International Practices in Special Education

,QWHUQDWLRQDO3UDFWLFHVLQ6SHFLDO(GXFDWLRQ
:LQ]HU0DUJUHW$0D]XUHN.DV
3XEOLVKHGE\*DOODXGHW8QLYHUVLW\3UHVV
:LQ]HU0DUJUHW$DQG0D]XUHN.DV
,QWHUQDWLRQDO3UDFWLFHVLQ6SHFLDO(GXFDWLRQ'HEDWHVDQG&KDOOHQJHV
:DVKLQJWRQ*DOODXGHW8QLYHUVLW\3UHVV
3URMHFW086( :HE0DUKWWSPXVHMKXHGX
For additional information about this book

http://muse.jhu.edu/books/9781563685132
Access provided by Miami University (4 May 2015 20:11 GMT)
Contents
Introduction 1
A Comparative Perspective on Special Education
Margret A. Winzer and Kas Mazurek
Part One: North AmericaConvictions,
Successes, and Challenges
1 A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action:
Special Education in the United States 21
Mark P. Mostert
2 Celebrating the Challenges: Tracking the
Inclusive Reform in Canada 44
Margret A. Winzer
Part Two: EuropeReforming and
Restructuring National Systems
3 Education for All in the Countries
of the United Kingdom 67
Lani Florian, Martyn Rouse, and John Anderson
4 Reform, Restructure, and Renew:
Special Education in Poland 87
Jolanta Baran
5 Special Education from an International
Perspective: The Case of Germany 103
Olga Graumann and Ulf Algermissen
Part Three: AfricaAspirations and Challenges
6 Special Needs Education in Ethiopia 125
Alemayehu Teklemariam and Temesgen Fereja
International Practices.indb v
10/14/11 5:45 PM
vi
Contents
7 Special Education Contexts, Problems,
and Prospects in Nigeria 138
Festus E. Obiakor and Fr. MaxMary Tabugbo Offor
Part Four: The Middle East
Innovations and Opportunities
8 One Step Forward, Two Steps Backward:
Special Education in Israel 151
Thomas P. Gumpel
9 Opportunities and Challenges for Improving
Special Education in the United Arab Emirates
Samir Dukmak and Hytham Bany Issa
171
Part Five: South AsiaDiversity,

Progress, and Challenges
10 Facing the Challenge of Inclusion in India 193
Maya Kalyanpur and Anjali Misra
11
Making the Invisibles Visible: Special

Education in Pakistan 217
Mah Nazir Riaz
Part Six: The Pacific RimChanging

Paradigms and New Approaches
12 Special Education in Rising China:
Its Developments, Prospects, and Challenges
in the Early 21st Century 241
Wing-Wah Law
13
Special Education in South Korea:

Overcoming Conflicts for the Realization
of Educational Welfare 264
Dae Young, Jung
14
Current Developments in Education Policy for

Students With Disabilities in Australia 280
Joseph Zajda
International Practices.indb vi
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Contents
vii
15 New Perspectives on Special Needs and

Inclusive Education in Japan 295
Naoki Ito, Satoshi Arakawa, Satoshi Nitsu, Fusaji Ando,
Seiichi Makino, Tatsuya Toda, and Mitsuyasu Tomita
Contributors 309
Index
International Practices.indb vii
315
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction:
A Comparative Perspective
on Special Education
Margret A. Winzer and

Kas Mazurek
Over the past 3 decades, the concepts and practices of special education, and in particular
inclusive schooling, have assumed the momentum of a general globalized phenomenon.
The ideas have so piqued the interest of educators, legislators, and parents that inclusive schooling is now placed firmly on the social change agenda and has become an
international movement.
Inclusion is one of the most significant, enduring, popular, and widespread reform
movements in contemporary education. But even as a growing number of nations
embrace the philosophy and concepts, it is only very recently that scholarly attention has
been paid to the realities of implementation in various national and cultural settings. As
the inclusion movement emerges more urgently around the world, its processes and
practices require scrutiny and examination from a variety of pragmatic and theoretical
perspectives. International Practices in Special Education: Debates and Challenges is designed
to provide a broad overview of special education and inclusive schooling as conceptualized and practiced in the world today.
The text analyzes changes and developments in contemporary special education
through the perspectives of national case studies, which provide a rich database and broad
international views. Our major goal is not merely to present details of prevalence figures,
etiologies, and rehabilitation and special education efforts around the world, important
as these in themselves may be. The object is to investigate special education practice within
its social context with a particular emphasis on the varied parameters, threads, and challenges involved in the current international movement toward inclusive schooling.
In this opening chapter, we begin by introducing the text and the contributing authors.
We then examine two core areasinclusive schooling and comparative studies. Finally,
to assist readers in comparing and contrasting the threads that arise, we delineate the
main themes that arise from the chapters.
T H E T E X T A N D T H E AU T HOR S
International Practices in Special Education: Debates and Challenges was compiled to provide
a comprehensive cultural, social, political, demographic, and educational overview of a
number of countries that are grappling with the complexities of inclusive schooling. The
nations sampled are not simply part of a world journey: As can readily be seen from the
table of contents, they encompass a sizable percentage of the worlds population. However,
much more important than the absolute number of people our nations represent is why
1
International Practices.indb 1
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
the countries in this book were chosen. One criterion was to profile high interest and
geopolitically significant nations. Another was to include nations that are illustrative of
important dynamics and lessons for understanding the principles, practices, and challenges of special education and inclusive schooling.
A critical question in comparative education books employing the case study approach
is: Who shall speak for the nations represented? Overwhelmingly, nationals are the
authors of the chapters that follow. We invited scholars who are active professionals in a
variety of disciplineseducation, psychology, sociology, rehabilitation, and educational
administrationand who are involved in some way in special education. Our quest was
to obtain and convey a truly intimate knowledge of societies and schools; one that only
an insider can adequately capture.
T H E I NC LUS I V E AG E N DA
The generic term inclusion refers to the social and educational inclusion of persons
traditionally marginalized, excluded, or oppressed so as to empower them to determine the trajectory of their own lives through access to the required goods and services
needed to realize their potential (Winzer & Mazurek, 2009). Inclusion is defined by
an inspiring litany of moral imperatives. Fundamentally, it is a human rights agenda,
promoted and advanced on the basis of social policy considerations that address social
justice, individual rights, equal access, nondiscrimination, and equity of opportunity.
Inclusion is seen as an imperative to social cohesion in increasingly diverse communities, as well the most effective way to combat discriminatory attitudes, create welcoming
communities, build an inclusive society, and achieve education for all (UNESCO, 2000,
2003, 2009).
Inclusive schooling is a coupling of a social justice agenda, an egalitarian sense of
rights, and the responsibility to provide every child with the best possible education. It
resides within the conceptual framework of human rights, equity, and diversity, grounded
in the belief that education is a fundamental human right, the axis to enjoy other human
rights, and the foundation for more just societies (UNESCO, 2003).
Inclusion serves to develop and promote respect for a wide range of diversityculture,
gender, race, ethnicity, language, and so onthat increasingly characterizes large, predominantly urban, communities. While inclusive programs are directed at the full scope
of disadvantage, they have a specific preoccupation with disability as a particular form of
diversity. The overarching aim is to produce a conceptual shift in the way in which
individuals with disabilities are perceived in terms of their place in society and how
educational rights are provided.
As the philosophy and dialogue of inclusive schooling for students with disabilities are
increasingly accepted throughout the world, policy makers and educators have adopted
the notion that all children have the right to be educated together and have set out to
recast the functions, content, processes, and structures of schooling. But how to effectively restructure systems and schools remains professionally and socially controversial
and beset by contradictions and contestations.
Many different approaches are taken to educating students with disabilitiesseparate,
regular, and special systems; a continuum or cascade of services; and full inclusion in
mainstream settings, whether by design or because it is the only available option. In
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
many Western nations, inclusive schooling is an article of unshakeable conviction.

The United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States, for example, see educating
students with disabilities with their typical peers as a basic human right. Policy makers
have simply instituted laws and policies that make students with disabilities little
different from typically developing students. Other nations see special placements as
both feasible and desirable, and retain parallel systems for general and special education. Still other nations have not yet undertaken systemic institutionalization or
implementation: A gap looms between philosophical acceptance and actual practice
and provision.
Yet, even with these varied practices and modes, the sad reality is that most children
with disabilities worldwide are not in school at all. It is estimated that anywhere from one
quarter to one half of children who are out of school have some form of disability (US
Agency, 2002). Put another way, about 98% of children with disabilities in developing
countries do not attend school (Winzer & Mazurek, 2008).
T H E N AT U R E A N D U T I L I T Y OF C OM PA R AT I V E S T U DI E S
Comparative and international studies in education is a wide and diverse field that
encompasses issues in both pedagogy and the social milieux in which students are educated around the world. From modest beginnings, the field has expanded dramatically
in the past 3 decades. Still, comparative studies is not an academic discipline; it is not
a qualitatively distinct paradigm. It does not have its own unique theories, methods of
inquiry, or distinct subject matter for investigation. Rather, it is a field of study that liberally borrows its theoretical foundations, research methodologies, and the phenomena to
be studied from other disciplines.
Because of its inherent eclecticism, comparative studies is defined in sometimes
fundamentally different ways by its own practitioners (e.g., Altbach & Kelly, 1986;
Krugly-Smolska, 1989; Schriewer & Holmes, 1988). In truth, comparative educators
devote considerable effort to establishing the purpose and utility of this field of study,
to defining its nature and relationships to other disciplines, and to clarifying its methodological principles and specific procedures (Schriewer & Holmes, 1988, p. v). In other
words, comparative studies are an area of research and scholarship still in the process of
inventing itself (Mazurek, 2006).
We raise this issue because we do not want to mislead readers into thinking that this
text followsin method, approach, format, or interpretationuniversally agreed upon
canons of comparative studies. Quite simply, such agreement does not exist (Mazurek,
1990). Nonetheless, comparative studies have much to offer scholars, students, and
practitioners of special education. The following highlights the potential benefits of
comparative studies in special education.
Comparative Studies Focus on Globalization

The necessity of thinking about disability, special education, and inclusive schooling
in terms of globalization and a world agenda is critical as countries around the world
enhance inclusive schooling or begin to create programs. Yet, of all the challenges to the
contemporary inclusive movement perhaps the most severe arise from the powerful and
ubiquitous forces of globalization (Winzer & Mazurek, 2009).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
As a term, globalization is nuanced and confusing. Held (1991) defined globalization
as the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a
way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice
versa (p. 9). Later, Kachur and Harrison (2000) pointed out that, In a general sense,
globalization involves a combination of broad cultural, economic, political, and technological forces that are changing the ground rules for human interaction on a worldwide
scale (p. xvi). Despite its ubiquitous nature, globalization is an opaque and malleable
theoretical term and concept. Rizvi and Lingard (2000) warn that it is essentially a
contested term that refers to diverse processes employing political, social, technological, economic, and cultural changes (p. 419). Still, two aspects are constant. One,
globalization speaks to the modern phenomenon of an incredibly shrinking world where
powerful cultural, economic, political, and technological forces ignore national and cultural boundaries. Two, even with the difficulties surrounding this particular variety of
international interdependence, globalization is clearly here to stay.
In todays world, no society is completely isolated from external influences: Events in
one part of the world ripple through the whole. It follows that the significance of globalization in the daily lives of citizens in the worlds diverse countries is profound. And,
while global interdependence carries positive changes, it also poses real challenges for
future generations and societies.
There are inherent contradictions within the phenomenon of globalization itself that
strike at the heart of the inclusive philosophy. For example, the ideology of inclusive
schooling, firmly rooted in notions of social justice and humanism, is spreading across
the globe and demanding national and cultural realignment in accordance with its
Weltanschauung. Yet, in virtually all countries today, education policy is conceptualized as
a central plank of national economic planning (Rivzi & Lingard, 2000). Investment in
education brings individual returns (such as increased mobility), societal returns (such
as economic growth, decreased inequality, and enhanced social cohesion), and national
returns (an economically more productive labor force, lower unemployment, increased
economic competitiveness in the global economy, higher gross domestic product, and
lower future expenditures in the areas of crime prevention and punishment, poverty
alleviation, and so on) (Mazurek, 2006; Winzer & Mazurek, 2009).
However, in a climate where education is viewed as an investment, disability is not an
innocuous boundary. Thus, on the one hand, many researchers stress that inclusive education should be viewed as an economic necessity rather than an ideological preference
(see Giffard-Lindsay, 2007). The argument is that for economies to prosper, all human
capital should be mobilized effectively, not just the human capital that tops a meritocratic hierarchy. On the other hand, notions of an educational marketplace regulated by
narrowly framed measures of performance, accountability, quality, and achievement are
damaging and inimical to the inclusion of students with disabilities. The more a nation
subscribes to the human capital model of schooling, the more it is drawn to classify, sort,
and segregate some students and to allow a prejudice to mount against those who might
be viewed as a drag on educational productivity. People with disabilities are not viewed
as serious building blocks in the construction of economically viable societies. When
defined as nonproducers or underproducers, they may be seen as drains on resources or
deflecting attention from other needs. In such a scenario, it is likely that arguments
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
based in economic utility will marginalize special learners as they are placed in the
territory of nonproductive citizens (Winzer & Mazurek, 2005a, b).
Comparative Education Studies Provide a Worldview

By their very nature, comparative studies are cosmopolitan in outlook. Because they
are naturally concerned with cross-national analysis, comparative studies enrich understanding, encourage participants to be outward looking, and counter xenophobic and
parochial cultural and national tendencies. By providing a basis for dialogue that transcends narrow interpretations, they assist in defining individual positions on issues that
require exercising skeptical judgment and help dispel the assumption that developments
in one nation are or even should be the international norm (Winzer & Mazurek, 2008).
Comparative Studies Inform and Improve Regional Practices

Schooling in all its aspects is conducted in fundamentally different ways around the
world. However, no single nation holds a monopoly on excellence and innovation. Comparative educators recognize that there is much to be gained by becoming informed of
each others work, experiences, successes, and failures. Indeed, the greatest hope and
ultimate utility of comparative studies is to help groups and institutions reflect upon
their own practices, policies, and theories by bringing to bear relevant information and
insights from around the world (Mazurek, 2006). It is to be hoped and expected that
ideas and approaches used in one place may be relevant and useful in another. Aspects
of successful policy observed in foreign situations might then be borrowed (Phillips &
Ochs, 2004).
Borrowing is a fixed term in the comparative education literature, described by Phillips
and Ochs (2004) as the conscious adoption in one context of policy observed in another
(p. 776). The widespread and very rapid dissemination of educational ideas is stimulated
by globalization, which has provided an impetus to the borrowing of policies and best
practices between countries (Turbin, 2001, p. 96).
The notions of learning from other nations and policy borrowing must be bounded by
two major caveats. First, there are real and important socio-political-economic
idiosyncrasies in the various national milieus in which special education is practiced:
There are unique elements to each specific context and unique problems and issues arise
that demand tailored solutions. Comparative studies therefore are always cautious about
the degree to which global generalizations can be derived from case studies.
Second, uplifting as the notion that each nation can learn from the other may be,
there is the potential danger of cultural imperialism or hegemony. Conflict theorists
have produced a powerful and convincing body of literature arguing that the ideas and
practices of some internationally dominant cultures and nations have become so globally
preeminenthere the culprits are usually identified as the major Western industrialized
democraciesthat they are exported to and imposed upon other nations and cultures
(Mazurek, 2006). The process can be, and often is, subtle as many recipients develop a
fixation with formal Western education practices under the assumption that these truly
and objectively represent best practices.
The above dangers are reified in the powerful ethnocentrism that permeates calls for
inclusive reforms. The implicit and explicit message is that a handful of Western nations
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
hold a monopoly on best ideas and approaches for providing special education services
and are to be emulated for exemplary practices and enlightened vision. After the current
discourses on inclusive schooling and many of special educations basic concepts developed in individualistic cultures such as the United States, western models, mandates,
and putative educational knowledge became exported wholesale around the world.
Of course, the notion that policy can simply be transplanted from one national
situation to another is simplistic (Phillips, 2005, p. 25). Theories and trends from the
west, and their attendant policies and practices, cannot simply be transported to the
entire world; they do not enjoy easy transitions to other cultures. Social and cultural
contexts that are highly different from the western roots of inclusion render direct translations treacherous when exported to qualitatively different nations and cultures.
The beliefs that underlie inclusive schooling, such an idea of social justice specific to the
western intellectual tradition, may be interpreted so differently in another national culture that the ideas and interventions cannot take root and thrive (Winzer & Mazurek,
2008).
With a reform as well established and seasoned as inclusive schooling, nations would
be better to selectively borrow bits and pieces, add, adapt, or omit parts of the original
design, and reframe a model in domestic or regional contexts. However, while such
advice rings true with common sense, this too can bring unanticipated consequences.
Continuing engagement with the inclusion agenda has spawned important shifts to the
point that inclusive schooling exists in an ongoing state of revision based on new insights
from practice and present conditions. Hence, the cautionary tale involves fidelity. That
is, once the agenda becomes so plastic and malleable that inclusion means a bit of
everything to everybody then it is in danger of becoming a vacuous term. If it loses its
traditional conceptual grounding, practice will become what is merely convenient and
doable, not what is inclusive.
Comparative Studies Enhance Teacher Knowledge

The need for teachers to have a sound awareness of other nationstheir social milieus,
cultures, customs, political and economic processes, education systems, and so onis
now well understood by professional educators and policy makers. In some cases, the
social issues, debates, and problems of distant nations will be alien; more often, they will
be eerily familiar and may invoke a sense of dj vu. Teachers in varied nations living in
remarkably different cultures are struggling with the same professional and social issues
that concern all teachers. Teachers, in fact, are bonded more by similaritiesmaking
do with seemingly always less than sufficient teaching resources, struggling to meet curricular objectives while responding to individual student needs and interests, mediating
the demands of parents, administrators, and a myriad of education stakeholders; and so
onthan alienated by differences (Mazurek, 2006).
Comparative Studies Provide a Database

Before any lessons can be drawn, it is obvious that a body of information must first
be developed. Thus, a typical comparative study in education devotes much space to
enumerating such things as the structural elements of a nations education system,
financing, enabling legislation, policies governing schooling, curricula, teacher training,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
pedagogy, student body characteristics, and enrollment ratios. Clearly, such information
is important. But again, caveats must be imposed. In the first place, it is a mistake to
conclude that data so gathered are objective or value free in the positivistic sense. After
all, data are collected not randomly but within certain parameters and upon specific
subjects. Therefore, definitions become crucial and there is a great danger that data will
be collected along the preconceived, usually implicit, worldview of the researcher (see
Mazurek, 2006).
In this regard, special education is particularly vulnerable because what constitutes
even the basic subject matter is often elusive. For prevalence rates, multiple definitions
exist, the terminology is far from precise and standardized, and understandings of disability vary. Because disability is defined quite differently around the world, the statistics
are often inconclusive and susceptible to omissions. When examining policy, the meaning of inclusion is by no means always clear. Flux and mutability are more the norm than
the exception and it is difficult to pinpoint accurately the status of the reform agenda.
Differing definitions and eligibility criteria create ambiguity and confusion and attempts
to make meaningful comparisons among students and the instructional supports and
programs provided for them are exceedingly difficult.
Comparative Studies Provide Varied Theoretical Positions

The field of comparative studies in education has developed a number of models,
theories, and methodological positions. The uses, strengths, and limitations of these are
beyond the scope of this introduction. Suffice to say that the varied positions provide
starting points from which to view and conceptualize the philosophy and practice of
special education. Among these can be found several major interpretations (Mazurek &
Winzer, 1994).
The functionalist perspective posits special education as inevitably related to and in
symbiotic dynamic with the social, political, economic, religious, and other significant
structures of a society. One particular version of this view more narrowly sees special
education in terms of appropriate mobilization of human capital. As the central tenet
holds that usefulness determines the value of a person to society, this explanation places
emphasis on the training and socializing functions of schooling and to the value added
to individuals productive skills and hence to their social value.
Another more developmental and evolutionary orientation sees the care and training
of persons with disabilities as a mirror of changing social and cultural attitudes. The way
in which a society responds to the problems of deviance and disability is regarded as a
reflection of continuing public discourse on the obligations of a society to its individual
citizens. Humanitarian views permit benevolent and charitable deeds; dependent and
disabled persons have a moral, if not a legal, right to charity and education. This
prompted churches, philanthropic organizations, and other nongovernment organizations (NGOs) to initiate special schooling.
Yet another view holds that the provision of equal access to education and rehabilitation
services for all people, exceptionality notwithstanding, is an integral component of civil
rights that disallow discrimination on any grounds. The concept of rights is based directly
in law, and the law itself is deemed to be an embodiment of a priori notions of social
justice. While it embraces the humanistic notion of the intrinsic value of individuals,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
it extends beyond humanism because it insists that individuals exercise some role in
determining decisions that affect them.
C OM PA R AT I V E S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION
It is only very recently that comparative studies have emerged in the field of special
education and inclusive schooling. The significance to special educators of attention
from the field of comparative education is the relational context within which special
education around the world is portrayed. Comparative studies offer constructive and
telling insights into broader educational and social dynamics. These include the political
and cultural dimensions of educational policy making; the cultural, ideological, and
economic relationships of schooling, society, and disability; and pragmatic considerations
related to critical variables such as legislation, funding, definitions of special needs,
teacher training, material and human resources, and the difficulties faced by educational, clinical, and social welfare authorities (Winzer & Mazurek, 2009).
Within the broad inclusive agenda, there are central issues that converge in both
ideology and practice. Yet, despite convergences at a macro level of analysis, in any nation
education reform is filtered through a matrix of variables that set the tone for receptiveness to fundamental change. This renders the undertaking of a comparative study, the
utility of such studies, the confidence with which conclusions can be drawn, and the
validity of potential lessons that may be learned, complex and complicated.
For one thing, as has been previously noted, definitional precision and conceptual
clarity are problematic. Perhaps most significant and troublesome within this category
of concerns is the fact that inclusion is not an unequivocal term; the complexity of the
construct denies a precise or universally accepted language so that inclusion can be
and indeed is used in quite different ways to ultimately mean quite different things.
Second, inclusive schooling involves multiple concepts, facets, platforms, significant
actors, and target audiences and involves many different legal, economic, political,
social, and technical issues. As well, because inclusion is a long-lived reform, the agenda
has undergone multiple modifications and constant adaptations that bring puzzling
ambiguities to cross-national studies; riddle perceived trends with disputes, contradictions, and uncertainties; and render the inconsistencies in the messages emanating
from nations addressing the agenda the norm rather than the exception (Winzer &
Mazurek, 2011).
M A JOR T H E M E S
The above complexities notwithstanding, a number of key issues surrounding special
education and inclusive schooling clearly emerge from the following chapters. Below, we
briefly delineate some central themes to provide a general blueprint to assist in reading
and finding meaning in the contained case studies. The purpose of the following listing
is not to prioritize; rather, it is to highlight themes that appear in almost every chapter.
Therefore, the themes are listed in alphabetical order. Moreover, the use of categories
does not imply that these themes are independent. In fact, they are anything but discrete. They are complementary and intimately bound, best viewed as intermeshed and
overlapping.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
Accountability
Because nations seek to be competitive in an increasingly global marketplace, a frequent
part of education reform worldwide is accountability. At all levels, education systems are
increasingly open to rigorous scrutiny by governments, parents, and other stakeholders.
Often, this spawns a fiscal agenda that demands returns on the public money invested in
schooling. In result, great interest in the measurement of school outcomes using largescale assessments as an index of progress ensues, and this spills over to affect curriculum
revisions, pedagogy, and the professional status of teachers.
When applied to special education, accountability translates into two sets of forces
the egalitarian and affirming as represented by inclusion and the applied and pragmatic
as in the human capital view of schooling. These have never been more pronounced or
more in conflict than they are today. A chasm is developing between excellence and
equity: Those involved in the inclusive agenda have adopted equity as the conceptual
preference; those in general education increasingly adhere to excellence as the priority.
The movement that endorses market forms and the accountability dynamic of education is particularly well articulated in the United States, Canada, and the United
Kingdom. Nevertheless, as some of our authors point out, market-driven systems that
measure, compare, and rank students, teachers, and schools on the basis of test results
and other so-called performance indicators give rise to a competitive ethos rather than
a collaborative one. And, inevitably, narrowly defined measures of success exclude certain
students. The incompatibility between standards-based approaches and the reality that
included students may never attain such predetermined levels can mean that children
with disabilities suffer most. When these children are seen as posing a threat to a schools
or education jurisdictions ability to meet high performance level expectations, they end
up essentially being treated as academic liabilities.
Cultural Parameters
Culture, broadly defined as ways of perceiving, evaluating, and behaving (Goodenough,
1999), includes at the very least historical consciousness and experience, political, social
and economic conditions, religion, the education system and its traditions, ideologies,
views on equality, beliefs about which inequalities are the most important to address, the
manner in which disability is conceptualized, and what facilities and personnel should
be available. Culture influences every aspect of education reform and is paramount as
nations tailor the philosophies and processes of special education to their unique political, social, and educational realities.
As one example, culture is fundamental in shaping attitudes toward disability. Each
culture has its own interpretations and explanations, based on its unique forms of
knowledge, belief systems, values, language, and religions, as to why some children
are born with disabilities; appropriate ways of defining what constitutes a disability; how
people with disabilities are to be treated; the learning and occupational potential
of persons with disabilities; parental coping mechanisms and the manner of responding
to a childs impairment; and the roles expected of community and society (Winzer &
Mazurek, 2005b).
Disability is not a neutral term but inevitably value laden, carrying with it whole sets of
political and social beliefs depending on its idelogical location. Because definitions and
10/14/11 5:45 PM
10
Introduction
understandings of disability are embedded in social situations and cultural contexts,
Peters (1993) suggests that obstacles to education result not from inherent incapacities,
but from the physical and attitudinal barriers socially and politically constructed within
the environment (p. 6). The effects of organic and physical disabilities are interwoven
with social difference and magnifiedoften distortedby cultural views. In many
societies, the social landscapes of people with disabilities are pathologized and marginalized, surrounded by labels and oppressive terminology. The resulting prejudices lead
to discrimination and exclusion. In India, for example, the traditional societal pattern
has been rejection and prejudice or, sometimes, charity.
Attributions regarding disabling conditions and the way in which policy makers,
teachers, and parents conceptualize the agenda influence the pace and efficacy of education reform. In this sense, inclusion is not an exclusively technical issue that can be fixed
by a new ensemble of policy, professionals, and resources: It is the manner by which societies construct and respond to disabilities, gender, race, and cultural differences that
determines how inclusive that society can be (Winzer & Mazurek, 2009). The objective
criteria and consequences reflect the biases, self interests, and moral evaluations of those
in a position to promote inclusion or exclusion (Winzer & Mazurek, 2008).
T H E DATA B A S E
Globally, millions of people are disabled. It appears that around 10% of the worlds
population, or 650 million people, live with a disability, making this the worlds largest
minority (UN, 2006b). Further, the World Health Organization estimates that 80% of
people with disabilities live in developing countries.
Even a cursory glance at the numbers and rates shown in the various chapters reveals dramatic differences in prevalence, etiology, and access to schooling. As well, it can be seen that
worldwide prevalence rates are increasing although crossnational divergence is striking.
Many factors play into the murky prevalence estimates. These include a lack of consensus on definition and identification; unclear categories; different points at which societies
make a social or medical judgment that an individual is exceptional, disabled, or
different; and the absence of national surveys or epidemological data.
The etiologies of disabilities vary between nations. In the West, rates in the normative
categories of deaf, blind, and intellectually disabled tend to be small and stable; the bulk
of school-aged children identified as disabled are within socially constructed categories
that link behavioral and social indices to disability, referred to generically as mild disabilities.
In developing nations, the major causes of disabling conditions are those that are largely
preventable. Every year, some 500,000 children lose some or all of their vision due to
vitamin A deficiencies. Forty percent of the 26,000 people killed or maimed each year by
landmines are children; more than 10 million children are traumatized by armed conflicts (Smith-Davis, 2004). Further preventable common etiologies include waterborne
blindness, trachoma, measles, tuberculosis, leprosy, and consanguineous marriages.
Education for All

The vision of Education for All (EFA) was delineated in 1990 and confirmed at the
World Education Conference in Dakar, Senegal, in 2000 (UNESCO, 2000). In an effort
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
11
to implement the goals of the Dakar Framework, many countries created national
education forums in order to draft action plans that accentuate the role of basic education as a crucial element of lifelong learning. Special needs was not a focus of the Dakar
outcomes. However, an ensuing document, the Flagship on Education for All and the Rights
of Persons With Disabilities Towards Inclusion became a catalyst for ensuring the right to
education to individuals with disabilities (Smith-Davis, 2004).
Even with the current emphasis on baseline worldwide individual rights to education, the
EFA initiative is far from being reached. The reasons why many nations are unable or unwilling to implement the grand plans are varied, but fairly clear. Some are fragile, failing, or
failed states (UNESCO, 2007) coping with civil and ethnic conflict, large refugee populations, extreme and prolonged economic hardship, malnutrition, weak governance at high
levels, accompanying political instability, and precarious public education systems. In other
nations, a multilevel architecture of education is not in place and the struggle is how to
provide all children equal access to, and services within, general primary education.
Generally, the quest for universal primary schooling overwhelms the training and education of people with disabilities. Limited resources are first directed toward the greatest
number, not to the small minority requiring specialized assistance. The disproportionate amount of time, money, and effort needed for each disabled child is disregarded in
the effort to provide universal elementary education.
Equality of Access
Even where a relatively high level of equality of opportunity to attend educational
institutions exists (certainly it never does fully), there is no guarantee that there is
equality of access for children. Accessing schooling is mitigated by many factors. Prominent are the number of spaces available; the suitability and relevance of the programs
offered; the overall quality and resources of available schools; the existence of services
and resources for disabled students; and the type and depth of disability. Thus, equality
of access is not to be equated with equality of opportunity. Even on a level playing field,
mitigating circumstances make it inevitable that not all children find the most optimal
school placement (Mazurek, 2006).
For students with disabilities, education provision draws on ideologies of normal/
abnormal, integration, meritocracy, and equity interpreted within local frames. As mentioned, less than 2% of children worldwide with special needs receive any form of special
needs services; girls have less access than boys (Ackerman, Thormann, & Huq, 2005;
Winzer & Mazurek, 2005b).
In industrialized countries, the Organisation for Economic and Co-operative
Development (OECD, 2010) reports a range between 1% to 35% of the primary and
lower secondary education population across 20 developed nations receiving special
needs additional resources. Developing nations present depressing rates of access and
attendance. In Pakistan, for example, only well-off families can afford to send the child
with a disability to private day cares, kindergartens, and special schools.
Financial Constraints
On the world stage, education funding has become leaner and meaner. Systems and
schools do not get adequate financial resources even if they agree on what should be
10/14/11 5:45 PM
12
Introduction
done in terms of inclusion. In all cases, needs outstrip available resources and there is
little indication the situation will improve in the near future.
Gender Issues
Although the ideology of inclusion calls for and legitimates equality, reality is characterized by starkly unequal social distribution. In many nations, women with disabilities
tend to be perennial outsiders and multiply disadvantaged: They experience exclusion
on account of both gender and disability. Schooling, or lack of it, thus becomes entwined
with gender ideologies that affect communal and family assessment of the value of investing in education for females (Mazurek & Winzer, 2010).
International Directives
International bodies such as the United Nations, the OECD, and the World Bank have
generated a plethora of conventions, declarations, statements, and resolutions relating to disability, inclusion, and special education that declare in favor of the inclusive
approach. Collectively and increasingly, these international nongovernment organizations mobilize information, attempt to foster ideological conformity, and work to reengineer systems to locate them within the wider international context. In doing so, they
have created a climate that places political pressure on governments and agencies to
accede to the notion of special needs as a human rights issue and to promote the legislation and policy that underlies educational intervention. Their advocacy jointly adds up
to a growing consensus that all children have the right to be educated together, regardless of type and degree of exceptionality, and that inclusion makes good educational and
social sense.
The 1981 International Year of the Disabled initially sparked interest in the welfare
and the education of people with disabilities around the world. In the following decade,
the United Nations generated the World Program of Action Concerning Disabled Persons
(1983) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN, 1989), which established
standards for the realization of childrens civil, political, economic, social, and cultural
rights and spoke to additional supports required by children with disabilities above and
beyond those promised to nondisabled children. The United Nations followed with the
World Declaration for Education for All (1990) and the Standard Rules for the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons With Disabilities (1993).
Perhaps the most telling agenda emerged when Europeans organized a world conference on special needs education in Salamanca in 1994 that attracted 300 participants
representing 92 governments and 25 international organizations. The conference generated the Statement of Principles, Policy, and Practice in Special Needs Education. The
accompanying Framework for Action added a further flourish by providing guidelines
for action. It stressed the value of education in the general school system for all student
populations and prompted the abandonment of special schools and special classes in
favor of more inclusive practices when it stated that those with special educational needs
must have access to regular schools which should accommodate them within a childcentered pedagogy capable of meeting their needs. The assignment of children to
special schoolsor special classes or sections within a school on a permanent basis
should be the exception (UNESCO, 1994a, b).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
13
The recent UN Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities (UN, 2006a),
which entered into force in May 2008, is the first international human rights treaty specifically related to persons with disabilities. It became a reality largely due to the active
mobilization of people with disabilities who participated in negotiating the text (Human
Rights Watch, 2010). The Convention serves to promote, protect and ensure the full and
equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities and to promote respect for their inherent dignity (Canada News Centre, 2010,
p. 1) and reiterates calls for an inclusive education system at all levels and lifelong
learning (UN, 2006a, p. 16).
Article 24 of the Convention is as a significant step in binding governments to a
guarantee of free, high quality, and inclusive education systems. This legal obligation,
which encompasses inclusive policies, systems, legal remedies, and so on, aims at achieving
high quality education, not only for learners with disabilities, but for all learners
(UNESCO-IBE, 2009). By ratifying the treatythat is, signing the Optional Protocol
countries pledge to uphold nondiscrimination and other protections and to provide
people with disabilities the services they need to participate fully in society.
As of December 2010, the Convention had been ratified by 96 countries, as well as the
European Union. While many of the nations represented in this text, such as Canada,
Germany, and Ethiopia have ratified the Optional Protocol, others are more wary. Japan,
for example signed the Convention on 2009 but is still debating ratification.
Nations vary dramatically in their responses to international pressures. For some
policy makers, international organizations wield little direct influence. For example,
Disregard for the international dimension in educational policy is perhaps nowhere
more obvious than in the United States (Steiner-Khamsi, 2010, p. 339). In nations such
as Germany and Australia, mandates serve as a background to the theory, concepts, and
ideas surrounding debate on inclusive schooling. Still other nations show a well-defined
susceptibility to the influence of broad policy frames prompted by global pressures
and international clarion calls. Following Salamanca, for example, many governments
around the world indicated that they acted in the spirit of the rules or were drafting new
policies in accordance with the rules; sometimes they translated the Salamanca rules
into native languages (de Zaldo, 2000).
Legislation
Equality in law is one of the most stringent guides to developing inclusive schooling: only
the law can ensure that the necessary conditions for equal opportunity are provided not
as sufferance but as a matter of right. Following the Salamanca Statement, the trend of
anchoring special education to legislation took on global significance. This is evident
from the care that every author to this text takes with detailing and explicating national
legislation.
In general terms, however, no matter how much detail, it is almost impossible to discover to what extent and how legislative acts are implementedor notwhat kind of
impact they have at the grassroots level, and whether the actual treatment provided
underwent transformations comparable to that of the legislation. In fact, the national
studies discussed lead to a series of disquieting conclusions about the salutary nature
and effectiveness of legislation in both industrialized and developing nations.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
14
Introduction
There often exists a large and almost unbridgable gap between the rhetoricthe
democratic dialogue of inclusion and the legislation and policies to facilitate equal
access and opportunity for students with disabilities; and the way legislation is disposed
of in the actual practice of individual schools and classrooms. Highly industrialized
nations such as the United States, Canada, Israel, and South Korea share a common reality: a restricted scope of practical acknowledgment. Schools fail to wholly reflect the law
and there are major breaks between legislated intent and pragmatic services. Developing
nations present a politically correct faade but myriad structural, cultural, economic,
and other factors govern adherence. Inclusive schooling is talked about, possibly celebrated, but little action ensues. Often, mere rhetoric poses as intent as Government
officials in developing countries quickly discover the political and economic benefits of
speaking the universal language of education reform (Steiner-Khamsi, 2010, p. 331).
The rhetoric about including children with disabilities is a dutiful response to
international mandates but often only superficial linguistic adjustments that are not
reflected in policy or programmatic realities (see Mazurek & Winzer, 2010; Singal, 2005;
Winzer & Mazurek, 2008).
Literacy Rates
Enormous numbers of individuals in developing countries remain illiterate. Rates of
illiteracy are far higher among females than among males and far higher in rural as
compared to urban areas. In many countries, girls tend to start school later, study less,
and drop out earlier than boysif they go to school at all.
NGOs
NGOs play a major role in stimulating and implementing inclusive programs in many
developing nations. Vital as the work may be, it must be recognized that charitable
responses to disability offer additional or specialized resources but at the same time
often confer stigma and an official status of abnormality. In a parallel vein, a governments continuing reliance on voluntary organizations takes the matter of disability out
of the public domain and places it within a charity framework while simultaneously indicating a lack of ideological commitment to the integrated education of disabled children
(see Alur, 2000; McConachie & Zinkin, 1995).
Psychoeducational Assessment
Before children can be identified as exceptional or provided special services, medical
and psychoeducational assessment is necessary. A number of authors point out the limitations to psychoeducational assessment in such areas as insufficient local norms, reliance
on traditional IQ tests, lack of trained personnel, government parsimony, unacceptable
wait times, and cultural biases.
Regional Perspectives
Regionally variable policies are strikingly apparent in school reform: The inclusive agenda
is progressing at different rates with different intensities and change is unevenly apprehended. In Australia and Canada, for example, each state or province approaches inclusive
education quite differently so that the momentum and practice differs dramatically.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
15
In other nations, disparities in service provision fall along urban-rural lines. There
are, for example, many innovative projects that are successful in supporting inclusion
but these are found chiefly in areas primed for change where people can both afford and
appreciate the need for change. Disabled students living in urban centers have ready
access to this range of services while geography largely denies the provision of provision
of and access to educational, rehabilitative, and health services to rural dwellers.
Research
The mechanisms and strategies for evaluating the effects and outcomes of inclusion are
complicated and frequently deficient. Although a body of research is providing traction
to the issues, there remains an absence of empirical data or qualitative data to show that
the reform actually works.
Massive research is directed at the processes and outcomes in Western industrialized
nations although results show many inconsistencies. Impressionistic data tends to be
positive; controlled studies show less optimistic results. There are no coordinating international agencies monitoring global progress in inclusion. Serious difficulties exist in
bringing together sensitive and authentic information about the existing situation in
developing nations where inclusive education outcomes are a scarcely touched-upon
research area (Peters, 2004).
School Transformation
Ultimately, educational inclusion means making a difference in the opportunities
and lives of all students, particularly those traditionally marginalized, segregated, or
excluded. The social transformation ideals inherent in inclusion promote school structures and pedagogies that are egalitarian, affirming, and play a key role in eliminating
social injustices. Inclusion requires general education to fashion fundamental changes
in its teaching and learning processes so as to transform itself into a more responsive,
resourceful, and humane system.
The restructuring that is key to realizing inclusive education forms a potent obstacle
founded on a matrix of factors that include passive resistance, vested interests, the
attitudes of teachers and other gatekeepers, the traditions of schools, and fear about
relinquishing special facilities that were built with so much time and effort. As an
example, western European nations have a long and distinct cultural and educational
heritage of which they are fiercely proud. German schools have a strong tradition of efficiency and orientation to high production while special education is characterized by a
strong and well-established system of special schools and classes. Despite international
pressures, ratification of the UN Optional Protocol and European Union policies,
Germany maintains two systems with the majority of students with special needs taught
in segregated settings.
Teacher Training
At the operational level, inclusive schooling translates into great pressure to impose
changes on schools and teachers. An inclusive agenda demands, to a greater or lesser
degree, that countries forfeit some or all of their pedagogical cultures: All teachers are
expected to transform their professional knowledge and their pedagogy in order to be
more instructionally diverse with a broader repertoire of effective teaching practices.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
16
Introduction
The delivery of special education is hindered by a lack of trained teachers. In some
countries, teacher training in special education is sparse or unavailable; in other places,
the problems revolve around the most efficient manner in which to train regular classroom teachers to respond to the needs of students with disabilities. Around the world,
teacher education programs have responded by increasingly introducing courses of study
and program components that focus on inclusive schooling. Nevertheless, calls for more
adequate and focused teacher education and professional development redound.
SUMM A RY
The chapters presented in this text show major disparities in fundamental approaches
to and interpretation of special education and the inclusive agenda. Ideological differences join to legal and structural dissentions to create different trajectories. Rather than
a seamless progress from the acknowledgment of disability to the giving of rights to
the development of comprehensive policy that recognizes and protects those rights, the
inclusive program is marked by significant boundaries and limitations.
To a greater or lesser extent, every nation is encountering difficulties in the
implementation of educational integration. Debates about the process and practice are
still widely prevalent although it is not the goals but the means of achieving the goals that
are controversial. Philosophical commitment far outstrips practice and the barriers to
successful and universal inclusion remain complex, diverse, and numerous.
In one sense, the inclusive agenda seems bleak, negative, and beset by insurmountable
obstacles. But, to many proponents, the scenario remains optimistic. In spite of all the
issues, dilemmas, and problems facing special education and the inclusive agenda and in
spite of the fact that many goals have not been reached, advocates have faith that inclusion
has made great political progress and will continue to make progress that will translate
into effective programs.
Of course, it may require decades before ideological commitment, political will,
training, and knowledge meld to allow a comprehensive network of services. And it may
require continued tweaking and adaptations of the agenda. By that we imply that if inclusive education is to become a reality, Western blinkers must be abandoned. The implicit
and explicit conventions of highly diverse societies must be recognized and solutions
must be contextually driven and reflect realistic strategies. Reform cannot be independent of time, place, and culture. Inclusion, equity, access, and the rest have to find their
manifestations and resolutions in the particular structures of their individual national
and cultural contexts.
R E F E R E NC E S
Ackerman, P., Thormann, M., & Huq, S. (2005). Assessment of educational needs of disabled
chjldren in Bangladesh. Washington, DC: USAID.
Altbach, P. G., & Kelly, G. P. (Eds.) (l986). New approaches to comparative education. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Alur, M. (2000). Invisible children: A study of policy education. Paper presented at the
International Special Education Congress, Manchester.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Introduction
17
Canada News Centre. (2010). Canada ratifies UN Convention on the Rights of Persons With
Disabilities. Retrieved from http://news.gc.ca/web/article-eng.do?m=/index&nid=517849.
de Zaldo, G. F. (2000). Disability in the developing countries. Paper presented at the International Special Education Congress, Manchester.
Giffard-Lindsay, K. (2007, September). Inclusive education in India: Interpretation, implementation, and issues. Create Pathways to Access, Research monograph 15. Sussex, UK:
University of Sussex.
Goodenough, N. (1999). Multi-culturalism as the normal human experience. In H. Hunt
& K. Marshall (Eds.) Exceptional children and youth (2nd ed., pp. 447478). Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Human Rights Watch. (2010, December 6). EU: Way cleared to join human rights treaty.
Retrieved from http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/12/06/eu-way-cleared-join-human
-rights-treaty.
Held, D. (1991). Political theory today. California: Stanford University Press.
Kachur, J. L., & Harrison, T. W. (2000). Public education, globalization, and democracy:
Whither Alberta? In T. W. Harrison & J. L. Kachur (Eds.). Contested classrooms:
Education, globalization, and democracy in Alberta (pp. xiii-xxxv). Edmonton: University
of Alberta Press.
Krugly-Smolska, E. T. (1989). Theoretical models in comparative education: An attempt at
synthesis. Canadian and International Education. 18 , 5464.
McConachie, H. & Zinkin, P. (1995). Conclusions. In P. Zinkin & H. McConachie (Eds.),
Disabled children and developing countries (pp. 219230). London: MacKeith Press.
Mazurek, K. (1990). Multicultural education and comparative education: Notes on theory
and method. Journal of Learning About Learning, 2, 5358.
Mazurek, K. (2006). Introduction. In K. Mazurek & M. Winzer, M. (Eds.) Schooling around the
world: Challenges, debates, and practices. (pp. 327). New York: Allyn and Bacon.
Mazurek, K., & Winzer, M. (1994). Comparative studies in special education. Washington,
DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Mazurek, K. & Winzer, M. (2010). Legislation, policy, and the inclusion of students with
special needs: National glimpses. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 4, 317.
OECD. (2010). Education at a glance, 2010: OECD indicators. Paris: Author.
Peters, S. (2004). Inclusive education: An EFA strategy for all children. Washington, DC: World
Bank.
Peters, S. J. (Ed.). (1993). Education and disability in cross-cultural perspectives. London:
Garland.
Phillips, D. (2005). Policy borrowing in education: Frameworks for analysis. In J. Zajda (Ed.),
International handbook on globalization, education, and policy research: Global pedagogies and
policies. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Phillips, D., & Ochs, K. (2004). Researching policy borrowing: Some methodological challenges in comparative education. British Educational Research Journal, 30, 773784.
Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2000). Globalization and education: Complexities and contingencies.
Educational Theory, 50, 419426.
Schriewer, J., & Holmes, B. (Eds.). (1988). Theories and methods in comparative education.
New York: Peter Lang.
Singal, N. (2005). Mapping the field of inclusive education: A review of the Indian literature.
International Journal of Inclusive Education, 9, 331350.
Smith-Davis, J. (2004, JulyAugust). UNESCOS flagship initiative. Teaching Exceptional
Children, p. 47.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2010). The politics and economics of comparison. Comparative Education
Review, 54, 323342,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
18
Introduction
Turbin, J. (2001). Policy borrowing: Lessons from European attempts to transfer training
practices. International Journal of Training and Development, 5, 96111.
United Nations. (1983). World Program of Action Concerning Disabled Persons. New York:
Author.
United Nations. (1989). United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, G. A. Res
44/25, Annex 44, UN GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 167, U.N. Doc A/44/49.
United Nations. (1990). World Declaration for Education for All. New York: Author.
United Nations. (1993). UN Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons
With Disabilities. New York: Author.
United Nations. (2006a). Convention on the Right of Persons With Disabilities and Optional
Protocol. New York: Author.
United Nations. (2006b). Some facts about persons with disabilities. New York: Author.
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1994a). Final report: World
conference on special needs education: Access and quality. Salamanca, Spain: Author.
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1994b). Salamanca
statement and framework for action on special needs education. New York: Author.
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1996). Legislation
pertaining to special needs education. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0010/001055/105593e.pdf.
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2000). The Dakar Framework
for Action. Retrieved from http:unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001211/121147.pdf.
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2003). Overcoming exclusion
through inclusive approaches in education: A challenge and a vision. Geneva: Author.
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2007). Education for all by
2015: Will we make it. EFA Global monitoring report. London: University of Oxford Press.
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2009). Guidelines for
inclusion: Ensuring access to Education for All. Paris: Author.
United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural OrganizationInternational Bureau
of Education. (2009, October 26November 13). Electronic forum on From inclusion education to inclusive curricula. Retrieved from http://www.ibe.unesco.org/en/
services/online.
United States Agency for International Development. (2002). Educating children with disabilities
in developing nations: A roundtable dialogue. Washington, DC: Author.
Winzer, M., & Mazurek, K. (2005a). Current reforms in special education: Delusion or
solution? In J. Zajda (Ed.), International handbook on globalisation, education and policy
research (pp. 643658). Dordecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Winzer, M., & Mazurek, K. (2005b). Global agendas in special education: A critique.
Educational Theory and Practice, 27, 724.
Winzer, M., & Mazurek, K. (2008, April). Views and overviews: A comparative survey of
inclusive education for students with special needs. Paper presented at the Council for
Exceptional Children Annual Conference, Boston.
Winzer, M., & Mazurek, K. (2009). Inclusive schooling: Global ideals and national realities.
Journal of International Special Needs Education, 12, 110.
Winzer, M., & Mazurek, K. (2011). A model to examine inclusive schooling. Unpublished
paper, University of Lethbridge.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
1
A Journey from Awareness
and Advocacy to Action:
Special Education in the
United States
Mark P. Mostert
The United States of America, a federal constitutional republic of 50 states and 1 federal
district, is one of the worlds most diverse and multicultural nations. Originally inhabited by native peoples, including Native Americans and Hawaiians, the United States
has experienced large influxes of immigrants, earlier from European countries and
more recently from Latin America and Asia. The United States is one of the five largest
countries on earth; it covers more than 9.8 million square kilometers.
T H E S O C I A L C ON T E X T
The U.S. population of more than 311 million ranks third in the world (after China and
India) and currently has a positive population growth. Although increasingly diverse,
Caucasian Americans still make up the largest percentage of Americans. Other large
minority groups (African Americans, Hispanic Americans) continue to grow. The most
significant trend is the population increase among Hispanic groups, which are now considered the second largest population group followed by African Americans (Central
Intelligence Agency, 2011). The U.S. population breakdown appears in Table 1.
The U.S. pretax median household income in 2007 was $49,777 ranging from $32,584
for African American households to $65,469 for Asian American households. Approximately 13% of the U.S. population lives below the poverty line (U.S. Census Bureau,
2010). The vast majority of Americans (82%) reside in urban and suburban areas. Four
cities have populations larger than 2 million (New York, Houston, Los Angeles, and
Chicago), a major shift from the 18th century when more than 90% of Americans were
farmers. Despite recent economic problems, the U.S. economy is still considered the
largest in the world, with a 2009 gross domestic product estimated at $14.3 trillion
(Bureau of Economic Statistics, 2011).
Clearly, all societies embody complex social and cultural forces. In the following,
I explain a few major factors that have had lasting and prominent effects on U.S. special
education.
Poverty. Almost 40% of children and youth in the United States come from low-income
families (that is, those with an annual income of below $36,800 for a family of four).
This proportion decreased from 1993 to 2000 but began to trend upward again in 2001
(Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 2003). The United States continues to focus
21
10/14/11 5:45 PM
22
Mark P. Mostert
Table 1. U.S. Population and Demographics
Vector
Age structure
Breakdown
014 years: 20.2%
1564 years: 67.0%
65 years: 12.8%
(2010 est.)
Male
31,639,127
202,665,043
16,901,232
Female
Total
30,305,704
310,232,863
1,031,293,212 (July 2010 est.)
2,571,696
Median age
35.5 years
Literacy
School life
expectancy
Ethnic groups
99%
15 years
38.1 years
(2010 est.)
99%
17 years
36.8 years
99%
16 years
Caucasian American 79.96%, African American 12.85%, Asian

American 4.43%, Amerindian & Alaska Native 0.97%, Native
Hawaiian & other Pacific Islander 0.18%, two or more races 1.61%
(July 2007 est.)
Religion
Protestant 51.3%, Roman Catholic 23.9%, Mormon 1.7%, other
Christian 1.6%, Jewish 1.7%, Buddhist 0.7%, Muslim 0.6%, other/
unspecified 2.5%, unaffiliated 12.1%, none 4% (2007 est.)
Political parties Major: Republican Party, Democrat Party
Small third parties (e.g.): Constitution Party, Green Party, Libertarian
Party, American Nazi Party, American Reform Party, Communist
Party USA
on improving all support systems related to child welfare and in meeting contemporary
challenges faced by those living below the poverty line and the often related concerns
around single-parent families, child abuse, child trafficking, and other factors that
increase the population at risk for school failure.
Homelessness. The problem of homelessness in the United States has increased with
declining economic growth and fewer work opportunities. Establishing accurate numbers is difficult, especially in rural areas (Fitchen, 1991). However, estimates are from
500,000 to more than 2 million. The little research that exists indicates that homeless
children and youth are often marginalized and stigmatized, even though many of their
problems are not of their own creation. Furthermore, homeless children are more
likely to be referred to special education classes and to be labeled as intellectually disabled (ID), learning disabled (LD), or emotionally and behaviorally disturbed (EBD).
Homeless children are also more likely to drop out of school by age 16 and appear
more hyperactive and less attentive than their peers (Nord & Luloff, 1995).
Immigration. The United States continues to be a nation of immigrants. The 2010 U.S.
census notes that 20% of children either are immigrants or have immigrant parents, that
25% of immigrant children are classified as poor, and that 75% of immigrant children are
U.S. citizens. Significantly, the proportion of immigrant children in the schools has more
than doubled since 1980, as has the foreign-born population of theUnited States, half of
whom were born in Latin America (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2011).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action
23
The population of persons illegally entering and living in the United States is estimated
at 10 to 20 million. Although these numbers are somewhat unreliable, children of these
illegal immigrants must surmount many challenges in order to succeed in school,
challenges that are compounded if they have a disability.
Substance abuse. Substance abuse among the general population and specifically within
the U.S. school system is significant. The Adolescent Substance Abuse Knowledge Base
(2007) notes that the latest statistics related to substance abuse indicate that approximately 14 million Americans 12 years or older use illicit drugs. Males have a higher rate
of use than females. Among youth 12 to 17 years, almost 10% had used illicit drugs.
For alcohol abuse, among those ages 12 or older, almost 6% (more than 12 million
people) reported drinking heavily. Alcohol abuse is most problematic during the college
years. Among 18- to 22-year-olds, binge and heavy drinking is reported by more
than58%of this college-age population. In 2009, approximately 11% of adults 18 and
older reported using illegal substances and abusing prescription medications (U.S.
Department of Health, 2009).
Violence. Although violent crime in schools has declined over the past decade (Virginia
Youth Violence Project, 2011), bullying presents a major challenge as it occurs at every level
of schooling and the incidence is on the increase. Of particular concern is the phenomenon of cyber bullying. Nationally, almost 30% of children and youth in schools participate
in bullying either as the perpetrator (13%), as victim (10.6%), or both (6.3%), peaking in
grades 6 to 8 (Nansel, Overpeck, Pilla, Ruan, Simons-Morton, & Scheidt, 2001).
C U LT U R E A N D DI S A BI L I T Y
Historically, people with disabilities in the United States, especially those with visible or
more severe IDs, were perceived to be either objects of pity or fear and treated accordingly (Winzer, 1993). However, a number of social reforms in the 18th and 19th centuries, driven primarily by political figures such as Dorothea Dix and religious advocates
such as Horace Mann acknowledged that people with disabilities were more than the
sum of their defects.
Although today these initial efforts would be considered crude, by the beginning of
the 20th century advances in education, psychology, and medicine allowed a relatively
coherent view of persons with disabilities that was primarily embodied by the medical
model. This model assumes that any physical or other anomaly resides within the
individual and is caused by conditions known or unknown and therefore amenable to
treatment or cure. However, the medical model has little regard for other aspects of disability as perceived by society and assumes an unequal relationship between the expert
and the person with the disability where the expert dictates treatment and the client is
the (usually) passive recipient of this expertise.
Currently, the social model of disability is largely accepted as the state-of-the-art
framework around disability issues. Here disability is viewed as a form of social perception rather than pathology. If this perception is negative, it may translate into social,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
24
Mark P. Mostert
environmental, and participatory barriers to full social integration. Further, the social
model of disability assumes equality and is more likely to empower people with disabilities to self-advocate for social and other changes and to assert their rights to equitable treatment as full members of society. As a result, people with disabilities have
become increasingly emancipated and their contributions to the social, economic, and
cultural life of their society has increased exponentially.
A S S I M I L AT ION
Historically, the United States has increasingly moved toward greater inclusion of
people with disabilities irrespective of severity or debilitating characteristics. In the
past 100 years, the concepts of normalization and deinstitutionalization have meant
a decrease in the separateness of institutions that essentially warehoused and isolated
people with disabilities, with a significant shift to supported community living and
employment.
Today, people with disabilities are included in society more than ever before. Between
federal and state laws, discrimination against people with disabilities has been reduced
and equal participation significantly increased. Advocacy groups continue to be a key
component in securing and maintaining disability rights in a variety of arenas.
T H E G E N E R A L S C HO OL S Y S T E M
Education in the United States is primarily executed via individual state governments
to local school districts. However, the federal Department of Education is the primary
funding mechanism for the states and therefore maintains a regulatory role, including addressing how federal legislation shapes policies and practices in state and local
districts. A historic gap exists between the amount of federal funding received and the
amount required has meant that the states have been responsible for funding the greater
share of education budgets as well as their own in-state fiscal obligations. At the state level,
funds are usually supplemented from general funds (generated by taxes) to make up the
federal shortfall. Given the current economic outlook, this is unlikely to change in the
near future.
Generally, children are required by law to be enrolled in first grade by the age of 6
or 7. After kindergarten, schooling consists of primary school (grades 1 to 5), junior
high school (grades 6 to 8), and high school (grades 9 to 12). Successful completion
of these grades results in a high school diploma, usually by the students 18th year.
Some states allow those 16 years and older to leave school without graduating. For
youth who drop out of school prior to 12th grade completion, options exist to study
for and pass an equivalency examination. Schools generally are in session August or
September through May or June, although several states have experimented with yearround schooling.
The vast majority of children and youth (almost 90%) enroll in government-funded
(public) schools; most of the remainder attend private schools. A very small but growing
minority of children and youth are homeschooled (Wilhelm & Firmin, 2009). Recently,
public education has encouraged initiatives around the concept of the charter school
10/14/11 5:45 PM
25
(Rhim, Ahearn, & Lange, 2007). Charter schools, although publicly funded, have special
dispensations to operate without many or all the regulations applied to a public school.
Essentially, the school is contracted by the state government for several years to operate
within a specific framework to serve its population. At the end of the contract, and upon
reviewing the schools performance, the contract may be renewed or allowed to lapse
(Department of State, 2011).
The Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2009) estimated that by the beginning of the 2010 school year approximately 49.4 million students
were enrolled in public schools. Of these students, 34.7 million were in kindergarten to the
eighth grade, and 14.7 million students were in grades 9 to 12. Approximately another 5.8
million students attended private schools. For the 2010 to 2011 school year, approximately
3,273,000 students should graduate from high school (2,962,000 public; 311,000 private).
Obviously, not all students remain in school and graduate at the end of the 12th grade.
Dropout rates remain a cause for concern, even though there appears to be a slight decline
in dropout rates over the past few years to 8.1% in 2009 (Department of State, 2011).
The public education system employs approximately 3.3 million teachers; private education employs approximately 0.5 million teachers. Further, as of 2009, the United States
contained about 13,800 public school districts, 99,000 public schools, and 33,700 private
schools. For the 2010 to 2011 school year, the Department of Education estimates that
$540 billion will be spent on public education, which translates into a per-student average of $10,792 (National Center for Education Statistics, 2009).
In grades K to 12, public education serves approximately 6 million children and youth
with disabilities. Although services extend over the typical school ages, students in special
education may remain in school until age 21 to complete their graduation requirements.
Graduation may be in the form of a regular high school diploma or a school-leaving
certificate.
H I S T OR Y OF S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION

Special education in the United States has a long and distinguished, if uneven, history.
Building on innovations in Europe, most notably by Jean Marc Itard and his attempts to
socialize Victor, the so-called wild boy of Aveyron (Itard, 1962), advocates for people with
disabilities have brought their energy and altruism to those considered less fortunate and
abnormal. Predictably, the first major efforts involved attention to those with visible disabilities, especially the visually and auditorily impaired. Among many others, Dorothea
Dix, Samuel Gridley Howe, and Annie Sullivan, Helen Kellers teacher, were catalysts in
making the essential point that persons with disabilities could be accommodated, assisted,
and included within the parameters of the normal social fabric (Winzer, 1993).
Perhaps the greatest contribution of this early era, along with educational interventions that are still used in special education, was the nascent notion that people with
disabilities were not criminals or useless but were capable of at least some level of mainstream functioning away from the traditional segregation of the asylum (Kavale & Mostert, 2004). Although disability was much more understood by the beginning of the 20th
century than previously, distinguishing among the varying special needs of distinct
special populations was less clear (e.g., mild intellectual disability was thought of as a
10/14/11 5:45 PM
26
Mark P. Mostert
form of behavior disorder; new categories were invented constantly from 1910 on). The
waves of immigrants to the United States from Europe, many of whom did not speak
English or who were considered second-class citizens, complicated the picture. Many
immigrant children, therefore, were considered inferior and in need of specialized
classes or even separate educational confinement.
The most critically important policy decision made at this time was the move to
compulsory schooling for all children in the United States, beginning in the 1870s and
completed by 1918 (Winzer, 1993). As compulsory schooling developed, the lack of
academic performance of children with disabilities was in stark contrast to their
nondisabled peers. For several decades thereafter, children with disabilities were placed
in separate segregated settings where individualized educational efforts developed, albeit
slowly. However, not all children and youth with disabilities were educated in public
schools even with the compulsory attendance policy. This state of affairs existed until the
late 1950s and early 1960s when a number of educational, parental, and legal advocates
fought for better services for disabled children, most significantly in pressing both the
states and the federal government to acknowledge and serve this population.
Advocacy
By the 1950s, several parents organizations, as well as the long-standing Council for
Exceptional Children (founded in 1922), together with informal advocacy entities, sought
more accessibility and support from public education for children and youth with disabilities. Indeed, along with concerned professionals, it was the press of parent advocacy
that resulted in the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (EHCA). For
the general population, these developments have increased awareness of disability issues
and fostered a greater level of acceptance of people with disabilities in all strata of society.
The impact of people with disabilities being fully included is perhaps best reflected in the
appearance in the popular media of persons with disabilities as role models and as people
who are no longer marginalized and ignored. In sum, disability advocates, persons with
disabilities, and the legal system have collectively advanced the cause immensely.
By the 1960s, the federal government had moved toward providing some special
education resources and also, in small ways, to forge legislation that would recognize
children and youth with disabilities and their need for services. It is generally accepted
that the first two public laws directing support for training special educators for children
with IDs were the Education of Mentally Retarded Children Act of 1958 and the Indian
Affairs Laws and Treaties Act (1959). Other laws soon followed, including the Teachers of
the Deaf Act (1961). Perhaps the next milestone was the enactment of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act (1965) and the State Schools Act (1965), both of which
directed financial resources to the states to support the education of children and youth
with disabilities.
Having firmly established an awareness of the plight of children and youth with
disabilities at the primary and secondary levels, legislators then turned their attention
toaddress early childhood education via the Handicapped Childrens Early Education
Assistance Act (1968). In addition to these legal statutes, litigation, particularly the
cases of Pennsylvania Association of Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of
10/14/11 5:45 PM
27
Pennsylvania (1971) and Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia (1972),
clarified the obligation of the states to pay for special education.
Although these legal milestones set the scene for federal and state recognition of people with disabilities, it was perhaps a section of a 1973 law that finally set the stage for
comprehensive disability-specific legislation. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973 established the right of people with disabilities to accommodations in any workplace that received federal funding. Two years later, in 1975, Congress passed the landmark Education for All Handicapped Children Act. A primary thrust for EHCA was to
ensure that children and youth with disabilities, many of whom had previously been
denied public education based solely on their disability, be included and served in public
schools. EHCA articulated the following fundamental principles:
Zero reject. Public schools are required to educate all children and youth with disabilities, irrespective of the disabilitys severity or support cost.
Identification. Procedures and processes to accurately identify the specific disability
and relevant category for the delivery of special education services.
Free, appropriate, public education. Public education paid for by the state in an appropriate setting with appropriate educational and supporting services.
Due process. The right of parents or caregivers to redress for any partor all of the
processat any level.
Parent/guardian surrogate consultation. The right of parents or legal surrogates to be
consulted at every phase of the special education process.
Least restrictive environment. The right of the child, given the childs unique composite of academic strengths and weaknesses, to be educated in a setting that will
allow optimum performance (that is, the least restriction on progress) as close to
the general education classroom as possible but as far from the general education
class as necessary.
Individualized education program (IEP). A formal, legal document describing all facets
of the process from identification to final assessment; the academic roadmap for
moving the special education student toward improved academic performance.
Nondiscriminatory evaluation. The right of the child to be evaluated with formal or
informal instruments, free of obvious bias.
Confidentiality. The right for children and families to have all information revealed in
the special education process kept confidential and on a need-to-know basis only.
Personnel development and in-service training. Developing skills and practices among all
involved personnel to better serve children and youth with disabilities in schools.
The EHCA (1975) delineated specific disability categories. These were IDs, LDs,
emotional and behavioral disorders, communication disorders, deafness and hearing
impairment, blindness and visual impairment, physical disabilities and other health
impairments, and severe/multiple disabilities.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
28
Mark P. Mostert
The EHCA was reauthorized and updated in 1986, extending support services to
children with disabilities from ages 3 to 5 and encouraging states to provide supports for
those from birth to 2 years. This reauthorization also added an early childhood version
of the IEP, the Individual Family Service Plan.
Further amendments were added in 1990. The name was changed to the Individuals
With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Building on the premises and successes of the
EHCA, the IDEA focused on problems related to implementing special education policy
and practice. It shifted the focus toward higher performance expectations for children
and youth with disabilities in schools and provided a legislative understanding that these
students had a right to enter fully into society as educated, self-sufficient, and productive
citizens. To this end, aside from the traditional IEP, IDEA legislated the individualized
transition plan (ITP) that acknowledges the need for support for children and youth
with disabilities in transitioning from school to adulthood. IDEA also stipulated the
implementation of behavioral plans and added two more categories that would qualify
for special services under special education law: autism (now autism spectrum disorders)
and traumatic brain injury. It further acknowledged the need to serve children and
youth with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, although not as a separate special
education category.
A reauthorization in 2004 renamed the act the Individuals With Disabilities Education
Improvement Act. It revised procedures for the identification of LDs, stipulated that
special education teachers be highly qualified, and provided for alternative settings for
children and youth prone to violence.
The No Child Left Behind Act

A recent federal law that impacts children and youth with disabilities is the No Child
Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001). The NCLB rests on two bedrock components. First, all
children and youth in schools, including those with disabilities, are able to learn and
these expectations are reflected in teaching and other education practices. Second,
the NCLB stipulates that all students be held accountable for their academic performance, as are their teachers, schools, districts, and states. Optimistically, the law also
calls for 100% proficiency in reading and mathematics for public school children and
youth by 2012.
The Americans With Disabilities Act

Although not specifically aimed at K to 12 education, the chief impetus of the Americans
With Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 was to prevent discrimination against people with
disabilities in the public realm such as in employment, public services, and environmental accommodations. The ADA applies to all businesses that employ 15 or more people,
requiring employers to provide reasonable accommodation for employees with disabilities so that they can meet their job performance requirements.
The law is clear on two often misunderstood points. First, reasonable accommodations
must be made, such as modifying workspace or devices, but not accommodations that
are extraordinarily onerous for the employer, such as very expensive or disruptive adjustments. Second, the employee with the disability must be qualified for the job, and the
10/14/11 5:45 PM
29
disability cannot be used to excuse inappropriate conduct as defined by the employer for
all employees.
C H I L DR E N A N D YOU T H W I T H DI S A BI L I T I E S
Generally, children and youth with disabilities are considered to be those who require
special education as a means of optimally accessing their individual academic and social
potential. They require an array of services such as including relatively benign support
such as the adaptation of curriculum material. Others may require specific special
education teaching interventions such as Direct Instruction, a very specific behavioral
technique that uses small-group teaching, probes, and much reinforcement. Or children
may need equipment such as walkers or assistive communication devices. A number of
students may need specialized facilities such as separate classrooms or day treatment
programs, which may require related services that can include medical professionals,
psychotherapists, and so on (Hallahan, Kauffman, & Pullen, in press).
As a population, children and youth in need of special education are extremely diverse
in their characteristics with disabilities ranging from mild to severe and from physical
disabilities to cognitive impairments. Overall, Hallahan et al. (in press) note that approximately 10 of every 100 public school children and youth (approximately 6 million students) are served in special education programs.
For the last several decades, educators of children and youth with disabilities have
acknowledged that interventions and services should be delivered in contexts as close to
the general education classroom as possible while simultaneously recognizing that
placement needs to be as far from the general education classroom as necessary for
optimal academic progress (Mostert, 19992000). However, such placement options are
for academic endeavors rather than other parts of the school day such as lunchtime and
school assemblies when students with disabilities are mainstreamed with their general
education peers.
PR E VA L E NC E , OPP ORT U N I T Y, A N D AC C E S S
Historically, there have been significant changes in the prevalence in disability categories
as definitions have evolved or when special education categories have been changed. For
example, after the establishment of LD as a separate category, the incidence of those
identified with mild ID decreased with a concomitant increase in the number of children
and youth identified as LD. This was also the case when autism, previously included in
the emotional/behavior disorder category, was added as a separate federal special education category. Migration to the autism category meant that fewer children and youth
were classified as EBD.
Because of definitional differences among the states, highly accurate prevalence figures
in some special education categories such as LD, ID, and emotional/behavior disorder
vary from state to state. Prevalence numbers tend to be firmer in categories that are medically discernable and of low incidence, such as spina bifida, paraplegia, and blindness.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
30
Mark P. Mostert
Although many children and youth are identified for special education services,
significant evidence exists that some categories may be over- or underrepresented. For
example, it is generally held that minority students in the United States are overidentified for special education (Blanchett, 2006), whereas the category of EBD is significantly
underidentified (Kauffman & Landrum, 2009). This also holds true between male and
females. Males are identified in both the EBD and LD categories in overwhelmingly disproportionate numbers to their female counterparts (Share & Silva, 2003).
Furthermore, students with disabilities have accounted for a disproportionate
number of high school dropouts, a phenomenon that appears to be increasing under
the stipulations of the NCLB. Dropout rates among special education populations
differ by disability, from roughly 17% for youth with autism and those with visual
impairment to 61% of those with EBD. Overall, approximately 51% of students with
disabilities graduate with a regular high school diploma (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2009).
QUA L I F Y I NG S T U DE N T S F OR S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION

Public schools in the United States follow a legally mandated path in identifying and
serving children with disabilities. Generally, classroom teachers are first to notice inadequate academic progress and are usually the educational professionals who initiate the
process for possible identification of a student in need of special education services. The
process for special education placement is outlined below.
Referral. The first step in the process is referral for a comprehensive evaluation of a childs
academic and other strengths and weaknesses. The referral procedure assumes that the
classroom teacher has comprehensively attempted to address the students academic and
related problems and that these interventions have been documented as reflective of
further and more specialized intervention.
Assessment. Formal assessment is usually conducted by special education teachers and
school psychologists. The process includes administering standardized achievement tests,
often an IQ test, and formal behavioral evaluations. Informal assessment data such as
classroom observations and teacher interviews are collected, along with any relevant family and other contextual information. This provides the most comprehensive picture of
the childs current abilities and, if they are found to exist, disabilities. The assessment
must clearly show that progress in the general education classroom without any additional help or support is unrealistic.
Disability designation. The comprehensive assessment will reveal the presence and nature
of a disability. Based on this information, a determination for eligibility for special education services will be made and the child classified into one of the disability categories
mandated under federal and state law.
IEP development. The multidisciplinary team developing the IEP consists of many if
not all of the stakeholders involved in the assessment process, usually teachers, the
10/14/11 5:45 PM
31
educational psychologist, parents, and legal guardians as well as an administrator and,

where appropriate, the student. The participants jointly develop the IEP, effectively laying out interventions and benchmarks for academic and behavioral improvement. The
resulting document is legally binding.
Special education placement. The details of the IEP determine the special education setting
in which the individualized instruction will be executed and can range anywhere from
the general education classroom with support and accommodations to homebound or
hospital settings, depending on the nature and severity of the disability.
Evaluation of progress. Evaluation of progress toward the goals of the IEP consists of both
formal and informal curriculum assessments, annual evaluations, and usually a major
reevaluation every 3 years. At this time, the IEP may be modified, retained, or discontinued depending on the childs progress or lack thereof.
Aside from this formal process, there are several other important areas that impact the
entire referral and placement sequence. The next section outlines these areas.
C ON DUC T A N D DI S C I PL I N E
Despite their classification, children and youth with disabilities are not immune from
criminal and other sanctions for inappropriate behavior. Specifically, the amendments to the IDEA (1997) included provisions disciplining children and youth in
the same way as their nondisabled counterparts such as by suspension or a change in
educational setting. If the suspension and/or placement change exceeds 10 days, special education law provides for a manifestation determination hearing to determine
whether the behavior was caused by the students identified disability. If this is found
to be the case, adjustments are made to the IEP to address the issue. If the behavior
is found not to be a result of the disability, the student is sanctioned in the same way
as his or her nondisabled peers.
M U LT IC U LT U R A L A N D BI L I NGUA L S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION

Although figures vary, a large group of school-age children come from language-minority
homes and therefore have limited English proficiency. These students are primarily concentrated in the southwestern United States and in all heavily urbanized areas. Given
the nations increasing diversity, bilingual special education has become important in
meeting the needs of children who do not speak English as their primary language (U.S.
Department of Education, 2011b).
The key issue with this group is how to effectively distinguish between the effects of culture
and limited English proficiency, as these factors understandably impact education in English
and whether those among this population are disabled both in their own language and in
terms of educational achievement in schools. Some evidence shows that these issues are at
least partially responsible for the chronic problems of disproportionate representations of
minority groups in special education, especially for males (Kearns, Ford, & Linney, 2005).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
32
Mark P. Mostert
Thus, educators must ensure that assessment and interventions are evidence-based, for
example, curriculum-based measurement, response to intervention, and Direct Instruction.
T R A N S I T ION
A recent area of emphasis has been focused on assuring a smooth transition from school
to work or higher education for youth with disabilities. Indeed, IDEA (2004) specifies
that all youth in special education by their 14th year be afforded clear and attainable
plans for this transition within the IEP. The transition emphasis was the result of more
children and youth being included in general education and higher expectations for
academic achievement that translated into more high school graduates and therefore
meant an increased flow of youth with disabilities into higher education and full-time
employment (deFur & Korinek, 2008).
Predictably, youth with disabilities tend to transition to employment less successfully
than their nondisabled peers (Heward, 2009). They also tend to work more in part-time
than full-time positions commensurate with their nondisabled cohorts (Frank &
Sitlington, 2000). Although recent trends of employability appear somewhat positive,
youth with disabilities as a group still face immense challenges in being included in the
workforce as well as in higher education.
C ON T E X T UA L FAC T OR S
Opportunity and access are also impacted by, but are not limited to, the following:
Urban versus rural settings. The majority of special education students live in urban areas,
although there is a significant interest in rural special education (Sundeen & Wienke,
2009). In urban schools, educators face a unique set of challenges, including limited
English proficiency, student home life instability, and significant student health issues.
Urban children are much more likely to live in poverty than their rural counterparts and
are also much more likely to receive free or reduced-priced lunches than rural students
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). Urban schools generally have higher
enrollments, fewer resources, less control of the curriculum, and higher rates of teacher
absenteeism and behavior problems than their suburban or rural counterparts. Consequently, educational endeavors are seriously affected, resulting in higher dropout rates
and lower levels of academic performance. For rural settings, significant challenges also
exist. These relate to recruitment and retention of special educators, lower pay, greater
geographical isolation, and generally fewer available resources than in suburban schools
(Collins, 2007).
Gender differences. Although males are disproportionately represented in many special
education categories, it is possible to argue that females may be underserved in special
education, especially because they are more likely than males to engage in internally
rather than externally inappropriate behaviors such as depression or suicidal ideation
instead of physical aggression (Furlong, Morrison, & Jimerson, 2004). Further, although
males with disabilities are disproportionally represented, posthigh school girls with
10/14/11 5:45 PM
33
disabilities fare less well than their male counterparts in both employment and higher
education (Mostert & Spaulding, 2011).
Aside from the factors mentioned above, Hallahan et al. (in press) note the following
as intervening factors that may cause children to develop disabilities or have them
exaggerated:
Poverty. There is evidence that poverty generally decreases educational and social
opportunities and may increase the incidence of disabilities either benignly (e.g., less
attention to school readiness) or overtly (e.g., disability cased by poor nutrition or
malnutrition).
Teenage pregnancy. Although the incidence of teenage pregnancy seems to have stabilized
over the last several years, most evidence demonstrates that teenage mothers children
are at higher risk for disability than their older peers.
Poor prenatal care and nutrition. Babies who are born to mothers who have had little or no
access to prenatal care as well as mothers poor nutrition or substance abuse while pregnant tend to raise the probability of a child being born with a disability.
Low birth weight. As a group, children born with lower birth weights tend to have more
medical problems than those carried to term for obvious medical and developmental reasons.
Environmental hazards. Environmental hazards have long been known to cause some
forms of disability; for example, ingestion of lead paint particles causing ID. Also, as
infant and toddler populations continue to grow, the proportional number of other environmental hazards such as accidents will likely mean an increase in disability related
characteristics for many children.
Abuse and violence. Subjecting children to abuse and violence can obviously result in
physical or psychological injury that may result in either mild or severe physical and
psychological disability.
Curbs on social services. The intent of social services is to assist and support families who
are the most at risk for disability. Cutting or ending these services likely increases the
chances of children developing a disability or having their disabilities exacerbated.
T E AC H I NG A N D L E A R N I NG I N T H E E A R LY Y E A R S
A long-established general concept holds that the earlier academic and other problems
are identified and attended to, the greater the likelihood of the problem being eradicated or at least not exacerbated. Although conducting research on this group is beset
by many ethical and design difficulties, the general consensus is that such intervention is
able to minimize or even prevent many disabilities (Heward, 2009).
In special education, early intervention targets children from birth to 2 years old and
consists of an interrelated set of supports and services such as family, nutrition, and
10/14/11 5:45 PM
34
Mark P. Mostert
therapy designed to offset the effects of a disability or to prevent a disability from
occurring. Early childhood special education is usually applied to those 3 to 5 years old and
provides educational and related services (Heward, 2009). In 2005 to 2006, approximately
294,000 children in the United States were served in this category (Heward, 2009).
Early childhood intervention efforts support not only the child with disabilities, but
also the familygenerally acknowledged as the first line of disability support. Depending on the child and the nature of the disability, services are provided via hospital-,
home-, or center-based programs (Hallahan et al., in press). Early childhood special
educators are trained as experts in assessment, child-focused interventions, family-based
practices, interdisciplinary educational models, and the use and application of technology (Council for Exceptional Children, 2011).
I N S T RUC T ION A L PL AC E M E N T
Although federal statutes do not prescribe special education class size, many states have
stipulations limiting the size of special education classrooms. Special education classes
are almost smaller than general education classes under the assumption that children
and youth with disabilities need more intensive and individualized help.
L E A S T R E S T R IC T I V E E N V I RON M E N T
Contrary to popular opinion, a majority of children with disabilities are served in
general education settings. However, under the least restrictive environment requirement, children and youth with disabilities must be served as close to the general education classroom as possible but as far from it as necessary given their individual learning
and behavioral characteristics. The notion of a continuum of services and placements
provides the bedrock of U.S. special education and practice. Educational environments
therefore range from placement in the general education classroom along with support,
to increasing restrictiveness and finally to residential school settings.
Although the least restrictive environment requirement assumes a continuum of
services and placements, the mainstreaming and inclusion movements have skewed
placement debates in favor of the general education setting over any other, regardless of
students needs (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Stecker, 2010). As a result, while many students with
disabilities do well in general education there is little doubt that others, given their specific needs, are inappropriately placed (Zigmond, 2003). Further, this press toward full
inclusion diminishes and may even cancel out the most fundamental foundation of special education: that each child has different and unique abilities and disabilities and
therefore must have an individualized program of education that will in turn determine
physical placement.
Much of the inclusion debate has focused on the physical placement of children and
youth with disabilities, that is, placement in the general education classroom or closest
to it, depending on the unique characteristics of the child. Yet, the more important issue
is the quality and relevance of instruction and interventions irrespective of physical placement (Kavale & Forness, 2000). Instructional considerations should not be subordinated
to settings in which appropriate special instruction might be less likely to occur.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
35
T EC H NOL O G Y
In U.S. classrooms, technical equipment, services, and resources are widely available.
Assistive technology helps children and youth with disabilities by harnessing existing
technology to support educational and social endeavors (Alper & Raharinirina, 2006).
Given the great technological advances of the 20th and early 21st centuries, there is
little doubt that people with disabilities in the United States have generally been able
to take advantage of these advances (Edyburn, 2007). For example, most sidewalks have
ramped corners for wheelchair accessibility, red lights sound prompts for the visually
impaired, and text-output telephones are available for those with hearing impairments.
The advent of computers and software programs aimed at supporting people with
disabilitiessuch as voice recognition software and screen and font enlargershas also
further ensured communal participation for people with disabilities. The notion of universal design for learning is especially helpful. It holds that by modifying materials,
means of transmission, and attention to how humans respond to these designs,
educational participation and achievement of children and youth in educational settings
will be enhanced (Jimnez, Graf, & Rose, 2007).
PA R E N T A N D T E AC H E R AT T I T U DE S T O PL AC E M E N T
Parent and teacher attitudes toward various placements for children and youth with disabilities are quite varied. Generally, parents tend to favor inclusion in less segregated
settings because these settings are thought to provide higher expectations for academic
performance, nondisabled students will benefit from being exposed to children with
disabilities, and the inclusion of students with disabilities is a morally appropriate thing
to do (Palmer, Fuller, & Arora, 2001). However, parents also voice several reservations about
more inclusive placements. Concerns include whether the type and severity of disability
might not fit the less inclusive setting; the child with a disability might not be accepted
socially; some forms of disability such as behavior problems might influence or distract
classroom peers; an academic curriculum might not be appropriate based on the disability; and appropriate services and personnel might not be available in the less restrictive
setting. These general observations appear to hold true for both parents of children with
mild and more severe disabilities (Peck, Staub, Gallucci, & Schwartz, 2004).
Overall, teachers attitudes toward children and youth with disabilities support these
populations being part of the general education classroom. However, there appears to
be little support for the general education setting as the only placement option. Another
common caveat relates to whether appropriate support is available in the general setting
or not. Further, general education teachers seem more optimistic about the achievement
predictions of children and youth with disabilities than their special education colleagues do (Swick & Hooks, 2005).
T E AC H E R S A N D PE DAG O G Y
Special education teacher education certainly existed prior to the landmark EHCA. But
the 1975 legislation increased attention to special education teacher education programs
for several reasons. First, there was a sudden influx of children and youth with disabilities
10/14/11 5:45 PM
36
Mark P. Mostert
into public schools that exponentially increased the demand for special education
teachers. Second, general education teachers did not have the skills, nor had they been
trained, to teach children with special needs. Third, overnight EHCA implemented an
entire set of conditions and requirements for which public education was poorly prepared. The situation today is much different, if not ideal.
Colleges and universities offer more than 800 special education programs and special
education teacher preparation occurs at the bachelors, masters, and doctoral levels.
Although certification requirements differ from state to state, all states require that special education teachers hold some form of complete or emergency licensure. Some states
accredit teachers via bachelors programs whereas others require completion of a masters degree. Generally, special education teachers are licensed to teach children and
youth with disabilities from kindergarten through the 12th grade. Some states specify
licensure in a particular area such as LD; others require a generic special education
credential.
As the press to full inclusion had increased, teacher training programs have begun to
respond by aligning general and special education teacher education more closely,
acknowledging that interprofessional collaboration for students with disabilities is much
more likely than in the past. This does not, however, mean that all teacher training
programs and licensure requirements are universally integrated. Indeed, completely
integrated programs are the exception rather than the norm.
T E AC H E R PR E PA R AT ION
There has been a chronic shortage of fully qualified special education teachers for several
decades (Billingsley & McLeskey, 2004). The growing disability population further exacerbates these shortages. Consequently, a significant minority of special educators is either
unqualified or not fully qualified. Further, shortages in many areas are so great that states
rely on emergency certification, which requires minimal academic work in special education thereby allowing teachers to fill classroom slots while continuing on the path to full
certification (Boe & Cook, 2006). Shortages, however, vary by special education category
and location. The most significant shortages are in urban and rural schools and among the
high incidence categories of ID, LD, and EBD (Katsiyannis, Zhang, & Conroy, 2003).
Attempts to alleviate the shortage include alternative paths to certification, mentorship programs, and online teacher training programs. There are also efforts to access
nontraditional populations such as retired military personnel or those seeking a midlife
career change for special education teacher training (Boe & Cook, 2006).
The retention of special educators within the profession also is of great concern. Many
new graduates and novice special education teachers leave within the first several years
in the field. Not all disability categories appear to have the same attrition rates, however.
Teachers of children and youth with EBD and those who teach groups of students with
different disabilities tend to be the shortest-lived professionals (Katsiyannis et al., 2003).
Overall, the attrition rate of special educators is consistently higher than that of their
general education peers, with higher attrition rates among novice than experienced
teachers. Also, there is some evidence that more teachers leave special education than
enter the profession each year (U.S. Department of Labor, 2011).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
37
Aside from teacher shortages and attrition, other challenges exist. For example, the
relationship between general and special education continues to raise challenging issues,
the division in teacher preparation in these areas notwithstanding. Generally the bifurcated nature of most teacher preparation programs means that general and special educators demonstrate areas of expertise that are sometimes mutually exclusive.
M A JOR C ON T ROV E R S I E S A N D I S S U E S
The following section highlights some major issues in special education in the United
States.
Response to treatment intervention. Perhaps the most dominant trend over the last few
years has revolved around the concept of response to treatment or response to intervention ([RTI]; Kavale, Holdnack, & Mostert, 2005). RTI has had the most effect on
the identification and support for students with LD. Within the traditional model, students suspected of having LD as evidenced by severe underachievement in the general
education classroom were referred for formal assessment. Key to identification was the
IQ-achievement discrepancy; that is, the significant gap between academic potential as
predicted by the IQ score and the students actual academic achievement.
However, this process has come to be seen as ineffective and detrimental to children
and youth with LD for several reasons. First, this meant that children would have a
significant level of underachievement and failure prior to the start of the formal identification process. Second, the notion of using IQ as a determinant for LD has become controversial both in terms of the relevancy of the test and a concerted effort to frame the IQ
test itself as discriminatory to some groups of students (Kavale et al., 2005).
RTI seeks to ameliorate this state of affairs by providing relevant remedial support
much earlier in the students academic life by continually assessing progress for quicker
intervention adjustment, providing progressively intense instruction consummate with
the students unique academic needs, and using evidence-based teaching practices. Many
RTI models exist, but they generally involve three tiers of increasingly concentrated
intervention. Tier 1 involves intense instruction in the general education classroom by
the classroom teacher. If there is little or no response, students move on to Tier 2, which
is regular and intense small group instruction. If the student does not respond in Tier 2,
he or she is referred to Tier 3 for a special education evaluation.
RTI may appear to be the latest bandwagon in special education. Indeed, there is relatively little empirical research as to its efficacy due to problems in implementation, a
range of interpretations about what practices each tier should specifically incorporate,
and the long-term impact RTI will have on raising academic achievement (Hallahan
etal., in press).
Teacher training. In the United States, teacher training for special education usually
involves limited overlap with the training of general education teachers. Whereas general educators are trained as curriculum and normal development specialists, special
educators are generally trained as behavior management and special instruction professionals. This training gap has persisted and been reinforced by traditionally quite
10/14/11 5:45 PM
38
Mark P. Mostert
separate general education and special education classrooms and programs. However,
with the trend toward full inclusion and increased collaboration between general and
special educators, teacher training institutions are beginning to explore ways of combining general and special education training to better reflect what is happening in the
classroom. These efforts, however, are quite limited and far from universal (Boe, Shin,
& Cook, 2007).
Transition to adulthood. As mentioned previously, emphasis on the transition from
school to work and adulthood has received renewed attention with the recognition
that youth with disabilities must be integrated into and become contributors to the
general society. However, many challenges remain. For example, there is a disconnect
between legal supports for children in schools and those covered by other legislation once they leave school and a shift in who is responsible for service access, which
becomes the responsibility of the adult and not any other support agency (Mostert &
Spaulding, 2011).
Disproportionality. Disproportionality of minority students in special education has
been chronic over the past 35 years and will continue into the foreseeable future.
However, there currently appears to be a great deal of focus on this issue and that may
well result in more equitable representation in the future (Artiles, Klingner, & Tate,
2006).
FUTUR E TR ENDS
The following provides a useful framework for discussing future trends in special education looking toward the next decade (after Taylor, 2006).
Disability incidence. Over the past several decades, patterns of incidence have shifted
somewhat due to definitional changes as well as the introduction of new categories of
disability (for instance, autism). Further, breakthroughs in medical research are likely
to identify an increasing number of medical and genetic disabilities that will need to be
addressed in educational settings.
Teacher shortages. The chronic shortage of special education teachers is likely to continue
and grow. Factors include the retirement of the baby boom generation, prospective
teachers seeking employment in higher-paying professions, and the possibility that rigid
accountability rules and laws will prove unattractive to some prospective educators. Further, the underrepresentation of minority teachers will need to be addressed to meet the
needs of the growing minority school-age population.
Issues related to assessment and academic performance. With the advent of NCLB, participation in assessment for academic skill mastery by special education students will continue
to be of concern. Further, the match between empirically based best practices and assessment outcomes will continue to be problematic in terms of the research to practice
gap. These pressures will likely increase as U.S. education seeks to improve academic
10/14/11 5:45 PM
39
and graduation rates while simultaneously reducing dropout rates (Zhang , Katsiyannis,
& Kortering, 2007).
Technology. Special education will come to increasingly utilize technology as a means of
educational intervention, especially in terms of interactive technologies and utilization
of the Internet, the Web, and so on. As well, technology that helps to enable people with
physical or medical disabilities will become increasingly more sophisticated, allowing
students greater participation in the educational process.
Inclusion. Students with disabilities increasingly will be included in general education
and for longer periods of time, and teacher training efforts to ensure that all teachers
are able to effectively the needs of all students will continue to evolve.
Transition support. Whereas transitions within the public school system are acknowledged
and recognized as important, the transition from school to work or higher education is
less well developed. Addressing these transitions more comprehensively will ensure a
smoother move from school that will be more supportive and less adversarial than is
currently generally the case.
The family. As patterns of family composition continue to shift, and the importance
of the family unit, however defined, is recognized, there will be an increasing need to
develop new frameworks for working with those units that fall outside of the traditional
definitions of the traditional concept of family.
THE FUTURE
Historically, special education in the United States has moved, albeit unevenly, toward
support, care, and inclusion of persons with disabilities. Although imperfect, there is little
doubt that people with disabilities in the United States are recognized and participate in
society as much, or more, than in any other nation. Advocacy groups, parents, educators,
researchers, and legal advocates have succeeded in providing a host of supports and educational and social opportunities. The following are some observations about the future.
Standards-based performance. All states will continue to develop and refine assessments
to measure annual yearly progress among all students, including those with disabilities.
Special attention will need to be paid to students who, in spite of support and repeated
interventions, fail to meet benchmarks for progress. Relatedly, renewed attention needs
to be directed to whether all students can or will benefit from the general education curriculum or whether other educational configurations may be more relevant and appropriate. Also, special education teachers will increasingly be held accountable for their
students progress, or lack thereof.
The nature of disability. Although there has been general acceptance of the social model
of disability, the concept may benefit from more nuanced understandings of the nature
and circumstances of disability and the likelihood that no one model can accommodate the
10/14/11 5:45 PM
40
Mark P. Mostert
complex individuality and uniqueness of each persons disability. For example, exclusive
application of the social model tends to ignore the real challenges faced by people with
medical disabilities in terms of acknowledging the locus of the disability that is internal
rather than external.
Self-determination. The concept of self-determinationthe notion that people, including
those with disabilities, must be responsible for the decisions about their own lives rather
than have their lives determined by otherswill continue to serve as a bedrock for selfadvocacy among those in the disability community. Conversely, the expert model, still
in use everywhere, will diminish as people with disabilities take their rightful place as
independent and self-determined citizens.
Teacher training. There are two major challenges here. First, teacher training programs
will need to attract many more students than they are currently doing as a way to meet
current and future staffing demands. Second, although teacher education has made
some advancement in melding general and special education teacher training, these
efforts will need to increase if high levels of interprofessional collaboration are going to
optimally benefit children and youth with disabilities.
Interprofessional collaboration. As special education populations continue to flow into
general education classrooms, the need for professional collaboration between
general educators, special educators, and support staff will need to increase. Although
collaboration has been a priority for several decades, challenges remain in training
teachers to collaborate given that most teacher education programs are essentially separated into general and special education teacher preparation.
Response to intervention. RTI will continue to be implemented despite the paucity of
empirical research showing its efficacy. As with many other bandwagon issues in special education (Mostert, 19992000), it remains unknown whether RTI will prove to have
been overrated and implemented too quickly.
Early intervention. Although the field acknowledges the importance of early intervention
and despite laws supporting the concept, many questions remain. These include the role
of parents and families, whether infants and children should necessarily be supported in
integrated settings, and the role of the teacher versus that of parents or caregivers.
Transition to work and higher education. The press toward including more people with disabilities in the workforce and in higher education will increase as youth with disabilities
assert their right to participate in every aspect of society. Although the importance of
transitioning is acknowledged, much work needs to be done in fashioning effective transition models and in educating both higher education and the workplace about how to
accommodate and support those with disabilities.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities (UNCPD, United Nations,
2010). The United Nations and member states have long recognized that a coordinated,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
41
international response was necessary to support the approximately 700 million people with
disabilities worldwide with a specific human rights convention of their own. In general, the
UNCPD lays out a set of obligations for member states so that people with disabilities in
their countries can be protected and afforded all the rights and opportunities enjoyed by
their fellow nondisabled citizens. The UNCPD, enforced early in 2008, is likely to have a
significant impact on special education and disability issues across the globe.
R E F E R E NC E S
Adolescent Substance Abuse Knowledge Base. (2007). National drug statistics summary.
Retrieved from http://www.adolescent-substance-abuse.com/national-drug-statistics
.html.
Alper, S., & Raharinirina, S. (2006). Assistive technology for individuals with disabilities: A
review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21, 4764.
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 105-17, 42 U.S.C.A. 12101 et seq. (West
1993).
Artiles, A. J., Klingner, J. K., & Tate, W. F. (2006). Theme issue: Representation of minority
students in special education: Complicating traditional explanations: Editors introduction. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 35.
Billingsley, B. S., & McLeskey, J. (2004). Critical issues in special education teacher supply
and demand: Overview. The Journal of Special Education, 38(1), 24.
Blanchett, W. A. (2006). Disproportionate representation of African American students in
special education: Acknowledging the role of White privilege and racism. Educational
Researcher, 35(6), 2428.
Boe, E., Shin, S., & Cook, L. (2007). Does teacher preparation matter for beginning teachers
in either special or general education? Journal of Special Education, 41, 158170.
Boe, E. E., & Cook, L. H. (2006). The chronic and increasing shortage of fully certified teachers in special and general education. Exceptional Children, 72, 443460.
Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. (2003). Reducing the budget deficit. Retrieved from
http://www.cbpp.org.
Central Intelligence Agency. (2011). The world factbook: United States of America. Retrieved from
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html.
Collins, B. (2007). Issues in rural special education that affect students with severe disabilities. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 26, 39.
Council for Exceptional Children. (2011). The division for early childhood. Retrieved from
http://www.dec-sped.org/About_DEC/Recommended_Practices.
deFur, S. H., & Korinek, L. (2008). The evolution toward lifelong learning as a critical transition outcome for the 21st century. Exceptionality, 16, 178191.
Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, Pub. L. No. 94-142, 20 U.S.C.A. 1401
et seq.
Education for All Handicapped Children Act, Pub. L. No. 99-457 (1986).
Education of Mentally Retarded Children Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-926, 72 Stat. 1777
(1958).
Edyburn, D. (2007). Understanding the future of special education technology. Journal of
Special Education Technology, 22, 5859.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Pub. L. No. 89-10, 20 U.S.C.A. 70.
Frank, A. R., & Sitlington, P. L. (2000). Young adults with mental disabilities: Does transition
planning make a difference? Educational Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35, 119134.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
42
Mark P. Mostert
Fitchen, J. (1991). Homelessness in rural places: Perspectives from upstate New York. Urban
Anthropology, 20, 177210.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Stecker, P. M. (2010). The blurring of special education in a new continuum of general education placements and services. Exceptional Children, 76, 301323.
Furlong, M. J., Morrison, G. M., & Jimerson, S. (2004). Externalizing behaviors of aggression and
violence and the school context. In R. B. Rutherford, M. M. Quinn, & Mathur, S. R. (Eds.),
Handbook of research in emotional and behavioral disorders, 243261. New York: Guilford.
Hallahan, D. P., Kauffman, J. M., & Pullen, P. C. (in press). Exceptional learners: An introduction
to special education. Boston: Prentice-Hall.
Handicapped Childrens Early Education Assistance Act of 1968, Pub. L. No. 90-538, 20
U.S.C.A. 621 et seq.
Heward, W. L. (2009). Exceptional children: An introduction to special education. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Merrill.
Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties Act of 1959, Pub. L. No. 86-158, 73 U.S.C.A. 339.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. 1415 et seq.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-466, 20
U.S.C. 1401 et seq.
Itard, J. M. G. (1962). The wild boy of Aveyron. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Jimnez, T., Graf, V., & Rose, E. (2007). Gaining access to general education: The promise of
universal design for learning. Issues in Teacher Education, 16, 4154.
Katsiyannis, A., Zhang, D., & Conroy, M. A. (2003). Availability of special education teachers:
Trends and issues. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 246.
Kauffman, J. M., & Landrum, T. J. (2009). Politics, civil rights, and disproportional identification of students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Exceptionality, 17, 177188.
Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (2000). What definitions of learning disability say and dont say.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 239256.
Kavale, K. A., Holdnack, J., & Mostert, M. P. (2005). Responsiveness to intervention and the
identification of specific learning disability: A critique and alternative proposal. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28, 116.
Kavale, K. A., & Mostert, M. P. (2004). The positive side of special education: A history of fads, fancies, and follies. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
Kearns, T., Ford, L., & Linney, J. A. (2005). African American student representation in special education programs. The Journal of Negro Education, 74, 297310.
Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia. (1972). 348. F. Supp. 866.
Mostert, M. P. (19992000). A partial etiology of discriminative disability: Bandwagons and
beliefs. Exceptionality, 8, 117132.
Mostert, M. P., & Spaulding, L. (2011). Challenges for adults with learning disabilities. In
M. London (Ed.), Oxford handbook of lifelong learning (pp. 424442). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Nansel, T., Overpeck, M., Pilla, R., Ruan, W., Simons-Morton, B., & Scheidt, P. (2001). Bullying behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 20942100.
National Conference of State Legislatures. (2011). The immigrant policy project. Retrieved from
http://www.ncsl.org/Default.aspx?TabId=13146.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-11020, U.S.C.A. 70 6301 et seq.
Nord, M., & Luloff, A. E. (1995). Homeless children and their families in New Hampshire: A
rural perspective. Social Science Review, 463478.
Palmer, D. S., Fuller, K., & Arora, T. (2001). Taking sides: Parent views on inclusion for their
children with severe disabilities. Exceptional Children, 67, 467484.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
43
Peck, C. A., Staub, D., Gallucci, C., & Schwartz, I. (2004). Parent perception of the impacts
of inclusion on their nondisabled child. Research & Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 29, 135143.
Pennsylvania Association of Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
334 F. Supp. 1257 (1971).
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Pub. L. No. 93-112, C.F.R. 104.35(c) 504, 34.
Rhim, L. M., Ahearn, E. M., & Lange, C. M. (2007). Charter school statutes and special education: Policy answers or policy ambiguity? Journal of Special Education, 41, 5063.
Share, D. L., & Silva, P. A. (2003). Gender bias in IQ-discrepancy and post-discrepancydefinitions
of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 414.
State Schools Act of 1965, Pub. L. No. 89-313.
Sundeen, T., & Wienke, W. (2009). A model for recruiting and preparing new rural special
educators: Mining an untapped potential. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 28, 310.
Swick, K., & Hooks, L. (2005). Parental experiences and beliefs regarding inclusive placements of their special needs children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 32, 397402.
Taylor, G. R. (2006). Trends in special education: Projections for the next decade. Lewiston, NY:
Edwin Mellen Press.
Teachers of the Deaf Act of 1961, Pub. L. No. 87-276, 75 Stat. 575.
United Nations. (2010). Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities. Retrieved
from http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?navid=13&pid=150.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). 2010 Census Summary. Retrieved from http://2010.census.gov/
2010census.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2011a). Urban
schools: The challenge of location and poverty. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/
web/96184ex.asp.
U.S. Department of Education. (2011b). Office of English Language Acquisition. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/index.html.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). The digest
of education statistics, Table 51. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display
.asp?id=59.
U.S. Department of Health. (2009). Results from the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and
Health: Mental health findings. Retrieved from http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/NSDUH/
2k9NSDUH/MH/2K9MHResults.htm#1.1.
U.S. Department of Labor. (2011). Occupational outlook handbook, 201011. Retrieved from
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos070.htm.
U.S. Department of State. (2011). U.S. education. Retrieved from http://www.ait.org.tw/
infousa/enus/education/index.html.
U.S. Government. (2011). Jobs, education, and volunteerism. Retrieved from http://www.usa.gov/
Citizen/Topics/Education_Training.shtml.
Virginia Youth Violence Project. (2011). Violence in schools. Retrievedfrom http://youthviolence
.edschool.virginia.edu/violence-in-schools/home.html.
Wilhelm, G., & Firmin, M. (2009). Historical and contemporary developments in home
school education. Journal of Research on Christian Education, 18, 303315.
Winzer, M. A. (1993). The history of special education: From isolation to integration. Washington,
DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Zhang, D., Katsiyannis, A., & Kortering, L. J. (2007). Performance on exit exams by students
with disabilities: A four-year analysis. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 30,
4857.
Zigmond, N. (2003). Where should children with disabilities receive special services? Journal
of Special Education, 37, 193199.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
2
Celebrating the
Challenges: Tracking
the Inclusive Reform
in Canada
Margret A. Winzer
Canada, the third largest country in the world, sprawls across more than 9 million square
kilometers between the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic Oceans. The nation is a federation
of 10 provinces and 3 territories: British Columbia, Alberta, and Manitoba comprise
Western Canada; Central Canada consists of Ontario and Quebec; the Atlantic provinces
are New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Prince Edward
Island; and Northern Canada is made up of 3 territoriesNorthwest Territories, Yukon,
and Nunavut.
In 2009, the total population of Canada was 33.6 million. The enormous geographical
spaces give rise to significant regionalization and great diversity. Ontario is the most
populous province with 13 million inhabitants followed by Quebec with 7.8 million persons. The two smallest provinces are Newfoundland and Labrador and Prince Edward
Island. The average population density is only 3.5 people per square kilometer, but the
population is spread unevenly. More than 80% of Canadians lives in urban areas; 45% of
the population lives in six metropolitan areas (Statistics Canada and the Council of
Ministers of Education, Canada, 2007). Most new immigrants to Canada settle in Toronto,
Vancouver, or Montreal.
T H E S O C I A L FA BR IC
Canada is a settler nation. With the exception of the Native people, all Canadians are
immigrants or descendants of immigrants. The nation has traditionally depended on
a large and sustained flow of immigration, and the dominant role of immigration in
demographic growth remains potent today. Two-thirds of population growth comes
from immigration (Statistics Canada and the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada,
2007).
Until the 1970s, the Canadian population was of chiefly European ancestry. During
the 1970s and 80s, enormous demographic changes transformed Canada into a
multicultural and multiethnic nation with citizens representing more than 200 different
ethnic origins, large groups of identifiable racial minorities, the presence of multiple
languages, and unique traditions and cultures. According to the 2006 census, 19.8% of
the populationmore than 6 million peoplewere foreign born. This accounts for an
increase of 13.6% between 2001 and 2006, four times higher than the growth rate for the
Canadian-born population in the same period. More than 5 million people identified
themselves as members of a visible minority group, accounting for 16.2% of the overall
44
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Celebrating the Challenges
45
population (Statistics Canada and the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, 2007).
Roughly one out of every five people in Canada, or between 19 and 23% of the nations
population, could be a member of a visible minority when Canada celebrates its 150th
anniversary in 2017 (Statistics Canada, 2005).
About 4% of the population identify as one of three Aboriginal groupsNorth
American Indians, Metis, or Inuit. Almost half of the Aboriginal population consists of
children and youth aged 24 and under, as compared with 31% of the non-Aboriginal
population. About half of Aboriginal people live on reserves. In the year 2008 to 2009,
119,000 elementary and secondary students lived on reserves throughout Canada. The
education of Native students on reserves is a treaty right and the obligation of the federal
government (Phillips, 2010).
Canadians spoke more than 200 languages in 2006. About 58% of the population
speaks English as their first language; 22% speak French; and 20% speak another
language. Besides languages that have long been associated with immigration German,
Italian, Dutch, Ukrainian, and Polishan increase in speakers of Chinese languages,
Punjabi, Arabic, Urdu, Tagalog, and Tamil (Lessard, n.d.) has occurred.
G E N E R A L S C HO OL S Y S T E M
Canadas education system is decentralized, complex, and multilevel. There is no federal
department of education and no integrated national system of education. Section 93
of the constitutional framework as originally set out in 1867 provided that [I]n and
for each province, the legislature may exclusively make Laws in relation to Education.
The reenacted Constitution Act of Canada of 1982 confers responsibility for all matters
relating to education to each province. In the 13 jurisdictions, departments or ministries
of education are responsible for the organization, delivery, and assessment of education
at the elementary and secondary levels. Postsecondary systems have various degrees of
autonomy from provincial and territorial government control.
The exception is the education of Native children living on reserves for whom the federal
government is constitutionally responsible in terms of general and special education. However, an education act for Native students doesnt exist; for students who are exceptional,
there are policies and guidelines, but no special education law (Phillips, 2010).
Within the guaranteed services in the provinces and territories, access to education is
protected by legislation, regulations, policies, and procedures to ensure that all children
and youth receive a free and appropriate education. Public education is free to all
Canadians at primary and secondary levels provided they meet various age and residence
requirements.
Canada has approximately 15,500 schools with 310,000 teachers (Statistics Canada and
the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, 2007). About 93% of Canadian students
attend publicly funded institutions at the primary and secondary levels. Private schools
are relatively rare. The independent or private schools vary from one another some are
religion based, others center on a particular philosophy or pedagogy, some focus on
cramming, and some are elite. In 1994, the Alberta government offered charter schools
private schools within the public system. There are now about a dozen charter schools in
existence (Lessard, n.d.).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
46
Margret A. Winzer
Canadian jurisdictions set high expectations for student achievement and participate
in international exams such as the Programme for International Student Assessment
(PISA) and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMMS) to
benchmark standards. In general, Canadian students perform above Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) averages, although there are
pronounced provincial variations.
In 2008, Canada ranked sixth highest among members of the OECD in its share of
young adults with a high school certificate. Only 8.1% of Canadians in the relevant age
groups lacked a certificate as compared with the OECD average of 20% (OECD, 2010).
On the other hand, the dropout rate of 8.5% is of concern, particularly in rural areas
and small towns. Over the 2007 to 2010 period, the high school dropout rate in large
cities averaged 7.9%; outside of these cities, the rate was 15.5%. The male share of the
dropout population continues to rise, with five males now dropping out for every
three females (Richards, 2011).
Provincial education rights are guarded jealously and there exist considerable
influential variations. Provinces differ with respect to legislation, policy, curriculum,
assessment and accountability practices, compulsory schooling ages, and teachers
salaries, among other areas. There are 17 provincial and territorial teachers associations,
of which all but 2 are affiliated with the encompassing Canadian Teachers Federation
([CTF]; Rottmann, 2008).
DE V E L OPM E N T OF S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION

In both historical and contemporary terms, Canadian special education has tended to
follow the American model. Educational issueslegislative, administrative, curricular,
and inclusiveare directly influenced by events, philosophies, research, and pedagogy
from the United States. Egerton Ryerson, prominent in both the foundation of Canadas
common schools and special institutions, wrote that it was the United States to whose
example and experience we are so much indebted for the establishment and success
of our Canadian School system (Ryerson, 1868, p. 150). In establishing institutional
settings, the provinces followed the customary practice of borrowing heavily from
American experience (Ontario Inspector of Prisons, Asylums, and Public Charities,
1878, p. 2). By about 1910, segregated classes for students with disabilities, founded on
American models, were seriously addressed in the public schools.
With special classes in place, the numbers and types of exceptionalities served
expanded rapidly. By 1953, seven provinces had incorporated permissive legislation into
their school laws authorizing local school systems to establish special classes (Dunn &
McNeill, 1953/54).
Placement in institutions, special schools, and particularly special classes remained
the common mode in the education of students with exceptionalities into the 1960s.
But this decade marked the onset of a simmering controversy revolving around the
tension between training students with exceptional conditions to fit into so-called normal
society and training them separately in special, segregated settings in regard to their
unique needs. New professional constructs emerged, supported by varied factors such as
parent pressure, legislation, litigation, a series of efficacy studies about special classes,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
47
exposs of the deplorable conditions in institutions, and the normalization movement.

Integration became a popular item of discussion, if not action (Winzer, 2009).
Throughout the 1970s, intense scrutiny of the knowledge and practices of special
education continued; simultaneously, discontent with special classes peaked. Prompted
by internal pressures and stimulated by the seminal American legislation, the Education
for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, Canadian jurisdictions acted to form the
statutory and operational frameworks to define and facilitate special services for students
with exceptionalities. The 1980s saw dramatic increases in the number of students
mainstreamed into general classrooms. When the term inclusion emerged in the professional literature in 1984, Canadian jurisdictions readily adopted the liberal tones. The
philosophical underpinnings of the movement were unequivocally accepted and the
inclusion of students with exceptionalities into neighbourhood schools and general
classrooms progressed rapidly.
L EG I S L AT I V E AC T I V I T Y
In the Canadian federal arena, interpretation of a solid legal framework of interlocking
laws supports the right of children and youth with exceptionalities to be educated
with their peers. The federal and supreme law, the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms, overrides all provincial legislation. Under Section 15 of the charter, every
individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection of
the law without discrimination and in particular, without discrimination based on race,
national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age, or mental or physical disability. The
Citizenship Act provides that all Canadians, whether by birth or by choice, are entitled
to the same rights, powers, and privileges and are subject to the same obligations, duties,
and liabilities. The Canadian Multiculturalism Act provides that the:
Government of Canada recognizes the diversity of Canadians as regards to race,
national or ethnic origin, colour or religion as a fundamental characteristic of
Canadian society and is committed to a policy of multiculturalism designed to
preserve and enhance the multicultural heritage of Canadians while working to
achieve the equality of all Canadians in the economic, social, cultural, and
political life in Canada.
The Canadian Human Rights Act gives effect to the principle that all individuals should
have equal opportunities. Discrimination is prohibited on the basis of race, national or
ethnic origin, color, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status,
disability, and conviction for which a pardon has been granted.
Canadas 13 provincial and territorial jurisdictions are all committed to education
reform and innovations, to the principles and practices of inclusive education at all
levels, and to eliminating the discriminatory aspects of noninclusion. The modernization
of jurisdictional legislation and policies to reflect the tenets of inclusive education is
ongoing, although it is virtually impossible to pinpoint to what extent each province and
territory has progressed. In the year 2000 alone, for example, five provinces undertook
comprehensive reviews of special education policies and programs (Valentine, 2001).
Several provinces are currently reviewing their policies and funding frameworks in an
10/14/11 5:45 PM
48
Margret A. Winzer
effort to better respond to the needs of increasingly diverse populations. For example,
Alberta has reviewed its policies (Alberta Education, 2008); Newfoundland and Labrador
have undergone a major review (McBride, 2008).
Litigation
In Canada, the emphasis on using the power of the courts to settle disputes of an
educational nature is less pronounced than in the United States. Nevertheless, recent
years have seen a marathon of court cases stimulated by three connected factorsthe
principles of the inclusion movement, the willingness of advocacy groups to support
parents, and interpretations of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. When
parents initiate litigation, they may ask that a school district provide special services
or extend the amount of services; alternately, they may view the general classroom as
the most appropriate educational setting and disagree with decisions regarding their
childs placement. In both Canada and the United States, increases in autism and the
promises of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) have led to mounting litigation by parents
(see Nelson & Huefner, 2003).
T H E I NC LUS I V E AG E N DA
Diversity, equality, and inclusion are critical principles in Canadian legislation, policy,
and public life. If inclusion is viewed as a subset of the more general mandate to serve
all children in Canadas pluralistic society, almost everyone agrees with the goals in
principle. Canada was one of the first countries to sign the United Nations Convention on
the Rights of Persons With Disabilities in 2007. In March 2010, the federal government,
with the support of all the provinces and territories, ratified the convention at the United
Nations headquarters in New York and thereby underscored the governments complete
commitment to the goal of full societal participation for persons with disabilities (Canada
News, 2010, p. 1). The government claims that, Canada is committed to promoting and
protecting the rights of persons with disabilities and enabling their full participation in
society (Canada News, 2010, p. 1). Further, Canadians feel that people with disabilities
should have the opportunity to participate in life to their fullest potentialthat this is
part of the Canadian way of doing things (Human Resources and Social Development
Canada, 2004, p. 5). A public poll (CTF, 2004) showed that Canadians think students with
exceptionalities should be integrated into classrooms and want more support, resources,
and experts to help. In the education context, inclusion itself is no longer an issue
(Alberta Teachers Association [ATA], 2008, p. 11). Indeed, In Canada, if we choose
to teach, we are choosing to teach in inclusive settings (Hutchinson, 2007, p. xxv).
Educators, researchers, and parents advocate that all children be educated in general
classrooms that reflect the diversity of Canadian society and its inclusive values (Lupart
& Webber, 2002; Porter, 2004). Canadian teachers want students to work together and to
blend and to partake [in] everything as a regular student (Dyson, 2007, p. 27).
In a very general sense, Canada holds to a shared purpose when addressing the
inclusion of students with exceptionalities. The term is prominent in provincial and
territorial legislation, and educational policies and procedures across the nation make
educational inclusion the dominant policy (Hutchinson, 2007). Even though the tendency
10/14/11 5:45 PM
49
to consensus on the main issues transcends both constituency and location, it is difficult
to make any broad statements about inclusive schooling across the whole of Canada. The
two major dimensions of difference are the organizational contextthe legislation and
policy underlying inclusive schooling and the service delivery modelsand plans for
bringing together students, teachers, instruction, and learning that are specific to schools
(Winzer, 2008).
In the absence of a strong national education presence and with local educational
autonomy in place, many variations in legislative provisions, policy, and inclusive practice
exist. A decentralized education system adds a further complication. School boards and
schools, as well as individual officials, teachers, and other staff members, have their own
priorities: They make different choices and respond differently to the pressures from
parents and students for particular forms of accommodation (Smith, 2007). Provincial
and territorial policies are outlined in Table 1.
Table 1. Provincial and Territorial Policies on Inclusive Education

Province/Territory
Policy
British Columbia
Legislation does not mandate full inclusion but places the

expectation on school boards that students will be integrated
unless the special needs indicate otherwise. Physical location
is not the key; the provision of appropriate services is the
practice of inclusion transcends the idea of physical location, and
incorporates basic values that promote participation, friendship
and interaction (British Columbia Ministry of Education, 1995).
Permissive legislation makes inclusion in the general classroom
the first placement option to be considered in consultation with
parents and, when appropriate, the student. Instruction, not
setting, is the key to success and decisions related to the
placement of students are best made on an individual basis in a
manner that maximizes their opportunity to participate fully
in the experience of schooling (Alberta Learning, 2002, p. 13).
Inclusion is broadly defined. The purpose of mandatory special
education legislation is to provide appropriate educational
opportunities and equitable benefits for all children and youth
with exceptional needs.
Inclusion is seen as a means of enhancing the well being of
every member of the community. Manitobas mandatory allinclusive policy expects teachers to create classroom learning
environments that can address a broad range of diverse learning
styles and educational needs (Manitoba Education, Training
and Youth, 2002).
The integration of exceptional pupils should be the normal
practice when such a placement meets the students needs and is
in accordance with parental wishes. Inclusion is not mandatory:
the gamut may range from full inclusion to full withdrawal.
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Manitoba
Ontario
continued on next page
10/14/11 5:45 PM
50
Margret A. Winzer
Province/Territory
Quebec
New Brunswick
Nova Scotia
Newfoundland
and Labrador
Prince Edward
Island
Northwest
Territories
Yukon
Nunavut
Policy
All students with disabilities or difficulties are to have access to
quality educational services in the most normal environment
approach possible. School boards may also set up classes that
bring together only students with special needs if that is judged
to be the best method of supporting their achievement.
Equity for all children is basic to public education. It boasts the
strongest inclusive policy in the country. Bill 85, passed into law
in 1986, is mandatory inclusion and requires the inclusion of
all children with disabilities within general classrooms. (New
Brunswick Department of Education, 2002).
The schools function is to do all it can to inspire students with
the desire to achieve the highest degree of excellence that
possible. Nova Scotia enacted noncategorical inclusion in 1996.
The official policy is to facilitate the membership, participation
and learning of all students in school programs and activities.
The general classroom is the first choice, rather than an optional
choice, for placement (Nova Scotia Department of Education and
Culture, 1996).
Schooling is viewed as the means to provide students the
opportunity to acquire the knowledge, skills, and attitudes
needed to be self-reliant, responsible, caring, and contributing
members of society. There are no specific statutes governing
special education save the Schools Act of 1997, which appears
to be a significant piece of legislation for students with special
needs (Edmunds, 2003). Programming is delivered with age
peers except where compelling reasons exist.
Public education provides for the development of children
so that each may take a meaningful place in society. Special
education is mandatory and noncategorical although a
continuum of services exists.
Policy points education based on individual strengths and needs
that is relevant and meaningful for each person. This promotes
education in the general classroom.
The aim is to develop the intellectual, physical, social, emotional,
cultural, and aesthetic potential of all students to the limits of
their abilities. Mandatory and non-categorical special education
is promoted. As far as is practicable, students are educated in the
least restrictive and most enabling environment with appropriate
program modifications to meet individual needs. A small
number of specialized resource programs provide alternative
environments for students unable to benefit from general
classroom placement.
Public education is inclusive and based on Inuit societal values
and principles. Those who require additional support are
provided with assistance.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
51
S T U DE N T S W I T H E XC E P T ION A L I T I E S
In Canada, the phrase children with exceptionalities is commonly used (rather than the
American with disabilities or the European special education needs). Exceptional encompasses
both disabilities and giftedness and tends to be the most acceptable wording (see
Hastings, Sonuga-Barke, & Remington, 1993).
Canada lacks a national registry, which makes it difficult to obtain accurate figures on
prevalence rates and the numbers served. Canadian statistics on the population of people with disabilities rely on World Health Organization (WHO) definitions. There are
approximately 4.4 million persons with disabilities in Canada, about 14.3% of the population. Statistics Canada (2008) reported that 4.6% of 5- to 14-year-old children had
some kind of disability. Supplementary data indicates that approximately 7.7% of all
children from birth to 19 years of age have a limitation or a disability (see Valentine,
2001). In the school system, about 12 to 12.5% of students will receive special services at
some point in their school careers (Winzer, 2008).
Apart from the identified population of students with exceptionalities, various agencies
suggest that up to 30 to 40% of children could be deemed at risk of failing and dropping
out (Wotherspoon & Schissel, 2001). The category focuses on students who have difficulty
proceeding through school at the prescribed rate and includes girls who become
pregnant, adolescents involved in drugs and crime, those who have attempted suicide,
school dropouts, and large groups for whom English is not a first language (Winzer,
2008). Special education intervention may or may not occur for such learners.
Disability is not randomly distributed in the population. Families in poverty and
minority families are more likely to have a child with a disability. School-related risks are
most heavily concentrated among visible minorities, people who are poor, residents of
the inner city and poor rural regions, and individuals who are not fluent in English
(Wotherspoon & Schissel, 2001).
About 29% of families with disabled children are in the lowest or lower-middle income
brackets, as compared to 17% with nondisabled children. Among other factors are the
higher costs of raising a child with a disability and ongoing child care that translates into
reduced employment opportunities for parents (Roeher Institute, 2000). Research consistently finds that higher income families of children with disabilities have more choices
for help and support than do lower income families (Scorgie, Wilgosh, & McDonald,
1998). For example, ABA helps children with autism learn communication, social, daily
living, and behavior management skills. The intensive one-on-one treatment can cost
between CAD$30,000 and CAD$80,000 annually (Tam, 2010), only fully funded in some
provinces.
The enrollment in Canadas schools declined from 5.3 million in 2002 to 5 million in
2008 (Hillsdon, 2011). But with inclusion and the availability of support services, the
number of students identified for special services has increased dramatically. For example, from 1998 to 2004, the proportion of exceptional children in Ontarios schools more
than doubled (Urquhart, 2005). In Alberta, the period 1998 to 2003 saw an increase of
64% in identification of students with severe disabilities and an increase of 140% for
students with mild/moderate disabilities, compared to a general increase in the school
population of 5% (Pyryt, 2003).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
52
Margret A. Winzer
The four most common disability areas are learning disabilities, speech and language
impairments, intellectual disabilities, and behavioral disorders. The least common areas
are visual impairments, traumatic brain injury, pervasive developmental disorders, and
deaf-blindness (Winzer, 2008). Students with learning disabilities (LD) make up the
largest single group: LD affects approximately 17 in every 1,000 children (Canadian
Council on Social Development, 1999). Growth in the diagnosis of Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) has been staggering, perhaps as high as 1 in every 20
children (Sanghavi, 2005). Once, autism spectrum disorders (ASD) were assumed to be
comparatively rare: Today, autism has moved from being a relatively unrecognized disability to having a position of notoriety (Simpson, 2004, p. 137). It is estimated that
more than 100,000 individuals in Canada are currently diagnosed with ASD. About
3,000 new cases are identified each year so that 1 in every 200 children in Canada has an
ASD (Autism Society Canada, 2004). More children also are identified as behaviorally
disordered. The rates of behavioral and emotional problems for children aged 4 to 11
are disturbingly high, with 1 in 10 children exhibiting behavior consistent with hyperactivity problems, conduct disorder, or an emotional disorder (Canadian Institute of
Child Health, 2000).
I NC LUS ION I N PR AC T IC E
More than 90% of Canadian school-aged children and youth attend general classrooms
for all or part of the school day. Actual class composition varies across the nation.
For example, in 2001, 71% of elementary classrooms across Alberta included students
with exceptionalities with an average of 3.4 students with mild to moderate disabilities
and an additional 0.7 with severe needs (ATA, 2002). In Ontario, elementary classroom
teachers had an average of 5.9 students with special needs; in grades 7 and 8,
teachers had 10 students on average (Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario
[ETFO], 2002).
Although inclusion in the general classroom is celebrated, a range of supports and
alternative arrangements still exist. These include residential schools, special schools,
special classes, resource rooms, alternate programs offered by school districts for specific
groups, and charter schools.
When a child is placed in a general classroom setting, the processes closely
match those described by Mark Mostert in his chapter on the United States in this
volume. We therefore only very briefly outline the cycle of the integration process
in Canada.
Identification. Some children arrive at school with an established disability. More
often, a lag is discovered when a child meets the complexity of reading and math,
which makes classroom teachers the first to refer a child for assessment.
Assessment. The process begins with an IQ measure and includes a battery of other
tools as well as archival data.
Eligibility. Based on specific criteria, ministries or departments of education make
the decision as to whether a child is eligible for special funding.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
53
Individual Education Plan (IEP). The essence of integration is individualization:

goals and methods formulated in response to individual needs and documented
in an IEP (called many different names across Canada). Each identified child has
an IEP written by a team in collaboration with the parents. Students who do not
receive funding may, however, also have IEPs.
Classroom accommodations and adaptations. As well as long-term goals and short-term
objectives, the IEP contains accommodations (environmental changes) and adaptations (instructional or materials).
Instruction. Teaching focuses on IEP goals and is presented by the teacher, often
with the assistance of a paraeducator.
Monitoring and evaluation. Progress toward the attainment of the goals of the IEP
are consistently measured and evaluated.
The Early Years

Early identification and early intervention for young children with disabilities is an
emerging priority in Canada. However, a hodgepodge of services and types of intervention
exist, provided by different people in different settings under different agencies and
jurisdictions.
Infants and toddlers are often served in center-based (or clinic-based) programs,
which are typically specialized with the appropriate services provided by professionals
related to a discipline in the childs area of most significant need. Most programs tend to
follow developmental and therapeutic models, either on an individual basis for infants or
in small groups for toddlers.
The current philosophy of early childhood special education (ECSE) stresses that it
should not be separate from general early childhood educationit is not parallel care
and education, but care and education embedded in and integral to general early
childhood education. The most appropriate settings for young children are comprehensive
programs that promote regular contact.
Increasing numbers of public school systems are implementing early childhood
programs, especially programs for children who are considered to be at risk for school
failure or those who have special needs. For example, in Alberta children with severe
disabilities are eligible for early childhood services at the age of 2 1/2. From 3 1/2 years
of age, children with mild or moderate disabilities are eligible for early education
programs (Alberta Learning, 2000).
Teacher Training
The pedagogical shift toward inclusive schooling has created new demands on teacher
education programs. There is an expectation that pre-service training will instill teacher
candidates with positive attitudes toward inclusion and students with exceptionalities as
well as equip teachers with the knowledge and skills for working in diverse classrooms.
Considerable variation exists among teacher education faculties, even within the same
province, as to the extent and depth to which teacher candidates are provided with basic
information about special education. Some faculties offer an introductory survey course;
10/14/11 5:45 PM
54
Margret A. Winzer
others infuse special education into another course; most provide an elective option
dealing with inclusionary issues and practices (McBride, 2008; Roeher Institute, 2004).
For specialist qualifications, the approach generally taken by jurisdictions is to encourage rather than require (McBride, 2008). Ontario is the only jurisdiction that currently
has legislation with special requirements for teachers working with exceptional
students.
Pre-service programs alone cannot prepare teachers for inclusive classrooms; practicing
teachers require sustained and effective in-service training. Often, teacher associations have
stepped into the breach. These organizations have a long and varied history of providing
workshops, discussion groups, and training for their members, and their professional
development efforts have expanded markedly in recent years (Bascia, 2001, 2005).
Challenges
Inclusion is avidly pursued in Canada, and the philosophical ideals have carved out
significant improvements for persons who are exceptional. Nevertheless, many aspects of
the agenda remain elusive and some groups remain vulnerable to exclusion. These are
Aboriginal students; students with physical, emotional, mental, and learning challenges;
newly arrived immigrant students; visible minority students; and students from lower
socioeconomic groups. Canadas most serious education gap lies between the 1.2 million
persons who identified as Aboriginal in the 2006 census and other Canadians.
A genuinely liberating philosophy has not translated facilely into effective operations
within contemporary schools. Although most policy makers, teachers, teacher associations, advocacy groups, and parents agree with the goals of inclusion in principle, few
agree about how to achieve it (Lupart, 1998, p. 256). They cannot decide whether inclusion means fundamental changes in the schools or more incremental modifications.
Many observers focus on the lack of a carefully conceptualized blueprint. Canadian
researchers speak to the inclusion confusion (Winzer, 2001), the inclusion delusion
(Lupart, 1998), to a journey without a destination (Naylor, 2005), and to a path more
easily charted than followed (MacKay cited in Bach, 2006, p. 2).
The practice of inclusive schooling is marked by significant boundaries and limitations. A considerable body of literature identifies 13 areas central to any discussion on
the challenges and countervailing forces in the journey toward inclusive schooling in
Canada. These are briefly discussed below.
Rhetoric to Reality Gap

Governments in Canada contend that their policies on inclusion are consistent, explicit,
and mandate inclusive approaches. Legislation or ministerial orders/directives across
the nation use the language of shall or must. Although this implies an obligation to
conform to the demands of inclusive schooling, there is a lack of hard data to demonstrate that this occurs. Mounting evidence suggests that inclusive policy is reflected more
in documents than in reality (Lupart, 2005; McBride, 2008; Naylor, 2005).
Unclear Policies
As a matter of public policy, a government or a school system cannot responsibly adopt
inclusion without defining its proposed program (Martin, 1995). Nevertheless, some
dubious and ambiguous inferences underpin current policy decisions. The process is
10/14/11 5:45 PM
55
often affected without systematic modification of a schools organization, due regard to

teachers instructional expertise, or any guarantee of continuing resource provision. In
Alberta, for example, critics chided that the ministry has not developed a systematic,
province wide action plan to support regular classroom teachers in assuming the challenge of inclusive practice (ATA, 2008, p. 14).
Retention of a Dual System

Without doubt, the direction across Canada stresses the elimination of a dual system and
continuum of services and encourages the placement of all students in neighborhood
schools and general classrooms. Despite this leaning, many jurisdictions have
implemented inclusive education without fully dismantling the programs and services
typical of traditional special education. One result is that inclusive schooling is viewed
as a discretionary responsibility rather than a core value of the system. A second consequence is that much of what passes for inclusion today tends to be reduced to a new name
for special education.
Confusion Between Philosophy and Practice

Often, discussions around inclusion are fueled by political and ideological convictions.
Many reformers are so caught up in the ideology that they make equity synonymous with
placement in a general classroom. Ideology that divorces itself from the fundamental
principles of individualized instructional programming fails to appreciate and reflect
the actual educational outcomes of the inclusive endeavor by ignoring important interactions between student needs and instructional processes.
Schools have a responsibility to provide a learning environment that encourages
growth and development in all domains for each student. Place needs to be kept in
perspective. Students need an education calibrated to their learning needs, and the
place of instruction should not trump the nature of instruction. Not only does setting
have a limited impact on outcomes, but it may be ineffective in systems where the levels
of teachers training and expertise, classroom conditions and supports, and funding are
not adequately realized.
Contextual Features
Managing inclusive classrooms requires new kinds of supports or that traditional supports
be provided in new ways. Supports include access to specialists, collaborative planning
and decision-making, appropriate equipment, individual planning, and the availability
of paraeducators (teacher aides). Yet, the school structures and school support systems of
most schools in Canada are hopelessly ill equipped to achieve the educational goal of
fostering continuous progress and appropriate educational services for all students
(Lupart, 1999, p. 220).
Policy and funding are interdependent: Policy provides the framework for how supports
should be provided and funding provides the resources for delivering the supports.
Fundingand who should provide itforms a major roadblock. In recent decades,
education funding has decreased dramatically and the education infrastructure
has become leaner and meaner (Bascia, 2001, p. 2) to the extent that the dynamism of
the inclusive movement is circumscribed by the inadequacy of resource allocation
(Crawford, 2005, p. 20).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
56
Margret A. Winzer
Cost and economic restraint cause tension between school administrators and parents,
disability rights advocates and general educators, and districts and provinces as they try
to balance aid for general education and also ensure that exceptional students receive
the necessary supports. In some schools, the two systems end up competing for resources.
In others, the supposed autonomy and flexibility allowed to school districts in an
environment of stringent accountability requirements facilitate and arguably encourage
school districts to shift funding and staffing away from inclusive supports (Naylor, 2005,
p. 25). Some places tweak budgets and funding formulas to afford inclusion.
Teacher Workload
Teaching is often a stressful occupation, with demands from administrators, colleagues,
students, and parents compounded by work overload, shifting policies, and a lack of
recognition for accomplishments (Greenglass & Burke, 2003). While the configurations
of the workplace are not all the same, inclusion has meant significant changes in the
composition of classrooms. Any typical elementary classroom will contain children who
demand the attention, energy, and expertise of the teacher.
For many teachers, inclusion increases workload and stress. Inclusion means working
longer hours: In British Columbia, three-quarters of special education teachers reported
that in 2010 their workload was higher than it was 5 years ago (Naylor & White, 2010).
Multiple sources of work intensification exist: the sheer volume of new initiatives, the
emergence of numerous expectations, incessant record-keeping, IEP meetings, IEP writing, complying with complicated funding procedures for students who are exceptional,
supervising the work of paraeducators, and extracurricular activities.
Lack of access to experts is a key stumbling block to the success of inclusive education
(OConnor, 2004). Across the nation, specialist teacher support and the availability of specialists has been sharply reduced. For example, struggling elementary students in Ottawa
face up to a 4-year wait for a formal assessment, the first step in a diagnosis (Pearson, 2011).
Teacher Skills
Considerable evidence suggests that teachers and administrators are insufficiently
prepared and ill-equipped to effect the multidimensional and complex changes that
inclusive education reformers have envisioned (Lupart & Webber, 2002, p. 18). Many
teachers feel under siege. They do not know how to cope with the multiple innovations
asked of them; they seem unprepared to comply with the broad array of requirements
and cannot meet the challenges they face on a daily basis; they do not have a thorough
understanding of the nature and characteristics of students with exceptionalities; they
are not well versed in the skills necessary to adapt curriculum for special learners; and
they cannot adapt to a variety of learning styles in the classroom (Chang, Early, & Winton,
2005; Farkas, Johnson, & Duffet, 2003; Pudlas, 2001).
The signature feature of inclusion is its focus on the individual student as the unit for
planning. Yet, preparing an IEP requires knowledge of the format, as well as knowledge
about normal and atypical child development, curriculum for a number of grade levels,
task analysis, diverse strategies for effective learning, ways to incorporate the skills of support personnel, and effective use of the skills of paraeducators. Many teachers lack the
range of skills, and teacher-training institutions are not preparing candidates for the task.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
57
Teacher Training
Many teachers in the public system have not had the formal education in working with
students with special needs (Pudlas, 2001, p. 43). One study in Nova Scotia (Edmunds,
Halsall, MacMillan, & Edmunds, 2000) found that 80% of respondents felt that they did
not have adequate professional training for inclusion. In British Columbia, more than
40% of respondents to a survey felt that they were professionally unprepared to teach
students with special needs (Naylor, 2004).
Canadian teacher preparation programs have not kept pace with system needs
(McBride, 2008). Across the nation, teacher preparation for inclusive schooling is uneven
and haphazard (McBride, 2008; Roeher Institute, 2004). No uniform requirements exist
in either the training or certification of personnel who work with special students or in
the establishment of standards of educational practice relating to these students
(McBride, 2008). It is not surprising that at the official provincial or territorial levels,
virtually without exception, personnel responsible for special education see the need for
improved skills and knowledge among classroom teachers in addressing the education of
students with special needs (McBride, 2008).
One confounding factor is the lack of an integrative image of shared purpose and
values guiding teacher education that can translate into a comprehensive approach to
inclusive issues. Jordan (2001) argues that the resources provided by governments for
teacher training and in-service training are inadequate to effectively build system capacity to meet diverse students needs.
Many practicing teachers feel that their work is jeopardized by a lack of professional
training geared toward supporting inclusive schooling. Although teachers are requested
to retrain and reform according to the legislated policy of inclusion, ongoing professional development is a challenge. There are many other demands on teacher time while
decreased education funding reduces access to professional development.
Assessment Issues
A potent theme is the incompatibility between the avowed support for inclusive education
and the dogged pursuit of a standards-based approach to accountability (ATA, 2008).
Evidence indicates that some school systems exclude students with exceptionalities from
large-scale assessments. Fiske and Ladd (2000) speak to the situation in the United
Kingdom; Hursch (2005) notes that American states such as Texas and New York have
found it rational to leave the lowest-performing students behind (p. 614). On the
Canadian side, it is not possible to ferret out data relating to provincial standards-based
assessments or international cycles such as PISA and TIMMS. Because the design and
implementation of large-scale assessments has not effectively factored in the notions
of inclusion, the history of including students with disabilities into large-scale assessments has been dismal (Adamowycz, 2008). It appears that many jurisdictions reshape
the test pool by excluding students with IEPs from the assessment process altogether
(Adamowycz, 2008) so that data matching that generated by the American No Child Left
Behind Act (see Hettleman, 2010) is unavailable.
While it is important to measure education outcomes in order to determine whether
students are improving (Richards, 2011), large-scale system accountability often conflicts
with the focus on individual student needs (Naylor, 2005). Schools must avoid the
10/14/11 5:45 PM
58
Margret A. Winzer
temptation to overemphasize the importance of standardized outcomes in relation to
pre-established targets of content knowledge relying on narrow assessment methods.
Options range from providing accommodations that do not alter the target skills tested
to providing alternate assessments for students with modifed curricula.
Outcomes
The inclusion concept stresses that [y]oung people with disabilities have an equal right
to be in school and to have something meaningful happen once they are inside (Smith,
1994, p. 7). That is, the inclusive process is understood as the special programs, services,
funding, policies, and quality curriculum in teaching and learning that are in place to
support students with disabilities and should provide a broad array of improved student
outcomes.
Prescriptions for placement and instruction are notoriously vague. Often, an individual
students right to placement is mediated by practicalitythe degree to which a placement
is feasible or workable. For example, some pupils enrolled in specialized classes may not
meet the specific criteria but have been so placed because other specialized classes are
full (Pearson, 2011). In some cases, the talk is of inclusion but the evidence is of exclusion.
The policy says, Lets force the door open for students who are exceptional, but a steady
and increasing flow of problem students are ejected out the back and side doors. In some
cases, students are included but poorly served. The IEP is not implemented faithfully,
and students are left almost entirely to the ministrations of untrained paraeducators (see
Winzer, 2005).
Paraeducators
Variously referred to as teachers aides, teaching assistants, classroom assistants, childcare
workers, paraprofessionals, or paraeducators, this is the fastest growing personnel segment
associated with inclusive schooling (Winzer, 2005). Although the use of paraeducators is
well established, their lack of training has been highlighted as a major concern in the successful undertaking of a pedagogical role (Lindsay, 2003). Particularly for students with
mild disabilities, paraeducators are often untrained in validated instructional protocols
or too inexperienced to implement instructional objectives with fidelity.
Parents
Parents discovery of a childs disability brings them into a lifelong series of interactions. Many families are plunged into the world of infant stimulation, early intervention,
preschools, respite services, and medical intervention. Especially, families have longterm relationships with school systems.
Parents, especially parents of children with significant disabilities, have long formed a
core constituency for the inclusive agenda. Most parents desire inclusion for their
children (Porter, 2004) and appear to have started their connection with the school
system when their child entered school with hope and trust. For many, both hope and
trust dissipated either rapidly or over time (Naylor, 2005). Many parents hold ambivalent
attitudes about inclusion resulting from ambiguous education policy. Nor are they
confident that a school will welcome their child or assure them of a quality education
presented by well-trained and well-supported teachers.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
59
Many parents express dissatisfaction with the services offered to their children in the
schools. A Statistics Canada survey found that parents of about one-quarter of children
with disabilitiesabout 24.3% of children with disabilities who were attending school
believed that their childs special educational needs were not being met (The Globe and
Mail, 2008). In a British Columbia study, parents felt that relationships with the school
were often strained and difficult. Diagnostic testing was often difficult to obtain;
reporting practices were problematic and inappropriate; concerns surfaced about the
IEP process; and parents felt that they faced a form of systemic resistance to their efforts
to address the issues of programming, staffing, and communication (British Columbia
Teachers Federation [BCTF], 2002).
Research Findings
The scientific evidence on the general advantages of inclusive schooling is elusive and
contested. In studies that compare the benefits of inclusion in general settings to instruction
in special classrooms, impressionistic data tend to be positive; controlled studies with
empirical research show less optimistic results. Research produces mixed results and
modest advantages (Canadian Council on Learning, 2009). Overviews, reviews, and metaanalyses have failed to provide clear evidence for the benefits of inclusion (Lindsay,
2003, p. 6). Research fails to support the efficacy of inclusion for students with learning
disabilities: Eighteen studies from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada
concluded that the best research available on the effects of LD student placement only
tentatively favours inclusion (Canadian Council on Learning, 2009, p. 3).
In Canada, the literature and research sources offering national perspectives or
empirical data on implementation remain quite limited. Data is not available on a number of critical pragmatic criteria such as achievement of IEP goals, length of time on an
IEP, general achievement, time spent out of the general classroom, time spent with a
paraeducator, the instructional duties of paraeducators, and whether stigma is associated
with paraeducator support.
FUTUR E TR ENDS
With its widely accepted, and self-proclaimed, value for diversity, it is not surprising that
inclusion in Canada is an article of unshakeable conviction and that a broad-based advocacy exists for all children and youth to be educated in ways that reflect the diversity of
Canadian society and its inclusive values. There is considerable evidence that the general
public, policy makers, parents, teachers associations, and general classroom teachers
support the philosophy of inclusion.
In the past few decades, Canadian society in general has made major gains in its ability
to provide sophisticated services for individuals who are exceptional both in the wider
social arena and within public education. As schools adopt the tenets, they strive to
become learning organizations in which teachers are adapting their pedagogies to the
diversity of learning demands presented by individual children.
In many ways, the horizons are marked by the possibility for growth. Teachers
seem willing to accept and excel at their expanded roles, and many fine examples of
inclusive practice exist. At the same time, there is no shortage of issues and constraints
in interpretation and implementation, and in inherent and unintended contradictions
10/14/11 5:45 PM
60
Margret A. Winzer
in the agenda. Reflecting on the challenges just discussed and the extensive explorations
in the literature, a number of points are clear. First, inclusive education in Canada is not
yet a reality. Legislative mandates, policy, and public expectations have exceeded not
only the technical capacity of professionals to deliver but also in the capacity of systems
to respond effectively. Second, reform efforts are piecemeal and fragmented with cosmetic changes outweighing substantive transformation. The process of inclusion remains
an intricate and delicate area of educational management with complex and multiple
challenges surrounding implementation. Finally, and perhaps most critical, analyses of
inclusive schooling repeatedly call for events that do not happen.
The matters that continue to generate controversy are familiar concerns and have
dogged the inclusive movement since its inception. These are
the amount of, and the suitability of, inclusive education for all exceptional students;
the documentation needed to access funding;
modification of the way that funding is allocated;
the process used to identify and assess potential exceptional needs;
improvement of the integration of services, most particularly at the infant and
pre-school levels;
improvement of student access to the curriculum;
modification to the accountability framework to take into account the circumstances of students with exceptionalities;
the knowledge and skills required by teachers;
increasing the viability of teacher training as well as the professional development
available to teachers;
ensuring that parents are involved;
and undertaking more research.
As Bach (2006) and other advocates point out, the comprehensive nature of the solution
will require significant changes and investment. It will mean the restructuring of roles
of many of the education actors; a massive professional and leadership development
strategy; restructuring of funding; new accountability mechanisms; major institutional
change within government, districts and schools; new relationships between schools,
parents, and communities; and ways to recruit and retain qualified staff, especially in
rural and isolated schools.
NO T E
The past two decades have seen a remarkable commitment to inclusive ideals and
the development of policies and practices aimed at meeting the needs of all students.
Although closely modeled on the American special education system, the Canadian
system has developed a character of its own molded in large part by the celebration
10/14/11 5:45 PM
61
of diversity in a multicultural society, the configuration of the education system, the

interlocking federal legislation, and the ongoing revisions of provincial and territorial
legislation and policies.
The resilience and popularity of inclusion have given the ideology and the attendant
programs a remarkable reach. All the Canadian provinces and territories have policies
that hold inclusion as a goal to which schools must aspire, and inclusive schooling is standard practice across the nation.
R E F E R E NC E S
Adamowycz, R. (2008). Reforming education: Is inclusion in standardization possible?
Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 68, 123.
Alberta Education. (2008, July 10). Albertas special education program to be reviewed. Retrieved
from http://education.alberta.ca/department/newsroom/news/2008/july/20080710
.aspx.
Alberta Learning. (2000, November). Shaping the future for students with special needs: A review of
special education in Alberta: Final report. Edmonton, Canada: Author.
Alberta Learning. (2002). Standards for special education. Edmonton, Canada: Author.
Alberta Teachers Association. (2002). Falling through the cracks: A summary of what we heard
about teaching and learning conditions in Alberta schools. Edmonton, Canada: Author.
Alberta Teachers Association. (2008). Success for all. Edmonton, Canada: Author.
Autism Society Canada. (2004, March). Canadian autism research agenda and Canadian
autism strategy: A white paper. Ottawa, Canada: Author. Retrieved from http://www
.autismsocietycanada.ca/DocsAndMedia/ASC_Internal/finalwhite-eng.pdf.
Bach, M. (2006, November). Solidarity forever? What prospects for a movement for inclusive education? Paper presented at the New Brunswick Professional Development Conference on
Inclusive Education.
Bascia, N. (2001). The other side of the equation: Professional development and the organizational
capacity of teacher unions (Working Paper No. 27). Toronto, Canada: OISE, Centre for
the Study of Education and Work.
Bascia, N. (2005). Triage or tapestry: Teacher unions work in an era of systemic reform. In
N. Bascia, A. Cumming, A. Datnow, K. Leithwood, & D. Livingstone (Eds.), International
handbook of educational policy (pp. 593609). London: Springer.
British Columbia Ministry of Education. (1995). Special education services: A manual of policies,
procedures and guidelines. Victoria, Canada: Author.
British Columbia Teachers Federation. (2002). Research project. Retrieved from http://www
.bctf.ca/education/InclusiveEd/Research Project.
Canada News. (2010). Canada ratifies UN Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities.
Retrieved from http://news.gc.ca/web/article-eng.do?m=/index&nid=517849.
Canadian Council on Learning. (2009, March). Does placement matter? Comparing the academic
performance of students with special needs in inclusive and separate settings. Retrieved from
http://www.cclca.ca/CCL/Reports/LessonsInLearning/LinL20090318SpecialNeeds
.html.
Canadian Council on Social Development. (1999). The progress of Canadas children 19992000:
Into the millennium. Ottawa, Canada: Author.
Canadian Institute of Child Health. (2000). The health of Canadas children (3rd ed.). Ottawa,
Canada: Author.
Canadian Teachers Federation. (2004). Poll shows. Retrieved from http://www.oecta.on.ca/
agenda/agendas2004/04sept.html#pol.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
62
Margret A. Winzer
Chang, F., Early, D. M., & Winton, P. J. (2005). Early childhood teacher preparation in special
education at 2- and 4-year institutions of higher education. Journal of Early Intervention,
27, 110124.
Crawford, C. (2005). Scoping inclusive education for Canadian students with intellectual and other
disabilities. Toronto, Canada: Roeher Institute.
Dunn, L. M., & McNeill, W. D. D. (1953/54). Special education in Canada as provided by local
school systems. Journal of Exceptional Children, 20, 209215.
Dyson, L. (2007). The meaning of social integration in cross-national contexts: A comparison of Canadian and Chinese elementary school teachers perspectives. Journal of International Special Needs Education, 10, 2331.
Edmunds, A. L. (2003). The inclusive classroom: Can teachers keep up? A comparison of
Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador teachers perceptions. Exceptionality Education Canada, 13, 2948.
Edmunds, A. L., Halsall, A., MacMillan, R. B., & Edmunds, G.A. (2000). The impact of government funding cuts on education: Report from a teacher survey. Nova Scotia, Canada: Nova
Scotia Teachers Union.
Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario. (2002). Fulfilling the promise: Ensuring success for
students with special needs. Toronto, Canada: Author.
Farkas, S., Johnson, J., & Duffett, A. (2003). Rolling up their sleeves: Superintendents and principals talk about whats needed to fix public schools. Washington, DC: Public Agenda.
Fiske, E. B., & Ladd, H. F. (2000). The tomorrows schools reforms: An American perspective. (IPS
Policy Paper No. 6). Institute of Policy Studies, University of Wellington, New Zealand.
Retrieved from http://ips.ac.nz/publications/files/0321666586e.pdf.
Greenglass, E. R., & Burke, R. J. (2003). Teacher stress. In M. F. Dollard, A. H. Winefield, & H.
R. Winefield (Eds.), Occupational stress in the service professions (pp. 213236). New York:
Taylor and Francis.
Hastings, R., Sonuga-Barke, E. J., & Remington, B. (1993). An analysis of labels of people
with learning disabilities. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 32, 463465.
Hettleman, K. R. (2010, July 4). The illusion and broken promises of special education. Education Week. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2005/03/09/26hettleman
.h24.html.
Hillsdon, P. (2011). The state of education in Canada and BC. Retrieved from http://www
.paulhillsdon.com/2011/01/04/the-state-of-education-in-canada-and-bc.
Human Resources and Social Development Canada. (2004). Advancing the inclusion of persons
with disabilities (Executive summary). Ottawa, Canada: Author.
Hursch, D. (2005). The growth of high-stakes testing in the USA: Accountability, markets and
the decline in educational quality. British Journal of Educational Research, 31, 604622.
Hutchinson, N. L. (2007). Inclusion of exceptional learners in Canadian schools. Toronto: Pearson
Canada.
Jordan, A. (2001). Special education in Ontario, Canada; A case study of market-based
reforms. Cambridge Journal of Education, 31, 349371.
Lessard, C. (with Brassard, A.). (n.d.). Educational governance in Canada: Trends and significance.
Montreal, Canada: University of Montreal, Centre for Policy Studies in Higher Education and Training.
Lindsay, G. (2003). Educational psychology and the effectiveness of inclusive education/
mainstreaming. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 124.
Lupart, J. (2005, November). Excellence and inclusion: Can Canadian schools achieve both?
Building inclusive schools: A search for solutions. Paper presented at the Canadian Teachers
Federation Conference, Ottawa.
Lupart, J., & Webber, C. (2002). Canadian schools in transition: Moving from dual education
systems to inclusive schools. Exceptionality Education Canada, 12, 752.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
63
Lupart, J. L. (1998). Setting right the delusion of inclusion: Implications for Canadian schools.
Canadian Journal of Education, 23, 251264.
Lupart, J. L. (1999). Inching toward inclusion: The excellence/equity dilemma in our schools.
In Y. Lenoir, W. Hunter, D. Hodgkinson, P. de Broucker, & A. Dolbec (Eds.), A panCanadian education research agenda (pp. 215231). Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Society for
Research in Education.
Manitoba Education, Training and Youth. (2002). Educational planning. Retrieved from http:/
www.edu.gov.mb.ca/metks4/instruct/specedu/eduplan.html.
Martin, E. W. (1995). Case studies on inclusion: Worst fears realized. Journal of Special Education, 29, 192199.
McBride, S. (2008). A cross-Canada review of selected issues in special education. Victoria, Canada:
McBride Management.
Naylor, C. (2004). Teaching in 2003: Survey reporthow teachers in Coquitlam and Nanaimo view
special education and ESL services. Retrieved from http://cms.bctf.ca/issues/research
.aspx?id=5842.
Naylor, C. (2005, November). Inclusion in British Columbias public schools: Always a journey, never a
destination. Paper presented at the Canadian Teachers Federation Conference, Ottawa.
Naylor, C., & White, M. (2010). Worklife of BC teachers, 2009. Victoria, Canada: British Columbia
Teacher Federation.
Nelson, C., & Huefner, D. S. (2003). Young children with autism: Judicial responses to the
Lovaas and discrete trial training debates. Journal of Early Intervention, 26, 119.
New Brunswick Department of Education. (2002). Guidelines and standards: Educational
planning for students with exceptionalities. Fredericton, Canada: Author.
Nova Scotia Department of Education and Culture. (1996). Special education policy manual.
Halifax, Canada: Author.
OConnor, E. (2004, July 8). Not enough resources for special-needs students, says national
teacher poll. The Province, p. A27.
Ontario Inspector of Prisons, Asylums, and Public Charities. (1878). Tenth Annual Report.
Toronto, Canada: Queens Printer.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). Education at a glance,
2010: OECD indicators. Paris: Author.
Pearson, M. (2011, February 17). Four-year wait for special ed assessments. Ottawa Citizen.
Phillips, R. (2010, June 7). Forgotten and ignored: Special education in First Nations schools
in Canada. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 106, 123.
Porter, G. L. (2004, Winter). Meeting the challenge: Inclusion and diversity in Canadian
schools. Education Canada, 44, 1113.
Pudlas, K. (2001). Educational provisions for children with exceptional needs in British
Columbia. Exceptionality Education Canada, 11, 3354.
Pudlas, K. A. (2003). Inclusive educational practices: Perceptions of students and teachers.
Exceptionality Education Canada, 13, 4964.
Pyryt, M. C. (2003, summer). Special education on Albertas screen. Keeping in Touch, p. 4.
Richards, J. (2011, January 6). School dropouts: Who are they and what can be done? [E-brief].
Toronto, Canada: C. D. Howe Institute.
Roeher Institute. (2000). Count us in: Overview of childhood disability. Toronto, Canada: Author.
Roeher Institute. (2004). Inclusive policy and practice in education: Best practices for students with
disabilities. Toronto, Canada: Author.
Rottmann, C. (2008). Organized agents: Canadian teacher unions as alternative routes for
social justice activism. Canadian Journal of Education, 31, 9751014.
Ryerson, E. A. (1868). Report on institutions for the deaf and dumb and the blind in Europe and in the
United States of America with appendices and suggestions for their establishment in the province
of Ontario. Toronto, Canada: Daily Telegraph Printing House.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
64
Margret A. Winzer
Sanghavi, D. (2005, April 26). Time to calm down about Ritalin. Boston Globe.
Scorgie, K., Wilgosh, L., & McDonald, L. (1998). Stress and coping in families of children
with disabilities: An examination of recent literature. Developmental Disabilities Bulletin,
26, 2242.
Simpson, R. L. (2004). Inclusion of students with behavior disorders in general education
settings: Research and measurement issues. Behavioral Disorders, 30, 1931.
Smith, W. J. (1994). Equal educational opportunity for students with disabilities: Legislative action
in Canada. Montreal, Canada: McGill University, Office of Research on Educational
Policy.
Smith, W. J. (2007). Data-based advocacy: Determining reasonable accommodations of special needs in an age of accountability. Education Law Journal, 16, 269282.
Special education comes up short, parents feel. (2008, May 27). The Globe and Mail. Retrieved
from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlety/story/RTGAM.20080527.
Statistics Canada. (2005, June 28). Canadas Aboriginal population in 2017. The Daily.
Retrieved from http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050628/d050628d.htm.
Statistics Canada. (2008). Participation and activity limitation survey of 2006: A profile for education for children with disabilities. Ottawa, Canada: Author.
Statistics Canada and the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. (2007). Education indicators in Canada: Report of the pan-Canadian Education Indicators Program. Retrieved from
http://www.cmec.ca/stats/indexe.stm.
Tam, P. (2010, December 15). $25M for autism raises a lot of questions. The Autism News.
Retrieved from http://www.theautismnews.com/2010/12/15/25m-for-autism-raises-a
-lot-of-questions.
Urquhart, I. (2005, November 9). Special education debate returns to haunt Ontario. Toronto
Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com.
Valentine, F. (2001). Enabling citizenship: Full inclusion of children with disabilities and their parents.
Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Public Policy.
Winzer, M. (2001). Reform in special education: The inclusion confusion. Humanisierung der
Bildung, 1, 91105.
Winzer, M. (2005). The dilemma of support: Paraeducators and the inclusive movement.
Exceptionality Education Canada, 15, 101123.
Winzer, M. (2008). Children with exceptionalities in Canadian classrooms (8th ed.). Toronto,
Canada: Pearson.
Winzer, M. (2009). A history of special education: From integration to inclusion. Washington, DC:
Gallaudet University Press.
Wotherspoon, T., & Schissel, B. (2001). The business of placing Canadian children and youth
at-risk. Canadian Journal of Education, 26, 321339.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
3
Education for All in
the Countries of the
United Kingdom
Lani Florian, Martyn Rouse,

and John Anderson
Education for All (EFA) refers to the global commitment to provide quality basic education
to all children, youth, and adults. While it is usually associated with access to education in the poorest countries of the world, there is a growing appreciation that issues of
access, equity, and quality education are important matters for all countries, rich and
poor. The term was used deliberately in the title of this chapter, not only to locate the
United Kingdom in a broader global context but also because the term special education is
not used consistently across all four countries of the United Kingdom.
T H E U N I T E D K I NG D OM
Understanding that the United Kingdom (UK) is made up of four separate but linked
countriesEngland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Walesis an important starting
point for considering national issues of EFA because each country has its own education
system. However, while the strong similarities and links between the different national
systems often justify grouping them together for general discussion purposes, this can
obscure important differences. The common, but mistaken, use of the term England to
refer to the United Kingdom or Britain reinforces the misconception that the island of
Britain is one country. This error further compounds confusion about the relationships
between Britain and the countries of the United Kingdom. To clarify this situation, some
background about the context in which contemporary UK policies have developed and
operated is needed.
Essentially, the interrelated but distinct nature of the national contexts of the countries
of the United Kingdom is historical. The early 18th-century political union of Great
Britain brought England, Scotland, and Wales under a single form of government in
1707. In 1800, a further Act of Union added Ireland until it was partitioned in 1921 to
become the Irish Free State. However, during this time of political change, Northern
Ireland opted to remain a part of the United Kingdom. Hence, today the United Kingdom
refers to Great Britain and Northern Ireland, also commonly (although incorrectly)
referred to as Britain.
The authors would like to thank our colleague Cliff Warwick, Department for Children, Education,
Lifelong Learning and Skills (DCELLS), Wales, for information about the changing policy context in Wales.
67
10/14/11 5:45 PM
68

While education in each of the four countries share many common features, Scotland
and Northern Ireland have always had separate systems. Historically, Scotlands education
system has served as a distinctive marker of national identity and pride, an aspect of
resistance to assimilation with England (Anderson, 2003). In Northern Ireland, for
different historical and political reasons and, in part, due to the direct rule by Westminster, educational reforms generally followed developments in England and Wales,
which until recently operated a unified system. However, the devolution of political
power within the United Kingdom more broadly has led to the emergence of a distinct
system of education in Wales since 2007 that is the responsibility of the Department for
Children, Education, Lifelong Learning and Skills (DCELLS) (Welsh Assembly, 2010).
Devolution has also led to further distinctions in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Differences in national contexts have resulted in variations in special education policy
(such as the language used) and practices (such as the types of data collected) making
some direct comparisons difficult if not impossible. However, the conceptual and philosophical issues and problems of access to, and equity in, education for all children and
young people are shared concerns. This chapter discusses the shared concerns that are
relevant across all of the countries of the United Kingdom. Differences are identified to
make the distinctive nature of each country context explicit. Where data are available,
some examples are provided to enable the reader to make comparisons.
T H E S O C I A L FA BR IC OF T H E U N I T E D K I NG D OM
Like other European countries, the United Kingdom has been undergoing rapid economic
changes brought about in part by the decline of many traditional industries such as
manufacturing and mining. Heavy engineering (for example, iron and steel manufacturing,
ship building, and volume car making) has been replaced by high-tech industry and the
service sector (tourism and financial services). Together with these major economic changes,
Britain is becoming increasingly urban and multicultural (de Blij, 2005).
The most recent government statistics estimate the population to be 61.8 million (Office
for National Statistics, 2010b). According to the 2001 census, approximately 4.6 million
people (7.9% of the population) are from a minority ethnic group (Office for National
Statistics, 2010a). However, as shown in Table 1, regional variations are substantial.
Major Forces Shaping the Social Milieu of the United Kingdom:

Immigration and Language
The United Kingdom has a long history of immigration, and Britain identifies itself
as multicultural with a tradition of offering opportunity to others and refuge to those
escaping persecution or hardship (Home Office, 2007). After the Second World War,
the government welcomed immigrants who were needed to help rebuild Britain. From
the 1950s on, immigrants arrived from the former British colonies in the Caribbean and
South Asia; this is reflected in the relatively large ethnic minority groups from India and
Pakistan. In recent years, the enlargement of the European Union (EU) has resulted in
a new wave of immigrants from the accession states of Eastern and Southeastern Europe.
Additionally, an increasing number of refugees have sought asylum in the United
Kingdom from conflicts elsewhere on the world.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Education for All in the Countries of the United Kingdom
69
Table 1. Regional Variation Across the Countries of the United Kingdom

England*
Scotland*
Wales*
Northern Ireland**
Population 51 million
5.17 million
2.98 million
1.79 million
Indian 14,000 Polish 14,000
Minority
Indian 1.3 m
Irish 50,000
groups
Pakistan 0.9 m
Pakistan 31,000 Pakistan 11,000 Slovak 6,000
African 0.7 m
Indian 15,000
Philippine 6,000
Caribbean 0.6 m Chinese 16,000
Indian 6,000
Mixed 13,000
Irish 0.6 m
Mixed 0.8 m
Service
Historically
Economic
Service industries Service
industries
agricultural
activity
Financial services industries
Manufacturing Large public sector
Tourism
Agriculture
Dependent on UK
and forestry
Agriculture
Manufacturing
support
Public sector
Manufacturing and forestry
Fishing
Financial
Education and
Tourism
health
Public sector
Agriculture
Education and
health
Oil and gas
*2001 census figures rounded; **2009 data.
In all countries of the United Kingdom, the majority of immigrants tend to be

concentrated in urban areas, so while overall numbers of some minority groups may
be low, the concentration of groups within particular areas is often high. In addition,
recent changes to employment patterns have seen an increase in East European migrants
moving to rural areas to work in agriculture and farming. Many schools in these areas are
receiving non-English speaking children for the first time, while other schools in urban
areas enroll a majority of students for whom English is not a first language. However, this
is not the only language issue as different dialects of English are spoken throughout the
United Kingdom. Many Welsh and Scottish people speak Welsh or Gaelic; Irish is also
spoken in Northern Ireland, as is the dialect Ulster Scots (Home Office, 2007).
Insights Into the Unique Social and Cultural Realities

of the United Kingdom
After the end of the Second World War, Britain moved to establish a welfare state. This
included a new Education Act (Education Act, 1944), which provided secondary education
for all, and a National Health Service (NHS) that was free at the point of delivery. More
than 60 years after it was established, the NHS remains a crucial element of the social
fabric of the United Kingdom and continues to enjoy high levels of public approval.
Many of the other policies associated with the welfare state were pro-child and socially
progressive. Nevertheless, traditional views of disability as illness, deviance, or personal
tragedy remain deeply embedded in the United Kingdom. Barnes and Mercer (2003)
noted that since the 1960s disabled people have organized to challenge this orthodoxy
so that today there is a greater understanding of disability as a sociopolitical issue rather
than an individual medical one. Since the first Disability Act in 1970, antidiscrimination
10/14/11 5:45 PM
70

legislation has helped to ensure that disabled people are empowered to exercise their
rights as full citizens with the same rights and responsibilities that are afforded to others
in the society. Nevertheless, according to a recent survey by the BBC (British Broadcasting
Corporation, 2010), people with disabilities still face discrimination. For example, many
young people in Britain today believe that disabled people do not want to work.
The United Kingdom has a long history of universal provision of public education (see
Table 2). Children between the ages of 5 and 16 must attend school, and the majority of
students remain in education beyond the age of 16. Note that in Northern Ireland the
starting age is 4; the leaving age will be raised to 18 by 2015. Education is financed largely
through national taxation with funds distributed through local authorities, although
some schools are funded directly by the government. Across the United Kingdom, primary schools generally educate both boys and girls, but a small number of secondary
schools are single-sex schools.
In all four countries of the United Kingdom, faith schools are part of the state-funded
education system. Since compulsory school attendance laws were introduced in the 1870s
and 1880s, the state education system developed in partnership with the mainstream
Christian churches. Today, around a third of maintained schools (schools that are eligible
for government funding) in England have a religious character (Church of England,
Catholic, with a small numbers of Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, and Muslim schools;
Teachernet, n.d.). In Scotland, the majority of schools are effectively secular and are
known as nondenominational schools. Northern Ireland has a highly segregated education system with 95% of pupils attending either maintained (mostly Catholic) schools
or controlled schools (mostly Protestant). Controlled schools are open to children of all
faiths as are Catholic schools. The latter admit some non-Catholic children. In recent
years, a number of integrated schools have been established by the voluntary efforts of
parents supported by the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education (NICIE).
These schools are also state funded.
Curriculum
There is a national curriculum in England, which consists of English, mathematics,
science, design and technology, information and communication technology, history,
geography, modern foreign languages, music, art and design, physical education, and
citizenship. In addition, there are a number of other compulsory courses, such as religious education. Children take national curriculum-based tests at age 7, 11, and 14.
Table 2. Number of Schools and Enrollment by Country (rounded up)
England and Wales
Northern Ireland
Scotland
Number of state schools

30,000
1,300
5,000
Enrollment
8.5 m
350,000
830,000
Source: http://www.britishcouncil.org/usa-education-uk-system-k-12-education.htm
10/14/11 5:45 PM
71
The school-level results in England are public and are used to construct league tables of
school performance (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, 1999).
While the national curriculum also initially applied to Wales, a National Curriculum
Council has retained oversight of the curriculum and undertakes a 5-year review cycle.
From the outset, Welsh has been a core subject in Welsh-speaking schools. In Wales, the
national curriculum tests have been replaced by teacher assessments. In 2008, Wales
introduced a skills curriculum that emphasizes the acquisition of skills over content
knowledge (Warwick, personal communication, 29 November, 2010).
Northern Ireland follows a similar framework to the English national curriculum. However,
the curriculum was recently revised to better provide access to the skills and competences
perceived as relevant to a 21st-century economy in order to provide a rich entitlement and
greater choice, and to enable teaching to be adapted more readily to meet pupils individual
needs and aspirations. The curriculum also includes the study of the Irish language in all
maintained schools; Irish is also the language of instruction in a small number of Irishimmersion schools (Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment, n.d.).
Scotland is currently making the transition to a new Curriculum for Excellence
program designed to give teachers and schools more flexibility and greater curricular
coherence across the 3 to 18 age range. The purpose of Curriculum for Excellence is
encapsulated in what are called the four capacitiesto enable each child or young person to be a successful learner, a confident individual, a responsible citizen, and an effective contributor (Learning and Teaching Scotland, n.d.).
Assessment and Examination

Currently, after 5 years of secondary education in England, Wales, and Northern
Ireland, the majority of students take examinations in a range of subjects at the level
of General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE). The GCSE is a single-subject
examination set and marked by independent examination boards. Students usually take
up to 10 (there is no upper or lower limit) GCSE examinations in different subjects,
including mathematics and English language. After taking the GCSEs, students may
leave secondary school, they may choose to stay on at school for 2 more years (years 12
and 13), or they may continue their education at a college where a range of courses are
available. Students who are aiming to attend a university normally take A-level (advanced
level) examinations. Results on GCSE and A-level examinations are not only important
for individual young people; they are also used to compare schools.
The assessment and examination arrangements in Scotland are the responsibility of
the Scottish Qualification Authority (Scottish Qualifications Authority, 2006). The
current tiered system (called the Standard Grade) offers examination papers at three
levels (foundation, general, and credit). This system is currently undergoing review and
revision in light of the Curriculum for Excellences introduction in order to develop a
framework for national qualifications. This new examination arrangement is expected
to replace Standard Grade with a new national examination in 2014.
National Assessments and Children With Special Educational Needs

Ongoing debates concern the extent to which all children, including those identified
as having special educational needs, should take part in national assessments
10/14/11 5:45 PM
72

(McLaughlin & Rouse, 2000) and how their progress might be assessed. In response, the
government of England has attempted not only to extend the range of students for whom
reasonable progress is considered important through the use of more fine-grained
alternative measures, but also to widen learning beyond the core academic areas of the
curriculum (English, math, and science) to include broader achievements in terms of
personal and social development (Department for Education and Skills [DfES], 2004a,
para. 3.22). Current policy developments in Wales are aiming to design a seamless
national system of assessment that includes all students (Warwick, personal communication, November 29, 2010).
Academic Attainment and Selection

All UK school systems produce high academic attainment for some pupils, but there is
concern in all countries about the long tail of underachievement for the lowest performing 20% (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2007)
and the steep rise in the numbers of young people not in education, employment, or
training (NEET). The Office for National Statistics has reported 17.6% of 18 to 24 year
olds, nearly one million young people, as NEET (Leper, 2010).
In England and Wales, the 1988 Education Act introduced a series of school reforms
based on the principles of the marketplace, including choice, competition, and decentralization. These reforms radically shifted the control of day-to-day decisions about
education from local authorities to schools. Subsequent legislation has strengthened
these reforms. It has been argued that children living in poverty and/or those with special educational needs have been made more vulnerable as schools serving areas of
deprivation struggle to compete in the education market (Gillborn & Youdell, 2000;
McLaughlin & Rouse, 2000).
Scotland did not adopt the same market-based reforms as England and continues to
have a largely comprehensive system. Variations in achievement are largely a withinschool phenomenon, unlike England, where they are a between-school problem (OECD,
2007). Northern Ireland retains a selective secondary education system in which children are sorted as a result of transfer tests that are no longer regulated by the state
because of contentious and unresolved policy changes relating to selective secondary
education.
OV E RV I E W OF S PEC I A L N E E D S
There is a long-standing tradition of special school provision in the United Kingdom.
Many such schools were established during the 20th century to educate children with
disabilities. Although the numbers varied in different parts of the United Kingdom,
about 2% of children attended special schools. In addition, until the 1970s, a very small
number of children were in hospitals or attended junior training centers run by health
authorities. The 1970 Education Act in England and Wales, followed by similar legislation in Scotland in 1974 (MacKay & McLarty, 2003), and Northern Ireland in 1986,
ended the long-standing practice of classifying a small minority of children as uneducable and put a stop to the arrangements for classifying children suffering from a disability
of mind as children unsuitable for education at school. It also took away the power of
10/14/11 5:45 PM
73
health authorities and relocated responsibility to education authorities. For the first time
in UK history, 100% of school-age children were entitled to education (Vaughn, 2002).
In the 1970s the government established a Committee of Inquiry, chaired by the
philosopher (now Baroness) Mary Warnock, commonly referred to as the Warnock
Report (Department of Education and Science, 1978). The committee was to undertake
a review of special education policy and provision. Further policy developments followed
the recommendations of the committee report and its associated Education Acts (1980
in Scotland; 1981 in England and Wales; 1986 in Northern Ireland). These acts, informed
by the Warnock Report recommendations, stressed the noncategorical nature of disability and embraced an ecological or interactive view of special needs that suggested that up
to 20% of students may have special educational needs (SEN) at some point in their educational careers. However, attempts to leave behind categories of handicap were not
without problems because many forms of provision, especially special schools, were
themselves categorical.
The tension between a noncategorical approach to special education provision and
the perceived need to categorize children for educational and accountability purposes is
well documented (Wedell, 2008) and remains a current concern and topic of debate
among policymakers, professionals, families, and advocates.
Special Educational Needs

The idea that up to 20% of all children might experience difficulty in learning at some
time in their school careers required a definition of SEN that was flexible and sensitive
to the range and type of individual differences that make up the school-age population.
Subsequently, children with SEN were defined as having significantly greater difficulty
in learning than other children of a similar age, or of having a disability preventing or
hindering them from making use of mainstream educational facilities. But the term has
been problematic. For example, a student with a medical diagnosis or disability does not
necessarily have a SEN unless a special educational provision is needed to access the curriculum. Equally, a child with a SEN does not necessarily have a disability.
The original intent of a flexible, noncategorical approach to SEN provision was to
enable support to be provided to children experiencing difficulties in learning without
the delay and expense of multidisciplinary assessment or the stigma of a label. It shifted
the focus of special education away from the comfortable certainty of categorical handicaps toward a consideration of learning needs. But it has also obscured particular learning difficulties and deprived people of a vocabulary to such an extent that in England
and Wales subsequent guidance reintroduced the notion of categories by specifying four
areas of need: communication and interaction, cognition and learning, behavior, emotional and social development, and sensory or physical need (DfES, 2001b, p. 85).
More recently, in response to concerns about the lack of specificity in SEN data, the
English government has begun to collect data from schools to include 11 categories of
SEN: Specific Learning Disability (SpLD), Moderate Learning Difficulty (MLD), Severe
Learning Difficulty (SLD), Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulty (PMLD),
Emotional and Behavioral Difficulty (EBD), Speech, Language and Communication
Needs (SLCN), Hearing Impairment (HI), Visual Impairment (VI), Multisensory
Impairment (MSI), Physical Difficulty (PD), Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), and
10/14/11 5:45 PM
74

Other (OTH). However, such data are not collected consistently across the United
Kingdom. In Northern Ireland and Wales, different categorical data are collected. In
Scotland, categorical data are not collected.
SEN is the term currently used in policy documents in England, Wales, and Northern
Ireland. However, Scotland has attempted to leave the language of special education
behind by replacing the term SEN with Additional Support Needs (ASN) in the 2004 Additional Support for Learning Act. This act specifies that any child may need additional
support for any reason at any time. However, both SEN and ASN cover an array of problems from those related to particular impairments (thought to represent about 2% of
children) to those related to learning and behavioral difficulties experienced by some
learners compared with other similar learners (up to 18% of the school population at any
given time).
Identification and Assessment of Special Educational Needs

Despite the acknowledgment of the interactive nature of SEN, the administrative
procedures that have been set out to ensure that children are appropriately supported
when they experience difficulty are based on an individual-needs approach to provision.
All of the UK countries use a variation of a staged intervention structure that is specified
in governmental guidance, called a code of practice. Table 3 outlines the staged assessment process followed in Northern Ireland.
England and Wales follow a similar approach but stages of action are simplified and
refer to School Action (stages 1 and 2), or School Action Plus (stages 3 and 4),
and statement (stage 5). In Scotland, a particular staged intervention model is not
specified, but local education authorities are encouraged to use a wide range of
approaches that are built around discrete stages of intervention which seek to resolve
difficulties as early as possible and with the least intrusive course of action (Scottish
Government, 2005, p. 25).
Table 3. Code of Practice on the Identification and Assessment of Special Educational

Needs: Northern Ireland
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 4
Stage 5
Teachers identify and register a childs special educational needs and,

consulting the schools SEN coordinator, take initial action.
The SEN coordinator takes lead responsibility for collecting and
recording information and for coordinating the childs special
educational provision, working with the childs teachers.
Teachers and the SEN coordinator are supported by specialists from
outside the school.
The board considers the need for a statutory assessment and, if
appropriate, makes a multidisciplinary assessment.
The board considers the need for a statement of special educational
needs; if appropriate, it makes a statement and arranges, monitors, and
reviews provision.
Source: Department of Education for Northern Ireland. (1998). Code of practice on the identification and assessment
of special educational needs. Belfast: Author.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
75
Statutory Assessment of Special Educational Needs

As can be seen in Table 3, children with complex needs can be referred for what is known
in the United Kingdom as statutory assessment by a multiprofessional team. Such an
assessment might lead to a statement of special educational needs being issued (except in Scotland, which issues a Coordinated Support Plan, or CSP). Requests for such assessment may
be initiated by the school or by the parents. The Statement is reviewed at least annually.
As in other countries following an individual needs approach to SEN provision, there
are guidelines to ensure that parents and childrens views are included in this planning
process. The Statement and CSP are statutory documents that specify the educational
and other provisions that are required to meet complex needs.
Forms of Provision
The relational definition of special needs education as that which is additional to or
different from that which is provided to other students of a similar age characterizes the
legal definitions of special or additional support needs in the United Kingdom. As a
result, there are many forms of provision in mainstream and special schools. Some provision is categorical; some is not. Provision may be made in special schools, special units
attached to mainstream schools, or in mainstream classes. Many mainstream schools
offer resourced provision or special bases for children with particular difficulties, but
the majority of children with special or additional support needs are educated full-time
in mainstream classes, bringing in specialist support as required. Schools in Northern
Ireland, England, and Wales have a designated SEN coordinator (SENCO) responsible
for managing provisions for students with SEN. In Scotland, teachers who provide specialist support are referred to as Support for Learning Coordinators.
For comparison purposes, current data from each country is summarized below. These
data summaries, taken from government Web sites, reflect the differences in policy perspective and emphasis across the United Kingdom.
England
In January 2009, some 221,670 (or 2.7%) pupils across all schools in England had
statements of SEN, a reduction of 1,740 from the previous year. There were some 1,433,940
pupils with SEN, but without statements, representing 17.8% of pupils across all schools.
This is an increase of 0.6 percentage points from 2008. More than half (55.6%) of
children with statements of SEN were placed in early years settings, mainstream schools,
resourced provision in maintained mainstream schools, or SEN units in maintained
mainstream schools. This represents a decrease from the previous year.
The most prevalent type of primary needs among pupils with statements of SEN in
primary schools were speech, language, and communication needs (24%). In secondary
schools, it was moderate learning difficulty (21.7%), and in special schools, severe learning difficulty (23.6%) (Department for Children Schools and Families [DCSF], 2009a).
Scotland
In Scotland there were 676,740 pupils in 2,692 publicly funded schools (367,146 in 2,128
primary schools; 302,921 in 374 secondary schools; and 6,673 in 190 special schools). The
10/14/11 5:45 PM
76

proportion of children in special schools is about 1%. In mainstream schools, there were
3,174 pupils with a Coordinated Support Plan (CSP).
Of those pupils with ASN, the most prevalent reasons for support were social,
emotional, and behavioral difficulties (13.7 pupils per 1,000) and learning disabilities
(13.6 pupils per 1,000). Overall, 68% of pupils with additional support needs were boys,
a slight decrease from recent years (70%). There were 11,334 pupils assessed or declared
as disabled. Nevertheless, there are wide variations in the extent to which pupils with
disabilities had been identified by different local authorities, and the information should
not be considered as complete (Scottish Government, 2009).
Wales
In January 2009, there were 14,832 pupils with a statement of SEN (3.1% of the total,
a decrease from 3.4% in 2003). Over two-thirds of these pupils (68.2%) were taught
in mainstream schools. Just under half of the pupils with Statements were educated
in mainstream classes, and more than a fi fth were taught in special classes or units
within ordinary schools. The percentage of pupils with identified additional learning
needs educated in mainstream schools varied considerably across LEAs, from 94.4%
in Ceredigion (which does not have a special school) to 18.5% in Bridgend (Welsh
Assembly, 2009).
Northern Ireland
There are two types of special schools in Northern Ireland: those that cater to children
who have severe learning difficulties and those that cater to children who have moderate learning difficulties. In 2009/2010, there were 4,444 children attending 41 special
schools; 227 pupils were in two hospital schools in Northern Ireland. In addition, there
are 170 special units attached to 88 mainstream schools that cater to a wide range of
educational needs. The Education and Library Boards also provide outreach support
services for pupils with literacy difficulties and behavioral challenges.
Estimates in Northern Ireland are that some 15% of school-age learners have some
special need. This is equivalent to some 50,000 pupils (Department of Education, 2010).
DI M E N S ION S OF T H E PROV I S ION OF EQUA L AC C E S S

As noted earlier, beginning in the 1980s the United Kingdom moved toward a
noncategorical, interactive notion of special educational needs. Still, countries varied
in the extent to which they moved in this direction, and debates continue about the
extent to which categories of special educational needs and disability labels are helpful
in planning educational provisions. However, because special education is defined as
education that is additional to, or different from, what is normally available in schools
(DfES, 2001a), there is a recognition that difficulties in learning can only be understood in the context in which they occur. What is normally available in some schools
may not be normally available in others. As a result, there is a postal-code lottery of
educational provision that produces different ideas about who has special needs and
who should get a statement. The result is that across the United Kingdom there is a
five-fold variability regarding who gets identified as having special or additional support
10/14/11 5:45 PM
77
needs. The variability in identification of SEN is not only associated with differences in
what is ordinarily available in schools; it is also associated with local expectations and
traditions.
It is recognized that there are disparities in terms of who gets what with respect to
educational provision and opportunity (Office for Standards in Education, 2010).
Throughout the United Kingdom, children who have SEN are disproportionately from
disadvantaged backgrounds, are much more likely to be absent or excluded from school,
and achieve less than their peers both in terms of attainment at any given age and in
terms of their progress over time. After 16 years of age, young people with SEN are one
of the groups most likely not to be in education, employment, or training.
SEN and Broader School Reforms

Across the United Kingdom, the education of students identified as having SEN has
been influenced by the push toward greater inclusion starting with the Warnock
Report and the associated education acts, and more recent pro-inclusion legislation.
The Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 (SENDA) strengthened
the right to a mainstream school place for students with disabilities or SEN. These
and other developments such as the Department for Education and Skills statutory
guidance in England Inclusive Schooling: Children with SEN (DfES, 2001a), the revised
Special Educational Needs Code of Practice (DfES, 2001b), and the requirements of the
National Curriculum (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, 1999) all provided a
firm legislative context for further developments in inclusive education in England and
Wales. Recently, the governments strategy for SEN, Removing Barriers to Achievement
(DfES, 2004b), reaffirmed a commitment to inclusive education as a model for meeting
students with special needs.
Developments in Scotland and Northern Ireland have been similar. At the time of
writing, Wales is exercising its newly devolved legislative powers to develop new education
policy that will strengthen a seamless and unified system of education for all children
(Warwick, personal communication, November 29, 2010).
In 2003, the government in England introduced a major new initiative, Every Child
Matters (DfES, 2003). In Scotland, a similar initiative, Getting It Right For Every Child
(GIRFEC) (Scottish Government, 2010) was introduced. These initiatives represented an
ambitious approach for improving the well-being of children and young people from birth
to age 19. The aim is for all children, whatever their circumstances, to have the support
they need to be healthy, happy, and safe, and to make a positive contribution and achieve
economic well-being. This approach entails greater coordination of human services, such
as education, health, social care, and youth justice, and involves sharing information
among these services and working together in new ways to protect children and young
people from harm and help them achieve what they want in life (DfES, 2003).
However, these developments exist alongside a broader set of educational reforms that
have a much different policy intent. The key principles underlying the Education Reform
Act 1988 in England and Wales included privatization, increased accountability, greater
scrutiny, more choice for parents, and competition between schools. The act introduced
a national curriculumwhich specified content together with a national assessment that
specified standardsand a series of other changes designed to bring the rigor of the
10/14/11 5:45 PM
78

market place to bear on schools. While developments in Northern Ireland have been
similar, Scotland has resisted the more vigorous marketization of education that has
prevailed in other parts of the United Kingdom.
Thus, within the UK context, and especially in England today, standards-based reforms
stress academic excellence and high-stakes accountability for individuals, schools, and
local authorities while other legislation has strengthened the protection and support
offered to vulnerable children. Often these reforms are in conflict and lead to a series of
tensions within schools (Rouse & Florian, 1997) and, in part, has led to the wide betweenschool variation in achievement that can be seen in England (OECD, 2007).
DI F F E R E NC E S A N D VA R I AT ION S I N OPP ORT U N I T Y

A N D I N AC C E S S
Although the attempts to differentiate types of learners have been based on professional
knowledge and good intention, the lines that are drawn to determine who gets special
education and who does not could be argued to be arbitrary distinctions. One needs
only to consider the range of definitions and eligibility criteria in different parts of the
United Kingdom to understand this point.
Eligibility for special education is not fixed but depends instead on many factors.
Patterns of identification of need in all four countries of the United Kingdom are complex, but it is poverty rather than race, language, or disability per se that is associated
with lack of success in school (Gillborn & Youdell, 2000). Indeed, in England, white
working-class boys are the lowest achieving group and are more likely to be described as
having SEN than all others except for Gypsy/Traveller children (DCSF, 2009a).
The relationship between achievement in school and the identification of SEN is particularly important because of the relational definition of special needs education as that
education that is additional to or different from that provided to others of a similar age.
It is only when what is otherwise available is insufficient to meet the educational needs of
any given student that he or she is deemed to have SEN (for a discussion, see Florian &
Kershner, 2009).
The United Kingdom has a long-standing tradition of early years education. For children
under age 5, publicly funded nurseries and preschools are available for a limited number
of hours each week. Childminders, private day care, voluntary sector playgroups, and local
authority nursery classes (in England) all are considered part of early years provision.
Care for children under the age of 5 is provided by a wide range of professionals.
Providers of early years education vary enormously in terms of their qualifications and
training. While trained teachers work in all classes based in school settings (reception
and nursery classes), this is unlikely to happen in private day nurseries or voluntary sector playgroups. In these settings, staff are likely to have qualifications relating to the care
of young children rather than a teaching qualification.
All of the countries of the United Kingdom make provisions for children with
disabilities and complex needs from birth. The codes of practice that accompany special
education legislation outline a framework for the provision of services to children from
10/14/11 5:45 PM
79
birth through the school years. While the referral for services may be initiated by anyone,
in many cases it is the early years practitioners who begin the process of identifying
children with special or additional needs. It is common for practitioners to liaise (often
through parents/caregivers) with other agenciesparticularly medicalif children
have been identified with any kind of impairment. In these cases, families may be in
receipt of a disability living allowance, and additional funds will be available to settings
and families to fund additional support as well as to access specialist provisions such as
speech therapy or physiotherapy.
Children with Statements of SEN are given privileged access to settings offering
specialist provisions that are considered particularly suitable. In some cases, this may
mean that children attend a setting outside of the catchment schools their peers
would be expected to attend. When this occurs, additional funding for transport is
provided.
E DUC AT ION A L PL AC E M E N T
As noted, the United Kingdom has followed international trends in adopting policies
of social and educational inclusion. As a model for meeting SEN, inclusive education
requires the elimination of barriers to participation in education (Booth & Ainscow,
2002). There has been considerable debate about how this might best be achieved. Some
argue that classroom teachers should take responsibility for providing the necessary
support to help pupils overcome barriers to learning with specialist input as needed.
Others believe that learners who are experiencing difficulty should have direct access to
specialists. Still others argue that placement in specialist facilities such as special schools
is the best way to educate children who experience difficulties.
To date, there has been no satisfactory resolution to this debate, although UK
government policy has tended to favor models of inclusive education that promote a
process of increasing participation and decreasing the exclusion of vulnerable students
from the culture, curricula, and communities of local schools (Booth & Ainscow, 2002).
However, as noted earlier, the administrative structures that protect the educational
entitlements of children with additional needs are based on an individualized approach
that itself can be a barrier to inclusion (Florian, 2010).
In 1988, separate training of special education teachers at the preservice level was ended,
in part because such training had created a group of teachers who were themselves segregated and were seen as a barrier to inclusion. To replace the expertise that would be
lost, further professional development was to be made available for experienced teachers who would take leadership roles in special needs education and inclusion. However,
financial support for the training was soon reduced, leading to questions about who
should be responsible for teaching children with special needs.
The crucial task of preparing and supporting professionals to work in inclusive schools
is gaining increasing attention as educational policies designed to encourage greater
inclusion are enacted. Two aspects of teacher professional development are of concern:
the preparation of all mainstream classroom teachers and the preparation of specialists.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
80

A recent report in England (Office for Standards in Education, 2008) was critical of
many aspects of existing initial teacher education practice in preparing beginning
teachers to work with children who experience difficulties in learning.
Currently, it is common for special needs and inclusion courses in initial teacher
education to be offered as an optional extra or an elective course available only to some
students. Typically, these courses focus on the characteristics of particular kinds of
learners, ways they should be identified, specialist teaching strategies, and the prevailing
policy context.
Cornwall and Graham-Matheson (2008) reported on a project in England designed to
strengthen the specialist expertise of teachers. A consortia of five university-based
providers developed a set of postgraduate modules (that could lead to a certificate or
diploma). These modules were designed to be holistic in order to encourage teachers to
reflect on the links between theory/research, policy and practice and to consider practice
in their own and other schools/settings (p. 13). Rather than attempting to impart specialist knowledge, the modules focus on helping teachers to access specialist knowledge
when needed.
In Scotland, there is recognition that the content knowledge of specialist courses is
often not well integrated into the broader curriculum and pedagogical practices of
mainstream settings. Crucially only some, not all, student teachers are able to take such
courses, which in turn leads to a belief that they are not capable of teaching special children because they have not done the course. As a result, a debate is taking place about
whether the content knowledge contained in optional courses in special needs is sufficient to improve practice in schools. There is also a growing recognition that Initial
Teacher Education may not be preparing beginning teachers sufficiently well to meet the
needs of all children in schools that are increasingly diverse (Office for Standards in
Education, 2008).
The Scottish government has recognized that inclusive education is of high priority
and that teachers need to be well prepared and appropriately supported throughout
their careers if they are to succeed in developing and sustaining inclusive practice to
meet the increasingly diverse needs of Scottish schools. With the support of the
government, the Scotland Teacher Education Committee (Scotland Teacher Education
Committee, 2009) set up a working group consisting of course directors and inclusion
specialists representing all seven universities involved in initial teacher education.
The remit of the group was to develop a framework that would identify the values and
beliefs, the professional knowledge and understanding, and the skills and abilities to
be expected of student teachers and of qualified teachers at whatever stage of their
careers.
The framework highlights the principles of inclusive practice, social justice, inclusion,
and learning and teaching in the context of current policy and legislation (Scotland
Teacher Education Committee, 2009). It adopts a broad definition of inclusion covering
additional support needs, poverty, culture, and language, and it is informed by relevant
aspects of the UK governments new Equality Bill (Government Equalities Office, 2010).
It attempts to promote inclusion as being the responsibility of all teachers in all schools
and builds upon existing innovative practice within the universities of Scotland to provide a secure basis for planning courses in teacher education and professional learning.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
81
In Northern Ireland there is also a greater clarity about the need for new professional
knowledge and skills among teachers. OGorman, Durdy, Winter, Smith, & Barry (2009)
identified the main professional development needs of special needs coordinators as
learning how to liaise with parents, with other teachers, and with the Educational
Psychology Service; monitoring the progress of pupils; and applying for concessions in
public examinations.
As a consequence of the facilitative climate and of incremental revisions to education
in recent years, increasingly diverse pupilssuch as those with disabilities and specific
needs and newcomer pupils from across Europe with alternative language needsare
attending mainstream classes. Teachers in Northern Ireland are mostly concerned with
developing a positive school ethos, ensuring the entitlement of their pupils, reviewing
and implementing educational plans, drawing effectively on the support of classroom
assistants, supporting curriculum differentiation, and preparing curricular materials to
match the pupils attainments.
Since the 1990s, the countries of the United Kingdom have been working toward
improving access to mainstream education for students with disabilities and others
identified as having SEN. While almost all students (99%) are educated in mainstream
schools, progress has been slow and uneven. As the recent Lamb Inquiry on Special
Educational Needs and Parental Confidence in England has noted, while many children are well supported and making good progress, too many others have a far less
positive experience, and securing appropriate educational support can be a battle for
some families (DCSF, 2009b). Throughout the period of New Labour (19972010),
the government promoted a policy of educational inclusion but retained special needs
policies that continued to rely on traditional approaches; that is, identification and
assessment of individual need and the availability of specialist facilities for those who
chose them.
Unresolved tensions remain between the need for policies that are responsive to the
needs of individuals and the demand for higher standards and greater accountability.
An inspection report on inclusion noted that many schools have difficulty in setting
targets and knowing what represents reasonable progress (Her Majestys Inspectorate,
2004, para. 35).
Wedell (2005) suggests that there are at least four distinct contexts in which questions
about the reasonable progress of students with special needs should be asked. First,
teachers need to know whether the method chosen to help a pupil is effective, or whether
alternative methods might improve progress. Second, teachers and parents want to
know whether teaching is helping their students to make optimum progress. As well,
staff performance review procedures for teachers should involve having teachers set
targets for the effectiveness of the help they give pupils. Finally, league tables and other
comparisons between schools should ask questions about the value added services
they offer (p. 105).
A fundamental tension arises from the way in which content and achievement standards are currently defined. Decisions about what students should know and be able to
10/14/11 5:45 PM
82

do at any given age arise from expectations about what typically developing students
should be able to do at that age. To that extent, they are norm-referencedgoverned by
the laws of normal distribution even when the standards are described as criterion referenced. Fixed-grade or age-achievement norms are problematic in that they ignore the
realities of human difference.
Students with SEN present major challenges to current standards-based reform initiatives. If the reforms are to lead to higher standards and are to meet their original intent
of closing the achievement gap between the highest and lowest performing groups, then
it is essential that systems of assessment be developed that are capable of demonstrating
the learning and progress of all students. A fundamental shift in thinking about human
ability and potential will be required if systems of assessment are to be developed that
will enable all students to demonstrate their learning.
F U T U R E T R E N D S E FA ?
Today, there is a growing recognition that the field of special education must change
in response to 21st-century concerns about what it means to provide an education for
students identified as having SEN and disabilities (Warnock, Norwich, & Terzi, 2010).
New thinking about how pupils who experience difficulty in learning might be assessed is
needed. This includes whether these pupils should be and how they might be categorized,
how and where they should be taught, and the kind of preparation and qualifications
their teachers should have.
In the years since the Warnock Report, inclusive education as a model of meeting
special educational needs has emerged. This model has not resulted in positive
experiences for all children, leading Mary Warnock herself in 2005 to publicly recant
some of the arguments put forward in the 1975 report (Warnock et al., 2010). Today, a
conflict exists between the protection offered by the individual needs approach to meeting SEN as operationalized by Statements or CSPs and the resources that accompany
them, and contemporary views of good practice in educating all students. For example,
research on teaching assistants (TAs) (Farrell, Balshaw, & Polat, 1999) urges a shift away
from the one-to-one allocation of TAs to individual pupils with Statements in favor of a
model where TAs work alongside teachers in support of learning for all pupils. But problems occur when Statements specify resource allocations (such as a fixed number of
hours of adult support) that are at odds with good practice.
Ironically, the manner by which statements specify resources for children may not
support their learning. It is not surprising that there is a conflict between contemporary
knowledge of good practice and Statements, a tool developed 20 years ago when a
different view of provision prevailed. Statements were designed to ensure that resources
followed children. Todays challenge is to separate the protection offered by the Statement
from the means by which that protection is offered.
Finally, there is a continued need to address the long-standing dilemmas of access and
equity in education that UK systems of special education have yet to resolve. In 1978
Warnock (Department of Education and Science, 1978) noted:
10/14/11 5:45 PM
83
We recognise that our recommendation that statutory categories of handicap should

be abolished may give rise to concern about how to safeguard the interests of
children with severe, complex and long-term disabilities. We have found ourselves on
the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand we are aware that any kind of special
resource or service for such children runs the risk of emphasising the idea of their
separateness, an idea which we are anxious to dispel, or limiting the notion of
special education to the provision made for such children. On the other hand,
unless an obligation is clearly placed on the local education authorities to provide
for the special needs of such children, there is a danger that their requirements for
specialist resources will be inadequately met.
In order to resolve this difficulty, we have tried to devise a system which, while
avoiding the disadvantages inherent in categorisation, will preserve the advantages
it confers.
(pp. 4445, emphasis added)
Yet, as this chapter has shown, the dilemma of the Warnock Committee persists today.
There continues to be scope to improve current policies and practices through a
clearer conceptual and strategic vision about what teachers need to know and to be
able to do; the role of specialist facilities; and the ways in which mainstream education
can be improved in order to educate all children. At times, progress seems to be slow.
But when one takes the long view, it is clear that many things have changed in the past
20 years.
In 1991, the United Kingdom adopted the United Nations Convention on the Rights
of the Child. Article 23 states the disabled child should have effective access to and
receive education that encourages the fullest possible social integration and development. In 1995, the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) provided comprehensible,
enforceable civil rights for disabled people. The United Kingdom was among the first
countries to sign and ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with
Disabilities (CRPD). Article 24 of the CRPD calls upon states to ensure that persons with
disabilities can access an inclusive quality and free primary education and secondary
education on an equal basis with others in the communities in which they live (United
Nations, 2006). As in other international policy documents, the ideals of inclusive education are seen as key to equality of opportunity for disabled people, but they have proved
difficult to implement.
The devolution of political power is leading to divergent approaches within the countries of the United Kingdom. This is reflected in different emphases in education policy,
different forms of data collected, and different approaches toward teacher professional
knowledge. As a result of devolution, the UK policy context is changing rapidly. There is
no doubt that further policy developments will continue to mark the distinctive approach
each country has adopted. It remains to be seen whether, to what extent, and how these
policy options affect outcomes for students with disabilities and other special educational needs (England and Northern Ireland), additional support needs (Scotland), or
additional learning needs (Wales).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
84

R E F E R E NC E S
Anderson, R. (2003). The history of Scottish education, pre 1880. In T. G. K. Bryce &
W. M. Humes (Eds.), Scottish Education (2nd ed., pp. 215224). Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.
Barnes, C., & Mercer, G. (2003). Disability. London: Polity Press.
Booth, T., & Ainscow, M. (2002). The index for inclusion: Developing learning and participation in
schools (Rev. ed.). Bristol, UK: Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education.
British Broadcasting Corporation. (2010). Access all areas: Disability survey. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11848338.
British Council. (n.d.). UK education systems. Retrieved from http://www.britishcouncil.org
/usa-education-uk-system-k-12-education.htm.
Cornwall, J., & Graham-Matheson, L. (2008). TDA pilot project: Strengthening the specialist SEN
expertise of serving teachers, final report to the teacher development agency. London: Training
and Development Agency for Schools.
Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment. (n.d.). Curriculum and assessment.
Retrieved from http://www.rewardinglearning.org.uk/curriculum.
de Blij, H. (2005). Why geography matters. New York: Oxford University Press.
Department for Children Schools and Families. (2009a). DCSF: Special educational needs in
England: June 2009. Retrieved from http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR
/s000852/index.shtml.
Department for Children Schools and Families. (2009b). Lamb inquiry: Special educational needs
and parental confidence. London: DCFS. Retrieved from http://www.education.gov.uk
/chi ld rena ndyou ng people/sen/sen/t y pes/a0 0 63735/la mb - inqu ir y - specia l
-educational-needs-and-parental-confidence.
Department of Education. (2010). Northern Ireland summary data. Retrieved from http://www
.deni.gov.uk/index/32-statisticsandresearch_pg/32-statistics_and_research_statis
tics_on_education_pg/32_statistics_and_research-numbersofschoolsandpupils_
pg/32_statistics_and_research-northernirelandsummarydata_pg.htm.
Department of Education for Northern Ireland. (1998). Code of practice on the identification and
assessment of special educational needs. Retrieved from http://www.deni.gov.uk/the_code_
of_practice.pdf.
Department of Education and Science. (1978). Special educational needs: Report of the Committee
of Enquiry into the education of handicapped children and young people (The Warnock Report).
London: Her Majestys Stationery Office.
Department of Education and Skills. (2001a). Inclusive schooling: Children with SEN. London:
Author.
Department for Education and Skills. (2001b). Special educational needs code of practice (revised).
London: Author.
Department for Education and Skills. (2003). Every child matters. Cm.5860. London: The
Stationery Office.
Department for Education and Skills. (2004a). National performance framework for special educational needs. London: Author.
Department for Education and Skills. (2004b). Removing barriers to achievement. London:
Author.
Farrell, P., Balshaw, M., & Polat, F. (1999). The management, role and training of learning support
assistants (Research Brief No. 166). London: DfEE Publications.
Florian, L. (2010). The concept of inclusive pedagogy. In G. Hallett & F. Hallett (Eds.), Transforming the role of the SENCO (pp. 6172). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
85
Florian, L., & Kershner, R. (2009). Inclusive pedagogy. In H. Daniels, H. Lauder, &
J. Porter (Eds.), Knowledge, values and educational policy: A critical perspective (pp. 173183).
Abingdon: Routledge.
Gillborn, D., & Youdell, D. (2000). Rationing education: Policy, practice, reform, and equity.
Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Government Equalities Office. (2010). Equality Act 2010. Retrieved from http://www.equalities
.gov.uk/equality_bill.aspx.
Her Majestys Inspectorate. (2004). Special needs and disability: Towards inclusive schools. London:
Author.
Home Office. (2007). Life in the United Kingdom: A journey to citizenship. Norwich, UK: The
Stationery Office.
Learning and Teaching Scotland. (n.d.). What is Curriculum for Excellence? Retrieved from
http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/understandingthecurriculum/whatiscurriculumfor
excellence/index.asp.
Leper, J. (2010). Rising numbers of NEET young people a key issue for coalition government.
Retrieved from http://www.cypnow.co.uk/news/ByDiscipline/Youth-Work/1003023
/Rising-numbers-Neet-young-people-key-issue-coalition-government.
MacKay, G., & McLarty, M. (2003). Educational support for children with disabilities. In T. G.
K. Bryce & W. M. Humes (Eds.), Scottish education: Post devolution (2nd ed., pp. 817826).
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
McLaughlin, M., & Rouse, M. (2000). Special education and school reform in Britain and the
United States. London: Routledge.
Office for National Statistics. (2010a). Ethnicity and identity: Population size. Retrieved from
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=455.
Office for National Statistics. (2010b). Population estimates. Retrieved from http://www
.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=6.
Office for Standards in Education. (2008). How well new teachers are prepared to teach pupils with
learning difficulties and/or disabilities. London: Author.
Office for Standards in Education. (2010). The special educational needs and disability review.
London: Author.
OGorman, E., Durdy, S., Winter, E., Smith, R., & Barry, M. (2009, October). Professional development for post-primary special educational needs teachers in Northern Ireland and the Republic
of Ireland. Belfast: Scotens.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). Quality and equity of
schooling in Scotland. Paris: Author.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (1999). The National Curriculum for England.
London: Author.
Rouse, M., & Florian, L. (1997). Inclusive education in the marketplace. International Journal
of Inclusive Education, 1, 323336.
Scottish Government. (2005). Supporting childrens learning code of practice. Retrieved from
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/08/15105817/58273.
Scottish Government. (2009). Statistical bulletin education series: Pupils in Scotland, 2006.
Retrieved from http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/167568/0046177.pdf.
Scottish Government. (2010). A guide to implementing Getting It Right for Every Child: Summary for
practitioners. Retrieved from www.scotland.gov.uk/Resources/Doc/1141/0100658.
Scottish Qualifications Authority. (2006, March). National qualifications: A quick guide.
Retrieved from http://www.sqa.org.uk/files_ccc/nq_quick_guide.pdf.
Scotland Teacher Education Committee. (2009). National framework for inclusion. Retrieved
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2009/04/26163423.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
86

Teachernet. (n.d.). Faith Schools. Retrieved from http://www.education.gov.uk/schools
/leadership/typesofschools/b0066996/faith-schools.
United Nations. (2006). United Nations Convention on the Rights and Dignity of Persons With
Disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=284.
Vaughn, M. (2002). University of the West of England. Milestones on the road to inclusion
19702002.
Retrieved
from
http://inclusion.uwe.ac.uk/inclusionweek/articles
/milestones.htm.
Warnock, M., Norwich, B., & Terzi, L. (2010). Special educational needs: A new look. London:
Continuum.
Wedell, K. (2005). What is reasonable progress for pupils? British Journal of Special Education,
32, 105.
Wedell, K. (2008). Evolving dilemmas about categorization. In L. Florian & M. McLaughlin
(Eds.), Disability classification in education (pp. 4768). Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Welsh Assembly. (2009). Pupils with statements of special educational needs January 2009. Retrieved
from http://wales.gov.uk/docs/statistics/2009/090617sdr932009en.pdf.
Welsh Assembly. (2010). Education and skills. Retrieved from http://wales.gov.uk/topics
/educationandskills/?lang=en.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
4
Reform, Restructure, and
Renew: Special Education
in Poland
Jolanta Baran
Poland is a relatively large nation situated in the center of the European continent. It
covers 312,679 square kilometres. The country is divided into 16 provinces (voivodships),
379 districts (powiaty), and 2,478 local government communes (gminy). In the year 2009,
Poland had a population of 38,167,329. The number of people living in urban areas
is increasing; it is now about 61%. The majority of the population is Polish (96.7%).
The most numerous minority groups are Germans (152,900), Belarusians (48,700),
Ukrainians (31,000), Romani people (12,900), Russians (6,100), Lemkos (5,900), and
Lithuanians (5,800).
Poland is a democratic parliamentary republic headed by a president elected by direct
popular vote for 5 years. The bicameral parliament consists of the 460 members of the
lower chamber (Sejm) and 100 members of the senate. Members of the Sejm and the senate are elected by general election for a 4-year term.
Jasiewicz (2009) points out that in Poland faith in God and habitual church attendance
has been preserved better than in any other European society (p. 494). About 89.8% of
the population are Roman Catholics (about 75% practicing). Other religions include
Eastern Orthodoxies (1.3%), Protestants (0.3%), other (0.3%), and unspecified (8.3%;
Central Statistical Office, 2009a).
The long history of Poland and the start of Polish statehood is said to have begun in 996
ad when the prince, Mieszko I of the nation of the Slavs, was baptized and joined medieval Western Christian civilization. In the long intervening centuries, Polands history
was turbulent times of great adversity, of many troubles, but also many triumphs.
At one time, Poland could have been described as a multicultural community. In 1939,
one-third of the total population of 35.1 million inhabitants were of national
minorities17% Ukranians and Belarusians, 10% Jews, 5% Germans, and 1% Russians,
Lithuanians, and Czechs. During the Nazi occupation of Poland in World War II, many
Poles and a huge number of the countrys minorities were killed. After the war, when the
communists took over the government, they made changes in the migration movement of
people as well. During that time, minority schools and religious schools were dissolved.
In 1989, huge political changes engulfed nations in Eastern and Central Europe
and forever changed what was then the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).
87
10/14/11 5:45 PM
88
Jolanta Baran
In Poland and other countries, communism was overthrown. Poland then passed
through a difficult, but very promising, era of extensive economic and political change.
The process of political change continues to this day and has transformed postcommunist Poland into a fully democratic society with social structures and political institutions
that reflect a democratic value system in form, content, and function (Mazurek &
Majorek, 2005).
T H E S C HO OL S Y S T E M
Since 1989, education reform has been one of the main vehicles for Polands ongoing
transformation. Education in Poland is defined as part of the common welfare of the
whole of society (ADAPT-Europe, 2007, n.p.). It is guided by the principles contained
in the Polish constitution and by instructions included in international legislation and
conventions (European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education, 2010b).
Debates and discussions at all levels of the countrys political spectrum affirm education as a priority, and identify how fundamental changes in education are crucial for
future social and political change (Mazurek & Mjorek, 2005). After Polands initial
period of transition the prospect of becoming part of the European Union (EU) was also
a prominent factor in formulating education policies. Poland became an EU member on
May 1, 2005.
The period of political transformation that began in 1989 brought about new legislation
that became the basis for changes in education. These multiple reforms modernized the
Polish school system and made it similar to the school systems of other European western
countries. Together with the implementation of new levels of schooling and new types of
schools, the reforms deemed special education to be an integral part of the education
system. Hence, the reforms favored early identification and intervention for students
with special education needs (SEN), as well as their integration into preschool programs
and later schooling.1
The legislative foundations for the functioning of the educational system in Poland
are based on acts relating to all levels of schooling, to SEN, and to higher education.
Particularly relevant legislation for all levels and for students with SEN is detailed in the
following list.
The Education System Act of November 7, 1991, with later amendments, spoke
to general schooling and created organizational norms for much broader forms
of education for pupils with SEN. The act provided education in all types of
1. Terminology and language remain confusing. Poland is 1 of the 27 member nations of the EU-funded
European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education (2010a), which aims to improve education
policy and practice for students with SEN. Therefore, I adopt the European phrase, special education needs in
this chapter.
People familiar with the inclusive agenda recognize that integration, mainstreaming, and inclusion are similar
but not identical terms. The dilemmas contained within these inherent concepts reflect on Polish legislative
foundations and also on the concepts used by researchers when examining the reform agenda. Some parties
argue that when speaking about all possible levels of integration, it is convenient to use one term nonsegregation
education (Szumski, 2006). Others reject this phrase: They see a word that has a root in segregation as inappropriate and not politically correct. For the purposes of this paper, the term integration/inclusion is used.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Reform, Restructure, and Renew
89
schools for students with SEN. Mainstream schools must provide special education, although the act also stated that education can be provided in segregated
special schools.
The Implementation of the Education System Reform Act of January 8, 1999,
with further amendments, brought the most critically important changes.
Mazurek and Mjorek (2005) observe that the scope of the 1999 reform initiative was enormous. It had four major components: It structurally changed the
entire education system from the nursery school level up to graduate studies
in universities; the administration and supervision of the education system was
changed: substantial curricular reforms and changes in teaching methods were
undertaken; external assessment and examination policies and procedures were
changed; and qualifications for the teaching profession were reviewed (also see
Jakubielski, 2002).
The 2004 Poland for Children National Program for 20042012 served as the foundation for special education reform. The goal of the implemented changes was to
provide equal access to education for each child through the creation of optimal
educational conditions with respect to the individual needs and potential of each
pupil with SEN.
The initial 2004 legislation was followed by a Minister of Education decree on
January 18, 2005. The decree focused on organizing education; improving the
upbringing and care for children and youth with SEN; and the care for socially
at-risk children in nursery schools, regular schools, and regular sections or special
sections in mainstream schools. It included details on psychological and pedagogical support centers; parental assistance; the integration of persons with special
needs into the larger society; preparation of students with SEN for independence
as adults; and evaluation of programs in preschools, in primary and secondary
education, and in prevention.
The act of July 25, 2005, the Higher Education Law, with later amendments and
further laws related to higher education.
An operational plan called the Effective, Friendly and Modern Education Plan
started in the 2009 to 2010 school year. It describes program changes, an earlier
start of education (beginning with 6-year-olds), and means to improve ways to
meet special educational needs compatible with the concept of lifelong learning.
A new law, the Education System Act of March 19, 2009, states that between 2009
and 2012 the school starting age (grade 1) will gradually be lowered from 7 to 6. In
line with this, kindergarten (grade 0) will become compulsory from age 5.
A Minister of National Education Decree of February 2, 2009, on organizing early
aid of childrens development, was designed to provide the most advantageous
conditions for children at risk in the early years.
The schools now covered by the Polish educational system are shown in Figure 1. Also
shown is the variety of settings and options for students with SEN that encompass special
10/14/11 5:45 PM
90
Jolanta Baran
Age
Master degree high education

Continuous master degree
high education
Bachelor degree high education
SECONDARY SCHOOL FINALS

Postsecondary
school*
Post-secondary
school*
Post-secondary
school*
Post-secondary
school*
19
Secondary school*
Specialized
secondary school*
Technical
secondary school*
Supple
mentary
secondary
school*
Supplementary
technical
secondary
school*
Vocational
school*
16
Lower secondary
school*
13
Primary school*
7
Pre-primary school*
6
Nursery school*
3
Figure 1. System of education in Poland including special schools, which are denoted by an
asterisk (*).
Source: Dostp osb niepenosprawnych do edukacjistan obecny, szanse i bariery (2006, Kwiecie). Warszawa:
Ministerstwo Edukacji i Nauki. BIP, p. 18.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
91
schools and special education centres, special classes (sections) in mainstream schools,
and inclusive classes in mainstream schools.
As Figure 1 shows, the Polish educational system includes:
Pre-primary education is part of the school system for children aged 3 years until
the time when they start primary education. Pre-primary classes are established in
nursery schools that are separate establishments or in nursery divisions based at
primary schools.
Starting with the 1999 to 2000 school year, the primary school is divided into
two stages. Stage 1 is grades 1 to 3 and is called integration (not to be confused
with integration for pupils with SEN) because teaching at this stage is designed
to ensure a smooth transition from preschool to primary school. Teaching is
arranged on an integrated basis. Stage 2, grades 4 to 6, is arranged by subject
areas.
Starting with the 1999 to 2000 school year, 3-year compulsory lower secondary
schools (which replaced 8-year primary schools).
Starting with the 2002 to 2003 school year, different types of upper secondary
schools have been established: 2- to 3-year vocational schools that provide training
for lower level employment, such as , 3-year general education secondary schools,
3-year specialized secondary schools, and 4-year technical secondary schools.
Starting with the 2004 to 2005 school year, 2-year supplementary secondary schools
and 3-year technical supplementary secondary schools for those who graduate
from vocational schools.
There are also general art schools (art, music, ballet, and so on) at the level of
upper secondary schools (leading to secondary school finals and professional certification) and postsecondary schools.
For students with SEN, the commonly accepted concept in Poland is for many pathways
to special schooling (Gil, 2007). The multifaceted solutions, which fall within the recommendations of the EU (Council of the European Union, 2008), range from special
schools to a combination of general and special education to full inclusion in the general
classroom.
The different types of special education match the types of education for typically
developing students as shown in Figure 1. There are:
Mainstream education units. A pupil with SEN in integrated/inclusive education
is perceived as an individual who gets some special aid while attending a regular class in a mainstream school. A psychological and pedagogical services center
assesses the students needs and potentials and then develops individualized programs for them. Individualization includes various forms of support such as therapeutic and compensatory classes, including didactic/compensatory functioning,
speech therapy, and social therapy.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
92
Jolanta Baran
Special education schools and units at all levels catering to all types of disabilities.
During the 2008 to 2009 school year, there were 632 primary special schools,
662 middle special schools, and 65 secondary special schools in urban areas. Far
fewer facilities are located in rural Poland chiefly because support agencies such
as psychological and pedagogical services tend to be located in cities. In 2008 to
2009, there were only 144 special primary schools, 162 special middle schools, and
8 special secondary schools in rural areas. Most of the special schools follow the
mainstream curriculum with the exception of schools for those students who are
deaf, blind, and intellectually impaired.
Special vocational education cater mostly to youth with mild intellectual
disabilities.
Since the 2004 to 2005 school year, 3-year special job-training schools (SJTS) have
been created that are only for persons with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities or those students with multiple disabilities.
Individual education programs at home have been developed for children who,
because of a health condition, cannot attend school every day.
Rehabilitation-education centers serve people who need a special program and
full daycare because of severe and multiple disabilities. At these centers, teachers
work on individual therapeutic/training plans and provide occupational therapy,
living and self-care training, and so on.
Special nursery schools are reserved for young children who have severe and
profound disabilities and who need special facilities for therapy, motor rehabilitation, and augmentative and alternative communication.
Special pre-primary schools exist as separate institutions or as part of special
education centers, rehabilitation-education centers, and in mainstream primary
schools.
Compulsory education is in force in Poland and includes students with significant intellectual and physical disabilities. Children enter the first year of formal schooling in the
calendar year when they are 7 years of age. Pupils with SEN can continue in preschool
until they reach age 10, if necessary. Students must remain in school until they reach the
age of 18; students with SEN can stay in school until the age of 21.
PR I VAT E S C HO OL S
Another component of the new legislation permitted the development of non-state-run
schools, which were previously unknown in Poland. Today, the schools are divided into
two sectors: public and nonpublic (civic/social, church, or private). It is possible for
students to earn the same state certificates and diplomas in nonpublic schools when
those schools implement the minimum program established by the Ministry of National
Education and respect its principles in regard to promoting students. Private schools
are financed by fees received from parents; they can also obtain money from private
10/14/11 5:45 PM
93
enterprises and foundations. Nonpublic schools with the rights of public schools are
eligible for a governmental grant calculated according to the number of pupils, which
equals 100% of the average cost of educating a pupil in a public school.
Children of religious or ethnic/racial minorities may attend a public school run by the
state government administration or local administrations. Alternatively, they may enter
nonpublic school under the auspices of social organizations and associations, religious
groups, and so on (Central Statistical, 2009b). There are no available statistics to specify
how many students attend which type of school.
The legislation similarly allows for the organization of special education schools and
care institutions to be governed by the government and local administrations. Foundations, associations, religious communities, and other groups were given the right to open
institutions to provide education, rehabilitation, and psychological and pedagogical support, among other services. Initiatives from associations and social organizations garnered donations that led to the growth of a number of facilities. For example, the number
of rehabilitation-education centers is growing because of private initiatives and because
many special institutions that were losing residents due to the integration/inclusion
movement converted into rehabilitation-education centers.

Poland has a long history of special education. Institutions for people with intellectual
disabilities were first organized in the 16th century by nuns and brothers of various
orders to provide medical treatment and education (Pilecka & Pilecki, 1994). For centuries, monasteries and convents tended to the care of persons with disabilities. At the
end of the 18th century, Poland lost its statehood after it was partitioned by Russia,
Austria, and Prussia. Education was organized by the invaders with the intent to deprive
Polish citizens of their national identity (Gil, 2007). The development of special care
also stopped. After Poland regained its independence in 1918, specialized institutions
were created (for example, institutions for deaf or blind people). Slowly, thanks to a
social and economic movement called organic work, more special institutions started
operating.2
During the period called the Second Republic following World War I, Maria
Grzegorzewska (18881967) established the National Special Education Institute in
Warsaw in 1921 (today it is the Academy of Special Education). The institute prepared
teachers for special schools and other institutions serving persons with disabilities.
Aleksander Hulek (19161993), who promoted integration of people with disabilities as
a rehabilitative tool, proposed that every child with a disability should be provided with
optimum conditions for living, growing, and learning in a natural environment (regular
school, family, neighborhood, local society) (1992).
2. According to Hagen (1975), organic work is a term denoting a 19th-century Polish philosophy that
the vital powers of the nation be spent on labour rather than fruitless national uprisings [which] meant
educating the Polish masses in their national language and history, improving both estate and peasant
agriculture through technical education, and encouraging the rise of Polish industry and trade as well
as arts and letters (p. 42).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
94
Jolanta Baran
Throughout World War II, special schools and the National Special Education Institute
were closed. Under the communist regime after the war, a Marxist-Leninist ideology
determined treatment for persons with disabilities. The social environment characterized disability as a source of shame and denial; the public environment legitimized the
state taking the role of caretaker. Intervention focused on defectology, a Soviet discipline
that stressed the causes, aspects, and substance of impairments and their impact on an
individual, while emphasizing special education as the best remedial treatment for
children with disabilities (United Nations Childrens Fund, 2005). In 1961, legislation
sanctioned segregation: It directed students with SEN to attend special preschools,
schools, and institutions. Most persons with disabilities were confined to segregated
institutions. As part of the political programs of the communist regime, schools and
universities were forced to implement communistic ideology into their pedagogy and
teaching curricula for pupils with SEN.
Currently, the theory and practice of educational integration/inclusion is passing
through a long and revolutionary route in Poland. The first visible and significant
transition of special education in the 1990s was characterized by legislation, different
forms of organizations such as private schools and agencies, varied placement options for
students with SEN, and many research initiatives. Modern Polish education has adopted
inclusion as the preferred model for serving pupils with SEN although a multitude of
different solutions joining elements of mainstream and segregated educational placements are available (European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education,
2010a; Gil, 2007). Both legislation and policy provide the possibility for students with
SEN to learn in all types of schools and have general access to secondary schools.
Approximately 14% of Polands population is considered to be disabled. The majority
of persons with disabilities are aged 55 and higher; most live in urban areas. Because of
the very low population growth, the last decade has seen the number of elderly persons
with disabilities overtake the number of school-age children (Central Statistical Office,
2008). According to official figures, 3% of the Polish school-age population has special
needs (Poland, 2007).
In children, the most prevalent etiologies leading to disabilities are related to acquired
origin. Meningitis and other serious inflammatory illnesses cause impairments of the
neurological system that appear as intellectual and sensorial disability in babies and very
young children. Genetic and other congenital conditions account for a small percentage
of causes. About 22% of extremely premature babies show severe developmental deficits:
intellectual disability, cerebral palsy, vision impairments, hearing impairments
(Ministerstwo Edukacji Narodowej, 2005).
The classification of disabilities used by the Ministry of National Education for statistical
reasons does not exactly match the types of special schools and specialist centers detailed in
legislative statements. The categories used by the ministry are deaf, hard of hearing, blind,
vision impaired, impaired motor skills, intellectual disability (mild, moderate, or severe),
autism, multiple disability, socially maladjusted, threatened with social maladjustment,
threatened with addiction, behavioral disorders, psychic disorders, and chronically ill.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
95
Pupils with specific learning disabilities (SLD) are not presented in the classification
although it is estimated that approximately 10% of the school-age population exhibits
SLD of different intensities. The significant majority of SLD students are in regular
schools. Some need a therapeutic school environment. For example, they may receive
remedial (psychological and pedagogical) support in school in the therapeutic section,
compensatory section, or specialist classes. Depending on an individuals needs, specialist classes might be corrective-compensatory, speech therapy, or social-therapeutic.
The population of boys outnumbers girls in special education nowadays: There are 94
girls for every 100 boys. In children and youth with disabilities, the proportion increases
for boys. There are 55 girls in primary and lower secondary schools to every 100 boys at
the same level of education (Central Statistical Office, 2009b).
In the 2008 to 2009 school year, the total primary school population was 2,294,434
pupils; the total number of the lower secondary school population was 1,393,692. Of
these, there were 26,342 students with SEN in special primary schools and 31,439 in
lower secondary special schools. Regular schools enrolled 39,877 SEN pupils in the primary grades and 26,848 in lower secondary (Central Statistical, 2009b).
More than half of primary school-age children with SEN (59.3%) were in integration/
inclusion; this accounted for 2.8% of the total school population in the 2008 to 2009
school year. Rates were not as high in lower secondary schools; 55.9% of pupils with disabilities are in special education although this is 4.1% of the entire school population
(Central Statistical Office, 2009b).
The population of pupils with mild intellectual disabilities is the largest among all of
those with disabilities in Poland. Most often, these children start education in regular
schools. Later, 80.3% of such students learn in special vocational schools. Children with
hearing or vision impairments, and those with physical disabilities, are found more often
in integration/inclusion than in segregation.
In secondary schools, the most numerous groups of youth with disabilities are
those physically disabled (23.4%), chronically ill (16.4%), visually disabled and
hearing disabled (equally 9.7%), and mildly intellectually disabled (9.4%). Young persons with hearing impairments and those with physical disabilities are more likely
than other groups with disabilities to continue education in postsecondary schools
(Central Statistical Office, 2009b). The rates in higher education are persons with
chronic illness (60%), persons with physical disabilities (25%), those blind and with
vision disabilities (8%), and deaf as well as persons with hearing disabilities (6.5%)
(Cierpiatowska, 2009).
E A R LY I N T E RV E N T ION
Preschool education in Poland comprises children aged 3 to 6. Younger children may
attend nursery schools supervised by the Ministry of Health. The forms of organization
of nursery schools and pre-primary schools for children with disabilities are similar to
the other levels of education.
Pre-primary education for children with SEN is not compulsory. However, children of
any kind and any level of disability have the right to access services. Early intervention
support is aimed at children to stimulate their development and to offer their parents
10/14/11 5:45 PM
96
Jolanta Baran
guidance. The support is provided by early support teams that include different specialists such as psychologists, physicians, and speech therapists.
In the years between 2005 and 2007, the government launched a pilot program on
early intervention. The main goal was to devise an early, multispecialist, comprehensive,
coordinated, and continuous method to identify children at risk for disabilities or children with established disabilities, as well as plans to serve the needs of these children
and their families at an optimal level (Raport, 2008). The task of coordinating included
three departments (health, education, and social politics) and resulted in a universal
model of early aid services.
As discussed earlier in this chapter, legislative decisions to accompany the research
and the educational model have emerged. Both public and private institutions are
recommended for early intervention. They can be psychological and pedagogical
services centers, specialist centers, special schools and special education centers,
rehabilitation-education centers, or at-home programs. The team for early aid includes
a special teacher with respect to a kind of disability (specifically intellectual, hearing or
vision), a psychologist, a speech therapist, and other specialists adequate to a childs
needs.
In the last decade, the overall number of children in nursery schools and pre-primary
schools decreased. One reason is that Poland has a negative population growth. In
addition, more than half of all families do not take advantage of such institutions. However,
the numbers of children with SEN attending preschool institutions is relatively high. Of
the total preschool population, there are approximately 1.9% in the age range of 0 to 4
years and 2.8% age 5 to 9 years (Ministerstwo Edukacji Narodowej, 2004). Nevertheless,
many parents do not try to place their disabled child in any preschool institution. Reasons
include false information or lack of information and knowledge about their childs needs
and rights, barriers to transportation, and social isolation of the family. The availability
and openness of nursery schools and pre-primary schools also remains limited.
A PPROAC H I NG I N T EG R AT ION
The number of students in special schools and settings decreases year by year. When
compared to special schools and special centers, the past decade has seen an increasing
number of pupils enter integration/inclusive education. A group of philosophical and
practical reasons underlie the slow and gradual change from segregation to integration/
inclusion. These include:
Many people consider that the costs for inclusion are less than for segregated
education. For example, when pupils are in segregated settings, class sizes are kept
small depending on the type of disability. Generally, for pupils with multiple disabilities or autism, including Aspergers syndrome the maximum class size is 4
students; for deaf or hard of hearing pupils and those with moderate or severe
intellectual disabilities, the maxium class size is 8; for blind pupils or those with
low vision, up to 10; for pupils with physical/motor disabilities, including aphasia,
up to 12; for pupils with mild intellectual disability, with social maladjustment,
and threatened with social maladjustment, up to 14; for pupils with profound
10/14/11 5:45 PM
97
intellectual disability in rehabilitation-education centers, up to 4. Class sizes in

special sections in mainstream schools match these. On the other hand, when a
child is integrated/included into a regular classroom, the legal regulations say
that on each level of education (including nursery schools and in pre-primary
schools) the total number of pupils can be up to 20, including 3 to 5 pupils with
disabilities.
Central (government) administration entities promote integration/inclusion. For
example, the government decided to distribute more money (an education bonus/
voucher) for each student placed in an integrated/inclusive setting and give less
for segregated placements.
The pressure on schools to provide integration/inclusion options comes from the
parents of children with SEN. Parents are becoming more and more aware of their
rights and their power to send their children to special institutions and to obtain
specialist treatment for them. Parents create associations, foundations, or solidarity communities that have forced many changes in legislation and led to the provision of better rehabilitation and education facilities. Individual parents fight for
their child to have the optimum level of support.
There is a growing number of books and papers that postulate the ideas of integration/inclusion, give information about the principles, show and explain the
paradigms, and discuss effectiveness based on qualitative and quantitative studies
(e.g., Dykcik, 2006; Korzon, 2009; Rakowska, 2007).
In terms of educational placement, psychological and pedagogical services centers are
generally a first step for a child with SEN. Entry into a nursery school or a school of any
level is founded upon the opinion of the need for special education written by a judgment team at a psychological and pedagogical services center. The team consists of a
group of professionalsthe head of the psychological and pedagogical services center,
a psychologist, a special education teacher, a physician, and other specialists depending
on the childs needs. The judgment does not mean that the child has to be placed in any
specific setting, but it does provide a legal base to ensure that special educational conditions are available in any school. As well as diagnosing a child and writing a judgment on
the need for special education, personnel include recommendations helpful for teachers
and other school specialists.
Once a child is identified as having special needs, local governments supported by
federal funding must provide appropriate special education (Gil, 2007). Integration/
inclusion under Polish education legislation is not obligatory for a child with SEN. It is
up to the parents to choose what form of education they want for their child. If the
parents wish it to be integration/inclusion (which now happens more often), the head of
a school has to organize the educational conditions in a proper way to meet the needs of
the child. Therefore, when and if mainstream educational experiences are provided to
SEN pupils, they are dependent upon the availability of school resources and the predisposition of the school administrator (Gil, 2007). And, because education is decentralized,
local administrations have to find enough money to cover the costs of integration in the
schools.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
98
Jolanta Baran
Students with SEN who are integrated/included follow the same curriculum as the
other students, if their learning capabilities meet the required standards. If learning difficulties make it impossible for a child to follow the class, then an individual curriculum
is provided (Hyzniak, 2008). In the classroom, two teachers work with pupils at the same
time during activities. These are referred to as the leading teacher and the supportive
teacher. The latter is a special teacher with additional teaching certification such as an
early education certificate or any school subject certificate. The role of the support
teacher includes making the school syllabus compatible with the capabilities of a child;
setting individual learning targets for a child; making decisions about the grades a child
receives; corresponding with the childs parents; and personally assisting children
throughout the day (Hyzniak, 2008).
It is a rule that the space in a classroom for integration/inclusion has specific arrangements. The distinguished zones include a relaxation zone; an individual work zone for
special methods used by the supportive teacher in a one-to-one situation to avoid any
disturbances in other pupils participating in the lesson process; and special equipment
appropriate to an individuals special education needs.
Teachers who work with pupils with SEN need additional qualifications. This is usually
a special education certificate, often with a major in intellectually disabled education
because pupils with that disability outnumber those with others disabilities, although it
may also be in other specializations. Teachers working with young children with SEN are
supposed to have at at least a B.A. in pre-primary education. In special nursery schools
and in special pre-primary schools, teachers are special educators with respect to the
particular type of disability.
The Education Development Center (ORE) under the Ministry of National Education
is responsible for coordinating the work of regional subagencies and for providing information and training for professionals to understand pupils with SEN. Currently, teachers
have wide access to postgraduate studies, professional vocational courses, workshops,
and other enriched activities. Universities and colleges offer courses in special education, remedial work, psychological and pedagogical support, and many other offerings
at the undergraduate, graduate, and postgraduate levels to provide the qualifications
needed.
However, since Poland is a member of the EU, it must conform to the Bologna System
of Education. The Bologna Systems requirements conflict with the present Polish special
education training.
Since integration/inclusion in education has become a fact in Poland, discussions about
its legitimacy no longer occur (Baran, 2000). Nevertheless, the multidimensionality of
the phenomenon brings complex dilemmas that are theoretical, philosophical, pedagogical, and social, as well as economic and legislative.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
99
Gil (2007) points out that, The situation for disabled people in Poland appears
virtually perfect from a policy perspective; however, from a practical perspective, much
work is needed (p. 45). The following are conclusions based on inquiry and research
with teachers and other education specialists about the difficulties in implementing integration/inclusion education reform in Poland.
Theoretical debates abound. Some highly regarded educators argue for more policy to reform mainstream schooling; other equally eminent voices argue for the
retention of separate facilities. At the same time, some researchers argue that the
principles of integration in the least restrictive environment clash with the ideals
of inclusion. For example, if pupils with different abilities and those with SEN
participate together in the same lesson, the teacher has to organize the process in
a very restrictive and structured way in order to meet the educational needs of all
the different pupils. While the process may be good for some pupils, it may not suit
others, such as those who are more creative or gifted.
The current legal and policy frameworks in Poland do not provide children with
assistance to integrate into society. The potential of the legislation aimed at helping children to participate fully in school life is typically hypothetical and rarely
put into practice (Gil, 2007, p. 45).
There are approximately 3 to 4 times fewer available places in integration than are
needed (Apanel, 2009). Nor is every school and every teacher ready to organize
integrative/inclusive education.
There is a low awareness of SEN among regular school teachers together with a
lack of appropriate teacher preparation to work with SEN pupils. For example, a
comparative study of changes in the preparation for teachers who work in regular
schools with pupils with SEN (Gajdzica, 2006) did not show significant growth
when comparing the data of the 1999 to 2000 school year with those of the 2004 to
2005 school year. Ninety percent of teachers claimed that when they teach a regular class they do not spend the time with SEN pupils that is necessary to execute
the students program requirements and to support their development appropriately. Less then half of the teachers differentiated teaching methods; about the
same number favored observation and practical methods.
The contradictory perceptions of inclusion have to be evaluated within a context
of reduced budgets for education. The budget is not high enough to respect all
expectations in this area and there is a lack of money for the equipment needed
in schools.
There are not enough professionals to support integration/inclusion. The lack
includes specialists such as speech therapists, remedial teachers, and therapeutic
teachers for children in pre-primary schools and for pupils with cerebral palsy,
speech disorders, and learning disabilities (Apanel, 2009).
Parents are less satisfied with integrated/inclusive education than are leading
teachers and supportive teachers. Parents satisfaction is correlated with their
10/14/11 5:45 PM
100
Jolanta Baran
childrens feelings about their classmates affinity level and their satisfaction with
the supportive teacher.
There are differing expectations. School personnel and parents argue about the
range of services promised as opposed to the ones offered by the school. They also
argue about the desired or expected outcomes by parents for their child.
Parents of nondisabled students often have negative social attitudes toward students
with SEN.
Pupils with SEN often occupy poor social positions in mainstream schools.
SEN children often dont have sufficient preparation during their preschool period
to start primary education.
FUTUR E TR ENDS
The phrase education for all (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization, 2005) has greatly impacted legislative decisions and initiatives by the Polish
government. The optimistic and expected perspective is that integration/inclusion will
bring good results for all pupils in all areas of their lives and also in the school system.
The Ministry of Education program for the coming years is focused on the activation
of such assumptions. To accomplish this, supportive teams will be created in each school
to supervise and to aid a teachers work. Professionals called methodical advisors (from
the Education Development Center local agencies) and leader teachers will play a
significant role in giving directions and help.
This perspective calls for a new profile of teacher competencies and better teacher
preparation in individual work techniques and in special education issues in order to
meet the needs of pupils with SEN appropriately. A new model of cooperation between
schools, psychological and pedagogical services centers, other agencies, and parents will
be devised.
R E F E R E NC E S
ADAPT-Europe. (2007). Poland. Retrieved from http://www.adapt-europe.org/poland
/education.htm.
Apanel, D. (2009). Edukacja integracyjna jako obszar zainteresowania pedagogiki specjalnej
[Inclusive education as an area of interest in special education]. In G. Dryaowska, &
H. uraw (Eds.). Trwao i zmiana w pedagogice specjalnej [Persistence and change in special
education] (pp. 167179). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Akademickie AK.
Baran J. (2000). Otwarto i gotowo nauczycieli do zmian systemu edukacji [Teachers
readiness and willingness to change the education system]. In A. Rakowska & J. Baran
(Eds.) Dylematy pedagogiki specjalnej [Dilemmas in special education] (pp. 97103). Krakw:
Wydawnictwo Naukowe Akademii Pedagogicznej.
Central Statistical Office (2008). Demographic yearbook of Poland. Warszawa: Zakad Wydawnictw
Statystycznych.
Central Statistical Office (2009a). Concise statistical yearbook of Poland. Warszawa: Zakad
Wydawnictw Statystycznych.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
101
Central Statistical Office (2009b). Education in 2008/2009 school year. Warszawa: Zakad
Wydawnictw Statystycznych.
Cierpiatowska T. (2009). Studenci z niepenosprawnoci. Problemy funkcjonowania edukacyjnego
i psychospoecznego [Students with disabilities. Educational and psychosocial functioning problems]. Krakw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Pedagogicznego.
Council of the European Union. (2008). Resolutions on the situations of persons with disabilities in
the European Union. Report 6941/08. Brussels: Author.
Dykcik W. (2006). Otwarto pedagogiki specjalnej [The scope of special education]. In
C. Kosakowski, A. Krause, & S. Przybyliski (Eds.) Pomidzy teori a praktyk. Dyskursy
pedagogiki specjalnej t. 5 [Between theory and practice. Discourses in special education vol. 5]
(pp. 1319). Olsztyn: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warmisko-Mazurskiego.
Dostp osb niepenosprawnych do edukacjistan obecny, szanse i bariery [Disabled persons access
to educationcurrent status, opportunities and barriers]. (2006, Kwiecie). Warszawa:
Ministerstwo Edukacji i Nauki. BIP.
European Agency for Development in Special Education Needs (EADSEN) (2010a). Retrieved
from www.european_agency.org.
European Agency for Development in Special Education Needs (2010b). Legal system, Poland.
Retrieved from http:// www.european.org/country-information/poland/national.
Gajdzica, Z. (2006). O wychowaniu i ksztaceniu dzieci o specjalnych potrzebach
edukacyjnych w szkole oglnodostpnej [On the upbringing and education of children
with special educational needs in mainstream schools]. In J. Wyczesany & Z. Gajdzica
(Eds.). Uwarunkowania edukacji i rehabilitacji uczniw o specjalnych potrzebach w rozwoju
[Developmental determinants in the education and rehabilitation of students with special needs]
(pp. 98145). Krakw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Akademii Pedagogicznej.
Gil, M. (2007). From segregation to equalization: The Polish perspective on educating
children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Education, 2,
4052.
Hulek, A. (1992). Ewolucja integracyjnego systemu ksztacenia dziecka niepenosprawnego
[The evolution of an inclusive education system for disabled children]. In A. Hulek, &
B. Grochmal-Bach (Eds.). Ucze niepenosprawny w szkole powszechnej [The disabled student
in elementary school] (pp. 1333). Krakw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe WSP.
Hyzniak, A. (2008). Case study: Special education needs children in mainstream education
in Poland. Retrieved from http://www.hltmag.co.uk/jan08/stud03/html.
Jakubielski, L. (2002). Reform in a changing society: The case of Poland. Retrieved from
http://www.umich.edu/~iinet/crees/outreach/jakubeilski.htm.
Jasiewicz, K. (2009). The past is never dead: Identity, class, and voting behavior in
contemporary Poland. Eastern European Politics and Society 2, 491508.
Korzon, A. (2009). Ksztacenie integracyjne niepenosprawnych potrzeba specjalnych
kompetencji nauczyciela szkoy oglnodostpnej [Inclusive education for the disabled
Required competencies for general school teachers]. In T. kowska, & I. RamikMaewska (Eds.). Wielowymiarowo edukacji i rehabilitacji osb zniepenosprawnoca [The
dimensions of educating and rehabilitating persons with disabilities] (pp. 723729). Szczecin:
Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Szczeciskiego.
Mazurek, K., & Majorek, C. (2005). Poland: Transformations in society and schooling. In
K. Mazurek & M. Winzer (Eds.). Schooling around the world: Debates, challenges, and practices
(pp. 264283). New York: Pearson.
Ministerstwo Edukacji Narodowej. (2005). Wczesna, wielospecjalistyczna, kompleksowa,
skoordynowana i ciga pomoc dziecku zagroonemu niepenosprawnoci lub
niepenosprawnemu oraz jego rodzinie. Program rzdowypilota 20052007.
(2005) [Early, multidisciplinary, comprehensive, coordinated and ongoing help
for children with disabilities and their families. The government programA pilot
10/14/11 5:45 PM
102
Jolanta Baran
project 20052007 (2005)]. Retrieved from http://www.men.gov.pl/index.php?option
=com_content&view=article&id=446%3 Aqwczesna-wielospecjalistyczna-kompleksowa
-skoordynowana-i-ciga-pomoc-dziecku-zagroonemu-niepenosprawnoci-lub-niepeno
sprawnemu-oraz-jego-rodzinieq&catid=118%3Apomoc-psychologiczno-pedagogiczna
&Itemid=155.
Ministerstwo Edukacji Narodowej. (2008). Raport z realizacji pilotau programu rzdowego
Wczesna, wielospecjalistyczna, kompleksowa, skoordynowana i ciga pomoc dziecku zagroonemu
niepenosprawnoci lub niepenosprawnemu oraz jego rodzinie (WWKSC) w latach 20052007
[Report on the implementation of a government pilot program titled Early,
multidisciplinary, comprehensive, coordinated and ongoing help for children with
disabilities and their families (WWKSC), 2005-2007]. Zesp Roboczy ds. Ewaluacji i
Monitoringu Pilotau Programu WWKSC. Warszawa: Author.
Pilecka W., & Pilecki J. (1994). Poland. In M. A. Winzer, & K. Mazurek (Eds.), Comparative
studies in special education (pp. 334349). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Rakowska A. (2007). Dylematy edukacyjne nauczycieli szk specjalnych [Dilemmas of
special education teachers]. In C. Kosakowski, A. Krause, A. yta (Eds.) Osoba z
niepenosprawnoci w systemie rehabilitacji, edukacji i wsparcia spoecznego. Dyskursy pedagogiki
specjalnej t. 6 [Rehabilitation, education, and social support for persons with disabilities.
Discourses in special education, vol 6] (pp. 5964). Olsztyn: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu
Warmisko-Mazurskiego.
Szumski, G. (2006). Integracyjne ksztacenie niepenosprawnych. Sens i granice zmiany edukacyjnej
[Inclusive education and learning disabilities. Understanding the meanings and boundaries of
educational change]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN SA.
United Nations International Childrens Fund. (2005). Children and disability in transition in
CEE/CIS and Baltic states. Florence, Italy: Author.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2005). Guidelines for
inclusion: Ensuring access to education for all. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org
/images/0014/001402/140224e.pdf.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
5
Special Education from an
International Perspective:
The Case of Germany
Olga Graumann and

Ulf Algermissen
Germany is a federal state in Central Europe. It has a population of about 80 million

people living in an area covering 357,112 square kilometers. The population density
is one of the highest in the world. Despite some encouraging figures in January 2010,
demographic figures show a serious decline: The most recent fertility rate (the average
number of children born per woman in her childbearing years) is now down to 1.36 (as
of 2009), one of the lowest rates worldwide. The average age of the population is relatively high at 43 years.
In 1918, following the First World War, the monarchy was replaced by a new form of
government. The Weimar Republic brought numerous reforms to the world of education
that stemmed from nationally and internationally known reform educationalists such as
Georg Kerschensteiner, Maria Montessori, and John Dewey. The Weimar Constitution of
1919 also provided, for the first time, a period of 4-year common schooling for children
from all social classes and religions in primary schools, from which secondary education
was to build. With the seizing of power by Adolf Hitler in 1933, the Third Reich ended
these efforts. The threads were taken up again after World War II and have featured
prominently in the education scene in Germany until today.
At the end of World War II in 1945, Germany was divided into four zones of occupation.
In 1949 the three western zones became the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG); the
remaining eastern Soviet zone was the German Democratic Republic (GDR). The GDR
was separated from the rest of Germany by the so-called iron curtain, which in its
tangible form ran through the middle of Germanys largest city, Berlin. This made Berlin
an island in Eastern Germany, separating East and West and the zones of occupation.
In the late 1980s, changes in the Soviet Union, in particular glasnost and perestroika,
made the end of the Cold War possible. Germany was reunified in 1990. The GDR school
system, oriented toward the Soviet Union, was adapted to that of Western Germany.
According to its constitution, Germany is a federal parliamentary representative
democratic republic consisting of 16 Lnder (states). One of the founding members of
the European Union, Germany together with 16 other EU countries forms a currency
union known as the Euro zone. Germany belongs among the most highly developed
countries in the world. It is a member of the United Nations (UN), the Organisation of
The authors would like to express their gratitude to David Whybra for his careful and thoughtful
translation of this chapter from German into English.
103
10/14/11 5:45 PM
104

Economic Co-operation and Development, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the
Organization of Security and Co-operation in Europe, the European Council, the G8
group, and the G20 group. With reference to the nominal gross domestic product,
Germany has the largest economy in Europe and the fourth largest in the world. In 2009,
it was the second largest export nation, and the third largest import nation.
In terms of religion, one-third of the German population is Catholic, one-third
is Protestant, and one-third has no religious leaning. About 5% of the population
originates from a Muslim country, but there are no statistics to say whether they do, in
fact, practice Islam.
Currently, about 14% of the populationespecially the long-term unemployed,
immigrants, and single motherslive near the poverty line. Moreover, the trend is
becoming stronger. Nevertheless, one must speak of relative rather than absolute poverty
in Germany.
In the face of economic problems from reduced economic growth, globalization,
demographic developments, the national debt, and unemployment, the point has come
where Germany can still be called a social state, but where change in the form of dismantling the social state is now prevalent. The number of unemployed (including people in
short-term employment, part-time jobs, odd jobs, and on government programs) is increasing and the gap between welfare development and poverty is widening. Germany is heavily
in debt, and politicians and employers increasingly call for drastic cuts in state expenditure,
particularly in social assistance programs. Like in all societies, low-income families,
immigrants, and people with disabilities are especially hit by economic crises and by the
reduction of social support. In comparison to numerous other industrial states, Germany
is still doing well regarding social assistance, and we remain hopeful that an upturn of the
economy will have a positive effect for the marginal people in German society.
Since the 1950s, Germany has increasingly become a country of immigration. At the
moment, almost 2 million people of Turkish nationality live in Germany. Another 2
million belong to Greek, Italian, Croatian, Serbian, and other ethnicities. Since the end
of the 1980s, Germany has also taken in more than 100,000 so-called latecomers each
yearthat is, ethnic Germans from the former Soviet Union. This means that about 19%
of the total population are first-, second-, or third-generation immigrants. These waves
of immigration have had sustainable effects on the German education system.
T H E G E R M A N S C HO OL S Y S T E M
Each of the 16 federal states has its own ministry of education. Each state enjoys cultural
sovereignty and individual ministries determine their own school system. All 16 ministers
of education are members of the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and
Cultural Affairs of the States in the Federal Republic (in German, the KMK). As early as
1955, decisions and joint agreements of the KMK created a common framework for their
school systems that guaranteed the correspondence or comparability of the curricula,
final qualifications, and teacher education and training. The KMK thus enables a high
measure of mobility for learners and teachers within Germany. Directives on content
in the subjects and areas of learning are issued additionally as recommendations to be
accommodated in the curricula of each state.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Special Education from an International Perspective
105
All schools in Germany are public schools: The state and the local authorities are always
involved, even if the schools are privately funded. Public responsibility for the individual
school is reflected in the educational aims and in matters of administration. Under the
Basic Law (Article 6 II), parents have the right to choose the appropriate school type for
their child. However, the government may restrict this right for educational reasons.
There is also a basic right to free development of personality (Article 2 I). This applies to
freedom of worship, for which a place must be found in educational institutions.
The government supplies the schools with staffteachers are paid by the respective
federal state. The school-maintaining body or local authority bears the remaining costs
for primary schools and secondary schools. As a rule, they are also responsible for schools
with special needs, insofar as they are not otherwise maintained by agencies such as
church or humanitarian associations like Diakonie, Caritas, or the Lebenshilfe. The
material costs borne by the local authority are chiefly constructing school buildings and
equipping them with amenities. The local authorities are also responsible for maintaining
the buildings; supplying the teaching and learning materials; possibly supervising the
children outside of lessons; and paying for miscellaneous nonteaching personnel such as
janitors and administrative staff.
In general, the primary schools are half-day schools that offer neither lunch nor an
afternoon program. The necessity for, and the supervision of, pupils after their lessons
has been fiercely discussed in Germany for decades. The numbers of schools with an
afternoon program and the numbers of all-day schools have been climbing, but to a different degree in the individual federal state. In these cases, the parents are obliged to
contribute to the cost of food and supervision.
The German system is described as tripartite. As Figure 1 shows, pupils are selected
after 4 years in primary school for the secondary phase. This controversial issue has
been discussed for decades. A recent event illustrates the flavor of the debate. When
the government of the city-state of Hamburg put forward a draft law in 2010 for the
extension of the primary school stage to 6 years, the population rejected this draft in
a referendum.
Critics still plead for an 8- to 10-year basic education so that individual talents and
abilities will be able to develop and not become abruptly suppressed by school decisions
made at the age of 10. However, the federal states have been unable to decide on the
abolition of early selection: Six-year primary education only exists in two federal states.
As mentioned, the general school system is often referred to as the tripartite system.
The schools for special needs, or special support schools as they are called today, are often
not considered in descriptions or public statistics of the general tripartite school system.
In truth, however, the special schools are a fourth part of the school system that selects
children during their early primary years according to special needs categories and individual development characteristics.
Special schools take a large share of the pupils in urban environments. This can be
explained by the urban mix of socioculturally disadvantaged children and young people,
whether immigrants or not, who are in need of special learning support. With the exception of placements for children with learning disabilities or language difficulties, special
institutions are, as a rule, all-day schools, often combined with a boarding school. This is
discussed in greater detail in the following.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
106

Sonderschule (special school)
Hauptschule
(general education
secondary school)
Grundschule
(primary
school)
Berufsbildungsjahr/
Duale Ausbildung
(special vocational year/
dual vocational training)
Realschule
(middle education
secondary school)
Berufsschule/Berufsaufbauschule/Fachoberschule
(vocational school/
technical secondary
school)
Gymnasium
(grammar school)
gymnasiale Oberstufe
(senior grammar school)
or
Gesamtschule
(comprehensive
school)
berufliches Gymnasium
(vocational high school)
Berufspraxis
(vocational
practice)
Fachhochschule
(university of
applied sci.)
Universitt
(univerisity)
4 Jahre (4 years); 5 bis 6 Jahre (5 to 6 years); 3 Jahre (3 years); 3+2 Jahre (years)
Figure 1. Schulsystem DeutschLand (School System of Germany).
T H E DE V E L OPM E N T O F I N T EG R AT ION I N G E R M A N Y A N D T H E
C ON T E X T OF I T S J US T I F IC AT ION
Legislation
One normative definition of disability does not exist. On the contrary, the terms to
describe disabilities vary around the world. National legislation means that disabilities
are interpreted quite differently in different nations. In general, however, legislation
establishes who is entitled to what forms of education or, possibly, who has to be
protected.
In Germany, the laws in question are the Federal Social Security Law, the Employment
Support Law, and the Federal Severely Disabled Law. Health insurance covers medical
and complementary services for the indisposed and the disabled regarding rehabilitation. Legally fixed employment support is for vocational and supplementary purposes.
There also exists a certain right to social indemnification (Antor & Bleidick, 2001).
Article 3(2) in the German Basic Law, added in 1994, is decisive. It states that, No one is
to be disadvantaged on account of a disability. Nevertheless, the discussion about equality under public law continues in Germany.
History of Special Education

From the end of the 18th century an obligation for children to attend lessons existed
in all the former German states. However, the idea of general education for the people,
arising out of the impulses of the Reformation and Enlightenment in the 16th and 17th
centuries, did not find any reflection in everyday school practice. For want of money, only
half of the children were able to attend lessons.
The first attempts to offer schooling to disabled children involved those deaf and blind
people who were also members of the nobility and privileged classes. In 1778, the first
institution for the deaf and dumb was founded in Leipzig. In 1808, the first school for the
10/14/11 5:45 PM
107
blind was established in Berlin. Seventy years later, the first schools for children with
learning difficulties were founded.
It was only during the 1960s that a wide expansion of schools for special needs began.
Special needs schools were created to cater to 11 groups of disability. The disability
groups were: learning, language, mental, hearing, deafness, sight, blindness, physical,
behavior, serious multiple disabilities, and illness. The schools for special needs promised, among other things, homogeneous classes, small class size with stronger individualization and differentiation, subject content appropriate to the slower learning speed of
disabled children, optimal dovetailing of the pupils learning requirements and teaching steps, well-illustrated teaching materials, and specially qualified teachers.
One reason for the increase in the number of schools for children needing learning
support was the trend to a performance-oriented society and school system. This brought
with it the necessity that the learning of typical pupils in general schools would not be
disturbed nor endangered by slower pupils (Graumann, 2000). Still, the 1960s also saw
moves toward more democracy being called for by the state, which equated with
developments in the education system toward equality of opportunity, emancipation,
and self-independence.
Of course, this encouraged various education policy debates and increasingly strong
criticisms of the separation of children with disabilities into schools for special needs. In
determining societys share in the causation and remediation of learning problems, for
the first time schooling itself was considered to be the possible cause of failing
performance.
Some people argued that the separation processes, which go hand in hand with
certain types of disability, offer the opportunity to justify specific claims for help and
support. Counterarguments claimed that special schools harbor the danger of
segregation and labeling, which then causes social disadvantage. With separation and
differentiation, special needs education does not succeed in sufficiently achieving its
quality standards. Problems then arise involving stigmatization and labeling, poor
transferability to general schooling and to working life, a lessening of development
opportunities through a reduction of the learning materials and of social contacts, and
the cementing of social inequality (Graumann & Rakhkochkine, 2007). School marks
and selection procedures were similarly criticized because they drew mainly children
from families with a low social profile into the vicious circle of insufficient early
conditioning for learning, subsequent bad marks, and finally transfer to special needs
education. Nevertheless, even as the legitimate nature of special needs education fell
into a crisis both on the educational policy level and on the level of content, special
schools continued to expand.
At the end of the 1970s, after approval by the school authorities of a number of federal
states, the first pilot projects working on integration were set up. In 1975, the Flming
primary school in Berlin (Projektgruppe Integrationsversuch, 1988) became the first
school in the state system in the FRG and West Berlin to begin to teach disadvantaged
and nondisadvantaged children in one classa so-called integration class. It thus
became a guiding light for all those schools that were prepared to give integration a try.
The basic conditions were 15 pupils, of which 3 to 5 children had some special need,
and team-teachingthe cooperation of general educational and special needs
competences.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
108

In 1994, the KMK passed a resolution on special needs support in the schools of the
FRG. With this recommendation, the work toward inclusive education and common
teaching was expressly supported for the first time. The term special school need was
replaced by special educational support. Only after the verification of special educational
support could that learning location be chosen, which best meets the support needs of
the child or young person (KMK, 1994).
By 2009, the Web site of the KMK stated that:
The plurality of support locations, the experience with inclusive teaching of disabled
and nondisabled children, educational science thought-provoking impulses from
educational science and the focus of educational policy in the federal Lands clearly
show that the child-centered, individualizing perspective of special needs support
and integrative education have priority over institution-related support. (2010)
In almost all federal states, legal regulations are now in place with respect to the integrated
education of disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged children. Legally, parents have the
opportunity to request integration for their children, but the regulations offer no legal
entitlement. A general school may only be chosen as a learning support location if the
required material conditions and personnel exist, and if the school authority agrees.
Thus, the decision for or against integration primarily depends not on an educational
recommendation, but on the goodwill of the state, or town council, to bear the necessary
material and personnel costs.
Since March 2009, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(2006) has required the federal, state, and town/city authorities in Germany to apply the
law for people with disabilities in order for them to achieve self-determination and equal
participation in society. In Article 24 of the convention, an inclusive system of education
is called for in which children with disabilities are, in general, to be taught together with
nondisadvantaged children at general schools. That is, students with disabilities must
have the same rights as other children in the community and must receive access to
inclusive, high-standard, and free primary and secondary schooling.
Following the 2006 UN Convention and its claim for inclusive education systems, no
German federal state can abdicate its responsibility for more inclusion. As we shall see,
the application of this demand has not been carried very far forward.
DE F I N I T ION OF DI S A BI L I T Y
Contrasted with the concept of illness, disability is defined as lasting changes in the
physical, mental, or intellectual capacities that deviate from a state of normality whereas
illness is seen as a passing disturbance of bodily functions. Models of these explanations
can be summarized as follows:
Disability as an individual category. A disability is caused by some damage, or is an
individual anomaly. The individual is defined by his or her disability.
Disability as a labeling, conceptual construct. A disability is seen as the result of a
process of attribution, oriented toward social or cultural perceptions.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
109
Disability as a socially produced hindrance. A disability is seen in connection with

socio-economic disadvantage (equality of opportunity). It is a state of affairs produced by society.
Disability in the perception of a personenvironment relationship. This ecological or constructivist perception sees disability as a disturbance of the integration of a person
into his or her environmental system; that is, as a construct in a social situation
(Metzler & Wacker, 2001).
In Germany, these models are seen as interdependent. The classifications of the World
Health Organization (WHO) are used to distinguish between impairment, disability,
and handicap. However, it is recognized that impairment, disability, and handicap are
related in their causes because a limitation leads to reduction of achievement, and this
can be the cause of integration problems.
At the same time, the concept of disability is under critical reflection. The distinction
between normal and deviant is no longer an objective norm: If it is normal to be different, there can no longer be any distinction.
School Population
The group of pupils with learning difficulties is by far the largest group among the
pupils with special needs (43.3%). Problems first emerge through an experience of
the learner with the school system. The pupil demonstrates a special need that cannot
be covered in general schools. A high percentage of pupils from families with a low
social profile and/or a background of immigration fall into in this category. Pupils
are transferred to special placements from general schools. For example, in 2000
the risk of being transferred to a special needs school for a learning disability for a
foreign child was 2.6 times greater than for an ethnic German child (Kornmann &
Kornmann, 2003).
The distribution of boys and girls with special needs is different according to disability.
Special needs are diagnosed far more in boys than in girlsabout two-thirds versus
one-third. For example, the proportion of girls is distinctly lower in the schools for children with emotional and behavioral difficulties compared with boys.
Disability is also institutionally fixed. In particular, boys attend special needs schools
for emotional and social development, as well as for delayed language development,
much more often than girls. By way of contrast, girls are almost equally represented in
schools for children with learning disabilities (Kottmann, 2004).
S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION I N R E L AT ION TO DI F F E R I NG

S U PP ORT E M PH A S E S
Today, three tendencies for the establishment of a special needs concept can be identified (Sassenroth, 2002). These are total integration; as much integration as possible
but retaining special needs schools so that parents of a child with a disability can have
a choice between integrative schooling and special needs schooling; and integration
through separation.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
110

There is no majority consensus for total integration in the federal states. In all
likelihood, this will not change in the next decade. The second concept is more or less
consistently practiced in all the federal states. Still, the idea of integration through
separation has not yet disappeared in Germany.
In Germany, the best possible provision of support for the children and young people
determines the decision on a support location. In 2008, approximately 8 million pupils
were being taught in German primary and secondary schools (not including vocational
schools). Of those, approximately 500,000 pupils had special needs. About 400,000
pupils were in schools for special needs, and about 100,000 pupils were being supported
on an integrative basis in general schools. This is shown in Table 1.
In order to establish a demand for special needs education, the individual support
requirements of each child has to be established. In a comprehensive, time-intensive
process, the special needs teacher isolates the relevant school problems for investigation
and subsequently analyzes these in a child. The process includes environmental analysis
as well as interactive, multidimensional, informal, and formal screening procedures. The
selection of the elements in this procedure is based on the particular problem and on
the childs perceived special needs.
The results are used to produce an individual development plan that summarizes the
childs special needs (Eggert, 1997). In a subsequent consultation with the parents (part
of the diagnostic process), all parties consider how the special need is to be accommodated
in classroom work. Afterward, a suggestion is made to the regional school authority
about whether the child is to be given integrative or selective schooling. If no agreement
is reached, a support commission can be set up to which further specialists can be invited.
Induction into a special support school against the wishes of the parents has not happened for some years now.
In Germany, special schools exist for individual types of disability (see Biermann &
Goetze, 2005). These include:
Learning disabilities. Pupils are taught in separate schools for special needs, known in
many federal states as general support schools. This type of special needs school has been
the subject of much criticism in Germany recently (e.g., Klemm, 2009). The pupilteacher ratio of 9 children to 1 teacher is very much better than in general schools
(as a rule, 25 children to 1 teacher). However, the size of the learning groups remains
too large. Team-teaching is usually not provided, so the heterogeneous school population cannot be taught individually. There is also criticism about the lack of specific
subject material and methodology. In addition, these schools are mostly half-day.
Not all pupils have help for their homework or afternoon supervision.
Empirical studies show many more positive than negative effects of integrative
schooling for the students with learning disabilities (Haeberlin, 1999). However,
only 18% are integrated in general schools.
Outcomes are problematic. Pupils with learning disabilities have poor chances
in the job market, even if it is possible for them to do a 10th year after 9 years of
special needs schooling to obtain a secondary school leaving certificate (known
as a Hauptschule). There are too few apprenticeships. As well, these pupils are
more likely to have low motivation: They dont stick to the rules and have less
10/14/11 5:45 PM
10/14/11 5:45 PM
10.0
6.6
16.6
11.6
5.0
2.1
Language
Physical
development
Mental
development
Emotional
and social
development
Special need
(not defined)
Ill health
81.6%
2.1
4.9
7.4
15.5
5.2
7.8
2.3
1.1
35.5
Ratio of students in special

schools to all
students with
special needs, %
18.4 %
0.0
0.1
4.2
1.1
1.4
2.2
1.0
0.5
7.8
Ratio of students with

special needs integrated
in general schools to all
other students, %
81.6%
100.0
98.0
64.0
93.0
79.0
78.0
70.0
69.0
82.0
Ratio of students
in special schools
to total of those
receiving specific
special support, %
18.4%
0.0
2.0
36.0
7.0
21.0
22.0
30.0
31.0
18.0
Ratio of students
integrated in general
schools to total those
receiving specific
special support, %
Approximately 8 million pupils were taught in 2008 in German schools at the primary and secondary levels (excluding vocational schools). Of these, approximately 0.5
million needed special support. Of these, approximately 400,000 were given support in special schools and approximately 100,000 were given support in general
schools.
100.0%
3.3
Hearing
Total
1.6
43.3
Total (all pupils with

special needs), %
Sight
Learning
Special needs
Table 1. Survey of the Distribution of Pupils in Need of Special Support at Special Schools and Those at Integrative General Schools
(Data: KMK, 2010)
112

staying power than others. To overcome these problems, students can take a basic
vocational education year that offers a broad education and a safety net for young
people who are not yet ready to start working life. Support courses aimed at young
people who cannot cope with the rules of the workplace also exist.
Mental disabilities. For pupils with mental disabilities, special organization forms
have evolved that deviate from the general school system. They have a 1-year
preliminary stage, an 8-year lower and middle stage, and a 3-year upper and work
stage. School attendance can be extended up to age 25. As well as special needs
teachers, a series of vocational groups such as physiotherapists, speech therapists,
ergotherapists, caregivers, and psychologists are involved.1
At the primary stage, pupils with mental disabilities are often accepted at a
general school in their home area. A transfer to secondary education is, however,
difficult to put into practice. Of all pupils with mental disabilities, 93% attend
special institutions; only 7% are in general schools.
Traditionally, work openings after school were restricted to workshops for the
disabled. Currently, there are some new possibilities of work, mainly in hotels,
catering firms, and other industries that employ people with mental disabilities.
Emotional and behavior disorders. Pupils with special needs in the area of emotional
and social development have a variety of support needs. There are differentiated
and conceptually distinct forms of preventive measures: mobile advisory and
support services, collective learning and cooperation with general schools,
and special needs support centers. Basically, the aim is appropriate intervention
within a sliding system of advice and support ensured through flexible organizations so that students can remain in their home-base schools. A comparatively high
percentage receives integrative schooling, as shown in Table 1.
Special needs support is focused in primary schools, EBD (emotional and
behavioral disorder) classes, and special needs institutions that are conceived of as
transitory. The inherent aim, independent of the support location, is to boost the
students ability to build relationships. A clearly ordered life within a reliable and
resilient framework gives the pupils some orientation for forming and stabilizing
relationships at school age and beyond. Another aim is a return to the primary
school at the earliest possible date. Cooperation with external institutions and
the network of other regional services is of great importance. Teaching is based
on the primary school curriculum. In secondary education, the pupils can,
independent of the respective support location, obtain diplomas from the schools
they attend.
Advice and preparation for the working world are often difficult; such input
does not always help in the case of delinquent pupils. A strengthening of the ties
between school and commerce/industry is being undertaken, and programs to
create apprenticeships for young people are being developed by educators and
community agencies.
1. Ergotherapy is a method of treating disease through muscular exercise.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
113
Physical disabilities. Pupils with physical disabilities were not, as a rule, provided
with any schooling in the past. Since the 1960s, however, schools specifically for the
physically disabled have come into being, mostly for children with severe, multiple
physical disabilities. The schools for children with physical disabilities are mainly
all-day schools, generally located on the edge of towns.
Integrative schooling can only be achieved in some cases. Of all pupils
with physical disabilities, 79% attend a special institution, and 21% are taught
integrated in general schools. It is unfortunately very expensive to equip general
schools in a disabled-friendly and barrier-free way. At the moment, work is being
undertaken to redesign some physical disability schools into support and advice
centers that can offer services in special needs individual support and advice for
general schools.
Schools for students with physical and motor disabilities follow the same
curriculum as the general schools. Modifications to the curriculum are made
relative to individual learning abilities and the special needs of the pupils. Some
teachers for students with certain disabilities such as cerebral palsy, use basal
activation, which creates situations that facilitate actions on a neurophysiological
basis, thus improving muscle tension movement coordination.
Hardly any industrial apprenticeships are available for physically disabled young
people, but there are state-supported opportunities in vocational training centers.
These work together with social services and the psychological and medical
services.
Hearing impaired. Pupils with hearing impairments are taught in educational institutions for the deaf or hard of hearing, often with boarding facilities attached.
There is not one standard type, but rather many different forms exist: schools for
the deaf; schools for the hard of hearing; schools or regional centers for pupils
with hearing impairments; and schools for pupils with hearing impairments with
additional disabilities who require extra specialization in learning, emotional and
social development, intellectual development, and vision. All schools offer the
customary diplomas in secondary education.
In recent years, the educational institutions for students with hearing impairments
have progressively become less restricted. Now it is not the support location but the
special need that is decisive. The number of boarding schools has decreased in
favor of increased integration. The trend is for institutions to merge. Pupils with
different levels of hearing loss will be able to attend different classes or be assigned
to different language learning groups.
Extensive efforts are under way to integrate pupils with hearing impairments
into general schools close to their homes (individual case integration). Whether
these pupils always find the necessary learning conditions in general schools
is questionable and dependent on the help of the state government and the
school authority in supplying special needs teachers (for example, co-teachers).
At the moment, there are special classes attached to the advisory centers where
pupils with other disabilities, such as those with speech and language difficulties,
are taught.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
114

About 30% of pupils receive integrative schooling, mainly children who are
hard of hearing. The consequence is that the educational institutions for students
with hearing loss have only been accepting children with severe, multiple physical
disabilities.
For more than 200 years, there has been disagreement about how children with
hearing impairments should best be supported in terms of the most appropriate
communication mode. In Germany, teaching is most frequently oriented toward the
stimulation and use of hearing. The aim is to use any remaining hearing capacity with
the help of hearing aids or cochlear implants so that pupils learn spoken language as
naturally as possible. Signs are mostly dismissed in the schools as unnecessary. Nevertheless, Deaf adults use German Sign Language (DGS), which is a legally recognized
language that has traditionally flourished in the German Deaf community.
Visually impaired. Pupils with visual impairments, like those with hearing
impairments, are taught in different educational institutions. Schools for the blind
and schools for the visually impaired follow the same goals as the general schools.
Of course, some special needs advice is necessary such as relevant course materials,
seating arrangements, and possibly learning braille. The pupils can obtain diplomas as in general schools.
In 2008, 7,000 pupils with visual impairments were supported; that is, 1.6% of all
pupils with a special need. Approximately one-third of those enjoyed integrative
schooling (see Table 1).
On-the-job internships help the pupils in their vocational development. There are
officially recognized workshops for blind students as well as intra-regional vocational
education centers and vocational support centers. Some universities make special
provisions for blind students although courses are not specifically planned for them.
Speech and language disabilities. In order for pupils with speech and/or language
impairments to develop speech and minimize impairments, a variety of forms
and locations are available. These encompass preventive/precautionary measures
(medical/surgical; speech therapy); special needs support in general education
classes (integration); special needs education with the option to move to general
schools; special needs support in cooperation with general schools in which classes
with language impairment are integrated; special needs support in the framework
of regional or intra-regional special needs support centers that offer prevention,
therapeutic intervention in school, and advice; and special needs support in the
area of vocational orientation and vocational education.
If a child is inducted into a special language class, in some states he or she
first attends a remedial class before moving into grade 1 in order to catch up on
development deficits in basic areas such as movement, perception, concentration,
working, and learning behavior. The aims and support measures are stated in
an individual support plan for each pupil. Teaching in grades 1 to 4 is primarily
directed toward developing language competence with an aim to maintaining
the joy of learning and avoiding failures. The acquisition of written language
in connection with music education, with role-play and drama, and through the
interplay of movement, action, and language is especially important.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
115
There is no agreement on whether children with a language disability would

profit from a particular didactic concept with its own methodology. In general, the
special schools follow the general schools curriculum although the teaching does
have to be coupled with speech therapy. The most success has been with teamteaching shared between general school and special language needs teachers.
Only 22% of all pupils assigned to the special language need category are given
integrative schooling. It must not be forgotten, however, that there are numerous
pupils with language and speech difficulties in general schools who remain
undiagnosed.
To help select a vocation, the schools work closely with vocational advice centers,
vocational schools, and industry where visits and internships are valued. Special
needs teachers, support centers, or the advice centers for young people with language disabilities support the pupils in the transition to the working world through
individual advice and, in some cases, special courses.
Gifted. As a rule, gifted pupils are not seen as a part of the special schools system,
and different support models in the general schools for gifted pupils include
acceleration and enrichment. There are also state schools for gifted children, which
are often boarding schools. Private schools charge substantial fees. There are some
schools in church sponsorship for gifted children with behavioral disabilities. Pilot
classes also exist in some states that cater especially to gifted children.
Educators do not agree about whether and how far gifted children need special
education. Empirical studies have as yet found no advantage vis--vis special support
in general school classes (Henze, Sandfuchs, & Zumhasch, 2006). Gifted children
generally go through school without any problems (Rost, 2000) although additional
external support through parents and/or afterschool activities makes a lot of sense.
Several foundations such as Friedrich Naumann, Cusanus, the Protestant Church,
Hans Bckler, and the German Peoples Fund offer university scholarships.
MODE L S OF I N T EG R AT ION
Integration is a basic right where people live together in society (Muth, 1984). In education,
the aim of all efforts at integration should be the conversion of every general school into
an integrated school. Four basic models of integration or inclusion can be listed (see
Hinz, Kerner, & Niehoff, 2008). All have advantages and disadvantages. These are:
Extra classes for students for special needs. Here pupils are together only in
certain subjects.
General schools with specific special educational support.
Same-aim learning with no special educational support; for example, individual
integration in local general schools.
Learning with different aims. In this model, the level of achievement is adjusted
to the individual level of performance with the involvement of special educational
support competence, such as team-teaching.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
116

Studies accompanying the different models show that certain conditions must exist if
integrated learning is to succeed. The conditions include the proximity of the program
to place of residence; sufficient disability-specific support that includes special educational competence; disability-friendly room amenities and facilities; and team-teaching
through a combination of general and special needs teachers.
There is no right to a place in a kindergarten in Germany. Care in crches, in kindergartens,
and in afterschool care facilities is not seen as part of the educational system but as a
social service. There is, however, a whole range of sponsors for preschool and afterschool
programs that include town authorities and private bodies such as churches, associations,
self-help groups, and private individuals.
Since 1974, there has been a right to therapeutic measures for children of preschool
age. Care is divided into four categories: preventive measures; medical early detection
and diagnosis; advice and treatment by a doctor; and therapy prescribed by a doctor. The
work can take place in the field, in clinics, in surgeries, and in early support centers.
These early support centers have arisen on a broad front. Educators, together with
qualified personnel from disparate training programs, attend to the children and their
parents. The main fields of activity are diagnostics; support, assistance, and advice for
the parents; interdisciplinary cooperation; and sociopolitical lobbying.
There are also therapeutic day-care institutions (special needs kindergartens). They
care for children with disabilities with delayed development symptoms and/or whose
behavioral problems cannot be sufficiently supported in general kindergartens. The
group size is between 8 to 12 children. In addition to two caregivers per group, therapeutic
intervention is a fixed item in the educational concept.
In most states, the care and education of children with disabilities takes place in
these therapeutic day-care centers. Alternatively, children may attend integrative daycare centers or integrative general kindergartens, the number of which has risen in
recent years.
With the new Childrens Education Law, the care of children with disabilities in
day-care centers that work on the integrative principle will be legally assured for the first
time. There will be standard financing of the extra educational expenditure resulting
from educating and caring for children with and without disabilities under one roof. For
every special needs child taking a place in a day-care center, a per-head lump sum will be
paid by the government to the day-care center, which is distinctly more than what a child
of kindergarten age without a disability gets.
For children with physical, language, or mental disabilities attending a special needs
kindergarten or an integrative kindergarten, some of the costs can be paid by the
government depending on the parents income. The Childrens Education Law
determines the amount of the parents contributions for the integrative kindergartens.
The costs for all medical and medical-therapeutic services are usually borne by medical
insurance.
The following section describes the early support and preventive measures carried out
by numerous different organizational forms with regard to the individual disability types.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
117
Children with hearing impairments are registered at a very early stage in the
framework of the screening of newborn babies. Early support is vital. This includes
preventive examinations and early education measures organized by early needs
advice centers beginning at age 1. From age 3, education begins in special needs
kindergartens. If the early support institution and the school for children with
hearing impairments work well together, the transition from preschool to primary
school can succeed.
The case is similar with children who have visual impairments. Early support runs
from infancy to 6 years. The parents can choose between general support and
specific sight impairment support.
The parents of a child with a mental disability are offered diagnostic, therapeutic,
educational, and social rehabilitative services immediately after the birth of the
child. There is a whole range of early support and education measures. The focus
of early support is generally on alleviation of the severity of the disability and
improvement of a childs quality of life.
The Lebenshilfe Federal Association was founded in 1958 on a self-help basis. It
supports people with mental disabilities to participate in social life on an equal basis.
It has developed an interdisciplinary concept of mobile and externally functioning
early support centers and crches, thereby relieving the burden on the family.
For the development of the children with physical and motor disabilities, early help
is designed to prevent and reduce delays in development and to avoid further complications. Support measures must begin as early as possible. Interdisciplinary
cooperation is of preeminent importance. Success depends on the close and trusting
cooperation of different specialist competences such as medical, therapeutic, social
and psychological services, advisory centers, early support centers, kindergartens,
special needs kindergartens, and schools for special needs and childrens homes.
For children with language disabilities, early support measures begin with a
thorough investigation of the childs language development status and an estimation of his or her general development. The whole personality of the child and the
environment are taken into account to maximize the development opportunities,
increase abilities, and consolidate the strong points of the child and his or her family. There are special needs advisory centers; therapeutic centers; kindergartens;
and speech therapy surgeries for the early recognition, treatment, and prevention
of language disabilities, difficulties, and impairments. Churches often finance the
early support institutions.
Preventive measures for students with emotional or behavioral issues are usually
confined to the time before the student enters school and rely on the cooperation
between the schools for special needs, special needs support centers, and day-care
centers. The support of preschool institutions through special needs teachers
has proven to be helpful, especially in the transition to school. Preventive
measures include early detection and recognition of problematic issues in
the family, information on measures for early support and, above all, addressing
10/14/11 5:45 PM
118

the development of children and young people in critical situations as soon as
possible. Lacking such measures, the difficulties can become more entrenched
and require additional special needs support.
T E AC H E R E DUC AT ION A N D T R A I N I NG
General teacher education in Germany is of 3.5 to 5.5 years. However, differences exist
among the states.
Traditionally, teacher training for special needs education required further education
beyond general teacher training. Every special needs teacher had already finished a general
teacher education course and worked for a while in a school (KMG, 1994). The specialization
and separation of the vocational fields of general teachers and special support teachers
brought with it a serious fault-line in the development of educational expertise. At the end
of the 1970s, basic courses in special education were introduced into the general teacher
training curriculum. With the introduction of basic study courses, mutual discussions
between the two professions were infrequent and were reduced to diagnostic considerations.
This is shown by statements from teachers in general schools such as, I couldnt work with
children like that!, and I couldnt work under such conditions!
Currently, calls for greater integration or inclusion require teachers from general
schools to willingly work with children with disabilities because all children are supposed
to be welcome. In inclusive contexts, teachers are expected to consult with colleagues on
relevant diagnostic findings, initiate individualized teaching methodologies, support
and assist pupils, and handle classroom management.
This leads to a number of critical questions for teacher education. First, can we assume
that all teachers can develop the skills to relate to all children under difficult circumstances?
Teachers require competencesthe knowledge, skills, values and attitudes, accompanied by
the ability to use them in certain contexts (see Halinen, & Jaervinen, 2008). Do all teachers
possess the competences to succeed? Nothing is gained by pretending that these skills are
always at hand. The resilience and potential of personnel do have limits, although there is a
certain justification in calling for a general obligation for teachers to update their supportive
educational competence in case of need. In fact, one commentator (Preuss-Lausitz, 2010)
went so far as to say, Thats his [teachers]) job. If he doesnt fulfill it, he should be sacked.
A second crucial question becomes: How can teacher education react appropriately to
the openness and richness of the variety in school support systems? Initial discussions in
Germany on inclusive education pinpoint a number of critical elements. An extended
teacher education course can take in the essential elements of inclusion (see Ellinger &
Wittrock, 2005; Wittrock, 1997). These encompass, but are not restricted to, the following:
Teacher attitudes. Work on inclusion must begin with a consciously open attitude
toward heterogeneity and a perspective that encompasses the contradictory nature
of school demands. Teachers must examine their own attitudes and specify their
own limits in the face of particular challenges.
Teacher self-knowledge. Reflective cooperation and actions help teachers to relate
their own backgrounds to vocational tasks. This makes them better able to match
personality and role, and attitude and method (see Reiser, 2005).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
119
Practical aspects. Teachers must be able to conceive and implement practical aspects
of integration work, such as being able to estimate specific needs resulting from
individual disabilities or impairments.
Advisory facilities. Learning about systemic advisory facilitates cooperation between
the stakeholders in school such as leadership teams, teaching staff, parents and
pupils, school authorities, social workers, and school psychologists. Teachers are
prepared for pupil-teacher interactions, support sessions with parents, and case
discussions among the staff.
Child development. An indispensable essential element is the study of the basic structures of human development as described in constructivist theoretical contexts.
Assessment. The active knowledge of implicit, diagnostically relevant contexts is an
unconditional component of the didactics of diversity. Teachers should therefore
possess a working knowledge of support diagnostics and planning in the form of
individual development plans for children who are especially challenged in school.
These basic qualifications go far beyond the competencies normally taught in teacher
education. The assimilation of this suggested content into teacher education study courses
and on the form of postgraduate courses are, at the moment, still the object of educational policy deliberations. Nevertheless, the practical execution of these plans will be
decisive for the possibilities of establishing a sufficiently complex educational attitude
appropriate to integrating special needs education into general educational science.
FUTUR E TR ENDS
Future developments in Germany must be considered from two broad perspectives. First
is the development of society with regard to special needs. Second is developing trends
in special education.
According to the German Basic Law, the Federal Republic is a democratic and social
federal state. For decades, Germany has had a tight social network of contact points for
families with a child or young person with a disability. It has also established a very extensive system of special needs schools. But since at least the 1970s, economic resources have
been continuously declining. Access to resources, especially those concerning care and
education, is still very good for a small part of society, but most still have to struggle for
access to these resources. For people with disabilities, it is a question of direct and indirect grants, of tax relief, and of childrens allowances, as well as kindergarten places,
apprenticeships, university places and, last but not least, of jobs.
Since the 1970s, the special needs system has developed into its present form. Still, the
talk has been of a crisis in special needs education and the change of paradigm that has
ensued (Werning, Balgo, Palmowski, & Sassenroth, 2002). The expansion of special
needs education is no longer the center of education policy discussions; rather, the focus
is on the integration of people with disabilities into school and society.
Inclusive education, which is more than the German concept of integrating children
with disabilities into general schools, must be given critical consideration. However,
although much of the aims of the inclusion concept are desirable, it must not be forgotten
10/14/11 5:45 PM
120

that there is a real danger that individual children with disabilities will no longer be the
focus of the educational debate, and their needs may no longer be met sufficiently.
Special needs education competence remains indispensable and we must not lose sight
of that amid all the efforts at inclusion.
R E F E R E NC E S
Antor, G., & Bleidick, U. (Eds.). (2001). Handlexikon der Behindertenpdagogik. Schlsselbegriffe
aus Theorie und Praxis (Hand lexicon of pedagogy for handicapped people). Stuttgart,
Germany: Kohlhammer.
Biermann, A., & Goetze, H. (2005). Sonderpdagogik. Eine Einfhrung (Special pedagogy: An
introduction). Stuttgart, Germany: Kohlhammer.
Bleidick, U., & Ellger-Rttgardt, S. (Eds.). (1994). Behindertenpdagogik im vereinten DeutschLand.
ber die Schwierigkeiten eines Zwiegesprchs zwischen Ost und West (Pedagogy of the handicapped in a unified Germany: On the problems of a dialogue between east and west). Weinheim,
Germany: Deutscher Studien Verlag.
Ellinger, S., & Wittrock, M. (Eds.). (2005). Sonderpdagogik in der Regelschule. Konzepte
ForschungPraxis (Special pedagogy in the public school: Concepts
researchpractice). Stuttgart, Germany: Kohlhammer.
Graumann, O. (2000). Von der Hilfsschule zur Integrationein Fortschritt in der Schullandschaft? In S. Kirk, J. Khler, H. Lohrenz, & U. Sandfuchs (Eds.), Schule und Geschichte.
Funktionen der Schule in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart (School and history: Functions of the
school in hte past and present) (pp. 346373). Bad Heilbrunn, Germany: Klinkhardt.
Graumann, O., & Rakhkochkine, A. (2007). Steigerung der Unterrichtsqualitt durch
Integration. In K.-H. Arnold (Ed.), Unterrichtsqualitt und Fachdidaktik (Quality of
instruction and didactics) (pp. 299320). Bad Heilbrunn, Germany: Klinkhardt.
Haeberlin, U. (1999). Die Integration von Lernbehinderten: Versuche, Theorien, Forschungen,
Enttuschungen, Hoffnungen (Beitrge zur Heil- und Sonderpdagogik) (Integration of the
learning disabled: Attempts, theories, research, disappointments, hopes [contributions to therapeutic and special pedagogy]). Bern, Switzerland: Haupt.
Halinen, J., & Jaervinen, R. (2008). Towards inclusive education: The case of Finland.
Prospects. UNESCO-IB, 145, 7798.
Henze, G., Sandfuchs, U., & Zumhasch, C. (Eds.). (2006). Integration hochbegabter Grundschler
(Integration of gifted elementary school students). Bad Heilbrunn, Germany:
Klinkhardt.
Hinz, A., Krner, I., & Niehoff, U. (Eds.). (2008). Von der Integration zur Inklusion. Grundlagen
PerspektivenPraxis (From integration to inclusion: Basicsperspectivespractice).
Marburg, Germany: Lebenshilfe-Verlag.
Klemm, K. (2009). Sonderweg Frderschulen: Hoher Einsatz, wenig Perspektiven. Eine Studie zu
den Ausgaben und zur Wirksamkeit von Frderschulen in Deutschland (Special supporting
schools: High efforts, little perspectives. A study on the expenditures and on the effectiveness of supporting schools in Germany). Retrieved from http://www.bertelsmann
-stiftung.de/bst/de/media/xcms_bst_dms_29959_29960_2.pdf.
KMK, Sekretariat der Stndigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Lnder in der
Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Ed.). (2010). Statistische Verffentlichungen der Kultusministerkonferenz. Dokumentation Nr. 189Mrz 2010. Sonderpdagogische Frderung in Schulen
1999 bis 2008 (Stastical publication of the Standing Conference: Special pedagogic
support in schools). Berlin, Germany: Author.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
121
KMK, Sekretariat der Stndigen Kultusministerkonferenz der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Ed.). (1994). Empfehlungen der Kultusministerkonferenz zur Sonderpdagogischen
Frderung in den Schulen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Bek. d. MK v. 1.9.1994
301-8I027 (Recommendations of the Standing Conference for Special Pedagogic
Support in Schools of the Federal Republic of Germany). Bonn, Germany: Author.
Kornmann, R., & Kornmann, A. (2003). Erneuter Anstieg der berreprsentation auslndischer
Kinder in Schulen fr Lernbehinderte (A new increase in the overrepresentation of foreign
children in schools for the learning disabled). Zeitschrift fr Heilpdagogik, 54, 286289.
Kottmann, B. (2004). Selektion in die Sonderschule. Das Verfahren zur Feststellung von sonderpdagogischem Frderbedarf als Gegenstand empirischer Forschung (Selection into the special
school: Diagnostic procedures as a subject of empirical research). Bad Heilbrunn,
Germany: Klinkhardt.
Metzler, H., & Wacker, E. (2001). Behinderung (Disability). In H.-U. Otto & H. Thiersch
(Eds.), Handbuch Sozialarbeit Sozialpdagogik (Handbook of social work, social pedagogy) (2nd Rev. ed., pp. 118139). Aufl. Luchterhand: Neuwied Kriftel.
Muth, J. (1984). Zur bildungspolitischen Dimension der Integration (On the educationalpolitical dimensions of integration). In Eberwein: Behinderte und Nichtbehinderte lernen
gemeinsam. Handbuch der Integrationspdagogik (Disabled and nondisabled learning
together. Handbook of integrative pedagogy) (pp. 1724). Weinheim, Germany: Beltz.
Preuss-Lausitz, U. (2010). Das Recht auf Miteinander. Bei: Die Zeit. Retrieved from http://www
.lwl.org/lja-download/datei-download-schulen/UN_Konvention_fuer_die_Rechte
_von_Menschen_mit_Behinderungen/Inklusive_Beschulung/Stellungnahmen_zur
_inklusiven_Beschulung/1271235037_0/2.1.10___Die_Zeit-Streitgespraech.pdf.
Projektgruppe Integrationsversuch. (Ed.). (1988). Das Flming-Modell. Gemeinsamer Unterricht
fr behinderte und nichtbehinderte Kinder an der Grundschule (Common instruction for disabled and nondisabled children in primary school). Weinheim, Germany: Beltz.
Reiser, H. (2005). Professionelle Konzepte und das Handlungsfeld (Professional concepts
and the sphere of action). In Horster, Hoyningen-Sess et al. (Eds.), Sonderpdagogische
Professionalitt (Special pedagogyprofessionalism) (pp. 133150). Wiesbaden, Germany:
VS.
Rost, D. H. (Ed.). (2000). Hochbegabte und hochleistende Jugendliche. Befunde aus dem Marburger
Hochbegabtenprojekt (Gifted and high performing adolescents. Results from the Marburg
project). Mnster, Germany: Waxmann.
Sassenroth, M. (2002). Verhltnis der Sonderpdagogik zur Allgemeinen Pdagogik (The
relationship of special and general pedagogy). In R. Werning, R. Balgo, W. Palmowski,
& M. Sassenroth (Eds.), Sonderpdagogik. Lernen, Verhalten, Sprache, Bewegung und
Wahrnehmung (Special pedagogy) (pp. 114). Munich, Germany: Oldenbourg.
United Nations. (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. New York:
Author.
Werning, R., Balgo, R., Palmowski, W., & Sassenroth, M. (2002). Sonderpdagogik. Lernen,
Verhalten, Sprache, Bewegung und Wahrnehmung. Munich, Germany: Oldenbourg.
Wittrock, M. (Ed.). (1997). Sonderpdagogischer Frderbedarf und sonderpdagogische Frderung
in der Zukunft (Special pedagogical demand and support in the future). Neuwied:
Luchterhand.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
10/14/11 5:45 PM
6
Special Needs Education
in Ethiopia
Alemayehu Teklemariam and

Temesgen Fereja
Ethiopia is situated in east Africa, between latitudes 3 to 18 degrees north and longitudes
33 to 48 degrees east. It covers an area of approximately 1,140,000 square kilometers
roughly the size of France and Spain combined. Ethiopia is bordered by Somalia on the
east, Kenya on the south, Eritrea on the north, Sudan from northwest to west, and Djibouti
on the northeast. With an abundance of water, fertile soil, and untapped mineral wealth,
Ethiopia is a country of vast potential bent on establishing a secure and viable economic
and legal environment. About 65% of the land is arable; 15% is presently cultivated,
mainly in areas of moderate altitude.
Ethiopias altitude ranges from about 100 meters below sea level to about 4,000 meters
above sea level. The climate varies. The average temperature ranges from 15 degrees
centigrade in the high altitudes to 40 degrees centigrade at sea level. There are two
seasons: The dry season prevails from October through May; the wet season lasts from
June to September. Ethiopias proximity to the equator and its large altitude range creates climates varying from continental cold to tropical. As a result, people living in the
area are affected with several diseases that could then cause disabilities. The variation in
climate is also a cause of drought and poverty for large numbers of the agrarian populace
of Ethiopia.
The population of Ethiopia was estimated at about 77 million in 2008. About 64.4
million people were living in rural areas; 12.6 million were living in urban areas. The
population is growing at an annual rate of 2.9% (Central Statistics Authority, 2009).
Agriculture is the backbone of the national economy. About 83% of Ethiopias population
earn their livings from the land, mainly as farmers. The principal exports from this sector
are coffee, oilseeds, legumes, flowers, sugar, vegetables, cattle, and hides and skins.
The Ethiopian economy suffers from a lack of technological know-how, the absence of
developed infrastructure facilities, rapid population growth, soil erosion, recurrent
drought and famine, and unfavorable external terms of trade that result in a shortage of
foreign exchange. The agricultural sector, the mainstay of most of the Ethiopian people,
is most affected. The economic backwardness affects the living conditions of Ethiopians,
particularly their social, psychological, and educational development. In other words, it
limits the quality of life of many Ethiopians.
The people of Ethiopia are multiethnic, multicultural, multilingual, and followers of
various religions. The religious composition of Ethiopia 12 years ago was 50.6% Orthodox
Christian, 32.8% Muslim, and 10.2% Protestant. About 4.6% were followers of traditional
125
10/14/11 5:45 PM
126

religions, with the remaining 1.8% were of other or no religion (Central Statistics
Authority, 1998). These religions use various languages for preaching and services.
More than 83 different languages with 200 dialects are spoken in different regions.
Amharic, with its unique alphabet, is the official language. However, other languages
such as Afan-Oromo, Tigrigna, Guragna, Kembatigna, Somaligna, Hadiyigna, Welaita,
Sidama, Gamo, Afar, and Gumuz are spoken among a significant number of people in
this ethnically diverse country. Foreign languages such as Arabic, French, and English
are widely spoken among the elite. In addition, different regions have their own languages
that are used for official work and instruction for children in primary schools. From
personal observations, it is evident that many languages are being used in classrooms;
some languages for classroom use are still being developed. This is a good start to meet
the educational needs of linguistically diverse Ethiopian children.
T H E E DUC AT ION S Y S T E M I N ET H IOPI A
Primary education in Ethiopia is divided into a lower primary cycle (grades 1 to 4) and
an upper primary cycle (grades 5 to 8). General secondary education (grades 9 to 10) is
followed by either technical and vocational education and training (TVET) or upper secondary education (grades 11 and 12) in preparation for tertiary education (Transitional
Government of Ethiopia, 1994).
Five core subjects are taught by one teacher for grades 1 to 4 (this arrangement is
referred to as a self-contained classroom) with additional subjects taught by specialists.
These five subjects are Amharic, English, mathematics, social studies, and aesthetics.
Reflecting the linguistic diversity of the country, the lower primary school syllabus includes
mother tongue instruction as well. Amharic, the national official language, is taught as a
subject to other ethnic groups whose native language is not Amharic. English is increasingly used as a medium of instruction at the upper primary and secondary levels.
A recent report by the Ministry of Education of Ethiopia (2009) indicated the following:
For primary school (ages 7 to 14), the net enrollment rate (NER) reached 83.4%;
that is, 15,340,786 children were enrolled from a total population of 16,050,075 in
23,354 primary schools (grades 1 to 8).
The NER in 1,087 secondary schools (grades 9 and 10) was 13.8%, which is,
1,501,363 students.
The gross enrollment rate (GER) for university preparatory schooling (grades 11
and 12) was 5.8%.
With population expansion, it is likely that the number of primary school enrollments
will increase from 15 million to 20 million by 2015.
The modern system of education was established in Ethiopia in 1908, more than 100 years
ago. Initially, education was focused mainly on teaching communication skills and the rudiments that were necessary to run the modern bureaucracy that was being established. This
was disrupted by the Second World War and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia. After the war,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Special Needs Education in Ethiopia
127
efforts were made to again prioritize education. A number of schools and institutions of
higher learning were opened over the subsequent two to three decades. The main concentration at this time was to produce teachers and administrators for the state machinery.
The first school for special needs children was opened in 1917 in Dembidollo, in the
western part of the country. It was established by a blind churchman named Reverend
Gidada Solan, an Ethiopian taught by Swedish missionaries. His training was mainly in
Christian theology and braille (Alemayehu, 2000). Gidada may be considered Ethiopias
first trained teacher in special needs education; he taught braille to blind children. He
was also the father of the former president of the Democratic Republic of Ethiopia,
Negaso Gidada (19952000).
After that, special needs schools were launched by European missionaries, particularly
from the United States, Sweden, and Finland. In the 1960s, many schools for blind and deaf
children were founded by these missionaries, who brought their own teachers and informally trained Ethiopian teachers for short periods. For the existing schools, there was no
teacher training except informal short and rudimentary training that took place at the
school level, which mainly consisted of sharing experiences. Many teachers of that time
took their teaching positions without preservice training in special needs education. Beyond
the efforts of the missionaries, governmental efforts to improve special education are very
recent.
Attitudes Toward Persons With Disabilities

Attitudes toward persons with disabilities vary from place to place in Ethiopia. One study
(Tibebeu, 1995) revealed that the attitudes toward all persons with disabilities in aggregate were found to be negative. In some rural communities of Ethiopia, disability is generally attributed to various agents, such as a curse or punishment from God, visitation of
the sins of the fathers upon the children, incidents or sights affecting pregnant women,
or the work of evil spirits.
In Ethiopia, society marginalizes certain groups based variously on their disability, gender, ethnic background, or other historical and traditional reasons. Negative attitudes
and a lack of knowledge about the assets of persons with disabilities, coupled with misconceptions of disabling factors and the disability, cause most children with disabilities to be
hidden from sight, kept at home, and deprived of education (Tirussew, 2005).
Prevalence
The World Health Organization (WHO) has estimated that persons with disabilities
constitute about 10% of the world population. This suggests that the number of persons
with disabilities in Ethiopia currently may be about 7.7 million, from the total population of 77 million. However, estimates by the WHO may not include all disabilities such
as those associated with learning or social and behavioral difficulties.
Complementing the WHO estimates are a number of local surveys conducted in
Ethiopia since 1979. Tirussew (Tirussew, 2005; Tirussew, Sovolainen, Agedew, & Daniel,
1995) cited the following results:
In 197980, a survey by the Ministry of Agriculture in cooperation with the
Rehabilitation Agency for the Disabled and the Central Statistics Office showed
that 5.48% of people had disabilities.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
128

In 1984, a survey conducted in Addis Ababa by the Office of the Population and
the Housing Census of Ethiopia disclosed that 3.6% of people had disabilities.
A UNICEF study on women and children in Ethiopia showed that 3.5% of the rural
population and 4% of the urban population had disabilities.
A survey carried out by the National Office of Population and the Housing Census
of Ethiopia in 1994 showed that the prevalence of disabilities was about 2%.
Another survey by the Institute of Educational Research (IER) of Addis Ababa
University in collaboration with the Support to Special Education Project (SSEP)
involved financial support and expertise from the government of Finland. It showed
that 3% of the population had disabilities. Researchers estimated that the population
had the following disabilities: 41.2% physical disability, 30.4% visual impairment,
14.9% hearing impairment, 6.5% intellectual disability, 2.4% speech and language
disorder, 2.4% multiple disabilities, and 2.2% behavioral difficulties.
Readers will note that the prevalence of disabilities varies quite significantly across the
different surveys, which indicates that data pertaining to persons with disabilities in
Ethiopia are fragmented, incomplete, and confusing. This may be because of factors
such as the absence of an operational definition of the target population, diversity in the
system of classification of disabilities, lack of clarity in conceptualizing disability profiles,
omission of some important disability groups, and societys attitude toward disabilities.
Families may not provide census information for their children with disabilities and
instead keep them away from the public eye. Some disabilities, such as hearing loss,
may not be easily identified by parents. Children also may not disclose their problems
because they fear segregation.
Because Ethiopia is a country at an early stage of economic and social development,
where disabling factors such as malnutrition, war, and periodic episodes of drought and
famine are enormous, the figures of people with disabilities might seem very low. In reality, poverty, lack of awareness, war, and drought are among the major causes of disability
in the country. The problem is especially aggravated by inadequate nutrition, limited
access to healthcare, the absence of quality educational services, and the high prevalence
of harmful traditional practices.
P OL IC I E S A N D R E L AT E D D O C U M E N TAT ION
The Ethiopian Constitution

Article 9(4) of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE,
1994c) states that all international agreements as ratified by Ethiopia are an integral
part of the law of the land. These include the United Nations (UN) Human Rights
Declaration (UN, 1948), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN, 1989), the
UN Standard Rules for Persons with Disabilities (UN, 1993), and the Salamanca
Framework on Inclusive Education (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization [UNESCO], 1994). Ethiopia also ratified the Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities (UN, 2006) on July 7, 2010.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
129
Article 13 of the constitution states that all legislative, executive, and judicial organs
have the responsibility to respect and enforce what is embodied under that section and
that this should be done in conformity with human rights considerations. The constitution
also clearly stipulates the rights of citizens to equal access to publicly funded services and
the support that shall be given to accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities
(FDRE, 1994c, Article 41, 5).
Key Policy Frameworks

The Education and Training Policy of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
(FDRE, 1994b) clearly indicates its commitment to address the needs of all children
by appreciating the needs of children with disabilities. It further confirms that special
education and training will be provided for people with disabilities (Educational
Structure No. 3.2.9). This policy document also underlines that efforts will be made to
enable both the handicapped and the gifted learn in accordance with their potential
and need (Educational Structure No. 2.2.3).
The Developmental and Social Welfare Policy (FDRE, 1997) declares that protecting
and ensuring the healthy development of children deserves special attention (Article 5).
It states that appropriate and comprehensive care and services shall be extended to
children so as to ensure their all-round and harmonious development (Article 5.1.1).
Furthermore, in light of the high prevalence of potentially harmful traditional practices
in the country, the policy clearly points to the necessity of directing efforts toward their
elimination (Article 5.1.4) and educating the public to this end (Article 5.3.4). The
document also commits to addressing the problems of children in especially difficult
circumstances; this encompasses children with disabilities. With regards to the needs of
orphan children, the policy clearly aims to facilitate conditions that will enable orphan
and abandoned children to get the assistance they need and to eventually be
self- sufficient (Article 5.1.7). Finally, the policy declares that all efforts shall be made to
provide protection against child abuse and neglect (Article 5.1.10).
The Health Policy (Transitional Government of Ethiopia, 1993) promotes and
encourages early utilization of available healthcare facilities for the management of
common childhood diseases. The need to provide backup support for the family, particularly for women and children, is stressed. The policy further raises issues specific to
healthcare services, such as maternal healthcare (Article 10.1), family planning (Article
10.2), maternal nutrition (Article 10.3), and optimization of access and utilization of
immunization services (Article 10.5). It also encourages the active involvement of parents in protecting and maintaining family health (Article 10.8). In subarticle 3.6, the
policy specifically points to the participation in the development of community-based
facilities for the care of the physically and mentally disabled, the abandoned, street
children, and the elderly.
Proclamations
The Disability Labor Proclamation (Proclamation No. 101; FDRE, 1994a) aims to protect
and promote the right of people with disabilities to appropriate training, employment
opportunities, and salary and to prevent any workplace discrimination. Sections 3 and
10/14/11 5:45 PM
130

4 refer to the promotion of employment opportunities for persons with disabilities in
the open labor market. It states that no selection criteria shall refer to the disability of
the candidate and that necessary equipment shall be provided to allow persons with
disabilities to carry out their duties. Article 6 of the proclamation provides for grievance procedures as follows: Any disabled person whose rights are affected because of
non-compliance with the provisions of this proclamation and regulations and directives
issued hereunder, may lodge his grievance to the organ empowered by law to hear the
labor dispute.
The Higher Education Proclamation (No. 351; FDRE, 2003) declares that students
with disabilities shall, during their stay in their institution, get special support to accommodate their special educational needs. Every higher education institute should open its
door for persons with disabilities. It also has the responsibility to provide the necessary
material and professional support to meet special educational needs.
The Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (1999) has prepared the National Program
of Action for the Rehabilitation of Persons With Disabilities. The UN Standard Rules on
the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons With Disabilities (1993) and the
Developmental and Social Welfare Policy of Ethiopia (2007) were the basis for preparation of this program. A technical committee composed of representatives from the
Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs, the MOE, the Ministry of Health, the Ethiopian
Federation of Persons With Disabilities, and the Community-Based Rehabilitation
Network was formed to formulate the National Program of Action. Drafts were
enriched by comments from relevant federal and regional government bodies and
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs).
The focus areas of the program are disability prevention, medical rehabilitation, educational rehabilitation, vocational rehabilitation, employment services, accessibility,
awareness raising, and strengthening and expanding disabled persons organizations,
religion, culture, sport, recreation, and family life. Thus far, no measure has been
enacted to ensure the implementation of the National Program of Action for Rehabilitation of Persons With Disabilities in the country.
The MOEs Education Sector Development Plan (ESDP III; MOE, 2006a) has given
due consideration to the expansion of educational opportunities to children with special
needs. According to this document, the MOE shall provide technical assistance to the
regions in the form of guidelines and capacity building. The regional educational
bureaus in turn will assist woreda education offices to include special needs education in
their action plans, budgets, and reports.1 The document clearly indicates that special
needs education is considered an issue to be mainstreamed in general school education
as well as TVET. That means the strategy program envisages mainstreaming as starting
from early childhood education and going through primary, secondary, and tertiary
levels. The ESDP III further stresses the need for the MOE to strengthen cooperation
between education offices and development partners to address the increasing demand
for the expansion of inclusive education in the country.
1. Woredas are administrative units in Ethiopia equivalent to districts.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
131
Based on the ESDP III (2006a), the MOE has developed a federal special needs
education strategy of inclusive education to meet the Millennium Development and
Education for All (EFA) goals (MOE, 2006a, 2006b). According to this document, the
governments strategy for improving the provision of educational services for children
with special educational needs is based on the principle of inclusion. The special needs
education strategy aims at making the education system inclusive by educating teachers
and establishing support systems. The three strategic priorities defined in special needs
education strategy are including special needs education in national and regional
education sector planning and reporting systems; developing guidelines and providing
technical assistance to regions; and strengthening the capacity of the education system.
Educational Provision
A recent UNESCO report, Global Monitoring Report of Education for All (UNESCO, 2006
2007) estimated that one-third of children who do not attend school are children with
disabilities. The largest numbers of out-of-school children are found in Nigeria, Pakistan,
India, and Ethiopia.
Children and people with disabilities have traditionally been, and are currently,
neglected in all aspects of life in Ethiopia. Poverty, negative social attitudes regarding
disability, insufficient school facilities to meet the needs of children with disabilities, and
low levels of education are all factors.
Despite a substantial increase in the NER of children without disability (83.4%), there
are more than 3 million children with disabilities who are still not enrolled in primary
schools. Although it is difficult to obtain reliable data on the education of children with
disabilities either in regular classrooms or in special classes and special schools, it is
reported that among the school-age children with disabilities in the country, only about
35,177 children have access to education (MOE, 2009). That is, the GER of children with
disabilities is less than 2% (MOE, 2009).
The participation of children with disabilities or those with special educational needs
in all the educational structuresthat is, in early childhood education, general education (primary and secondary), TVET, and higher educationis an extremely daunting
challenge. Special needs education is provided in special schools and special classes to
those children who are physically, sensory, or intellectually impaired, but there are only
a few special schools and classes. They are mostly found in the capital, Addis Ababa, and
in some regional towns. There are few or no special schools or classes in the rural areas
of Ethiopia, which are inhabited by more than 83% of Ethiopians. Mainstreaming has
long been an unthinkable option in the countrys rural schools, as there are no appropriate provisions and services to meet the needs and potential of children with special educational needs. Schools at all levels do not have assessment procedures and intervention
mechanisms are not in place.
Those with access to education are largely served by 20 special schools (day and
residential schools for children with hearing impairment, visual impairment, and
intellectual disabilities), which are run by the MOE, NGOs, and national associations of
persons with disabilities. There are also 162 special classes at regular public schools
(MOE, 2007). Thus, out of more than 25,000 primary schools in the country, only 162
regular schools are open to serve children with disabilities in special classes. Studies
10/14/11 5:45 PM
132

(e.g., Ababa, 1996; Alemayehu, 2000) indicate that the special schools as well as special
classes are understaffed and ill-equipped as well as having a shortage of instructional
materials. The special needs education program is also suffering because of its small
budget.
Many people in the education sector believe that the education of children with disabilities should have a larger share of the total annual national budget. Some general
education experts, however, argue that there is no need to budget separately for children
with special needs; they rationalize that because the policy states inclusive education, so
should the budget. This kind of thinking could be accepted if the budget helped to meet
the needs of children with special needs, but in reality, despite the enactment of the
Education and Training Policy in 1994, there are only fragmented efforts. Little has
been planned for children with disabilities at the woreda or school level in the past 15
years.
Furthermore, the repetition and dropout rate in general or regular education pose
quite a serious challenge for the countrys education system. In 2009, the dropout rate
was as high as 12.4% at the primary grade level; the repetition rate was 6.2% at the firstgrade level (MOE, 2009). A case study conducted in one of the primary schools in Addis
Ababa revealed that among children who academically constitute the bottom 5% of
grade 1 students, 17% had some type of hidden and undetected impairment but had no
educational support (Tirussew, 2001). This implies that children with disabilities constitute
a good share of the students who drop out or repeat in the early years at the regular schools.
This can be attributed to the absence of special needs educators at the school level who
could create awareness for the school community, assess the needs of the children, and
provide support for both children and teachers.
T H E E A R LY Y E A R S
In contrast to the almost exclusive (95%) state provision in the rest of the education sector, early childhood education is very limited, entirely private, and largely urban. The
GER for early childhood education (ages 4 to 6) was 3.9% (263,464 children) in 2,740
preschools, from a total population of 7 million children (MOE, 2009).
T E AC H E R T R A I N I NG
Upon completion of general education (grade 10), potential teachers undergo teacher
training for 1 year for lower primary grades and 3 years for upper primary grades.
However, the 1-year duration for lower primary teachers education was changed to 3 years
as of September 2008. Secondary teachers are trained at the university level for
3 years upon completion of university preparation, that is, grades 11 and 12.
Because of the low level of awareness of the field of special education and a shortage
of professional educators and institutions, until recently there was not any organized
system of special needs teacher training in the country. From our own experiences, we
know that the teacher training for special needs education was dependent on intermittently organized short seminars, workshops almost totally based on the support of donors
from various voluntary organizations, and scholarships from abroad.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
133
There were planned or unplanned short-term preservice and/or in-service programs

lacking clear missions and objectives that failed to bring any tangible benefit to the system. As a consequence of these failures, an effort was made to have an organized 6-month
program in Nazareth College of Teacher Training Education (later called Adama
Teachers Training College) beginning in 1993. A few teachers are educated in Finland at
the bachelors and masters levels. Although it does not seem well organized, it is far
better than the previous informal practices.
However, the program was suspended after 2 short years because of lack of organizational setup and the absence of a governmental budget allocation. Nevertheless, efforts
were continued and after another couple of years substantial recognition and due attention was gained from the government to prepare and use support inputs from abroad for
special needs education program development. Accordingly, necessary supports were
secured from the government of Finland to promote the expansion of the program
throughout the country. With the support input, a teacher education program at the
undergraduate and masters levels has continued for special needs education at the
University of Joensuu (Finland). A center for special needs teacher education was
planned at Sebeta in central Ethiopia for the 1995/96 academic year that would serve
the whole country as a resource and assessment center and support the promotion of the
development of special needs education program.
There have been recent encouraging developments with the initiation of new programs
on special needs education in different universities and colleges as well as a mainstream
course in special needs education across all teacher education and training institutes in
the country. For instance, the launch of special needs education programs at Addis
Ababa University (BEd, MA, and PhD), Dila, Haromaya, Gonder, and Bahirdar Universities (BEd), and Kotebe, Debrebirhan, Adwa, Hosana, and Sebeta Colleges of Teacher
Education (diploma) are among recent achievements to promote special needs education in the country. These were achieved primarily because of the support from the
universities of Jyvaskyla and Joensuu with the financial support of the government of
Finland and the University of Oslo (Norway). These three universities, in collaboration
with Addis Ababa University, built the capacity of Ethiopian teachers to educate children
with special needs, mainly at the graduate level.
C H A L L E NG E S
In Ethiopia, policies and the constitution underline the right of persons with disabilities
to have access to education, health services, rehabilitation, and social welfare in the
country. They also commit to providing the necessary protections and provisions required
to promote the well-being of persons with disabilities.
During the past 15 years, schools have flourished in all the villages of Ethiopia but
have very serious problems and constraints in meeting quality and equity. Some of these
include low participation rates of children with special needs, a curriculum that is not
adapted to the diverse needs of children, and lack of equitable access to schooling for
many children with special needs.
The development of provision of special needs education in Ethiopia is insignificant.
There is a low student participation rate (less than 3%) at all levels, which is mainly a
10/14/11 5:45 PM
134

reflection of the very low number of schools available. There is also a lack of appropriate
and sufficient amount of educational materials, absence of teacher training for special
needs, poor financing of the education system and resulting poor support systems for
children, and negative attitudes and ignorance about the abilities of children with disabilities. All in all, clear educational provisions in the country that include the placement
of children with special educational needs are lacking. The provisions are limited to
special schools and special classes only for a few categories of children with disabilities:
visual impairment, hearing impairment, and mental retardation. Other disabilities are
ignored and children with special needs in regular classes do not have any support. As a
result, many children repeat classes and drop out of school.
Furthermore, there is a lack of professionals in the area of special needs education who
can assess and provide support to all children according to their needs and potential.
The shortage of qualified teachers and the inadequacy of budget have been the major
problems for all groups of children with disabilities. These indicate that there are many
irremovable barriers still within the education system, such as unfavorable attitudes, inaccessible environment, lack of practices, implementing policies, and lack of resources.
There are about 26,000 general education (grade 1 to 10) schools in the country at
present. Of these 26,000 schools, more than 1,500 schools are secondary. At present,
there is a need for approximately 52,000 special needs education teachers, but none of
the schools have teachers with the appropriate expertise (knowledge and skills) in special
needs education. There are only a limited number of minimally trained teachers (not
more than 1,000) for special schools and special classes at the primary level. Furthermore,
the new organizational structure and manpower of schools demand two special needs
education teachersone leading teacher and one assistant teacherto support the education and training of children and youth with special needs in general education.
This implies that practical efforts in educating professionals and teachers, advocating,
creating awareness, involving parents, providing educational materials, developing
guides, and arranging additional supports in different forms for children and youth with
special needs are still missing, but it is impossible to satisfy the aforementioned demands
and requirements and achieve the goal of universal primary education in 2015 without
such practical efforts, which will also save the children and youth with special needs
from segregation or isolation. Unless the enormous number of children with special
needs is considered and given due attention, Ethiopia cannot declare the success of universal primary education by the year 2015.
FUTUR E TR ENDS
Basic education and special needs education are of the utmost importance to meet the
needs of people with disabilities in the Ethiopian population. Policies and proclamations
have focused on upholding the rights of persons with disabilities to equal access to publicly funded services in the country. These show that the Education and Training Policy
has already created favorable conditions for the development of special needs education.
It has deliberately and purposefully outlined the principles of special needs education
by stating that all children and youth, including those with special needs, should be
educated in accordance to their full potential and to meet their needs. This reflects the
10/14/11 5:45 PM
135
worldwide changing concept of special education, the change in phrasing from special
education into special needs education, from the narrow scope of the education of the disabled into the education of all children with diverse needs that identifies and addresses
barriers to learning and participation. It reflects the current directions in special needs
education to meet the diverse needs at schools, to support schools to retain all of its
learners, and to decrease the numbers of dropouts and repeaters.
The Education and Training Policy and all the prevailing efforts arising from it have
been in the direction of creating equal access to primary education for all, expanding
primary education equitably, achieving the goal of universal basic or primary education
for all, improving instruction through teacher education programs, and developing
flexible and meaningful curricular materials. The educational system was recently
reorganized on the basis of this policy. For instance, it has created an atmosphere for the
community, particularly parents, to participate in educational activities. This is one of
the main requirements of a special needs education program.
Even in view of these favorable constitutional rights, policy directions, and
proclamations, there is still a long way to go to address the needs of persons with disabilities in Ethiopia not only in the education sector but in all areas of life. The challenge
is overcoming obstacles such as the public attitudes toward mainstreaming children with
disabilities and enforcing the policies in the country at large.
Following the implementation of the Education Sector Development Plan (MOE,
2006a), a strategy for special needs education was developed with the assistance of the
government of Finland in particular. This strategy is committed to furthering inclusion,
developing teacher training, and planning and review. Written in July 2010, a 5-year
plan, the Education Sector Development Plan IV (MOE, 2010), emphasizes education of
children with special needs, with clear development indicators.
Recently, there are new developments in teacher education. The teacher training for
secondary school will be 4 years, that is, 3 years academic subject study and 1 year
pedagogical study. The subject of special needs education is included as a separate
introductory course for all potential teachers with the simple aim of creating awareness
about children with disabilities.
Teachers, however, need further education and training to provide appropriate
support for students with special needs. At least they have to be aware of these special
needs for the country to achieve universal primary education. To do their jobs effectively,
they have to have some basic understandings about the philosophy and assumptions
underpinning inclusive education policies and practices, the national and international
policies and legislation on childrens and human rights, the nature of barriers to learning and participation, and the principles underlying different strategies that can be used
to address them. Such understanding will enable teachers to create learning environments in which learners challenge the traditional thinking about barriers to learning
and participation, analyze barriers to learning and participation in local schooling context, reflect on the extent to which objectives of the learning experience have been
achieved, and decide on adaptations where necessary.
The Education and Training Policy of Ethiopia (MOE, 1994) calls for special needs
teachers to be prepared within the existing teacher education institutes in an integrated
manner. The introductory course on special needs education that was developed to meet
10/14/11 5:45 PM
136

this requirement is not enough. Therefore, courses in special needs education are to be
included in all teacher education programs from the beginning of the academic year
2010/11 onward.
However, teachers in inclusive schools also need specific skills such as reading and
writing braille, mobility training, communication issues, sign language, and the like to
work with some of the children and to facilitate inclusion of all needs at schools. Therefore, all student teachers and education officers must take a component on special needs
education in all major initial and in-service teacher education programs. The provisions
should include supervisory supports with emphasis on the worldwide movement toward
organizing schools as inclusive schools and focusing on meeting individual needs in the
mainstream classrooms.
C ONC LU DI NG R E M A R K S
Ethiopia is one of the low-income countries that has committed to achieving universal
primary education, which is only feasible when all children with disabilities have the
opportunity to attend school. The Ethiopian policy frameworks and strategies are good
opportunities for responding to the education of children with disabilities in the country, but there are still negative attitudes, barriers, and misconceptions at the family and
societal level. Furthermore, a shortage of human and material resources and a lack of
coordination among the stakeholders are major obstacles to effective enforcement
of policies and proclamations. To address the problems discussed in this chapter and
achieve success in the education of people with disabilities in the inclusive settings,
serious measures need to be taken.
There is a need to plan in advance and develop effective implementation mechanisms
for inclusive education on the part of the government to ensure the school enrollment of
all children in the country. Above all, the government should be aware that the vast
majority of children with disabilities are living below the poverty line in Ethiopia. Unless
they are provided with the necessary education and training opportunities, the connection between poverty and disability will not be broken for years to come in the country.
R E F E R E NC E S
Ababa, H. (1996). Academic barriers of the hearing-impaired. Unpublished masters thesis,
University of Joensuu, Finland.
Alemayehu, T. (2000). Communication experiences of deaf students: A case study of four
pre-lingual deaf adolescents in Oromia Region, Ethiopia. Unpublished masters thesis,
University of Oslo.
Central Statistics Authority. (1998). National housing and population census. Addis Ababa:
C.P.P.
Central Statistics Authority. (2009). National housing and population census projection. Addis
Ababa: C.P.P.
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. (1994a). Disability labor proclamation. Addis Ababa:
BSPP.
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. (1994b). Education and training policy. Addis Ababa:
BSPP.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
137
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. (1994c). Ethiopian constitution. Addis Ababa: BSPP.
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. (2003). Higher education proclamation, no. 351/2003.
Addis Ababa: BSPP.
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. (2007). Developmental and social welfare policy. Addis
Ababa: Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs.
Ministry of Education of Ethiopia. (2006a). Education sector development program III, from
2005/06 to 2010/11. Addis Ababa: EMPDA.
Ministry of Education of Ethiopia. (2006b). Special needs education program strategy: Emphasizing
inclusive education to meet the UPEC and EFA Goals. Addis Ababa: Master Printing Press.
Ministry of Education of Ethiopia. (2007). Directory of special needs education services: Equipment
and materials. Addis Ababa: Master Printing Press.
Ministry of Education of Ethiopia. (2009). Education statistical abstract of academic year 2007/08.
Addis Ababa: Educational Management Information System.
Ministry of Education of Ethiopia. (2010). Education sector development program IV. Addis
Ababa: EMPDA.
Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs. (1999). National program of action for the rehabilitation of
persons with disabilities. Addis Ababa: Author.
Tibebeu, B. (1995). Meaning attached to disability, attitudes towards disabled people, and attitudes
towards integration. Jyvaskyla, Finland: University of Jyvaskyla.
Tirussew, T. (2001). Preventing learning difficulties and early school drop out. In P. S. Klein
(Ed.), Seeds of hope: Twelve years of early intervention experience in Africa. Oslo, Norway:
Unipub Forlag.
Tirussew, T. (2005). Disability in Ethiopia: Issues, insights, and implications. Addis Abada: Addis
Ababa University.
Tirussew, T., Sovolainen, H., Agedew, R., & Daniel, D. (1995). Baseline survey on disability in
Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: IER.
Transitional Government of Ethiopia. (1993). Health policy. Addis Ababa: Ministry of Health.
Transitional Government of Ethiopia. (1994). Training and education policy. Addis Ababa:
EMPDA.
United Nations. (1948). Human rights declaration. New York: Author.
United Nations. (1989). United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (G. A. Res
44/25, Annex 44, U.N. GAOR Supp. No. 49 at 167, U.N. Doc A/44/49). New York:
Author.
United Nations. (1993). United Nations Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons With Disabilities. New York: Author.
United Nations (UN). (2006). United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons With
Disabilities. Article 24. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention
/conventionfull.shtml.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (1994). Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. New York: Author.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (20062007). Global
monitoring report. Paris: Author.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
7
Special Education
Contexts, Problems, and
Prospects in Nigeria
Festus E. Obiakor and

Fr. MaxMary Tabugbo Offor
Demographically, Nigeria is the most populous nation in Africa today. The country
occupies about 923,768 square kilometers (365,700 square miles), which is roughly the
size of California, Nevada, and Arizona put together. The population is the 10th largest
in the world (Bureau of African Affairs, 2005).
Nigeria gained its independence from Britain on October 1, 1960. Since independence, it has experienced many political and socioeconomic problems that have retarded
its progress (Damachi, 1972; Diamond, 1989). For example, the Nigerian government
has been unable to eradicate corruption, nepotism, and tribalism, which affect its general and special education advancements. The alternation between civilian and military
rules, with more years of military government than civilian government, has perpetuated corruption of some citizens (Obiakor, 1998). As a result, most Nigerians dream of
getting a government job or political position where the least amount of labor is needed
to acquire wealth (Olatunji, 2010).
Sadly, even with Nigerias diverse talents and natural resources, its general and special
education programs continue to flounder in mediocrity. In fact, its sociopolitical problems are so endemic that they affect all spheres of its education modernization programs.
As a consequence, many Nigerian citizens with disabilities are not in programs that will
help them maximize their potential.
This chapter analyzes special education contexts, problems, and prospects in Nigeria.
However, we first discuss precolonial and colonial influences on educational programming
in Nigeria.
PR EC OL ON I A L E DUC AT ION I N N IG E R I A
During the precolonial period, traditional education flourished and the family played
critical roles in the generational growth of the individual. The cardinal goals of traditional education were to develop latent physical skills; inculcate respect for elders and
those in positions of authority; develop intellectual skills; develop character; impart
specific vocational training and a healthy attitude toward honest labor; and promote the
understanding and appreciation of the cultural heritage of local communities and the
community at large (Fafunwa, 1975; Obiakor, 1998).
In the precolonial period, the functions of the family included reproduction, child
care, socialization, economic support, collective responsibility, and cultural continuity
(Obiakor, 1991, 1998). With traditional education, everyone was involved, and the family
138
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Special Education in Nigeria
139
and the extended family system progressed, allowing the body and soul to be developed.
Those with more wealth took care of those less fortunate. The family transmitted educational and sociocultural attributes (Obiakor, 2005). Education at this time was not solely
academic; it included morality, patriotism, virtues, and all other characteristics that the
elders in the community considered to be ideal for community living. Traditional education recognized that all children are not the same and that some are stronger or faster
while others are weaker or slower. However, all children were treated with dignity, valued,
and educated together for the common good (Ozoji, 2005).
Traditional education was taught in social settings, allowing the adults to be role
models as they handed down family traditions from one generation to another. This
kind of traditional education produced strong and healthy patriotism in each member
of the family, helping to create patriotic leadership. With everyone responsible for one
another, no one acted in a way that tarnished the reputation of his or her family.
Because of the value system taught by traditional education, kinship was handed down
from father to son and from one generation to another. However, there was room for
earned honor: A servant who served his or her master well by working hard, or the best
village wrestler, or a great warrior was allowed to marry the chief or kings daughter. For
instance, a proverbial saying popular among the Igbos in the eastern part of Nigeria is,
When a child washes his/her hands very clean, he/she would be allowed to eat at the
Kings table (Obiakor, 2008). This proverb reveals the true essence of Nigerias traditional education as people learn by doing, whether they are doing for themselves or
whether they are doing for their community, village, and nation.
Clearly, traditional education involved all aspects of citizens lives. Community elders
acted as jurors and judges and resolved disputes ranging from common domestic quarrels to land disputes and tribal fights. Everyone was responsible for each other, confirming the African proverb It takes a village to raise a child (Clinton, 1996; Obiakor, 2008;
Obiakor, Grant, & Dooley, 2002).
British Colonial Influence on Nigerias Education

The arrival of missionaries and European traders brought what is now known as formal
education. These missionaries and traders did not come with the intention of educating
Nigerian citizens. The original intent of the missionaries was to convert the pagans
(native peoples) to Christianity. The traders came to sell their own goods and purchase
artifacts of the native people very cheaply.
In both respects, the intentions were very personal and selfish. Because Nigeria had
great wealth in human and natural resources that were yet to be tapped, the missionaries
and traders took advantage and made profits for themselves (Castle, 1975; Fafunwa,
1975). The missionaries acted as little gods who came to redeem the ungodly
Nigerians. The traders, on the other hand, amassed tremendous wealth for themselves.
In his inaugural address to the Wisconsin Branch of the Peoples Democratic Party of
Nigeria, Obiakor (2005) noted that the missionaries and traders cleverly befriended the
kings or chiefs, elders, and leaders of the communities and fostered self-serving interactions that portrayed the traders as superhuman.
To accomplish their goals, European missionaries and traders began a divide-andconquer strategy that hampered unity among Nigerians (Obiakor, 2005). The missionaries,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
140

without consideration for Nigerias traditional style of education and the values it
exemplified, imposed their new religion, Christianity, upon Nigerians educational
system. While Christianity helped to eradicate some dehumanizing practices such as the
killing of twins, it simultaneously imposed some antitraditional values. For instance, the
British colonial education produced colonial subordinates and officials who discouraged
traditional education. These officials paid little or no attention to consulting with the
indigenes and/or showed no consideration to the cultures of Nigerians in educational
planning and development (Obiakor, 2005; Obiakor & Maltby, 1989).
As Obiakor (2005) noted, colonial officials failed to focus on traditional forms of
education and values: They focused on training more subordinate interpreters, clerks,
and messengers. Because their objectives were not to educate people to achieve the same
status as themselves, they taught only the three Rs: reading, writing, and rithmetic. With
this type of education, trained Nigerians remained semi-illiterate. A few interpreters
were able to translate Sunday services from English to different indigenous languages
(in many cases, the interpreters supplemented and/or supplied their own ideas/
meaning). To a large extent, people with disabilities were ignored and not given educational considerations.
Based on the half-hearted education by the colonial masters, the ideas Nigerians valued
most before the advent of the British education were overlooked and in some situations
totally eliminated. Some of the kings or chiefs who were bold enough to disagree with colonial authorities were removed from their thrones using the tactics of divide and conquer.
Instead of listening to elders, rulers, and kings or chiefs of the land, colonial masters
persuaded the native people into accepting the kind of education that enhanced foreign
values. One can conclude that while these colonial masters constantly devised ways
through education to meet their selfish ends, they ignored the Nigerian traditional education, which developed the whole person and encouraged vocational skills for
self-sustenance (Obiakor, 1998, 2005; Obiakor & Maltby, 1989).
I N T RODUC I NG S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION TO N IG E R I A N S

The beginning of the effort to educate persons with disabilities in Nigeria was started in
1915 by the Sudan United Mission (SUM). The missionaries began educating many children with visual impairments. These children could not be taught with other children
even though they were anxious to learn (Abang, 1992, 2005; Jacques, 1979; Ozoji, 2003).
These missionaries thought it would be beneficial if they started a school where children
with visual impairments could study the braille system of reading and writing. Around
the same period, Miss Batu started teaching the braille system in the Hausa language to
grade 11. In 1916, she taught braille to three other girls whose sight was so bad that they
could not read print materials (Abang, 1992, 2005; Jacques, 1979).
On the whole, this system of education was formal, foreign, and organized differently
from how the elders and parents educated their children previously. From this new phase
of formal education came the introduction of formal and organized special education,
which went against the community philosophy that the native people and the extended
family system had known and supported all their lives (Bakere, 1992; Ihunnah, 1984;
Obiakor, 2005; Obiakor, Maltby, & Ihunnah, 1990; Ozoji, 2003, 2004).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
141
Table 1. Schools and Centers Established by Volunteer Agencies

Name of school
Year
Volunteer agency
State
School for Blind Children,

Gindiri
Special Education Center,
Orji River
School for the Deaf, Ibadan
Wesley School for the Deaf,
Surulere
Pacelli School for the Blind,
Surulere
1953
SUM
Plateau
1958
CMS
Enugu
1963
1957
Mrs. Oyesola
Wesley Mission
Oyo
Lagos
1962
RCM
Lagos
Source: Ozoji, E. D. (2003). Special education for beginner professionals (2nd ed.). Jos, Nigeria: Enterprises Publications.
Other missions quickly copied what the SUM did with Miss Batu. They opened their
own schools, using their places of worship as classrooms. Following the trend, a special
education school opened in 1953 at Gindiri Plateau State of Nigeria (Ozoji, 2003, 2005).
The missionaries formalized their curriculum and instructions. Through the formal
special education program that they instituted, they were able to assist persons with disabilities to obtain diplomas, just like anyone who completed the regular education course
of studies. This new form of education was inclusive, similar to the traditional form of
education practiced before the colonial era. Ozoji (2003) noted the Royal Commonwealth Society for the Blind in London was instrumental in stabilizing this inclusive
educational placement.
Slowly, the efforts of voluntary agencies found home in the hearts of the Nigerians; as
a result, they consolidated their place in the nation, especially because of the laissezfaire attitude of the government toward education in general.
The missionaries great quest for the evangelization of all people, especially persons
with disabilities, became more evident. Through the process of evangelization, intertwined with teaching in a formal manner, persons with disabilities were introduced to
the Western form of education (Abang, 2005; Ozoji, 2003). This is shown in Table 1.
Expansion of Special Education in Nigeria

Though the educational system in Nigeria continues to struggle, it has come a long way
from what it used to be before the British colonists introduced their system of education
to Nigerians. Along with this system of education came what is known today as special
education for children, youth, and adults. The traditional form of education in place
before the advent of the British system was given no consideration when the curriculum
and pedagogical methodologies were planned (Obiakor, 2005; Obiakor & Maltby, 1989;
Ogunsanya, 2010). Nonetheless, Nigeria has to move forward to expand general and
special education services for all its citizens (Federal Ministry of Education, 1977, 2004;
Universal Basic Education Commission, 2008).
It is common knowledge that no policy on education can be formulated without first
identifying the overall philosophy and goals of the nation. These goals must reflect the
needs of the nations citizenry, including those citizens with disabilities. According to the
10/14/11 5:45 PM
142

National Policy on Education (Federal Ministry of Education, 2004; Universal Basic
Education Commission, 2008),
Education is an instrument for nation development; to this end, the formation of
ideas, their integration for national development and the interaction of persons
and ideas are all aspects of education.
Education fosters worth and development for the individuals sake, and for the
general development of the society.
Every Nigerian child shall have a right to equal educational opportunities irrespective of any real or imagined disabilities each according to his/her ability.
There is need for functional education for the promotion of a progressive, united
Nigeria; to this end, school programs need to be relevant, practical and comprehensive while interest and ability should determine the individuals direction in
education. (pp. 67)
Based on the aforementioned policy, the overall aim of education appears focused on
educating children in a comprehensive manner to the extent that those with disabilities
will find something at their skill level for self-sustenance. Central to the National Policy
on Education is
the inculcation of national consciousness and national unity, the inculcation of the
right type of values and attitudes for the survival of the individual and the Nigerian
society, the training of the mind in understanding of the world around and the
acquisition of appropriate skills and the development of mental, physical, and social
abilities and competencies as equipment for the individual to live and contribute to
the development of the society. (p. 8)
There is no doubt that the government of Nigeria arrived late to the scene of special
education. While it appears that the government was coerced, dragged, and forced into
developing special education for its citizenry, it has been in partnership with foreign
volunteer agencies since the inception of special education (Onwuegbu, 1977; Ozoji,
2003). For example, over the years it approved the schemes meant for special education,
awarded grants to the agencies, approved certificates of occupancy, and provided other
forms of moral support (Eleweke, 1999; Obiakor, 1998; Ozoji, 2003, 2005). In addition, it
supported the establishment of special education by making provisions for its existence,
at least in theory.
Enabling legislation includes the 1948 Education Ordinance, the 1954 Education Law,
and the 1962 Northern Nigeria Education Law. It was not long after these laws that Nigerians
began to experience political and tribal crises that led to unrest and military coups. As a
consequence, from 1967 to 1970, the Nigerian government was involved in a devastating
civil war (the NigerianBiafran war) and the impact of that war is still felt today.
With the end of the NigerianBiafran civil war in 1970, the Nigerian government
became more aggressively involved in providing special education and rehabilitation
services for the veterans of the civil war. Many schools for students with disabilities began
to spring up, as shown in Table 2.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
143
Table 2. Special Education Schools Established by the Nigerian Government

Name of school
Year
State
Kwara State School for the Handicapped, Ilorin

Special Education School for the Handicapped, Abeokuta
Special Education Center, Orlu
Plateau State School for the Deaf, Jos
Special Education School for the Deaf, Kaduna
Benin Special Education School for the Deaf
Special Education Center Tudun Maliki
Special Education School for the Handicapped, Shagamu
Ondo State Special Education School for the Blind
Special Education Center, Jada
Special Education Center for the Exceptional Children, Calabar
Niger State Special Education for the Handicapped, Minna
Special Education School for the Handicapped, Sokoto
Special Education Center, Bauchi
Special Education School for the Blind, Umuahia
Special Education School for the Visually Impaired, Zuba
Special Education for the Hard of Hearing, Kuje
1974
1976
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
1977
197778
1981
1981
1983
1984
1984
1985
1991
1992
Kwara
Ogun
Imo
Plateau
Kaduna
Edo
Kano
Ogun
Ondo
Adamawa
Cross River
Niger
Sokoto
Bauchi
Abia
Abuja
Abuja
Source: Ozoji, E. D. (2003). Special education for beginner professionals (2nd ed.). Jos, Nigeria: Enterprises Publications.
Educational policies after the Nigerian civil war revealed some improvements
regarding special education programming and the treatment of citizens with disabilities
(Abang, 2005; Obiakor, 1998; Ozoji, 2003). The inference could be drawn from the
provisions of the Third National Development Plan (197580), which included some
benchmarks for special education (Federal Ministry of Education, 1977). The philosophy, objectives, and provisions of this plan especially favored the operation of special
education. Targeted actions in the national plan for special education included the
following:
Establishing an efficient system of special education institutions throughout the
federation.
Establishing the National Council on Special Education to carry out a national
census of persons with disabilities and identify their needs.
Establishing the cooperation of the Ministry of Education in training special
educators.
Providing free education at all levels for persons with disabilities.
Publicizing the National Policy on Education, which in particular ways elaborated
the provisions and operations of special education.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
144

Including elements of special education in teacher education.
Introducing a 6-3-3-4 system of education (6 years of elementary school, 3 years of
middle school, 3 years of secondary school, and 4 years of tertiary school).
The Federal Ministry of Education (1977) instituted Section 8 of the National Policy
on Education to buttress the provision of special education programs to all Nigerians.
Around this period, the nations first Federal College for Special Education Program was
established at Oyo, Oyo State, Nigeria. Since its inception, the college has graduated many
students in the various aspects of special education. To show that the federal government
was determined to make special education work well for its citizens, elements of special
education courses were introduced into teacher education programs and other higher
institutions of learning (Abang, 2005; Fabunmi, 2005; Ogunsanya, 2010).
The government continued its efforts to accelerate the proper functioning of special
education by creating the Department of Special Education at the University of Ibadan,
one of the nations oldest universities, with Dr. Mba as its first department head. In 1980, a
similar department was established at the University of Jos with Sister Theresa Abang,
PhD, as its pioneering department head. Today, there are about 105 special education
schools that are located all over the nation. The latest school is the Ganaka International
School of Special Education, established on September 29, 2005 (Abang, 2005;
Ogunsanya, 2010; Universal Basic Education Commission, 2008).
Earlier, Obiakor (1998) argued that applying the phrase treat everyone equally is not
very appropriate or even applicable in all situations in Nigeria. Rather, he concluded that
it is our moral obligation to treat every one with justice and equity. Though the government
of Nigeria attempts to provide education for all its citizens, it has not been done equitably.
There continues to be deficiency in technology. Even many of the schools using lowtechnology materials such as pencil grips, soft-bottomed scissors, and calculators find it
difficult to procure them.
BU I L DI NG C U LT U R A L BR I D G E S TO E N H A NC E S PEC I A L
E DUC AT ION S E RV IC E S
It is evident that Nigerians can never be completely separated from their traditional
cultures and values. However, it is also clear that Nigerians must embrace some foreign
cultures to advance the education of those with disabilities. Put another way, Nigeria must
face its 21st-century challenges to advance special education services to all its citizens.
For example, there are new paradigms, technologies, methodologies, and techniques
that Nigerians must value and incorporate into their traditional practice to foster special
education.
How Nigeria can build cultural bridges that value traditional and European cultures
to enhance special education? Rather than see persons with disabilities as abnormal or
evil people, Nigerians must see them as normal people who can live normal lives. They
must shift their cultural paradigms and powers in this regard. In other words, whether
people have cognitive disabilities or emotional/behavioral disorders, they must never be
subjected to subhuman treatments or living conditions.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
145
This normalization idea is now called inclusive intervention (Garuba, 2003; Ozoji, 2003,
2005). It is critical to see special education not as a service for some people but essentially
as a service for everybody. The thinking underlying this view is that everybody has unique
needs. When individualized attention is directed toward those needs, what is being truly
provided is special education (Abang, 2005; Garuba, 2003; Ozoji, 2003, 2005). Not surprisingly, the lack of mandatory legislation buttresses the abnormality mentality because
if someone is abnormal, he or she cannot be protected by law. The inability of the
Nigerian government to pass laws to support persons with disabilities has continued to
create ongoing myths about causes of disabilities (Abang, 2005; Fabunmi, 2005; Obiakor,
1991; Ozoji, 1991, 2003; Yaksat & Hill, 1982).
Attitudes toward people with disabilities have a very significant influence on special
education in many developing countries. Though these attitudes might be culturally
relevant to Nigerians, they might be retrogressive when people fail to use all necessary
means to help educate people with disabilities. Because how people act and what people
do varies from people to people and culture to culture, educational progress might be
difficult to achieve without changing attitudes about disability.
It must be understood that Nigeria is a multiethnic nation with each tribe teaching
and living its own culture to influence the attitude of tribal members regarding persons
with disabilities. There is no homogenous Nigerian cultural attitude toward anything,
and in todays Nigeria there is an apparent intrusion of the European culture in all
aspects of activities. How do we build cultural bridges between the Nigerian cultural
values and those of the Europeans? These bridges will be difficult to build, especially
because Nigerians see disability in varied ways. Disability may be a curse on the family or
the wider community for offenses against God or the gods; anger of the ancestors or
ancestral gods for neglect or breach of promises; a punishment of the child for offenses
committed in the previous incarnation; a punishment for a parents misdemeanor; a way
to know a potential evil person curtailed by the gods; a punishment for offenses against
the laws of the land or breaches of custom; or a wicked act of witches and wizards (Obani,
2002; Obiakor, 1991; Ogbue, 1995).
In the light of these beliefs, it is hardly surprising that attitudes toward persons with
disabilities in Nigeria are generally negative. The consequence of such negativism is a
lack of parental involvement in the education of their children. Many parents are insufficiently informed and therefore unaware of the role of special education in equalizing
educational opportunities for their children with disabilities (Galadima, n.d.; Obiakor,
2005; Ozoji, 2003; Yaksat & Hill, 1982). To build cultural bridges, literacy must be
increased through innovative educational programming. Educated parents must form
powerful parental organizations that advocate for improvement of services, better educational environment and facilities, and quality education.
Because special education is an expensive enterprise, efforts must be made to provide
the technological equipment needed to equalize opportunities. Unless the government
is willing to spend a good amount of money, it will be impossible to provide good special
education programing to the Nigerian citizenry. In the face of continued dwindling of
revenue and earnings from oil, Nigeria must develop creative ways to fund educational
programs and understand that insufficient funding may adversely mar the progress of
special education (Obiakor, 1998; Olatunji, 2010; Ozoji, 2003).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
146

There is no doubt that the Nigerian government has recognized the importance of
special education for its citizens with disabilities. For example, it has published very laudable policies for special education (Universal Basic Education Commission, 2008). To
build cultural bridges, the government must be willing to provide the necessary funding
that will make implementation of the ideas a reality. Sadly, there is no funded mandate
in the form of legislation passed to guide the implementation of special education in
Nigeria. The reason for this may be a lack of funding from the government to those
expected to implement the bills and a lack of political awareness of those whose rights
are being protected. To bridge this gap, a good solution may be to show Nigerians why
they should value their rights and, when denied their rights, how to initiate due process
and legal action (Anderson, 2004).
There is an urgent need for legislation to help increase awareness and growth rate
of special education in Nigeria (Eleweke, 1999; Eleweke, Olaniyan, & Okeke, 1993;
Obiakor, 1998; Ozoji, 2003). To solidify cultural bridges, there must be coordinated
efforts by either the federal government, state governments, or local governments to
educate the public regarding special education and the different disabilities that some
Nigerian citizens might have.
Therefore, instituting a national commission for persons with disabilities and public
enlightenment will be a major task (see Ozoji, 2005). In addition, the private sector must
be involved in organizing volunteers to help destroy the myth that the government is
responsible for doing everything for its citizenry. Through volunteer works, graduates
who have learned how to advocate can help organize the community, the society, and
even the private sectors to engage in volunteer work for students with special needs
(Abang, 2005; Ozoji, 2003).
C ONC LUS ION

In this chapter, we have analyzed the contexts, problems, and prospects of special
education in Nigeria. To buttress our analyses, we have discussed the impacts of
traditional education, colonial education, and postcolonial educational efforts. With
traditional education, morality, patriotism, obedience, honor, respect, and other virtues
flourished. For instance, people were responsible for their neighbors and recognized
that all children are not the same. During the colonial period, traditional education was
dismantled and formal education was introduced. In addition, voluntary agencies began
to formally and informally educate individuals with disabilities. During the postcolonial
period after independence, Nigeria began to design programs to educate all its citizens,
including those with disabilities.
In the 1970s, the government became involved in programs to rehabilitate the nations
civil war veterans. Even then, there was no concrete action until 1977 and the promulgation of Section 8 of the National Policy on Education. However, while this governments
effort seemed laudable, there are traditional sociocultural values and beliefs that impede
progress. In addition, there is no mandatory law that guides the provision of special
education services. This could be attributed partly to the lack of funding, lack of
educational philosophy, high illiteracy rate, and lack of political will.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
147
We believe the Nigerian government needs to enact laws and policies to guide the
proper implementation of special education. We also conclude that individuals and the
private sector must be encouraged to educate parents and the public about different
disabilities and what they entail. In the end, we feel strongly that through education,
public attitudes toward persons with disabilities will be changed.
R E F E R E NC E S
Abang, T. B. (1992). Special education in Nigeria. International Journal of Disability, Development
and Education, 39, 1318.
Abang, T. B. (2005). The exceptional child: Handbook of special education. Jos, Nigeria: Fab Aniieh
Press.
Anderson, D. W. (2004, November). Human rights and persons with disabilities in developing
nations of Africa. Paper presented at the Fourth Annual Lilly Fellows Program National
Research Conference, Birmingham, AL.
Bakere, C. A. (1992). Integration in education: The case of education for the handicapped
children in Nigeria. International Journal of Special Education, 7, 225260.
Bureau of African Affairs. (2005). A sub-division of U.S. Department of State for sub-Sahara Africa.
Washington, DC: Author.
Castle, E. B. (1975). Principles of education for teachers in Africa. London: Oxford University
Press.
Clinton, H. R. (1996). It takes a village and other lessons children teach us. New York: Simon &
Schuster.
Damachi, U. G. (1972). Nigerian modernization. New York: Third Press.
Diamond, L. (1989, November). Nigerias transition trap: Is there a way out? African
Commentary, 1, 2830.
Eleweke, C. J. (1999). The need for mandatory legislations to enhance services to people with
disabilities in Nigeria. Disability & Society, 14, 227237.
Eleweke, C. J., Olaniyan, S. O., & Okeke, B. (1993). The importance of legislation in ensuring
education for all exceptional children by the year 2000 A.D. In E. D. Ozoji & I. A.
Nwazuoke (Eds.), Educating exceptional children in the 21st century: Tasks and strategies
(pp. 4146). Jos, Nigeria: Ehindero.
Fabunmi, M. (2005). Historical analysis of educational policy formulation in Nigeria:
Implications for educational planning and policy. International Journal of African and
American Studies, 4, 16.
Fafunwa, A. B. (1975). History of education in Nigeria. London: George Allen & Company.
Federal Ministry of Education. (1977). National policy on education, section 8. Lagos, Nigeria:
Author.
Federal Ministry of Education. (2004). National policy on education. Lagos, Nigeria: Author.
Galadima, M. (n.d.). Overcoming the skeptical attitudes of regular teachers towards inclusive education
approaches in Sokoto State, Nigeria. Sokoto, Nigeria: Ministry of Education. Retrieved from
www.afri.can.org/Ghana/Mamuda.doc.
Garuba, A. (2003). Inclusive education in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities for
Nigerians. Asian Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, 14, 191198.
Ihunnah, A. C. (1984). The status of special education in a developing country: Nigeria.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Blacksburg, VA.
Jaques, B. J. (1979). Educational provision for the visually handicapped in Nigeria.
Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
148

Obani, T. (2002). The development of concepts of handicap in adolescents: A cross cultural
study. International Journal of Educational Development, 4, 285291.
Obiakor, F. E. (1991). Cultural and socio-economic factors affecting special education policies
in Nigeria. International Journal of Special Education, 6, 271278.
Obiakor, F. E. (1998). Special education reform in Nigeria: Prospects and challenges. European
Journal of Special Needs Education, 13, 5771.
Obiakor, F. E. (2005, September). Building patriotic African leadership through African-centered
education. Paper presented at the Inauguration of the Wisconsin Branch of the Peoples
Democratic Party (PDP) of Nigeria, Milwaukee, WI.
Obiakor, F. E. (2008). One hundred multicultural proverbs: Inspirational affirmations for educators.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Obiakor, F. E., Grant, P. A., & Dooley, E.A. (2002). Educating all learners: Refocusing the comprehensive support model. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Obiakor, F. E., & Maltby, G. P. (1989). Pragmatism and education in Africa: Handbook for educators
and development planners. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Obiakor, F. E., Maltby, G. P., & Ihunnah, A. C. (1990, April). Special education policies in
Nigeria: Cultural, socio-economic and political issues. Paper presented at the 68th Annual
International Convention of the Council for Exceptional Children, Toronto, Canada.
Ogbue, R. M. (1995). A survey of special education facilities in Nigeria. Lagos, Nigeria: Federal
Ministry of Education.
Ogunsanya, A. (2010). Federal College of Education (Special) Oyo State, Nigeria. Retrieved from
http://directory-nigeria.org/federal-college-of-education-special-oyo.
Olatunji, B. (2010). Nigeria: FG set to implement education roadmap. Retrieved from http://
allafrica.com/stories/201002100394.html.
Onwuegbu, O. L. (1977). The Nigeria culture: Its perception and treatment of the handicapped.
Unpublished manuscript, Federal Advanced Teachers College for Special Education,
Oyo, Oyo State, Nigeria.
Ozoji, E. D. (1991). Attitudinizing the special education teachers. Journal of Special Education
and Rehabilitation, 2, 1826.
Ozoji, E. D. (2003). Special education: For beginner professionals (2nd ed.). Jos, Nigeria: Enterprises
Publications.
Ozoji, E. D. (2004). Attitudinizing the special education teachers. Journal of Special Education
and Rehabilitation, 3, 2125.
Ozoji, E. D. (2005). Special education for general studies purposes. Jos, Nigeria: Enterprises
Publications.
Universal Basic Education Commission. (2008). The development of educational report of Nigeria.
Abuja, Nigeria: Federal Ministry of Education.
Yaksat, B. L., & Hill, K. E. (1982). Strategies for involving parents of visually impaired children,
professionals and the wider community as partners in achieving full access to education for these
children. Paper presented at the Annual Conference at Gindiri Material Center for the
Handicapped, Gindiri, Plateau State, Nigeria.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
8
One Step Forward, Two
Steps Backward: Special
Education in Israel
Thomas P. Gumpel
The Israeli education system in general and the special education system in particular
face enormous challenges. Israel is a highly complex society, fractured into different
sectors where each sector unabashedly pushes its own agenda and tries to dictate
government policy. Israel is also an immigrant country with a large indigenous population
and is engaged in an ongoing political, national, and military conflict with enemies
without and competing national narratives within. It would be inconceivable that these
monumental stresses would not impact on societys greatest instrument of socialization,
social control, and homogenization: the education system. The provision of special services to children with special educational needs is a civil and human rights issue, and so
these fractures in Israeli society are amplified in the special education system.
All national education systems, Israel included, develop through the interplay between
larger sociohistorical, national, demographic, and bureaucratic requirements (Gumpel &
Awartani, 2003; Gumpel & Nir, 2005). Of course, this is also true if we examine challenges
and the structure and future trajectories of special education in Israel. As we shall see,
this small country faces a series of challenges that are unique to the Israeli context, as
well as other challenges that are common to other ethnically diverse nations.
As a country facing both real and perceived existential threats, while simultaneously
occupying the Palestinian Territories, the Israeli education system faces additional challenges. Some of these issues relate to professional and bureaucratic aspects of the system;
however, other challenges stem from the ongoing ethnic and national conflicts. Let us
first examine some social and cultural issues shaping the current Israeli education system
by (very) briefly exploring their historical and political roots. From there, we will examine
recent changes in the education and treatment of children with special educational
needs, focusing on the move toward the provision of services in general education
settings and personnel preparation. As an example of the convergence of national,
ethnic, and political considerations, and how they can influence both general and special
educational policy, we will specifically examine the special education system in Jerusalem,
which is arguably the most complicated city in the world.
A N I S R A E L I PR I M E R
The State of Israel is a small country (20,770 square kilometers) with a primarily
industrial and service-oriented economy (96.5%). The population of 7.5 million is
composed of two primary ethnic groups: 75.5% Jewish and 20.4% Israeli-Palestinians
151
10/14/11 5:45 PM
152
Thomas P. Gumpel
(also called Israeli-Arabs) who are either Muslims or Christians (Central Bureau of
Statistics, 2009a). Druze and Bedouins are two ethnic groups subsumed within the Arab
sector. There are four primary religions represented in the country: Jewish (75.5%);
Muslim (17% predominately Sunni Muslim); Christian (2%); and Druze (1.7%) (Central
Bureau of Statistics, 2009b). Despite the fact that Israeli-Arabs comprise 20.4% of the
entire population, they account for 24.75% of the school-aged population (Ministry
of Education, 2005), implying a young population, a higher birth rate, and future
demographic changes in the states ethnic mix.
Israel has five major cities: Jerusalem (the capital), Tel Aviv, Haifa, Umm El Fahem,
and Beer Sheva. Jerusalem and Haifa are mixed cities with both Jewish and Arab
populations. Tel Aviv and Beer Sheva are predominately Jewish, and Umm El Fahem is
Arab. Most towns in Israel have a Jewish majority and are located within a relatively small
geographic area (from south of Tel Aviv to Haifa in the north). On the other hand,
Israeli-Arabs are dispersed in four primary geographical areas: Arab towns and cities,
mixed Jewish and Jewish-Arab cities, villages, and unrecognized settlements, with
different demographic groups inhabiting different types of settlements. The Druze population lives almost exclusively in villages in the northern part of the country. The oncenomadic Bedouin population lives primarily in unofficial and unrecognized villages in
the southern part of the country.
In this rich ethnic mosaic, the Jewish population can be roughly divided into four
groups: secular; traditional (keeps some sort of Jewish traditions and holidays and would
be considered reform or conservative Judaism in North America); religious (would be
considered orthodox Judaism in North America: Men are noticeably visible by the knitted yarmulke); and the ultraorthodox (who live in separate communities, often known as
Hasidic Jews in North America: Men are noticeably visible by their black suits, hats, and
beards). The Jewish population is also divided into Ashkenazi Jews (of European descent)
and Sephardic Jews (also called Mizrahim and are of Middle Eastern descent). The ultraorthodox are divided into countless subgroups, some Ashkenazi and some Sephardic.
Thus, a salient aspect of Israeli life is its countless divisions and subdivisions. Each
division is heavily associated with a certain political and social outlook and is evident in
everyday life in Israel: Street signs and products in stores are in Hebrew, Arabic, English,
Russian, and sometimes Amharic. Any Israeli (Jew or Arab) can quickly classify anyone
he or she meets by both ethnicity and their related political views; more so, neighborhoods, villages, towns, and sometimes even cities are known by their ethnic or linguistic
distinctiveness. All Israelis group themselves by religious and political affiliation. Religious affiliation and political parties cater to specific constituencies, where in Israel
political representation is not based on geographical location but rather solely by
ideological identification. For example, Tel Aviv (a secular city) is viewed as liberal and
progressive whereas Jerusalem (a religious city) is very conservative. Settlements in the
West Bank are predominately religious, conservative, hawkish, and right-wing. In the
Arab sector, Muslims from villages tend to be more conservative than their counterparts
in the cities. Arab Christians tend to be more liberal; Arabs in Jerusalem (predominately
Muslim) tend to be religious and conservative. This list of schisms can go on, with each
small group being divided into smaller subgroups. In all, however, a common thread
throughout this fragmented society is that each group tends to be associated primarily
with its own members, often via geographic isolation.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
One Step Forward, Two Steps Backward
153
Some History
To understand how this fragmentation came about, we must examine its historical roots.
The State of Israel was founded in 1948 based on the Zionist movement founded by
Theodor Herzl (18601904). Disheartened by continuing European anti-Semitism, Herzl
wrote that despite their attempts at assimilation into the fabric of 19th-century European
culture, Jews would always be outsiders and subject to continuing anti-Semitism. In this
national movement, Zionism called for the establishment of a Jewish national and religious homeland in the biblical Land of Israel. Only in their own land, Herzl wrote, could
Jews ever hope to be free from the 2,000-year-old yoke of European anti-Semitism. As
Herzls views on the imperative for a Jewish state in Palestine took hold, Zionist policy
became part of British foreign policy intent on dismantling the ailing Ottoman Empire.
This was in keeping with the McMahonHussein Correspondence (secret correspondence of 19151916 between Sir Henry McMahon the British High Commissioner in
Egypt and the Sharif of Mecca, Hussein ibn Ali, regarding the future distribution of
lands of the Ottoman Empire) and the SykesPicot Agreement (which was between Sir
Mark Sykes and Franois George-Picot) in 1916 that divided the Ottoman Empire into
British- and French-controlled areas following its defeat in World War I.
After the Armistice of 1918, Palestine was ceded to the United Kingdom as per the
secret SykesPicot Agreement, and an active period of settlement of Palestine by
European Jews began. With many stops and starts, and by overcoming political and
military attempts by the indigenous Arab population to thwart their mass migration, the
Jewish and European colonial hold in Palestine grew steadily from 1904 until 1948, when
the British Mandate in Palestine drew to a close with the formation of the State of Israel.
Independence was declared and a Jewish democracy was established in 1948 following
the United Nations (UN) division of the area into two states: Israel and Palestine. The
UN Partition Plan for Palestine was approved by the UN General Assembly on November
29, 1947. It was accepted by Israel yet rejected by the indigenous Arabs and the entire
Arab League who launched a war in order to destroy the nascent Jewish state.
The definition of Israel as an ethnic democracy, however, engendered a myriad of
problems for the indigenous non-Jewish population of the state. Any examination of
modern Israel will reveal tensions inherent in an ethnically based democracy where
approximately 20% of the population is not part of the group possessing legally granted
and ensured political hegemony. Thus, infrastructure and educational services have
been consistently underfunded over the last 62 years for the non-Jewish parts of Israel.
Wars and Strife in Israel

Since its inception, Israel has been plagued by seven wars and ongoing terrorism based
on the continuous rejections of Israels legitimacy and of the UN Partition of 1947 as well
as the nationalist aspirations of the indigenous Arab people. The state was born during
the first of these wars, the War of Independence of 1948. Victory in 1948 was accompanied by massive land confiscations and the demolishing of indigenous Arab villages,
as well as the forced expulsion of 700,000 residents from those villages (Morris, 1988,
2004). Currently, the number of these refugees has grown to approximately 4 million
individuals and remains one of the major obstacles to Middle East peace (Morris, 2004).
The 1967 Six Day War created another major challenge as Israel conquered massive
10/14/11 5:45 PM
154
Thomas P. Gumpel
tracts of land (Brams & Togman, 1998), increasing its population by a factor of four.
However, as this population boost was solely Arab due to the absorption of occupied
Arab lands, ethnic tensions were exacerbated.
The Arab population in Israel today is referred to by two different terms: 48 Arabs
and 67 Arabs, with 48 Arabs residing primarily in the north of the country and 67
Arabs residing solely in the newly Occupied Palestinian Territories (including Jerusalem).
As we have seen, two major factors influence this minoritys status in the country. On the
one hand, the Arab minority lives in an ethnic democracy guaranteeing the rights and
privileges of the Jewish majority. On the other, it is part of the Arab world, which has
historically rejected the State of Israels legitimacy.
During the early years of the state, the Arab minority was subject to martial law, which
included administrative detentions, curfews, travel permits, and expulsions (Segev &
Cohen, 2008). Martial law and overtly discriminatory laws were revoked in 1966, giving
Arab citizens of the state equal protection under the law. Arabs living in East Jerusalem,
occupied and administered by Israel since the Six-Day War of 1967, are a special case.
They became permanent residents of Israel shortly after the war. Although they hold
Israeli ID cards, few have applied for Israeli citizenship, to which they are entitled, and
most maintain close ties with the West Bank and Jordan (most retain Jordanian
citizenship). As permanent residents, they are eligible to vote in Jerusalems municipal
elections, although only a small percentage takes advantage of this right (United Nations,
2010). Thus, as residents of Jerusalem, Arabs in the city live both in and out of Israel.
Since the Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem in 1980, however, they reside in the half of
the city occupied by Israel in 1967 and hence fall under the protection of the Fourth
Geneva Convention of 1949 (Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Article 50)
guaranteeing the education and treatment of civilians in occupied territories under
international law. Despite protections delineated in the Israeli Declaration of Independence, Arab citizens of Israel continue to experience discrimination in different realms
(Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, 2007; Or, 2003).
Israel also has a number of salient social problems. Despite having the 15th highest
Human Development Index ([HDI]; United Nations Development Programme, 2010),
Israel suffers from an increasing poverty level as well as income inequality. Poverty is
becoming rampant (Gazit, 2010; Latet, 2010). According to the most recent report
released by an Israeli nongovernmental organization (NGO; Latet, 2010), despite the
high HDI index compared with other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) countries, the percentage of children living under the poverty
line is 36.3% (vs. 11% for other OECD nations). Combined with a high and increasing
(approximately 5% yearly) GINI (global distribution of family income) rank of 39.2
(World Bank, 2010) pointing to a high level of inequality of income distribution between
the wealthiest and poorest citizens, Israelis face many hardships.
T H E E DUC AT ION S Y S T E M
To understand the provision of education to children with special educational needs, we
must first understand the general education system and we must always remember that
both systems sit in the highly fragmented Israeli society where competition between and
10/14/11 5:45 PM
155
within each ethnic sector is omnipresent. The system is controlled by a strong central
bureaucracy located in Jerusalem and is run by the Ministry of Education (MOE) and a
director general who are administratively and politically responsible for the enactment
of laws, the development of regulations, and the operation of the education system. The
MOE sets national goals; tightly controls inputs and the allocation of budgets; monitors and controls student achievements through national performance evaluation tests;
determines the national curriculum; and is responsible for employing teachers and the
construction of new schools (Glasman, 1986). All MOE policies are in sync with national
policies and priorities. The education system is divided geographically into six districts
that supervise and monitor the educational processes conducted by schools to ensure the
compatibility of these processes with central policies (Zucker, 1985).
Jewish Israel is a nation of immigrants where the education system has always been
charged as the primary vehicle for diminishing the differences among immigrants and
between immigrants and vatikim (Hebrew for old-timers) and ensuring social, political,
cultural, and economic mobility. This process has repeatedly been tested through waves
of immigration, the most recent of which coincided with the fall and breakup of the
former Soviet Union. Between 1989 and 1991, Israel was deluged with waves of immigration of Soviet Jews. The educational and social support systems were called upon to
acculturate approximately 376,000 new citizens (an increase in the population of about
7.8% in 2 years; Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 1998).
Israel is also a nation with a large indigenous Arab minority. This linguistic and religious minority has struggled to achieve parity with the Jewish majority despite living in a
Jewish ethnic democracy where all political power has de jure been kept in the hands of
the Jewish majority.
During the 2009 to 2010 school year, the Israeli education system included 3,652
schools (including schools for children with special needs; Central Bureau of Statistics,
2001; Zionit, Berman, & Ben-Arie, 2009) and 2,468,700 children (32.7% of the entire
population). Of these children, 69.4% were Jewish, 24.1% were Muslim, 1.7% were
Christian, and 1.9% were Druze. The only growing demographic group of these 4 was
the group of Muslim children (which increased from 20.2% in 1995; Zionit, Berman, &
Ben-Arie, 2009).
The state-run bureaucratic system is divided into two main sectors: the Jewish education
division and the non-Jewish system. Each system is then subdivided once again (Jewish
secular, Jewish religious, Jewish ultraorthodox, Arab, Druze) (Gumpel & Nir, 2005;
Gumpel & Sharoni, 2007). The system faces constant growth; the number of pupils
enrolled in the education system increased by more than 16.5 fold over a period of 50
years, from 108,131 pupils in 1948 to close to 2.5 million pupils in 2010. The number of
immigrant pupils is also increasing (about 1.5% in 1991 to approximately 11% in 1996;
Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport, 1996), as is the number of immigrant teachers
(1,950 teachers in 1992 to 5 150 in 1996). The annual dropout rate for pupils in uppersecondary education is about 4.8% in Jewish education and 11.8% in Arab education
(Central Bureau of Statistics, 2001). Israel boasts a high literacy rate of 91.8% among
those over the age of 15 (UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2008). National expenditure
on education places Israel among the highest investing countries in public education in
comparison with other OECD countries.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
156
Thomas P. Gumpel
However, perennial problems exist. Severe difficulties result from Israels complicated
multiple streams at both the primary and secondary levels; mandatory military conscription immediately following high school; problematic educational attainments in the face
of rapid population growth; increased demands on the education system; and reduced
funding of public education (Nir & Nafcha, 2007). Educational attainments for high
school students are low, with a high percentage demonstrating poor basic skills (OECD,
2009). Further, as in the socioeconomic spheres, large gaps exist between Israeli-Arabs
and the rest of the population (OECD, 2009, 2010). Israeli children significantly underperform in reading, mathematics, and science as compared to children in other OECD
countries as measured by the Programme for International Student Assessment ([PISA];
OECD, 2010). Additionally, teachers in Israel are paid significantly less than their OECD
counterparts (Nir & Nafcha, 2007). School violence is higher than most OECD countries
(Zionit, Berman, & Ben-Arie, 2009), burnout among teachers remains high and stable
(Friedman & Lotan, 1985), and class size is above the OECD average (Zionit, Berman, &
Ben-Arie, 2009).
Perhaps the greatest challenge facing the education system is how to deal with the disparity between educational achievement and enfranchisement for different sectors of
Israeli society. Since achieving independence, the countrys leaders have repeatedly
declared that a primary goal of the education system has been to reduce the socioeconomic gaps between different segments of the population on an inter-ethnic level (that is,
Jewish vs. Arab allocations in education) and an intra-ethnic (Ashkenazim vs. Mizrahim,
religious vs. secular) level. These gaps exist on a myriad of economic, cultural, and
legal levels.
Disparity in educational performance exists between the primary Jewish groups
(Gumpel & Nir, 2005) and between Jews and Arabs (OECD, 2009). These gaps are visible
between different socioeconomic groups, between Ashkenazim and Mizrahim, between
old-timers and new immigrants, and between different towns, cities, and villages
(National Taskforce for the Advancement of Education in Israel, 2004). In 2009, 68% of
all Jewish high schools students were eligible for their high school matriculation diploma,
as compared to a 49.2% rate for Arab high school students, 46.6% of Muslims, and
approximately 60% of Christian and Druze youth. These numbers have remained fairly
stable since 1995.
T H E S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION S Y S T E M

In the 2008 to 2009 academic year, 109,511 children (5.76%) were identified as having special educational needs. Of these, 16.97% studied in segregated schools. Another 22.42%
studied in general education schools, with 56.99% of these studying for the majority of
the school day in special day classes (50.9%; Zionit, Berman, & Ben-Arie, 2009).
All of the problems and challenges facing the general education system in Israel confront the special education system as well. Indeed, we can make that claim that as the
special education system tries to integrate itself into in the general education system (as
in a time of increased inclusion) it will become more vulnerable to the inadequacies of
the larger system. Despite the fact that discussion of integration and inclusion began
during the 1950s, it only began to gain momentum following legislation of the Special
10/14/11 5:45 PM
157
Education Law of 1988 (SEL) and the implementation of the law in the early 1990s. At
that period, many children who had previously received services in segregated settings
began to receive services within the general education framework (Avishar & Layser,
2000; Comptrollers Office, 2001; Margalit, 1999).
Like much of Israeli society, special education procedures prior to the passage of the
Special Education Law of 4758 (SEL, 1988) were based on an informal and personal
form of negotiations between the education system, the childs family, and the MOE.
Services were provided under the more general auspices of the Compulsory Education
Law of 1949 and the State Education Law of 1953.
The foundation for understanding Israeli special education is the SEL. The law was
intended to mark a turning point in the provision of special education services to children and adolescents with special needs. It passed with wide multiparty support in 1988
with hopes that it would create procedural certainty and codify guidelines where none
had previously existed (Gumpel, 1996).
Examination of the legislative intent of the Israeli parliament (the unicameral Knesset)
reveals a basic conceptualization of disability among Israeli lawmakers at the time as it
advocated for a segregationist and categorical organization of service provision. The
special education system has been historically dominated in Israel by neurologists,
neuropsychologists, pediatricians, and psychologists and based on a medical and
pathology-based model of impairment; all children receiving special education services
are divided into 12 different eligibility categories based on their primary disability
(Gumpel, 1999b). The law defines the exceptional child as any person between the ages
of 3 and 21 who, as a result of faulty development of his physical, intellectual, mental or
behavioral skills, has restricted ability in adaptive behavior and requires special
education (SEL, 1988, p. 2930).
The law consists of five subsections: Definitions of Terms, Free Special Education,
Diagnosis and Placement, Education in a Special Education Institution, and Miscellaneous. It differs from much Western special education legislation in that it does not
specifically and clearly mandate education in a least restrictive environment (LRE).
According to the law, special education includes all teaching, instruction and systematic
treatment that are given to exceptional children including physical therapy, speech
therapy, occupational therapy and treatments from other professional disciplines which
are to be ancillary services, all of which are provided according to the exceptional childs
needs (SEL, 1988, p. 2930).
From the opening lines that define the scope of the law, the MOE repeatedly claimed
that the law mandates separate education of all children with special educational needs,
including those children with diagnosed learning disabilities (Gumpel, 1999a). This
opening section provides operational definitions and begins with the definition of the
handicapped child and special education. These two definitions provide an interesting
tautology: the handicapped child is defined as A person aged three to twenty-one,
whose capacity for adaptive behaviors is limited, due to faulty physical, mental,
psychological or behavioral development, and is in need of special education (SEL,
1988, p. 2930). On the other hand, special education is defined as methodological
teaching, learning, and treatment granted by law to the handicapped child (p. 2930).
These circular definitions exemplify the confusion regarding exclusionary versus
10/14/11 5:45 PM
158
Thomas P. Gumpel
inclusionary special services. For a child to be defined as handicapped, he or she must
be taught in a special education framework, which is then defined as a learning environment provided only to children with handicaps. In other words, in order to be defined
as a person with a handicap, one needed to be enrolled in a segregated special education
system. Being enrolled outside of a segregated system, according to the ministry, means
that one is no longer handicapped and therefore no longer entitled, or in need of,
financial support from the MOEs Department of Special Education. Indeed, from 1988
to 2002, virtually all children undergoing a placement committee hearing were placed in
some sort of restrictive environment.
The Battle for Inclusion

Ambiguity regarding the parliaments intent regarding the inclusion of children with
special educational needs and the lack of a clear and mandatory focus on the LRE was
widespread. Despite the original laws emphasis on placement in inclusive settings, parents had great difficulties in actually having their children placed in general education
settings. The MOE refused to financially support placement in inclusive settings based
on its narrow reading of the law and the definition of special educational needs as being
anchored in segregated settings. The MOEs claim stemmed from the fact that the law
empowered the Placement Committee to recommend ancillary services. The MOE
claimed that recommendations are not requirements and hence not legally mandated. This claim led to the underplacement of children in inclusive settings. When the
High Court of Justice reviewed these issues while reviewing petitions in order to force
the MOE to support inclusive placements, the MOE routinely came to an agreement with
the petitioning party, thus preempting the courts potential precedent-setting judgment
by a panel of judges (Ziv, 2004).
A blue-ribbon commission convened in 2000 by the Minister of Education found in its
report that despite the legal emphasis on inclusion, once a child has been placed in a
general education framework, he or she lost the legal protection of the SEL and its concomitant provision of ancillary services. The commission also stated that without the
provision of specific fiscal resources, inclusionary special education was impossible.
A report by the state comptroller in 2002 revealed that the budget allocated to inclusionary education by the Department of Special Education in the MOE was much smaller
than that allocated to supporting the provision of special educational services in segregated settings (Israel State Comptroller, 2002). In a landmark case, a group of parents of
children with disabilities (incidentally, or not, the same parents organization that sponsored the original SEL) petitioned the High Court of Justice to force adequate financing
and support inclusive education (High Court of Justice, 2002). Incidentally, or not, this
was the same DPO who sponsored the original SEL.
In 2002, the Special Education Law of 1988 was revised following a series of court
cases by DPOs who argued that the law was restrictive in allowing only for education of
children with special needs in segregated settings. The 2002 revisions to the SEL (Instructions to Chapter D1 for Special Education Law, 4763 [Correction number 7 for Special
Education Law, 1988]) changed the wording in the law from a handicapped child to an
included child. As well, a statutory forum was developed in every school with the authority
to determine the eligibility for all children with special educational needs in the school
10/14/11 5:45 PM
159
and for assistance and inclusionary support. Such support could include different types
of pull-out programs, support services to improve written and spoken expression,
psychological, and other types of assistance, and the development of individualized
educational plans. Guidance from the MOEs director general further highlighted the
importance of inclusionary practices. It noted that most students with special needs can
be included into a regular classroom with the aid of an inclusion plan and can derive
great academic and social-emotional benefit from such inclusion (Director General,
Ministry of Education, Culture, and Sport, 2003, p. 1).
Nevertheless, the new SEL of 2002 remained ambiguous regarding inclusionary special education. For example, the ambiguity manifested itself in the use of the two different terms: handicapped child and included child. Interested parties questioned whether the
law intended to draw a clear distinction between these two statuses. The new law also
stipulated that each general education school would create an Inclusion Committee in
order to decide whether the inclusion of a child was possible on a case-by-case basis. And,
despite a clearer mandate from Parliament and the courts (High Court of Justice, 2001;
Instructions Chapter D1 for Special Education Law, 4763 [Correction number 7 for
Special Education Law, 1988], 2002), inadequate appropriations of fiscal resources continued to deny inclusionary placement to children with special educational needs
(Dorner et al., 2009).
Another blue-ribbon commission in 2007 was charged with recommending governmental policy for supporting the special education system as it moved toward greater
inclusion (Dorner et al., 2009). This commission examined and made concrete recommendations. These included enabling parental participation in educational placements
wherever they are; creating a money-follows child methodology to fiscally support
inclusive placements; and clearly stating that the child with special needs has a right to
be included, as partial realization of his rights to an education (p. 55).
Despite much legal and legislative movement over the last 2 decades, the question
remains as to how much the policy of inclusion has trickled down from the decision makers in Parliament and the courts to the school system and the actual inclusion of children
with special educational needs. Figure 1 presents a breakdown of the current state
(20082009 academic year) regarding the placement of children with special educational needs for elementary school children. (Secondary schools mirror the figures.)
The figure shows that inclusionary practices may be available to different groups of
children. In reality, however, general education placements are implemented primarily
among children with learning disabilities ([LDs]; Central Bureau of Statistics, 2010).
Regardless of legal requirements to include children with special needs in general
education classrooms, this has not occurred. Only a small percentage of children are
actually included in the general education system. Most children continue to be served
in segregated schools or special day classes. It appears that this is not changing. The
only group consistently included in the general education system is students with
diagnosed LDs.
How, then, are inclusionary practices implemented for children with LDs? This issue
was examined by another blue-ribbon panel (the so-called Margalit Commission). The
Margalit Report called for, among other things, the desegregation of children with LDs
from their non-LD peers and the increased training of professionals working with such
10/14/11 5:45 PM
160
Thomas P. Gumpel
National Inclusionary Practices - Elementary Education
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
di
Le
ar
ge
ua
ng
La
De
ve
lo
pm
en
ta
ld
el
ay
s
or
Be
ni
de
ha
ng
rs
Su
vi
di
o
sp
sa
ra
lD
ic
bi
io
lit
is
n
y
tu
of
rb
In
a
B
nc
te
lle ord
e
M
c
e
t
rli
ild
M
io
M
n
ul
n
I
e
al
nt
tip od
el
er
Di IQ
le
le
at
sa
di
c
tu
bi
ag e In
Se
lit
al
n
t
v
y
e
os
er
Di
C
l
l
ec
er
e/
sa
i
s
eb
pr
-In
tu
b
ilit
of
a
ra
te
ou
y
lP
lle l Di
nd
sa
ct
al
sy
ua
bi
I
n
/S
l D lity
te
ev
lle
is
er
ab
ct
eua
i
l D lity
ph
ys
is
ab
ic
al
ilit
ha
y
nd
i
ca
Ps
ps
yc
hi
Au
at
tis
ric
De
m
af
di
ne
so
Ra
ss
rd
er
/h
Bl
s
ea re d
in
is
dn
rin
ea
g
es
se
im
s/
s
vi
pa
si
i
r
on
m
en
im
t
pa
irm
en
t
0.0
Inclusion
Special Day Class
Segregated School
Figure 1. National inclusionary practices for elementary education (academic year 20092010).
Note: Disability categories represented are mandated by the Ministry of Education for data
collection purposes.
Source: Central Bureau of Statistics, 2010.
children and youth (Margalit, 1997), especially in the Israeli-Arab sector. An important
by-product of the Margalit Report was the de facto removal of LD as one of the 12 categories under the direct responsibility of the Department of Special Education in the
MOE. Instead, a new division was formed within the Psychological and Counseling
Services Department called the Division of Learning Disabilities to deal with LD issues.
This bureaucratic shift symbolizes, among other things, a change in priorities from a
segregated to an inclusive philosophy for children and youth with LDs.
There has been a marked increase in the identification of youth with LDs. A primary
force behind this increased identification has been for the allowance of examination
accommodations (Zionit, Berman, & Ben-Arie, 2009). So, what is the current status of
the diagnosis and treatment of LDs in Israel? In the governmental commission to examine the implementation of the SEL, the Israeli focus on a highly categorical method of
service provision was questioned (Margalit et al., 1997) and specific focus on children
with learning disabilities was recommended.
However, despite the increase in the number of children being identified as having
learning disabilities, in order to better understand the two-decade official push for inclusion,
an examination of the trends over the last decade shows a different picture (see Figure 2). If
we examine these trends, we can clearly see that not only are inclusionary placements not
increasing since the passage of the correction to the SEL, they appear to be decreasing.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
161
Decisions of Placement Committee

General Education Kindergarten or Classroom
49.20%
Special Day Class
Segregated SPED School
51.02%
50.42%
50.90%
48.22%
46.09%
45.06%
43.06%
42.81%
40.39%
43.11%
Percemt
40.12%
11.09%
10.41%
9.47%
6.71%
1999/2000
2002/2003
2003/2004
2004/2005
5.92%
2005/2006
5.99%
2006/2007
Academic Year
Figure 2. Changes in inclusionary practices over time.

Source: Zionit, Berman, & Ben-Arie, 2009.
Inclusive education in Israel is on the decline. Placement in special day classes in the
general education system and placement in segregated special education schools both
remain stable over time. We can see that the Israeli school system reflects Israeli society
as a whole along with its historical and cultural legacies.
The education system has developed in a number of different areas for the small
number of children being included (5.99% in 2006 to 2007). One of these areas has
been the development of the special education specialist (Mitchell, 2004). The second
chapter of the Margalit Report dealt with pre- and in-service training and recommended the development of interdisciplinary college- and university-level programs to
train professionals in the area of LD and specifically recommended the development
of the LD specialist (, the Hebrew acronymMatal) and the development of a
bureaucratic structure to promote inclusion (, the Hebrew acronym for Matya)
(Margalit et al., 1997).
MatalEducational performance diagnostician. The Matal position encompasses two
primary foci on both a micro and a macro level. On the micro level, the Matal
professional has an individual focus that deals mostly with the pupil, his or her parents
and teachers, and an organizational focus that deals mostly with school-wide issues.
On an individual level, the Matal teacher spends most of his or her time evaluating and
developing treatment plans for children experiencing difficulties in academic skills,
developing individual inclusion plans, assisting students to develop learning strategies
(either individually or in group work), or engaging in discussions with general education
teachers regarding possible allowances and appropriate accommodations.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
162
Thomas P. Gumpel
MatyaOrganizational resources. Matyas are organizations in each city and community
by which educational, and specifically inclusion-oriented, resources are organized.
The Matya structure allows for the funding of school-based and itinerant professionals
specializing in a wide variety of specialized skills, from behavioral specialists and
consultants, to diagnosticians, to other ancillary services.
T H E C U R IOUS C A S E OF J E RUS A L E M
Jerusalem, the conflicted city, is in constant turmoil. As a 4,000-year-old city, Jerusalem
has its earliest roots in distant antiquity. Jerusalem is the Holy or Noble City to the
three Abrahamic religions and has been besieged 23 times, attacked 52 times, and
captured and recaptured 44 times (Cline, 2004). It is the central focal point of ancient
Jewish tradition and became the first monotheistic city during the time of David and
Solomon. Featured at its center is the Holy of Holies: the First and Second Temple built
on the Temple Mount. Jerusalem has been coveted and conquered by the Israelites,
the Greeks, the Romans (who renamed it Aelia Capitalina), the Byzantines, the Arabs,
the Persians, the Crusaders, the Arabs again, the Mamelukes, the Turks, the British, the
Jordanians, and now the Israelis. The central point in Jerusalem is the ancient Jewish
Solomonic Temple (built in 957 bc and destroyed in 586 bc by the Babylonians) and the
Second Temple, also called Herods Temple, built and renovated by Herod in 19 bc and
destroyed by the Romans in 70 ad.
By the first century ad, Jerusalem achieved significance for a wider community: the
Holy City was now home to both Jews and early Christians. From the time of the advent
of Islam, Jerusalem once again became a Holy City: The Prophet Mohammad visited
Jerusalem during his night journey and ascension to Heaven. Judaism and Christianity
both view it as the place where Adam was formed; where Adam, Cain, Abel, and Noah
offered sacrifices to God; where Abraham showed his willingness to sacrifice his son,
Isaac; and where Jacob had his dream.
On this small parcel of land (35 acres or 141,610 square meters), the Muslim Ummayad
Caliph Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan constructed the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aksa
mosques (built in 691 ad and 705 ad, respectively). Jews call this area the Temple Mount
and Muslims refer to it as the Hara mesh-Sharif (The Noble Sanctuary).
In 1947, Jerusalem was declared an international (Corpus Separatum) city by the UN
according to the 1947 UN Partition Plan, later reaffirmed by UN General Assembly
Resolution 194 in 1948. These partition plans, however, were never implemented as they
were rejected by the Arab population and the Arab world, and so Israel annexed West
Jerusalem and Transjordan annexed East Jerusalem. Between 1948 (the Israeli War of
Independence) and 1967 (The Six Day War), Jerusalem was divided into two discrete
sections: the Israeli (western) part of Jerusalem and the Jordanian (eastern) part of
Jerusalem.
Following the 1967 conflict, the border that ran through Jerusalem was removed and
Jerusalem became a united city under Israeli sovereignty with military occupation of the
eastern part of the city. In 1980, the Knesset passed the Jerusalem Law formally annexing
East Jerusalem. The UN Security Council 478 and the entire international community
condemned the annexation; it has never been recognized by any country other than
10/14/11 5:45 PM
163
Israel. The Palestinian National Authority has consistently stated that East Jerusalem is
the site of the capital of the future Palestinian state. Hence, Jerusalem remains a central
issue in Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.
As the perennial flashpoint in the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians, it is
worth studying the education system in general, and the special education system, in
particular. Jerusalem, as a case study, further exemplifies the splintered aspects of Israeli
society, while also focusing on the never-ending competition of the two separate national
narratives that of the dominant and powerful Israeli national policy toward Arab citizens of the city vis--vis their fellow Jewish Jerusalemites. We begin by examining the
difficult conditions under which the education system in East Jerusalem operates.
We can and must examine Jerusalem through a demographic lens as the political
battle being waged in the city is geared to maintaining the demographic advantage of
one group. Indeed, when looking at the population increase in Arab East Jerusalem, we
see that the birth rate among this population is higher than for the Jewish secular population. The municipality of Jerusalem has changed its border frequently in order to
maintain a Jewish majority in the city. The last episode in this fight for Jewish demographics was headed by the Separation Fence, which blocked different communities
from being included in East Jerusalem through the construction of an up to 8-meterhigh concrete wall.
The population of the city has been increasing steadily since 1922 (the beginning of
modern record-keeping), with both Jewish and Palestinian populations increasing
steadily although the number of Jews in Jerusalem has increased at an accelerated rate
(Choshen, 2010). Despite the fact that the Palestinian population of Jerusalem is increasing at a slower rate, the number of Palestinian children enrolled in schools in Jerusalem
has been increasing steadily over the years (Wargen, 2006).
There are eight different school systems in the city (see Figure 3). The principal Israeli
government school system is called the Jerusalem Educational Authority (JEA). It is
divided into three semi-autonomous sections: JEA Jewish Ultra-Orthodox, JEA Arab,
and JEA Jewish. Other school systems in East Jerusalem include recognized and
unofficial schools that are private schools receiving limited funds and limited state
supervision. There are also unrecognized and unofficial schools that do not receive
any state support but are privately owned and financed, usually under the auspices of
some sort of Christian organization. The Waqf schools are under the authority of the
Muslim religious trust of Jerusalem. United Nations Relief Work Agency schools are
under the control of the UN and operate primarily in refugee camps. The only
Palestinian refugee camp inside of Israel is in Shuafat, a Palestinian neighborhood in
northern Jerusalem and inside the citys municipal boundaries. Approximately 30,000
residents live in the camp and its satellite communities.
Within the citys municipal boundaries, 56% of the children are Jewish and 44% are
Palestinian (Gumpel, 2010). However, according to JEA data, aside from the large number of Ultra-Orthodox school children in Jerusalem, the city school system is composed
of more Palestinian children than Jewish children (Jerusalem Municipality, 2010).
Herein, we examine only JEA schools as they are completely under the Israeli government. According to a report issued by the Israeli Parliament, the education system in
East Jerusalem suffers from a number of challenges. The number of children in East
10/14/11 5:45 PM
164
Thomas P. Gumpel
Who Are the Children in Jerusalem?
92579
62273
57273
20603
13955
RW
A
3741
co
un
te
Ch
ild
W
aq
re
n
5520
Un
JE
A-
Je
wi
sh
R
of ec
fic o
ial gn
-P ize
ale d
st
in
ian
Un Unr
of ec
fic og
ial ni
Sc zed
ho
ol
s
Pr
iva
te
Sc
ho
ol
s
Ar
AJE
Un
JE
A-
Ul
tra
-O
rth
od
ox
ab
6408
UN
16116
Figure 3. Jerusalems schoolchildren.
Jerusalem is growing, with 44% of the student population in Jerusalem attending state
schools (Wargen, 2006).
Combined with a shortage of classrooms, many children in East Jerusalem are studying
in overcrowded schools or are being denied enrollment due to lack of space (Wargen,
2006). The Jerusalem JEA has built classrooms and schools in a disproportionate manner
favoring the Jewish children of Jerusalem over their Arab peers over the last 2 decades
(Jerusalem Municipality, 2010). Indeed, in the 2005 to 2006 school year, East Jerusalem
was short 1,354 classrooms. In the 2 decades from 1989 to 2009, the number of classrooms built in the JEA Jewish part of the city exceeded those of the classrooms built in
the Arab part of the city despite the fact that there are more children studying in JEA
Arab schools than JEA Jewish schools. Overcrowding and a lack of resources may be a
salient factor contributing to the higher dropout rate in East Jerusalem schools vis--vis
West Jerusalem schools (50% vs. 4.7%; Wargen, 2006). With an average of 35 pupils per
classroom (often as high as 45 pupils per classroom despite the MOE limiting the number
of class size in all schools to 36), approximately 47,000 children study today in an inappropriate environment, often in storage rooms and bomb shelters (Medzini, 2010b).
This situation was brought to the courts attention in a motion submitted to the
Supreme Court, which sits as the High Court of Justice. As a result of two class action
appeals to the High Court of Justice (High Court of Justice, 2001), the Municipality of
Jerusalem promised to build 245 classrooms in Jerusalem; however, this guarantee was
never fulfilled and in August of 2006 suits were refiled with the court (High Court of
Justice, 2008). This issue was once again revisited in 2011 when the High Court of Justice
10/14/11 5:45 PM
165
reviewed a case brought by several East Jerusalem families who claimed that the lack of
adequate space and classrooms meant that they had to privately fund their childrens
education in private schools. The court leveled serious criticism at the MOE and the JEA
and demanded that the lack of resources be corrected within 5 years (Glickman, 2011).
The lack of adequate infrastructure has two primary outcomes. First, approximately
10,000 pupils in East Jerusalem are not being served in any educational framework
because of lack of space (Wargen, 2006). Second, the dropout rate is disproportionately
high in East Jerusalem.
Wargen (2006) found that the education system in East Jerusalem is chronically underfunded. In 2006, the citys educational funding for East Jerusalem was only 29% of the
JEA budget, despite East Jerusalem children comprising 56% of the JEA children. (JEA
Ultra-Orthodox education is funded separately.) In a report released by the citys legal
advisor, children in West Jerusalem are funded at the rate of 408 New Israeli shekels
(NIS) per pupil, whereas children in East Jerusalem are funded at the rate of 214 NIS per
pupil (US$108 vs. US$57; Medzini, 2010a).
Because of these perennial problems and the grave discrepancy between the wealthier
and better endowed education system in the western part of the city and the poorer eastern part of the city and because of the chronic shortage of schools and classrooms in East
Jerusalem, many parents in East Jerusalem opt out of the underfunded and overcrowded
state schools. Instead, they elect to send their children to any one of the four types of
private or semi-private schools.
Private schools can range from state-recognized and official schools where the state
can fund up to 85% of the budget and may impose its fiscal and curricular control on the
school, to unrecognized and unofficial schools in which the state has no stake or control,
to schools run by the Muslim religious trust: the Waqf. This myriad of alternative placements exists only in East Jerusalem, and is often the option of choice for those families
with the fiscal means to allow them to take advantage of these private schools.
From 2009 to 2010, approximately 51% of children in East Jerusalem attended schools
administered by the JEA (Ir Amim, 2010). The remainder attended any one of the other
options available to Palestinian residents of the city.
Special Education in East Jerusalem

The vast problems affecting the general education system in East Jerusalem will also
have a detrimental effect on the provision of special education in the city. Most children
with special needs attend JEA schools, since their resources appear to be greater than
the other three options available (Recognized Unofficial: 24.75%; Waqf: 7.7%; and Private and United Nations Relief Work Agency: 16.77%; Ir Amim, 2010). Some parents of
children with special educational needs in East Jerusalem have attempted to transfer
their children to more endowed schools in West Jerusalem despite the accompanying
language and cultural differences. Official city policy has forbidden this process and
the current mayor has directed his offices to bar ethnically mixing schools in the city
(personal communication, 2010).
Inequality of service is endemic to the JEA. As we have seen, there is little correlation
between the number of children represented by each of the three demographic groups
in the JEA (Jewish, Arab, and Jewish Ultra-Orthodox) and the number of special needs
10/14/11 5:45 PM
166
Thomas P. Gumpel
kindergartens or schools for each group. The JEA allocates most resources to the smallest
demographic group in the city (JEA Jewish). More schools translates into greater
resources for including children in the general education framework. Schools in the JEA
Arab sector are more crowded than their West Jerusalem counterparts.
The lack of classrooms and schools also affects the special education system in East
Jerusalem. It is short 240 classrooms and schools are overcrowded and are unable to
adequately serve children with special needs (Ir Amim, 2010; Israel State Comptroller,
2008). It is not uncommon to see schools housed in rented apartments throughout
the eastern part of the city. These rented apartments are modified homes and were
not intended to be schools and are often inaccessible for children with mobility
problems.
The JEA has claimed that there are no public lands on which to build schools in East
Jerusalema claim disputed by local NGOs and the courts (Ir Amim, 2010) who say that
the city has the land to build schools yet has declined to do so. The lack of classrooms is
only one aspect of the poor infrastructure of the special education systems in East
Jerusalem (Ir Amim, 2010). Concomitant overcrowding and a lack of resources are
widespread in the system.
C ONC LUS ION

Anyone who has ever watched the news about Israel and the Middle East will agree that
Israel is a complex country. Competing constituencies, demographics, cultures, linguistic
traditions, nationalistic aspirations, and educational needs all coalesce to form a complex mix where service provision and professional preparation become complex and
interconnected. These interrelated groups have always lived side-by-side in Israel, and
Israeli culture and society is built around a de facto recognition of this cultural appreciation of separateness in all aspects of Israeli life.
The SEL, as written, is a highly categorical and segregative law, reflecting a highly
categorical and segregative society. As we have seen, recent attempts to create a more
inclusive education system have failed. As Israel retains a highly categorical special education system, a reliance on a strict medical model of disability will inevitably lead to a
high categorical system of service provision.
Special education policy reflects cultural mores and does not create them, and this is
evident in the Israeli context as well. The general and special education systems reflect
this societal fragmentation and segregation. Inclusion of children with special educational
needs in the general education system is not being implemented for all children. This is
clearly a reflection of the splintered nature of Israeli life. When there is no integration
anywhere in the country, it is illogical to assume that only the education system would be
integrated. Indeed, we have seen that the education system based on segregation, is
becoming more segregated.
One must reexamine the complex changes taking place in the delivery of services to
children and youth with special needs in Israel. At least regarding policy for children
with learning disabilities, new procedures designed to keep the identification and treatment of children with LD in the childs neighborhood school are evident. However, this
cannot be said for other disability groups.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
167
Linkages between educational policy and national policy are evident in all aspects of
Israeli policy in East Jerusalem. Education policy reflects the greater political will and
power of the enfranchised majority; namely, the almost unilateral allocation of resources
to the Jewish majority while neglecting the indigenous population in the rest of the city.
In almost all parameters, East Jerusalem and its special education system are lacking in
vital resources as compared to Jewish West Jerusalem. These resources are vital in order
to adequately serve the large Arab population with special educational needs.
As interested observers conducting a deep analysis of the linkage between educational
and special educational policy and larger sociohistorical trends, we must ask ourselves
how the long-term discrimination against East Jerusalem schools and their families
reflects and serves social trends. In its 63 years of existence, Israel has expelled Palestinians
from their land in two primary waves: during the war of 1948 and through the creation
of settlements on occupied Palestinian land and the concomitant evacuation and
expulsion of the indigenous populations living on those expropriated lands. It appears
that in the 21st century, further expulsions are impossible and would not be accepted in
the international arena. Hence, it appears that creating areas with tremendous financial
and social hardships is the method of choice. Through the direct discrimination of
residents of East Jerusalem, it appears that the ultimate goal is to entice the indigenous
population to leave the area, thus maintaining the demographic advantage for the Israeli
Jewish presence in Jerusalem.
This situation is unfortunate. If Israel annexed East Jerusalem, one can think of no
reason for the decades-old underfunding of education and special education in East
Jerusalem. If one does not accept the unilateral annexation of occupied territories, then
Israel appears to be in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Either way, the
situation saddens us.
In any nation, educational policy is a result of national policies, both de jure and de
facto. In Israel, these manifest themselves as separation and inequality. On March 3,
2007, Israel signed the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities. With
its emphasis on human rights and inclusive education for all, it is clear why its ratification
has been so long in coming.
R E F E R E NC E S
Avishar, G., & Layser, Y. (2000). Evaluating values in special education as change in education.
Halacha veMaashe bTichnun Limudim, 15, 97124.
Brams, S. J., & Togman, J. M. (1998). Camp David: Was the agreement fair? In P. F. Diehl
(Ed.), A road map to war: Territorial dimensions of international conflict. Nashville, TN:
Vanderbilt University Press.
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. (2007). Israel and the occupied territories.
Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2007/100597
.htm.
Central Bureau of Statistics. (2001). Statistical abstract of Israel 2001. Jerusalem: Central Bureau
of Statistics.
Central Bureau of Statistics. (2009a). Selected data from the New Israel statistical abstract No.
612010. Retrieved from http://www.cbs.gov.il/reader/newhodaot/hodaa_template
.html?hodaa=201011207.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
168
Thomas P. Gumpel
Central Bureau of Statistics. (2009b). Sources of population growth, by district, population group
and religion. Retrieved from http://www.cbs.gov.il/shnaton61/st02_04.pdf.
Central Bureau of Statistics. (2010). Students with special needs in secondary education by type
of disability and type of setting, 2007/08. Retrieved from http://www.cbs.gov.il/reader
/shnaton/templ_shnaton.html?num_tab=st08_29&CYear=2010.
Choshen, M. (Ed.). (2010). Statistical yearbook of Jerusalem. Jerusalem: Jerusalem Studies Institute.
Cline, E. H. (2004). Jerusalem besieged: From ancient Canaan to modern Israel. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
Comptrollers Office. (2001). State comptrollers annual report. Jerusalem: Government Press.
Director General, Ministry of Education, Culture, and Sport. (2003, June). Director generals
regulations: Inclusion plan in regular education and the treatment of children with special needs
in regular and special education classrooms. Jerusalem: Ministry of Education and Science
Press.
Dorner, D., Penn, R., Sovel, R., Shlimof-Rechtman, S., Kosto-Shefi, A., Malka, S., et al. (2009).
( The public commission to examine the special education system in Israel). Jerusalem: State of Israel.
Friedman, I. A., & Lotan, E. (1985). ( Burnout in teachers in Israel).
Jerusalem: Henrietta Szold.
Gazit, Y. (2010). Report on the state of poverty in Israel. Jerusalem: Jerusalem Institute for Market
Studies.
Glasman, N. S. (1986). Funding and control linkages in education. In E. Ben-Baruch &
Y. Newman (Eds.), Educational administration and policy making: the case of Israel. Tel Aviv:
Unipress.
Glickman, A. (2011, February 7). : -( High Court of Justice
to the Ministry of Education: Take care of East Jerusalem children), Yediot Ahronot.
Retrieved from http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4024671,00.html.
Gumpel, T. (1996). Special education law in Israel. Journal of Special Education, 29, 457468.
Gumpel, T. P. (1999a). Special education in Israel. In C. R. Reynolds & E. Fletcher-Janzen
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of special education (Vol. 2, pp. 995998). New York: Wiley.
Gumpel, T. P. (1999b). 2000: ( ? Special
education toward the second millennium: Where have we come from and where are we
going?). Issues in Special Education and Rehabilitation, 14, 7182.
Gumpel, T. P. (2010). The law says inclusion but the people say exclusion: An examination of inclusion
policy in Jerusalem, the most complicated city in the world. Paper presented at the Embracing
Inclusive Approaches for Children with Special Educational Needs Conference, Riga,
Latvia.
Gumpel, T. P., & Awartani, S. (2003). A comparison of special education in Israel and
Palestine: Surface and deep structures. Journal of Special Education, 37, 3348.
Gumpel, T. P., & Nir, A. E. (2006). The Israeli education system: Blending dreams with
constraints. In K. Mazurek & M. A. Winzer (Eds.), Schooling around the world: Debates,
challenges and practices (pp. 149167). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Gumpel, T. P., & Sharoni, V. (2007). Current best practices in learning disabilities in Israel.
Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22, 202209.
High Court of Justice. (2001). Fadi Beriya (minor) and 911 others v. Municipality of Jerusalem,
No. 5185/01 77 (2001). NGO Yated for parents of children with down syndrome
v. Ministry of Education, No. 2599/00, PD. (5) 834, 839 834, b (2002).
High Court of Justice. (2008). Muhamad Hamdan and 27 others v. Municipality of Jerusalem,
No. 17 July, 2008, 3834/02 (2008).
Instructions Chapter D1 for Special Education Law, 4763 (Correction No. 7 for Special Education
Law, 1988), Knesset (2002).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
169
Ir Amim. (2010). A sorry state: The state of education in East Jerusalem 2010. Jerusalem: Author.
Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (1998, December 24). Population of Israel: General trends and
indicators. Retrieved from http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Archive/Communiques/1998
/POPULATION+OF+ISRAEL-+GENERAL+TRENDS+AND+INDICATOR.htm.
Israel State Comptroller. (2002). Annual state comptrollers report 59B for the year 2001
(pp. 230233). Jerusalem: Author.
Israel State Comptroller. (2008). Annual state comptrollers report 59B for the year 2008
(pp. 615660). Jerusalem: Author.
Jerusalem Municipality. (2010). Yearbook of the JEA. Retrieved from http://www.jerusalem
.muni.il/jer_main/defaultnew.asp?lng=1.
Latet. (2010). ( Alternative poverty report). Tel Aviv: Latet, Israeli
Humanitarian Aid.
Margalit, M. (1997). Report on the actualization of the abilities of students with learning disabilities.
Jerusalem: Minister of Education and Science.
Margalit, M. (1999). Report on the actualization of the abilities of students with learning disabilities.
Jerusalem: Minister of Education and Science.
Margalit, M., Ortolengi, R., Or-Noy, A., Breznitx, Z., Deklo, M., Harel, S., et al. (1997).
( Report of the Committee to examine the
fulfillment of the potential of students with learning disabilities). Jerusalem: Ministry
of Education.
Medzini, R. (2010a, August 18). Pupils in east Jerusalem get half funding of those in west.
Yediot Ahronot. Retrieved from http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3876882,00
.html.
Medzini, R. (2010b, August 18). , -( Hundreds of classrooms
lacking, and in East Jerusalem children will study in bomb shelters). Yediot Ahronot.
Retrieved from http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3938401,00.html.
Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport. (1996). The education system by the numbers. Jerusalem:
Author.
Ministry of Education. (2005). ( The education system by the numbers).
Jerusalem: Author.
Mitchell, D. (Ed.). (2004). Special educational needs and inclusive education. London: Routledge
Palmer.
Morris, B. (1988). The birth of the Palestinian refugee problem 19471949. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Morris, B. (2004). The birth of the Palestinian refugee problem revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
National Taskforce for the Advancement of Education in Israel. (2004). The National Plan for
Education, Part I. Jerusalem: Government Printing Office.
Nir, A. E., & Nafcha, M. (2007). Teachers salaries in public education: Between myth and
facts. International Journal of Educational Management, 21, 315328.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2009). OECD economic surveys:
Israel 2009 (Vol. 2009). Paris: Author.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). PISA 2009 results: What
students know and can dostudent performance in reading, mathematics and science (Vol. 1).
Paris: Author.
Or, T. (2003). Government Commission to investigate the conflict between the security services and
Israeli citizens. Jerusalem: Ministry of Justice. Retrieved from http://elyon1.court.gov.il
/heb/veadot/or/inside_index.htm.
Segev, T., & Cohen, J. (2008). 1967: Israel, the war, and the year that transformed the Middle East.
Henry Holt and Co.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
170
Thomas P. Gumpel
Special Education Law of 4758, Knesset. (1988).
UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2008). UIS statistics in brief. Retrieved from http://
st at s.uis.unesco.org/unesco/TableViewer/document.a spx?Report Id=121&IF
_Language=eng&BR_Country=7160&BR_Region=40540.
United Nations. (2010). The question of Palestine. Retrieved from http://unispal.un.org
/unispal.nsf/home.htm.
United Nations Development Programme. (2010). Human development report 2010. New York:
Author.
Wargen, Y. (2006). Education in East Jerusalem. Jerusalem: Knesset Center for Research and
Information.
World Bank. (2010). World development indicators. Washington, DC: Author.
Zionit, Y., Berman, T., & Ben-Arie, A. (2009). 2009 (Children in Israel 2009).
Jerusalem: The Israel National Council for the Child.
Ziv, N. (2004). - ( People with disabilities: Between
social rights and existential needs). In Y. Rabin & Y. Shani (Eds.), Social, economic and
cultural rights in Israel (Vol. 813).
Zucker, D. (1985). The Israeli education system: Structure, organization, financing and
patterns of action. In W. Ackerman, A. Carmon, & D. Zucker (Eds.), Education in an
evolving society: Schooling in Israel. Jerusalem: The Van Leer Institute.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
9
Opportunities and
Challenges for Improving
Special Education in the
United Arab Emirates
Samir Dukmak and

Hytham Bany Issa
This chapter provides an overview of special education and related programs and services
in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The framework the authors employ is adopted from
the UAE Ministry of Education document School for All: General Rules for the Provision of
Special Education Programs and Services (Public & Private Schools; United Arab Emirates
Ministry of Education, 2010). The elements in this significant document identify
opportunities for a commitment to the improvement of special education services in the
country. The chapter closes with suggestions for further improvements and research in
special education.
T H E UA E: A N OV E RV I E W
Situated in the Arabian Gulf, geographically east of Saudi Arabia and north of Oman,
the UAE is a federation of seven semiautonomous Emirates established in 1971. In accordance with the 1971 Constitution, the Federal Supreme Council is the highest legislative
and executive body and is comprised of the rulers of the seven Emirates. The country
has a free-market economy based on oil and gas production, trade, and light manufacturing. Citizens enjoy a high per capita income, but the economy is heavily dependent
on skilled and unskilled foreign workers. While the total estimated resident population
is 4.5 million, only 21% are citizens. Citizens employed by the government are eligible to
receive aid from the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare for sons and daughters who
are under the age of 18, unmarried, or have disabilities (Bureau of Democracy, Human
Rights, and Labor, 2003).
The UAE is a multicultural society in which many different nationalities live and form
the countrys workforce. The official languages of the country are Arabic and English,
but Pakistanis, Indians, and other nationalities speak other languages such as Urdu and
Hindi. Islam is both the religion of UAE nationals and the main religion in the country.
However, other religions, such as Christianity and Hinduism, are found among expatriates
(Crabtree, 2010).
While marriage in the UAE is still arranged and starts at an early age for women (Crabtree,
2010), the influence of women in the economic world is significant. Women represent most
primary- and secondary-school teachers and healthcare workers, and make up almost half
of all government workers. In recent years, economic opportunities for women have grown
in government services, education, public relations, private business, and health services
(Al-Jenaibi, 2010; Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labour, 2003).
171
10/14/11 5:45 PM
172

Today, more and more women are participating in higher education. It is estimated
that 70% of university graduates are female (Salloum, 2003). The government encourages both men and women to continue their education, and pays their education
expenses. Both men and women receive scholarships, despite an admitted limitation in
the number of jobs available to women (Al-Jenaibi, 2010). There is a continuing increase
in the number of specializations available to Emirati women, including medicine,
commerce, teaching, and social welfare (Crabtree, 2010).
S C HO OL I NG
In comparison to other countries, the education system of the UAE is relatively new.
Primary education is compulsory for all nationals throughout the UAE, and secondary
education is available in all Emirates. Expatriates have developed self-funded private
schools to meet their religious, cultural, and educational needs.
Curricula in the UAE vary among the Emirates, with most influenced by school
curricula in the United Kingdom, Canada, United States, and India (Bradshaw, Tennant,
& Lydiatt, 2004). The UAE offers comprehensive education to all male and female students from kindergarten to university, with free education for the countrys citizens at all
levels. Schools in the public system are gender-segregated. The existing education structure, established in the early 1970s, is a four-tier system encompassing 14 years of educationkindergarten (45 year olds), primary (6 12 year olds), preparatory (1215 year
olds) and secondary (1518 year olds). Primary school education is compulsory for all
UAE citizens. Government policy is to provide staff/student ratios of 1:20 at kindergarten
and primary levels, and 1:15 at intermediate and secondary levels. The existing staff/
student ratio is well within this proposed range (Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights,
and Labour, 2006).
L EGI S L AT I V E F R A M E WOR K OF S PEC I A L N E E D S E DUC AT ION

In 2009, the UAE ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons With
Disabilities (United Nations, 2006). Prior to that, in November 2006, the government
passed Federal Law No. 29/2006 In Respect of the Rights of People With Special Needs
(UAE, 2006). This very significant law stipulates that persons with disabilities enjoy an
inherent right to life on an equal basis with others; recognizes that all persons are equal
before the law; prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability; and ensures their
right to own and inherit property, control financial affairs, and protects their physical
and mental integrity (Emirates News Agency, WAM, 2008). Law No. 29/2006 is directed
toward ending discrimination in employment, education, the provision of other state services, and beyond. For example, the majority of public buildings provide access to people
with disabilities; however, this new law also requires that people with special needs be
provided with equitable access and related facilities in all new property development
projects (Al Roumi, 2008).
UAE Federal Law No. 29/2006 In Respect of the Rights of People With Special Needs
(UAE, 2006) is the key legal imperative affecting special needs populations generally,
and regulating special needs education in particular. There are four key articles regarding
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Improving Special Education in the United Arab Emirates
173
education for individuals with special needs. Article 12 ensures that individuals with
special needs should have equal opportunities for obtaining education in all academic
institutions and vocational training centers as part of regular classes or in special classes.
This article also requires that the curriculum be provided in a form that is appropriate
for the individual with special needs; for example using the braille system or sign
language. Article 13 commits the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Higher
Education and Scientific Research to providing educational diagnoses, curricula, and
pedagogical assistance for teaching individuals with special needs. This should be carried
out in cooperation with the concerned parties and other relevant state authorities.
The article also speaks to providing individuals with special needs with alternative
communication methods and alternative strategies for learning and accessing physical
environments.
Article 14 addresses the need for skilled personnel. The Ministry of Education and the
Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research are charged with establishing academic disciplines and spearheading training program, and instruction for professionals
and staff working with special needs children and their families. Trained professionals
are needed who are knowledgeable in the areas of diagnosis and early detection, and in
educational, social, psychological, medical, and vocational rehabilitation. Article 15 provides the general terms of reference for the Specialized Committee in the Education of
People With Special Needs that was established by a resolution of the Council of Ministers.
This committee assumes the following duties:
1. Ensuring that, from early childhood, individuals with special needs receive equal
opportunities for education in all educational institutions in regular classes or
specialized units.
2. Developing a structure for educational programs and preparing educational plans
for individuals with special needs, taking into consideration their developmental
and psychological features.
3. Arranging and organizing all tasks related to the education of individuals with
special needs such as programs, procedures, methods, conditions of enrollment in
regular classes, and examinations.
4. Establishing policies for training staff.
5. Providing advice and technical and educational assistance to all educational
institutions and considering their funding requests for equipment and technologies.
OV E RV I E W OF S PEC I A L N E E D S E DUC AT ION
Reliable surveys to determine either the number of individuals with disabilities in the
UAE population or percentages in each disability category have not been undertaken.
However, according to Bradshaw et al. (2004), the percentage of people with disabilities
in the UAE appears similar to the worldwide average; that is, 810% of the population.
At the present time, a specific categorical system for identifying and supporting students
with disabilities does not formally exist.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
174

The UAE Ministry of Education provides special education services for students with
special needs from kindergarten to grade 9. Information regarding enrollment and due
dates for students with special needs in school is made available to parents and community
members by the end of the first semester of the academic year. The initial enrollment for
a student with special needs is made after the completion of a multidisciplinary evaluation
and the creation of an Individualized Education Plan (IEP). Reenrollment for ongoing
services for a new academic year is determined after carrying out an evaluation of the
student during the last 3 months of the current academic year. This reenrollment process also applies to students with special needs who are transferred from another school
or education institution where they previously received special education services.
Demographic data on students with special needs who intend to enroll in any public
school in the UAE in an upcoming academic year are sent to the appropriate Education
Zone (i.e., one of the nine education jurisdictions or districts), the Special Education
Department, the Department of Examination and Assessment, and other relevant
departments in the Ministry of Education by the end of the current school year. There, the
necessary preparations for examination and the provision of assistive technologies begin.
With regard to grade- and age-level determination, students with special needs are
enrolled in a grade that is commensurate with their age according to Ministry of Education guidelines. These guidelines are also applied to students who have not previously
been enrolled in any school. However, promotion of students with special needs to the
next grade is automatic, even if those students have not achieved their IEP goals. In such
cases, the objectives and goals may be changed during the review process. Retaining or
failing students with special needs in a grade is not permitted.
Special education services within the UAE public school system currently focus on early
interventionan important point that the authors will return to and elaborate upon
later in this chapter. Special needs students in kindergarten and grade 1 are usually identified through a school-based team process, then assessed by an educational psychologist
and/or speech-language pathologist, and finally accepted for extra support. Identified
students are then assigned to either a special education classroom or to resource room
support (Bradshaw, et al., 2004). There is a maximum of 12 students in a special education classroom, and a maximum of 5 students in a resource room, at any given time.
The above support system in special education classrooms operates up to about the
grade 4 level. After that, all students with mild and moderate special needs are integrated
into general education classrooms. Children with severe disabilities are usually cared for
by the family because the UAE culture, in general, does not allow families to send their
children to institutions (Swadi & Eapen, 2000). Thus, cultural considerations are an important dimension for understanding the nature and scope of special education provisions in
the UAEa topic to which the authors return in the closing section of this chapter.
ORG A N I Z AT ION A L S T RUC T U R E OF S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION

Special education services and programs for in the UAE are administered at three
levels: centrally through the Ministry of Education, regionally through Education Zones,
and locally through schools. At all levels and in all cases, the guiding principle is that
programs for students with special needs must be established taking into account their
individual needs under the provisions of Federal Law No. 29/2006 regarding the rights of
10/14/11 5:45 PM
175
students with special needs, and under the principles and general rules for the provision
of special education programs and services (UAE Ministry of Education, 2010, p. 53).
At the central level, the Special Education Department within the Ministry of Education
administers special education services throughout the UAE. The director is assisted by
various staff members, including senior supervisory special education professionals and
consultants who provide direct and indirect supervision and consultation for school
personnel in the Education Zones and in local schools. The primary duties and
responsibilities of this department include monitoring the implementation of laws and
regulations regarding the rights of individuals with special needs in schools, providing
assistance to schools, supporting school efforts in developing programs for students with
special needs, and providing professional development for administrative personnel who
provide special education services. In this manner, the UAE Ministry of Education
supports the design and implementation of all special education programs in the UAE,
whether in general schools or special schools and institutes.
At the Education Zone level, there is a Special Education Department in each zone.
The head of that department is responsible for the administration and provision of
special education programs and services delivered in that zone. The head is assisted by
special education professionals and specialists who provide direct and indirect supervision
and support to all school personnel to meet the needs of students with special needs that
are enrolled in the schools of that zone.
At the school level, the principal maintains responsibility for the administration and
provision of special education programs and services and is assisted by special education
professionals and specialists. The school principal, with his or her team, provides direct
and indirect supervision of and support for all school personnel to facilitate the delivery
of high-quality education programs and services to meet the needs of students with special
needs enrolled in the school. Schools are subject to an annual evaluation by the Ministry
of Education to ensure their compliance with all regulations and conditions required to
offer such programs. It is worth noting that, before implementing any special education
program in a school, approval is required both from the zone, through its Department of
Special Education, as well as the Director of Special Education in the Ministry of Education.
Schools are also required to make necessary architectural structural changes to the school
building, as well as undertake any other required school modifications to allow students
with special needs to access the school. These requirements are deemed to be very
important for the issuance of licenses for special education programs in all schools.
S TA F F I NG A N D QUA L I F IC AT ION S
The current proposal is that there be at least one special education teacher assigned to
each school in the UAE. Additionally, there should be more than one special education
teacher assigned to schools that provide direct service to a large number of students
with special needs. The preferred qualification is for special education teachers to have
a bachelor degree in special education from a university recognized by the Ministry of
Higher Education. To teach in special schools or institutes in the UAE usually involves
a thorough evaluation of the candidates qualifications. Candidates must pass a written
examination and an interview under the supervision of the Director of Special Education in the Education Zone where they will work.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
176

In the case of assistant teachers who do not have a bachelor degree, then a specialist
diploma or a secondary school certificate with specialized training courses may be
accepted by the Ministry of Education. Once hired, engagement in ongoing professional
activities such as completing training programs and attending workshops and conferences
is expected.

Special education services in the UAE have been developed and expanded since 1979 to
include a wider variety of categories for students in different grade levels. The term special
education in the UAE has come to include gifted and talented individuals whose abilities,
talents, and educational objectives have to be met by special education services in general
education classrooms. In 2006, special education services in the UAE were further expanded
to serve students with special needs up to the 9th grade (UAE Ministry of Education, 2010).
This is a break from the past, when special educational services and programs for students with intellectual disabilities were offered by the Ministry of Education in communityor center-based education programs. On the other hand, students with visual, hearing,
and physical disabilities have long received their education in general education classrooms, supported by regular and special education teachers. Recently, with the introduction of the aforementioned Federal Law No. 29 in 2006, all students with disabilities in
public and private education institutions have access to equal education opportunities
and thus the number of students with intellectual disabilities being included in general
education schools is increasing (UAE Ministry of Education, 2010).
The organizational structures and guidelines for the provision of special education in
the UAE as outlined above serve as a framework for what is a work in progress. The
underlying thrust and emphasis is that educators, other professionals, parents, and all
individuals involved with special education in the UAE must undertake to ensure that we
strive to achieve best practices in the process of inclusion (UAE Ministry of Education,
2010, p. 13). This vision and mission for special education stresses an inclusive educational
perspective, which emphasizes that students with special needs should have the opportunity to participate in educational programs and services in the least restrictive environments commensurate with their individual strengths and needs. While regular education
classrooms often provide the least restrictive environments, it is recognized that this is not
the case all the time nor for all special needs student (UAE Ministry of Education, 2010).
Educational Considerations for Students With Special Needs

In accordance with the above vision and mission, the Ministry of Education in the UAE
emphasizes various educational considerations in teaching and caring for students with
special needs. Major considerations include (but are not limited to):
1. Accepting the philosophy of inclusion for students with special needs in the general
education system.
2. Providing students with special needs with necessary assistive technology.
3. Emphasizing the importance of IEPs for students with special needs.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
177
4. Recognizing the importance of classroom accessibility.

5. Treating all special needs students with dignity and respect but not sympathy.
6. Promoting awareness in schools about using respectful language toward students
with special needs.
7. Maintaining effective communication with parents of special needs children about
their childs progress.
Prereferral Services
According to the UAE Ministry of Education School for All (2010) document, students
in general or regular schools whose performance exceeds or does not meet expectations
compared to their peers should be referred to the School Support Team (SST). The purpose of this action, as was noted earlier in the chapter, is to develop intervention plans
for students before a referral is made to determine their eligibility for special education
programs and services.
Strategies to Evaluate the Progress of Students With Special Needs

There are various strategies and tools used to evaluate special needs students progress,
such as performance assessment and achievement tests that have to be conducted in an
appropriate place with minimum distractions. The selection of an assessment strategy is
based on the students needs and nature of disability. The level of performance, goals,
and objectives as stated in the IEP are the bases for assessment. Depending on the students needs, assessment tests may be conducted individually or in group settings on
specified dates and times with full coordination with the school administration. Parents
should be informed that these tests will be taking place, and a written approval should
be obtained when necessary. Extra time to complete exams can be given when needed,
and any materials required for the exams, such as material printed in braille for students
with visual impairment, should be provided by the school.
Rights, Duties, and Responsibilities of Parents

Collaboration between parents, schools, and teachers is deemed to be very important.
Such collaboration can be through ongoing exchanges of information, periodic
reports, and setting educational goals. In the process of education for children with
special needs, parents have certain rights as well as various duties and responsibilities.
Examples of parents rights related to their children with disabilities in the UAE
include:
1. Parents have the right of full access to all school information regarding programs
provided for their children.
2. Schools must establish positive relationships with parents based on mutual interest
and effective communication.
3. Schools must provide parents with periodic reports on the progress of students in
achieving the goals set for them in education plans.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
178

4. Parents have the right to be informed of all dates of meetings and assessments that
are related to their childrens education.
5. Parents have the right to be informed of any formal evaluations of their children,
and notified before any changes in placement.
6. Parents have the right to participate and volunteer in any activities related to their
children or to the school their children attend.
7. The school should encourage parents in all the above.
In addition to enjoying the above rights, parents of children with special needs also have
duties and responsibilities. These may include (but are not limited to) the following:
1. Parents should attend all meeting and assessments related to their childrens
education.
2. Parents should maintain effective communication and correspondence with the
school administration.
3. Parents should accept a role in the implementation of education plans for their
children.
4. Parents are required to provide relevant information related to their children.
5. Parents are required to communicate with the district or school in case of
an emergency.
DI F F E R E NC E S A N D VA R I AT ION S I N OPP ORT U N I T Y A N D I N AC C E S S
Mild Verses Severe Disabilities

The authors underscore that the most appropriate placement for the majority of students
with special needs is the regular/mainstream school. However, it seems that education
authorities in a number of countries believe that inclusion of all children in regular classrooms is the way forward in providing equal opportunities for children. While such a
general rule applies for students with mild disabilities, and may even also apply for some
students with moderate disabilities, all children are not born equal and some require
more than one educational approach in order to reach their potential.
For example, children with some severe disabilities will not be able to participate in
academic programs in mainstream schools and therefore require special programs in
order to have their needs met and their independence increased. It is difficult for the
teacher simultaneously to meet the needs of the student with a severe disability and the
typically developed child. In such a situation, both students will be discriminated against;
the typically developing student will not get the attention he or she requires, and the
student with the severe disability will be neglected.
On the other hand, the nature of the disability that a student has, considered within the
context of resources available, most certainly influences the consideration of inclusion in
a mainstream school. For example, a student who has a physical disability and normal
10/14/11 5:45 PM
179
intellectual abilities can be included in the mainstream school if he/she has necessary aids
and equipment available, is supported by properly trained school staff, has access to
trained professionals such as occupational therapists, physiotherapists, speech therapists,
and so on. If this is his/her school environment, we have a formula for positive outcomes.
In the UAE, many students with low academic achievement and mild disabilities are
included in regular classrooms in mainstream schools. However, many others are transferred from regular classrooms to special education classrooms in the same schools.
A third group of students regularly visit a school resource room for instruction in specific academic skills. All of these students were enrolled in their schools before it was
known that they had a disability, or are at risk of having a disability or low academic
achievement. Unfortunately, students who are diagnosed as having a disability before
enrolling to study in mainstream schools are not accepted. Furthermore, no students
with severe disabilities have ever been accepted to study in the mainstream schools in
the country.
I DE N T I F IC AT ION, A S S E S S M E N T, PL AC E M E N T
A N D I M PL E M E N TAT ION
A student in a regular education classroom whose performance does not meet expectations
compared to his/her peers should be referred to the School Support Team (SST), who
will create an intervention plan to improve performance. However, if performance does
not improve, eligibility for a special education program is considered. The Ministry of
Education (2010) document identifies specific procedures for identifying students with
disabilities and provides guidelines for deciding upon the best education placement.
There are six steps in the process:
Step One: Referral

A student who is experiencing learning problems and who is not making satisfactory
progress is referred to the SST by means of a written referral. The SST is usually formed by
the school principal and normally consists of the school principal, the students teacher,
a special education teacher, a social worker, a speech and language therapist, and a
psychologist. The SST meets on a weekly basis to discuss the academic performance of
referred students, reviews medical histories, and conducts a classroom observation on
the areas of concern. On these bases, recommendations for pre-referral intervention to
overcome students learning problems are made. After a maximum of 4 weeks of intervention, the intervention may be discontinued if progress is adequate. On the other hand,
if a students progress is not adequate, the student is referred to the Zone Coordinator
of the Multidisciplinary Evaluation Team (MET) for a comprehensive evaluation and
determination of eligibility for special education and related services.
Step Two: Assessment, Evaluation, and Eligibility Determination

The referred student undergoes a comprehensive assessment by the MET, which consists
of a special education teacher, the students teacher, the students parent, the school
principal, a psychologist, a social worker, and other specialists who may be deemed
necessary. The team members assess the students strengths, needs, academic level, and
10/14/11 5:45 PM
180

social functioning. The MET should complete its assessment within 30 days of receiving
a referral from the SST. Next, a full assessment report on the student is written and sent
to the Zone Coordinator. The coordinator schedules a meeting with the MET members
to discuss the students case and to determine the students eligibility for and need of a
special education program and related services.
Step Three: IEP Development

If the MET decides that the student is eligible to receive special education, the MET
develops an IEP. The goals and objectives, accommodations, and modifications are the
most important elements of the IEP. Accommodations and modifications in teaching
methods, learning materials, and/or learning environment may be necessary to meet
the individual needs of the student and should be specified in the IEP. Accommodations are changes that do not alter what is being taught, but include alterations of
environment, curriculum format, or equipment that allow a student with a disability
to gain access to content and/ or complete assigned tasks. Such accommodations may
include, but are not limited to, sign language, text-to-speech interpreters, text-to-speech
computer-based systems, large-print books, and so on. Modifications are also specified
in the IEP and may take the form of reducing the number of assignments or modifying
them significantly.
Step Four: IEP Implementation

Written approval for the IEP is obtained from the parents, and implementation should
start within a 2-week period. Placement decisions are made taking many factors into
consideration such as identification of required services, what the least restrictive environment would be, the location of special education services, what behavior intervention
plans are required, the need for an assistant teacher to facilitate the process of inclusion,
support services that may be required, and so on.
Step Five: Monitor, Review, and Revise IEP

The IEP implementation process should be reviewed regularly, and the progress of the
student should be monitored. At the end of academic year, an IEP annual review report
is prepared by the special education teacher. Accordingly, recommendations for the next
school year are made.
Step Six: Certificate of Grade Completion

Upon completion of a grade level, a student with special needs will receive a certificate
indicating that he or she has a disability and has received special education services. In
other words, students certificates include the category of disability they have, assistive
technology they need, and the areas or subjects in which they excelled.
E DUC AT ION PL AC E M E N T
As has been repeatedly noted, an important consideration in the UAE is providing
students with disabilities an education in the least restrictive environment. Students
should be educated with age-appropriate peers who do not have disabilities whenever
10/14/11 5:45 PM
181
the regular classroom is deemed to be the best option for students who are eligible for
special education services. For example, a student with special needs may be involved in a
regular classroom and receive special education services only from a community-service
provider, or may receive classroom-based or school-based special education programs
and support services. Conversely, students with severe disabilities usually participate in
a community- or center-based education program because they are unable to benefit
fully from participation in a regular education school setting (UAE Ministry of
Education, 2010).
Students with learning problems that are primarily the result of factors related to environment, language, or economic status, or who simply experience academic failure, do
not qualify for special education placements. These students are usually referred to the
SST for intervention and support services (UAE Ministry of Education, 2010). In the case
of gifted and talented students, regular schools provide advanced education programs
to supplement the general education curriculum and provide a high level of enrichment
activities. Enrichment activities may include independent studies and vocational guides
that are detailed in a written document referred to as an Advanced Learning Plan (ALP).
ALPs are developed by specialized teams to meet the needs, interests, and creativity of
gifted and talented students. Procedures parallel the six-step process for referral and
development of IEPs outlined previously.
M A JOR I S S U E S
Several major issues in relation to special education in the UAE can be identified and
require attention. These include the following areas: preparation and support for
inclusive education, research into national and social readiness, integration with other
school reforms, professional qualifications in special education, and assessment and
diagnosis.
Preparation and Support for Inclusive Education

As previously noted, the Ministry of Education is adopting the inclusive education policy
in the UAE. However, implementation requires proper preparationsimply adopting the
policy does not automatically lead to successful inclusive education programs. According
to Kauffman (1993), at least three factors contribute to successful inclusion programs:
preparation by administrators, teamwork between educators, and professional inputs.
Disability type and severity are other factors to consider for successful inclusion. Florian
(1998, p. 22) suggests a set of conditions that must be in place for successful implementation of inclusive education policies:
1. An opportunity for student participation in the decision-making process.
2. A positive attitude about the learning abilities of all students.
3. Teachers knowledge about learning difficulties.
4. Skilled application of specific instructional methods.
5. Parent and teacher support.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
182

Successful inclusion also requires adequate support and assistance for teachers (Downing
& Williams, 1997; Minke & Bear, 1996) and a restructuring of schools and classrooms
within schools (Phillips & Sapona, 1995) so that properly planned, inclusive arrangements benefit all children (Leyden & Miler, 1998). Providing adequate support may be a
prodigious undertaking (Minke & Bear, 1996).
Research Into National and Social Readiness

In its General Rules for the Provision of Special Education Programs and Services (2010),
the UAE Ministry of Education identifies many interesting current issues in the provision
of special education for students with special educational needs. However, one important
element that is not mentioned is the need for significant amounts of further research.
Most obviously, research to identify the needs, obstacles, difficulties, and problems that
stand in the way of implementing the policy of inclusion in the UAE is needed. Such
research includes study of the efficacy of both regular and special education teachers.
The results will provide the scientific basis needed to successfully implement policies,
programs, and distribution of services.
One related area that such research must also address is attitudes toward inclusive
education. Investigation into what extent UAE society is at this point ready to adopt and
implement an inclusive policy and orientation is crucial. The planning and implementation
process of inclusive education cannot be undertaken without reference to the attitudes
of all who will be involved in and affected by the inclusion process. In other words, the
Ministry of Education needs to take the initiative to study and investigate public and
professional attitudes toward, and readiness for, inclusive education in the UAE.
School Reform
When reforms of school systems are undertaken, it is imperative that the place of special
education within the context of the reforms, and the implications for students with special needs, are considered before implementation. This principle needs to be recognized
and adhered to; however, that is not always the case. While a discussion of school reforms
in the UAE is well beyond the scope of this chapter, this important point nonetheless can
be very briefly illustrated by noting two developments in the UAE.
Over the last few years the Ministry of Education and the Abu Dhabi Education Council
have created new forms of schooling in the country, including partnership schools
(Emirates News Agency, WAM, 2006) and the future schools program (Afshan, 2010).
The former seeks to improve public schools in Abu Dhabi by bringing together the public and private sectors in partnership to sponsor education and engaging private
education providers. The latter, initially started in 2008 in the first three grades and
recently extended to grade 4, was created for the purpose of developing bilingual UAE
nationals. Certainly, such a brief description greatly and inexcusably simplifies the
complexities of these new school initiatives and the purposes they serve.
However, for the purposes of a discussion on the implications of these new schools and
programs for special education, we may note the following threads binding both: First,
in both the medium of instruction is English, while the students are non-English native
speakers. Second, many native English speakers are brought in from abroad to teach.
Third, the authors believe that teachers and other employees who are brought in from
10/14/11 5:45 PM
183
overseas do not understand the culture of the UAE and are likely to encounter difficulties
in adapting to the UAE culture. Finally, from the authors perspective, because of
cultural differences between students and their teachers, students will experience
difficulties adapting to their teachers.
Different as the two programs and schools are, and notwithstanding their welldeserved successes in many areas, the fact remains that the school reform represented
by partnership schools and future schools does not mention anything in relation to
special education. What is the situation of special education in this school reform? Is
English the medium of instruction also for students with special needs who are learning
in special education classrooms, resource rooms, or regular classrooms in these schools?
Do special needs students have different arrangements? Does having foreign teachers
on staff present unique challenges for students with special needs? Such basic questions
must be asked and resolutions effected in the context of any school reform when it is
proposed.
Professional Qualifications in Special Education

The majority of special education teachers in the UAE are specifically trained in the
field of special education, but many other teachers work as special education teachers
without any specialized training. Additionally, the country lacks professionals in many
specializations such as speech therapy, audiology, hearing impairment, emotional and
behavioral difficulties, evaluation and measurement, and so on. The majority of those
who are qualified special educators have qualifications in general special education or in
mild and moderate disabilities. However, it is almost impossible to find a person who is
qualified in evaluation and measurement, or has professional qualifications in behavior
modification. This lack of qualified personnel makes it difficult to provide effective
special education for individuals with special needs.
Assessment and Diagnosis

The assessment and diagnosis of individuals with special needs is a very important
process required for planning education programs; assessment and diagnostic
procedures have to be reliable and valid. Furthermore, tests have to be culturally unbiased. However, the UAE does not have proper culturally unbiased assessment tools such
as UAE standardized IQ tests and adaptive behavior scales. According to Al-Hilawani,
Koch, and Braaten (2008), the current assessment instruments used in the Gulf region
do not reflect the culture. It is therefore not clear how children with special needs
are classified or regrouped. Childrens intellectual disabilities or learning disabilities
cannot be properly or accurately diagnosed unless culturally unbiased diagnostic
tests such as IQ tests, adaptive behavior scales, and visual and auditory perception tests
are available.
E M E RG I NG PR IOR I T I E S
This closing section identifies four dimensions of special education in the UAE that
particularly warrant attention and need to be improved. Three will be briefly highlighted;
the fourth will be developed more fully.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
184
Enhanced Implementation of Inclusive Education

One of the future trends for special education in the UAE is that children with special
needs will be included and taught in the countrys regular/public school system. The
UAE Ministry of Education document School for All: General Rules for the Provision of Special
Education Programs and Services (Public & Private Schools; United Arab Emirates Ministry
of Education, 2010) is a comprehensive and carefully crafted document that organizes
and provides special education services for children with special needs. This document
should be fully implemented and there should be a law against any violation of this document. Such legislation should cover issues related to vocational training for students with
special needs or at least a plan to prepare students for vocations.
Professional Staffing
Second, it is important for the future of special education in the UAE to have qualified
personnel in the fields of evaluation and measurement in special education, emotional
and behavioral difficulties, speech pathology, deaf education, and other tracks in special
education. The UAE Ministry of Education is currently initiating serious efforts to cooperate with academic institutions in the country to train personnel in these specializations.
Developing Appropriate Instruments

Third, for the reasons noted in the preceding section, serious efforts need to be undertaken in the UAE to construct culturally unbiased assessment and diagnostic tools such
as IQ tests, adaptive behavior scales, and visual perception and auditory perception tests.
Developing a Framework for Understanding

Fourth and finally, much more consideration of and research into the social context of
special needs education is urgent. It is important to understand more deeply than is the
case now how culture and social environment play critical roles in the perception and
treatment of individuals with special needs. Cultures, customs, traditions, and societal
values influence attitudes toward disabilities. Understanding attitudes toward individuals with special needs is very important as, ultimately, attitudes influence the provision
of rehabilitation and education services (Dukmak, 2002).
Unfortunately, in spite of an extensive search of the literature, the authors were unable
to locate any studies that specifically investigated attitudes toward individuals with special needs in the UAE. That specific point is important to emphasize. Nonetheless, it is
possible to make some general observations and draw limited conclusions on correlations between religion, culture, sociopolitical variables, and attitudes toward disability
and persons with special needs that are relevant for this chapter.
Disability, Religion, and Attitudes

There is a relationship between the attitudes of people toward individuals with special
needs and religion. Fitzgerald (1997) and Miles (1995, 1997) underscore the important role religion plays in defining and confining the lives of people with special needs.
Understanding the correlation is complex, however. On one hand, it is argued that the
Islamic religion sees disability as a punishment from God resulting from a committed sin, evil eye, or a result of arbitrary consequences of divine will (Hamza, 1964).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
185
According to Miles (1997), there is no implication in Islam that disability must result
from wrongdoing, but such an opinion is not uncommon among Muslims. Yet, a study
carried out in the UAE (Crabtree, 2007) suggested that religion was seen to have an
important influence over family life as religious interpretations by parents were positive
forces that made them accept their childs disability. Even as families often believed that
the birth of a child with a disability was a curse or punishment from God for wrongdoing,
strict adherence to Islamic values likely promoted a greater understanding and tolerance
of disability. Social stigma of disabled children and their mothers was ameliorated by
the influences of religion (Crabtree, 2007, p. 49).
Additionally, attitudes toward individuals with disabilities might not only relate to the
religions of people but also to what extent people are religious. For example, some studies
(Feldman, 1976; Florian, 1977) found that Muslims and Jews who perceived themselves
as nonreligious had more positive attitudes toward people with physical disabilities than
people who perceived themselves as religious. Accordingly, the complex nexus of religion,
disability, and attitudes warrants continuing investigation.
Disability, Gender, and Religion

Various sectors of populations, including individuals with disabilities, are influenced by
social prejudice. The disability rights movement plays a major role in modifying pervasive social prejudice toward individuals with disabilities, but the movement often fails
to address the agendas of women with disabilities. Commensurate with this it may be
observed that, internationally, disability rights movements are generally dominated by
men (Abu-Habib, 1997). Women and children with disabilities, therefore, are considered
the most marginalized groups in society (Brett, 2002).
With regard to religion and gender, one study proposes that the position of men and
women in Muslim families is polarized and subject to hierarchical distinction, although
men and women are viewed as complementary (Stang Dahl, 1997). Consequently, in
Muslim societies, gender norms and roles are clearly defined, particularly in relation to
early child-rearing issues, which are virtually the exclusive domain of mothers as are
educational concerns and the inculcation of spiritual and cultural values (Bouhdiba,
1997). Consequently, the responsibility for bringing a child with a disability into the
world falls on the mother, with some serious consequences attached.
This situation is not restricted to families in Gulf countries and other countries of the
Middle East, but also to many other Muslim families in other parts of the world such as
in Pakistan and Bangladesh (Fazil, Bywaters, Ali, Wallace, & Singh, 2002). Although
there is a lack of literature on families and disabilities in the Middle East, the published
work shows that social stigma is common in the region. According to Young (1997),
individuals with disabilities in the Middle East are devalued to a considerable degree.
Mothers may be repudiated by their husbands and nondisabled children. Daughters will
find their marriage prospects blighted.
Disability, Culture, and Attitudes

People with special needs usually face two types of problems: one is coping with the
public rejection that comes from societal attitudes; the other is personal adjustment
to the disabling condition (English, 1971). According to Priestley (1998), many of our
10/14/11 5:45 PM
186

dominant cultural values about disability are themselves disabling (p. 27). In general
terms, the societal rejection of the disability is constructed as the individuals misfortune, rather than as social exclusion or oppression. Imrie (1997) argues that the social,
attitudinal, and environmental barriers in society are an important component in disabling people with physical and/or intellectual disabilities. Prejudice against people
with physical disabilities has been found to be associated with cultural norms that were
related to health and physical appearance (Schneider & Anderson, 1980).
It has been argued that individuals with special needs are viewed more positively in
modern cultures than in traditional societies (Jordan & Friesen, 1968). In the case of
Eastern cultures, when physical disabilities are interpreted as punishment from heaven
or the results of unnatural forces, they are perceived as being unchangeable by medical
means. Thus, the attitudes of people toward physical disabilities who live within these
cultures can be characterized by a passive acceptance of fate, as well as pity toward the
individuals with a physical disability (Katz, Hass, & Bailey, 1988).
In the Middle East in general, and the Gulf region in particular, children with special
needs live in a culture where there have been efforts to hide individuals with disabilities
from society. This is because families are faced with the negative consequences of labeling their children. Identification and disclosure carry social consequences to such a
degree that some families, especially those who have children with severe disabilities, are
more likely to keep them at home and hidden from society. In these cultures, families
who have children with special needs may require many years to develop an understanding of individuals with disabilities. Fortunately, during the last 10 years, some progress
has been made through educational initiatives and government actions.
Disability and Prosperity

The UAE is different from the rest of the Arab region as it is not beleaguered by poverty
like, for example, Jordan and Egypt, and the country is free from civil conflict such as
exists in Palestine. Yet UAE families still face the problems of significant social stigma
about disability. To date, these have yet to be ameliorated by open dialogue on issues
pertaining to social inclusion of individuals with disabilities. That said, even if such
debates have yet to be more fully introduced, there is substantial progress on many
fronts. For example, the UAE takes justifiable pride in the medical and technological
advances being made in the country, and that the nations recreational and leisure
facilities are now wheelchair friendly (Eno, 2000).
On the other hand, according to Crabtree (2007) social inclusion of individuals with
disabilities in the UAE, in terms of education and employment, remains at a basic level.
Even equal access to health services is not always extended to individuals with disabilities, and discrimination is particularly invidious where disability and immigrant status
overlap. In many cases, problems related to rehabilitation services delivery are caused by
the absence of specific policies and by deficits in the countrys administrative system.
Other factors are related to the complexity and unresponsiveness that characterize the
delivery system for rehabilitation services (Dukmak, 2009; Ma, Coyle, Wares, & Cornell,
1999; Timmons, Butterworth, Whitney-Thomas, Allen, & McIntyre, 2004).
For all the above reasons, disability in the Middle East in general and the UAE in
particular, is a subject that is ripe for investigation and full of hope and promise.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
187
The authors discussions under the Major Issues and Emerging Priorities sections
constitute an attempt to stimulate that investigation in a positive and fruitful direction.
R E F E R E NC E S
Abu-Habib, L. (1997). Introduction. In L. Abu-Habib (Ed.), Gender & disability: Womens
experiences in the Middle East (pp. 18). Oxford, UK: Oxfam.
Afshan, Ahmed. (2010, July 29). Madares Al Ghad system to be extended to grade 4. Khaleej
Times Online. Retrieved from http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew
.asp?section=theuae&xfile=data/theuae/2010/july/theuae_july697.xml.
Al-Hilawani, Y. A., Koch, K. R., Braaten, S. R. (2008). Enhancing services for students with
mild disabilities in the Middle East Gulf Region: A Kuwait initiative. Teaching Exceptional
Children Plus, 4(5), Article 1. Retrieved from http://journals.cec.sped.org/tecplus/vol4
/iss5/art1/.
Al-Jenaibi, B. (2010). Differences between gender treatments in the workforce. Cross-Cultural
Communication, 6(2), 6374.
Al Roumi, M. (2008, February 10). UAE ratifies UN convention on rights of people with disabilities. Gulf-News. Retrieved from http://www.gulfnews.com/nation/General/10188576
.html.
Bouhdiba, A. (1997). The child and the mother in Arab-Muslim society. Psychological Dimensions of Near Eastern Studies, 1997, 126141.
Bradshaw, K., Tennant, L., & Lydiatt, S. (2004). Special education in the United Arab Emirates:
Anxieties, attitudes & aspirations. International Journal of Special Education, 19(1), 4955.
Brett, J. (2002). The experience of disability from the perspective of parents of children
with profound impairment: Is it time for an alternative model of disability. Disability &
Society, 17(7), 825843.
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labour. (2003, March 31). Country reports on human
rights practices2002. U.S. Department of State. Retrieved from http://www.state.gov/g
/drl/rls/hrrpt/2002/18291.htm.
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labour, (2006, March 8). Reports on human rights
practices in the UAE (2005). Retrieved from http://www.uaeprison.com/human_rights
_practices_report_uae_2005.htm
Crabtree, A. S. (2007). Family responses to the social inclusion of children with developmental
disabilities in the United Arab Emirates. Disability & Society, 22(1), 4962.
Crabtree, S. A. (2010). Engaging students from the United Arab Emirates in culturally
responsive education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(1), 8594.
Downing, J. E., & Williams, L. J. (1997). Inclusive education for students with severe disabilities.
Remedial and Special Education, 18(3), 133153.
Dukmak, S. (2002). Parental attitudes towards their children with special needs in Palestine.
Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Manchester, UK.
Dukmak, S. (2009). Rehabilitation services in the United Arab Emirates as perceived by parents of children with disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation, 75(4), 2734.
Emirates News Agency, WAM. (2006, February 21). Partnership schoolsa new phase of
national development. Retrieved from http://www.uaeinteract.com/docs/Partnership
_schools__a_new_phase_of_national_development/19758.htm.
Emirates News Agency, WAM. (2008, February 14). UAE signs protocol to Convention on the Rights
of Persons With Disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.uaeinteract.com/docs/UAE
_signs_Protocol_to_Convention_on_Rights_ofpersons_with_Disabilities/28632.htm.
English, R. W. (1971). Correlates of stigma toward physically disabled persons. Rehabilitation
Research and Practice Review, 2, 117.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
188

Eno, F. A. (2000). A world of difference. WE Magazine, 4(2), 86.
Fazil, Q., Bywaters, P., Ali, Z., Wallace, L., & Singh, G. (2002). Disadvantage and discrimination compounded: The experience of Pakistani and Bangladeshi parents of disabled
children in the UK. Disability & Society, 17(3), 237253.
Feldman, E. (1976). Attitudes of Jewish and Arab village leaders towards rehabilitation of the disabled.
Unpublished masters thesis, Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
Fitzgerald, J. (1997). Reclaiming the whole: self, spirit, and society. Disability and Rehabilitation, 19(10), 407413.
Florian, V. (1977). A comparison of attitudes towards the physically disabled between Jewish
and Arab high school students. Megamot, 2, 184192.
Florian, L. (1998). Inclusive practice: what, why and how? In C. Tilstone, L. Florian, L. Rose,
& R. Rose (Eds.), Promoting inclusive practice (pp. 1326). London: Routledge.
Hamza, N. (1964). The psychology of handicapped. Cairo: Egypt Press.
Imrie, R. (1997). Rethinking the relationships between disability, rehabilitation and society.
Disability and Rehabilitation, 19(7), 263271.
Jordan, J. E., & Friesen, E. W. (1968). Attitudes of rehabilitation personnel towards physically
disabled persons in Columbia, Peru, and the United States. Journal of Social Psychology,
74, 151161.
Katz, I., Hass, R., & Bailey, J. (1988). Attitudinal ambivalence and behavior towards people
with disabilities. In H. E. Yuker (Ed.), Attitudes towards persons with disabilities (pp. 4757).
New York: Springer.
Kauffman, J. M. (1993). How we might achieve the radical reform of special education. Exceptional Children, 60, 616.
Leyden, G., & Miller, A. (1998). Including all our children in mainstream school and comments: Realizing the dream. Educational Psychology in Practice, 14(3), 188193.
Ma, G. X., Coyle, C., Wares, D., & Cornell, D. (1999). Assessment of services to American
Indians with disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation, 1116.
Miles, M. (1983). Attitudes towards persons with disabilities following I.Y.D.P. (1981) with suggestions
for promoting positive change. Peshawar, Pakistan: Mental Health Center, Mission Hospital
Peshawar.
Miles, M. (1995). Disability in an Eastern religious context: Historical perspectives. Disability &
Society, 10(1), 4969.
Miles, M. (1997). Afghan children and mental retardation: information, advocacy and prospects. Disability & Rehabilitation, 19(11), 496500.
Minke, K., & Bear, G. (1996). Teachers experience with inclusive classrooms: Implications
for special education reform. Journal of Special Education, 30(2), 3573.
Phillips, L., Sapona, R., & Lubic, B. L. (1995). Developing partnerships in inclusive education: one schools approach. Intervention in school and Clinic, 30, 262272.
Priestley, M. (1998). Disability politics and community care. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Salloum, H. (2003). Women in the United Arab Emirates. Contemporary Review, 283(1651),
101104.
Schneider, C. R., & Anderson, W. (1980). Attitudes toward the stigmatized. Some insight
from recent research. Rehabilitation Counselling Bulletin, 23, 299313.
Stang Dahl, T. (1997). The Muslim family: A study of womens rights in Islam. Oxford, UK:
Scandinavian University Press.
Swadi, H., & Eapen, V. (2000). A controlled study of psychiatric morbidity among
developmentally disabled children in the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Tropical
Pediatrics, 46, 278281.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
189
Timmons, J. C., Butterworth, J., Whitney-Thomas, J., Allen, D., & McIntyre, J. P. (2004).
Managing services delivery systems and the role of parents during their childrens
transitions. Journal of Rehabilitation, 70(2), 1926.
United Arab Emirates. (2006). Federal Law No. 29/2006 in respect of the rights of people
with special needs.
United Arab Emirates Ministry of Education. (2010). School for all: General rules for the provision of special education programs and services (public & private schools). Abu Dhabi, UAE:
Ministry of Education, Department of Special Education.
United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities and Optional
Young, W. C. (1997). Disability, spiritual beliefs and the church: The experiences of adults
with disabilities and family members. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 40(5), 594603.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
10/14/11 5:45 PM
10
Facing the Challenge of
Inclusion in India
Maya Kalyanpur and

Anjali Misra
Come to India! One billion people cant be wrong, reads a popular tourism slogan,
which, like many witticisms, hides an ineluctable truth. For many, the first image of India
is of a teeming population, second only to that of Chinasand they would not be far
wrong. India is the seventh largest country in the world. In an area roughly one-third the
size of the United States but with a population three times as large, India has 17% of the
worlds population. Three of Indias largest citiesMumbai, Kolkata, and Delhieach
have populations larger than Los Angeles, the second-largest city in the United States.
However, 72% of the Indian population lives in rural areas.
This diamond-shaped country dominates South Asia, jutting into the Indian Ocean in
the south and crowned by the Himalayas in the north. Indias neighbors, Pakistan in the
west, Nepal and China in the north, Bangladesh and Myanmar in the east, and Sri Lanka
in the south, have strong political and cultural links with it. In fact, both Pakistan and
Bangladesh (then called East Pakistan) were new countries carved out of India as part of
the political negotiations for independence from the British in 1947.
Indian civilization is the only one that has lasted unbroken and relatively unchanged
through the millennia. Hinduism, the predominant religion in the prehistoric Rig Vedic
period, prevails even today, outlasting all other religions. It withstood invasions from
Alexander the Great in the 4th century bc and the Mongols in the 12th century ad as
well as empire building by the Mughals from the early 17th to the mid-19th centuries and
the British from the mid-18th to the mid-20th centuries.
India is a secular democratic republic. The structure of its central government is based on
its colonial heritage of the British parliamentary system, with distinct but interrelated executive, legislative, and judicial branches. It has both a prime minister and a president,
although the latters duties are mostly ceremonial. With a brief 2-year exception, India has
maintained a democratic political system, tainted by dynastic rule and political corruption
but tempered by legislative measures. For example, the 2005 Right to Information Law
served to create a highly engaged and increasingly empowered electorate (Polgreen, 2010).
As a republic, Indias 29 states (there are also seven federally administered union
territories) have independent state rights, in particular with regard to education.
Currently, the central government contributes 25% to state coffers toward expenditures
in education, with specific emphasis on implementation of universal primary education
or Education for All (EFA) programs.
Contemporary India is very much a country in transition. Since the early 1990s, when
the postindependence socialist policies gave way to privatization and a free-market
193
10/14/11 5:45 PM
194

economy, numerous problems have prevailed. These include substantial poverty, large
income gaps between wealthy and poor, and a mass of people who lack the skills to participate in the new economy.
Only the continent of Africa exceeds the linguistic, cultural, and genetic diversity of
India (Library of Congress, 2004). Each state has its own language, cuisine, customs,
and history. This diversity is probably best exemplified by the variety of languages
spoken: There are 22 regional officially recognized languages, with Hindi being the
national language and the most commonly spoken. However, the Indian Census lists 114
languages spoken by 1 million or more persons and 216 dialects. Other sources estimate
that 850 languages and 1,600 dialects are in daily use (Library of Congress, 2004). As a
result, many Indians speak more than one language.
Similarly, every major religion is represented. Hindus constitute 80.5% of the population; 13.5% are Muslims (there are more Muslims in India than in the entire Middle
East), and 2.3% Christian. Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Zoroastrians, and Jews make up the
remaining 4%.
Perhaps because of its immense diversity, India is also a country of contradictions. For
instance, using Green Revolution agricultural technologies, the country has become
self-sufficient in food production. However, 35% of the population continues to live in
povertythat is, on less than $2 a day (United Nations Development Programme, 2009).
Similarly, India has more newspapers than any other nation, and newspaper readership
grows annually by millions. Further, it has developed an educational infrastructure that
has trained one of the worlds largest scientific and technical populations (Library of
Congress, 2004). However, in 2007, the average adult (age 15 and older) literacy rate was
only 66% (United Nations Development Programme, 2009).
Certainly Indias enormous population, which at a growth rate of 1.37% is likely to
exceed Chinas by 2050, has contributed to these startling discrepancies. For instance, in
2007, there were nearly 195 million children of school age (6 to 14 years; Kaushik, 2007),
making it difficult for necessary services to keep up with demand. According to UNESCO
(2005, cited in Singal, 2006a), India is one of 35 countries most unlikely to meet the EFA
goal by 2015.
At a simplistic level, it could be argued that these contradictions are the result of having
too many people and too few resourcesthat it is merely a question of numbers. However, the interplay of other factors on politics and policy cannot be overlooked. In this
section, we examine how three factorsthe interconnection between caste and class, the
medium of instruction as a legacy of colonialism, and gender discriminationaffect the
education of poor children, girls, and, by extension, children with disabilities.
Poverty and the CasteClass Nexus

Much like race in the United States and class in the United Kingdom, caste is embedded
into the social fabric of India, affecting virtually every aspect of its politicaleconomic
milieu. Social stratification in traditional Indian society was based on a fivefold division
of society (Ramaswamy, 2005). These social strata consisted of three high castes, a fourth
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Facing the Challenge of Inclusion in India
195
nonpolluting caste, and the lowest, ritually polluting caste, referred to as the scheduled
castes by the government. The lowest caste members prefer to refer to themselves as
Dalits. The first three groups received the greatest social prestige, the greatest secular
power, and the greatest material wealth, in that order, while the fourth group performs
various services for them, particularly in the field of agriculture. Dalits are confined
to the least desirable occupationsscavengers, sweepers, washermen, and laborers
resulting in extreme poverty, in addition to being socially stigmatized and residentially
segregated.
Since independence in 1947, the Indian government has made several efforts to
improve the status of Dalits, including abolishing ritual segregation through community
development and welfare programs, and instituting reservations, a form of affirmative
action (Government of India, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment [MSJE],
2006). As a country in transition, these policies and the process of modernization have
produced an environment conducive to upward social mobility for Dalits (Yardley, 2010).
However, the high correlation between caste and poverty continues to create a lethal
cocktail of educational denial (Kaushik, 2007, p. 16). For instance, Dalit children
constitute 57.3% of the total number of children enrolled in grade 1 who drop out before
completing grade 8. Further, when families lack the economic capability to provide for
their childrens education or cannot forgo the income the child brings by earning a
wage instead of attending school, the legacy of poverty is passed from one generation to
the next.
Medium of Instruction as a Legacy of Colonialism

The colonial system of education was overtly elitist, designed to create a class of
English-speaking, Western-thinking Indians to fill the lower tiers of the administrative
system. Ironically, the postcolonial system that purports to be egalitarian has actually
perpetuated the class distinctions and elitism by stepping quietly into the shoes of the
system the British left behind (Balagopalan, 2002). Private English medium schools,
originally established by Christian missionaries, became the means for children of the
Indian upper castes to access an education in English.
With independence, new state boundaries were drawn up along lines of language
usage. The central government decided to adopt Hindi as the national language,
although it was spoken by only 40% of the population. The government imposed compulsory learning of Hindi as a second language in all states, with the primary medium of
instruction being the regional or official state language (Ilaiah, 2007). Currently,
students in government-run schools learn in the regional language of their state (which
may or may not coincide with their mother tongue). They start learning Hindi as a second
language from grade 3 onward, and English as a third language from grade 7 onward.
All central and many state government-run higher education institutions teach in
English. Thus, students who have been educated in English from the beginning have a
considerable edgegiven that less than 2% of students are accepted into elite institutions such as the Indian Institutes of Technologyover those who began to study it in
grade 7. Indeed, as Varma (2007) states, The English language has become one of the
most subtle forms of social exclusion. Unless you speak it with the same fluency and
accent, youre immediately considered inferior in the social hierarchy (p. 43).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
196

The economic liberalization policies of the 1990s have contributed to education
becoming a growth industry and a commodity for sale and transaction, available only to
those who can afford it (Sinha, 2007, p. 38) further reinforcing class and caste distinctions. Even today, only about 20% of children attend private schools; the rest receive an
education in government-run, free schools.
Gender Discrimination Against Girls

The cultural legacy of patrilineage and strong son-preference among many communities makes women and girls the victims of discriminatory practices and abuse (Patel,
2003). For instance, the patriarchal perception of women as burdens relegates them to
subordinate positions in the family, forces them into low-paid or unpaid jobs in the workforce, and denies them property and inheritance rights. The idea of woman as burden
is embedded in the cultural belief that any economic investment in girls, such as an
education, accrues to the husband, not to the natal family, as opposed to boys, whose
education is seen as feeding back into the earnings and status of the family.
As a result, more girls than boys are likely to be out of school at all ages. For instance,
6.8% of girls between the ages of 11 and 14 are not in school, as opposed to 5.3% of boys
of the same age range (Annual Status of Education Report [ASER], 2010). Girls constitute 51.2% of the total number of children enrolled in grade 1 who drop out before
completing grade 8 (Kaushik, 2007). A large number of girls also drop out of the education system around puberty for reasons of safety, particularly if schools are located a
distance away from the family home (requiring them to travel alone), or because they are
needed to help with household chores or income generation (Mehrotra, 2005). Regional
variations do exist. For example, in Kerala there is complete retention until age 12 with
females outnumbering males.
The educational system in India is so complex and multitiered that no chart can do
summative justice for the numerous variations and exceptions to the rule. Table 1
provides a general overview of the basic structure.
Two parallel systems of education have emerged in India: the government system and
the nongovernment system. The government system, which does not charge fees, has two
components: formal and informal education. At the primary level, the formal government
system of education is considered inferior to the nongovernmental systems because
schools have fewer resources and English is not the medium of instruction. However, a
few secondary-level educational programs such as the Kendriya Vidyalaya (Central
Schools) have maintained a high standard of education with outcomes comparable with
the nongovernmental system. Government-run higher education institutions have
produced an elite class that has held its own in technology and science within the global
arena.
The informal educational system was developed to provide alternative, flexible options
to children who have either never attended school or had dropped out and were overage,
such as migrant or street children, as well as literacy programs for adults (Department of
School Education and Literacy, 2005). Currently, options offered through the National
10/14/11 5:45 PM
197
Table 1. Structure of General Education Systema

Major
Educational
characteristics levels
Government
Formal
Nonformal
Nongovernment
Voluntary,
nonprofit
Private,
for profit
Sources of
revenue
Taxes, grants
Government
monies,
matching
funds from
foreign
agencies,
international
donors
Corporate
funds and
tuition fees
Costs for
beneficiaries
None (some schools may

charge tuition on a sliding
scale)
Ranges from
none, nominal
fee to fee
based
Fee based
Mostly lower middle class

and working class; some
disadvantaged children
(e.g., poor children, rural
children, street children,
children with disabilities)
Disadvantaged
children
Middle-class
and affluent
children
Target
beneficiariesa
Preschool (3 to
6 years)
Primary (7 to
14 years)
Secondary
(15 to 17 years)
Tertiary (18+)
Medium of
instructiona
Adult
Nonea
literacy and
alternative
school
completion
programs
Preschool (3 to
6 years)
Regional
language
Primary (7 to
14 years)
Grades 1 to 10
Regional
language;
national
language
introduced
at grade 3
Secondary (15
to 17 years)
Grades 11 to 12
Regional
language;
English
introduced
at grade 7
Tertiary (18+
years) (3 years
baccalaureate
degree)
English
Regional
language
Regional
language,
with national
languagea
English
This presents only a general picture. There may be exceptions in which some agencies and government programs
target additional beneficiary groups or provide instruction in English.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
198

Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS) include distance learning as well as face-to-face
programs for traditional school certificates, vocational education coursework, bridge
courses, back-to-school camps, seasonal hostels, and drop-in centers to reach children
who cannot attend formal schools.
The NIOS curriculum has become an attractive alternative for many students with
disabilities enrolled in inclusive schools who need the flexibility of staggered courses and
examinations (Singal, 2006b), even though the program has been criticized for substandard quality, resulting in limited future life opportunities (Nambisson, 2000; Singal,
2009).
The nongovernmental education system that developed as a response to the government
shortfall also has two components: voluntary, nonprofit agencies and private, for-profit
agencies. Voluntary agencies (also referred to as nongovernmental organizations or
NGOs) target disadvantaged, out-of-school communities, such as street children, poor
children in rural areas, and children with disabilities. Many voluntary agencies receive
government funding that is then matched through donations from large businesses,
foreign agencies, or international donors, on the understanding that beneficiaries will be
charged nothing or only a nominal fee to offset specific recurring costs (Chadha, 2005).
Private, for-profit agencies, always a presence, have burgeoned with economic
liberalization into a differentiated school system with schools to suit every pocket
(Sinha, 2007, p. 36). Parental perceptions hold that that these English-medium schools
have more to offer. Such schools accounted for 21% of total enrollments at the elementary level in 2009 (ASER, 2010). While these parallel structures predominate in the
regular education system, they also prevail in the special education system, as the next
section describes.
Although variations may exist across states, school attendance in general education is
compulsory up to the age of 14 years and the general pattern of education is 10+2+3.
Primary education consists of grades 1 to 5, upper primary consists of grades 6 to 8, and
lower secondary education consists of grades 9 and 10. Grades 1 to 8 are also referred to
as elementary education and grades 1 to 10 constitute basic education (Chauhan, 2009;
see Table 2). After passing grade 10 examinations to complete basic education, students
Table 2. Level of Schooling by Grade Level
Grade level/
number of years
Grades 1 to 5
Grades 6 to 8
Grades 9 to 10
Grades 11 to 12
3 years
2 years
Variable
Level of Education
Primary
Elementary
Upper primary
Lower secondary
Pre-university or upper secondary
(students can choose to take these years
in school or at university)
Graduate (baccalaureate or bachelors
degree)
Postgraduate (or masters)
MPhil and PhD
Basic education
Secondary
University
10/14/11 5:45 PM
199
specialize in arts, science, or commerce areas. Passing national examinations after grade
12 qualifies students for university entrance, although admission grade requirements are
very high.
In the past 10 years, the government has built more schools than in the previous 40
years (Chauhan, 2009). Despite the increase in the number of private and government
schools, overall demand far outstrips supply. As a result, admission into private schools
has become highly competitive, typically involving a series of tests and interviews to wean
out all but the best from long waiting lists. In this system, inequalities relating to caste or
class and gender are exacerbated. For instance, girls and children from traditionally
disadvantaged caste groups are generally underrepresented in the private school system
(Mehrotra & Panchamukhi, 2006).
S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION S E RV IC E S

Special education services are provided within this framework of general education.
Historically, voluntary agencies have predominated in providing service for people with
disabilities in India (Alur, 2002a; Misra, 2000). This started with Christian missionaries,
who created special schools in the 1880s, and some government intervention in the 1940s
during British rule, with sheltered workshops for war veterans.
At first, the newly independent Indian government preferred to focus on setting up
national research institutes and awarding scholarships to deserving students with disabilities while granting monetary assistance to voluntary agencies to continue to establish
special schools. However, in the 1970s when the United Nations Educational, Scientific,
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) recommended that developing countries implement inclusive schooling as a cost-effective alternative to educating children with
disabilities separately, the Indian government responded with a pilot project. This was
the Integrated Education of Disabled Children scheme, which was eventually subsumed
under two generic development programs: the District Primary Education Program
(DPEP) and the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) or EFA program (Rao, Narayan, & Mani,
2005). As a result, educational services for children with disabilities are provided through
both formal and informal components of government programs (as in the regular education system) as well as through voluntary agencies (Chadha, 2005).
Most special schools have been established by NGOs and are disability specific. Many
are residential. Some parents prefer special schools because of the ease of access to a
variety of services, including medical treatment, adaptive equipment, trained teachers,
and an individualized curriculum (Raver, 2001). However, the existing special schools
can accommodate only a very limited number of children.
In recent years, the government has started giving subsidies to private schools for
offering inclusive education to students with disabilities. Although this has resulted in
increased inclusion, access has been governed by a variety of factors. For one, admission
is based on available resources and only students who require minimal or no assistance
are likely to be included. For another, schools accept children if parents are willing to
find and pay for additional support services such as an aide, speech and occupational
therapy, assessment, and remedial help at home (Thirumurthy & Jayaraman, 2007).
In addition, the highly competitive environment of general education, the unbending
10/14/11 5:45 PM
200

demands of the curriculum that includes having to learn three languages, and the lack
of testing modifications in most schools place many students with disabilitiesin particular, students with language disabilitiesat a distinct disadvantage.
According to the most recent round of the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO,
2003), the total number of people with disabilities in India is 18.49 million, about 1.8%
of the total population. In a comprehensive situational analysis of the disability sector in
India, the World Bank (2007) noted that using broader definitions of mental illness and
developmental disabilities could result in a prevalence as great as 40 million.
In terms of educational levels, the report found that about 38% of children with
disabilities aged 6 to 13 years were not attending school. Some 55% of adults with disabilities were illiterate, with only 7% in rural and 18% in urban areas having completed
secondary education. More recently, Alur and Bach (2010) estimated that children with
disabilities constituted 27% of all out-of-school children, including 75% of all children
with severe disabilities and 30% of all children with mild disabilities. Those who do
attend school rarely progress beyond primary grades.
The 2003 NSSO survey also found that children with developmental disabilities,
individuals in rural areas, and girls with disabilities receive even fewer services than
most people with disabilities. Girls with disabilities, especially after age 12, have lower
enrollment ratios than boys with disabilities as measured by regions (urban and rural),
by type of schooling (regular and special schools), and by level (primary and secondary).
Prevailing cultural attitudes may account for this. For instance, many families choose
not to educate their child, particularly if the child is severely disabled or has multiple
disabilities because of the belief that such a child would not benefit from an education
(Misra, 2000). The limited availability of schools, especially in rural areas, is also a
major contributory factor. It is estimated that there are only 2,500 or so private and
government-run special schools in the country (World Bank, 2007). Rao and Reddy
(2004) found that less than 15% of special education services were located in rural
areas.
C AUS E S OF DI S A BI L I T Y
Major causes of disability in India are linked to poverty, malnutrition, communicable
diseases, poor-quality prenatal care, and limited access to immunization for polio or
measles. High prevalence rates of blindness result from vitamin A deficiency; diseases
such as cholera and typhoid result from poor hygiene (Asian Development Bank [ADB],
2002). Another nutrition-related cause is iodine deficiency, which results in developmental and physical disabilities and growth deficits in millions of children. Currently, 30% of
households use noniodized salt (International Institute for Population Sciences, 2000).
Iron deficiency, which can seriously impede mental development and cause anemia
(Govinda & Bandyopadhyay, 2008), affects 74% of people younger than 33 and 95%
of adolescent girls (United Nations Childrens Fund [UNICEF], 2004). Polio is a major
contributor of physical disabilities and, with blindness, is at least four times more likely
10/14/11 5:45 PM
201
to occur among the poor (Pinto & Sahu, 2001). Road and agricultural accidents and
injuries also cause physical disabilities.
The unfortunate fact is that large numbers of children become disabled from
preventable factors. Ensuring the vaccination of all children continues to present
problems because vaccines are often rendered ineffective through poor storage conditions
and heat. In addition, medical services are often inaccessible in rural areas: Approximately 70% of doctors practice in urban centers. People from rural areas often depend
on temporary government medical camps for immunization and other medical services.
L A BE L I NG OF DI S A BI L I T I E S
Scholars assert that the labeling process may be deeply problematic (Kalyanpur, 2008a;
Singal, 2009). For instance, the NSSO (2003) found almost equivalent rates of both incidence and prevalence of disability overall in both urban and rural areas. This happened
despite the preponderance of a rural population and substantially greater prevalence
rates for more visible conditions, such as locomotor and visual impairments, than less
visible conditions, such as learning and developmental disabilities. An acute scarcity
of identification and screening services in rural areas hardly helps (ADB, 2002; Rao &
Reddy, 2004).
Kalyanpur (2008a) has suggested that these discrepancies are the result of problematic definitions that emerge from the medical model and that identify deviations from
developmental milestones rather than on common understandings and perceptions of
disability. For instance, although people are identified as being disabled if they have less
than 40% functioning, no guidelines for identifying this functional level are provided.
Also, because of the social stigma, many people will not admit having a family member
with a disability, which could result in an undercount. Because of traditional discriminatory attitudes against females, often girls in northern and western India are consistently
undernourished, resulting in mild levels of developmental delay. However, they may not
be perceived as being mentally retarded within the collective perceptions of their communities (Sen, 2005). Similarly, Pai (2002) found that village children in Maharashtra
with mild mental retardation and hearing impairments, which did not prevent them
from earning an income for the family, were not perceived as disabled.
A MOU N T O F E DUC AT ION A L I N T EG R AT ION
India has made a commitment to inclusive education, and the term has gained popularity
in government documents and school systems (Kalyanpur, 2008b; Singal, 2006b).
Inclusion, however, has different interpretations, and the focus is mostly on ensuring that
children with disabilities are within the educational system. As a result, all educational
settings, including special schools, are considered inclusive.
Children with disabilities receive educational services through both the government
and the nongovernment regular and special schools. As mentioned before, the two major
government initiativesDPEP and SSAtarget children with disabilities. As a result,
the number of children with disabilities in the regular school system exceeds the number
in special schools. Of all 5- to 14-year-old students with disabilities who have access to
10/14/11 5:45 PM
202

schooling, 94.5% are in regular schools and 5.7% are in special schools (World Bank,
2007). Under the DPEP, more than 600,000 children with special needs have been
enrolled in regular schools (World Bank, 2007). However, the primary focus of this
program is on the identification of disabilities and distribution of aids and appliances
rather than educational inclusion (Singal, 2006b). On the other hand, the SSA program
was launched in 2003 with the specific purpose of implementing the governments platform for EFA. It targets all children between the ages of 6 to 14 years, including children
with special needs, and offers schools cash grants of up to Rs.1,200 (about US$26) per
child per year (World Bank, 2007).
Despite government programs, children with disabilities are five and a half times more
likely to be out of school than their nondisabled peers and about four times more when
compared to the scheduled caste or Dalit population (World Bank, 2007). Most disconcertingly, as overall attendance rates increase, children with disabilities have begun to
account for greater proportions of out-of-school children. In other words, children with
disabilities are the last group of out-of-school children who are able to access school.
Dimensions of the Provision of Equal Access

In the 1990s, the government enacted three disability-related legislations (see Kalyanpur,
2008b, for a more comprehensive analysis). Responding to the need for capacity building,
the 1992 Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI) Act established the RCI as a statutory body
mandating minimum teacher certification standards in special education and rehabilitation (Misra, 2000). The Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of
Rights and Full Participation) (PWD) Act of 1995 and the National Trust (for the Welfare
of Persons With Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation, and Multiple Disabilities)
Act of 1999 followed. The 1995 PWD Act mandates yearly screenings for disabilities and
access to a free education in an appropriate environment for every disabled child. The
1999 National Trust Act provides for the constitution of a central body, the National
Trust, to enable people with disabilities to live within their communities and develops
procedures for appointing a guardian or trustee in the event of a parents death. The
recently enacted Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 is
the first nondisability-focused legislation that delineates children with disabilities as a
separate category from other disadvantaged groups. Table 3 provides a summary of this
legislation.
At the ministerial level, the 2006 National Policy for Persons With Disabilities and the
Action Plan for Inclusion in Education of Children and Youth With Disabilities (IECYD)
have sought to ensure that when children with disabilities are placed in inclusive settings,
existing physical infrastructures and teaching methodologies are modified to meet their
needs. The policy expands coverage in rural and unserved areas, mandating 3% coverage
of persons with disabilities in poverty-reduction programs. The action plan also provides
for in- and preservice training in disability and inclusive education to regular education
and preschool (anganwadi) teachers through collaboration with the Rehabilitation
Council and the National Council for Teacher Education. It recommends that some special
schools convert to resource centers for teacher training and materials while others
remain as special schools, providing children with severe intellectual or multiple
disabilities with home-based services.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
203
Table 3. Legislation
Law
Rehabilitation Council
of India Act, 1992
The Persons With
Disabilities (Equal
Opportunities,
Protection of Rights
and Full Participation)
Act, 1995
National Trust (for the
Welfare of Persons With
Autism, Cerebral Palsy,
Mental Retardation, and
Multiple Disabilities)
Act, 1999
Right of Children to
Free and Compulsory
Education Act, 2009
Mandate
Sets minimum standards for teacher training and
certification for professionals in the field of special
education and rehabilitation
Provides education in appropriate environment,
public awareness campaigns, 3% reservation quota in
employment, accessibility features in buildings, transport
and other public services, and the appointment of a
disability commissioner in each state to safeguard the
rights of people with disabilities
Provides the constitution of a central body, the National
Trust, to enable people with a disability to live within
their communities by extending need-based services for
families in crisis (including respite care, foster family care
or day care, residential hostels, and homes), developing
procedures for appointing a guardian or trustee in the
event of a parents death, and establishing self-help groups
Reiterates the governments promise of a childs right to
free education of equitable quality, espousing the idea
of rights within the culturally responsive framework
social justice and collective advocacy. Specifies practical
modifications, such as modified textbooks and barrier-free
school buildings
ROL E S O F PA R E N T G ROU P S
Over the years, the role of parent groups has become increasingly prominent. Similar
to parent groups in the United States, the initial objectives were to provide services for
their children. Most parent groups, therefore, were established around special schools
and, as the children grew up, expanded to workshops and similar vocational options. In
the absence of government intervention, many parent groups provided training courses
for teachers and became clearinghouses for disseminating information about services.
In 1994, several parent associations consolidated to form a National Federation of
Parents Associations called Parivaar (or family), which has since become a major force
in advocating on behalf of children with disabilities and their families. For instance,
Parivaar played a pivotal role in lobbying for the enactment of the 1999 Family Trust
Act (J. P. Gadkari, president, Parivaar, personal communication, March 8, 2010). While
this act mandates specific services, such as the provision of a guardianship arrangement,
it does not mandate any parental rights, such as equal partnerships with professionals,
as explicitly provided, for instance, through the Individuals With Disabilities Act for
parents in the United States.
On an individual level, the level of parent involvement and empowerment tends to
depend on the parents socioeconomic status and, even more so, on the willingness of
the professionals to engage with them. While many private schools do encourage participation in classrooms, fundraising, and cultural events, most government schools do
10/14/11 5:45 PM
204

not have an open door policy where parents can have easy access to the principal or
teachers (Jambunathan & Caulfield, 2008). Typical parentteacher relationships can be
characterized as formal and bound by hierarchy and distance (Kalyanpur & Gowramma,
2007; Misra, 2000). Many parents are so grateful that their child is given the opportunity
to go to school that they hesitate to question or make demands, fearing removal or
retribution.
On the whole, the lack of a milieu of parental rights has forced parents, and particularly
mothers, to develop their own networks and strategies toward participating in their
childs rehabilitative care and education. Middle-class parents, who constitute the
majority of the members of parents groups, tend to use the Internet to access information and to network and are more likely to be permitted by professionals to be part of the
educational process (Kalyanpur & Gowramma, 2007; Mukhopadhyaya, 2003; Rao, 2006).
On the other hand, although specific agencies have made efforts to increase low-income
parents participation by providing training in the belief that parents are a childs second
teacher, most low-income families tend to be disenfranchised from this process (Rao,
Narayan, & Mani, 2005).
DI F F E R E NC E S A N D VA R I AT ION S I N OPP ORT U N I T Y

A N D I N AC C E S S
In a situation where there is an overall dearth of services and most children with disabilities
do not go to school, the question of variation of opportunity and access by level or type of
disability, location, gender, or other social factors is almost moot. However, there are differences worth considering, always keeping in mind that the disadvantage is relative. For
instance, negative attitudes about people with disabilities still abound and are strongest
against people with intellectual impairments and females (Rao et al., 2005).
Although a majority of the population, including children with disabilities, lives in
rural areas, most voluntary agencies set up special schools in urban areas. Catering
primarily to middle-class parents at first, they charged fees. As a result, educational
services were inaccessible to poor children with disabilities and those living in rural
areas. Although this has eased somewhat with government intervention and with more
voluntary agencies targeting disadvantaged communities, only 1% of children with
disabilities in rural areas are enrolled in school as compared to 11% in urban areas
(World Bank, 2007).
The general school system is characterized by a highly structured, rigid curriculum,
delivered in a lecture format to large groups of students even from the very early grades.
In 2006, teacher pupil ratios were 1:36 in elementary schools and 1:49 in primary schools
(Chauhan, 2009). Four-year-olds in private preschools are expected to read and be able
to spell four- and five-letter words, add and subtract, and start learning Hindi as a second
language. Expectations increase in higher grades. Students must memorize large
amounts of information, and the emphasis is on preparing them for national exams
taken at predetermined grade levels.
Such practices do not lend themselves to individualization of teaching strategies,
materials, or assessment practices. As a result, those who are less able are not only unsuccessful and ignored but also unable to vocalize their needs within a school culture that
10/14/11 5:45 PM
205
expects unquestioning attention, conformity, and respect and discourages any opposition
to teaching practices.
The government has taken measures to mandate modifications in national examinations for students with learning difficulties, but private schools are not required to comply
with these regulations, nor are these measures adequate for the day-to-day accommodations from which such students could benefit. Government requirements on the medium
of instruction also place students with language difficulties in the almost impossible
situation of mastering three languages to complete their education (Kalyanpur &
Gowramma, 2007; Thirumurthy & Jayaraman, 2007). All these factors are intensified
when one realizes that the choice for those children with disabilities who are able to
attend school is not whether to attend a special or inclusive regular school but between
no school or a regular school with little or no support (Singal, 2009).
Enrollment and completion rates for girls drop steeply at secondary levels (ASER,
2010), severely limiting their access to vocational options. This situation becomes more
acute for girls with disabilities because of their additional vulnerability. For instance, a
study of South Indian middle-class families with adolescent daughters (Kalyanpur &
Gowramma, 2007) found that parents worried about allowing the girls to work in places
where other employees are male and often developed employment options within the
family support network that provided the protection they sought. The burden of a young
adult daughter with disabilities is more keenly felt by low-income families who lack access
to financial resources and support systems.
In many developing countries, such as India, development of special education services
and an increase in disability awareness has resulted in patterns paradoxical, even
opposite, to those in developed countries such as the United States. For instance, even
as mainstreaming became more widespread in the United States in the 1970s with the
number of special schools gradually decreasing over time, in India the growth of special
schools was just beginning. Although there has been a movement toward inclusion in
India, this has not reduced the number of special schools. Similarly, in the United States,
large numbers of children are labeled as learning disabled, accounting for about half
the population of children with disabilities. Physical disabilities, such as visual and
motor impairments, are low-incidence categories. In India, however, it is precisely the
more visible disabilities, such as visual and motor impairments, which account for more
than half the population of children with disabilities. Children with developmental
disabilities, particularly at mild levels, and learning difficulties, tend to remain
underidentified.
There are 158 million children in India between birth and 6 years of age, constituting
42% of the total population (Census of India, 2001). More than two-thirds of children
live without basic amenities and with little or no access to services that foster growth and
development. One-third of babies are born with low birth weight (International Institute
for Population Sciences, 20052006). Approximately 2.6 million children younger than
5 years die each year; girls are 50% more likely to die (Government of India, Ministry of
Health and Family Welfare, 2005). About 50% of children younger than 5 years of age
10/14/11 5:45 PM
206

are moderately to severely malnourished. Deficiencies of key vitamins and minerals in
pregnant women and babies results in long-term morbidity.
In a constitutional amendment, the government committed to providing early
childhood care and education for all children younger than 6 years. Other legislation for
those younger than 6 years includes prevention of female feticide, promotion of breastfeeding, growth and development of children with disabilities, and provision of day care
through crches for women laborers (Sharma, Sen, & Gulati, 2008). Although the Right
to Education Act of 2009 recognizes children with disabilities and includes accessibility
provisions, it does not include children younger than 6 years.
The Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) program, launched in 1975, is the
largest government-sponsored program globally, with anganwadis across 5,885 administrative units, each with a population between 80,000 to 120,000. The program takes a
holistic approach, targeting the health, nutrition, and education of young children. Beneficiaries have shown better outcomes, including lower infant mortality rate, better
nutritional status, and higher completion rates in educational progress than the general
population (Government of India, Ministry of Women and Child Development [MoWCD],
2007a). However, the program does not specifically target children with disabilities (Alur,
2002b), and studies indicate that they are poorly represented among its beneficiaries.
Wide variations in quality of services and their implementation have been noted within
and across states (National Institute of Public Cooperation and Child Development,
2006). In response, at the midterm assessment of the 10th Five-Year Plan (Planning
Commission, 2005), the decision was made to universalize ICDS coverage by 2012 by
expanding day care and crche facilities.
The nongovernmental sector also provides early childhood services. Private agencies
tend to focus on kindergartens and preparatory schools that cater to socially well-off
families. Admission is highly competitive and not easily accessible to children with disabilities. Voluntary agencies work in rural areas or cater to disadvantaged communities.
Put together, these agencies cover only 57% of children between 3 and 6 years and 21%
of the entire birth to 6 age range (MoWCD, 2007b).
The National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT) has outlined
a developmentally appropriate curriculum for early childhood education (NCERT,
2005). Yet, in reality there are wide interstate variations in delivery of education and
programming for young children.
Teacher training programs vary in terms of requirements, duration, quality, content,
and practical experiences. There is no oversight for accountability, accreditation, or
maintenance of quality indicators of appropriate early childhood development
(NCERT, 2006). ICDS workers receive a 26-day training course that does not include a
practice component (Datta, 2001). Voluntary agencies typically include on-the-job
training specific to their needs but these programs are not regulated or rigorous.
Universities offer 2-year accredited early childhood programs; however, they can only
prepare about 6,000 teachers, far short of meeting national demand. Across the
country, 20 states do not have any recognized preschool preparation institutions
(National Council for Teacher Education [NCTE], 2005). There is little incentive for
teachers to seek professional development because they are poorly paid and there is no
accountability (NCTE, 2005).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
207
Poor teacher preparation in early childhood practices has resulted in developmentally

inappropriate instruction being delivered in a rigid and regimented fashion with an
emphasis on teaching to admission tests at the next level and little encouragement for
creative expression. For instance, in their study of 21 early childhood classrooms in a
southern city, Jambunathan and Caulfield (2008) found high pupilteacher ratios of
20:1 and rows of desks in classrooms that lacked resources, materials, supplies, and
stimulating manipulatives.
E DUC AT ION A L PL AC E M E N T
As discussed in previous sections, the limited numbers of special schools, mostly located
in urban areas, accommodate a very small percentage of students with disabilities. While
many students with disabilities are in regular schools, these tend to be children with disabilities that require minimal curricular modifications. For instance, students with motor
impairments (37%) and students with visual impairments (18%) account for 55% of all
children with disabilities in elementary schools; students who are mentally challenged
(15%), students with speech impediments (13%), and students with hearing disabilities
(10%) constitute only 38% of this population (National University of Educational
Planning and Administration, 2007). Indeed, scholars have asserted that government
commitment to the inclusion of children with disabilities (through SSA) is mere rhetoric
and not reflected in programmatic reality (Alur & Bach, 2010; Raver, 2001; Singal, 2005).
For instance, many SSA schools are physically inaccessible to students with disabilities
and lack a systematic method of referral and assessment. Attendance and enrollment
rates are dismal (World Bank, 2007). Implementation of effective teaching practices is
inadequate (SSA, 2007).
Teacher Attitudes
Studies of teacher attitudes toward the inclusion of children with disabilities have found
that although teachers express acceptance of children with disabilities, they lack confidence in their skills and the quality of support for inclusive education (Singal, 2006a).
In general and more significantly, teachers did not consider the learning outcomes of
students with disabilities as their responsibility. As a result, the educational needs of the
students remained the responsibility of the resource or special education teacher, if
there was one, or the parent.
It is disheartening that the resource teacher to student ratio currently is 1:182 instead
of the recommended 1:8 (MSJE, 2006). A survey of 310 government primary schools in
New Delhi revealed that parental support and a philosophy of philanthropy in the school
were strong predictors of principals willingness to admit students with disabilities
(Sharma, 2001). The teachers in this study expressed dissatisfaction with the administrations management of inclusion without their input and the lack of resources and were
concerned about their workload within the reality of large class sizes and other responsibilities. Still, most teachers had made no changes in their teaching on the grounds that
the students had only physical disabilities. Only a few teachers had modified the physical
arrangement of the classroom and were willing to give the student with disabilities extra
attention and time by soliciting peer helpers.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
208

Singal (2006b) has suggested that efforts by teachers to accommodate students with
disabilities are based on feelings of pity, kindness, and sympathy. Finally, when asked
about their classroom experiences, 62.5% of students with disabilities in a study (Soni,
2004, cited in Chauhan, 2009) felt their teachers were positive and spent extra time
with them, but not one said he or she was allowed or encouraged to answer questions
in class.
Pedagogical Approaches and Availability of Resources

Regular education teachers perceptions that students with disabilities included in their
classrooms were the responsibility of the special education teacher could be attributed
in large part to the notable absence of collaboration between regular and special education teachers. Indeed, the prevalent perceptions among special educators themselves are
that students who cannot adhere to the general education classroom requirements must
be taught in a special school and that the needs of students with disabilities can be best
met in special settings (Rao, Cheng, & Narain, 2003). This is hardly helped by the fact
that best practices for inclusion such as collaboration, social acceptance, differentiated
curriculum, materials, and assessment are limited to intellectual discussions in teacher
training programs that often use western textbooks (Misra, 2000).
Support services such as speech, physical, and occupational therapy are far too scarce
to meet the demands of individual students with disabilities (Raver, 2001). The dearth is
even more apparent in government schools. In principle, several government programs
include the provision of assistive technology. For instance, the SSA program offers free
transportation as well as assistive devices for visual, hearing, orthopedic, and intellectual
disabilities, such as braille machines, white canes, hearing aids, and thick pens, and has
allocated Rs.500 rupees [about US$10] to teachers who develop low-cost teaching and
learning materials. However, studies indicate that, for several reasons, only 25% of
students with disabilities were using aids and appliances (Singal, 2009; Thomas, 2005).
Access to rehabilitative services tends to be concentrated in urban areas. The devices
that are available are often difficult or expensive to repair and maintain. As well, inadequate policy dissemination means that people are often unaware of programs providing
free aids and appliances: A survey found that 72.3% of households with disabilities had
no knowledge of the government program for distribution of free assistive devices (World
Bank, 2007). As a result of government corruption, assistive technologies in reality get
rationed instead of being distributed as a right for those with disabilities (World Bank,
2007). Some individuals have to bribe officials to receive these free devices. Finally,
inadequate infrastructure is a factor; for example, ramps built in 500,000 schools were
found to have poor surface and angle construction and wheelchairs were not designed to
suit the undulating, unpaved, and stony surfaces of rural roads (SSA, 2007).
Parental Attitudes
Many variations exist in parental attitudes based on demographics and access to
resources. In general, given limited access to reliable diagnoses and guidance, many
parents feel helpless and overwhelmed by their childs disability (Misra, 2000). Parents
from poor backgrounds may believe that the disability is a result of past misdeeds
(karma), fate, or the mothers fault (Misra, 2000). The societal stigma associated with
10/14/11 5:45 PM
209
disability, such as negative prospects for an arranged marriage of their other children
(Alur & Bach, 2010) or school rejection (Thirumurthy & Jayaraman, 2007), often results
in parents becoming socially isolated. This, in turn, prevents them from disclosing
information about their childs special needs to teachers or seeking appropriate interventions for their children. Some parents believe and accept that their child should
not be educated in a regular school. However, when given a choice between special
and inclusive schooling, most do choose inclusive classrooms (Alur, 2002b). Many
parents are willing to invest in the education of their child with a disability, despite the
number of educated, unemployed youth in the country, out of necessity to reduce their
dependency on others (World Bank, 2007).
Two government-established institutions, the NCERT and the NCTE, are responsible
for research, curriculum development, and training in regular education nationwide.
A separate organization, the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI), regulates and
monitors teacher preparation in special education. While six government-established
national institutes prepare personnel through long-term diploma or degree programs
to teach individuals in disability-specific categories (visual impairments, hearing impairments, orthopedic impairments, mental retardation, traumatic injuries, and multiple
disabilities), the RCI also accredits certificate and diploma training courses offered by
nongovernment voluntary agencies, many of which are considerably shorter than those
offered at the national institutes.
Because of this institutional dichotomy, the regular education teacher training
curriculum does not include a disability component, resulting in a dismal lack of preparation of general education teachers about inclusion or disability in general (Alur &
Bach, 2010). In 2006, the IECYD Action Plan sought to address this omission by requiring
that the RCI and NCTE collaborate to provide in- and preservice training on disability
and inclusive education to regular education teachers as well as to anganwadi workers in
the ICDS program.
However, critics of teacher training programs suggest that, in general, the preparation
of special and regular education teachers in inclusive education is inadequate. First,
most courses offer theoretical knowledge but no opportunities for practical experiences.
As a result, teachers emerge from this training lacking confidence in their ability to
include children with disabilities in their classrooms or even the conviction that students
with disabilities can be included in the general education classrooms (Abdul &
Muhammed, 2009). Second, the different lengths of training contribute to wide variations in the quality of teacher training programs. For example, under the SSA program,
teacher training ranges from 1 to 5 days or 45 to 90 days. The 1- to 5-day training is considered to be an orientation as it is very basic and merely covers issues of identification
and management (Singal, 2009). However, less than 0.2% of all SSA teachers undergo
the longer 45- to 90-day training (World Bank, 2007). It does not help that most government teachers are poorly educated to begin with, have little to no contact with technology
and science, and that the majority of undertrained teachers are deployed to work in
rural areas in poor, deprived schools (Govinda & Bandyopadhyay, 2008).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
210

In a comparative study of progress in the education sector between 1986 when the
government launched the National Policy on Education and Program of Action and
2006 at the mid-term review of the SSA/EFA program, Chauhan (2009) concludes that
the Government has made concerted efforts to enhance access of children to schools
(p. 234). For instance, in the 6 years between 2000 and 2006, the percentage increase of
23% in the number of elementary schools constructed was almost as high as the increase
of 27.6% during the period between 1985 and 2000. Further, 91% of primary and 87%
of elementary schools are located in rural areas. As a result, the net enrollment ratio is
84.5% at the primary level and 50% at upper primary level, with girls constituting 48%
of the total enrollment at elementary level. Despite this massive expansion, Chauhan
(2009) notes that 16% of children aged 6 to 11 years and about 50% of those aged 11 to
14 years are still not in school. Disparities based on caste, gender, and wealth persist. For
instance, dropout rates for girls, poor children, and children in rural areas have been
consistently greater than for their counterparts.
Children with disabilities, especially girls, are prioritized target beneficiaries for the
EFA program. Certainly, the many disability-specific activities, including offering free
assistive devices and transportation to students with disabilities and training teachers in
inclusive education, have contributed toward an overall increase in the number of
children with disabilities in school in India. However, more than half a century after
independence, the progress in absolute numbers is small (World Bank, 2007). Children
with disabilities were found to be the last group of out-of-school children to be included
in schools even in states with high enrollment rates overall, such as Kerala. Girls with
disabilities, poor children with disabilities, and children with disabilities in rural areas
are doubly disadvantaged.
The most pressing issue facing India now is ensuring that its population is educated.
Research has shown that education is strongly correlated to economic development,
which, in turn, reduces population pressures. As families begin to recognize the longterm dividends of an education, they become more willing to invest in childrens
education and will have fewer children to ensure this (Chauhan, 2009; Sen, 2005).
The education of women and girls, in particular, is the indicator that shows this
correlation the most strongly (Sen, 2005). For children with disabilities, there is the
auxiliary need to provide access to affordable health services, particularly in the areas of
prevention and early detection, to reduce the long-term impact of the impairment. Because
of the cyclical nature of this process, there are concerns that current population growth
trends might make the goal of an educated and healthy population impossible to achieve.
Barriers to the inclusion of children with disabilities are tied inextricably to this larger
context (Miles & Singal, 2010; Thirumurthy & Jayaraman, 2007; World Bank, 2007). This
section examines the most significant barriers: the parallel structures of service delivery,
differing definitions of inclusion and disability, and inadequate teacher training, leading
to poor quality of inclusive education.
Parallel Structures of Service Delivery

The parallel structures within the educational system are major barriers to progress
toward the inclusion of children with disabilities, particularly given the context of limited
10/14/11 5:45 PM
211
resources. Two different ministries, the Ministry of Human Resource Development

(MHRD) and the MSJE, deal with regular education and special education, respectively,
resulting in fragmentation and dualism. For example, MSJE regulates teacher training for
special education through the Rehabilitation Council and MHRD does this for general
educators through their departments of special education and inclusive education.
This affects uniformity in preparation of teachers for inclusive education and feeds the
perception of separation of special education (Alur & Bach, 2010).
The dichotomy is further exacerbated by NGOs, which, in contributing to the education
of students with disabilities, have also created a dual system and harmed inclusion efforts.
By continuing to teach students in segregated environments, NGOs perpetuate the charity
view of disability rather than the human rights perspective. They also reduce governmental
initiative and urgency to integrate students with disabilities (Alur & Bach, 2010).
Differing Meanings of Inclusion and Disability

These parallel structures in service delivery relate to another major barrier to inclusion:
the differing interpretations of the meaning. Researchers in the field have asserted
that the Indian government has adopted the concept of inclusion more to conform
to international donor requirements than with a clear understanding of its meaning
(Kalyanpur, 2008a; Singal, 2005). As a result of the belief that just providing an education
to traditionally excluded groups, such as children with disabilities, is a major step toward
including them, inclusion in India has come to mean a mlange of styles that incorporates all options, from regular classroom placement to special schools. Despite the initial
vision of the early IECYD plan of children with disabilities attending neighborhood
schools, the current SSA/EFA program has allowed special schools to flourish, through
both government and voluntary agencies, as part of the effort toward inclusion. The pervasiveness of this problem is seen in the contradictory mandates of the two legislations.
While the PWD Act promotes inclusion, the National Trust Act promotes segregation
with its requirement that facilities for individuals with disabilities include residential
hostels and homes (Singal, 2005).
This loose interpretation of inclusion has also impacted the defi nitions of disabilities.
Both less inclusive, medical models of impairments and more inclusive, biopsychosocial
models are used. As a result, data on prevalence rates vary depending upon the source
used. For example, the 2001 National Census data showed people with disabilities as
being 2.13% of the population, the 2003 NSSO data yielded a prevalence rate of 1.8%,
while alternative sources estimate greater incidence rates of 4 to 8% (World Bank, 2007).
School-based records point to further discrepancies in the number of children with disabilities (Alur & Bach, 2010).
Inadequate Teacher Training and Quality of Inclusive Education

With the governments attempt to respond to inadequate infrastructure by building more
schools, the debate has moved toward the issue of quality of education. The acute teacher
shortage means that, instead of the promised three teachers per school, many schools
function as single-teacher schools, resulting in high pupilteacher ratios. To offset this
problem, untrained teachers are increasingly appointed locally on a contractual basis
(Chauhan, 2009; Mehrotra & Panchamukhi, 2006).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
212

The bottleneck for placement in secondary and higher education means that private
schools have become increasingly selective about who they admit, and teachers at all
grade levels are under tremendous pressure to teach to the test and adhere to the
curriculum. As a result, there is little motivation to adapt to diversity, differences, and
disabilities. Further, teaching students with disabilities is not considered socially prestigious. There are low salaries and poor working conditions, so few individuals opt for this
as a career.
Differences in the quality of education based on medium of instruction have created
what Sinha (2007) refers to as a system of hidden apartheid where schools, instead of
nurturing equity and social justice and fostering inclusive democracy, actually reinforce
class differentiation and foster social exclusion. Children with disabilities have even less
opportunity to participate in such a scenario, particularly if they happen also to be poor
and female.
FUTUR E TR ENDS
Perhaps it will be a long time before existing inequities of caste and class, wealth, and
gender that affect school-age children, and children with disabilities in particular, are
no longer a part of the rich tapestry of a diverse India. Efforts toward this goal, already
begun, must not stop. A primary and imperative need is building a cohesive structure
for service delivery. There are three aspects that this cohesive structure should focus on:
mobilizing coordinated action from key stakeholders, including government and nongovernment agencies as well as parents; standardizing teacher training; and adopting a
multifaceted approach with the convergence of health and education.
C O OR DI N AT E D AC T ION A MONG K E Y S TA K E HOL DE R S

There needs to be a clearly articulated and widely understood common meaning of
inclusion. The discourse necessary for the clarification of inclusion will inevitably lead
to reflection and meaningful insights into what direction India wants to take in meeting the needs of her disabled population. Leaders in the field need to answer questions,
such as the following: Is inclusion synonymous with best practice in the Indian context?
If best practices for inclusion are currently debated and researched in developed nations
with little consensus or uniformity regarding who is included or how services are provided, then how will the populous nation of India implement this philosophy? What
means can be used to dispel the societal notion that students with disabilities must be
taught in separate schools and are a drain on meager resources, especially in a society
where vocational opportunities for individuals with disabilities are almost nonexistent
and competition for others to get ahead is intense? Can a shift in traditional paradigms
of teaching and learning within the school system that require a fundamental change in
the Indian school culture be achieved to facilitate inclusion?
Most significantly, policymakers and professionals alike must understand that, for
long-term sustainability, both public and private sectors have to be equally involved
instead of expecting the government to take on the entire responsibility. In this context,
Alur and Bach (2010) suggest the need for collaboration between the private and public
sectors and urge NGOs to provide training, offer resources, and take an active advocacy
10/14/11 5:45 PM
213
role in inclusion. With greater cross-fertilization of ideas, government district-based

models to provide inclusion can be better supported to replicate successful practices and
implement effective monitoring and evaluation systems.
Similarly, empowered and educated parents can be instrumental in moving the
disability agenda forward. They can be key players in perpetuating the human rights
philosophy and in mobilizing a dramatic shift from karma and charity-based beliefs.
Parents in India often sacrifice personal gains for their children and are important
sources to tap as partners in the inclusion process and as resources to teachers.
Standardized Teacher Training

Inclusion is recommended as the only financially viable way to educate the large numbers
of students with disabilities. Radical and systemic changes are required not only in the
methods of curriculum delivery and resources but in the philosophy, beliefs, and values
of educators. Administrators will need to create an environment of acceptance of diversity and responsibility toward all children, irrespective of ability. Efforts toward inclusion
will require a modification in current teaching and assessment practices resulting in
innovative, creative thinking, and overall improvement in teaching and learning.
National teacher training institutes must establish an inclusive curriculum that instills
the notion of education for all among teachers and an understanding of social justice.
Universities must expand their training programs and provide incentives for higher
education in the field of special education. Teachers must receive training in the use of
differentiated teaching practices and be prepared to collaborate with special educators.
Trained professionals must be given incentives to go to rural areas. Collaboration
between special schools run by voluntary agencies and government-run regular schools
will also dispel the segregationist attitude toward education of those with disabilities.
Special schools could offer specialized services such as occupational and speech therapy
to children in inclusive classrooms and serve as resource centers while maintaining
responsibility for serving students with more severe disabilities.
Converging Health and Education Services

There is an urgent need for early identification and better assessment tools and practices
to meet student needs. Community-based centers that currently exist to offer free
medical clinics could include screening and referral for disabilities administered by
workers trained in the use of locally developed instruments. Information about disabilities in easy-to-understand language must be readily available and disseminated through
government, medical, and educational agencies. This could also involve including a
special education component in training programs for medical and related professionals
such as doctors, nurses, therapists, and social workers. Developing a systematic referral
process for provision of services from identification of disability to admission to school is
crucial. If village health workers, anganwadi teachers, parents, and primary schoolteachers know what resources are available and how to tap into them, it could help to ensure
that students with disabilities receive all necessary supports, aids, and appliances.
The laudable goal of EFA requires mobilization of resources and efforts through
collective monitoring and commitment of all those who believe in building better futures
for millions of Indias children with disabilities. The status of this group as the most
marginalized, underserved, and voiceless must change.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
214

R E F E R E NC E S
Abdul, G. K., & Muhammed, A. P. (2009). Inclusive education: Does the regular teacher education
programme make a difference in knowledge and attitudes? Paper presented at the International Conference on Education, Research, and Innovation for Inclusive Societies,
Andra Pradesh, India.
Alur, M. (2002a). Special needs policy in India. In M. Alur & S. Hegarty (Eds.), Education and
children with special needs: From segregation to inclusion (pp. 5166). New Delhi: Sage.
Alur, M. (2002b). They did not figure: Policy exclusion of disabled people in India.
Alur, M., & Bach, M. (2010). The journey for inclusive education in the Indian sub-continent. New
York: Routledge.
Annual State of Education Report. (2010). Annual status of education report, 2009. New Delhi:
Pratham.
Asian Development Bank (ASB). (2002). Identifying disability issues related to poverty reduction:
India country study. Manila, Philippines: Author.
Balagopalan, S. (2002). Constructing indigenous childhoods: Colonialism, vocational
education, and the working child. Childhood: Journal of Child Research, 9, 1934.
Census of India. (2001). Census. New Delhi: Office of the Registrar General of India.
Chadha, A. (2005). NGO initiatives in inclusion: The SSA experience. New Delhi: Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan.
Chauhan, C. P. S. (2009). Education for all in India: A second look. International Journal of
Lifelong Education, 28, 227240.
Datta, V. (2001). A study of urban early childhood programmesA project sponsored by UNICEF.
Mumbai: Tata Institute of Social Sciences.
Department of School Education and Literacy. (2005). Education guarantee scheme and alternative
and innovation education. Retrieved from http://education.nic.in/edu_guarantee_sch
/edu_guarantee_back.asp.
Government of India. (2007). Selected educational statistics, 20042005. New Delhi: Department
of Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development.
Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. (2005). Annual Report,
200405. New Delhi: Author.
Government of India, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (MSJE). (2006). National
policy for persons with disabilities. New Delhi: Author.
Government of India, Ministry of Women and Child Development (MoWCD). (2007a). Report
of working group on development of children for the eleventh five year plan (20072012). New
Delhi: Author.
Government of India, Ministry of Women and Child Development (MoWCD). (2007b).
ICDS-IV Project. IDA assisted: 200809 to 201213: A hand book. New Delhi: Author.
Govinda, R., & Bandyopadhyay, M. (2008). Access to elementary education in India: Country
analytical review. Sussex, UK: Consortium for Research on Educational Access, Transition, and Equity.
Ilaiah, K. (2007). What kind of education do Dalit-bahujan children need? In A. Kaushik
(Ed.), Shiksha: The challenge of Indian education (pp. 5158). New Delhi: Tehelka Press.
International Institute for Population Sciences. (2000). National Family Health Survey
(NFHS-2), 199899. Mumbai: Author.
International Institute for Population Sciences. (20052006). National fact sheet India
(Provisional data): National Family Health Survey 3. Mumbai: Author.
Jambunathan, S., & Caulfield, M. (2008). Developmentally appropriate practices in Asian
Indian early childhood classrooms. Early Child Development and Care, 178, 251258.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
215
Kalyanpur, M. (2008a). Equality, quality, and quantity: Challenges in inclusive education

policy and service provision in India. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12,
243263.
Kalyanpur, M. (2008b). The paradox of majority under-representation in special education in
India: Constructions of difference in a developing country. Journal of Special Education,
42, 5564.
Kalyanpur, M., & Gowramma, I. P. (2007). Cultural barriers to South Indian families access
to services and educational goals for their children with disabilities. Journal of the
International Association of Special Education, 8, 6982.
Kaushik, A. (2007). Introduction: Completing the elusive triangle. In A. Kaushik (Ed.),
Shiksha: The challenge of Indian education (pp. 1520). New Delhi: Tehelka Press.
Library of Congress. (2004). Country profile: India. Federal Research Division. Retrieved from
http://memory.loc.gov/frd/cs/profiles/India.pdf.
Mehrotra, S. (2005). The economics of elementary education in India: The challenge of public finance,
private provision, and household costs. New Delhi: Sage.
Mehrotra, S., & Panchamukhi, P. R. (2006). Private provision of elementary education in
India: Findings of a survey in eight states. Compare, 36, 421442.
Miles, S., & Singal, N. (2010). The Education for All and inclusive education debate: Conflict,
contradiction, or opportunity? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14, 115.
Misra, A. (2000). Special education in India: Current status and future directions. Journal of
International Special Education Services, 3, 611.
Mukhopadhyaya, T. R. (2003). The mind tree: A miraculous child through the silence of autism.
New York: Arcade.
Nambisson, G. B. (2000). Dealing with deprivation. Seminar, 493, 5055.
National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). (2005). Seventh All-India
Educational Survey, provisional statistics as on September 30, 2002. New Delhi: Author.
National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). (2006). National curricular
framework, 2005; Position paper: National focus group on early childhood education. New Delhi:
Author.
National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE). (2005). Annual report, 200405. New Delhi:
Author.
National Institute of Public Cooperation and Child Development. (2006). Three decades of
ICDS: An appraisal. New Delhi: Author.
National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO). (2003). Disabled persons in India, NSS 58th
round (JulyDecember 2002). New Delhi: Government of India.
National University of Education Planning and Administration. (2007). Elementary education
in India: Progress toward UEE. Flash statistics. District Information System for Education
data, 20052006. New Delhi: Author.
Pai, M. (2002). Integrating disability concerns in primary education: The Maharashtra
experience. In M. Alur & S. Hegarty (Eds.), Education and children with special needs: From
segregation to inclusion (pp. 104110). New Delhi: Sage.
Patel, V. (2003, June 30). A cultural deficit. India Together. Retrieved from http://www
.indiatogether.org/2003/aug/wom-sexratio.htm.
Pinto, P. E., & Sahu, N. (2001). Working with persons with disabilities: An Indian perspective. Buffalo,
NY: Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information and Exchange.
Planning Commission. (2005). Midterm appraisal of the Tenth Five-Year Plan. New Delhi:
Government of India.
Polgreen, L. (2010, June 28). Right-to-know law gives Indias poor a much-needed lever.
The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/29/world
/asia/29india.html.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
216

Ramaswamy, G. (2005). India stinking: Manual scavengers in Andhra Pradesh and their work.
Pondicherry, TN: Navayana.
Rao, L. G., Narayan, J., & Mani, M. N. G. (2005). Status of education of children with disabilities.
Secunderabad, India: National Institute for the Mentally Handicapped.
Rao, L. G., & Reddy, S. H. K. (2004). Organizational aspects of special schools for mental
retardation in India. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 27, 127133.
Rao, N., Cheng, K.-M., & Narain, K. (2003). Primary schooling in China and India:
Understanding how socio-contextual factors moderate the role of the state. International Review of Education, 49, 153176.
Rao, S. (2006). Parameters of normality and cultural constructions of mental retardation:
Perspectives of Bengali families. Disability and Society, 21, 159178.
Raver, S. A. (2001). India: Training teachers for children with mental retardation. International
Journal of Special Education, 16, 1623.
Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. (2007). Inclusive education in SSA. Retrieved from 164.100.51.121
/inclusive-education/Inclusive_Edu_May07.pdf.
Sen, A. (2005). Women and men. In A. Sen (Ed.), The argumentative Indian (pp. 220250).
New York: Giroux, Farrar & Strauss.
Sharma, A., Sen, R. S., & Gulati R. (2008). Early childhood development policy and
programming in India: Critical issues and directions for paradigm change. International
Journal of Early Childhood, 40, 6582.
Sharma, U. (2001). The attitudes and concerns of school principals and teachers regarding
the integration of students with disabilities into regular schools in Delhi, India.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Melbourne.
Singal, N. (2005). Mapping the field of inclusive education: A review of the Indian literature.
Singal, N. (2006a). Inclusive education in India: International concept, national interpretation.
International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 53, 351369.
Singal, N. (2006b). An ecosystemic approach for understanding inclusive education: An
Indian case study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 21, 239252.
Singal, N. (2010). Education of children with disabilities in India. In UNESCO, EFA global
monitoring report: Reaching the marginalized. Paris: UNESCO.
Sinha, S. (2007). Childrens right to education and democratization of schools. In A. Kaushik
(Ed.), Shiksha: The challenge of Indian education (pp. 3340). New Delhi: Tehelka Press.
Thirumurthy, V., & Jayaraman, B. (2007). Special education in India at the crossroads.
Childhood Education, 83, 380384.
Thomas, P. (2005). Mainstreaming disability in development: India country report. Retrieved
from
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTSARREGTOPLABSOCPRO/1211714
-1144074285477/20873614/IndiaReportDFID.pdf.
United Nations Childrens Fund. (2004). Mapping Indias children: UNICEF in action. New
Delhi: Author.
United Nations Development Programme. (2009). Overcoming barriers: Human mobility and
development (Human Development Report). New York: Author.
Varma, P. (2007). We need to go back to the drawing board. In A. Kaushik (Ed.), Shiksha: The
challenge of Indian education (pp. 4150). New Delhi: Tehelka Press.
World Bank. (2007). People with disabilities in India: From commitments to outcomes. New Delhi:
Human Development Unit, South Asia Region.
Yardley, J. (2010, July 9). In India, the story of castes, honor and killings intertwine. New York
Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
11
Making the Invisibles
Visible: Special Education
in Pakistan
Mah Nazir Riaz
Pakistan came into existence on August 14, 1947, after a struggle for independence from
British rule led by Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. The two Muslim majority wings
in the eastern and northwestern regions of the Indo-Pak subcontinent are made up of
East Pakistan and West Pakistan, separated by 1,600 kilometers of Indian territory and
incompatible linguistic and cultural differences.
Since gaining independence, Pakistans history has been characterized by periods of
military rule, political instability, and armed conflicts with neighboring India. Moreover,
economic grievances and political dissent in East Pakistan led to violent political tension
and military action to restore peace in the region that escalated into a civil war. After 9
months of guerrilla warfare between the Pakistan army and the Indian-backed Bengali
militia, Indian intervention led to the Indo-Pakistan war in 1971 and ultimately to the
cessation of East Pakistan as an independent state that instead became Bangladesh.
Pakistan is a federation of four provinces, a capital territory, and a group of federally
administered tribal areas. The government of Pakistan exercises de facto jurisdiction
over the western parts of the disputed Kashmir region, organized as two separate political entities: Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. There are currently 113 districts in
Pakistan proper, each with several tehsils (administrative divisions) and union councils.
The tribal areas comprise seven tribal agencies and six small frontier regions detached
from neighboring districts. Azad Kashmir comprises ten and Gilgit-Baltistan seven
districts, respectively.
With a population of more than 170 million, Pakistan is the sixth most populous country in the world. Pakistan is rated as a low-income countryit ranks 65th among 102
developing nations. The Human Development Index (HDI), which was 0.34 in 1975,
increased to 0.539 in 2006. However, this improvement has been quite slow, and most of
Pakistans social and development indicators appear to be quite low compared to other
similar developing countries. Pakistan was ranked 134 in the year 2006.
Despite Pakistans slow growth, its gross domestic product (GDP) has increased. But
public spending in the social sector as a whole is less than 0.5% of the GDP. Little funding
is allocated for health, education, housing, water supply, sanitation, and gender equality.
Over the past decade, the structure of Pakistans economy has changed from a mainly
agricultural base to a strong service base. At present, agriculture accounts for only 20%
of the GDP, whereas the service sector accounts for 53%. Also, significant foreign investments have been made in areas such as telecommunications, real estate, and energy.
217
10/14/11 5:45 PM
218
Mah Nazir Riaz

Other important industries include food processing, iron and steel, and apparel and
textiles, which account for approximately 60% of exports.
Pakistan is a democratic, parliamentary, federal republic with Islam as the state religion.
Thus, the social and political role of Islam is of fundamental importance in Pakistan. It
exercises a very strong influence on shaping not only our social and religious values but
also Muslims cultural traditions, including social institutions, beliefs, and ceremonials
(Baluch, 1965). It was indeed the religion of Islam that provided the basis for the creation of an independent Muslim state, which enabled Muslims to ordain their lives freely
on the tenets of Islam (Ahmad, 1982). Islam has a pervasive influence not only on daily
activities such as diet, marriage, customs, education, and the celebration of festivals but
also on the formulation and implementation of the policies of the government.
According to Islamic principles, education is compulsory for every man and woman.
Almost every religion preaches nondiscrimination on the basis of color, sex, economic
and social status, and physical disability (Qureshi, 2003). Islam also emphasizes universal kinship and the quality of humankind. The prejudice against education, especially as expressed by the Taliban in Swat and other parts of Khyber Pukhtoon Khawa,
is erroneously attributed to Islam. Moreover, contrary to Western propaganda, Islam
has given equal status to men and women. Islam allows women economic independence and the right to get an education, to participate in social life, and to work outside the home. Women have the right to approve their spouse, to seek divorce, and to
remarry if divorced or widowed. The Holy Quran (the Divine Book of Muslims) says
the following:
O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female and made you into races and tribes,
so that you may identify one another. Surely the noblest of you, in Allahs sight, is the one who is
most pious of you. Surely Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware.
(Surah Al-Hujrat 49: Ayeh 13)
The Noble Quran
Pakistani society comprises four major ethnic and language groups, namely, Pathans,
Punjabis, Balochi, and Sindhi, who live in four different provinces of Pakistan. Pakistan
is a multilingual country with more than 60 languages spoken. The official language of
Pakistan is English, whereas the national language is Urdu. Each province has its own provincial language, such as Punjabi and Saraiki (Punjab); Pashto (Kahyber Pakhtunkhwa);
Sindhi (Sindh); and Balochi (Balochistan).
More than 50% of Pakistanis are literate. The literacy rate has gradually increased
during the last 6 decades. If we compare the overall literacy rate in the country from
1951 to 2009, we find an increase from 16.47% in 1951 to 57% in 2009. The literacy rates
vary regionally, particularly by sex. For the male population, the rate increased from
19.2% to 57%; for females, it increased from 12.2% to 45%. An estimate of the literacy
rate in 2009 revealed that it ranges from 87% in Islamabad to 22% in tribal areas, where
the female literacy rate is 7.5%.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Making the Invisibles Visible
219
Education in Pakistan is divided into 5 levels. These are primary (grades 15); middle
(grades 68); high (grades 910), leading to a secondary school certificate; intermediate
(grades 1112), leading to a higher secondary school certificate (HSSC); and university
education, leading to graduate and advanced degrees.
After earning the HSSC, students may enroll in a professional college, where they can
pursue a bachelors degree in engineering (BEng), medicine (MBBS), dentistry (BDS),
or law (LLB), for example, or study for a Bachelor of Arts (BA), Bachelor of Science
(BSc), Bachelor of Commerce (BCom), or Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA).
A masters degree requires 2 years of study beyond a bachelors degree. Several universities
in Pakistan offer the MPhil/PhD degree in selected fields and require extensive research
in an area of specialization.
At the time of independence, Pakistan had only one university. Now there are 132
universities, including 59 in the private sector. There are also 730 technical and vocational institutions in the country. From 1947 to 2003, not a single university in Pakistan
was ranked in the top 600 universities of the world. Today, 5 Pakistani universities belong
to this prestigious group. In the field of natural sciences, the progress has been even
more remarkable: The University of Karachi is now 223 in rank; the National University
of Science and Technology, 260; and Quaid-e-Azam University, 270. About 445,000 university graduates and 10,000 computer science graduates are turned out every year by
Pakistani universities.
In Pakistan a large number of educational institutions called madrassahs provide
Islamic education and offer free boarding and lodging to students who come mainly
from poor families. Besides these, several private schools offer a parallel secondary
school education system based upon the curriculum that prepares students for the
Cambridge International Examinations. Students who opt for this system take the
ordinary-level (O) and advanced-level (A) examinations through the British Council.
The number of educational institutions in the country (see Table 1) is based on information in Pakistan Education Statistics (Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education,
20072008). Presently, in the public sector there are 146,603 primary schools in Pakistan,
together with 9,989 informal mosque schools that educate children who range from 5 to
9 years of age. There are 17,250 primary schools in the private sector.
There are vast provincial disparities in rates of enrollment. They are highest in the
urban areas of the province of Punjab (53%); in the rural areas of Balochistan, they are
lowest (10%). The school dropout rates are alarmingly high in rural schools, especially
among girls. Thus, girls education is far behind that of boys, and this gender gap appears
to be markedly large when Pakistan is compared with neighboring countries in South Asia.
The establishment and management of schools is the responsibility of provincial
governments. Due to inadequate funding, almost 60% schools in Pakistan lack basic
facilities and equipment, such as benches, desks, blackboards, and laboratories. Most of
the schools are overcrowded, and, in some cases, the classrooms accommodate students
from different grades (multigrade classrooms).
In most educational institutions in the private sector, the medium of instruction is
English. Over a period of time this will be extended to all schools across the country. In
10/14/11 5:45 PM
10/14/11 5:45 PM
2
828
4,624
1,222
2,209
236
149
265
9,535
Boys
Total
492
867
20,756
15,055
12,381
1,309
562
932
52,354
Source: Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education (20072008).
Pakistan (Level)
Preprimary
Mosque
Primary
Middle
High
Higher Sec.
Inter College
Degree College
Total
Urban
Girls
Mixed
8
482
12
27
4,913
11,219
1,328
12,505
1,859
8,313
296
777
180
233
438
229
9,034
33,785
Table 1. Number of Educational Institutions in Pakistan

Boys
10
8,893
51,514
6,668
4,975
449
65
121
72,695
Rural
Girls
Mixed
32
281
71
158
41,227
33,106
6,703
12,403
2,442
4,166
369
305
95
59
101
48
51,040
50,526
Total
323
9,122
125,847
25,774
11,583
1,123
219
270
174,261
Boys
12
9,721
56,138
7,890
7,184
685
214
386
82,230
Total
Girls
40
83
46,140
8,031
4,301
665
275
539
60,074
Mixed
763
185
44,325
24,908
12,479
1,082
292
277
84,311
221
fact, the use of English is increasing in Pakistan very rapidly; it is estimated that 18
million Pakistanis have a command of the English language. This makes Pakistan the
ninth largest English-speaking country in the world and the third largest in Asia.
The regular education system of government schools in Pakistan functions independently of the special school system. A similar pattern is seen in private schools. Pakistan
has some inclusive schools, but they are mainly located in big cities and run by the private
sector. Most of these schools are not accessible to children with disabilities who live in
remote rural areas. Besides, fearing social stigmatization, the parents themselves are not
willing to send their special child to school. Sometimes principals or teachers refuse to
accept a child with a moderate disability due to limited facilities. Hence, distance, lack of
transportation, and other problems make it difficult for children with disabilities to
attend and avail themselves of the existing facilities in a specific area.

The history of special education in Pakistan is older than that of Pakistan itself. The first
school for children with disabilities was established in Lahore in 1906. Still, only a few
educational institutions were educating these children when the partition of the IndoPak subcontinent occurred in 1947 (see Aqila, 2003).
The need to establish schools for special education was placed on the government
agenda for the first time by a national commission on education in 1959. The commission recommended both the provision of vocational education for children and adults
with mental retardation and the training of teachers for the education of persons with
handicaps. The education policy of 1972 allocated specific funds for special education.
During the next 2 decades, the government recognized the need to pay special attention
to the problems of persons with handicaps. Consequently, the budget allocation was
enhanced. This initiative on the part of the government led to the establishment of more
than 200 special education schools that enrolled more than 20,000 children.
Further rapid developments in special education truly began in 1980, when the United
Nations declared 1981 as the International Year of Disabled Persons. For the first time,
the systematic care of persons with disabilities was brought into focus in Pakistan. The
movement gained political support, and unlimited financial resources were available for
special education during the Zia-ul-Haq regime. The late president, General Zia-ul-Haq,
invited several experts in the field of special education from the United States, Great
Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Japan, Egypt, Jordan, and Kuwait for consultation
(Sultana, 1993). The government of Pakistan also sent educationists, administrators, and
medical doctors to foreign countries to gain knowledge and equip themselves with the
skills needed for the education, treatment, and rehabilitation of persons with disabilities. The federal government also initiated various education programs around the
country.
In 1985 the Directorate General of Special Education (DGSE) was established as a
part of the Ministry of Health, Special Education, and Social Welfare. Initially, the DGSE
devised programs for the education of persons with special needs (DGSE, 1986). However,
these efforts were soon expanded to include early detection, treatment, and rehabilitation facilities. Consequently, a network of special education institutions was established
10/14/11 5:45 PM
222
Mah Nazir Riaz

throughout Pakistan between 1983 and 1988 for all of the 4 major disability groups (i.e.,
blindness, deafness, physical handicaps, and mental retardation) (Riaz, 1994). Almost
all of these institutions were established at the divisional headquarters and in big cities,
including Islamabad, Azad Kashmir, and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas
(FATA).
Legislation and Policy

The National Policy for Persons With Disabilities (Government of Pakistan, 2002)
was approved by the DGSE in October 2002 and launched in Lahore in June 2003.
Its objectives are the optimal development of persons with disabilities in all walks
of life, especially with regard to health, education, and social, economic, and vocational needs. The overall mission is to provideby 2025an environment that
will facilitate the optimal realization of the potential of persons with disabilities;
this will be accomplished by inclusive mainstreaming and providing them the support of the government, the private sector, and civil society. Keeping in view our
Islamic teachings, these facilities will be provided to all persons with disabilities
regardless of caste, creed, religion, gender, or other considerations for the realization of their full potential. Specific objectives include the integration of persons
with disabilities into all spheres of lifesocial, economic, personal, and political.
Moreover, their involvement in planning and implementing educational, training,
and rehabilitation programs for themselves, their families, and their communities will ensure that they are able to enjoy their rights and opportunities in the
same way as other Pakistani citizens. Persons with disabilities are to have equal
opportunities and access to education; medical, social, and psychological services;
vocational training; and employment and rehabilitation without discrimination.
Legislation relating to the employment and rehabilitation of persons with disabilities is to be adequately formulated and strictly enforced.
The National Plan of Action (NPA) (Government of Pakistan, 2006) was designed
to implement the National Policy for Persons with Disabilities of 2002. The plan
was prepared in 2006 after consultation with individuals and groups, NGOs, and
private-sector stakeholders at the federal and provincial levels. The NPA focused
on action to be taken over the following 5 years, although the recommendations
were made up to the year 2025.
For the implementation of the National Policy for Persons With Disabilities, databanks
on disability will be established at the federal, provincial, and district levels and will
include statistics on causes, types, and frequencies of disabilities, as well as available
services and programs. The time frame set for this task was July 2007 on, and the data
were to be disseminated by posting on the Internet from January 2008 on. It was also
decided that early child development will be included in the curriculum of paramedical,
nursing, and medical colleges from July 2009 on. All provincial headquarters, including Islamabad, have been declared disability-friendly cities that will provide barrier-free
10/14/11 5:45 PM
223
environments, including those for sports and recreation, for persons with disabilities.
In the national policy the government has also included the establishment of parks for
persons with disabilities.
In addition, the National Plan of Action recommends the provision of inclusive, costeffective educational opportunities to all children with moderate and mild disabilities
from kindergarten through tenth grade. As all regular schools must make provision for
children with special needs, amendments in textbooks and methodologies were suggested
in their curricula. It was further proposed that the existing teacher-training curricula at
all levels must incorporate inclusive education as an integral component from January
2007 on. Inclusive schooling is discussed later in more detail.
Current Special Education

At present, a network of federal, provincial, and NGO-based institutions provides
education to almost 4% of the total population of children with special needs in Pakistan.
As Table 2 shows, the Directorate of Special Education has established 1,063 institutions
exclusively for the education of children with special needs. Currently, children with
severe disabilities are admitted to special schools after examination by an admission
committee consisting of principal, vice principal, and technical staff (e.g., physiotherapist, speech therapist, audiologist, medical officer).
The basic objective of all of these schools and institutes is to provide individually planned
and systematically monitored teaching and training facilities that address learners individual requirements. To achieve this goal, all equipment and educational materials are
adapted to the childrens needs in order to help them attain a higher level of self-sufficiency
and success at school and in the community than would be possible if they were placed in
typical classrooms. Furthermore, changes are required in teaching practices and the
curriculum, and supplementary equipment, teaching aids, and specialized physical
arrangements that facilitate the students optimal participation are needed.
The success of programs begins with an assessment of the specific strengths and limitations of each special child. For example, if an assessment shows that a student cannot
write by hand due to a physical disability, then, if resources permit, the school authorities
may provide a personal computer for typing school assignments or at least permit the
student to answer questions orally. Similarly, a child who easily gets distracted in a large,
busy classroom may be placed in a smaller classroom such as a resource room. Special
education programs for children who have developmental disorders must focus on what
is necessary for the students to know and what they are capable of learning.
The DGSE has also developed several projects throughout Pakistan for the education,
welfare, and rehabilitation of persons with special needs. For instance, all individuals
with disabilities who are capable of benefitting from vocational training are provided
training opportunities at vocational training centers established at Islamabad, Lahore,
Karachi, Quetta, and Peshawar. These centers, which are well equipped with the latest
machinery and other equipment, offer 2-year certificate courses in different trades.
Another special program is the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment for Disabled
Persons (VREDP) plan, which was launched in 1992 with financial and technical assistance from the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the International
Labour Organization.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Gender
AJK
Balochistan
Boys
201
540
Girls
111
184
Total
312
724
Teaching Staff
Male
10
18
Female
36
44
Total
46
62
Distribution of Organizations by Disability
Hearing impairment
6
5,140
Mental retardation
3
4,103
Visual impairment
1
4,129
Physical disability
4
566
Multiple disabilities
0
1,598
Total
14
19
Distribution by Types of Service
Education
4
9
Guidance and
2
7
counseling
Vocational training
1
8
Sports and recreation
1
8
Assessment
3
7
Rehabilitation
5
4
Therapeutic services
5
2
Early identification
1
0
Northern Area
129
86
215
13
21
34
11
8
12
10
1
42
11
11
10
9
6
12
9
7
Capital
594
489
1,083
24
108
132
15
14
15
19
14
77
20
20
14
13
18
24
16
11
51
49
41
44
25
22
58
46
22
17
15
28
11
93
235
205
440
NWFP
2,912
1,067
3,979
145
138
99
99
89
46
242
128
160
140
103
129
66
598
462
1,143
1,605
Punjab
11,084
7,100
18,184
Table 2. Facilities and Services Available in Pakistan for Persons with Disabilities (Distribution by Province)
63
72
90
46
72
46
79
85
48
67
25
53
27
220
163
510
673
Sindh
2,353
1,380
3,733
292
290
264
234
218
133
723
299
267
253
175
248
120
1,063
925
2,067
2,992
Total
17,813
10,417
28,230
10/14/11 5:45 PM
5
7
4
8
1
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
Source: Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education (20072008).
Media/Alternative
medicine
Community services
Prevention
Social uplift/
Empowerment
Employment
Outreach program
Old-age benefits
9
8
3
13
11
10
13
5
6
4
6
7
7
12
10
4
25
22
21
25
42
21
7
41
31
32
44
30
39
6
39
47
38
39
99
88
25
131
122
116
133
226
Mah Nazir Riaz
The Population to Be Served

In the first decade of this century, several international movements have developed a
number of conventions and agreements concerning the empowerment of persons with
disabilities. These trends have led the Pakistani government to participate actively in the
global movement for the betterment of people with disabilities. Consequently, the first
ever National Policy for Persons with Disabilities was formulated in 2002 (Government of
Pakistan, 2002). It aimed to provide information about the number of persons with disabilities in Pakistan based upon the World Health Organizations (WHO) estimates of
10% of the population and upon more detailed information provided by Pakistani-based
studies, including the National Census of 1998. This report indicated that the total
population of Pakistan is 132,352,279 (68,873,686 males and 63,478,593 females). These
numbers included 3,293,155 reported persons with disabilities. This is a low estimate of
2.49% of the total population.
Etiologies of Disabilities
Persons with disabilities include all those with any of the following types of disabilities
or combinations thereof: autism, deafness, hearing impairments, blindness/visual
impairment, mental retardation, multiple disabilities, orthopedic impairments, serious
emotional disturbances, specific learning disabilities, and speech or language impairments. In the following paragraphs we present the etiology of the normative disabilities
with particular reference to the situation in Pakistan. Note that at present there is a
constant increase in disabilities due to malnutrition and disease, environmental hazards,
natural disasters, traffic and industrial accidents, suicide attacks, and various forms of
aggression in society.
Visual impairment. Out of 40 million blind people around the world, about 80%
live in developing countries. The World Health Organization estimates that cataracts, glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration, trachoma, corneal opacity,
and diabetic retinopathy are the most prevalent causes of visual impairment. Add
to these disease, malnutrition, and lack of awareness about possible treatment.
However, 7080% of blind people can have their vision restored by medication,
laser treatment, or surgery.
Hearing impairment and deafness may be congenital or acquired. The more common acquired hearing impairments may result from premature birth, anoxia,
rubella, syphilis, or certain other infections during pregnancy. Some infectious
childhood diseases such as meningitis, measles, mumps, and chronic ear infection are also culprits. Aging is the most significant cause of hearing impairment.
Children who have at least one deaf parent or a close relative who is deaf are at
high risk of congenital hearing impairment or deafness.
Mental retardation. There are 4 levels of mental retardation: mild, moderate,
severe, and profound. Several other disorders may be associated with mental
retardation, including epilepsy, cerebral palsy, vision and hearing impairments,
speech/language problems, and behavioral problems. Some abnormal genes
10/14/11 5:45 PM
227
cause mental retardation whenever they are present and when the same abnormal
gene is inherited from both parents. In Pakistan and many other Muslim countries, marriages between cousins are quite common. Consequently, if both
spouses carry the same abnormal gene, it is much more likely that some of their
children will inherit this abnormal gene from both parents, resulting in a disability. Parents should think carefully before arranging marriages between cousins.
Physical disabilities affect not only ones mobility but perhaps also ones capability
for verbal and nonverbal communication. For instance, cerebral palsy, muscular dystrophy, and facial burns limit facial expression and can thus affect communication.
Detection of Disabilities
For children born in hospitals, a disability such as Down syndrome may be identified
at birth and the parents informed about the probable handicap. Numerous hospitals
in Pakistan have facilities to assess the nature and severity of such disabilities during
infancy. However, most children in Pakistan are not born in hospitals. Home deliveries
assisted by traditional (often untrained) midwives known for their experience are preferred, especially in rural areas, due to lack of financial resources and transportation, as
well as fear of hospitals. Most women believe that hospital personnel are less caring and
concerned than midwives. As a result, the detection of disabilities is delayed, sometimes
indefinitely.
Visual and hearing impairments are usually diagnosed later. In Pakistan, the pediatric
departments of most hospitals are well equipped with appropriate diagnostic facilities
for these disabilities.
The labeling of the population with disabilities is usually the function of medical
specialists and psychologists. However, we have a serious problem in the intellectual
assessment of children. Currently, not a single educational institution in Pakistan is
equipped to carry out intellectual assessments. Consequently, children with low intelligence or who are borderline cases further deteriorate because their parents ridicule
them, teachers blame the parents for not taking an interest in their childs studies, and
the children lag behind others in academic achievement.
Types and Number of Special Schools

According to a directory prepared by DGSE (2006), special education schools in Pakistan
provide education from primary through high school. Some of these schools are for
girls, some are for boys, and others are coeducational. The medium of instruction in
most of the schools is Urdu, the national language of Pakistan, although some schools
use English.
The number of students enrolled in each center varies widely and ranges from 10 to
250. There are 97 centers for children with hearing impairment; 54 special schools for
children with visual impairment; 40 centers for children with physical disabilities; and 42
schools exclusively for children with mental retardation. The remaining institutions provide services to students with more than one disability.
All of these institutions work under the supervision of directors; principals, vice principals, and multiprofessional teams comprising teachers, medical officers, audiologists,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
228
Mah Nazir Riaz

physiotherapists, social case workers, braille experts, mobility instructors, and vocational
teachers. These institutions provide facilities for education, treatment, training, parental counseling, and the rehabilitation of children/persons with disabilities. The professionals focus their efforts on making their clients self-reliant members of society.
Educational Placement
Depending on the type of disability, children are enrolled in the relevant institutes for
education, training, and rehabilitation. In this section we provide an overview of the special education centers working under the Directorate General of Special Education.
In the centers for children with visual impairment, both specialized and conventional
teaching methods are used. Specialized methods include braille books, talking books,
low-vision aids, closed-circuit TV, and magnifiers. Most of these centers provide education
up to the primary level. A few provide education up to the secondary school certificate
level.
The centers for children with hearing impairment carry out assessments and provide
speech therapy aimed at adequate communication ability and skills. Guidance and counseling services are provided to children and their parents. Special education up to the
primary level is provided in all of these centers; higher classes are also arranged in a few
centers. Education is in accordance with a specially designed syllabus based on communication techniques consisting of speech development, lipreading skills, and sign
language.
The centers for children with mental retardation provide special education to develop
perceptual, social, and communication skills. There is no formal methodology; rather,
individualized curriculum planning (ICP) programs promote and modify the behavior
of these children by using toys, pictures, and audiovisual aids. Specially designed checklists help to assess social and general behavior, as well as work-related behavior and the
learners reading and writing skills. These centers also provide prevocational training.
The centers for children with physical handicaps provide education, medical checkups, and physiotherapy services. Virtually the same syllabus is followed as that in schools
for children without such handicaps. For example, children are given training in arts
and crafts to prepare them for vocational training and rehabilitation. The exception is
children with cerebral palsy, for whom a special curriculum has been developed.
Most of the educational institutions for persons with disabilities provide all or some of
the following services:
Prevention. Although the prevention of disabilities is largely the domain of medical personnel, psychologists, social workers, and family counselors, educational
services play a crucial role through research and training. The educational institutions in Pakistan are striving to achieve this objective by including courses of
studies in health, education, and child development aimed at the provision of
information about the prevention of disabilities.
Detection. An effective diagnostic system is a prerequisite for the development
and implementation of preventive and intervention strategies. Children who are
diagnosed soon after birth and receive appropriate intervention and family support usually experience greater success than those whose diagnosis is delayed.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
229
Disabilities in infants born in hospitals are easily detected, and the concerned
medical specialists provide treatment for the children and guidance for the parents in the initial stages.
Intervention. Children with moderate or severe impairments are referred to a
multi-professional team for intervention strategies.
Counseling. Parents and children with disabilities are provided counseling services
for healthy mental growth and development of self-reliance. Counselors educate
parents and teachers so that they can develop a positive attitude toward children
with handicaps.
Attitudes
The attitude of society toward persons with disabilities is generally positive in Pakistan
and is more favorable in rural areas than in urban areas. However, people generally lack
knowledge about the capabilities of persons with disabilities, resulting in a low profile for
this population, together with several misconceptions and negative attitudes.
People may hold superstitious beliefs about persons with disabilities. For instance,
some Pakistanis believe that having a child with mental retardation is a curse on the family or an expression of divine wrath. Others attribute it to sinful acts of the parents. Some
illiterate people call persons with mental retardation Allah waley, which implies that such
persons are pious and innocent and possess supernatural powers. They believe that their
blessings can alleviate the ills and misfortunes of those who approach them for this purpose. On the other hand, many people in our society call people with mental retardation
pagal or lawanaity (persons with mental illness).
Many parents are not willing to disclose a childs disability due to the social stigma
attached to these persons. Parents are especially concerned that the marriage prospects
of their children without a disability may be adversely affected if they are suspected of
being carriers of defective genes.
Many poor and uneducated families consider a child with a mental or physical disability as a lifetime moral and financial burden and a source of social stigmatization. Sometimes they abandon a male child at a shrine or shelter, where he remains vulnerable to
abuse (Mumtaz, 2008). On the other hand, girls with mental retardation are confined
within the four walls of a room and thus are practically isolated from the family. Consequently, these children are cut off from their siblings and have no opportunities for
education, employment, or social activities.
A familys educational background and financial resources play a crucial role in shaping the personality of a child with any kind of physical or mental disability. Families who
are well educated, wealthy, and broadminded usually have a positive attitude. They perceive their special child as equal to other children and express their love and affection
without being influenced by social prejudices. They invest time, money, and energy to
provide the necessary treatment and assistance to help the child surmount challenges.
Empirical studies have revealed variations in the perceptions and attitudes of children, parents, teachers, administrators, the media, and society at large toward disability.
Differences in attitudes and viewpoints have also been reported between urban and
rural populations, between educated and illiterate individuals, and according to the
10/14/11 5:45 PM
230
Mah Nazir Riaz

type of disability. For example, when Noor and Khokhar (2000) looked at children with
physical disabilities studying in ordinary schools, they reported that the respondents
seemed satisfied with the positive attitude of administrators and teachers and with their
level of participation in the classroom. The main problem these children reported was
their difficulty in moving in the school buildings. Hussain and Javed (1997) reported
that the inclusion of children with hearing impairment in regular classroom is acceptable to many educationists in Pakistan. Wahid and Ishfaq (2000) found that university
teachers believe that, with training, children with hearing impairments can develop
appropriate reading, writing, mathematical, social, and vocational skills.
Other studies reveal that children with disabilities prefer to study with other children,
though they are not sure whether they are capable of pursuing their education in such
an educational setting, especially in view of the reactions and attitudes of other children
toward their disability. Hayat (1994) reported that most children with disabilities seem
eager to study in regular schools, where they can study and play with other children.
These young students believe that such an approach will aid their academic achievement
and remove the stigma associated with their disability. However, they are concerned
about being teased by other children. Similar findings were reported by Batool and
Mehmood (2000) about children with visual disabilities.
Inclusive Schooling
Inclusive education differs from earlier approaches that concentrated mainly on
disability and special education needs. Inclusive education addresses the rights of
children to participate and the schools duty to accept them. It rejects the segregation or exclusion of learners and maximizes their participation in community schools.
Inclusive education calls for a restructuring of policies, curricula, and the teaching
practices followed in schools and all other learning environments to meet childrens
diverse learning needs. In other words, the schools and other centers of learning must
become caring, nurturing, and supporting institutions that meet the needs of all students and teachers.
Inclusive education is a new concept in Pakistan. Currently, debates are ongoing
regarding the promotion of inclusive education. Two recent declarations are of particular interest.
The Islamabad Declaration on Inclusive Education (Ministry of Social Welfare and
Special Education, 2005) resulted from a national consultation on inclusive education
held at Islamabad in April of 2005. The federal, provincial, and district governments,
educational institutions, schools, parents, religious institutions, NGOs, organizations of
persons with disabilities, the donor community, the business community, and society at
large were urged to ensure that all childrenregardless of gender, abilities, disabilities,
and socioeconomic, cultural, and ethnic backgroundbe treated with dignity and
respect and have equal access to education, health services, work, and all other aspects
of life. It was recommended that Pakistan develop inclusive environments on all levels of
the mainstream public and private education system throughout Pakistan and eliminate
barriers to participation in all public places.
The Islamabad Declaration on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities followed the
2005 declaration (Government of Pakistan, 2009). It emerged after the leaders of
10/14/11 5:45 PM
231
organizations of persons with disabilities from all of the provinces of Pakistan and
Azad Jammu and Kashmir, senior officials from the DGSE, universities, students, the
corporate sector, print media, legislators, international NGOs, and professional bodies
assembled for a conference in August 2009. The participants agreed that the term
persons with disabilities will be used instead of disabled persons in all communications to
highlight the importance of human beings rather than the impairment. Furthermore,
persons with disabilities will be provided access to the same range of services, opportunities, and facilities that are provided to other citizens of Pakistan. Easy access will
be considered in designing new buildings, parks, housing developments, and public
places.
Those who advocate inclusive education believe that the government cannot achieve
its goal of education for all until all of its policies take into account the 10% of children
with mild and severe disabilities. Supporters argue that inclusion in mainstream schooling
is an appropriate way to provide education for all children by bringing support services
to the child rather than moving the child to the support services. Furthermore, it is more
expensive to set up special schools than to train existing teachers and provide learning
aids for children with disabilities in regular schools. Construction of ramps and classroom rearrangement can be accomplished within a limited budget. Parents and other
decision makers largely champion inclusive education if professional support and financial resources for the improvement of schools are made available.
In Pakistan, opponents of inclusive education believe that the professionals responsible for formulating the policies are mostly international experts who are not fully aware
of the situation prevailing in our country. They believe that efforts directed toward the
introduction of inclusive education are practically impossible. The majority of policy
makers and consultants working at the federal level in special education indicate that
they are not in favor of initiating inclusive education in Pakistan. They believe that the
idea of inclusive education is alien to and impractical in Pakistan. Some concerned
groups are also afraid that inclusive education may upset the current special education
setup: They prefer to protect the current special education system. Some people argue
that, without community awareness, teacher training, and appropriate courses, it is not
practical to adopt inclusive education. Even when parents, teachers, administrators, and
professionals seem to be aware of the concept of inclusive education, they are not sure
how to implement it in ordinary schools and are uncertain of its impact on schools and
children.
Inclusion in Practice
A few schools are making serious efforts to create an inclusive environment through
experimentation with various approaches. They provide access to existing schools to
children with special needs; keep children with special needs within regular schools
(although in separate classrooms); and support schools with multigrade inclusive classrooms. However, most schools in Pakistan are overcrowded and poorly equipped. The
pedagogical method used largely emphasizes learning by rote. Very few schools address
childrens individual learning needs. Many schools still use corporal punishment.
The private sector is willing to cater to needs of children with disabilities and seems to
be actively striving to expand and improve educational services. Some private schools
10/14/11 5:45 PM
232
Mah Nazir Riaz

have begun incorporating inclusive education. Often these schools are spacious and
financially sound and have good physical and instructional facilities.
A number of problems exist. For one thing, inclusive schools that demonstrate good
practices in Pakistan are restricted to big cities in the private sector. Most of these schools
are not accessible to children with disabilities living in remote rural areas. Too, in big
cities such as Lahore and Karachi, there are professionals, though limited in number,
who offer individualized education programs (IEP) for children with special needs. The
IEPs are designed to meet the needs of individual students. However, these programs are
very expensive, and the financial resources of the majority of parents are insufficient to
allow them to take advantage of this service.
Teacher Training
To provide sufficient numbers of special education personnel, the government of
Pakistan in 1986 established the National Institute of Special Education (NISE). The
organizations main objectives are to devise programs that train educators who cater to
the needs of persons with special needs; organize both short- and long-term training
courses for teachers who work in special education centers; establish collaborative links
with educational institutions, universities, and international agencies to train such professionals; organize national and international seminars; undertake research on the
problems of children with disabilities; and prepare materials to guide the parents and
teachers of children with special needs.
Relevant courses are often organized in collaboration with international agencies such
as the British Council, UNESCO, UNICEF, WHO, Cumberland University, the Norwegian
Association of the Blind and Partially Sighted, Sight Savers International, the World
Bank, Braillo Norway, NIFEM, IBM, and DIANATICs, UK. In addition, NISE organizes
national and international conferences and seminars on a variety of issues related to
special education. The development of special education curricula, learning materials,
and other related materials are undertaken by NISE as well.
The National Trust for the Disabled (NTD) (Government of Pakistan, 2003) often organizes training programs and orientation courses for administrators, teachers, and other
professionals in collaboration with the NISE. The topics include classroom-management
techniques, sign language, vocational training, conductive education for teachers working
with children with cerebral palsy, mobility training for teachers working with children with
visual impairment, networking of services for children with visual impairment, Total Communication for teachers working with children with hearing impairment, IEPs for teachers,
the role of physiotherapists in the management of children with physical handicaps,
introduction and management of cerebral palsy and Down syndrome, and financial management of the centers.
The National Library and Resource Centre, established to provide relevant knowledge
and professional literature and serve as a valuable resource facility for researchers in the
field of special education, is attached to NISE. The library obtains books, journals, and
10/14/11 5:45 PM
233
videos from developed countries of the world and disseminates them to the concerned
institutes of special education for guidance and application.
I S S U E S I N T E AC H E R PR E PA R AT ION
Very few students in Pakistan pursue higher education in the field of special education.
Consequently, the majority of teachers who have specialized in various disciplines do not
possess the skills required for teaching children with special needs. To increase the number of teachers available to teach at special education institutions, it is highly desirable
that at least students of B.Ed. (Bachelor of Education/teachers training for secondary
schools) study special education as a core course to acquire some training in working
with special children. The prerequisite for admission to special education teacher training programs is a graduate degree in psychology, sociology, physical therapy, nursing,
social work, or education. These training programs are run by the Ministry of Health
separately from regular teacher training programs.
Currently, two different approaches are followed for the preparation of a teacher to
deliver educational and other services to children with special needs, namely, traditional
and nontraditional. The traditional programs consist of regular semester courses largely
offered by universities in Punjab and Karachi. Special education teachers are given an
interdisciplinary comprehensive training aimed at providing a vast theoretical knowledge base, which will enable them to integrate a variety of theories in their practice.
The nontraditional teacher training programs are offered primarily through in-service
and professional development opportunities to teachers who work in special education
institutions. In-service training is provided through short, intensive courses taught by
foreign experts, such as psychologists, physicians, speech therapists, audiologists, and
special educationists. These experts are invited mostly from England, Germany, the
Netherlands, Japan, and the United States.
ROL E S OF T H E PR I VAT E S EC T OR , PA R E N T
G ROU P S , A N D A DVO C AC Y
Private Sector
Telenor Pakistan recently launched the Khuddar Pakistan program in collaboration
with STEP (Special Talent Exchange Program) (Safwan, 2009). This program aims to
fully integrate persons with disabilities in their organization, to create awareness about
their abilities, and to help them participate fully in everyday life with the help of assistive
technologies. To achieve this objective, technology training laboratories will soon be
established in partner institutions for persons with disabilities. The program also
includes a talent hunt at schools for young cricketers with visual impairment. When a
national wheelchair cricket tournament was organized by STEP, a total of 6 teams
participated from all over the country.
The National Braille Press, established at the Special Education Centre for Visually
Impaired Children in Islamabad in 1986, was established by the Norwegian Association
10/14/11 5:45 PM
234
Mah Nazir Riaz

of the Blind and Partially Sighted for printing braille books and other teaching materials.
Textbooks and useful materials in braille are distributed to special education centers
and NGOs.
The National Mobility and Independence Training Centre in Islamabad provides free
training and guidance to persons with visual handicaps. Initially, the institution organized workshops and training courses with the help of foreign experts, but now locally
trained teachers are providing instruction to parents, teachers, paramedical staff, and
NGOs (DSGE, 2006).
Parents
The majority of parents of children with disabilities are ready to do whatever they can
to educate their child. Those who have financial resources generously donate to special
education schools. However, parents largely seem dissatisfied with the quality of education and are not completely pleased with the existing vocational training facilities in
special schools.
In order to monitor the progress of children with disabilities, all of the special education centers working under the DGSE have established parent-teacher associations. This
forum helps parents learn the skills to meet the special needs of their children and
become partners in their education and training.
Advocacy Groups
Associations of exceptional people have played a pivotal role in changing the lives of
people with special needs in Pakistan. For example, the NTD is a national-level organization responsible for initiating, executing, and coordinating plans, programs, and
projects for education, training, and rehabilitation (Government of Pakistan, 2003). The
NTD has established special education complexes around the country. In most places,
the teacher-student ratio is 1:10, which is ideal in the context of Pakistan. A specialized
teaching methodology includes the use of various aids depending on students particular
disabilities. Vocational programs are also arranged for the training and socioeconomic
rehabilitation of students with disabilities. Physiotherapy services are also available for
students and out patients.
The Role of NGOs

A number of NGOs at the local, provincial, and federal levels are working for the
rehabilitation of persons with disabilities. These NGOs, INGOs, and UN agencies have
taken several initiatives to establish a large number of schools to address the needs of
persons with disabilities. In addition, NGOs have great potential for implementing inclusive
education: Several NGOs run model special schools in every big city in Pakistan.
Political situation. Almost 3 million Afghan refugees migrated to Pakistan during
the Soviet War in Afghanistan. A huge inflow of these refugees adversely affected
the socioeconomic conditions of the country. Pakistan also had to face the
10/14/11 5:45 PM
235
devastating effects of the earthquake of 2005 and the flood of 2010. The nation
is once again confronted with a major challenge by an enemy group known as
the Taliban, whose trained suicide bombers penetrate Pakistani territory whenever their leaders want to shed the blood of innocent masses. At the same time,
drone attacks and ongoing confl icts in Swat, North and South Waziristan, and
the tribal areas have caused massive destruction of human life and damaged
the infrastructure of northwest Pakistan. The ongoing confl ict between Taliban
militants and our government had displaced more than 3 million civilians in
Pakistan as of the end of 2009. This havoc has had disastrous consequences for
our fragile economy (Saiyid, 2008). Our present political leadership does not
seem to have the vision to fi nd a practical and lasting solution to this painful
situation.
Gender. During the past 2 years, gender disparity has further increased due to the
Talibans enforcement of a complete ban on female education in the Swat district.
A large number of girls schools were shut down or blown up by the militants in the
town of Mingora (Swat). However, after military operations in the areas, several
schools were reopened.
Access. Out of a total of approximately 18 million children in Pakistan, only about
42% are enrolled in schools. Besides significant gender disparities in educational
achievement, marked variations exist between urban and rural populations and
among the different provinces of Pakistan. The government is striving hard to
improve the current status of education in the country. Through various educational reforms, the Ministry of Education expects to achieve the target of 100%
enrollment among primary schoolaged children and an 86% literacy rate among
people who are at least 10 years of age.
Inclusion. Although mainstreaming has largely replaced special institutions in
the developed countries, very little change has taken place in Pakistan regarding
inclusive education. Mainstream schools reject the admission of a child with
a disability on the grounds that the child cannot cope with academic work.
They ignore the fact that education is not just about academics but also about
inculcating social and moral values, discipline, and social interaction. Another
argument against inclusive education involves the limited infrastructure and
teaching staff to cope with the needs of children with disabilities. Our classrooms in government-run schools are often overcrowded with a teacher-student
ratio of at least 1:50.
Pedagogy. In Pakistan today, the emphasis of schoolteachers is neither on enhancing the students learning ability nor on developing their classroom participation.
Furthermore, the present school system does not provide opportunities for creative
and critical thinking. Students are expected to obey their teachers and to learn by
rote rather than develop critical thinking or participate in creative activities.
Technology. Another important issue relates to the optimal utilization of available
resources provided by the government for special education. For instance, many
10/14/11 5:45 PM
236
Mah Nazir Riaz

institutions established for persons with visual impairment have automatic braille
translation machines that can translate large amounts of important material. But
very few people know how to operate them. Consequently, they are used marginally
for translating text. For optimal utilization of such equipment, either the teachers
must be trained or trained personnel must be available in the special education
institutions.
FUTUR E TR ENDS
As full citizens of Pakistan, people with disabilities are entitled to equal rights. The
Ministry of Women Development, Social Welfare, and Special Education, is currently
streamlining its functions to meet the needs of women, children, persons with disabilities, and elderly people. Its main objective is to implement the governmental policies
and projects that address the provision of training and services for persons with disabilities and handicaps. A national task force on persons with disabilities has been set
up to design appropriate strategies in consultation with the provincial governments,
NGOs, and civil organizations working in this field. A full-fledged program to spread
awareness of the needs of people with physical challenges will be launched in the near
future.
Schools focusing on the academic, social, emotional, and physical development of all
children will be established throughout Pakistan. This initiative is based on UN conventions, the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and the Islamabad Declaration
of Inclusive Education. It is expected that the number of schools providing inclusive
education in Pakistan will increase rapidly in the near future. This movement will necessitate changes in curriculum in collaboration with the relevant agencies, provision of
specialized aids and equipment for persons with disabilities, and teacher training
programs. To strengthen such programs, it is imperative to provide diagnostic and assessment services, occupational therapy, and physiotherapy.
The use of information technology will be publicized (e.g., the use of computers for the
education and training of persons with disabilities as promoted by special education centers established by federal and provincial governments). The private sector and the general public will also be involved in this fast-expanding field. Special attention will be given
to the provision of assistive technology for the rehabilitation of persons with disabilities.
Outreach programs will be promoted for the identification of children with
disabilities, assessment of their special needs, and training of their family members in
their homes. Training facilities will also be provided for staff involved in outreach
programs.
At present, there is only a 1% quota for the employment of persons with disabilities.
Legal steps will be taken to increase the quota to 2%. Employers will be given incentives,
financial assistance, and exclusive contracts or priority production rights to promote the
employment of persons with disabilities.
Future policies concerning persons with disabilities will focus on academic and
applied research, as well as creating public awareness and an attitude of change by
presenting positive images and success stories of persons with disabilities through the
mass media.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
237
Table 3. Classification of Disabled Population by Nature of Disability

Disability
Male
Visual handicap
146,029
Hearing impairment
138,235
Physical handicap
382,262
Severe mental illness
119,645
Mental handicap
134,887
140,285
Others
857,362
Total population of persons 1,918,705
with disabilities
Female
119,369
105,448
243,523
91,209
115,297
130,166
569,438
1,374,450
Total
265,398
243,683
625,785
210,854
250,184
270,451
1426,800
3,293,155
Percentage
8.06
7.40
19.00
6.40
7.60
8.21
43.33
2.49
Source: Statistics Division (Population Census Organization), Govt. of Pakistan (Census 1998).
C L O S I NG NO T E
The development and growth of special education in Pakistan is enlightening. As a
third-world country with limited financial resources and experiencing political unrest,
constant exposure to threats from neighboring countries and the Taliban, overpopulation, and the interference of the United States in the boundaries of our country, Pakistan
has made remarkable progress in the areas of special education, teacher preparation,
and the range of services provided to persons with disabilities.
R E F E R E NC E S
Ahmad, A. 1982. Nationalism or Islam: Indo-Pakistan Episode. New York: Vantage.
Aqila, K. (2003). A historical and evaluative study of special education in Pakistan. PhD diss.,
University of Karachi, Pakistan.
Baluch, N. A. (1965). The traditional cultures in West Pakistan. In A. S. Dil (Ed.), Perspectives
on Pakistan (pp. 167202). Abbottabad: Bookservice.
Batool, T., & Mehmood, H. (2000). Attitudes of visually impaired children toward their inclusion in the schools of normal children. Masters thesis, University of the Punjab.
Government of Pakistan, Directorate General of Special Education. (2006). Facilities and
services for persons with disabilities in Pakistan. Islamabad: DGSE.
Government of Pakistan, Directorate General of Special Education. (1986). National policy for
rehabilitation of the disabled. Islamabad: DGSE.
Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education. (20072008). Pakistan education statistics.
Islamabad: Academy of Educational Planning and Management.
Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education and Social Welfare. (2009, August). Islamabad
declaration on rights of persons with disabilities. Islamabad: Sightsavers, American Institute
for Research.
Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education and Social Welfare. (2006). National plan of
action. Islamabad: DGSE.
Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Social Welfare and Special Education. (2005, April).
Islamabad Declaration on Inclusive Education. Islamabad: Braillo Norway IDP International
Development.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
238
Mah Nazir Riaz

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Social Welfare and Special Education. (2002). National
policy for persons with disabilities. Islamabad: DGSE.
Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Social Welfare and Special Education. (2003). National
trust for the disabled. Islamabad: DGSE.
Hayat, R. (1994). The attitudes of physically disabled students and their teachers towards
integration of the disabled in schools for normal children. Masters thesis, University
of the Punjab.
Hussain, B., & Javed, T. 1997. The development of a plan for mainstreaming of hearingimpaired children. Masters thesis, University of the Punjab.
Mumtaz, S. (2008, September 27). Our invisible citizens. Daily Dawn. Retrieved from http://
DAWN.com.
Noor, N., & Khokhar, S. (2000). The study of the problems faced by the physically handicapped students in the normal educational institutions. Masters thesis, University of
the Punjab.
Qureshi, M. M. (2003). Pakistan country. Paper presented at the regional workshop on a
comprehensive and integral convention on the protection and promotion of the rights
and dignity of persons with disabilities.
Riaz, M. N. 1994. Special education in Pakistan. In K. Mazurek & M. Winzer (Eds.), Comparative studies in special education (pp. 143162). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Safwan. (2009, September). Telenor Khuddar Pakistan program. Retrieved from http://www
.telenor.com.pk/cr/khuddarPakistan.php.
Saiyid, D. (2008, September 27). The threat from within. Daily Dawn. Retrieved from www
.dawn.com/2008/09/27/op.htm.
Sultana, Q. (1993, April). Special education in Pakistan. Paper presented at the Annual International Convention of the Council for Exceptional Children, San Antonio, Texas.
Wahid, Z., & Ishfaq, S. (2000). A study of the perceptions of the Punjab University teachers
about the academic capabilities of hearing-impaired children. Masters thesis, University
of the Punjab.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
12
Special Education in Rising
China: Its Developments,
Prospects, and Challenges
in the Early 21st Century
Wing-Wah Law
Since the late 20th century, the rights and education of persons with disabilities have
been important international concerns, particularly in the international human rights
movement and the Education for All Movement (United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2010; United Nations, 2006). These movements
strive to maximize the participation of all, including disabled persons, in education and
society by redistributing resources and minimizing exclusionary and discriminatory
practices (Polat, 2011).
China has responded to these movements since the 1980s through various efforts to
develop work and education opportunities for disabled persons. Responses have included
the enactment of laws to protect the rights of disabled persons, provision of rehabilitation and employment services, expansion of public special education in special schools,
special and inclusive classes in ordinary primary and junior (vocational) secondary education, and curricular reform to reduce gaps in curricula between disabled students and
regular students.
These efforts represent a step toward bringing social justice to disabled people in
Chinese society. The striving for social justice is constrained, however, by weak
enforcement of the law as well as extra-legal factors such as low education financing, lack
of support for inclusive education, inadequately trained teachers and social workers, and
a lack of parental and community involvement. Before examining the development of
and contentious issues confronting education for disabled persons, it is useful to understand the general context of Chinese special education.
T H E G E N E R A L C ON T E X T OF C H I N E S E
S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION
China has a territory of 9.6 million square kilometers. It has 33 administrative divisions,
including four municipalities (Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and Chongqing), 22 provinces,
five autonomous regions (such as Tibet and Xinjiang), and two special administrative
regions (Hong Kong and Macao). Its administrative hierarchy comprises two major
tiers: the central government and local governments. The latter is further divided into
municipal/provincial, city, county, township, and village levels.
The author would like to express gratitude to Rao Ning for his careful research assistance in the writing
of this chapter.
241
10/14/11 5:45 PM
242
Wing-Wah Law
Demographically, China is the most populous country in the world. It has 1.3 billion
people, about one-fi fth of the worlds population. China comprises 56 ethnic groups,
with Hans as the ethnic majority group (92% of the total population); the rest are ethnic
minority groups (8%). Although more than 50 languages are used, the Han peoples
Chinese is the official written language. Putonghua is the official common national
language. Some minority languages do not have a written form.
Since the late 1970s, China has experienced drastic domestic changes. These include
an economic transition from a socialist to a socialist market economy, sociopolitical
changes from suppression to toleration of civil society and religion, and a reinstatement
of Chinese culture.
Economic Transition From Socialist to Socialist Market Economy

In the late 1970s, China adopted a policy of economic reform and opening up to the world.
Since then, China has diversified its diplomatic and economic links from the former socialist
bloc to include capitalist countries. To revitalize the declining socialist economy at home,
China adopted five major strategies (Law, 2006b). First, it made use of the diversification of
economic ties to tap into global capital and utilize foreign knowledge and technology from
Western countries such as the United States and Germany. Second, China transformed its
socialist economy marked by central planning to a socialist market economy marked by the
coexistence of state planning and the market as well as private forces. Third, China utilized
a differential approach to development. Because of its vast territory and huge population, it
is difficult for China to have equal pace of development across all areas. Thus China allowed
some areas to develop first (particularly coastal China in the 1980s to western China in the
late 1990s) and some people to get rich first, with a view to creating co-prosperity across
the nation. Fourth, China gradually shifted its economic structure from primary to tertiary
industry. The share of primary (the manufacture of raw materials such as meat, grains, and
timber), secondary (the manufacture of goods), and tertiary industries (industries that provide transportation or finance) changed from 28.2%, 47.9%, and 23.9% in 1978 to 11.3%,
48.6%, and 40.1% in 2008, respectively (National Bureau of Statistics, 2009). Fifth (and
related to the third strategy), China increased the pace of urbanization. The population of
urban dwellers rose from about 10% in 1950 to 18% in 1978 and 46% in 2008.
Chinas economic achievements are remarkable. Its gross domestic product (GDP) rose
over 80-fold, from CNY365 billion in 1978 to CNY30,067 billion in 2008. In 2009, China
replaced Japan as the second-largest economy (after the United States) in the world.
Despite these achievements, China is still at the level between lower-middle- and uppermiddle-income countries. Its per-capita income is still low; for example, the figure for 2008
was US$2,940, which led China to rank 127th in the world (World Bank, 2010).
Sociopolitical Change From Suppression to Toleration

of Civil Society and Religion
The Peoples Republic of China has been ruled by the Communist Party of China from
its founding in 1949. Since the economic reform and opening to the world in the late
1970s, China has made a policy shift from suppression to partial toleration of civil society
as an intermediate realm between the state and basic units, such as the family (Zhang &
Baum, 2004).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Special Education in Rising China
243
This burgeoning civil society is marked by the widespread use of mobile phones and
the Internet, the rise of public opinion in traditional mass media and cyberspace (Liu,
1996), and the blooming of nonprofit social organizations and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). The number of registered social organizations and NGOs rose from
154,000 in 2000 to over 410,000 in 2009 (Ministry of Civil Affairs, 2001, 2009). These
organizations take over from the state many social and community services in various
sectors and provide new services to address emerging social needs.
There are five major religions in China: Buddhism, Daoism, Islam, Catholicism, and
Protestant Christianity. Despite the constitutional right to freedom of religion, the state
strictly controlled religious activities during the period under Mao Zedongs leadership
(1950s through mid-1970s). Since the economic reform in the late 1970s, the state began
to allow the blooming of religions. Nowadays, religious activities are becoming more
open to the public and are less subject to the states control, as long as they do not organize activities or touch on issues that are deemed politically sensitive by the state. Because
China adopts the policy of separation between religion and education (National Peoples
Congress, 1995, Article 8), religious groups are not allowed to run schools or to organize
religious activities on campuses.
Reinstatement of Chinese Culture as an Integral

Part of Nation Rebuilding
Although Chinese culture is multifaceted and difficult to define (Fan, 2000),
Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism have been considered as three major pillars of
traditional Chinese culture that have shaped Chinese peoples social norms, thoughts,
behaviors, and values (Russell, 1922; Zhu & Xu, 2005). In imperial China, Confucianism
advocated the need to take care of disabled persons (and orphans and the widowed;
Confucius, 1985). Such responsibility often fell on the shoulders of their families and
communities rather than the state.
In post-1949 China under Mao Zedongs leadership, traditional Chinese culture was
condemned as feudalist and considered a forbidden topic, even in academic research
(Tang & Zuo, 1996). During the Cultural Revolution (19661976), Mao launched the
nationwide Campaign of Criticizing Lin Biao and Confucius to eradicate such Confucian values as fi lial piety, righteousness, particularistic loyalty, and ritualism (Brugger,
1978). After Deng Xiaoping assumed power in the late 1970s, Chinas government
began to reinstate the role of Chinese culture in rebuilding the nation. In particular,
it used traditional Chinese values and virtues to tackle moral and social issues that
arose from socialist market economic reform, such as money worshipping, extreme
individualism, and hedonism (Law, 2006a). To ease internal social and ethnic conflicts
resulting from economic and social disparities, Chinas President Hu Jintao (2003)
specifically incorporated a traditional Chinese valueharmony (he)as a guiding
principle of state governance and an important goal of the Chinese nations revival.
Later, the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the State Council (2008)
specified developing work for disabled people and improving their living and working
conditions as important and urgent tasks of building a harmonious and moderately
prosperous society in China.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
244
Wing-Wah Law
E X PA N S ION OF T H E E DUC AT ION A L S Y S T E M
Chinas educational system is the largest in the world. It comprises four major tiers:
preschool education, primary education and junior-secondary education as 9-year compulsory education, senior-secondary/technical education, and higher education. This is
shown in Figure 1.
In 2009, Chinas student enrollment amounted to 251 million. This broke down to
about 27 million in 138,200 preschools, 101 million in 280,200 primary schools, 54
million in 56,300 junior-secondary schools, 46 million in 29,00 senior-secondary schools,
428,000 in 1,672 special schools, and 23 million in higher-education institutes (Ministry
of Education, 2010).
To face the rising challenges from economic globalization and increasing demands for
quality human capital to advance national development, China has been expanding its
educational system in stages since the 1980s. This started with the policy of popularizing
9-year compulsory schooling (primary and junior-secondary education) in 1986 with a
view to enhancing the quality of the labor force at the low end of the labor market.
Similar to the economic strategy of allowing some areas to develop first, China started
popularizing primary education and then junior-secondary education. Geographically,
Level
Higher education
(4 years of
undergraduate
programs)
Post-compulsory
secondary education
(3 years)
Compulsory schooling
(6 years of primary
education and 3 years
of junior-secondary
education, grades 1-9)
Special Education
Regular Education
Regular higher-education
institutes
Places for disabled

learners in regular
or special classes
Special highereducation
institutes
Regular senior-secondary/
technical schools
Special seniorsecondary
education
Regular primary
and
junior-secondary
schools
Special
schools
Regular
Preschools
Special
preschools
Preschool education
(3 years)
Disabled learners
Figure 1. Academic structure of Chinas education and special education

Source: Adapted from Po (1995).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
245
it began with the coastal region in the late 1980s and extended to central and western
regions in the 2000s.
To produce more workers at the high end of the labor market, China began to drastically
expand its higher education in the late 1990s. Between 1997 and 2009, the quota of
admission to first-year undergraduate and certificate programs increased from about 1
million to 6.4 million; the admission rate rose from 9.1% to 24.2% (Ministry of Education,
1998, 2010). Education for students with disabilities, in special schools or mainstreamed
in regular classrooms, also increased from the preschool to higher education levels.
DE F I N I T ION A N D P OPU L AT ION

OF DI S A BL E D PE R S ON S
In China, a person with disabilities (canjiren) is legally defi ned as one who has
abnormalities or loss of a certain organ or function, psychologically or physiologically,
or in anatomical structure and has lost wholly or in part the ability to perform an
activity in the way considered normal (National Peoples Congress, 2008, Article 2).
Disabilities include physical, visual, hearing, speech, intellectual, psychiatric, and
multiple impairments.
According to the first two national sampling surveys of the disabled population, the
estimated number of disabled persons increased from 51.64 million in 1987 to 82.96 million in 2006. The estimated percentage of disabled persons in the population increased
by 1.44% to 6.34% in 2006 (State Statistical Bureau, 1987, 2006). These surveys reflected
two conspicuous changes in types of disabled persons: the percentages of physically
disabled persons and psychiatric persons rose, but those of intellectual disability and
hearing and speech disabilities dropped (see Table 1).
In 2006, disabled persons were distributed among 70.5 million families, which covered
about 20% of Chinas population (State Statistical Bureau, 2007). Male and female
disabled persons accounted for 51.6% and 48.4%, respectively. Regarding the rural-urban
distribution, a majority (75%) of disabled persons lived in rural areas with the rest
Table 1. Estimated Population of Disabled Persons by Type of Disabilities,
1987 and 2006
Type of Disability
1987
Number
Hearing
Speech
Visual
Physical
Intellectual
Psychiatric
Multiple
Total
17,700,000*
7,550,000
7,550,000
10,170,000
1,940,000
6,730,000
51,640,000
Percentage
34.4*
14.6
14.6
19.7
3.8
13.0
100.0
Number
20,040,000
1,270,000
12,330,000
24,120,000
5,540,000
6,140,000
13,520,000
82,960,000
2006
Percentage
24.2
1.5
14.9
29.1
6.7
7.4
16.3
100.0
*Figures include persons with hearing and speech impairments.

Source: State Statistical Bureau (1987); State Statistical Bureau (2006).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
246
Wing-Wah Law
residing in urban areas. With regards to age distribution, 4.7% of disabled persons were
ages 14 or below, 42.1% were ages 15 to 59, and 53.2% were ages 60 or above. The illiteracy rate of disabled persons ages 15 and above was to 43.3% (i.e., 35.9 million).
Regarding schooling, 26.4 million (31.8%) disabled persons attained primary school
qualification, 12.5 million (15%) completed junior-secondary education, 4.1 million
(4.9%) received their senior-secondary-school diploma, and 940,000 (1.1%) attained
degrees or subdegree qualifications.
In 2009, China provided rehabilitation services for 6.2 million disabled persons,
including hearing and speech training for more than 19,800 children, physical therapy
for more than 15,000 children with physical disabilities, and rehabilitation training for
1,090 autistic children (China Disabled Persons Federation, 2010).
E M E RG E NC E OF L EG A L PROT EC T ION
OF DI S A BL E D PE R S ON S R IG H T S T O
E DUC AT ION I N T H E 19 8 0 S
Before the late 1970s, Chinas special education focused on only two major disability
types: visual impairments and deafness. In 1965, 266 blind schools and deaf schools
enrolled about 22,800 blind or deaf students (Fang, 2000). No education was offered
for children with mental impairments and other types of disabilities. There was also no
specific institution to train special education teachers. After the Constitution was revised
in 1982, China began to expand the definition of education for disabled children to
include speech disabilities and other impairments.
Currently, special education generally refers to the provision of education for three
major types of children with special educational needs (SEN). These are children with
general disabilities, children with learning disabilities, and gifted children (Fang, 2005).
Children with general disabilities include those with physical, sensory, mental, speech,
or multiple impairments. Problem students (wenti xuesheng) refer to those with learning disabilities, behavioral and emotional disorders, or autism. (Problem students and
those who are gifted are not the focus of this chapter.)
Since the economic reform and opening to the world in the late 1970s, Chinas state
began to strengthen legal protection of and education for disabled people. In the early
1980s, the National Peoples Congress (1982) amended the Constitution to recognize
major rights of disabled people and required the state and society to help make
arrangements for the work, livelihood and education of the blind, deaf-mute and other
handicapped citizens (Article 45). This has become an important legal foundation for
developing special education.
Later, the Communist Party of China Central Committee (1985) stipulated that in
addition to the introduction of 9-year compulsory schooling, China should develop
special education for children who are blind, deaf, physically handicapped, or
developmentally disabled. As a result, in 1986 China enacted the Basic Education Law
and began to implement 9-year compulsory schooling for all children, including those
with disabilities. This is in line with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organizations position advocating the extension of the universal right to
education to persons with disabilities (UNESCO, 2010).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
247
In particular, the Basic Education Law required governments of all levels to set up
special schools or special education classes for children who were blind, deaf, or
developmentally delayed or who had language disabilities (National Peoples Congress,
1986, Article 9). However, this was far from enough to protect the rights of disabled people
in education or in other aspects of their lives. A few years later, the National Peoples
Congress (1990) enacted the unprecedented Law on the Protection of Persons With
Disabilities to provide a wider coverage of disabled peoples rights in areas including
rehabilitation, education, employment, cultural life, social security, and accessible
environments. Regarding education, the 1990 law enshrined Chinas six major guiding
principles to protect disabled childrens opportunity to access education at various levels.
The principle of equality. The law stipulated that disabled children had the same
legal right to 9 years of free, compulsory schooling as other children (Article 18).
The principle of different approaches to children with different levels of disability
(Articles 2223). The law stipulated two major approaches to special education:
segregation and inclusive education. In the segregation approach, children with
severe disabilities study in special schools or educational institutions. In the inclusive
approach, disabled students with the ability to receive regular education attend classes
(suiban jiudu) with other students in regular preschools, schools, or educational
institutions according to their age. During the 9-year compulsory schooling, these
disabled students could study the same curriculum and textbooks as other students,
but demands on their progress would be flexible (Ministry of Education, 1994).
To a large extent, Chinas inclusion approach is in line with the spirit of
UNESCOs (1994) Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs
Education. Disabled children who are not able to receive regular education can
attend special education classes, which are offered in childrens welfare institutes
or schools attached to regular preschools.
The principle of nondiscrimination against disabled children. Primary schools
and junior-secondary schools are required to admit eligible disabled children who
are able to adapt to their schools. As well, senior-secondary schools, vocational and
technical schools, and higher-education institutes have to admit qualified disabled
children, as prescribed by the state, without discrimination (Article 22). This principle is also advocated by the United Nations (2006, Article 24).
The priority of developing special education. The first goal is to increase the
number of special education programs and opportunities and its second goal is
to enhance the quality of the education. Compulsory education and vocational
and technical education would be developed first and then preschool and juniorsecondary education and above (Article 20) would follow.
The principle of cooperation. Government and private actors should act together
in sponsoring and providing special education (Article 21).
The importance of training teachers. The law stipulated that basic knowledge of
special education be incorporated into general teacher training regular schools.
Teachers who teach in special schools or who teach special education classes in
10/14/11 5:45 PM
248
Wing-Wah Law
general schools should receive specialized training regular schools (Article 25).
The Ministry of Educations (1994) Regulations on Education for Persons With
Disabilities strengthened this article by being the first regulations to govern the
daily operation of special education in China.
E DUC AT ION F OR DI S A BL E D C H I L DR E N
S I N C E T H E 19 8 0 S
Chinas system of special education was established gradually, beginning in the 1980s
with the first enactment of legislation to protect disabled persons rights. It covered
preschool education, 9-year compulsory primary and junior-secondary schooling,
senior-secondary/technical education, and higher education (see Figure 1). Education
for people with general disabilities seeks to create conditions that help them participate
in social life with equal opportunity (Ministry of Education, 1994). The Ministry of Civil
Affairs mainly oversees employment for disabled people, and the Ministry of Education
is mainly in charge of education for disabled children. Both ministries are assisted by a
semi-state organization, the China Disabled Persons Federation, which was established
in 1987 by merging several major associations for disabled persons.
Preschool Education
Preschool education for disabled persons is provided mostly through four major channels that are mostly publicly funded: regular preschools, welfare-related institutes for
disabled children, rehabilitation institutes, and special schools or special preschool
classes in regular schools (State Council, 1994). They provide education mainly for deaf
children, but are expanding to include children with other disabilities.
In developed cities, some private preschools are beginning to offer special education
classes for children. They focus mostly on language training for deaf children and rehabilitation for autistic children because early intervention and treatment are vital to these
children. Wealthy parents are willing to pay high tuition fees for these programs.
Preschool education for disabled children is still at the beginning stage of development,
however. Compared to other educational levels, its school facilities, teacher qualifications,
and teacher training programs are weak (Zhu, 2008).
Nine-Year Compulsory Education

Nine-year compulsory schooling is the largest sector of education for disabled children.
It is provided in four major types of classes: those in special schools for children with
visual, hearing, and mental impairments; special education classes held in regular
schools, childrens welfare institutes, and related institutes for the disabled; and
inclusive classes in regular primary schools and junior-(vocational) secondary schools
(suiban jiudu).
With a view to facilitating the access of disabled students to compulsory schooling,
China introduced a 5-year (19962000) plan for special education. Similar to the
popularization of 9-year compulsory schooling in the regular school sector, China set
different concrete targeted admission rates of 33 types of disabled children in areas with
10/14/11 5:45 PM
249
Table 2. School Enrollment of Disabled Persons Ages 614 by Type of Disability, 2006
Type of Disability
Hearing
Speech
Visual
Physical
Intellectual
Psychiatric
Multiple
Total
Disabled children
Number
Percentage
110,000
170,000
130,000
480,000
760,000
60,000
750,000
2,460,000
4.5
6.9
5.3
19.5
30.9
2.4
30.5
100.0
Percentage of disabled
children studying in regular
or special schools
85.1
76.9
79.1
80.4
64.9
69.4
41.0
63.2 (average)
Source: State Statistical Bureau (2007).
different levels of economic development. Between 1996 and 2000, the national admission rate of students with visual, hearing, and mental impairments was expected to rise
to about 80% (State Education Commission & China Disabled Persons Federation, 1996).
This plan was not successful, however. In 2006, disabled children ages 6 to 14 amounted
to 2.46 million (about 3% of the population of disabled persons; State Statistical Bureau,
2007). Most were children with mental impairments (30.9%) and children with multiple
disabilities (30.5%; see Table 2). About 63.2% of disabled children were enrolled in
regular schools or special schools. But this figure was significantly lower than the
corresponding national average of admission rates of typically developing children to
primary education (99.3%) and junior-secondary education (97%). In 2009, the figure
even dropped slightly to 62.9% (Ministry of Education, 2010).
Moreover, a significant portion of legally eligible disabled children could not receive
compulsory schooling. In 2009, while 428,100 disabled children were enrolled in special
or regular schools, some 211,000 were unable to enjoy basic education (China Disabled
Persons Federation, 2010; Ministry of Education, 2010; see Figure 2). The reasons preventing them included severe impairments, poor families that could not afford it, and
insufficient places for special education, particularly in poor rural areas.
Despite special educations expansion since the 1980s, disparities in educational
opportunities for disabled students still exist. Girls are more disadvantaged than boys
because boys are often given priority in family consideration. In 2008, the admission
rates of girls and boys were 34.4% and 65.6%, respectively (calculated from figures in
Ministry of Education, 2009b). Disabled students living in rural or less developed areas
are more disadvantaged. In 2008, most (95% of 1,640) special schools were located in
urban and county/township areas, and only about 5% of special schools were in rural
areas (Ministry of Education, 2009b). The admission and enrollment rates of special
and regular schools in rural areas were 38% and 40%, respectively, but about 75% of
disabled persons, as mentioned earlier, lived in rural areas. The urban-to-rural ratio of
disabled children population was 1:3, but that of disabled children in school was 1.22:1
(Guan, 2009).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
250
Wing-Wah Law
27,000
14,000
Psychiatric diseases
46,000
Physical disability
44,000
Intellectual disability
20,000
Speech impairment
29,000
Hearing impairment
31,000
Virtual impairment
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
Number of disabled children

Figure 2. Distribution of disabled students who were unable to access school education, 2009
Source: China Disabled Persons Federation (2010).
Postcompulsory Vocational and Regular Education

At the postcompulsory schooling level, the admission and enrollment rates of disabled
students are far lower than those of their counterparts in regular institutions. The
bottleneck of disabled students seeking to access further education begins at the seniorsecondary level. Based on limited statistics available from the China Disabled Persons
Federation (2010) and the Ministry of Education (2010) from 2009, 11,448 disabled
students studied in 174 vocational schools or institutes. Another 6,339 disabled students
were enrolled in 104 special senior-secondary schools: 5,197 in 80 special schools for the
deaf and 1,142 in 20 schools for the blind. The overall enrollment size of special seniorsecondary/vocational education was only 0.04% of its regular counterparts enrollment.
In addition, 1,852 vocational training institutes under the aegis of the China Disabled
Persons Federation offered short- or medium-term vocational training workshops to
7.9 million people.
Throughout the world, disabled people have very restricted opportunities for higher
education (UNESCO, 2010). China is no exception. Compared to other Chinese students, disabled students road to higher education in China is more difficult. Under the
policy of zero rejection, regular higher-education institutes, as mentioned earlier, must
use the same entrance requirements in admitting regular and disabled students.
Physically disabled individuals are required to take the national entrance examination.
Blind and deaf students must take entrance examinations run by individual higher
education institutes. English is a core entrance exam subject and has been a major barrier
to disabled students accessing higher education. Deaf students have been allowed to take
English only as an elective, rather than as a core subject, in compulsory schooling since
the special education curricular reform in 2007 (see more in the next section). As a
result, in 2009, only about 6,600 disabled students were admitted to regular universities
and colleges, and 1,196 disabled students were admitted to special higher-education
institutes (China Disabled Persons Federation, 2010). These numbers account for only
0.1% of 6.4 million first-year students in Chinese higher education. Disabled students
10/14/11 5:45 PM
251
demand for places in senior-secondary and higher-education programs has increased,

however, because of the expansion of compulsory schooling.
Curricular Reform of Chinese Special Education

Recently, China began to reform curricula for blind, deaf, and mentally impaired students
in special schools. The Ministry of Education (2007a, 2007b, 2007c) issued three new
curriculum standards covering course subjects and the amount of time devoted to these
subjects during the 9 years of compulsory education in order to help students master
a broad knowledge base and develop basic competencies to face labor market needs
in changing domestic and global economic contexts. A careful analysis of these new
curricula reveals four major changes.
First, the Ministry of Education introduced three common principles: (1) integration
between education and rehabilitation; (2) integration between learning and life; and (3)
maintenance of uniform national educational standards and the flexibility to adapt the
curricula to the students special-education needs.
Second, the Ministry of Education stressed the concept of inclusion by reducing the
gaps in the overall aim and scope of curricula between regular students and disabled
students. As in the regular curriculum, the new curricula emphasized the importance of
preparing students to live and function as responsible Chinese citizens. In particular,
these new curricula stressed the political task of special education in helping students
develop the spirit of patriotism and collectivism and a love for socialism and the
Communist Party of China.
Moreover, similar to the revised basic curriculum standards of regular primary schools
and junior-secondary schools in the early 2000s (Ministry of Education, 2001), the new
curricula for the blind and deaf aimed to help disabled students develop a basic and
broad knowledge base. Similar to the regular curricula, these two new curricula adopted
the concept of key learning areas by grouping subjects. Blind students, for example, are
required to take political education (6.3% of total class time in 9 years); Chinese (18.3%);
mathematics (16.9%); English (7.8%); history and society (3.5%); science (7.8%); physical
and health education (6.3%); art and music (10.6%); and integrative practical learning,
covering information technology, integrative social practice, and a school-based
curriculum (15.1%; Ministry of Education, 2007b).
Students with mental impairment are not required to take this kind of broad curriculum
because of their limited capacity to handle so many key learning areas. Instead, they
are expected to learn basic knowledge and master basic daily living skills. At the primaryschool level, mentally impaired students must participate in about 70% to 80% of the
general (compulsory) curriculum, including language in life, mathematics in life, life
adaptations (self-care, simple housework, self-protection, and social adaptation), singing
and movement, drawing and craft, and physical education and health (Ministry of Education, 2007c). Depending on school conditions and students learning ability, they can
take more challenging subjects through electives, which account for about 20% to 30%
of class time. The electives might include information technology, rehabilitation training,
a second language (such as local dialects, Putonghua, or simple English), art and leisure
activities, and some school-based modules.
Third, different elements and emphases are incorporated into the new curricula,
particularly for blind and deaf students. The object is to equip them with skills to rise to
10/14/11 5:45 PM
252
Wing-Wah Law
the challenges from rapid social change in an increasingly interconnected and
interdependent world.
Take the new curriculum for deaf children as an example. Similar to UNESCOs
(1996, 2000) advocacy of four major types of basic skills (learning to know, learning to
do, learning to be, and learning to live together) to face the challenges of globalization,
the new curriculum expects deaf students to shift the focus of their learning from merely
learning outcomes to include learning processes and skills by learning to learn, learning
to live together, learning to cooperate, and learning to survive (Ministry of Education,
2007a). The new curriculum incorporated a mandatory key learning areaintegrative
practical learning (which covers information technology, project learning, and service
learning)with a view to enhancing the abilities of disabled children in information
processing, social interactions, and participation in community and society.
Another new key learning areacommunication and social interactionwas
specifically intended to provide deaf children with training in sensory awareness, speech,
sign language, and writing skills to lay an important foundation for their future work
and social life. These students also were given an unprecedented opportunity to choose
English language as an elective. This training could help students access foreign
information and access to the world through the Internet. It also gives them a better
chance to access higher education because of the English-language component in the
entrance exams for admission to Chinese universities and colleges.
Finally, the new curriculum emphasized deaf students artistic and aesthetic development.
For example, every week students spend from 5 to 6 class hours for physical education in
grades 1 to 3; from 10 to 12 hours in grades 1 to 6; and from 0 to 6 hours in grades 7 to 9 for
arts and crafts (Wang, 2007). These new curriculum emphases are in line with the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006), which recognizes the
importance of disabled persons accessibility not only to physical environments but also to
the social, economic, and cultural environments and information in a changing world.
Fourth, to emphasize the integration of education and rehabilitation, different types
of rehabilitation for blind, deaf, and mentally impaired students are arranged in the new
curricula. Blind students are required to use 7.4% of class time on general rehabilitation,
mobility training, and social adaptation. Deaf students need to spend about 6.6% to
6.8% of class time on communication and social interaction, and 4.9% to 7.0% of class
time on labor skills (including basic daily life skills, and working and vocational skills;
Ministry of Education, 2007a, 2007b).
For mentally impaired students, rehabilitation, as mentioned earlier, is an elective
component. It needs to develop individualized programs for students with differing
impairment in movement, cognition, speech and/or thinking, and offer rehabilitation
training, treatment, and counseling (Ministry of Education, 2007c).
C ON T E N T IOUS I S S U E S C ON F RON T I NG WOR K

A N D E DUC AT ION F OR DI S A BL E D PE R S ON S
Work and education for disabled people in China have witnessed important achievements
since the 1980s. The Communist Party of China Central Committee and the State Council
(2008), however, have admitted that such work is facing a number of major challenges.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
253
These are the lack of a comprehensive policy and measures to protect disabled people;
problems in basic living, health care, rehabilitation, education, employment, and participation in social life; living standards that are far below the average standards of their
community; reluctance of some local governments and departments to encourage work
for people with disabilities; low public awareness of the needs of disabled people; and
some peoples strong discrimination against them.
Similarly, education for disabled children is facing contentious issues: demand for
legal assurance of greater access to education, shortage of educational financing,
problems of inclusive education, lack of professionally trained social workers, and low
parental and community involvement. The next section argues that these issues challenge
the provision of equal access to and the quality of education for disabled persons in one
way or another. Law alone cannot ensure social justice and equity; the provision and
quality of education for disabled children are also affected by extra-legal factors,
including educational financing.
Ensuring Access to Education

The first contentious issue is how to ensure disabled childrens greater access to
compulsory and postcompulsory schooling. Despite the promulgation of the 1990 law
on disabled persons rights and several important administrative regulations, in the late
2000s the Minister of Civil Affairs, Li Xueju (2008), admitted that disabled children,
disabled youths, and children whose parents are disabled were still confronting practical
difficulty in accessing education at various levels. To address this issue, Chinas government continued to rely on the use of the law. Some scholars (e.g., Bao, Li, & Guo,
2009; Deng & Zhou, 2005) pushed for a special law on education for disabled children
similar to the U.S. Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. Instead of enacting a special
education law, the National Peoples Congress (2006) revised the Basic Education Law
to include language requiring regular primary and junior-secondary schools to admit
disabled students who have the ability to receive a regular education.
One year after signing the United Nations Convention of Rights of Persons with
Disabilities in 2007, China revised the law protecting disabled persons. On the one hand,
the revised law continues to uphold the six guiding principles of education for disabled
people as codified in the 1990 law. On the other hand, the revised 2008 law codified
three new special education policies (National Peoples Congress, 2008). First, to ease
families financial burdens, local governments are required to provide free textbooks
and boarding allowances for students with disabilities and students from poor families
with disabled parents in order to help them complete compulsory education (Article 21).
Second, to provide enough school places, governments above the county level are
required to set up schools and related educational institutions in accordance with the
number, types, and distribution of disabled children in their jurisdictions (Article 24).
Third, unlike the 1990 version, which did not specify any consequence of violation, but
similar to the Ministry of Educations (1994) Regulations, the 2008 revised law clearly
stipulates that disciplinary measures would be taken against those in charge of or directly
responsible for any educational institutions that refuse to admit students with disabilities
or that impose additional conditions that are not required by the state in order to limit
the admission of disabled students (Article 63).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
254
Wing-Wah Law
To enforce the revised law, and based on the experience of the 19962000
implementation plan, the State Council (2009) issued an important instruction for the
popularization of 9-year compulsory schooling for disabled children with visual, hearing,
or intellectual impairments across China. In particular, it raised the target admission
rates: an annual increase to near 100% in cities and economically developed areas in
China and in rural areas in the western and central regions that had already achieved
the task of providing 9-year compulsory schooling for all eligible regular children, and
an increase to about 70% in areas that had not achieved this task. The instruction also
requires local governments to create better conditions for providing basic education for
children with disabilities. Unlike the 19962000 implementation plan, however, this
instruction has not specified any deadlines for accomplishing these targets, which allows
local government to determine when they should achieve the targets and possibly delay
such completion.
To some extent, the Outline of Chinas National Plan for Medium and Long-Term
Education Reform and Development (20102020) closed this loophole. This 10-year plan
set the development of special education as one of the central governments 10 priority
projects in the 2010s. Chinas new national plan introduced four concrete measures to
ensure greater access to special education (Communist Party of China Central
Committee & State Council, 2010). First, the 20102020 plan requires governments of all
levels to incorporate special education into their plans and agendas for economic and
social development. Second, it promises that by 2020 every city or county/town with a
population over 300,000 will have a special school and that the quota for disabled students in regular classes and special education classes in regular schools at various levels
will be expanded. Third, the 20102020 plan requires governments to increase their
expenditure on education for disabled students. It also requires the State Council to
establish basic standards of special schools and local governments to define a per-capita
public expenditure for disabled students. Fourth, the plan promises to gradually extend
free education for disabled students from compulsory schooling to the senior-secondary
level. Despite these legal revisions and administration regulations, in 2009 about one out
of three disabled children, as shown earlier, could not access 9-year compulsory schooling.
Too, the percentages of disabled students at senior-secondary and higher education
levels remained very low.
Shortage of Educational Financing

Legislation alone cannot ensure disabled childrens equal access to education; many
other factors also affect such provision. One factor is educational financing, a second
major challenge to education for disabled children in China. Chinas government has
been urged to increase its funding of education for disabled students (Xie, Qian, Yang, &
Jiang, 2009), but inadequate funding is a problem throughout Chinas entire educational
system. Despite fast economic growth and a large educational expansion since the 1980s,
the public investment for all educational levels has remained low in China. The percentage of the GDP spent on national education expenditures, for example, was 3.04% in
1990 and 3.48% in 2009 (Ministry of Education, National Bureau of Statistics, & Ministry
of Finance, 2009; Zhao, c. 1997), which was lower than the world average (4.6%) and the
average of lower-middle-income countries (4.0%) in 2009 (World Bank, 2010).
10/14/11 5:45 PM
255
Moreover, public financing for education is unevenly distributed in China because it

depends on economic developments of local areas and the ability of local governments
to generate income (particularly tax revenue). This is a result of the state decentralization and the relegation of major financial responsibility to local governments since the
economic reforms in the 1980s (Kaup, 2004; Law, 2006b). Financing for education is
exacerbated by the policy of developing different regions in different stages because it
has widened disparities in economic development and educational financing between
urban and rural areas and among eastern, central, and western regions (Law & Pan,
2009). Chinas government has set the reduction of such educational disparities as an
important goal of its administration between 2010 and 2020 (Communist Party of China
Central Committee & State Council, 2010).
Although its public financing for special education managed to rise from CNY931
million to CNY1,932 million between 1999 and 2004, the share of special education in
public-education financing remained at a low level during this period. It was between
0.36% and 0.38%, which was comparatively lower than the 3% in South Korea (Pang &
Yin, 2008). As a result, special schools and regular schools suffer from a lack of
professionally trained special education teachers, facilities, and services geared to
disabled students needs (Liu & Mao, 2007).
Turning to private education is not a viable solution for disabled children because
most parents cannot afford the high tuition fees. In 2006, the average annual household
incomes of families with disabled persons in urban and rural areas were CNY4,864 and
CNY2,260, respectivelymuch less than those of families without disabled family
members (State Statistical Bureau, 2007). Unless Chinas state government drastically
increases its public educational financing, the provision and quality of education for
disabled children will most likely continue to be constrained by very tight budgets.
Lack of Support for Inclusive Education

The third contentious issue confronting education for disabled children is related to the
popularization of inclusive education. Since it was piloted in 1987, inclusive education in
regular classes in China has become a major alternative channel for disabled students to
access education. It has mainly targeted students with mild hearing, visual, and mental
disabilities. The number of disabled students in regular classes is limited to 3. This policy
of inclusion has helped drastically increase the likelihood that disabled students will
receive formal education, particularly at the primary-education level.
In 2008, 36.7% (of 417,440) disabled students ages 6 to 14 were enrolled in special
schools, 45.2% in inclusive classes in regular primary schools, 16.9% in inclusive classes in
regular junior (vocational) schools, and 1.2% in special classes in regular primary schools
and junior (vocational) schools (calculated from figures in Ministry of Education, 2009b).
Inclusive education has also provided a significant arena for disabled students to
become immersed in mainstream society. Inclusion has also eased the financial burden
of Chinas state government and families with disabled children.
Inclusive education in China is challenged by three problems that adversely affect the
quality of disabled childrens learning in inclusive classes. First, regular schools lack
adequate funding to establish resource rooms and provide special facilities to support
the learning of disabled students. Second, many teachers in regular schools do not cater
10/14/11 5:45 PM
256
Wing-Wah Law
to the special needs of disabled students in their classes and demand that disabled
students perform as regular students. Because these teachers receive minimal training
about special education in their pre-service teacher training, they have very little understanding of special education and the needs of disabled students, not to mention their
limited ability to provide individualized programs for disabled students in their classes
(Tang, 2009). In a survey by Deng (2004), for example, many primary teachers in regular
schools supported inclusive education but still preferred that disabled children attend
special schools. Moreover, teachers in regular schools are under strong pressure from
their schools and from parents with regular children to follow the mainstream curriculum
and help regular students get good academic results in internal and public examinations.
As a result, while many disabled students physically sit or mix together with regular
students in the same classroom, they are often marginalized and do not learn as well as
expected. The dropout rate of disabled students in regular schools remains high (Guan,
2009). Third, despite the legal enactment of a zero-rejection policy, many local
governments do not closely enforce the law because they regard this task as a low priority.
Many regular schools continue to reject disabled students who are able to study in regular classes because they fear the performance of disabled students could affect their
students promotion rates and therefore their school reputation and future student
intakes.
Inadequately Trained Teachers and Social Workers

The fourth challenge to education for disabled children is the rising demand for strong
professional teams of special education teachers and social workers. In the early 1980s,
China began to emphasize such training and raise the qualifications of special education teachers. It has established training institutes at the senior-secondary/technical and
higher education levels, providing certificates and undergraduate, masters, and doctoral programs to special education teachers, educators, and researchers (Fang, 2005).
In 2008, China had 45,990 special education staff, including 36,306 full-time teachers,
3,469 administrative staff, and 2,385 teaching-support staff (Ministry of Education, 2009a).
Regarding educational attainment, 14.6% of full-time teachers achieved senior-secondary
qualifications, 49% were certificate holders, 35.5% were degree holders, and 0.6% held
masters degrees. Only 54% of teachers had received special education training.
This training of those in the teaching profession is falling far short from meeting the
demand for qualified special education teachers, as outlined in the aforementioned
medium- and long-term national plans for education development between 2010 and
2020 (Communist Party of China Central Committee & State Council, 2010). In a 2005
survey by Wang (2006), over 60% of 135 surveyed principals of special schools (in 12
provinces in eastern and western China) indicated that their teachers who were responsible for disabled childrens rehabilitation had not received relevant professional training and lacked relevant knowledge and skills. Over 70% of surveyed principals admitted
that their teachers did not have the ability to diagnose and assess disabled children.
The training of ordinary teachers for inclusive education in regular schools is even
worse than that of their counterparts in special schools (Xiao, 2009). All this suggests
that China needs to enhance the quality of in-service special education teachers in both
special and regular schools as a short-term measure and to increase special education
10/14/11 5:45 PM
257
training for pre-service teachers over the long term. This, in turn, will require more
universities and colleges to offer various special education specializations and modules
(Tang, 2009).
Moreover, China has long overlooked the role of social workers in education, especially
in special education. In many societies, social workers play an important role in both
regular and special school education. For example, they can help identify and assess
students special education needs and provide them with counseling services that teachers
cannot offer. Despite the rise of social organizations and NGOs in providing various
social services since the 1980s, the development of the social work profession is at the very
beginning stage in China. Only after the Communist Party of China Central Committee
(2006) specified Chinas desperate need for professional social workers in the
construction of a harmonious society did Chinas universities begin to develop curricula
for training social workers. Most of their curricula are mainly sociology-oriented, however.
The involvement of social workers in special education is rare (An, 2009).
As Liu (2010) argued, China needs to develop a strong pool of professionally trained
social workers for special education. To complement the role of special education
teachers, these social workers should be specially trained to identify and assess childrens
special needs, provide support to special education teachers in designing individualized
learning plans for disabled children, and offer counseling services to these children
and their parents. This, however, would require the state to recognize the professional
status of special educationspecific social workers, to establish relevant posts for them
in both special schools and regular schools with special education classes, and to
develop a specialist curriculum for those social workers in higher education, particularly teacher-training institutes through the cross-fertilization of special education and
social work.
Low Parental and Community Involvement

The fi fth contentious issue confronting education for children with disabilities is related
to parental and societal involvement. Parents could be a vital source of strength and
contribute to their disabled childrens education and rehabilitation. Although parents
and schools (and the community) in special education are urged to cooperate in China
(Zhao, 2008), parental participation in school education and management is minimal.
Parent associations are increasingly common in regular schools, particularly in urban
areas, but many exist as a formality and instead become social networking clubs for
parents or channels to help schools collect fees for student activities (Wang, Mao, &
Wang, 2010). Parental participation in special education is even worse. Many studies
(e.g., Wang, 2004; Zhang, Yaqiu, & He, 2004) have shown that in China parental
involvement in the education of their disabled children is minimal. This does not
necessarily mean that parents do not care about their disabled children. On the contrary,
Hans (2005) comparative study of parents with disabled children, parents with regular
children, and special education teachers in three special schools and two regular schools
in Dalian City showed that surveyed parents with disabled children had stronger needs
and were more willing to participate in school activities than the parents of regular
children. Surveyed special education teachers also hoped their parents would participate
more in school activities.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
258
Wing-Wah Law
One difficulty is that many parents do not know how to be involved in special education
for their children. Wang (2004) identified three major barriers to parental involvement in
special education. First, many parents with disabled children have little access to information about their development, rehabilitation, education, services, and rights: They lack
professional and social support to rear and educate their disabled children. Second, parental involvement in special education is often prevented by practical problems confronting
parents such as a sense of guilt over their childrens disabilities; feelings of low self-esteem
when interacting with teachers and other parents, particularly in regular schools; and little
time available for participation in school events and activities because of their need to earn
money to finance their childrens rehabilitation and education. Third, many special schools
and regular schools with special education classes are unaware of how important the parents role is. Many parents have few opportunities to communicate with teachers directly
about their disabled childrens needs and difficulties.
As compared to parental involvement, the role and functions of social organizations
and NGOs in work for disabled persons and special education at the community level in
China are far more marginal. Despite the blooming of nonprofit social organizations
and NGOs in providing various social services, very few focus on work and education for
disabled people. Such work has been mainly taken up by the government-sponsored
Chinas Disabled Persons Federation and organizations under its aegis at various levels.
Under tight public financing for special education, the community, social organizations,
and NGOs constitute an important source of potential resources in promoting, providing, and enhancing the quality of rehabilitation and education for disabled children.
C ONC LUS ION

This chapter has examined the general context and development of work and education
for disabled persons in China since the 1980s. As a middle-income but highly populous
country, China has made various efforts to promote social justice for disabled people. Such
promotion, however, has depended on its domestic contexts and conditions. In particular,
it has been constrained by weak legal enforcement to protect disabled peoples rights; a
lack of financial resources and support for education of disabled children (particularly
in rural areas) and inclusive education in regular schools; teachers and social workers
who lack appropriate training to handle disabled learners needs; and weak collaboration
among schools, parents, and the community in the education of disabled students. Now
that China has significantly improved its economy and is aiming toward building a moderately prosperous society in all aspects by the 2020s, we can expect more provision and
better quality in the work and education for disabled persons across the nation.
To further promote social equity for individuals with disabilities in the early 21st
century, China could first reconsider enacting a law on special education that would
force governments of all levels to take more financial and legal responsibility for disabled
peoples education and employment in their jurisdictions. But because law alone is not
enough to ensure the provision of public special education, it is important to ensure
adequate financing. As a rising economic power, China is in a better position to increase
its share of educational investment as a portion of the GDP than ever before. With such
an increase, special education could obtain more financial resources to build more
10/14/11 5:45 PM
259
special schools, improve facilities in regular schools that promote inclusive education,
provide more and better special education specific training for pre-service and in-service
teachers in special schools and regular schools, and establish the post of social workers
in schools with disabled learners.
Because local governments differ in their ability to generate income, the central
government should play an important role in reducing urbanrural and inter-regional
disparities in work and education for disabled people. For example, they could redistribute
education resources from rich to poor areas and from urban to rural areas, and closely
monitor local governments performance in work and education for the disabled.
In addition to compulsory education, it is essential to give disabled persons greater
access to postcompulsory education, particularly at the senior-secondary level, which is
the bottleneck in education for disabled children. Otherwise, their competitiveness and
employment possibilities in Chinas labor market might be further reduced, partly
because of the qualification inflation resulting from a drastic expansion of seniorsecondary education and higher education for regular students since the 1990s.
As well, China should provide greater support to parents with disabled children
(through, for example, parent education) and involve them more in their childrens education. China could solicit support from and tap the resources of local communities,
social organizations, and NGOs for developing education for disabled children.
Education for disabled children in China is still developing, and its policy and
provisions are moving toward more inclusive education despite many practical difficulties and limitations. Because Chinas state and local governments are still playing pivotal
roles in developing work and education for persons with disabilities, how to address these
increasing demands for social equity is expected to continue to hinge on their commitments, priorities, and strategies. At the same time, nonstate actors, particularly schools,
parent groups, communities, and NGOs, can be expected to increase their contributions
to the cause of promoting social justice for individuals with disabilities.
R E F E R E NC E S
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. 12101 et seq. (West 1993).
An, Q. (2009). Lun shehui gongzuo zai woguo teshu ertong jiaoyu zhong de jieru (On social
work intervention in special education for children with limited abilities). Zhongguo
Teshu Jiaoyu (Chinese Journal of Special Education), (3) 1316.
Bao, M., Li, J., & Guo, W. (2009). Woguo Teshu Jiaoyu Falu Quexian Jiqi Lifa Xueshu Jianyi
(Special Education Law of China: Its Problems and an Academic Proposal). Jixu Jiaoyu
Yanjiu (Continue Education Research) (12), 6871.
Brugger, B. (1978). Conclusion. In B. Brugger (Ed.), China: The impact of the Cultural Revolution
(pp. 253279). London: Croom Helm.
China Disabled Persons Federation. (2010). 2009 Nian zhongguo canjiren shiye fazhan tongji
gongbao (Statistical communique on development of the work for persons with disabilities
in 2009). Beijing: China Disabled Persons Federation.
Communist Party of China Central Committee. (1985). Reform of Chinas educational structure.
Beijing: Foreign Languages Press.
Communist Party of China Central Committee. (2006). Guanyu goujian shehui zhuyi hexie
shehui ruogan zhongda wenti jueding (A decision concerning several important questions
about the construction of a socialist harmonious society). Beijing: Peoples Press.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
260
Wing-Wah Law
Communist Party of China Central Committee & State Council. (2008). Guanyu cujin canjiren
shiye fazhan de yijian (Opinion concerning the furthering of the development of the
work for the disabled). Beijing: State Council.
Communist Party of China Central Committee & State Council. (2010, July 30). Guojia
zhong changqi jiaoyu gaige he fazhan guihua gangyao (20102020 Nian) (Outline of
Chinas national plan for medium- and long-term education reform and development
[20102020]). Zhongguo jiaoyubao (China Education Daily), pp. 13.
Confucius. (1985). Li ji (The classic of rites). Hong Kong: Boyi.
Deng, M. (2004). A comparative study of attitudes to inclusive education of teachers who
teach disabled students attending regular classes in rural and urban areas. Jiaoyu yanjiu
yu shiyan (Educational Research and Experiment), (1), 6166.
Deng, M., & Zhou, H. (2005). Guanyu zhiding teshu jiaoyu fa de changyi (A proposal on the
legislation of special education law). Zhongguo teshu jiaoyu (Chinese Journal of Special
Education), (7), 36.
Fang, J. (2000). Zhongguo teshu jiaoyu de qiyuan de fazhan (The development of special
education in China). In F. Zhang, H. Ma, & X. Du (Eds.), Teshu jiaoyu shi (History of
Special Education) (pp. 196234). Shanghai: East China Normal University Press.
Fang, J. (2005). Teshu jiaoyu xue (Special education). Beijing: Peoples Education Press.
Fan, Y. (2000). A classification of Chinese culture. Cross Cultural Management, 7, 310.
Guan, Q. (2009). Guanzhu zhongguo nongcun teshu jiaoyu zhongdian redian nandian
mangdian (Concerning Chinese rural special education: Focused, heated, difficult and
ignored issues). Zhongguo teshu jiaoyu (Chinese Journal of Special Education), (2), 37.
Han, M. (2005). Teshu jiaoyu xuexiao jiazhang canyu qingkuang de yanjiu (Parental involvement in education for handicapped children). Zhongguo teshu jiaoyu (Chinese Journal
of Special Education), (9), 812.
Hu, J. T. (2003). Zai sange daibiao yantaohui shangde jianghua (Speech at the Symposium
on the Three Represents). In D. Y. Shen & L. S. Cheng (Eds.), Hu jintao tongzhi
qiyi zhongyao jianghua xueji duben (A study guide for the speech of Hu Jiantao at the
Symposium on the Three Represents) (pp. 118). Beijing: Communist Party of China
Central Committee Party School Press.
Kaup, K. P. (2004, September). Empowering the disabled: The China Disabled Persons Federation.
Paper presented at the 2004 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.
Law, W.-W. (2006a). Citizenship, citizenship education and the state in China in a global age.
Cambridge Journal of Education, 36, 597628.
Law, W.-W. (2006b). Education reform for national competitiveness in a global age: The experience and struggle of China. In K. Mazurek & M. Winzer (Eds.), Schooling around the
world: Debates, challenges, and practices (pp. 68103). Boston: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.
Law, W.-W., & Pan, S.-Y. (2009). Legislation and equality in Basic Education for All in China.
Interchange: A Quarterly Review of Education, 40, 337372.
Li, X. (2008). Guanyu zhonghua renmin gongheguo canjiren baozhang fa xiuding caoan de shuoming
(An explanatory note concerning the revision of the Law on Protection of Persons With
Disabilities [revised draft]). Beijing: National Peoples Congress.
Liu, A. (1996). Mass politics in the Peoples Republic: State and society in contemporary China.
Boulder, CO: Westview.
Liu, B. (2010). Lun teshu jiaoyu zhong shehui gongzuo zhichi fuwu de tuozhan (On the
expansion of social work supporting services in special education). Zhongguo teshu jiaoyu
(Chinese Journal of Special Education), (6), 1317.
Liu, Q., & Mao, W. (2007). Zhongguo de jichu teshu jiaoyu (Special education at the
compulsory schooling level in China). Jiaoshi bolan (Teacher Readings), (12), 3941.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
261
Ministry of Civil Affairs. (2001). 2000 nian minzheng shiye fazhan tongji baogao (2000 statistical
report on the development of civil affairs). Beijing: Author.
Ministry of Civil Affairs. (2009). 2008 nian minzheng shiye fazhan tongji baogao (2008 statistical
report on the development of civil affairs). Beijing: Author.
Ministry of Education. (1994). Canjiren jiaoyu tiaoli (Regulations on education for persons
with disabilities). Beijing: Author.
Ministry of Education. (1998, April 12). 1997 nian guanguo jiaoyu shiye fazhan tongji gongbao (Statistical report on educational achievements and developments in China in
1997). Zhongguo jiaoyubao (China Education Daily), p. 2.
Ministry of Education. (2001). Jichu jiaoyu kecheng gaige gangyao shixing (Guidelines on the
curriculum reform of basic education). Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press.
Ministry of Education. (2007a). Longxiao xuexiao yiwu jiaoyu kecheng shezhi shiyan fangan
(Curriculum standards for schools for the deaf-mute in compulsory education, pilot).
Beijing: Author.
Ministry of Education. (2007b). Mangxiao xuexiao yiwu jiaoyu kecheng shezhi shiyan fangan
(Curriculum standards for schools for the blind in compulsory education, pilot).
Beijing: Author.
Ministry of Education. (2007c). Peizhi xuexiao yiwu jiaoyu kecheng shezhi shiyan fangan (Curriculum standards for schools for the mentally impaired in compulsory education, pilot).
Beijing: Author.
Ministry of Education. (2009a). Teshu jiaoyu xuexiao jiaozhigong shu (Statistics on teachers and
staff in special schools). Beijing: Author.
Ministry of Education. (2009b). Teshu jiaoyu xuexiao jiben qingkuang (Basic statistics of special
education, 2008). Beijing: Author.
Ministry of Education. (2010, August 3). 2009 nian guanguo jiaoyu shiye fazhan tongji
gongbao (Statistical report on educational achievements and developments in China
in 2009). Zhongguo jiaoyubao (China Education Daily), p. 2.
Ministry of Education, National Bureau of Statistics, & Ministry of Finance. (2009,
November 20). 2008 nian quanguo jiaoyu jingfei zhixing qingkuang tongji gonggao
(Report on the implementation of the national educational expenditure of the Peoples
Republic of China, 2008). Zhongguo jiaoyubao (China Education Daily), p. 2.
National Bureau of Statistics. (2009). Zhongguo tongji nianjian, 2009 (China statistical yearbook, 2009). Beijing: China Statistical Publishing House.
National Peoples Congress. (1982). Zhonghua renmin gongheguo xianfa (The constitution of
the Peoples Republic of China). Beijing: Author.
National Peoples Congress. (1986). Zhonghua renmin gongheguo yiwu jiaoyufa (The
basic education law of the Peoples Republic of China). In Zhonghua renmin gongheguo
jiaoyufa, yiwu jiaoyufa, jiaoshifa (The education law, basic education law and teachers
law of the Peoples Republic of China) (pp. 113). Beijing: China Law Publishing
House.
National Peoples Congress. (1990). Zhonghua renmin gongheguo canjiren baozhang fa (The
law of the Peoples Republic of China on the protection of disabled persons). Beijing:
Author.
National Peoples Congress. (1995). Zhonghua renmin gongheguo jiaoyufa (The education law of the Peoples Republic of China). In Zhonghua renmin gongheguo jiaoyufa,
yiwu jiaoyufa, jiaoshifa (The education law, basic education law and teachers law of the
Peoples Republic of China) (pp. 113). Beijing: China Law Publishing House.
National Peoples Congress. (2006). Zhonghua renmin gongheguo yiwu jiaoyufa (The basic
education law of the Peoples Republic of China). Beijing: China Law Publishing
House.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
262
Wing-Wah Law
National Peoples Congress. (2008). Zhonghua renmin gongheguo canjiren baozhang fa (The
law of the Peoples Republic of China on the protection of persons with disabilities).
Beijing: China Minzhu Fazhi Publishing House.
Pang, W., & Yin, H. (2008). Woguo teshu jiaoyu jingfei touru de shuju fenxi yu taolun (An
analysis on funds for special education in China). Zhongguo teshu jiaoyu (Chinese Journal
of Special Education), (12), 1317.
Po, Y. (1995). Teshu jiaoyu (Special education). Beijing: Huaxia Publishing House.
Polat, F. (2011). Inclusion in education: A step towards social justice. International Journal of
Educational Development, 31, 5058.
Russell, B. (1922). The problem of China. London: Allen & Unwin.
State Council. (1994). Guowuyuan. Canjiren jiaoyu tiaoli (Regulations on education for the
disabled). Beijing: Author.
State Council. (2009). Guanyu jinyibu jiakuai teshu jiaoyu shiye fazhan de yijian (Opinions
concerning further quickening the development of special education). Zhongguo canjiren
(Disability in China), (6), 2425.
State Education Commission & China Disabled Persons Federation. (1996). Canji ertong
shaonian yiwu jiaoyu jiuwu shishi fangan (Action plan for the implementation of
nine-year compulsory schooling for disabled children during the period of the ninth
five-year plan [19962000]). Beijing: State Education Commission.
State Statistical Bureau. (1987). Diyici quanguo canjiren chouyang diaocha zhuyao shuju gongbao
(Report on the First National Survey on the Population of the Disabled). Beijing:
Author.
State Statistical Bureau. (2006). Dierci quanguo canjiren chouyang diaocha zhuyao shuju gongbao
(diyi hao) (Report on the major data of the Second National Survey on the Population
of the Disabled [Part 1]). Beijing: Author.
State Statistical Bureau. (2007). Dierci quanguo canjiren chouyang diaocha zhuyao shuju gongbao
(dier hao) (Report on the major data of the Second National Survey on the Population
of the Disabled [Part 2]). Beijing: Author.
Tang, G. (2009). Putong shifan yuanxiao kaishe teshu jiaoyu ke de xianzhuang jiqi celue (The
offering of special education specialism in regular normal universities and colleges).
Wenjiao Ziliao (Data of Culture and Education), (2), 237239.
Tang, Z., & Zuo, B. (1996). Maoism and Chinese culture. New York: Nova Science Publishers.
United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities and Optional
Protocol. Washington, DC: Author.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1994). The Salamanca
statement and framework for action on special needs education. Paris: Author.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1996). Learning: The
treasure within. Paris: Author.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2000). Globalization and
living together: The challenges for educational content in Asia. Paris: Author.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2010). The right to
education for persons with disabilities: Towards inclusion. Paris: Author.
Wang, H. (2006). Zhongguo teshu ertong yiwu jiaoyu fazhan zhong de wenti diaocha baogao
(An investigation report on problems in compulsory education development for special
children in China). Zhongguo teshu jiaoyu (Chinese Journal of Special Education),
(10),39.
Wang, H., Mao, C., & Wang, Y. (2010, November 4). Jiazhang heshi neng zhenzheng jiandu
xuexiao (When will parents really govern schools?). Renmin Ribao (Peoples Daily), p. 12.
Wang, Q. (2004). Dui teshu ertong jiazhang canyu xuexiao jiaoyu de sikao (Parental
involvement in education for students with special needs). Xinan shifan daxue xuebao
10/14/11 5:45 PM
263
(Renwen shehuikexue ban) (Journal of Southwest Normal University [Humanities and

Social Sciences]), 30 (1), 9195.
Wang, Y. (2007, July 11). Qian tan xin longxiao yiwu jiaoyu kecheng shezhi shiyan fangan (Reflection
on the pilot curriculum standards for schools for the deaf-mute in compulsory
education). Retrieved from http://www.syse.syn.cn/display_new.asp?id=5265.
World Bank. (2010). World development indicators 2010. Washington, DC: Author.
Xiao, F. (2009). Zhongguo de sui ban jiudu lishi xianzhuang zhanwang (Disabled students
attending regular classes in China: History, current situations, and prospects). Zhongguo
Teshu Jiaoyu (Chinese Journal of Special Education), (3), 37.
Xie, J., Qian, L., Yang, X., & Jiang, X. (2009). Guowai teshu jiaoyu jingfei touru he shiyong jiqi
dui woguo teshu jiaoyu fazhan de qishi (The input and use of special educational funds
in the world and the implication to the development of Chinese special education).
Zhongguo Teshu Jiaoyu (Chinese Journal of Special Education), (6), 1724.
Zhang, X., & Baum, R. (2004). Civil society and the autonomy of a rural NGO. The China
Journal, 52, 97107.
Zhang, Y., Yaqiu, C., & He, W. (2004). Beijingshi teshu ertong xue qian jiating jiaoyu
zhuangkuang diaocha baogao (A survey on preschool home education of children with
special needs in Beijing). Zhongguo Teshu Jiaoyu (Chinese Journal of Special Education),
(11), 7377.
Zhao, B. Q. (1997). Guanyu zhongguo jiaoyu jingfei wenti de hugu yu sikao (Reflection on the
problems on educational financing in China). Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.cn
/jytouru/zlwenxian/01.htm.
Zhao, L. (2008). Teshu jiaoyu ying zou jiazhang canyu jiaoyu de moshi (Models of parental
involvement in special education). Zhichang Yanjiu (Career Horizon), (2), 123124.
Zhu, X. Y., & Xu, S. X. (2005). Zhongxi wenhua gailun (Introduction to Chinese and Western
cultures). Beijing: China Light Industry Press.
Zhu, Z. (2008). Zhejiangsheng Xueqian Teshu Jiaoyu De Xianzhuang Ji Duice (Early childhood
special education in Zhejiang province: Development and strategies). Zhongguo teshu
jiaoyu (Chinese Journal of Special Education), (12), 2327.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
13
Special Education in
South Korea: Overcoming
Conflicts for the Realization
of Educational Welfare
Dae Young, Jung
Korea is a peninsula extending south from the northeast Asian mainland. This peninsula
is divided into two parts. One part is communist North Korea; the other is South Korea,
which is a democracy and has a market economy. South Korea was home to around 48.2
million people as of July 1, 2010. Seoul, the capital city, has a population of around 10.4
million. South Koreas population density is 483 persons per 1 square kilometer, one
of the highest densities in the world. Yet the birth rate has plummeted over the past 3
decades as a result of the governments population control policy, recording less than
1.15 expected children for every woman of child-bearing age as of 2009.
Koreas location has historically made it prone to conflict and tension with the neighboring nations of China, Russia, and Japan. In the past, Korea was ceaselessly invaded by
those nations. The end of World War II brought about liberation from Japans oppressive
colonial rule over Korea. However, Korea was then divided along the 38th parallel, with
the Soviet Union occupying the north half and the United States occupying the south.
The United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution calling for a general election in Korea, which took place on May 10, 1948, in the area south of the 38th parallel.
The Government of the Republic of Korea was inaugurated on August 15, 1948. But on
Sunday, June 25, 1950, without warning, North Korean troops invaded the unprepared
South across the 38th parallel. Thus, the Korean War broke out. It ended with the 1953
armistice. But the two hostile forces are still deployed along the 155-mile demilitarized
zone (DMZ), which replaced the 38th parallel.
The many wars took a toll on South Koreas economy, and its citizens quality of life
suffered. The educational system was also poor, and South Korea did not have enough
money and energy to educate children with disabilities. In the first years of South Koreas
independence, religious organizations and welfare organizations led special education.
In 1970, South Korea began to solve the necessities of life through the Saemaeul (new
community) movement. As the economy began to develop and stabilize in the mid-1970s,
interest grew in special education. The Special Education Promotion Law (SEPL),
enacted in 1977, brought great changes to special education. Older attitudes that children with disabilities should be cared for in specialized facilities by social workers began
to change, and the nation started to actively intervene in their education. At present,
South Koreas special education is developing rapidly, thanks to democratization and
economic development (Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development
[MEHRD], 20072008).
264
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Special Education in South Korea
265
S O C I A L FA BR IC
Ethnically, Koreans are one family of the Mongolian race. They speak a common
language and share a strong cultural identity. Their language, which belongs to the
Ural-Altaic family, is distinct from Chinese and Japanese. Koreans use a unique phonetic alphabet called Hangeul that is characterized by an easily understood scientifically
designed system.
Korean culture is unique in the way it developed through its interactions with diverse
outside cultures. Today, Buddhism, Roman Catholicism, Protestantism, Cheondogyo
(a modernized religion based on Dong Hak), and other religions coexist in Korea. In the
absence of a state religion, every Korean is free to engage in the religious life of his or
her choice.
Korean culture is also characterized by advanced science and technology, which derive
from ancient times. Woodblock printing, for example, was developed during the Silla
Kingdom (57 bc935 ad) and was perfected during the Goryeo Dynasty (9181392),
when Koreans published the incredible, voluminous Tripitaka Koreana in its entirety,
using more than 80,000 woodblock printing plates. Korean creativity is further demonstrated by masterful paintings and sculpture; Korean art can be considered as the third
unique aspect of the culture. Paintings on the walls of ancient tombs provide a vivid
depiction of life during the Three Kingdoms period (57 bc668 ad).
The Hangeul phonetic alphabet is another source of pride for Koreans. Before
Hangeul was invented, Korean intellectuals used Chinese characters but the difficulty of
learning the characters left the masses illiterate. Deploring mass illiteracy, King Sejong
the Great commissioned royal scholars to invent Hangeul in the mid-15th century. This
movement encouraged the flourishing of folklore and folk novels and enhanced literacy
throughout the population.
South Korea remained a predominantly agricultural society until the first half of the
20th century. In the early 1960s, the government began implementing 5-year economic
plans, which led to unprecedented socioeconomic growth. Despite its poor natural
resources, South Korea has joined the top ranks of developing countries. The Saemaeul
movement, which promoted the qualities of diligence, self-help, and cooperation in creating infrastructure, also provided the country with the fuel to ignite modernization in
the rural regions (MEHRD, 20052006, 20072008).
Today, South Koreas society, culture, and economy are developing rapidly. According
to Drucker (2004), it took Europe 200 years, the United States 100 years, and Japan 70
years to modernize their societies. It has taken South Korea 40 years. As of December
2010, South Koreas size of exportation and importation was seventh in the world. As of
2010, the nations per-capita gross national product (GNP) stood at $30,200.
Of course, rapid development brings its own set of problems. For example, there is
conflict among the classes and regions. Korea has experienced ideological conflict for
years, a result of the division of the country into north and south. Recently, South Korea
has experienced conflict between progressives and conservatives.
South Korea is rapidly changing into a multicultural society due to the expansion of
international exchange. Foreign workers began to flow into South Korea in earnest
starting in the 21st century. About 13% of Koreans have married a person of a different
10/14/11 5:45 PM
266
Dae Young, Jung

nationality as of July 2007. As the number of immigrants via marriage is increasing,
Koreans accustomed to a homogeneous culture and a racially homogeneous nation are
experiencing cultural conflicts, language problems, school-life adaptation of children of
multicultural families, and underachievement of children of multicultural families. For
example, it is time for South Korea to actively intervene in bilingual education and
multicultural education.
G E N E R A L E DUC AT ION A L S Y S T E M
Korea has a single-track 6-3-3-4 system in order to ensure that every citizen can receive
elementary, secondary, and tertiary education without discrimination, according to
the ability of each student (MEHRD, 2008). The single-track system requires 6 years in
primary school, 3 years in middle school, 3 years in high school, and 4 years in college or
university. Primary and middle school are compulsory in Korea. Kindergarten (ages 3 to 5)
and high school are compulsory for children in special education.
Educational Philosophies
The ideology underlying education in South Korea pursues Hong-Ik human, a philosophy
that aims to create an ideal citizen who has a high degree of independence and who
contributes to the nations development of democracy and the well-being of humankind.
This ideology undergirds a concrete goal of education; that is, education should foster
this type of person. This is most clearly seen in the curriculum at the national level, which
has been revised seven times since it was first developed in 1955. With each revision, the
image of the person to be formed by education was characterized somewhat differently,
depending on the demand and the spirit of each period, but it always remained within
the fundamental ideology of the Hong-Ik human being with Hong-Ik ideology (see Han,
2003; Kang, 2004; MEHRD, 20052006, 20072008).
School Aims
National, public, and private kindergartens provide preschool courses for children in the
3- to 5-year age bracket. Based on the governments kindergarten education curriculum,
kindergarten aims at providing an appropriate environment for nurturing children
and promoting their wholesome development through various enjoyable activities with
diversified contents and methods of instruction. As of April 1, 2010, 40.5% of preschoolage children attended 8,388 kindergartens nationwide (Ministry of Education, Science
and Technology [MEST], 2010).
Primary school aims to provide general rudimentary education. As of 2010, the
enrollment ratio of primary schools increased to 98.6% (MEST, 2010). To expand foreign
language education, English has been taught as a part of the regular curriculum since
1997, with 1 to 2 hours per week from third grade on. Teachers are to teach English but
an exchange-class program or team-teaching system may be adopted, depending on
school conditions. Native English-speaking teachers are invited from many foreign
countries, including the United States, Australia, Canada, and England.
Secondary education is divided into middle and high school. As of 2010, the enrollment
ratios of middle school and high school were 97.6% and 92.4%, respectively. Middle
10/14/11 5:45 PM
267
school aims to conduct standard secondary education on the basis of primary education.
The purpose of high school is to develop students capability to chart their futures befitting their aptitude and talent and to enhance their ability as global citizens. High school
is divided into several different types of schools: general, vocational, science, and other
specialized high schools.
Institutions of higher education in Korea are divided into seven categories: colleges
and universities, industrial universities, universities of education, junior colleges,
broadcast and correspondence universities, technical colleges, and other miscellaneous
institutions. As of 2010, the enrollment ratio of higher education is 70.1% (MEST, 2010).
But South Korea has too many higher educational institutions in proportion to the
number of high school students.
Organization and Structure of the Education System

The macro-organization of the educational system in South Korea includes the MEST at
the national level and Regional Offices of Education at the metropolitan or provincial
level. The MEST is responsible for the formulation and implementation of polices related
to academic activities, sciences, and public education. The ministry plans and coordinates educational policies; works out ideas for elementary, secondary, and higher education support for all levels of schools; supports local educational agencies and national
universities; operates the teacher-training system; oversees adult education; and develops human resource policies. Regional or local administrative offices make decisions
regarding education, art, and science pertaining to each local area. Each local office has
a board of members, a reviewing and decision-making organ, and a Superintendent of
Education as an independent executive organ.
The School Education Law, which articulates the goals and objectives of education for
each school level, specifies the contents to be organized by schools and teachers. From
there, the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development promulgates the
national school curriculum, prescribes the curriculum for each school level, and details
the criteria for the development of textbooks and instructional materials.
The national curriculum has been revised on a periodic basis to reflect the newly
rising demands for education, the emerging needs of a changing society, and the new
frontiers of academic disciplines. The national curriculum ensures a standard quality of
education, maintains the quality of education, and guarantees equal education opportunity for all. To afford flexibility for individual schools, the national curriculum works
with regional guidelines in order to pursue the characteristics and objectives of each
school. The curriculum has 10 basic common subjects, autonomous activities, and special activities that cover the 10 years from the first year of elementary school through the
first year of high school. For the final 2 years of high school, elective subjects are designed
to provide students choices with regard to individual differences in career desire and
aptitude. Textbooks have been developed that emphasize encouraging students selfdirected learning capacity and creativity; that address different levels of student achievement; and that are fun and easy to use.
The South Korean governments efforts to relax the centralization of education and
expand the educational autonomy of local government are part of education reform. To
actively cope with rapidly changing social needs, the MEST changed to a frequent
10/14/11 5:45 PM
268
Dae Young, Jung

revision system from a periodical revision system for the national curriculum starting
from 2008 (MEHRD, 20072008). As noted, the government is attempting to strengthen
the autonomy of education by giving schools more authority for the arrangement and
operation of the curriculum.
S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION I N S OU T H KOR E A

South Koreas recent special education policies aim to provide educational services that
can meet the needs of people with disabilities according to the life cycle, that is, from
early childhood through childhood, the adolescent period, and adulthood. The longterm aim is to form an educational community in which people with disabilities and
people without disabilities can receive educational services together by reducing the
number of students who attend special schools or special classes and integrating them
into general classes.
Legislation
The policy of South Koreas special education is established and executed based on the
Constitutional Law, the Fundamentals of Education Act, the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, and the Special Education Law (SEL). It is influenced considerably by
the Disabled People Welfare Act, the Disability Discrimination Act, and the Convenient
Facilities Improvement Act.
Special Education Legislation

The Special Education Promotion Law (SEPL), first enacted in 1977, stipulated that special education include general education, therapeutic education, and vocational education. It was to be presented by using curriculum, methods, and media suitable for
students with special education needs.
The SEPL of 1977 was amended in 1994 with an emphasis on the selection, admission, and integration of students with disabilities. It stipulated that special education
related services referred to the services that provide human and physical resources,
including counseling support, family support, auxiliary personnel support, assistive
technology device support, learning aids support, integrated support, and information
access support.
The 1994 law was amended again in 2007. The amended law emphasized the expansion of educational opportunities, the establishment of a special education delivery
system, the improvement of the quality of special education, and the expansion of
related services and educational welfare support, and guaranteed the right of students to attend school (Kim, Lee, Kim, & Kwon, 2009). The major contents of the SEL
2007 are
Expansion of educational opportunity. Autism spectrum disorder and developmental delay were added to the categories of disabilities for special education. The
law also extends compulsory and free education. Prekindergarten (infants from
birth to age 2) and extended high school (1 to 3 years after high school) are
10/14/11 5:45 PM
269
free. Kindergarten (ages 3 to 5) to high school are compulsory. The law also
introduced adult education.
Establishment of a special education delivery system. This included the establishment
of an early identification system; the establishment of diagnosis in regular
schools, evaluation, selecting and placement of students with disabilities for special education; the foundation and management of special education support
centers; and the establishment of adult education institutions for individuals
with disabilities.
Support centers. Special education support centers were established throughout
the country with the aim of providing high-quality special education service and
increasing the services for early special education as well as supporting the independence of people with disabilities by increasing career education and improving
their life quality.
Improvement in the quality of special education. The amendments limit class size to
four students per class for kindergartens, six for primary and middle school, and
seven for high school. The law also establishes integrated education principles;
calls for the improvement of Individualized Education Plans (IEPs); allows people
with disabilities more voice in decisions concerning their careers and education;
and expansion of in-service training opportunities for teachers.
Expansion of related services and educational welfare support. This includes regulating
related services and establishing all-day programs for kindergarten and an education welfare system for college students with disabilities.
A guarantee of the rights of students and their parents. This serves to extend discrimination prohibition conditions and the topics that are prohibited.
Related Laws
The Disabled People Welfare Act (2007) forms the basis of all laws and ordinances
related to people with disabilities. It lays an important foundation for the development
and execution of policies and contributes to improving and guaranteeing the rights and
interests of people with disabilities. It aims to make a contribution to social integration
by improving the participation of people with disabilities in social activities, promoting
measures for their welfare, and clarifying national and local governments responsibilities for guaranteeing their rights.
The Disability Discrimination and Relief of Right Act (2007) prohibits discrimination on
the basis of disability. Areas of discrimination include employment, education, the provision and use of goods and services, judicial and administrative procedures, political rights,
maternity/paternity rights and family, welfare facilities, and the right to health care.
The Disabled Persons Employment Promotion and Vocational Rehabilitation Act
(2007) covers the employment and vocational rehabilitation of people with disabilities.
It supports independence through vocational guidance, vocational adjustment training,
job competency development training, job placement, and employment and guidance
for adjustment after employment.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
270
Dae Young, Jung

S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION DE V E L OPM E N T PL A N S
A N D S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION P OL IC I E S
In South Korea, development plans are made and practiced over 5-year periods. Below we
examine educational development plans in the periods from 1992 to 2002 and from 2003
to the present (Department of General Education, 1992; MEHRD, 1996, 1997, 2003).
The period from 1992 to 2002 saw a revised SEPL, broader opportunities for students
with disabilities to enter school, a strengthening of special education, and reinforcement
of the special education support system (Department of General Education, 1992).
Educational institutions for infants with disabilities increased, itinerant education for
children with severe disabilities began, and majors of 1 to 3 years in high school courses
were established. In 1994, the Korea Institute for Special Education was established to
develop policies through research and training (Korea Institute for Special Education,
2004, 2006). The number of special schools for children with severe disabilities increased
by 33.3% and the number of students who attended special schools increased by 20%. The
number of special classes for students with mild disabilities increased by 20.4%. Throughout this period, however, a new recognition of integrated education was emerging. For
example, 11.4% of special classes were integrated into general classes; the number of students with mild disabilities who attended special classes gradually decreased by 6.5%.
As a result of policies for the expansion of higher education for people with disabilities,
by 2002 there were 614 students with disabilities receiving higher education at 15 colleges
and 46 universities. In 2002, the Korea National College of Rehabilitation and Welfare
was established; it has 10 departments and admits 250 students every year. Students with
disabilities can be admitted to university through a special screening system.
The period from 2003 to 2007 saw a guarantee of the opportunity for schooling via
integrated education, improvement in the quality of special education through diversification of educational methods, reinforcement of the expertise and responsibility of
teachers in charge of special education, and the reestablishment of the delivery of special education and support systems. There was an improvement in the accessibility of
welfare and increases in employment, in opportunities to access information, and in
convenient facilities for people with disabilities (Korea Rehabilitation Society for the
Handicapped, 2005).
The budget for special education accounted for 2.0% of the total education budget in
2003. By 2007, it was 3.0%. Special schools were modernized and educational expenses
for preschoolers with disabilities were supported to relieve the burden on the parents.
Special education assistants were put in place to lessen the financial burden related to
the reduction of regular students per class. About 4,000 special education assistants were
placed throughout the country as of 2007.
Categories of Disability
Ten categories of disabilities were designated by the SEL of 2007. A person eligible for
special education is someone who has been diagnosed with any of, or a combination of,
the following: visual impairments, auditory impairments, mental retardation, physical
handicaps, emotional/behavioral disorder, autistic disorder, communication disorder, learning disabilities, health disorder, or developmental delay, or a person who is
10/14/11 5:45 PM
271
diagnosed with disabilities approved by presidential decree. Only those with applicable
disabilities are eligible for special education. Disabilities approved by presidential
decree means that children with other disabilities can be eligible for special education
if a social consensus is reached.
Prevalence
The prevalence of individuals with special education needs (SEN) is lower in Korea
than in other countries in the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), for a number of reasons. First, there is no consensus on the conceptual
and operational definitions for SEN, especially the subordinate categories of learning
disabilities and emotional/behavioral disorders. In the case of learning disabilities,
the concepts of underachiever, slow learner, and low achiever are not clearly defined.
Thus, students with learning disabilities are classified as underachievers and often do
not receive appropriate special education services. As well, the criterion for diagnosing
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is narrow; in many cases, ADHD is
excluded from special education. Second, the development of test instruments is insufficient. Screening tools, rating scales, and test instruments are imported from foreign
countries but are not appropriate enough to reflect the culture and characteristics of
South Korea. One of the reasons that it is difficult to secure reliable and valid test instruments is because South Korea is parsimonious about investing in developing instruments. Third, the criterion for diagnosis is so strict that children who should be eligible
for special education service are often excluded. We must also mention that the parents
of children who have the symptoms of disabilities may object to their children being
diagnosed with disabilities.
Recently, the prevalence of students with visual impairments and students with auditory impairments has declined sharply while the prevalence of students with emotional/
behavioral disorders and with autism has increased. Boys outnumber girls with SEN,
except for auditory impairments. For emotional/behavioral disorders, the prevalence of
boys was 2.6 times higher than that of girls. In autism and language disorders, the prevalence of boys is higher than that of girls by 4.6 and 3.5, respectively (MEST, 2010).
Special Education Statistics

Students who receive special education account for less than 2% of the total school
population in South Korea. As mentioned, this figure is lower than that of other OECD
countries such as the United States, Japan, and Australia.
The SEL of 2007 stipulated that review of actual conditions should be conducted every
3 years to establish special education policy. In 2010, the population and percentage
rates according to areas of disability were as follows: mental retardation, 53.5%; physical
handicap, 13.0%; learning disability, 7.9%; autism, 6.9%; auditory impairment, 4.7%;
emotional/behavioral disorder, 4.5%; visual impairment, 3.0%; health disorder, 2.7%;
communication disorder, 2.0%; and developmental delay, 1.7% (MEST, 2010).
Educational Placement
Students with serious disabilities are mainly placed in special education schools
and hospital schools. Special schools have their preschool, elementary school, middle
10/14/11 5:45 PM
272
Dae Young, Jung

school, and high school on the same campus. There are 150 special schools with a total
enrollment of 23,944 (30.0%) children with severe disabilities (MEST, 2010).
In the case of mild disabilities, 42,021 children are given education in 7,792 special
classes; 13,746 students are in 12,375 general classes within general schools. At present,
many children have postponed their school attendance due to health problems and their
disabilities, a number that almost matches the number of students who are actually taking special education.
Itinerant education is given to children with disabilities who are at home, who are in
the hospital or related facilities, or who are placed at general schools that do not have
special classes. There are 30 hospital schools for children with health disorders or severe
multiple disabilities throughout the country (MEST, 2010).
Examining the placement rate according to education environment reveals that 30.0%
of children with special needs attend special education schools and special education
support centers and 70% attend general schools. In general schools, 52.7% of students
are placed in special classes; 17.3% are in general classes. In general schools, students
with disabilities made up 4.4% of the students in preschool (including infants); elementary school, 44.3%; middle school, 24.3%; and high school (including postsecondary
education), 27.0%. When examining the rate of special school according to establishment, public special schools accounted for 36.7%, national special schools accounted for
3.3%, and private special schools accounted for 60.0%. Schools for mental retardation
accounted for 63.3%, schools for physical handicaps accounted for 12.0%, schools for
auditory impairment accounted for 12.0%, schools for visual impairment accounted for
8.0%, and emotional/behavioral disorder schools accounted for 4.7% (MEST, 2010).
It was previously reported that many children with disabilities who attended general
schools had difficulty adapting and returned to special schools (MEST, 2010). This phenomenon began to decrease after 2008 because the number of special classes at high
schools increased considerably due to the SEL of 2007.
Educational Services
Preschool Education
National, public, and private kindergartens educate children from the age of 3 to 5 years.
Kindergartens aim to provide an appropriate environment for nurturing children and
promoting their wholesome development through various pleasant activities with diversified content and methods of instruction based on the kindergarten curriculum provided
by the state. Goals for young children are to provide experiences that will promote sound
growth in mind and body; develop basic life habits and attitudes for living together with
other people; provide experiences that assist in creatively expressing thoughts and feelings; promote correct language use; and help children confront the concerns of everyday
life (MEHRD, 1997).
To provide preschool education to children of low-income families, the government
has undertaken a series of projects. It assisted families with kindergarten tuition from
September, 1999; financed free education for 5-year-old children from 2002; provided
tuition aid to the parents of 3- and 4-year-old children from 2004; and extended support
to families with two or more children attending kindergarten simultaneously from 2005.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
273
One of the characteristics of preschool special education is that parents of children

with disabilities prefer social welfare centers (SWC) to kindergartens because SWCs
operate all-day programs and provide various treatment services. Some parents delay
their children entering elementary school for 1 to 2 years in order to receive the services
that SWCs provide.
Primary and Secondary Education.

Primary education aims to provide the general skills necessary to live a productive life.
The quantitative expansion of primary education is attributed to the governments
proper educational policies and public enthusiasm for education that has not wavered
despite all the political, social, and economic trials and tribulations. The purpose of
middle schools is to expand on the foundation laid by primary education. Middle school
students are assigned to the schools nearest their homes.
High School Education

The goals of high school are to develop students capability to chart their futures befitting their aptitudes and talents and to help them to become global citizens. South Korea
has specialized high schools for gifted students, but these are criticized for mainly focusing on the students who go to prestigious universities (see Jung, 2004).
Higher Education
A special entrance system for students with disabilities was introduced to institutions of
higher education in 1995. This system aims to meet the needs of students with disabilities
for higher education and permits universities to admit students with disabilities within
10% of the entrance quota. It was reported that 652 students with disabilities attended
university as of 2010 (MEST, 2010).
T E AC H E R E DUC AT ION
The special education teacher-training curriculum is related closely to that of general
education. Special and general teacher education is offered by universities of education,
colleges of education, departments of education, or teachers certificate programs in college and universities, junior colleges, the Korea National Open University (an online and
correspondence university), and graduate schools of education. Kindergarten teachers
are trained by junior colleges and the department of kindergarten teachers in universities. Most primary school teachers are trained by universities of education. Secondary
school teachers are trained at teachers colleges or through teachers certificate programs in general colleges and universities.
The system for educating special education teachers is of two types. The first type
is through undergraduate programs in a university. Students who complete the special education course are eligible for integrated special education qualifications.
A special education program takes 4 years. Majors are divided into early childhood
special education, elementary special education, and secondary special education.
The second means of developing special education teachers is in a graduate school of
education where students holding an undergraduate degree in general education can
10/14/11 5:45 PM
274
Dae Young, Jung

obtain special education qualifications in two years by completing special education
courses.
In-service training is offered to teachers to improve their professionalism and inspire
them with a strong sense of mission so that they can carry out their educational activities
and prepare themselves for the rapidly changing era of information, industrialization,
and diversification. In-service training is offered in three categories: training for certificates, general training, and special training.
Certificates are tied to promotion to a higher level. Participants in the programs,
which last 30 days (180 hours) or longer, may be 1st Grade and 2nd Grade teachers, vice
principals, principals, librarians, and professional counselors.1 General training is
designed to nourish the abilities and capacities needed in various areas of school life,
including curricular instruction, student guidance, and administrative tasks. Overseas
training, a part of general training, consists of hands-on experience and field training
(for teachers who majored in science and industrial subjects). Field training is offered in
either foreign universities or training institutions for 4 to 8 weeks in order to give teachers the advanced knowledge, educational methods, and scientific technology of foreign
countries. Special training sponsored or arranged by the MEST consists of long-term
programs (2 years maximum) offered by the teacher-training institutes for the enhancement of special fields, at home and abroad.
Teachers Organizations and Welfare Organizations

South Korea has pledged to allow teachers union activities. Currently, there are four
such organizations: the Korean Federation of Teachers Association (KFTA), the Korean
Teachers and Educational Workers Union (KTEWU), the Korean Union of Teaching
and Education Workers, and the Korea Liberal Teachers Union (KLTU). The Korean
Teachers Mutual Fund (KTMF) and the Korean Teachers Pension (KTP) have been
established to promote teachers welfare and to provide financial security so that educational workers can fully devote themselves to their jobs.
Academic Activities
South Korea has 14 learned societies related to special education and eight special education institutes attached to universities. The Korea Institute for Special Education is in
charge of research and training and contributes to the development of special education
through policy studies and the development of teaching and learning materials (Korea
Institute for Special Education, 2004, 2006).
AC T I V I T I E S O F I N T E R E S T S G ROU P A N D N G O s
Many interest groups have formed since the end of the 20th century. Representative
groups include the Korea Parents Association (KPA), which has 30 branches throughout
the country, the Parents Association for Autistic Children (PAAC), and the Parents Association for Mentally Retarded Children (PAMRC). Societies of parents of people with
1. 1st Grade and 2nd Grade refers to the status of the teachers in rank.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
275
disabilities undertake diverse activities, such as education and consultation, advocacy,

surveys and research, international exchange, the operation of welfare facilities, and
guardianship for people with disabilities.
I S S U E S A N D TA S K S
South Korean education has made steady progress. Admission rates to primary schools,
middle schools, high schools, universities, and graduate programs have dramatically
soared. Illiteracy is very low. The 1997 Seventh Curriculum establishes the standard for
all school levels and directs the guidelines for developing textbooks. Along with general
education, special education has developed remarkably. Accordingly, legal systems have
been established, educational opportunities for students with disabilities have increased,
and the quality of special education service has improved considerably.
There are many successes, but also multiple challenges facing education in South
Korea (Jung, 2002). These include the following:
General education system. In some ways, the values and the goals of education have
been distorted due to the ups and downs of Korean politics. Currently, education in South Korea has been put on a back burner. The nation has other priorities, such as investment growth. Korean society has developed a distorted view
of the purpose of education, which includes the conflicting values of education,
Koreans perspectives toward education levels, and their reliance on private education. These manifest as the first-class syndrome (the trend to stick to the top-class
universities), excessive private lessons (the dependency on private education to
enter a good university), and students who failed in the previous entrance exam
(in worst cases, some students retake the exam three or four times). In the 21st
century, South Korea has a lot of work ahead in order to re-establish the purpose of education, develop the contents and methods, and mobilize the resources
required for its realization so that we can adapt to accelerating globalization and
an information society.
A clear plan. South Koreas politicians and government officials tend to aim for
performance and achievement, which causes the consistency of policy to be disregarded. Education was no exception to this rule. By adopting the educational
policies of advanced countries without careful consideration, the field of education experienced many failures. For example, special education experienced many
conflicts by introducing IEPs, integrated education, and transition education without careful consideration and before the system was fully ready.
Advocacy. The Progressive Party in South Korea, which came to power in the later
half of the 1990s to the beginning of the new century, had a great interest in
improving the rights of minority groups. Within this political environment, underprivileged persons and groups asserted and claimed their rights. This social atmosphere, for example, led parents of children with disabilities who were dissatisfied
with the slow improvement of special education to form interest groups and assert
and claim the rights to education.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
276
Dae Young, Jung

The SEL of 2007 accepted requests from the Progressive Party, parents associations, and
social organizations. It must be noted, however, that the SEL of 2007 accepted some radical and unrealistic requests so that excessive demand and interference distorted policies.
For example, the law stipulated that the number of students per special class should
be four in preschool; six in elementary school; six in middle school; and eight in high
school. At present, few schools comply with these class sizes. In elementary schools and
middle schools, it is common for the number of students per special class to exceed 10.
The acceptance of unrealistic requests made schools violate the law.
Early identification and the establishment of an early intervention system. As the government emphasizes early identification, the establishment of an early intervention
system is an important task of national policy. Efforts to establish a system for early
identification and early special education are ongoing, but performance is still not
satisfactory. We need a more systematic process.
Expansion of educational opportunities for students with mild disabilities. Students with
severe disabilities receive educational service at special schools. Students with mild
disabilities are mainly placed in special classes or general classes in general schools.
Special classes include full-time special classrooms, part-time special classrooms,
and resource rooms. But the number of students who receive special education
service is actually very small and the prevalence rates are much lower than those of
other countries. Special education is mainly centered on severe disabilities. When
students with mild disabilities are classified as underachievers, they do not receive
proper educational services. It is necessary to redefine the concepts so that all students with needs can receive systematic services.
Definitions and diagnosis. The conceptual and operational definitions of disabilities used to diagnose and evaluate disabilities are insufficient. In particular, the
distinction between learning disabilities and emotional/behavioral disorders
is not clear, which means that some children with mild disabilities are excluded
from receiving services. Efforts to develop proper diagnostic criteria for eligibility
should be made.
Improvement in the quality of special education services. In order to improve the quality
of special education, it is important to improve the quality of special education
teachers and strengthen the special education/general education partnership. All
teachers must develop expertise in special education, instructional accommodations and modifications, scientific research-based instruction, and inclusive education (Jung & Han, 2008).
Optimization of the delivery and support system for special education. Every time the government drafted 5-year development plans, MEST considered the establishment of
special education service delivery as important. Although the number of students
who need special education service placed in general classes has increased, proper
integrated education is not provided.
Inclusive education. The paradigm of special education is changing to consider
the importance and nature of inclusive education. However, the change centers
10/14/11 5:45 PM
277
on physical integration. We need a great effort to make changes in instructional,

psychological, and social integration as well (see Jung, 2003, 2004; Korea Association of Inclusive Education, 2005).
Support centers. There are 180 special education support centers established to support special education. Special education support centers aim to conduct early
identification, diagnostic evaluation, information management, special education
training, and support for teaching and learning activities (SEL, 2007). However,
qualified experts who can do the tasks properly are not placed in these centers.
The work of special education support centers and rehabilitation centers for the disabled
overlaps. Rehabilitation centers belong to the Ministry of Health and Welfare and mainly
deal with welfare support. They provide therapy services to children with disabilities and
operate various family support programs. Special education support centers deal mainly
with educational support. It is necessary to improve cooperation between education support centers and rehabilitation centers as well as to establish an interagency cooperation
system and transdisciplinary team approaches.
Systemic provision of related service. Special education-related services include family
support, therapy, auxiliary personnel support, instructional support, and inclusive
education support. However, systematic support is not provided because qualified
experts are not prepared. For example, more than 4,000 special education assistants support the activities of special education teachers. Many of them obtained
their qualification by taking short-term programs that were provided by universities or learned societies. To improve the effect of special education, it is necessary
to enhance the quality of special education assistants (SEL, 2007).
Higher education. The special entrance system allowed many students with disabilities to be admitted to universities. However, universities do not provide proper
support for students with disabilities. Although the MEST evaluates the support of
universities for students with disabilities every few years, remarkable improvement
has not been made. The special entrance systems for students with disabilities have
also caused some problems. For example, people with cerebral palsy who were
admitted to university through the special entrance system obtained the qualifications of special education teachers and were employed as teachers even though the
work is greatly physically taxing for a person perhaps in a wheelchair. It is necessary to reasonably reconsider this system for students with disabilities.
Multicultural families. In recent years, South Korea has faced a growing population
of ethnically diverse citizens. The number of multicultural families rose remarkably to account for 2.2% of the population. Research conducted by Seol, Suh, Lee,
and Kim (2009) projects that the rates will reach 5.5% by 2020. We must take measures to solve the problems of learning difficulties that children of multicultural
families experience.
Strengthening of vocational education and transitional education and the substantiality of
higher education for students with disabilities. One of the long-term goals of special
education is to help students with disabilities become competent persons who can
10/14/11 5:45 PM
278
Dae Young, Jung

achieve economic independence. However, the number of people with disabilities
who are employed is small. It was reported that among students with disabilities
who graduated from high school, 31.3% went on to higher education; only 11.4%
became employed (MEST, 2010). Although the government encourages companies and public organizations to hire people with disabilities, enterprises and public organizations are reluctant. Many large companies will bear the handicapped
employment levy instead of hiring people with disabilities.
Understanding of people with disabilities. Welfare policy and its execution are considerably influenced by the opinion and awareness of citizens. Government has made a
considerable effort to improve the life quality of people with disabilities, but there
still exists prejudice and discrimination, which impedes social integration. It is
important for citizens and government to cooperate to improve the life quality of
people with disabilities.
F I N A L T HOUG H T S
South Korea is a unique nation that has maintained a 5,000-year history even while
surrounded by powerful neighbors. It made a quantum leap during the 1960s amid the
invasion, tension, and conflict involving China, Russia, and Japan. Education made a
tremendous contribution to the nations emergence from absolute poverty to one with
thriving political and socioeconomic policies.
The governments sustained efforts to develop special education and change societal
attitudes about disabilities have considerably relieved prejudice and led to more positive
views of the rights of people with disabilities. The enactment of laws such as the Disability Discrimination Act, the Disabled Child Welfare Act, the Special Education Law, and
the Convenient Facilities Promotion Act made great contributions to this improvement
(Park, 2008; Park, Jung, Kim, & Kim, 2005). These laws compelled the national central
government and local governments to provide services for people with disabilities and
contributed to promoting the recognition of their rights. The change of recognition may
take a long time, but administrative and financial support according to laws and regulations can bring about change in a shorter period of time.
R E F E R E NC E S
Department of General Education. (1992). Special education development plan. Seoul: Author.
Drucker, P. F. (2004). Drucker sayings in Korean. Seoul: Chungrim.
Han, K. U. (2003). The pedagogy of 21c Korea. Seoul: Korea Academic Information.
Jung, D. Y. (2002). The prospect and tasks of Korean special education. Paper presented at the 10th
Rehabilitation International Korea Conference.
Jung, D. Y. (2003). A study on the educational structure and practical direction supporting
inclusive education. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 19, 139165.
Jung, D. Y. (2004). Education of children with gift/talent and/or disabilities. Kyungnam, Korea:
Changwon National University Press.
Jung, D. Y., & Han, K. I. (2008). Workbook for pre-special teachers. Seoul: Yangsuwon.
Kang, C. D. (2002). The history of Korean educational culture. Seoul: Moonumsa.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
279
Kang, M. S. (2004). School culture in Korea. In I. H. Kim (Ed.), Educational history and the
lecture of educational philosophy. Seoul: Moonumsa.
Kim, W. K., Lee, S. J., Kim, E, J., & Kwon, T. H. (2009). The commentary of special education law.
Seoul: Education Science Publishing.
Korea Association of Inclusive Education. (2005). Inclusive education for general teachers. Seoul:
Hakzisa.
Korea Institute for Special Education. (2004). The ten-year history of Korea Institute for Special
Education. Seoul: Seoul Multi-Net.
Korea Institute for Special Education. (2006). Research on actual state of students with special
education needs. Kyungki, Korea: Korea Institute for Special Education.
Korea Rehabilitation Society for the Handicapped. (2005). Workshop for assessing second
five-year welfare development for the handicapped. Seoul: Author.
Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development. (1996). Comprehensive development
plan of special education. Seoul: Author.
Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development. (1997). 19982002 five year special
education development plan. Seoul: Author.
Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development. (2003). Special education development plan to improve educational outcomes of all students (0307). Seoul: Author.
Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development. (20052006). Education in Korea.
Seoul: Author.
Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development. (20072008). Education in Korea.
Seoul: Author.
Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development. (2008). Annual report of special
education. Seoul: Author.
Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology. (2010). The annual report of special education.
Seoul: Author.
Park, J. Y., Jung, D. Y., Kim, J. Y., & Kim, D. S. (2005). A study for improving special education
related laws. Seoul: Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development.
Park, S. P. (2008). NGO, government, and policies. Seoul: Hanwool.
Seol, D. H., Suh, M. H., Lee, S. S., & Kim, M. A. (2009). A study of the medium- to long-term prospects and measures of multicultural family in Korea: On the focus of the population projection of
multicultural family in Korea, and the analysis of its socio-economic impacts on Korean society.
Seoul: Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Family Affairs.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
14
Current Developments
in Education Policy for
Students With Disabilities
in Australia
Joseph Zajda
Washed by the Pacific and Indian oceans, Australia has 34,218kilometers of coastline
and a landmass of 7,617,930square kilometers. The nation is a federation of six states
Victoria, South Australia, New South Wales (NSW), Queensland, Tasmania, and Western
Australiaand two territoriesthe Australian Capital Territory (ACT) and the Northern
Territory.
Australia was claimed by Britain in 1778 and founded in 1788. The country was first
settled through penal transportation to the Botany Bay colony of NSW. The gold rush in
the early 1850s brought new immigrants and new prosperity to the various colonies.
On January 1, 1901, the six colonies joined to become a federation and the Commonwealth
of Australia was formed.
Australia is a constitutional monarchy with a federal division of powers. It uses a
parliamentary system of government, headed by Queen Elizabeth II as the Queen of
Australia. The Queen is represented by her viceroys in Australia: the Governor General
of Australia and governors for each state.
Australia has over 22 million people. The urban population is nearly 90%, which makes
Australia one of the most urbanized nations globally. All of Australias major cities rate
very highly in global comparative livability surveys. Melbourne reached second place on
The Economists 2008 Worlds Most Livable Cities list (The Economist Intelligence Unit,
2009). Australia was ranked second in the United Nations (UN) Human Development
Index (UN, 2009).
Almost 90% of the population is of European descent. Most Australians are descended
from colonial-era settlers and post-Federation immigrants from Europe and other parts
of the world. The vast majority of immigrants came from the British Isles, and the people
of Australia are still mainly of British or Irish ethnic origin. In the 2006 Australian
census, the most commonly nominated ancestry was Australian (37%), followed by
English (31.7% ), Irish (9%), Scottish (7.6%), Italian (4.3%), German (4%), Chinese
(3.4%), and Greek (1.8%).
Australia is a free market economy defined by a neo-liberal ideology. It has a high
gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and a low rate of poverty. It was ranked third in
the 2010 Index of Economic Freedom, and is globally the 13th largest economy out of 196
280
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Education Policy for Students With Disabilities in Australia
281
nations. Australia has the 11th highest per-capita GDP (similar to that of the United
States).
E DUC AT ION I N AUS T R A L I A

Education in Australia is primarily the responsibility of the states and territories that
manage the school system within individual states, provide funding, and regulate the
public and private schools as well as postsecondary institutions. Both public schools and
private schools exist in each state. While the curriculum taught in each state or school
may vary, the learning areas are the same in all.
Education is compulsory between the ages of 5 and 15 to 17, depending on the
jurisdiction. The academic year in Australia varies between states and institutions but
generally runs from late January/early February until mid-December for primary and
secondary schools. Postcompulsory education is regulated within the Australian
Qualifications Framework, a unified system of national qualifications in schools,
vocational education, and training (Technical and Further Education, or TAFE) and the
higher education sector.
Schools in Australia are based on a three-tier structure: government schools, Catholic
schools, and independent schools. Government schools educate about 65% of Australian
students; some 35% attend Catholic and independent schools. Regardless of whether a
school is part of the government, Catholic, or independent systems, it is required to
follow the curriculum frameworks of its state or territory.
Preschool
Preschool (also known as kindergarten) is relatively unregulated and not compulsory.
Preschools are run by the state and territory governments, except in NSW, Victoria, and
South Australia where they are administered by local councils, community groups, or
private organizations. Fiscal and administrative responsibility for preschools in NSW
and Victoria rests with the Department of Community Services and the Department
of Human Services, respectively. In all other states and territories, responsibility for
preschools rests with the relevant education department (The Structures of Preschool
Education in Australia, 2007).
Preschool is offered to 3- to 5-year-olds. Attendance numbers vary widely between the
states. In general, some 86% of children attend preschool centers.
Primary and Secondary Schools

Primary schools cover 7 years, or 8, if one includes the prep grade, or preschool for
5-year-olds. The name for the first year of primary school varies considerably between
the states and territories. For example, what is known as kindergarten in ACT and
NSW may mean the year proceeding the first year of primary school or preschool in
other states and territories. Some states vary as whether Year 7 is part of the primary
area or not.
Secondary schools cover 6 years for 12- to 17-year-olds. More than 74% of students stay
at school until Year 12, the final year of secondary schooling. Year 12 examinations are
10/14/11 5:45 PM
282
Joseph Zajda
externally administered by the relevant states and territories. All students who sit for the
final Year 12 examinations are ranked. These scores are used for university admission
(99.9 score for medicine or 95 for the commerce faculty at the University of Melbourne).
The score of 95 means that the candidate, ranked against some 60,000 students who sat
for the Year 12 examination, placed in the top 5% in the state.
The 2006 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) ranked the Australian
education system as 6th for reading, 8th for science, and 13th for mathematics on a
worldwide scale including 56 countries (Australian Council for Educational Research
[ACER] 2009). The 2008 Education Index, published with the Human Development
Index (United Nations [UN], 2009), listed Australia as 0.993. This is one of the highest
in the world, tied for first with Finland and Denmark.
Higher Education Sector

There are 38 government and 2 private universities in Australia. The federal
government funds the public universities but is not involved in setting curriculum:
Each higher education institution designs its own programs and curricula. A relevant
professional body must endorse a course for it to run. Typically, a university degree
takes 3 or 4 years to complete, followed by masters (1 to 2 year) and doctoral (2 to 4
year) programs.
S T U DE N T S W I T H DI S A BI L I T I E S I N AUS T R A L I A
Students meeting Australian government criteria for disability status are referred
to as students with a disability. The term disability includes individuals with cognitive
and intellectual disabilities, physical disabilities, vision impairments, hearing
impairments, language disorders, autism, pervasive developmental disorders, chronic
medical conditions, and multiple disabilities. Some students also have other forms of
disadvantage, whether it is isolation, poverty, being indigenous, social deprivation,
and so on.
There are about 100,000 students with disabilities in Australian schools, both special
schools and regular schools. Some students with disabilities are educated in special
schools that provide a very important educational environment for those students. There
are about 20,000 students in these separate special schoolsthat is, about 15 to 20%
of all children with disabilities. The remainderabout 80%attend our regular primary
and secondary schools.
Recent years have seen a very significant increase in the number of students with disabilities being mainstreamed into government schools. Interestingly, about two-thirds
are in primary schools (Australian Human Rights Commission, n.d.).
The identification and assessment of students with disabilities play an important role
in the initial stages of pedagogy. Clearly, the identification of a child with a disability or
a learning difficulty needs to occur at an early stage to maximize cognitive developments
and social benefits to the individual and the family. In Australia, access to specialist
resources addressing special needs is available at the school level.During the identification
and assessment stage of students with disabilities, schools use specific disability criteria.
An example from the state of NSW is shown in Table 1.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
283
Table 1. The Archdiocese of Canberra and Goulburn Program for Inclusion of

Students with Disabilities
Categories of disability
1. Cognition (intellectual)
2. Sensory (hearing)
3. Sensory (visual)
4. Physical
5. Mental health (social/

emotional)
6. Pervasive developmental
disorder (autism)
7. Language disorder
8. Chronic medical
Relevant details
Full-scale score on a standardized, restricted
psychometric (IQ) assessment at or below the
second percentile and accompanied by associated
academic and adaptive behavioral delays
Permanent (sensorineural/conductive) hearing
loss of 30+ decibels with resultant communication
difficulties
Permanent vision loss of 6/24 or less in the better
eye corrected, or less than 20 degrees field of
vision
Ongoing physical condition (e.g., cerebral
palsy, osteogenisis imperfecta, spina bifida) that
significantly limits functioning and independence
in mobility, personal care, and undertaking
essential learning tasks
Mental health problems at a level of frequency,
duration, and intensity that seriously affects
educational functioning; behaviors must be
evident in home, school, and community
environments (a diagnosis of ADD [with or
without hyperactivity] is not included)
Diagnosis indicating a pervasive developmental
disorder (e.g., autism) or disability affecting
verbal and nonverbal communication and social
interaction that significantly affects the ability
to learn; diagnosis must also include a clinically
significant adaptive behavioral delay
Expressive and/or receptive language disorder
with a scaled score of 70 or less on a restricted,
standardized speech pathology assessment (i.e.,
the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals
[CELF])
Chronic medical condition that affects
functioning and/or independence so that a
student is highly dependent on another or access
learning
T H E PU R S U I T OF I NC LUS ION
In recent decades the dominant issue in special education has revolved around the education of students with special needs in general classrooms and neighbourhood schools,
variously encompassed under the terms inclusion, inclusive schooling, inclusive education
or, occasionally, progressive inclusion (Winzer & Mazurek, 2010b, p. 87). Although definitions abound, inclusive schooling for students with disabilities can be defined simply as
10/14/11 5:45 PM
284
Joseph Zajda
instruction that is specially designed to meet the unique needs of children and youth
who are exceptional (Winzer & Mazurek, 2010b, p. 87). Educational institutions should
cater to all students, including those with disabilities. The main aim of inclusive schooling is to empower children and youth who have physiological, cognitive, and emotional
differences that change substantially the way they learn, respond, or behave.
The 1980s heralded a remarkable international commitment to the inclusion of
persons with disabilities into society and schools. As Winzer and Mazurek (2010a)
observed, School systems were prompted to abandon special schools and special classes
and instead create socially just communities where students with disabilities could be
included into neighbourhood schools and general classrooms (p. 3). Then as policy
makers and educators around the world adopted the notion that all children had the
right to be educated together, they set out to recast the functions, content, processes, and
structures of schooling (p. 3).
Australia was influenced by myriad streams of the progressive pedagogy movement.
These included:
The American experience. In the United States, the first major federal legislation
authorizing funds for compensatory education was the 1965 Elementary and
Secondary Education Act, Title I (ESEA). This was replaced by the 1981 Education
Consolidation and Improvement Act (ECIA), which continues to be the cornerstone of Americas compensatory education efforts (Passow, 1997, p. 85).
As a form of inclusive pedagogy, mainstream education for students with
disabilities was promoted with the 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children
Act (PL94-142), amended in 1990 as the Individuals With Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA). This legislation and its amendments have served, and continue to
serve, as a model piece of legislation for other countries as they provide education
for students with disabilities (Winzer, 2006).
U.K. influences. The Report on the Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People in England (Warnock, 1978), known as the Warnock
Report, offered reinforcement for much needed policy reform.
International agencies. The 1981 International Year of the Disabled Person offered a
significant policy drive by drawing worldwide attention to special education.
The European experience. The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on special
needs education was the outcome of more than 300 participants representing 92
governments and 25 international organizations who met in Salamanca, Spain,
from June 710, 1994. Participants considered the fundamental policy shifts
required to promote the approach of inclusive educationnamely, enabling
schools to serve all children, particularly those with special educational needs.
As policy reform initiative, the Salamanca declaration continued the spirit of similar
education reforms in the area of compensatory and special needs. It asserted the
significance of inclusive pedagogy when it decided that Regular schools with
inclusive orientations are the most effective means of combating discrimination,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
285
creating welcoming communities, building an inclusive society and achieving

education for all. (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
[UNESCO], 1994)
UNESCOs later report, Overcoming Exclusion Through Inclusive Approaches in Education:
A Challenge and a Vision (2001), expanded the theme. UNESCO stated that
schools should accommodate all children regardless of their physical, intellectual,
social, emotional, linguistic or other conditions. This should include disabled and
gifted children, street and working children, children from remote or nomadic
populations, children from linguistic, ethnic or cultural minorities and children
from other disadvantaged or marginalised areas or groups. (UNESCO, 2001)
L EG I S L AT I V E F R A M E WOR K
Prescriptive legislation of the ilk of the American IDEA is not in place in Australia.
However, as a nation committed to multiculturalism, Australia follows the principles
of cultural diversity and a pluralist democracy. Therefore, commonwealth legislation
and the policies of state governments on social justice, antidiscrimination, and equality
have had a significant influence on educational provisions for students with disabilities
(Westwood, 2001).
The commonwealth government of Australia showed little interest in special education until the reformist Gough Whitlam Labor Government was elected in 1972. During
its 3-year rule, the government introduced a series of policy documents and legislation,
including antidiscrimination laws. At the policy level, the government adopted integration as its preferred way of meeting the educational needs of children with disabilities.
More significantly, it established the influential policy think tankthe Commonwealth
Schools Commissionwhich became a major influence through its support of research
and policy initiatives, as well as a vehicle for the commonwealth governments policy of
supporting integration (Winzer, Altieri, Jacobs, & Mellor, 2003).
In 1992, the commonwealth government passed the Federal Disability Discrimination
Act (DDA; Australian Human Rights Commission, n.d.) that came into effect on March 1,
1993. The DDA made it against the law for an educational authority to discriminate
against someone because that person has a disability. Critically, a person with a disability
has a right to study at any educational institution in the same way as any other student.
This includes all public and private educational institutions, primary and secondary
schools, and tertiary institutions such as TAFE, private colleges, and universities
(Australian Human Rights Commission, n.d.).
In 2004, the Disability Discrimination Amendment (Education Standards) Bill 2004
(Parliament of New South Wales, 2005) amended the DDA of 1992. The 2005 amendment, known as the Disability Standards for Education, plays a significant role in educational placement in Australia in general. The amendment came into being because there
was the need to mandate compliance with the disability standards mandated in 1992 and
to ensure that the provisions of the draft disability standards for education were fully
supported. The main aim of the amendment was to explain and clarify the legal
10/14/11 5:45 PM
286
Joseph Zajda
obligations of education and training service providers as well as the rights of people
with disabilities under the seminal DDA of 1992.
The Disability Standards of 2005 (Australian Government, Attorney-Generals Department, 2005) set out to ensure that students with disabilities have the same rights as other
students in a number of interlocking areas:
Educational equity. The standards give students and prospective students with
disabilities the right to education and training opportunities on the same basis
as students without disabilities. This includes the right to comparable access, services, and facilities, and the right to participate in education and training without
discrimination.
Accommodations. The rights to equity are not merely formal. Education providers
have a positive obligation to make changes to reasonably accommodate the needs
of a student with a disability. A reasonable adjustment for students with disabilities is defined as a measure or action taken to assist a student with a disability
to participate in education and training on the same basis as other students.
In determining whether an adjustment is reasonable, aneducation providershould
take into account information about the nature of the students disability, his or
her preferred adjustment, and any adjustments that have been provided previously
(Australian Government, Attorney-Generals Department, 2005).
Stereotypes. An aim of the standards was to overcome discrimination based on
stereotyped beliefs about the intellectual and cognitive abilities of students with
disabilities. Accordingly, all students should be treated with dignity and enjoy the
benefits of education and training in supportive environments that value and
encourage participation by all.
Harassment and victimization of students with disabilities. Education providers are
obliged to put in place strategies and programs to prevent harassment and victimization. They must ensure that staff and students know not to harass or victimize students with disabilities, or students who have associates with disabilities. An
education provider must take reasonable steps to ensure that staff and students
know what to do if harassment or victimization occur (Australian Government,
Attorney-Generals Department, 2005).
Direct and indirect discrimination. Direct discrimination occurs when a person
discriminates against another person on the ground of a disability, and as a result
treats, or proposes to treat, the aggrieved person less favorably than the discriminator would treat a person without the disability in circumstances that are not
materially different. Indirect disability discrimination is when a person discriminates against another person on the ground of a disability of the aggrieved person
if the person (the discriminator) requires, or proposes to require, the aggrieved
person to comply with a requirement or condition that is likely to result in the
effect of disadvantaging persons with disabilities.
Another key education policy document came in the form of the Adelaide Declaration
on the National Goals for Schooling in the 21st Century that arose from a discussion paper
10/14/11 5:45 PM
287
(1998) reviewing the Hobart Declaration (1989) and superseded these earlier documents.
In April of 1999, state, territory, and commonwealth ministers of education met as the
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA)
in Adelaide. At that meeting, ministers endorsed a new set of national goals for schooling,
which were released as the Adelaide Declaration (Department of Education, Science and
Training, 2006).
A later education policy document (which now supersedes the Adelaide Declaration)
was the 2008 Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians (Ministerial
Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs, 2008). It sets
the direction for Australian schooling for the next 10 years and also addresses inclusive
education. The education policy goals were developed by education ministers in collaboration with the Catholic and independent school sectors and following public consultation on the draft declaration (Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood
Development and Youth Affairs, 2008).
I NC LUS ION I N PR AC T IC E
Australia is developing its own unique view of inclusive education (Winzer & Mazurek,
2010b). Although legislation specifically targeted at special education such as that in the
United States does not appear, recent education policies in Australia promote equity,
inclusion, human rights education, and social justice. Following these policies and global
trends in inclusive education policy reforms, all educational institutions in Australia
today prefer an inclusive pedagogy approach. At the same time, due consideration is
given to the level of impairment involved in the special needs of an individual student.
Compared to other Western nations, the inclusive movement arrived relatively late in
Australia (Van Kraayenoord, 2002). It was not until 2001 that the actual terms inclusion and
inclusive schooling appeared in the lexicon (Winzer et al., 2003). They supplanted the word
integration, which had been used to denote the least restrictive but most appropriate educational placement for each student with a disability (Gannon, 1991). Today, the term inclusive
education is emerging in education policy used to articulate the rights of students with disabilities, impairments, and learning difficulties to participate in the full range of programs
and services and to use any facilities provided by the education system (Meyer, 2001).
The commonwealth government has an overarching concern with integration and
specific policies for discrimination as we have discussed above. But each Australian state
and territory has its own unique responses to inclusive education policy reforms. The
momentum and practice differ dramatically (Winzer et al., 2003), and there exist considerable curricular and classroom pedagogy variations in Australia among schools. We can
see the flavor of this in recent policy discussions and in two examples from different
systems.
A 2003 meeting of the Australian Special Education Principals Association (ASEPA)
identified the challenge of ensuring that all students (including students with disabilities
and special needs) are recognized and catered for in curriculum options across Australia.
It then established a Curriculum Working Party to review the range of curriculum
responses being developed in the states and territories for students with special education
needs.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
288
Joseph Zajda
At the policy level, the working party identified a significant consensus from members
regarding curriculum issues for students with disabilities and special educational needs
(SEN). They found that strategic vision, research activities and national leadership in
curriculum are missing for SEN, and that there were considerable variations state by
state in how to authentically include all students. The working party chided that there
is an ongoing tension that inclusion implies that all students will fit and be able to access
the generic product, whilst providing curricula that is not broad enough to accommodate the needs of all studentstherefore all does not in fact mean all. Because curriculum does not provide supporting documents and resources that meet the full range of
student and specific needs, they stressed that inclusive schooling for students with disabilities in Australia should address the diversity of needs, rather than planning one
curriculum for all (ASEPA, 2003, original italics).
The State of Victoria

The state of Victoria adopted a comprehensive integration approach in special education
following the report of the ministerial review of educational services for the disabled
(Victoria, Department of Education, 1984), known as the Collins Report. The controversial
Collins Report was influenced by education reforms in special education, notably from the
United States and the United Kingdom. The report proposed five major principles: rejection of the concept of ineducability; childrens right to education in a regular classroom;
transfer of children and resources from the special schools sector to regular schools; noncategorical service delivery; school-based resources; and collaborative decision-making.
Despite its pedagogical significance, the Collins Report failed to define the term
integration. Instead, it referred to two aspects of policy and practice, both of which identify
processes (Reed, 1990). They were a process of increasing the participation of children
with impairments and disabilities in the education programs and social life of regular
schools in which their peers without disabilities participate, and a process of maintaining
the participation of all children in the educational programs and social life of regular
schools (Victoria, Department of Education, 1984).
However, the report laid the groundwork for extended discussions. For example, the
Victorian social justice framework for schools in 1991 identified seven groups whose
needs should be monitored, including students with disabilities (The Social Justice
Framework/State Board of Education [and] School Programs Division, Ministry of
Education Victoria, 1991). In a 1997 review, integration became the main education
policy and pedagogical principle.
The 2001 Meyer report recommended that special schools continue with an enhanced
role to provide for children whose disabilities need longer support and to provide
research opportunities in collaboration with local schools on the development of strategies that strengthen inclusive education (Meyer, 2001). Currently, Victoria maintains a
dual system of regular and special schools. The complex of special schools thrives alongside inclusive programs with much collaboration and interaction.
New South Wales: The Archdiocese of Canberra and Goulburn

The Archdiocese of Canberra and Goulburn can be regarded as a pragmatic model of
inclusive pedagogy that addresses the diversity of needs of students with disabilities.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
289
For the purposes of identification and resourcing in ACT and NSW Archdiocesan
schools, students with a disability is the term applied to students with special needs
(disabilities; Archdiocese, New South Wales, n.d.). In the Archdiocese, students with special needs and disabilities are identified according to the Australian government criteria
and as determined at the state level. They also have an eight-level scale to address the
specific needs of students with disabilities. They include the following forms of disabilities: cognitive, sensory, visual, physical, mental health (social and emotional), pervasive
developmental disorder, language disorder, and chronic medical condition (see Table 1).
The Student Centred Appraisal of Need (SCAN) mechanism is an ascertainment and planning process to determine student needs and assist in making adjustments for students
with disabilities in ACT schools of the Archdiocese. An Individual Education Plan (IEP)
is a written plan developed at school level to plan for, review, and assess the learning
needs of students with disabilities.The IEP, developed in collaboration with parents, is a
key element of a schools response to meeting needs of every student with disabilities.
Schools offer their own IEP for each special needs student. The annual IEP summary is
a Catholic Education Office (CEO) requirement for system accountability and planning
processes.
An Individual Planning Tool (IPT) is an ascertainment and planning process to
determine student needs and assist in making adjustments for students with disabilities
in the NSW schools of the Archdiocese. The IPT process will be gradually introduced
into NSW schools from 2010. The Literacy Numeracy and Special Learning Needs
program is an Australian government initiative to provide educational systems with supplementary resources to support better learning outcomes for students with special
needs. The Archdiocese distributes these resources to schools on an annual basis to support students with disabilities and students with special needs (other than disabilities).
The research literature on teaching students with disabilities has broadly and widely
documented the nexus among teacher training, teacher perceptions, teacher attitudes,
teacher discrimination, and teacher efficacy that affect classroom pedagogy. Critical
areasamong many othersare teacher rejection of the principles of inclusive schooling
and teacher lack of knowledge and skills (Winzer, 2008).
Some teachers dislike the principles of inclusion. Winzer (2006) observes that
Many teachers reject the demands that all teachers be prepared to teach all children, dispute inclusion as a universal template that assumes that only one solution
exists to the various challenges faced by children with special needs, are unwilling
to accept the loss of the safety valve called special education, and prefer the present
system. (p. 33)
Teachers perceptions of teaching children with disabilities and their attitudes toward
inclusion are significantly influenced by their own perceived levels of efficacy, particularly
in the teaching of children with disabilities in their classrooms (Hsien, 2007; Winzer &
Mazurek, 2010b). Many teachers lack skills. Research findings from across the globe
indicate that schools and teachers are struggling to respond to students with special
10/14/11 5:45 PM
290
Joseph Zajda
needs and to provide authentic, relevant, empowering, and worthwhile schooling for
such students (e.g., Aniftos & McLuskie, 2003; Wills & Cain, 2002; Winzer & Mazurek,
2005; Zajda, 2011).
Australian teachers have reported that they found the inclusion of students with special
needs to increase their workloads and spoke of their increased stress and lack of support
(Chen & Miller, 1997; Forlin, Haltre, & Douglas, 1996; Klassen, Usher, & Bong, 2010).
A recent study in Western Australia (Anderson, Klassen, & Georgiou, 2007) found that
many teachers seemed willing to move toward greater inclusive practices although many
were ambivalent or angry about the problems associated with the day-to-day practice.
Teacher Training
Level of training is significantly correlated with the level of confidence in teaching
inclusively. It follows that the nature and the quality of teacher training for inclusive
schooling for students with disabilities is a major factor affecting teacher attitudes and
teacher efficacy (Romi & Leyser, 2006; Winzer, 2006; Winzer & Mazurek, 2010a, 2010b).
Reports from Australia claim that young teachers are not trained effectively to work
with students with special needs (see Milton & Rohl, 1999). In a recent Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) survey, more than 60% of Australian
teachers wanted more development than they received (OECD, 2009). It is not surprising
that a recent study (Anderson et al., 2007) found that the number one request by teachers was for more training and professional development in inclusion-related topics. In
particular, teachers wanted more training in a variety of disabilities.
Some advances are evident. In the state of Victoria, major government policies have
emphasized that for inclusive education reform to be successful there is need for reform
in teacher preparation at the pre-service level so that teachers are better prepared for
inclusive schooling for students with disabilities.
However, in the state of New South Wales it was proposed that teachers be trained to
cover a broader range of needs instead of specializing in areas such as autism, language,
or behavioral difficulties. The Education Minister did not believe specializations will be
lost, or that online training is inadequate. She said that 110 hours of additional specialist
training is something that most teachers that Ive talked to have actually jumped at the
chance to do. Opponents argue that The idea of using online training for just 110 hours
and [then] put teachers in front of students with diverse special needs was always absurd.
(ABC News, 2009). In September 2009, the New South Wales government deferred the
reform of special education in the public schools to allow time for further consultation.
C H A L L E NG E S
As Winzer and Mazurek (2010b) point out, Few issues have received the attention and
generated the controversy and polarization of perspectives as has the movement to
include all children with disabilities into general classrooms (p. 87). Although integration is accepted policy in Australia, the issue of genuine inclusion of students with
disabilities continues to be a challenge and there are still unresolved education policy,
curriculum, and classroom pedagogy issues.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
291
Australia sees a plurality of voices governed by a common concern; multiple discourses

address inclusive schooling for students with disabilities. Each state approaches inclusive
education quite differently so that education policy reforms for inclusive schooling contain a multifaceted diversity of educational provisions, rather than one approach.
Inclusive schooling in Australia illustrates the complexity of the inclusive reform movement, the changing agenda, and the pervasive challenges. We point to only two of the
challenges below: legislative intent and teacher skills and training.
Legislation and Its Intent

The rights of students at risk and with disabilities in Australia are protected by the
Education Act (1989), the Anti-Discrimination Act (1991), the Disability Services Act
(1992), and the DDA of 1992 (Australian Human Rights Commission, n.d.).
The DDA of 1992 was designed to protect individuals with disabilities against
discrimination, including discrimination in education. Jackson, McAfee, and Cockran
(1999) observe that the DDA is only necessary because we have to make something right
for a group of people for whom the right thing is not being done voluntarily (p. 20).
However, they concluded that, despite this intent, discrimination against students with
disabilities in Australia still exits. Surveys and anecdotal evidence indicate that discrimination remains a significant problem at all levels of education and in particular for
children with disabilities wishing to be included in mainstream education.
Jackson and colleagues (1999) further note,
Despite these noble intentions it is apparent that there is limited awareness of the
DDA in education systems at all levels. In school systems in particular the right thing
is still not being done even though there is awareness of the law at senior levels. It is
our conclusion that very large institutions with very large budgets and a history of
getting their own way have shown that they will not do the right thing, despite the
law. (p. 20)
Given the enduring history of discrimination in education, they call for multiple
strategies to address discrimination. School systems will not do the right thing in future
unless principles are clearly defined, their performance is independently monitored and
very powerful contingencies are placed on compliance with the law (Jackson et al.,
1999, p. 20).
Teacher Skills and Teacher Training

Teacher resistance and tension continue to be significant factors. A body of research
finds that teachers in Australia experience pedagogical difficulties when teaching students with disabilities. They find the inclusion of students with special needs to increase
in their workloads and cause stress. And, While educational integration is advancing
rapidly, policy makers, parents, and practitioners must still grapple with systems unready
to meet the multiple responsibilities of inclusive schooling (Winzer, 2006, p. 37).
Combined with the issue of inadequate training for pre-service teachers in preparing
classroom lessons that would meet the full range of inclusive schooling for students with
disabilities, there is the issue of shortage of teaching resources.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
292
Joseph Zajda
F I N A L T HOUG H T S
Education policy and pedagogy for inclusive schooling for students with disabilities in
Australia has a rich history of some 4 decades. Influenced by globalization and education
reform and reflecting social justice, human rights, and inclusion, schools in Australia
have adopted the global pedagogy of inclusive schooling for all (see Zajda, 2010).
Inequity in the classroom for students with disabilities continues to be a major issue
globally. In order to achieve social justice in schools, learning opportunities need to be
created that reinforce equity for all students. This is the essence of inclusive pedagogy
and human rights education. Nevertheless, there exist inclusions, not a sole identifiable
vision of inclusion. Efforts to bring about fundamental change cannot be quantified into
a generic recipe (Winzer & Mazurek, 2010a).
This chapter reviewed recent education policy and pedagogy initiatives in the area of
students with disabilities. It discussed education policy for students with special needs
within the nexus of social justice, human rights education, and inclusive pedagogy. We
conclude that education policy and pedagogy in Australia, while progressive in its intent,
has much to achieve if we are to have authentic and meaningful pedagogy for students
with disabilities.
R E F E R E NC E S
ABC News. (2009). Special education reform put on hold. Retrieved from www.abc.net.au/news
/stories/2009/09/18/2689698.htm.
Anderson, C., Klassen, R., & Georgiou, G. (2007). Inclusion in Australia: What teachers say
they need and what school psychologists can offer. School Psychology International, 28,
131147.
Aniftos, M., & McLuskie, L. (2003, December). On track toward inclusive education. Paper presented at the AARE Conference, Auckland, New Zealand.
Archdiocese, New South Wales. (n.d.). Students with special needs (disabilities)identification and
support. Retrieved from http://www.ceocg.catholic.edu.au/policies/spec_needs.htm.
Australian Council for Educational Research. (2009). OECD Programme for international student
assessment. Retrieved from http://www.acer.edu.au/ozpisa/keyfindings.html.
Australian Government, Attorney-Generals Department. (2005). Disability standards for
education. Retrieved from http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Humanright
sandanti-discrimination_Disabilitystandardsforeducation.
Australian Human Rights Commission. (n.d.). Disability Discrimination Act of 1992. Retrieved
from http://www.humanrights.gov.au/about/legislation/index.html#dda.
Australian Human Rights Commission. (n.d.). The Disability Discrimination Amendment
(Education Standards) Bill 2004 [2005]. Retrieved from http://www.hreoc.gov.au
/disability_rights/legislation/edbill2r.htm.
Australian Special Education Principals Association . (2003). Curriculumbuilt in, not bolted on.
Retrieved , from http://www.asepa.org.au/PDF/National%20Curriculum.pdf.
Chen, M. R. & Miller, G. (1997). Teacher stress: A review of the international literature. East
Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED410187).
Department of Education, Science and Training. (2006). The Adelaide declaration on national
goals for schooling in the twenty-first century. Retrieved from http://www.mceetya.edu.au
/mceetya/nationalgoals/index.htm.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
293
The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2009). Quality-of-life index. Retrieved from http://www
.economist.com/media/pdf/QUALITY_OF_LIFE.PDF.
Forlin, C., Haltre, J., & Douglas, G. (1996). Inclusion: Is it stressful for teachers? Journal of
Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 21, 199217.
Gannon, P. M. (1991). Current themes in integration. In A. F. Ashman (Ed.), The Exceptional
Child Monograph, No 2 (pp. 175194). St. Lucia, Queensland: Fred and Eleanor Schonell
Special Education Research Centre.
Hsien, M. L. W. (2007). Teacher attitudes towards preparation for inclusionIn support
of a unified teacher preparation program. Post-Script: Postgraduate Journal of Education
Research, 8(1), 4960. Retrieved from http://www.education.unimelb.edu.au/research
/resources/student_res/postscriptfiles/vol8/Michelle_Hsien.pdf.
Jackson, R., McAfee, J., & Cockran, J. (1999). Disability discrimination in education (discussion
paper). Retrieved from http://www.include.com.au/papers/DDAsummary.pdf.
Klassen, R., Usher, E., & Bong, M. (2010). Teachers collective efficacy, job satisfaction, and
job stress in cross-cultural context. Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 464487.
Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs. (2008).
Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Retrieved from http://
www.mceecdya.edu.au/mceecdya/melbourne_declaration,25979.html.
Meyer, L. H. (2001, February). Employment and training review of the program for students
with disabilities and impairments (Report submitted to the director, Office of School
Education). Melbourne, Australia: Victoria Department of Education.
Milton, M., & Rohl, M. (1999). Children K2 who are of concern to their teachers: Identification, programs and the professional needs of teachers. Australian Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 3, 916.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2009). Education at a glance:
OECD indicators. Paris: Author.
Parliament of New South Wales. (2005, October). Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Equality
in Education and Employment) Bill. Retrieved from http://www.parliament.nsw.gov
.au/Prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LC20051013033.
Passow, A. H. (1997). Compensatory education for equity and excellence: A critique of
the Title 1/Chapter 1 Program. In J. Zajda (Ed.), Education and Society (pp. 85106).
Melbourne, Australia: James Nicholas Publishers.
Reed, B. (1990). A survey of teachers concerns towards integration in state primary schools, Bendigo
Region, Victoria. Retrieved from https://www.highbeam.com/Registration/Registration1.
Romi, S., & Leyser, Y. (2006). Exploring inclusion preservice training needs: A study of
variables associated with attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs. European Journal of Special
Needs Education, 21, 85105.
The Social Justice Framework/State Board of Education [and] School Programs Division,
Ministry of Education Victoria. (1991). Retrieved from http://www.bing.com/s
earch?q=The+Victorian+social+justice+framework+for+schools+in+1991+&mkt=
en-au&qs=n&first=1&FORM=PERE.
The Structures of Preschool Education in Australia. (2007). Retrieved from http://www
.aeufederal.org.au/Ec/PreschoolEducationSheetNo2.pdf.
United Nations. (2009). Human development index. New York: Author.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1994). The Salamanca
statement and framework for action. In Final report of the World Conference on Special Needs
Education: Access and quality. Salamanca, Spain: Author.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2001). Overcoming
exclusion through inclusive approaches in education. A challenge and a vision (Conceptual
paper for the education sector). Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org
/images/0013/001347/134785e.pdf.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
294
Joseph Zajda
Van Kraayenoord, C. E. (2002). The roles of the educational psychologist in inclusion in
Australia. Educational and Child Psychology, 19, 4658.
Victoria, Department of Education. (1984). Collins report: Integration in Victorian education
(Report of the ministerial review of educational services for the disabled). Melbourne,
Australia: Author.
Warnock, H. M. (1978). Special education needs: Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the education of handicapped children and youth. London: Her Majestys Printing Office.
Westwood, P. S. (2001). Making special schools ordinary: Is this inspirational or confused
thinking. International Journal of Special Education, 16, 720.
Wills, D., & Cain, P. (2002, November 13). Key competencies required for teachers to work in and
foster inclusive school communities. Paper presented at the Teacher Education for Inclusion
Conference, Edith Cowan University, Perth.
Winzer, M. (2006). Including students with special needs: Two landscapes. Curriculum and
Teaching, 21, 2139.
Winzer, M. (2008). Muted voices in educational reform: Teacher attitudes and the inclusive
Movement. Educational Theory and Practice, 30, 525.
Winzer, M. A., Altieri, E., Jacobs, T., & Mellor, E. (2003). Reform in special education: Case
studies from Australia, Canada, and the United States. International Journal for the
Humanization of Education, 8, 96118.
Winzer, M., & Mazurek, K. (2005). Global agendas in special education: A critique. Educational
Theory and Practice, 27, 724.
Winzer, M., & Mazurek, K. (2010a). Different spaces, different places: An analysis of the
inclusive reform for students with disabilities in the United States and Germany. World
Studies in Education, 12, 318.
Winzer, M., & Mazurek, K. (2010b). Including students with special needs: Implications for
social justice. In J. Zajda (Ed.), Globalization, education and social justice (pp. 87101).
Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Zajda, J. (2010). Global pedagogies. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Zajda, J. (2011). PEP visits to non-government and government schools in Victoria during the last two
decades. Melbourne: Australian Catholic University.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
15
New Perspectives on
Special Needs and
Inclusive Education
in Japan
Naoki Ito, Satoshi Arakawa,

Satoshi Nitsu, Fusaji Ando,
Seiichi Makino, Tatsuya Toda,
and Mitsuyasu Tomita
Japan is an arc-shaped archipelago off the east coast of Asia. The country consists of four
main islandsHokkaido, Honshu, Shikoku, and Kyushuand many small islands. The
total land area of Japan is almost the same as Italy. Nearly 70% of the land is mountains
and forests. Most of Japan has a temperate climate with four distinct seasons. Japan is
composed of 47 prefectures, a prefecture being the largest unit of government below the
national level.
The population in 2010 was about 128 million, placing Japan about 10th in the world
in terms of population. However, compared to the United States, Japan has about half
the population in an area only 1/25th of its size. Over 43% of the national population of
Japan lives in the urban Tokyo, Osaka, and Nagoya areas.
The present main political parties are the Democratic Party (DP), the Liberal Democratic
Party (LDP), Komati, the Japan Communist Party, the Social Democratic Party, and other
small parties. In 2010, the administration changed hands from the LDP to the DP.
The principal religions in Japan are Buddhism, Shinto, and Christianity. Buddhism
especially has been a major presence in the life of the Japanese for a long time. However,
Japan has no state religion, and religious functions are forbidden in the public schools.
In ancient times, Japan was deeply influenced by China. Over the centuries, Japan
assimilated Chinese and other foreign cultures and simultaneously built its own culture.
Today, Japan boasts 11 World Cultural Heritage sites: for example, the Horry-Temple,
the oldest wooden building in the world, and Himeji-Castle. There are also three World
Natural Heritage sites.
Japan is one of the most developed countries in the world. For example, the Japanese mass
media has reached a high degree of development. Newspaper circulation is 68,521,000; that
is, 625 per 1,000 adults subscribe to newspapers, which is the top in the world. The Japanese
people also receive the benefits of huge developments in information technology. The penetration rate of the Internet reached 76.8% in 2008; mobile phones were at 92.4% in 2010.
For decades, a strong Japanese economy meant that tertiary industries expanded
rapidly. According to the census in 2005, the percentage of Japanese workers engaged in
primary, secondary, and tertiary industries was 5.1%, 25%, and 67.3%, respectively. At
the same time, the percentage of the population engaged in agriculture dropped from
26.8% in 1960 to 2% in 2005.
295
10/14/11 5:45 PM
296
Naoki Ito, Satoshi Arakawa, Satoshi Nitsu, Fusaji Ando, Seiichi Makino, Tatsuya Toda, & Mitsuyasu Tomita
Manufacturing, especially automobiles, industrial machinery, and electronics, became
the main industries. Japan still produces 15% of the cars currently produced in the world.
However, many Japanese automobile companies have been shifting their production bases
to overseas in order to reduce production costs and the damage caused by a strong yen.
The collapse of the bubble economy and a protracted recession, followed by the global
recession that began in 2008, struck the Japanese economy. The traditional system of
lifetime employment, seniority-based wages, and enterprise eroded. Today, many
Japanese people are faced with difficult economic problems.
In Japan, a low birth rate and longevity are advancing hand in hand. The rate of the
elderly population of Japan is the highest in the world. The number of people ages 65
and older has increased from 5.7% in 1960 to 22% in 2008, an increase twice as high as
that in Europe and three times that in the United States.
According to the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW), the number of
young unemployed persons (15 to 34 years old) who neither do housekeeping nor go to
school has rapidly increased. About 40% of youth do not have regular employment. This
is one of reasons for the declining marriage rate.
The current school system in Japan was established just after World War II. Since then,
no noticeable modification has been made to the regular school system. According to
the School Education Law in Japan, the school system provides kindergarten, elementary school, junior high school, senior high school, secondary school, special needs education, universities, and colleges of technology. These are shown in Figure 1.
Age
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
Compulsory
Education
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
Regular Schools Special Needs School
University
College
of
Technology
Graduate
Junior
College
Course
Upper Secondary
Department
Senior High School
Secondary
School
Lower
Secondary
Department
Junior High School
Elementary School
Kindergarten
Special
Needs
Class
Elementary
Department
Kindergarten
Department
Figure 1. Basic structure of the school system in Japan.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Special Needs and Inclusive Education in Japan
297
Parents have an obligation to send their children to school for 9 years beginning in
April of the year the child becomes 6 years of age. This obligation can be extended or
exempted due to very significant disability. However, the cases of extensions and exemptions have decreased to less than 100 annually.
Schooling for Special Needs

Japan has two separate school systems: regular schools and special needs schools.
However, inside the regular school system there are several measures to accept students
with disabilities.
As in many other countries around the world, the situation of special education in
Japan is in a state of flux. In recent decades, the education system for students with disabilities has changedand to a large extent. We outline these changes below. (For more
on legislation and reform see Abe, 1998; Matsumura, 2008; Yamaguchi, 2005.)
The first change came in 1979, when a new government ordinance was enacted to
deal with the rapidly increasing number of children with significant or multiple
disabilities. Education at schools for the handicapped became compulsory. Even
children with the most significant disabilities were now able to go to school.
Education in a resource room was accepted by amendment of ministerial ordinance
of the School Education Law in 1993 (see Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport,
Science and Technology [MEXT], 2009).
Changes to the law in 2007 brought a number of revolutionary changes, foremost
among which was a change in terminology from special education to special needs
education.
Before 2007, Japan had three types of special schools: schools for the blind, schools
for the deaf, and schools for the handicapped. The latter group was further
subdivided into three types: special schools for students with intellectual disabilities,
for those with physical disabilities, and for sickly students. From 2007 on, these special schools were integrated into one type called Tokubetsu Shien Gakko, which literally means special support school but is generally regarded as a special needs school.
Under the new special needs school system, one particular school can accept several
types of disabilities. But because the change happened abruptly and the history of
the old special schools was long-standing, not all special needs schools accepted the
five kinds of disabilities. In fact, most special needs schools are still maintaining the
old system based on the five kinds of disabilities. This is shown in Table 1.
After 2007, special needs education could be provided in various places: special
needs schools, special needs classes, resource rooms, and regular classes of regular
schools.
Learning disabilities (LD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
were recognized as disabilities, and children with these disabilities could receive
special instruction. In 2002, the MEXT showed that 6.3% of students with special
educational needs (students with LD, ADHD, and so on) were in elementary and
10/14/11 5:45 PM
298
Table 1. Number of special needs schools in 2008
Type of school Number of
Number of Departments
Schools
Kinder- Elementary Lower Upper
garten
2nd
2nd
Number of
Students
Blind
70(2)
47
65
62
57
3488
Deaf
99(8)
91
93
83
65
6427
Intellectual
490(49)
11
412
414
427
67271
Physical
151(13)
147
147
122
13157
Sickly
74(16)
73
69
40
3103
Deaf and
intellectual
Intellectual
and
physical
Intellectual
and sickly
Physical and
sickly
Intellectual,
physical, and
sickly
Deaf,
intellectual,
physical, and
sickly
Blind, deaf,
intellectual,
physical, and
sickly
157
90(4)
87
87
86
13928
1122
9
13
13
13
12
1361
13(1)
12
12
10
877
90
14
14
12
1353
14(2)
*All departments may not cope with the plural disorders showed in Type of school. Numbers in
parentheses are the numbers of branch schools.
Source: Tokubetsu Shien Kyouiku Shiryo (MEXT, 2008), http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/tokubetu/
material/1279975.htm.
junior high schools. The amendment of the School Education Law aimed to give
them special needs education. They are now served in regular classes and resources
rooms with special supports.
The legal changes in 2007 also brought some changes in the acquisition of teachers
licenses for special needs education. It is clearly stated that the study of the mental
and physical development of disabled children and their learning processes should
be included in educational psychology classes as part of the required teacher
training curriculum.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
299
Special Needs Schools

Most special needs schools have elementary, lower secondary, and upper secondary
departments. A few special needs schools, especially the old special schools for blind
and deaf students, have kindergarten departments and graduate courses in the upper
secondary departments. Recently, the number of special needs schools that only have
upper secondary departments increased, especially for students with mild intellectual
disabilities.
Almost all special needs schools that are located outside of a city provide school buses
and/or a dormitory. Most schools for sickly children are close to hospitals and are served
by the medical staffs.
Visiting Education
Children with the most significant disabilities attend special needs schools. Some of
them have such severe disabilities that they often cannot go to school. In these cases,
teachers visit their home to teach them. Usually a teacher visits twice every week. Special
needs school personnel evaluate whether a child can attend school regularly or requires
education at home.
Special Needs Education Within Regular Elementary

and Junior High School
Students with mild disabilities have the option of attending a special needs class in a
regular school, which is often closer to their home than the nearest special needs school.
Each school can have up to seven kinds of special needs classes, such as classes for students with intellectual disabilities, for students with physical disabilities, for sickly or
weak students, for weak-sighted students, for hard of hearing students, for students with
speech defects, and for students with emotional disorders or with autism.
However, no school has all seven types of classes. Most schools have only one or two
types of classes. In fact, the number of schools that do not have any special needs classes
is not small; the situation depends on the district. This is shown in Table 2.
Resource Rooms
There are three ways for students with mild disabilities who are attending regular classes
to attend resource rooms: they can attend a special needs class or a resource room at their
own school; they can attend a class or resource room at another school; or they can meet
with a visiting special education teacher if facilities are not available nearby. Students can
use one of these options from an hour a month to 8 hours a week (see MEXT, 2009).
Accredited Entry Students

In Japan, there are particular criteria to enter special needs schools. If a students disability matches the criteria, the parents of the student basically choose the special needs
school. However, if the parents strongly want their child to attend a regular school and
the school meets enough conditions, the student may be accredited by a municipal board
of education and be able to go to the regular school near her or his home. Accredited
entry students are limited but increasing.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
300
Table 2. Numbers of special needs classes (2008)
Main specialty
of disability
Elementary school
Lower secondary school
Number of
classes
Number of
students
14,143
47,062
6,996
24,202
1,847
3,163
638
1,038
Sickly and weak
780
1,492
312
520
Weak sighted
204
257
76
90
Hard hearing
497
901
209
328
Speech
386
1,324
64
87
9,817
32,132
4,035
11,570
27,674
86,331
12,330
37,835
Intellectual
Physical
Emotion and
autism
Total
Number of
classes
Number of
students
Source: Tokubetsu Shien Kyouiku Shiryo (MEXT, 2008), http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/

tokubetu/ material/1279975.htm.
In 2008, the number of people in Japan with identifiable disabilities was as follows: roughly
3,660,000 with physical disabilities; 550,000 with intellectual disabilities; and 3,230,000
with mental disorders, (see Cabinet Office of the Government of Japan, 2010).
In total, about 1.8% of students access one type of special needs education. Depending
on the source of the data, an estimated 60,000 children (0.56 to 0.7% of students) go to
special needs schools. About 124,000 children (0.8 to 1.15%) go to a special needs class
in normal elementary or junior high school. There are 50,000 children (0.3 to 0.46%)
using a special needs room (resource room). In 2007, about 72% of these children had
speech defects. In addition, there are 680,000 children (6.3%) who may have mild disabilities, such as LD, ADHD, or high-functioning autism, in regular classrooms.
Senior high school is not compulsory education in Japan. The ratio of students with
disabilities continuing to senior high school is about 97%, the same as for students without
disabilities. In 2007, there were 5,404 students with some type of disability at universities.
These proportions seem to be very low. In fact, some teachers find that there are many
more students who demand special needs education. Some of these students are well supported by good teachers; others are ignored. To make matters worse, some special needs
may be simply overlooked by some teachers.
Educational Equity
As most special needs schools are public schools, equality of education is guaranteed.
Educational opportunity is not affected by social class, gender, ethnic, religious, racial,
or other factors. Gender differences do not become an obstacle for disabled persons.
The educational subjects, the schedule, and the location are the same for male and
female students.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
301
Procedure to Enter School

Figure 2 shows the procedure for school attendance at elementary schools or in elementary departments of special needs schools. The municipal board of education plays the
most important role in deciding which school a child should attend. A guidance committee for school attendance (which also directs children who change schools at any point of
their school careers) also has a role in placing children with disabilities.
Before going into an elementary school, a consultation about the disability is held.
The boards of education conduct a precise investigation about a child in relation to her
or his disabilities: Data are collected from medical institutions, the kindergarten, and so
on. Specialists in the education of physically and intellectually disabled children from
the boards of education talk with the parents. Recently, administrators have started to
(DATE)
Oct.1st
Municipal Board of Education
makes a list of students who will enter
elementary school in the following April
Oct.31st
executes health examination for the students
Correspond to the criteria for

special needs school?
NO
Nov.30th
YES
Municipal Board of
Municipal Board of
Education
Education
notifies prefectual board of
accredits that the student
education that special needs
can get appropriate
school is appropriate
education at regular school
Guidance Committee
for School
Attendance
is established and
municipal board of
education hear the
views of parrents,
professions of
education, medicine,
psychology, or
disability study
Dec.31st
notifies parents the date and the
name of the regular school that
their child should attend.
Prefectural Board of Education

notifies parents the date and the
name of the special needs school
that their child should attend.
Jan.31st
Apr.1st
A new school year starts!
Figure 2. Procedure of school attendance for elementary school or elementary department

for special needs school.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
302
listen more to the parents points of view. Today, parents, professionals, and a member of
the municipal board of education together discuss what is the best choice for each child.
If the specialist and parents reach an agreement, the disabled child will go into a suitable school. For the child with significant disabilities, the special needs school is prepared. For the child with mild disabilities, selection is prepared for three possible courses:
a regular class, a special needs class, and a resource room.
According to the regulations of the present law, a child who is significantly disabled
can attend a special needs school. However, it is the municipal board of education that
judges the appropriate placement for an individual child. Sometimes, it judges that the
significantly disabled child does not belong in a special needs school but belongs in a
regular elementary school or junior high school in the childs town. We call this type of
students accredited entry students.
There are a few parents who deny the specialists judgments about their childs disability. For various reasons they refuse to send their child to a special needs school or a special needs class. Some parents say, Even if my child has a disability, the child can profit
in a regular class. Or some parents argue, If a child with disabilities studies in a regular
class, it is expected that the child becomes normal little by little.
According to the MEXT, the number of students going to regular schools increases
every year. In 2007, there were 1,759 students who would traditionally have attended special needs school but were instead placed in regular elementary schools. There were 583
such students in regular junior high schools.
Education for young children in Japan is primarily in kindergartens or nursery
schools. Almost all children receive some kind of education in either nursery school or
kindergarten before they enter compulsory education. As of 2009, the total number of
kindergartens and nursery schools in Japan was 36,000. In general, from 2003 to 2009
the proportion of children who were admitted, especially to nursery schools, increased.
Based on age groups, 50% of the children over 4 years old were in kindergartens while
41.6% were in nursery schools.
Kindergartens and nursery schools differ in the areas of tuition, schools hours, admission criteria, and class size, all of which influence parents decisions on which facilities in
which to enroll their children. Kindergartens are under the jurisdiction of the MEXT
and intended for children ages 3 to 6 years. They are considered as educational institutions in which children cultivate the foundations for compulsory education. Nursery
schools are child welfare facilities for children whose parents have difficulty taking care
of their children because of their work. They are under the jurisdiction of the MHLW
and intended for children from birth to 6 years of age. The government is now trying to
integrate kindergartens and nursery schools into single facilities.
Some children with disabilities go to nursery schools, kindergartens, or other day-care
facilities; others go to a kindergarten department of a special needs school, depending
on their needs. Some use day-care facilities for children with disabilities at the same time
that they are enrolled in kindergartens or nursery schools. Kindergarten departments
are found in 92% of the old schools for deaf students and 65% of the old schools for blind
students. Consultations for children are available in many of these schools.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
303
Nursery teachers, physical therapists, occupational therapists, and clinical psychologists

are usually assigned to day-care facilities for children with disabilities. They do individual training such as occupational therapy, sensory integrative therapy, and speech and
language therapy, in addition to caring for children with disabilities in groups in order
to promote the development of the children and reduce their disabilities.
The municipalities have built and manage many elementary schools and junior high
schools. As a general rule, however, the prefectures build and manage special needs
schools. Prefectures pay two-thirds and the country pays one-third of a teachers salary.
Although the teacher who works in a special needs school has to have both a license
for a regular school and a license for special needs education, the government will admit
a teacher with no license in special needs education to teach at the special needs school
for a time. The rate of teachers who have an appropriate license is about 70% in the special needs schools that originated from the old schools for handicapped students and
50% in those that originated from the old schools for blind or deaf students.
When the number of teachers is insufficient, support assistants are employed. The
MEXT distributed 30,000 support assistants wages to rural areas in 2008.
The teacher who takes charge of special needs education has to draw up an
Individualized Educational Support Program and an Individualized Teaching Program.
This is different from the Individualized Education Program (IEP) developed in the
United States. The contents of the plans in Japan are mainly written about the education
provided by a school; there is no support for students attending the school specified in
the plan. Teachers at special needs schools also give advice or provide support for students
studying at regular schools, if requested by the regular schools.
Issues in Teacher Preparation

Before acquiring a teachers license for special needs education, a license for a regular
school is needed. Teachers licenses for special needs education are licenses that clearly
state the fields of disability in which individuals can teach. The fields are divided into
three categories: education for those who are visually disabled, education for those who
are hearing disabled, and education for children with intellectual disabilities, physical
disabilities, and sickly children. For example, a candidate can acquire certain credits for
visual disability and obtain a teachers license for special needs education, including education for the visually disabled. In addition, when an individual acquires certain credits
for hearing disability, the person can obtain a teachers license for special needs education, including education for the visually or hearing disabled. By getting more credits,
teachers can add other fields of disability in which they can teach.
As an example, we will examine the curriculum for a license in the education of children with intellectual disabilities, physical disabilities, and sickly children. This curriculum includes four groups of subjects. The first group consists of fundamental theories on
special needs education, such as an introduction to special needs education. The second
group is made up of particular subjects on special needs education and is divided into
two categories. One is a series of subjects on the psychology, physiology, and pathology
of children with mental and physical disabilities. The other concerns curriculum and
10/14/11 5:45 PM
304
teaching methods for these children. The third group includes subjects for the education
of children with visual disabilities, children with hearing disabilities, and children with
developmental disabilities. The last group requires education students to do 2 weeks
practice teaching in special needs schools, which includes guidance from universities or
colleges before and after practice teaching.
Currently, half the number of teachers working in special needs schools for children
with visual or hearing disabilities, and 30% of teachers in special needs schools for
students with other disabilities, do not have the license for special needs education.
Teachers lacking the license are encouraged to take the necessary credits and acquire
the license by attending lectures given by a board of education or a teachers college during the long holidays. With these efforts, teachers are striving to improve their ability to
produce creative teaching practices in their own regions. As well, some teachers are
studying in graduate schools to examine their own practice and deepen their experiences
while working at schools.
ROL E S O F PA R E N T G ROU P S , PRO F E S S ION A L A S S O C I AT ION S ,

A N D A DVO C AC Y G ROU P S
Advocacy organizations in Japan are committed to important duties. One of the duties is
to lobby the government; another is to actively let many people know about disabilities.
Parents groups are divided into several organizations according to particular disabilities. Among the groups, those advocating for children and adults with intellectual disabilities are dominant and have the qualification of social welfare corporations. There are other
groups that have the same qualification or qualifications as nonprofit organizations.
The Japan National Assembly of Disabled Peoples International (DPI) is organized by
persons with disabilities themselves. The group tackles the problems of disabled persons
as human rights issues. The Japan Network on Disabilities (JANNET) was established in
1993 in connection with the Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons as determined
by the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). JANNET
started with 30 formal organization members including the All Japan Deaf-Mute Association and the Japanese Partner Dog Academy. JANNET exchanges information with
organizations for people with disabilities overseas.
M A I N DI S C US S ION S A N D DE B AT E S
A range of issues surrounding special needs education and inclusive schooling continue
to bring debate, discussion, and controversy in Japan. Two main issues have been discussed since the 1960s: the school system and the pedagogy of special needs education.
In the current climate, inclusive schooling is attracting much attention.
The first long-standing issue (which is connected to the inclusive debate) concerns the
entry into school of children with disabilities and integration. Some researchers and
educators insist that special schools are discriminatory and that all children, including
children with significant disabilities, should be placed in regular schools or regular
classes. They argue that the education of children with disabilities is a right and that the
term special education should be avoided. In contrast, most teachers of special education
10/14/11 5:45 PM
305
consider the special school or the special class as one of the most important educational
places for children with disabilities.
The second issue concerns the content and the methods of special needs education,
together with a revision of the relevant course of study. One topic concerns whether education for children with disabilities, especially intellectual disabilities, should be different from general education. Another dilemma surrounds whether students with special
needs should be guaranteed a common universal education even if the contents and
method of special education may be more suitable for them.
In March 2009, the revised curriculum for special needs schools was published. This
revision is based on the amendment of the Fundamental Law of Education, the three
laws concerning education, and the changes to special needs education. However, the
extent of this revision was not great.
Inclusive Schooling
Japan was an early signatory of the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of
Persons With Disabilities, which prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities
and promotes their social participation (United Nations, 2006). However, Japan has not
yet signed the Optional Protocol or ratified the convention. Nevertheless, the Japanese
government has started to review existing laws with a view to ratifying the convention.
The Democratic Party, which declares the promotion of inclusive education as one of
their policies, came into power in 2009. Their accession, the UN convention, and other
events and variables have prompted political discussions focused on what ought to be
inclusive education in Japan. Periodic and frequent official meetings and other conferences in Japan have examined special needs and inclusive education. Of course, a number of different opinions have emerged.
For example, a special committee of the Central Council for Education, which is an
advisory committee of the MEXT, explored inclusive education in some detail. Various
issues were treated such as the school entry system, consultation and support from an
early stage, and curricula in regular and special needs schools. This was subsumed under
the name of Japanese-style of inclusive education. This seemed to aim for maintenance
of the present situation, insisting that special needs education in Japan is compatible
with inclusive education.
The Conference for Promotion of the Reform of the System for Persons With Disabilities (2010) was sponsored by the Cabinet Office of the Government of Japan. The discussions centered on what should be the form of education for persons with disabilities.
Many participants were opposed to separate special needs education and focused on
whether special needs education is compatible with inclusive education.
Other main themes looked at whether special needs schools and classes or the dormitories
of special needs school were inconsistent with the UN convention. There were also considerations of unification of enrollment and the right of parents to school choice.
The principle that has emerged from this conference is that all children should be
enrolled in regular classes, regardless of their disabilities. However, it is simultaneously
admitted that if the child or the parents wish, then she or he can be enrolled at a special
needs school.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
306
Many people are worried that confusion and difficulty will arise if the system is
reformed. Teachers and parents also worry that special needs schools and classes could
be totally abolished. Some concerned organizations, such as the association of principals
of special needs schools, hold opinions that they base on the good results arising from
special needs education. Others argue that discussions on inclusive education should
not be limited to issues about the place of learning (regular school or special needs
school) or whether there should be special needs schools and classes or not; rather,
discussions should be based on the realities of the needs of children and the actual
educational scenes. They argue that inclusive education should guarantee all students
participation in learning, including regular curriculum and pedagogy, by responding to
the diversity of the educational needs of all students. In an inclusive school, a whole
school support system should be established consisting not only of teachers but also
various support staffs. There should be reasonable adjustments in the regular class, and
support from resource rooms, special needs classes, and external professional
organizations. Furthermore, the development of an inclusive school is a link in the
development of an inclusive community where children, youths, and adults with
disabilities are guaranteed to live and act from preschool to postschool time.
C H A L L E NG E S
In a general sense, we can say that special needs education in Japan remains separate
from the general system although many and varied options are emerging that join special
and general education. Still, it is not enough, and special education is still developing.
Both regular and special needs education have many problems, especially shortages of
personnel, lack of material resources, the busyness of teachers, and so on. We outline
further ongoing challenges below.
Many people hold that special needs and inclusive education should be established
based on the Japanese Constitution, the Convention on the Rights of the Child
(United Nations, 1989), and the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities (United Nations, 2006). However, we have not yet worked out how to adopt
measures that would resolve the situations and problems associated with inclusive
schooling. Unless there is a concrete plan for these, we would not expect any real
progress in inclusive education.
The situations of the actual education scenes, for both regular and special needs,
are becoming more and more serious. A lot of students in regular schools cannot
actually participate in learning and activities at school because of competition and
oppression from other students.
The MEXT gave funds to provide assistant personnel for special needs education to
every municipality in 2007 to 2008. Still, each municipality does not necessarily use
the funding efficiently to develop special needs education in the public schools.
The birth rate in Japan is declining, and the number of children is decreasing.
But while the number of students at regular schools is decreasing, the number
of students for special needs education is increasing. This causes some serious
10/14/11 5:45 PM
307
problems. The number of special needs school is not sufficient; therefore, many
children have to go to distant special needs schools and reside in their dormitories. There is also a shortage of classrooms at special needs schools. At one special
needs school, for example, teachers have to use one classroom for two classes by
separating the room with a curtain.
Because of the shortage of classrooms and teachers, the educational condition of
special needs education has become worse and is not meeting the special needs of
students sufficiently.
One of the reasons underlying the increase of students who receive special needs
education is that more parents have come to realize the benefits of special needs
education and expect their children to receive them than ever before. In one way,
this is rather welcome, and it is important to respond to the expectations. On the
other hand, it is a worrying and negative factor because it means that the percentage of children who are excluded from regular education is increasing.
In traditional special education, the main objective tends toward training the students for after-school life and vocations. To some observers, education that focuses
only on preparing for work in the future may be insufficient and improper and
may fail to realize the full and effective societal participation and inclusion of persons with disabilities. A newer view directs teaching toward all-around humanistic
development. However, in spite of the discussions on inclusion, competition and
achievements are being stressed not only in regular education but also in special needs education. Training children as future taxpayers is regarded as a most
important function of schooling. Hence, it may be that disparities and discriminations are spreading again between the students who are expected to be taxpayers
and the ones who are not expected to be.
With the national government and prefectures support, kindergartens and nursery
schools have been trying to improve their facilities and increase the number of
teachers. However, the actual conditions among facilities vary. In special needs
education for young children, several improvements are needed. These include
promoting better conditions and improving the expertise of teachers in order to
meet the individual needs of children with disabilities.
Schools must create transition programs. It is necessary that all the agencies
that support children with disabilities work to create Individualized Educational
Support Programs with a view to foreseeing students futures after graduating
from school in order to provide comprehensive and continuous support.
FUTUR E TR ENDS
Discussions about the formulation of an inclusive education system are proceeding. Promoting the infrastructure of the educational environment and a community are emerging as practical issues. In addition, how to determine a suitable school for a child and
how to develop the expertise of teachers are important problems and the subject of
10/14/11 5:45 PM
308
considerable discussion. Education for gifted students attracts little attention in Japan:
It is one of our future issues.
C ONC LUS ION

In 2007, an amendment of the School Education Law brought changing paradigms to
educational services for students with disabilities in Japan. It led to the alteration of the
phrase special education to special needs education, recognized LD and ADHD as types of
disabilities, and allowed that children with different special needs could attend either a
school for special needs education or a regular class in a regular school.
The number of students in special needs schools and special needs classes has rapidly
increased since the middle of the 1990s, overwhelming schools capacities. Many people
are working to improve special needs education. At the same time, many advocates in
Japan hope to develop inclusive schools and communities where no one is excluded,
everyone is guaranteed full participation and all-around humanistic development, and
all children can enroll in regular schools in their own communities.
R E F E R E NC E S
Abe, Y. (1998). Special education reform in Japan. European Journal of Special Needs Education,
13, 8697.
Cabinet Office of the Government of Japan. (2010). The white paper on persons with disabilities. Retrieved from http://www8.cao.go.jp/shougai/whitepaper/h22hakusho
/zenbun/zuhyo/zuhyo1_04.html.
Conference for the Promotion of the Reform of the System for Persons with Disabilities.
(2010, June). The fundamental direction about the promotion of the reform of the system for
persons with disabilities (the first opinion). Tokyo: Author.
Matsumura, K. (2008). Special needs education in Japan. Journal of Special Education in the
Asia Pacific, 4, 111.
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science and Technology. (2009). Tokubetu shien gakkyu
no genjo. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/shotou/054
/shiryo/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2009/08/05/1282736_2.pdf.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2007). Students with
disabilities, learning difficulties and disadvantages: Policies, statistics and indicators. Paris:
Author.
United Nations. (1989). United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (G. A. Res
44/25, Annex 44, U.N. GAOR Supp. [No. 49] at 167, UN Doc A/44/49).
United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Right of Persons With Disabilities and Optional
Yamaguchi, K. (2005, August). Development of special needs education in Japan and some
current problems. Paper presented at the International Special Education Congress:
InclusionCelebrating diversity, Glasgow, Scotland.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Contributors
Ulf Algermissen has been a teacher in different special education schools in Germany
since 1985, and principal of St. Ansgar- School (special school for children with
behavioural problems) since 1992. His academic training started in 1975 as a trainee in
industrial business in Hildesheim, Germany. He focused on special education studies
in Hannover from 1979 to 1985, and held a university lectureship at Hanover in the
Faculty of Special Education. Since 2006, he has engaged a lectureship at the University
of Hildesheim in the Faculty of Pedagogics. His research interests are in the areas of
maladaption and primary schools, therapy and pedagogics, and action research.
John Anderson is honorary professor of education at Queens University Belfast. He
has been a strategy coordinator for ICT in schools in Northern Ireland, an adjunct
associate professor at Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, the deputy director of the
UK Microelectronics Education Programme and a lecturer in education. As a
Managing Inspector in the Education and Training Inspectorate in Northern Ireland
he manages inspection programs and advises on policy on school improvement and
teacher education.He is an international consultant, evaluator and author on a wide
range of UK and European projects.
Fusaji Ando is a professor in the faculty of education at Hirosaki University. His field
of study is special needs education.
Satoshi Arakawa is a professor at Ibaraki University and vice dean of the College of
Education. He is also chairperson of the Japanese Association on Disability and
Difficulty.
Jolanta Baran is head of the branch for supporting the development of persons with
disabilities in the Department of Special Education, Pedagogical University of Cracow,
Poland. Her major interest is the wide range of problems associated with supporting
the development and improving the well being of persons with disabilities in both
family and education/care institutional contexts.
Dae Young, Jung is a professor in the Department of Special Education at Changwon
National University, South Korea. He is author and co-author of about twenty books
in diverse areas of special education, including special education, inclusive education
for general teachers, teaching children with learning disabilities, and so on. Functional
Behavior Assessment and Positive Behavior Support (2009) is his latest book.
He serves as president of the Korea Learning Disabilities Association and on the
editorial boards of several major journals in the field of special education.
309
10/14/11 5:45 PM
310
Contributors
Samir Dukmak is an assistant professor in the College of Education at Al Ain
University of Science & Technology, Al Ain, Abu Dhabi Emirate, United Arab Emirates.
He received his doctorate in special education from Manchester University, United
Kingdom. Dr. Dukmaks research interests include assessment of children with special
needs, inclusion/inclusive education, classroom interaction, rehabilitation, behavior
problems, intellectual disabilities, and stress and coping in families of children with
disabilities. His recent research contributions include articles in various regional and
international journals, and chapters in books edited by experts in the field of special
education.
Temesgen Fereja earned his masters degree in curriculum and instruction from Addis
Ababa University in 2001. In 2007, he completed his PhD at the University of Magdeburg,
Germany. He is currently an assistant professor in the Graduate School of Education,
Addis Ababa University. His research focuses on multicultural education issues in Ethiopia.
Lani Florian is professor of social and educational inclusion at the University of
Aberdeen (UK). Her research interests include models of provision for meeting the
needs of all learners, inclusive pedagogy and teaching practice in inclusive schools. She
has consulted on special needs education and inclusion for a number of international
agencies including UNICEF, and the OECD. She served as a rapporteur for UNESCOs
International Bureau of Educations 48th International Conference on Education,
Inclusive Education: The Way of the Future. She is editor of The SAGE Handbook
of Special Education, and co-author of Achievement and Inclusion in Schools, winner
of the 2008 NASEN/TES academic book award. She co-edited Disability Classification
in Education, and Promoting Inclusive Practice won the NASEN/TES academic
book award in 1999.
Thomas P. Gumpel is chair of the Department of Special Education at the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem and researches primarily issues of special education and access
in East Jerusalem, as well as bullying and victimization. He is the editor of the Journal
of International Special Needs Education, and is involved in many international initiatives promoting inclusion of children with special educational needs into the general
education system. For the last four years, he has returned to the classroom, and has
been teaching and working in the Palestinian school system in East Jerusalem.
Olga Graumann was a professor and director of the Institute of Educational Science
at the University of Hildesheim, Germany, until 2010. She is now the authorized
representative for international projects and cooperation at the University of
Hildesheim. Together with a group of teachers, she initiated the first model integration
school in the East of North Rhine-Westfalia in Germany and has published numerous
books and articles about Special Education and individual advancement in school.
She is president of the Academy for the Humanization of Education and the director
of diverse international projects. She was also a teacher for many years in different
schools for special education.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Contributors
311
Hytham Bany Issa is an assistant professor in the College of Education at Al Ain University of Science & Technology, Al Ain, Abu Dhabi Emirate, United Arab Emirates.
He started his academic career at the Education Department of Ahl-Albyet University in Jordan directly after receiving his doctorate in educational administration in
2009 from Yarmouk University in Jordan. Dr. Hythams research interests include
student assessment, higher education, primary and secondary education, school
leadership, educational administration and management, and pre-school education.
Naoki Ito is a Ph.D. candidate in the graduate program of sociology, Ritsumeikan
University. His current research themes are employment support for persons with
disabilities and sexuality education for students and young people with disabilities.
Maya Kalyanpur started her career as a teacher of children with intellectual disabilities
in India in 1981. She received her PhD in special education from Syracuse University,
New York, in 1994 and taught at Towson University in Maryland for 14 years, retiring
as professor. She has authored books and numerous articles on special education
policy and families from culturally diverse backgrounds in the United States and
India. Since 2006, she has been a consultant in Cambodia on projects relating to
inclusive education. Currently, she is Inclusive Education Advisor to the Ministry
of Education under the World Bank-supported Fast Track Initiative program.
Wing-Wah Law is an associate professor in the Faculty of Education, The University of
Hong Kong. His research interests and publications cover the areas of education and
development, globalization and citizenship education, education policy and legislation,
education reform and Chinese societies, and music education and social change.
Seiichi Makino is a professor in the Faculty of Humanities, Sapporo Gakuin University.
His field of study is special needs education for physically and intellectually disabled
children. He is an expert of autism spectrum support qualified by the Japanese
Academy of Autistic Spectrum.
Kas Mazurekis a professor in the Faculty of Education at the University of Lethbridge,
Canada. His research and teaching overlap the fields of comparative education,
multiculturalism, and the social contexts of ideas, policies, and practices in education.
Anjali Misra is professor of special education at the State University of New York,
Potsdam, and current chair of the Department of Special Education. She was primarily
responsible for the development of the Master in Special Education degree program at
this college. After completing a masters in child development from Delhi University
in India, she got a masters and Ph.D. in Special Education from Pennsylvania State
University. Dr. Misra has several years of experience teaching children with disabilities.
She founded a small school for children with special needs in India. She has published
chapters in six different books and articles in several journals including the Journal of
Clinical Child Psychology, Exceptional Children, The Elementary School Journal, and Behavioral
10/14/11 5:45 PM
312
Contributors
Disorders. Her current research interests focus on international special education,
service delivery, and in the area of emotional and behavioral disorders. Dr. Misra has
been the recipient of several awards in both India and the United States including
the Presidents Award for Excellence in Research and Scholarship at SUNY Potsdam.
Mark P. Mostert is director of the Institute for the Study of Disability and Bioethics
at Regent University in Virginia Beach Virginia, where he is also professor of special
education and director of the special education doctoral program.
Satoshi Nitsu is an associate professor in the Faculty of Humanities, Sapporo Gakuin
University. His field of specialization is special needs education.
Festus E. Obiakor is a professor in the Department of Exceptional Education at
the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. His research interests include multicultural
special education, education for at-risk learners, comparative/international special
education, and educational reform. He is an internationally known teacher-scholar
who has authored or co-authored more than 150 publications, including books
and journal articles. He serves on the editorial boards of many refereed journals
and he is the executive editor of Multicultural Learning and Teaching (MLT).
Fr. MaxMary Tabugbo Offor is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Exceptional
Education at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. His research interests include
multicultural special education, international special education, and at-risk learners.
He is an experienced public school teacher.
Mah Nazir Riaz is currently professor of psychology and dean of social sciences at
Frontier Women University in Peshawar. She was professor at the Centre of Excellence
in Psychology at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad from 1999 to 2002. Her academic
publications include over 60 research papers in national and international journals,
three textbooks, and chapters contributed to edited books. Among her national
and international honors and awards is the Izaz-e-Kamal (President of Pakistans
Award) in 2002 for her lifetime achievements and outstanding contributions to the
field of psychology; the Distinguished Professor Award from the Ministry of Education of NWFP in 2003; and the Star Women International Award in 1996. She is a
member of the International Society for Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection
(ISIPAR) and representative of ISIPAR for South Asia. Over the last two decades her
research projects have focused, in particular, on parental acceptance-rejection.
Martyn Rouse is chair of the social and educational inclusion program at the
University of Aberdeen in Scotland where he directs the Inclusive Practice Project,
which is designed to reform teacher education so that teachers are better prepared
to work in the diverse classrooms to be found in schools today. Previously he was a
senior lecturer at the University of Cambridge and Director of Studies for Education at
St Catharines College, Cambridge. He has undertaken research and development work
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Contributors
313
on inclusion for local authorities in the UK and for several national and international
agencies, including the European Agency for the Development of Special Needs
Education, the OECD and UNICEF. He has published widely on inclusion and special
needs and is a well-known speaker on these issues nationally and internationally. He
is the co-author of Achievement and Inclusion in Schools published by Routledge, winner of the NASEN/Times Education Supplement Academic Book of the Year 2008.
Alemayehu Teklemariam is chair of the Department of Special Needs Education,
Addis Ababa University (AAU), Ethiopia. His BA is from the University of Joensuu,
Finland; M.Phil from the University of Oslo, Norway; and PhD from the University
of Jyvaskyla, Finland. He has been a teacher in primary regular school and in
a special school for the deaf, he served as a teacher trainer at Adama Teachers
College and Sebeta Center for Special Needs Education, and he was a curriculum
expert and researcher at the Institute of Curriculum Development and Research
before becoming Head of Educational Programs and Teacher Education in the
Ministry of Education in Ethiopia. In 2003 he joined Addis Ababa University.
Tatsuya Toda is assistant professor in the Department of Educational Psychology,
Kushiro Campus, Hokkaido University of Education.
Mitsuyasu Tomita is a professor in the Faculty of Humanities, Sapporo Gakuin
University. His field of study is education methods.
Margret A. Winzer is a professor emerita at the University of Lethbridge where she
teaches courses in special education and early childhood education. She has researched
and written extensively in the area of special education and inclusion, most recently
in the fields of the history of special education and comparative studies in special
education.
Joseph Zajda is a professor in the Faculty of Education at the Australian Catholic
University (Melbourne Campus). He specializes in globalization and education policy
reforms, comparative and international education, decentralization and privatization,
and excellence and quality in education. He has written and edited 24 books and over
100 book chapters and articles in the areas of globalization and education policy,
social justice, intercultural dialogue, human rights education, higher education,
and curriculum reforms. He is the editor of the 12-volume book series Globalisation
and Comparative Education (Springer, 2009, 2010). He is also the editor of The International Handbook of Globalisation and Education Policy Research. Dordrecht: Springer
(2005, 2011) and also edits World Studies in Education, Curriculum and Teaching, and
Education and Society for James Nicholas Publishers. He received the Vice-Chancellors
Award for Excellence in Teaching, Australian Catholic University in 2004.
10/14/11 5:45 PM
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Index
Note: Page numbers followed by f and t indicate figures and tables, respectively.
Aboriginal population of Canada, 45, 54
access to special education: China, 25354;
Ethiopia, 13132; Germany, 10910, 111t,
11216; India, 202, 2045; as international
movement, 1; Japan, 300301; ongoing state
of revision of, 6; overview of, 11; Pakistan, 235;
Poland, 9698; UAE, 17679; U.K., 7678, 79,
8182; U.S., 3233. See also themes
accountability: in Canada, 5758; overview of, 9
achievement gaps in Israel, 156
advocacy: Japan, 304; Pakistan, 234; South Korea,
275; U.S., 2628
Africa. See Ethiopia; Nigeria
Americans With Disabilities Act (U.S.), 2829
assessment: Canada, 56, 5758; Germany, 110;
India, 213; Pakistan, 223; psychoeducational,
14; UAE, 17980, 183; U.K., 7172, 74, 74t, 75
assimilation: Israel, 155; U.S., 24
assistive technology. See technology
attitudes toward persons with disabilities. See
disability
Australia: challenges, 29091; education, 28182;
inclusion, 28385, 28789; issues, 292;
legislative framework, 28587; national
context, 280; social fabric, 28081; students
with disabilities, 282, 283t; teachers and
pedagogy, 28990
charter schools: Canada, 45; U.S., 2425

China: context of special education, 24143;
controversies and issues, 25258; disabled
persons population, 24546, 245t; education
for disabled children, 24852, 249t, 250f; education system, 24445, 244f; future trends,
25859; legal protection of rights to education, 24648; national context, 241
civil society in China, 24243
collaboration, interprofessional, in U.S., 40
colonialism in India, 19596
comparative studies: database from, 67, 10;
globalization and, 35; nature and utility of,
38; regional practices and, 56; in special
education and inclusive schooling, 8; teacher
knowledge and, 6; theoretical positions and,
78; worldview and, 5
controversies and issues: Australia, 292; China,
25258; Ethiopia, 13334; India, 21012;
Israel, 16667; Japan, 3046; Pakistan, 23436;
Poland, 98100; South Korea, 27578; UAE,
18183; U.K., 8182; U.S., 3738
Council for Exceptional Children, 26
cultural issues: China, 243; imperialism or
hegemony, danger of, 5; Nigeria, 14446;
South Korea, 265; UAE, 18283, 18486
cultural parameters of education reform, 910
Basic Education Law (China), 24647

Batu, Miss, 140
bilingual special education, 3132
borrowing, definition of, 5
bullying in U.S., 23
Dakar Framework, 1011

Dewey, John, 103
disability: Australia, 282, 283t; Canada, 5152;
charitable responses to, 14; China, 24546,
245t; cultural attitudes toward, 910; Ethiopia, 127; Germany, 107, 1089; India, 200
201, 2089, 211; Japan, 300; Nigeria, 14445;
Pakistan, 22627, 22930, 237t; Poland,
9495; population with, 10; self-determination by person with, 40; South Korea, 27071,
278; Soviet Union, 94; UAE, 17879, 18487;
U.K., 6970; U.S., 2324, 39. See also hearing
impairment; learning disabilities; mental
retardation; physical disabilities; speech and
language disabilities; visual impairment
Disability Standards for Education (Australia),
28586
discipline for inappropriate behavior in U.S., 31
District Primary Education Program (DPEP,
India), 199, 2012
Canada: development of special education, 4647;

future trends, 5961; inclusion in practice,
5259; inclusive agenda, 4849, 4950t; legislative activity, 4748; school system, 4546;
social fabric, 4445; students with exceptionalities, 5152
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 47, 48
Canadian Multiculturalism Act, 47
case studies, 12. See also specific countries
caste system in India, 19495
challenges to inclusion: Australia, 29091; Canada,
5459; Ethiopia, 13334, 136; Israel, 151,
16667; Japan, 3067; Nigeria, 14446; overview of, 16; U.K., 8283
315
10/14/11 5:45 PM
316
Index
diversity and inclusion, 2. See also linguistic
diversity; minorities
Dix, Dorothea, 23, 25
early childhood intervention: Canada, 53; China,
248; Ethiopia, 132; Germany, 11618; India,
2057; Japan, 3023, 307; Poland, 9596;
South Korea, 27273, 276; UAE, 174; U.K.,
7879; U.S., 3334, 40
economic transition: China, 242; South Korea, 265
Education for All Handicapped Children Act
(EHCA, U.S.): Australia and, 284; Canada
and, 47; in U.S., 2628, 3536
Education for All (EFA) initiative: China, 241;
India, 199, 210, 211; overview of, 1011;
Poland, 100; U.K., 6768
education policy and national economic planning,
4. See also legislation and policy
Education Sector Development Plan (ESDP,
Ethiopia), 13031, 135
education system: Australia, 28182; Canada,
4546; China, 24445, 244f; East Jerusalem,
16365, 164f; Ethiopia, 126; Germany, 1045,
106f; India, 19596, 197t, 19899, 198t, 204;
Israel, 15456; Japan, 29697, 296f; Nigeria,
13840; Pakistan, 219, 220t, 221; Poland,
8889, 90f, 9192; South Korea, 26668, 275;
UAE, 172; U.K., 7072; U.S., 2425, 26. See also
funding for education; inclusive schooling/
inclusion; reform initiatives
EFA. See Education for All (EFA) initiative
emotional and behavior disorders (EBD) in
Germany, 112, 11718
employment, transition to: Japan, 307; U.S., 32, 38,
39, 40. See also vocational training
England, 67, 69t, 7071, 70t, 75
equality in law, 1314
equality of access. See access to special education
Ethiopia: challenges, 13334; early intervention,
132; education system, 126; future trends,
13436; history of special education, 12628;
national context, 12526; policies and related
documentation, 12832; teacher training,
13233
ethnicity. See also linguistic diversity; minorities
ethnocentrism, danger of, 56
etiologies of disabilities, 10
Europe. See Germany; Poland; United Kingdom
exceptionalities, students with, in Canada, 5152
expert model, 40
family roles in precolonial Nigeria, 13839
Federal Disability Discrimination Act (DDA,
Australia), 28586, 291
Federal Law No. 29/2006 In Respect of the Rights
of People With Special Needs (UAE), 17273,
176
financial constraints on education funding, 1112.
See also funding for education
fragmentation in Israel, 15253
functionalist perspective, 7
funding for education: Canada, 5556; China,
25455, 25859; East Jerusalem, 167;
Ethiopia, 132; Germany, 105; India, 196, 197t,
199; Israel, 155; Japan, 306; Nigeria, 14546;
Pakistan, 217, 219; South Korea, 270; U.K., 70;
U.S., 2425
future trends: Canada, 5960; China, 25859;
Ethiopia, 13436; Germany, 11920; India,
21213; Japan, 3078; Pakistan, 236; Poland,
100; UAE, 18387; U.K., 8283; U.S., 3841
gender issues: China, 249; India, 196, 200, 201, 205;
Islam and, 218; overview of, 12; Pakistan, 229,
235; Poland, 95; UAE, 185; U.S., 30, 3233
Germany: disability, 1089; early intervention,
11618; future trends, 11920; history of
special education, 1068; inclusion, 10910,
111t, 11215; legislation, 106; models of
integration, 11516; national context, 1034;
school system, 1045, 106f; teacher education
and training, 11819
Gidada Solan, 127
gifted students in Germany, 115
globalization and comparative studies, 35
Great Britain. See United Kingdom
hearing impairment: China, 245t, 250f, 252;
etiology of, 226; Germany, 11314, 117;
Pakistan, 228, 237t
Herzl, Theodor, 153
history of special education: Canada, 4647;
Ethiopia, 12628; Germany, 1068; Japan,
29798; Nigeria, 140, 14144, 141t, 143t;
Pakistan, 22122; Poland, 9394; U.K., 7274,
74t, 7576; U.S., 2529
homelessness in U.S., 22
Howe, Samuel Gridley, 25
human capital model of schooling, 45, 7, 9
ibn Ali, Hussein, 153
identification of students for special education:
Australia, 282, 289; Canada, 5152; Germany,
109; India, 201, 213; Israel, 160; Japan, 299;
Pakistan, 227; Poland, 97; South Korea, 276;
UAE, 174, 17980; U.K., 7374, 78; U.S.,
2931, 37
immigration: Canada, 44; Germany, 104; Israel,
155; Pakistan, 23435; South Korea, 26566;
U.K., 6869; U.S., 2223
inclusive schooling/inclusion: agenda for, 23;
Australia, 28385, 283t, 28789; Canada, 47,
4849, 4950t, 5262; China, 24852, 249t,
250f, 25556; comparative studies in, 8; defi nition of, 2; East Jerusalem, 16566; Ethiopia,
12832; India, 199200, 2012, 21112; Israel,
15662, 160f, 161f; Japan, 297302, 298t, 300t,
301f, 3056; Pakistan, 223, 22425t, 22728,
23032, 235; South Korea, 26873; UAE,
17375. See also challenges to inclusion
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Index
India: causes of disability, 200201; controversies
and issues, 21012; early intervention, 2057;
educational placement, 2079; future trends,
21213; inclusion, 2012; labeling of disabilities, 201; legislation, 203t; national context,
19394; opportunity and access, 2045; parent groups, 2034; school system, 196, 197t,
19899, 198t; social context, 19496; special
education services, 199200; teachers and
pedagogy, 209
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA,
U.S.), 28, 31, 32, 284
instructional placement: Canada, 5859; India,
2079; Japan, 3012, 301f; Pakistan, 22829;
Poland, 97; South Korea, 27172; UAE,
18081; U.K., 79; U.S., 34, 35
integration. See inclusive schooling/inclusion
interest groups in South Korea, 27475
international directives, 1213. See also Education
for All (EFA) initiative; Salamanca Statement;
United Nations Convention on the Rights of
Persons With Disabilities
Islam in Pakistan, 218
Israel: controversies and issues, 16667; education
system, 15456; history of, 15354; Jerusalem,
152, 16266, 164f; national context, 15152;
special education system, 15662, 160f, 161f
Japan: challenges, 3067; discussions and debates,
3046; early intervention, 3023; future
trends, 3078; national context, 295; parent
groups, professional associations, and
advocacy groups, 304; school system, 29699,
296f, 298t, 300t; social fabric, 29596; special
needs, 300302, 301f; teachers and pedagogy,
3034
Jerusalem, 152, 16266, 164f, 167
Kashmir region of Pakistan, 217
Kerschensteiner, Georg, 103
Law on the Protection of Persons With Disabilities
(China), 247
learning disabilities: Germany, 110, 112; Israel,
15960
least restrictive environment (LRE): Israel, 157,
158; Poland, 99; UAE, 18081; U.S., 34
legislation and policy: Australia, 28587, 291;
Canada, 4748; China, 24648, 25354; Ethiopia, 12829; Germany, 106; India, 202, 203t;
Israel, 15659; Nigeria, 142, 14647; overview
of, 1314; Pakistan, 22223; Poland, 8889;
South Korea, 26667, 26870; UAE, 17273;
U.S., 2629
linguistic diversity: China, 242; Ethiopia, 12526;
India, 194, 195; Israel, 152; Pakistan, 218
literacy rates, 14
litigation in Canada, 48
Mann, Horace, 23
317
Matal professionals in Israel, 151

Matya structure in Israel, 162
McMahon, Henry, 153
medical model of disability, 23
mental disabilities in Germany, 112, 117
mental retardation: etiology of, 22627; in
Pakistan, 228, 237t
Middle East. See Israel; United Arab Emirates
minorities: Canada, 4445; Israel, 15152, 15354,
155; Poland, 87; U.S., 30, 38. See also linguistic
diversity
missionaries: India, 199; Nigeria, 13941, 141t
Montessori, Maria, 103
multicultural special education: South Korea, 277;
U.S., 3132
national context: Ethiopia, 12526; Germany,
1034; India, 19394; Israel, 15154; Japan,
295; Nigeria, 138; Pakistan, 21718; South
Korea, 264; UAE, 17172; U.K., 6768
National Policy for Persons with Disabilities
(Pakistan), 222, 226
National Policy on Education (Nigeria), 14142,
144, 146
Negaso Gidada, 127
New South Wales, 28889, 290
NGOs. See nongovernmental organizations
Nigeria: cultural bridges, building, 14446;
education system, 13840; history of special
education, 140, 14144, 141t, 143t; national
context, 138
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act (U.S.), 28,
3839
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs): China,
242, 257, 258; India, 198, 199, 206, 211,
21213; international directives of, 1213;
Pakistan, 234; role of, 14; South Korea, 27475
North America. See Canada; United States
Northern Ireland, 6768, 69t, 70t, 74t, 76
Obiakor, Festus E., 139
outcomes: Canada, 58; Germany, 110, 112; UAE,
177, 180; U.K., 72, 8182
Pacific Rim. See Australia; China; Japan; South Korea
Pakistan: controversies and issues, 23436;
disability, classification of, 237t; equal access
provision, 22223, 22425t, 22632; future
trends, 236; history of special education,
22122; national context, 21718; NGOs, 234;
parents and advocacy groups, 234; private
sector role, 23334; school system, 219, 220t,
221; social fabric, 218; teachers and pedagogy,
23233
paraeducators in Canada, 58
parents and placement: Canada, 5859; China,
25758; India, 2034, 2089; Japan, 302,
304, 307; Nigeria, 145; Pakistan, 234; Poland,
99100; South Korea, 27475; UAE, 17778;
U.S., 35
10/14/11 5:45 PM
318
Index
physical disabilities: China, 245t, 250f; effects
of, 227; Germany, 113, 117; India, 205, 207;
Pakistan, 228, 237t; UAE, 186
Poland: controversies and issues, 98100; early
intervention, 9596; future trends, 100;
history of special education, 9394; inclusion,
9698; private schools, 9293; school system,
8889, 90f, 9192; social fabric, 8788; special
needs overview, 9495; teachers and pedagogy, 98
policy borrowing, 5
population: Australia, 280; Canada, 44; China,
242; Ethiopia, 125; India, 193, 194; Israel, 151;
Japan, 295; Pakistan, 217; Poland, 87; South
Korea, 264; UAE, 171; U.K., 68; U.S., 2122,
22t
poverty: Canada, 51; Ethiopia, 125, 128, 131, 136;
Germany, 104; India, 19495, 200201, 2056;
Israel, 154; Pakistan, 217; U.S., 2122, 32, 33
prevalence estimates of disability: Canada, 5152;
Ethiopia, 12728; overview of, 10; Poland,
9495; South Korea, 271; U.K., 7576; U.S.,
2930
private schools in Poland, 9293
private sector in Pakistan, 219, 23334
proclamations in Ethiopia, 129
professional associations in Japan, 304
professional development: Canada, 57; U.K.,
7981. See also training in special education
for teachers
psychoeducational assessment, 14
reform initiatives: UAE, 18283; U.K., 7778
regional perspectives, 1415
regional practices and comparative studies, 56
research: Canada, 59; overview of, 15; UAE, 182
response to treatment/response to intervention
(RTI), 37, 40
rights-based perspective, 78
Ryerson, Egerton, 46
Salamanca Statement: Australia and, 284; China
and, 247; Ethiopia and, 128; overview of, 12, 13
Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA, India), 199, 2012,
209, 210, 211
school system. See education system; reform initiatives
school transformation, 15
Scotland, 6768, 69t, 70t, 7576
self-determination by people with disabilities, 40
social context: Australia, 28081; Canada, 4445;
China, 24143; India, 19496; Japan, 29596;
Pakistan, 218; Poland, 8788; South Korea,
26566; UAE, 18486; U.K., 68, 6970, 69t;
U.S., 2123, 3233
social model of disability, 2324, 39
social workers in China, 25657
South Asia. See India; Pakistan
South Korea: activities of interest groups and
NGOs, 27475; educational system, 26668;
issues and tasks, 27578; national context,
264; social fabric, 26566; special education,

26873; teacher education, 27374
special education, case studies of, 1. See also history
of special education; inclusive schooling/
inclusion; themes; training in special education for teachers; specific countries
Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001, 77
Special Education Law (SEL): Israel, 15659, 166;
South Korea, 26869, 271, 276
speech and language disabilities: China, 245t, 250f;
Germany, 11415, 117
standards-based approaches: Canada, 5758; overview of, 9; U.K., 8182; U.S., 3839
substance abuse in U.S., 23
Sullivan, Annie, 25
Taliban, 218, 235
teacher knowledge and comparative studies, 6
teachers: Australia, 28990, 291; Canada, 56; India,
2078; Japan, 303; Pakistan, 235; Poland, 98;
U.S., 35. See also training in special education
for teachers
technology: Pakistan, 23536; U.S., 35, 39
themes: accountability, 9; cultural parameters,
910; Education for All initiative, 1011;
equality of access, 11; financial constraints
on funding, 1112; gender issues, 12; international directives, 1213; legislation, 1314;
literacy rates, 14; NGOs, 14; overview of, 8;
psychoeducational assessment, 14; regional
perspectives, 1415; research, 15; school
transformation, 15; teacher training, 1516
theoretical positions and comparative studies, 78
therapeutic measures, right to, in Germany, 116
Third National Development Plan, Nigeria, 14344
training in special education for teachers: Australia,
28990, 291; Canada, 5354, 57; China,
25657; Ethiopia, 13233, 13536; Germany,
11819; India, 2067, 209, 21112, 213; Japan,
298, 3034; overview of, 1516; Pakistan,
23233; Poland, 98, 99; South Korea, 27374;
UAE, 17576, 183; U.K., 7981; U.S., 3538, 40
transition from school to work or higher education:
Japan, 307; U.S., 32, 38, 39, 40
UAE. See United Arab Emirates
U.K. See United Kingdom
United Arab Emirates (UAE): education system,
172; equal access provision, 17678; identification, assessment, placement and implementation, 17981; issues, 18183; legislation,
17273; national context, 17172; opportunity
and access differences and variations, 17879;
priorities, 18387; special needs education,
17375; staffing and qualifications, 17576
United Kingdom (U.K.): controversies and issues,
8182; early intervention, 7879; educational
placement, 79; equal access provision, 7678;
future trends, 8283; historical context,
6768; India and, 193, 195, 199; Pakistan
and, 217; role in education system in Nigeria,
10/14/11 5:45 PM
Index
13940; school system, 7072, 70t; social fabric, 6870, 69t; special needs overview, 7376;
teachers and pedagogy, 7981; Zionist movement and, 153
United Nations Convention on the Rights of
Persons With Disabilities: Canada, 48; China,
253; Ethiopia, 128; Germany, 108; Israel, 167;
Japan, 305; overview of, 13; UAE, 172; U.K.,
83; U.S., 4041
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO). See Education for
All (EFA) initiative; Salamanca Statement
United States (U.S.): assimilation, 24; children
and youth with disabilities, 29; conduct and
discipline, 31; contextual factors, 3233;
controversies and issues, 3738; culture and
disability, 2324; early intervention, 3334;
future trends, 3841; history of special education, 2529; instructional placement, 34; least
restrictive environment, 34; multicultural and
bilingual special education, 3132; Pakistan
and, 237; parent and teacher attitudes to
placement, 35; prevalence, opportunity, and
access, 2930; qualifying students for special
319
education, 3031; school system, 2425; social

context, 2123, 22t; teachers and pedagogy,
3537; technology, 35; transition, 32
U.S. See United States
Victoria, state of, 288, 290
violence in U.S., 23
visual impairment: China, 245t, 250f; etiology of,
226; Germany, 114, 117; India, 205, 207; Nigeria, 140; Pakistan, 228, 23334, 237t
vocational training: China, 250; Japan, 307;
Pakistan, 223; South Korea, 27778. See also
transition from school to work or higher education
Wales, 6768, 69t, 70t, 76
Warnock, Mary, and Warnock Report, 73, 8283,
284
welfare state in United Kingdom, 6970
western industrialized democracies and cultural
imperialism, 56
worldview and comparative studies, 5
Zionist movement, 153
10/14/11 5:45 PM
10/14/11 5:45 PM

International Practices in Special Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Practices in Special Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

,QWHUQDWLRQDO3UDFWLFHVLQ6SHFLDO(GXFDWLRQ

For additional information about this book

Access provided by Miami University (4 May 2015 20:11 GMT)

Part Five: South AsiaDiversity,

Making the Invisibles Visible: Special

Part Six: The Pacific RimChanging

Special Education in South Korea:

Current Developments in Education Policy for

15 New Perspectives on Special Needs and

International Practices.indb vii

Margret A. Winzer and

many Western nations, inclusive schooling is an article of unshakeable conviction.

Comparative Studies Focus on Globalization

Comparative Education Studies Provide a Worldview

Comparative Studies Inform and Improve Regional Practices

Comparative Studies Enhance Teacher Knowledge

Comparative Studies Provide a Database

Comparative Studies Provide Varied Theoretical Positions

Education for All

Caucasian American 79.96%, African American 12.85%, Asian

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

H I S T OR Y OF S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

The No Child Left Behind Act

The Americans With Disabilities Act

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

QUA L I F Y I NG S T U DE N T S F OR S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

educational psychologist, parents, and legal guardians as well as an administrator and,

M U LT IC U LT U R A L A N D BI L I NGUA L S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

A Journey from Awareness and Advocacy to Action

Celebrating the Challenges

DE V E L OPM E N T OF S PEC I A L E DUC AT ION

Celebrating the Challenges

exposs of the deplorable conditions in institutions, and the normalization movement.

Celebrating the Challenges

Table 1. Provincial and Territorial Policies on Inclusive Education

Legislation does not mandate full inclusion but places the

continued on next page

Celebrating the Challenges

Celebrating the Challenges

Individual Education Plan (IEP). The essence of integration is individualization:

The Early Years

Rhetoric to Reality Gap

Celebrating the Challenges

often affected without systematic modification of a schools organization, due regard to

Retention of a Dual System

Confusion Between Philosophy and Practice

Celebrating the Challenges

Celebrating the Challenges

Celebrating the Challenges

of diversity in a multicultural society, the configuration of the education system, the

Celebrating the Challenges

Lani Florian, Martyn Rouse,

Lani Florian, Martyn Rouse, and John Anderson

Major Forces Shaping the Social Milieu of the United Kingdom:

Education for All in the Countries of the United Kingdom