The Mask of Inclusiveness
Today, every policy and institution speaks of inclusiveness. Schools claim to welcome all children, give equal chances, and remove barriers. But when we look closely, inclusiveness is often more of a slogan than a practice.
Ivan Illich warned that institutions can create illusions of fairness. Education presents itself as inclusive, but in reality it often protects privilege. Children from powerful families move forward with ease, while those from weaker backgrounds face stricter rules and fewer opportunities. Inclusiveness, in such cases, is not justice. It is a mask that hides inequality.
Pierre Bourdieu showed why this happens. Schools reward the cultural capital of the dominant class—their ways of speaking, behaving, and knowing. Inclusiveness rarely challenges this hidden bias. Instead, it asks the marginalized to fit into the same old mold. The system remains unchanged, but the claim of inclusiveness creates the appearance of progress.
The result is hypocrisy. Students are told they are part of an inclusive system, yet they see that influence bends rules, assessments are uneven, and recognition is not equally shared. They learn that inclusiveness is selective—open to some, closed to others.
The Call for Genuine Inclusiveness
If inclusiveness is to mean anything, it must be more than words. It must not only admit students into classrooms but also treat them with equal dignity. Real inclusiveness requires:
1. Rules applied equally, without bending for the privileged.
2. Assessments that measure effort and learning, not background.
3. Opportunities for recognition and growth that reach every child, not just a few.
4. A culture where the voices of the weak are not silenced by the strong.
Teachers play the most decisive role here. They stand as the bridge between the promise and the practice of inclusiveness. Their fairness, or their bias, determines whether education heals inequalities or deepens them.
So the question stands: are we practicing inclusiveness, or are we only preaching it? And to every teacher—the final question remains: does selective inclusiveness suit the dignity of our profession?