL children and that parents have a right to choose which school their child should attend, it provided for various different types of school including eleven types of special school (Feyer et al,2008,). However, broadly speaking it is also, by choice given to parents, the legal basis for provision of inclusive education (Bm:bmk, 2009). In 1974 The School Education Act stipulated who governed the internal organisation of schools, with an amendment in 1975 giving the Lander responsibility for school buildings and ancillary staff, the Federal Government retained jurisdiction over the employment and funding of teaching staff and curriculum requirements ( Bm:bmk,2007). In contrast, in England the Education Act 1944, gave administration and funding of education to Local Education Authorities (LEA), set up in the 1944 Act (Gillard,2007). Recently some schools have become responsible for their own administration and budget control, with funding provided by the LEA (Gillard 2007), whilst the curriculum has been set firmly in Government control, with the introduction of the National Curriculum and national standards of formal testing from primary to secondary level (Gillard, 2007). In Austria, The Compulsory School Act 1985 and subsequent amendments of 1987 and 1998, define nine years of compulsory education from age six to fifteen, requiring all schools to provide inclusive or integrated classes as needed (Bm:ukk,2008). It further strengthens a parents right to choice, with additional supports being required by law to facilitate integration in education, including vocational education training schools and apprenticeships for business and industry (Specht et al,2007, Bm:ukk,2009). These acts have also devolved some of the administration of schools to provincial, municipal and school level, it allowed for more flexibility in the curriculum for individual schools to meet the specific needs of their pupil population (Biewer, 2009). Integration and inclusion has been a legally binding part of the framework of general education since 1993 in Austria, underpinned by Disability legislation in each Lander, and United Nations policies (UNCRC, 1989, UNESCO, 1994, UNCRPD, 2006). Austrian education policies seems to integrate special needs with general education, in contrast writers such as Booth and Ainscow (2005), state that since the 1970s special education policies in England have usually been developed in parallel to policies for general education in a way that further undermines inclusion. In 1978, the Warnock Report criticised the categorisation of students but also suggested more students had SEN, which led to an increase in categorisation overall, with statements of SEN introduced in the Education Act 1981 (Booth and Ainscow, 2005). Jones (2003), states that although encouraged towards inclusion, the very language of SEN, rooted in the medical model of disability, strengthens the idea that some children are… ..’normal’ while others are ‘special’. (Jones, 2003, p11) Booth and Ainscow (2005), state that the legacy of the Warnock Report, along with competitive market driven education, has severely impeded the introduction of an inclusive education system in England. Writers such as Blythe and Milner (1996) and Race (2006), agree with this, they also state that much of the exclusion in English education can be attributed to competitive market pressures in schools. However, in 2005 Baroness Warnock did a ‘u’ turn and called for more special schools (Warnock, 2005), the Education Act 2005 made provision for more ‘specialist’ schools (DfES 2005). Another interesting comparison in the education systems of the countries, with regards the effects on inclusion in education, is funding. Both countries allocate a budget on a per pupil basis (DfES,); however, individual schools in England finance teaching salaries from their budget, which according to Gillard (2007) is a large percentage of their overall budget. In Austria teaching staff are now employed by individual Lander, rather than as previously the Federal Government, however teaching salaries are reimbursed to the respective Lander via Federal tax compensations(Bm:ukk,2008). Schools are effectively free to take on the number of teachers required to meet specific requirements of students without budget limitations, in reality this equates to inclusion classes being smaller and staffed by two qualified teachers, one general and one SEN qualified teacher, who then work together implementing the same curriculum according to students individual educational plans (IEP) ( Webber,2006). In England, classes with children with SEN are understaffed according to Golder et al, (2009), and Forlin (2001) and where extra staff are available, it is usually a teaching assistant. The majority of teachers in mainstream schools in England have limited if any knowledge of SEN requirements (Forlin, 2001), with funding for specific in house training coming out of the individual school budget (Forlin, 2001, Hodkinson, 2009). Austria requires all teachers to have SEN training, this can be provided to meet specific needs of pupils, teachers are qualified to degree level, either in general or SEN education, a support system also exists for teachers and parents from multidisciplinary teams, based at special education centres or where available special schools (Feyerer et al,2008). These provide assistance to all teaching staff with assessment and production of IEP, training and co-ordination of specific requirements such as speech therapy and physiotherapy as well as providing equipment to meet individual needs such as Braille translations and teaching sign language (Specht, 2007, Biewer,2008 ). This would seem to be what is lacking in England according to most mainstream teaching staff (Hodkinson,2009, Golder et al,2009, Cook, 2001). Expertise from the special schools in England could be utilised in a more inclusive way as it appears to be in Austria. However, with assessment and funding for SEN being the responsibility of the same organisation, the LEA, and limited budgets available to finance both special schools and inclusive education, many parents are directed to either the special schools or halfhearted inclusion in a mainstream schools (Booth and Ainscow,2005). With inclusion policy in England effectively closing many special schools, according to Rustemier and Vaughan (2005), as a way of balancing LEA budgets it effectively gives parents very limited choice, many are actually wanting more special schools to open (Leyser and Kirk,2004, OFSTED,2004). The assessment and funding of SEN in Austria is under different umbrellas, once assessed as having a specific SEN, it is a legal requirement funding and support be provided in whatever setting, which in effect gives parents a real choice for their child, aiding inclusion, the chosen school is legally required to provide the place (BM:ukk 2009). English schools have what could be described as a ‘get out clause’ ,where schools can refuse if they can prove accepting a SEN pupil will affect other pupils education adversely or the school cannot reasonably met the SEN requirements, parents retain choice, however this seems to be more rhetoric than reality in England (Millar et al, 1992, Ryndak et al, 1995, MENCAP, 1999, Leysner and Kirk, 2004, ALLFIE, 2009). Both countries provide education from nursery to university level, with variations with regards funding and age stipulations (BM: ukk, 2008, Gillard, 2007). In England, the curriculum is not flexible, nor is the assessment processes designed to include intellectual disabled children fully (Booth and Ainscow, 2005, Race, 2007). Austria’s system of flexible curriculum and assessment process is much more conducive to a child with intellectual disabilities, assessments are not formal and they are individual to the child’s level (Webber, 2006). Pijl and Meyer (1999), describe both countries as having a two-track system of inclusion, as they also provide segregated schooling, with specialist curriculum for children with profound intellectual disabilities (Biewer, 2005, Peetsma et al, 2001). Although an increasing number of children are choosing a more academic route in secondary education in Austria (Bm:ukk white book, UNESCO 2000), the emphasis remains on vocational training and skills, geared towards employment, with various routes within the education system (diagram 1). Employers in different areas have some input into course requirements and skills and training in educational courses (Bm:ukk, 2008), emphasis is not just on academic attainment in Austria, although that is important, it is on equipping young people with the right skills, and social ability for their future lives (Feyere et al, 2008). In Austria the ratification of UNCRPD article 24 has only strengthened the countries commitment to inclusive education, much of the legislation was in existence prior to ratification in 2008. Pilot projects were initiated in Austria as a consequence of the Salamanca agreement in 1994 (EADSNE 2009, Webber, 2006), and with education taking a more devolved way forward it has also allowed more flexibility and choice to people with disabilities within education. Disabilities, is used to include all disabilities, Lebensilfe members have also said they prefer the term ‘Disabilities’ ,as for all SEN and disability law in Austria there is very little distinction made, disability laws vary as they are individual to each Lander ( Webber, 2006). Specific policies for people with intellectual disabilities, such as Valuing People (2001, 2009) in England do not exist in Austria. There seems to be consensus in Austria regarding implementation of article 24 UNCRPD; however, they think the government is acting to slowly (Lebenshilfe 2009). England has not ratified article 24, legislation exists for inclusive education, however, the financial, support and training structures for children, families and teachers seems to be lacking, and these negative effects are further compounded in England by the competitiveness in education market. Whilst many children and parents want inclusion ( ALLFIE, 2009, CSIE 2009, Inclusion International, 2009), and the ratification of article 24 would have given more ‘clout’ to existing legislation, there is a growing number of parents calling for more special school places ( Shepherd, 2009). In Austria, the rhetoric is nearer to reality than it would seem to be in England. Legislation for an inclusive society is great, being a leading SRV country (Race 2007) is great, but if the children in society are excluded, then as adults they will continue the uphill struggle. Reference List Alliance For Inclusive Education (2009) Views form young people calling for inclusive education. http://www.allfie.org Austrian Fact Book (2009) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/au.html Bm:bwk (2008) Austria national report. 48th session of the International Conference on Education, ICE: "Inclusive Education: The Way of the Future", Geneva, Vienna, BMUKK;BMWF, 2008, 193 p. http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/format_liste1_en.php'Chp1=Europe Baker, M. (2009) Are the Tories ready to run education' http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/oct/20/conservatives-education-policy-michael-gove accessed 3/1/10 Beller, S. (2009), A Concise History of Austria. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. Better Education for All: When We Are Included Too. Inclusion International Global Report. People wwith an intellectual disability and their families speak out on Education For All: Disability and Inclusive Education. http://www.inclusion-international.org/en/ii_priority_areas/ie/index.html accessed on 21/12/09 Biewer, G. (2005), ‘Inclusive Education’ – increase in educational effectivness or loss of standards' In Journal of curative Education. 56 3 pp101-108 Biewer, G. (2008), Integration and Inclusion in Education, In Biewer, G., Luciak, M., Swingorm, M. (Eds) Meeting the Difference: People- Countries-Cultures. Bath Spa. Munich p291-295 (Translation) Biewer, G. (2009) From the Model of Integration for People with Disabilities to School for All Children. Weinheim, Basel. Beltz (translation) Blythe Millner 1996 Bm:uk. Bm.w-f Specht, W., Gross-Pirchegger,L.,Seel,A.,tanzel-Tischler,E.,Wohlhart, D. (2006) Quality in Special Needs Education: A project of Research and Development, approach, results and conclusions. Graz: Austria. Bm:bwk (2008) The Development of Education in Austria 2004-2007 Bm:bwk (2000), The Development of Education in Austria 2000-2003. Bm:ukk (2003) White book: quality development and quality assurance in the Austrian system of education Vienna, Federal Ministry for Education, Science and Culture,. http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/format_liste1_en.php'Chp1=Europe BMUKK (2007), Brief Outline of the Austrian Education System http://www.bmukk.gv.at/enfr/school/educ/brief.htm4589.xml BMSK Federal Ministry of Socail Affairs and Consummer Protection (2008),Report to the Federal Government about the situation of people with disabilities in Austria. Vienna:BMSK.(translation) BMUKK ( 2009) Learning from One Another: A guide on Inclusive Education . Vienna Booth, T. and Aiscow, M. Dyson,A. (2005) England: Iinclusion and Exclusion in a Competative System. In Booth, T and Ainscow,M. From them to us:an intellectual study of inclusion in education. London. Routledge. Taylor & Francis e-library Bruckmuller,M. (2002), 1967-2002 Protected-Funded-Accompanied: 35 years of Lebenshilfe(Self-help) Austria- A chapter of Austrian Social History. Vienna-Lebenshilfe Austria. (translation) Cameron,D. (2009)http://conservatives.com/News/Speeches/2009/07/David_Cameron accessed 7/1/10 Cook, B.G. (2001). A Comparison of teachers’ attitude toward their included students with mild and severe disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 34(4), 203-213. CSIE (Centre for the Study of Inclusive Education) (2002) The Inclusion Charte r [online at http://inclusion.uwe.ac.uk/csie/charter.htm]. Accessed 6/1/10 Country Studies (2009) http://www.country-studies.com/austria DES (Department of Education and Science) (1978) Special Educational Needs: report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People (The Warnock Report). London: HMSO DfES (Department for Education and Skills) (2001a) The Code of Practice on the Identification and Assessment of Special Educational Needs. London: HMSO. DfES (Department for Education and Skills) (2001b) Inclusive Schooling – children with special educational needs. London: DfES. DfES (Department for Education and Skills) (2004) Removing the Barriers to Achievement: the Government’s strategy for SEN. London: DfES. DfES (Department for Education and Skills) (2005) Higher Standards, Better Schools for All. London: DfES DoH (2001) Valuing People: A New Strategy for Learning Disabbility for the 21st Century. London. The Stationary office. DoH (2009) Valuing People Now: London DoH Education in England (2009) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_England Feyerer, E., Niedermair, C., Tuschul, S. (2008) Special Needs Education and Inclusive Education- Training and Professional Qualifications. http://www.cisonline.at/fileadmin/kategoren/position-paper-teacher-training 14.5.2008.pdf Forlin, C. (2001) ‘Inclusion: identifying potential stressors for regular class teachers’, Educational Research, 43 (3), 235–245. Gillard D (2007) Education in England: a brief history www.dg.dial.pipex.com/history/ Golder,G. Jones,N. and Eaton Quinn,E. (2009) Rights of People with Intellectual Disabilities. Strengthening the Special Educational Needs Element of Initial Teacher training and Education. British Journal of Special Education 36 4 Heyneman, S.P. (2000), From the Party/State to Multiethnic Democracy: Education and Social Cohesion in Europe and Central Asia. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 22, No. 2, 173-191 History of Austria (2009) http://www.tourmycountry.com/austria/history13.htm Hodkinson, A. (2009) Pre-Service Teacher Training and Special Educational Needs in England 1970-2008: Is Government Learning the Lessons of the Past or Is It Experiencing a Groundhog Day' European Journal of Special Needs Education, v24 n3 p277-289 Hofmarcher, M.M. and Rack, H.M. (2006) Health Systems in Transition: Austria 2006 Health System Review http://www.euro.who.int/Document/E89021.pdf accessed 16/12/09 Inclusion International The Implications of the Convention on The Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) for Education for All http://www.inclusion-international.org/en/media_room/publications/index.html#52 initiative 24 http://www.inclusion-international.org/en/news/112.html Jones, C.A (2004) Supporting Inclusion in the Early Years. 1st edn. Berkshire: Open University Press Lebenshilfe (2009) http://www.lebenshilfe-stmk.at/cms/ Leyser, Y. & Kirk, R. (2004) ‘Evaluating inclusion: an examination of parent views and factors influencing their perspectives’, International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 51 (3), 271–285. Lowe, (1998) Mastering Modern British History. Palgrave. Maynes, M.J. (1985) Schooling in Western Europe: A Social History. New York. NYUP. MENCAP (1999) On a Wing and a Prayer: inclusion and children with severe learning difficulties. London:MENCAP. Miller, L. J., Strain, P. S., Boyd, K., Hunsicker, S., McKinley, J. & Wu, A. (1992) ‘Parental attitude towards integration’, Topics in Early Childhood Education, 12 (2), 230–246 National Statistics UK (2009) http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/index.html Neugebauer, W. (1990),The Destruction of Disabled Life: The mass murder of mentally and physically disabled persons in Austria 1939-1945. Linz: Upper Austria (translation) OFSTED (2004) Special Educational Needs and Disability: towards inclusive schools. London: HMSO Peetsma, T., Vergeer, M., Roelveld, J. & Karsten, S. (2001) ‘Inclusion in education: comparing pupils’ development in special and regular education’, Educational Review, 53 (2), 125–135. Pijl and Meyer (1999) Race, D. (2002) Learning Disability: A Social Approach. London Routledge. Race, D. (2007) Intellectual Disability Social Approaches. Berkshire. OU Press. Ramirez, F.O., Boli, J. (1986), "World culture and the institutional development of mass education", in The Handbook of Theory and Research in the Global Patterns of Education, J.G. Richardson (Eds),Greenwood Press, New York, pp.65 - 90 Rees, L. (2005) The Nazis: A warning from History. London. BBC Books. Rieser, R. (2008) Implementing Inclusive Education: a Commonwealth guide to implementing Article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities London: Commonwealth Secretariat Reizner, E.H. (1927) Nationalism and Education since 1789. New York Macmillan. Rustemier, S. and Vaughan, M (2005) Are LEAs in England Abandoning Inclusive Education'. London CSIE. Ryndak, D. L., Downing, J. E., Jacqueline, L. R. & Morisson, A. P. (1995) ‘Parents’ perceptions after inclusion of children with moderate or severe disabilities, Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 20 (2), 147–157. Specht,W.,Seel,A.,Stanzel-Tischler,E.,and Wohlhart, D. (2007) Individual Support within the Austrian Education System: Stratagies for the Development of Quality in Special Needs Education. Bifie: Bundesinstitut für Bildungsforschung, Innovation und Entwicklung des Bildungswesens Sherherd, J. (2009)http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/apr/15/special-educational-needs-nasuwt-teachers Statistics Austria (2009) http://www.statistik.at Telegraph (2010), Labour focuses on education as general election fight begins. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/6930070/Labour-focus-on-education-as-general-election-fight-begins.html accessed 11/1/10 Tredgold, A.E. (1952) A Textbook on Mental Deficiency(Amentia), 8th edn. London: Bailliere, Tindal and Cox. In- Race, D. (2007) Intellectual Disability Social Approaches. Berkshire. OU Press. United Kingdom fact Book (2009) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/uk.html United nations convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (2006) http://www.un.org United Nations Convention on the Right of the Child (1989), http://un.org U.N.E.S.C.O. (1994),World Conference on Special Needs Education, Salamanca http://un.org U.N.E.S.C.O. (2000) EFA 2000 Assessment - Country Report - Austria Vienna, Federal Ministry of Education and Cultural Affairs, 2000 http://www.unesco.org/education/wef/countryreports/austria/contents.html Warnock, M. (2005) Special Educational Needs: a new outlook. London: Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain Webber, G (2006) Pomona Project Annex VII 1: Austria Report http://www.pomonaproject.org/InterimReport2_annex7_1.pdf World Bank Statistics (2009) http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/0,,menuPK:476823~pagePK:64165236~piPK:64165141~theSitePK:469372,00.html