Alaska Criminal Statute Cross-Reference Guide

This guide provides cross-references between Alaska criminal statutes and National Criminal Information Center (NCIC), Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), Alaska OBTS, and Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) codes. The guide also includes brief annotations of each statute. The guide is also available in a computerized version. An accompanying volume, Conversion Tables for Use with the Alaska OBTS Database and the Alaska Criminal Statute Cross-Reference Guide, is designed for use with printed versions of the guide. The guide reflects legislative changes in Alaska Statutes through 1997, but is no longer updated.Bureau of Justice Statistics. Grant No. 94-BJ-CX-KOO

Difference in Policy and Politics: Dialogues in Confidence

This paper reports on a process of engagement with administrators and Government Ministers in dialogue about diversity that was informed by Disability Studies in Education, a discipline that critiques existing ways of thinking about disability, actively promotes more positive constructions and representations of disabled people’s lives and challenges conventional or traditional notions of normalcy. It took place within a project, initiated by Council of Europe, Policies and practices for socio-cultural diversity and involved the development of a framework of teacher competences for socio-cultural diversity. The paper charts the process of developing the framework and reports the dialogue that took place. The Ministers and administrators were encouraged to view teaching as a dialogue and to recognise teachers’ competence in responding to diversity, following Levinas (1969; 1996), a philosopher who addresses questions of ethics, as a continuing responsibility of teachers to their students

The inclusion challenge

This chapter takes a look at inclusion within Europe. It considers how inclusion is understood and the questions currently being raised about its feasibility. It examines the shifting political and policy contexts and recent patterns and trends towards inclusion and indeed exclusion. The chapter ends with a discussion of the prospects and possibilities for inclusion

Pupils with special educational needs in mainstream schools : a Foucauldian anaylsis of discourses

This research focuses on pupils with special needs in mainstream schools. It is concerned with how their identities and experiences are constructed at a formal level, within official documents, and informally, in the way the pupils are talked about. A Foucauldian perspective provided the framework for analysing formal and informal discourses and the power/knowledge relations these contain. Formal SEN discourses were examined by analysing the Warnock and HMI reports and earlier official documents. At an informal level, accounts were obtained from eleven pupils with a range of special educational needs and their peers. The pupils were also observed within mainstream classrooms and playgrounds. The pupils' accounts challenged the appropriateness of conventional binary divisions, for example disabled/able-bodied; integrated/segregated, for understanding the identities and experiences of pupils with SEN. The data suggest a much more continuous process of construction, characterised by oscillations, uncertainties and ambivalences and by resistance from the pupils with SEN. A number of implications for the placement of pupils with special educational needs in mainstream schools are considered. These relate to how schools might build on mainstream pupils' existing understanding of disability and ensure that integration is a positive experience for all

Provocations: Putting philosophy to work on inclusion

Inclusion is currently characterised by confusion about what it is supposed to be and do; frustration at the way the current climate of standards and accountability constrains teachers’ work; guilt at the exclusion created for individual pupils; and exhaustion, associated with a sense of failure and futility. This chapter considers the ‘impossibility’ of inclusion in the current context and how it has become a highly emotive and somewhat irrational space of confrontation, with questions about how we should include displaced by questions about why we should include, and under what conditions. An attempt is made to rescue inclusion from its valedictory state and to reframe it as an ongoing struggle and a more productive form of political engagement. This reframing takes some of the key ideas of the philosophers of difference - Deleuze and Guattari, Derrida and Foucault - and puts them to work on the inclusion problem (Allan, 2008)

Complicating not explicating: Taking up philosophy in learning disability research

This article provides an introduction to some theoretical ideas and practices from the so-called “philosophers of difference” – Foucault, Derrida and Deleuze and Guattari. They afford an opportunity to think differently about the construction of learning disability and to envision new forms of learning. Two key concepts – Foucault’s transgression and Deleuze and Guattari’s rhizome – are introduced and examples from research on learning disability and other dimensions of disability are given to illustrate their potential. The theoretical practices of deconstruction, developed by Derrida, and Deleuze and Guattari’s rhizomatic analysis are also presented and exemplified. I argue that these these theoretical concepts and practices, if taken up, shift the researcher towards an ethics of research and to greater responsibility. The implications of this are discussed in the final part of the paper

Waiting for discovery and support?:Divergent subjectivities in the Swedish education landscape

PURPOSE: In this paper, we explore and contrast the Swedish state and NGO arguments for installing two changes in national educational degree objectives in Swedish teacher education: one regarding sex and cohabitation education, and the other regarding support for pupils with ʻneuropsychiatric difficultiesʼ (here referred to as neurodivergent pupils, such as autistic or ADHD pupils). APPROACH: Using critical policy analysis, we compare the arguments from the government as well as responding bodies for instating the two objectives, with a focus on neurodivergent pupils.RESULTS: Our findings suggest that discourses concerning sex and cohabitation education for all pupils and support for pupils with ʻneuropsychiatric difficultiesʼ respectively, derive from different educational ideologies and reproduce different ideas about pupils; as active citizens versus passive objects of interventions. The objective of sex and cohabitation education is framed within a norm critical discourse putting forward reflexivity and identity, and where pupils are active subjects to be involved in the process. In contrast, neurodivergence is framed within a deficit approach as neurobiological, individual impairment, and a special educational problem that should be managed by professionals. It is seen as a risk for school failure, where neurodivergent pupils are passive objects of professional discovery and support.CONCLUSION: In a Swedish educational policy landscape, stressing the importance of educating pupils in line with ideas of children as right-bearers, our exploration illustrates how ʻall pupilsʼ versus neurodivergent pupils, already in teacher education, are positioned as belonging to different categories of citizens; as active subjects of rights, versus passive subjects of care. This perception of neurodivergence, we argue, hampers progress towards embracing neurodivergence as social category, and neurodivergent pupils as political subjects.<br/

Understanding disability with children's social capital

This paper examines disability arts and its role in identifying exclusion and barriers to participation within society. The work of selected writers, poets and musicians is presented and its value as a form of ideological critique is explored. It is suggested that disability arts has the potential to succeed where other forms of ideological critique fails because of the way in which difference is deployed, playfully and pragmatically, in order to make a political difference