This master thesis takes its point of departure in the Salamanca Declaration content, about Inclusion, and how we practice the marketability, and how we in Denmark, have tried to solve this problem. The thesis is an attempt to identify why this legislative should take almost 20 years before the implementation of Inclusion is processed in the country's municipalities. In order to understand this, I will try to identify the underlying management chains, discourses and paradigm-thinking that together and separately, have importance for the rationale, but also is the story of how we have endeavored to solve the task. The thesis is not an attempt to uncover the truth about the lack of willingness to include, but rather a Studio picture of what has been going on and maybe to some extent still is. Since I'm aware that there probably is no clear answer, but perhaps rather many legend models, it is also an attempt to contribute a cover of these assumptions, in order to bring the story forward in a whole. The thesis is at the same time a desire to describe what I define as the intersection, which is a metaphorical description of the public governance link between policy, management and service profession. My errand to describe the cross-field is a study of the necessary amount receivable, as implementation of inclusion calls for, namely a creative cross-field. Inclusion is not a method which, in isolation, may be decided in a typical management context. Inclusion is much more than that. Inclusion is a social task, which goes deep into many public structures. My position is therefore that it is not alone is enough to demonstrate this challenge, at the same time, it is imperative to take proactive ownership of the task, as part of the public administration. My basic assumption is that this problem must be solved in a creative cross-field collaborative community or what I call creative intersection. In the thesis I expand the intersection construction, to include parents and research. This is because the two groupings are crucial for the creative cross-field initiatives to take place. The thesis thus identifies three cardinal areas of analysis, namely: 1. the Salamanca Statement of non-implementation through 20 years. 2. Identification of cross-field's position in the management chain. 3. Sam's practice-building initiatives. I have chosen to make 5 qualitative interviews with respondents who are representative in relation to the intersection, as in the treatise partly to reflect a comparative study of cross-field interaction with inclusion rationale, but at the same time, a study of cross-field position and their own fundamental assumptions and encodings of each other. Finally, the study also brings a clarification for the reader, on a comparative look at the differences between cross-field participants. Thus, there is both a 1st-order and 2nd-order perspectives inlaid in the analysis. Task flows into one and the conclusion, where I will point to a broader perspective in relation the creative cross-field's development direction. Interview with various respondents is attached as audio file under annex, on cd. It is the dissertation's aim is to try to answer on why it is necessary to look at the creative cross-field as the organizational field, when there should be cooperation to give inclusion implementation force.
|Educations||Master of Public Governance, (Executive Master Programme) Final Thesis|
|Number of pages||59|