Key words: Inclusive education; Education policy; Support personnel; Professional developmentIn Queensland, Australia, the school system is being reformed to be more 'inclusive'.However the enthusiasm for 'inclusive education' in Queensland seems to be waning amongst practitioners, and the 'confusion, frustration, guilt and exhaustion' that has emerged with teachers and support practitioners in the UK, is emerging amongst support practitioners and teachers in Queensland. This article argues that this is happening because inclusive education reforms that intend to provide an equitable education for all students regardless of cultural, physical, social/emotional and behavioural differences, are being introduced, but these policies, procedures and stuructures continue to label, isolate and segregate students within schools in the way in which segregated special education facilities did in the past. As well, new policies and structures are being introduced without practitioners having the time and support to critically examine the underlying assumptions about disability, difference and inclusion that underpin their practices.These reforms need to be reviewed in terms of their effectiveness in achieving their 'inclusive' goals, i.e. in terms of the impacts that these reforms are having on the students themselves, and on the educational practitioners who support the students.
IntroductionRecently Slee (2006) explored the history of inclusive education reform using the imagery of 'crossroads.' Reflecting on the paradigmatic crossroads identified over 10 years ago by Clark, Dyson & Milward (1995, p. v), Slee noted that inclusive education reform has taken a particular path that has led to a re-badging of 'special education' as 'inclusive education' in policy and educational discourses, rather than a completely different path that interrogates how educational classification systems govern a "descending order of human value" (Slee, 2006, p. 112). Baker (2002, p. 663) agrees that, rather than addressing underlying issues about difference, disability and exclusion, a "transmogrification" has occurred through which " a new eugenics" has emerged, and this continues to contribute to labeling and segregation of students.Students with disabilities and learning difficulties continue to be identified in terms of medical or psychological deficits, as either not within the 'normal' range or standards of academic achievement or social-emotional control, or slow to achieve such standards. Once identified, such students are in need of intervention programs within schools in order to achieve the prescribed standards. But as Baker (2002) argues, these standards are an arbitrary construct of those who decide what constitutes 'normal.' For students so identified and categorised by some who adopt an inclusion discourse, an equitable education seems to equate to identification and categorisation of deficits, and educational adjustments and resourcing to address these deficits, so that students can meet standards of academic achi...