EMSENIC III: Final Reflections

It’s now a few days after the conference and, as with every conference, it was quite an emotional ride, seeing people and revisiting issues, allowing one’s own theories and work into the public whilst sharing in other people’s ideas. You can trace my minute by minute thoughts in the postings for day one and day two; what follows are my final thoughts which centre around four key themes: Inclusive Education, My Research into Collaboration and the EM SEN students, Erasmus Mundus and The Academic Life.

1. Inclusive Education
The very term inclusive education is not as accepted as you would think and the ideas that surround it are more up for debate than one would instantly think. The conference came up with a variety of synonyms and alternative ways of looking at it but the idea that interested me was the problem of translating the term both linguistically and culturally. There was a sense that putting any label or name on the area was almost as dangerous as anything else. The word inclusion does not mean the same in France who try to use the word integration but that means something separate again in English. The importance of linguistic sensitivity to reflect an academic and social movement was driven home to me. As one academic put it to me in conversation, there is a lot of use in: “Making the familiar, unfamiliar” and this was true here; by re-visiting issues of labelling, the values we attach to people (and words) and how we welcome everyone is humbling and something we should not forget to do.

2. My Research into Collaboration and the EM SEN Students
And this transcended into my own research as well where the importance of relationships was really driven home. My paper talked of a need for a new model of internationalisation based not on national economic models, not on cultural or relational models and building on ‘soft power’ models but perhaps based on a model which takes into account both the individual’s aims and their altruistic side – people/personnel/personal/individual internationalisation? A definition that does not try to label this as getting to know new people and cultures and fully recognises the individual.

Following discussions with Ann-Cheryl Armstrong it also become clear to me that there is an argument that I need to develop on a new model of colonialism; is Europe colonising or is it just demonstrating some of the traits? Again does a post-colonial definition of colonising ‘third countries’ need to be created?

3. Erasmus Mundus
Which brings me onto the wonders of Erasmus Mundus. Whatever the motives behind it -internationalisation or colonialisation, empowering people or nations or simply a method of developing educational resources within and outside Europe – it has helped me make me see different people and engage with people on a new level. The pleasure I had in seeing the partners and students – and I think they had in seeing me. This view of internationalisation that I am thinking of, the friendships and the academic links has made it a powerful tool and I wonder if Europe would have realised that during its inception and creation.

4. The Academic Life
What the EMSENIC Conference did for me was a reminder of why I love academia and why I want to be more involved from both an academic perspective – coupled to my administrative roles. The discussion of fundamental issues which affect the world around us (inclusion in the case of EMSENIC, internationalisation in the case of my research), defining new issues as well as new answers and the networks and personal relations that make the academic world so challenging and exciting. It is a privilege to witness and participate in both academia and, more specifically, EMSENIC.