All prices are in Ringgit Malaysia. Prices are inclusive ...
UNICEF Malaysia Research Report -- Inclusive Education
-
Upload
daria-jarczewska -
Category
Documents
-
view
204 -
download
0
Transcript of UNICEF Malaysia Research Report -- Inclusive Education
1
Inclusive Education for Children with Disabilities in Southeast Asia
SciencesPo · UNICEF Malaysia
Eva Canan · Jin Chen · Daria Jarczewska · Youngeun Lee · Jack Wattiaux
1
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 3
Part I. Stakeholders ......................................................................................................................... 6
Part II. Good Practices .................................................................................................................... 10
Part III. Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 17
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 22
Annex A. Stakeholders ................................................................................................................... 23
Annex B. Case Studies ................................................................................................................... 25
3
Executive Summary
Inclusive education was first introduced at the international level in the context of the Convention on
the Rights of the Child, adopted in 1989. This treaty recognises, in Article 23, the right for children
with disabilities to have access to education. Five years later, in 1994, the World Conference on
Special Needs Education affirmed inclusive education as a principle in the Salamanca Statement and
Framework for Action. It highlights that inclusive education is not only a right of children with
disabilities, but is also beneficial to all children. More recently, this principal has been enshrined in
Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, adopted in 2006.
Malaysia has ratified both conventions, though with substantial reservations regarding non-
discrimination and equality of opportunities. The Malaysian government has made some efforts
towards inclusive education, however it remains largely unwilling to adapt its laws and policies to
make the necessary in depth changes to the educational system required to create truly inclusive
opportunities for children with disabilities. More generally, Malaysian society has not yet embraced
the idea of inclusive education, still largely viewing disability through the medical rather than the
social lens.
In response to this situation, UNICEF Malaysia has multiplied its efforts in the past years to promote
inclusive education for children with disabilities throughout Malaysia. Most recently it has established
a platform of relevant stakeholders in order to create synergy between actors and channel their
shared efforts to advocate and lobby for inclusive education. It is also preparing to launch a series of
pilot projects later this year to test new ways of addressing the topic.
4
Objective of the report
In support of UNICEF Malaysia’s endeavour, this report aims to identify good practices of inclusive
education performed in neighbouring Southeast Asian countries that could be replicated in Malaysia.
More precisely, our main objective is to analyse grassroots initiatives that have successfully promoted,
developed and implemented inclusive education in schools and communities from a bottom-up
perspective and draw from them recommendations for UNICEF Malaysia.
The findings of the report are based on ten case studies originating from six Southeast Asian
countries, namely Cambodia (2 case studies), Indonesia (1), Laos (1), the Philippines (2), Thailand (1)
and Vietnam (3). Beside their common characteristic of being grassroots initiatives, these case studies
cover a variety of situations. Some are led by individual teachers while others are set up by
international NGOs. Some focus on a single school while others have scaled up to a quasi-national
level. Some focus on adapting the classroom, others on reforming teacher training and yet others on
shifting the larger public opinion.
Structure of the report
The report is divided in three sections. The first section sets the landscape by offering an introductory
analysis of the main stakeholders and key dynamics of inclusive education. Its main objective is to
sketch out the essence of this complex web of actors and information in a simple and comprehensible
map. This map is then used throughout the report as a framework of analysis.
The second section provides a review of the good practices we have come across in the case studies
we have selected. Our analysis tries as far as possible to adopt a transversal approach in the sense that
it highlights common trends observed across different case studies. Six clusters of good practices
have been identified as a result of this analysis. Additional good practices encountered in individual
case studies are also mentioned.
The third section draws on the good practices in order to make recommendations to UNICEF Malaysia
on key elements we believe it should take into consideration when developing and implementing
5
effective initiatives on inclusive education. The list of eight recommendations we have identified can
be found at the end of this executive summary. The final section of the report further provides a
rationale and precisions for each recommendation.
Finally, after a few concluding remarks, the annexes of the report provide complementary information
on the map presented in the first section of the report (Annex A) and detailed insights into the ten
case studies that provided the basis of the report’s findings (Annex B). Relevant bibliographical
references are indicated after each case study.
Recommendations of the report
The outcome of the report can be found in the following set of eight recommendations. They offer a
snapshot of current good practices inclusive education developed by grassroots initiatives in the
Southeast Asia region.
1. Develop comprehensive awareness-raising campaigns
2. Stimulate connection and involvement of all stakeholders
3. Empower all children as actors of inclusive education
4. Ensure teachers’ sense of ownership of inclusive education practices
5. Promote diversification of teaching methods and resources
6. Foster good practice sharing between teachers
7. Emphasise the indispensability of school leadership support
8. Encourage progressive and clustered implementation of inclusive education
6
Part I. Stakeholders
In this section of the report, we will analyse the key stakeholders involved in inclusive education and
map them out. We believe this mapping exercise to be a necessary preliminary step to any further
analysis due to the diversity of actors and the complexity of their relations to one another in the field
of inclusive education. The map we propose below sketches an overview of the situation and
illustrates its essential features in a simple and comprehensible manner.
In the specific context of this report, our analysis has two main objectives. First it will allow us in the
second section of this report to have a better understanding and finer analysis of the case studies we
have selected. We will be able to identify which parts of the stakeholder map are targeted by good
practices and how these attempt to utilise or alter its dynamics in order to promote inclusive
education. Secondly, it will allow us in the final section of this report to pinpoint our
recommendations towards key leverage points identified on the map.
Two disclaimers need to be highlighted before presenting our map however. Firstly, the map does
not include an exhaustive list of stakeholders and relations. To avoid oversimplification, we decided,
in the interest of clarity as well as of relevance, to include only the most important stakeholders and
relations. Secondly, we intentionally did not draw a map specific to one country since we wanted it to
be applicable in all six countries from which our case studies are drawn. The obvious limit to this
approach is that it risks sidelining country-specific structures.
7
Stakeholders of
Inclusive Education Stakeholder Key
High involvement Medium involvement Low involvement Abc High influence Abc Medium influence Abc Low influence
Relations Key
Formal relation Hybrid relation Informal relation Strong relation
National Authorities
Ministry of Education
Ministry of Social Affairs
Ministry of Health Other Ministries
Parents
Principal
Teachers
Parents of Peers
Family
Peers
Child With Disabilities
Local Authorities
DPOs / CSOs
Community Leaders
Regional Authorities
Teacher Training Institutions
SCHOOL
LOCAL
REGIONAL
NATIONAL
8
Criteria of analysis
Five criteria of analysis are used to build the map. These criteria are:
o Level – This refers to the level at which stakeholders act. Four levels are distinguished: school;
local; regional; and national levels.
o Involvement – This refers to the degree of stakeholders’ impact on the implementation of
inclusive education. Three degrees are distinguished: low; medium; and high.
o Influence – This refers to the degree of stakeholders’ impact on the decision-making process
regarding inclusive education. Three degrees are distinguished: low; medium; and high.
o Type of relation – This refers to the nature of relations between stakeholders. Two types of
relations are distinguished: formal and informal. A third type – hybrid – is used in the specific
case of DPOs and CBOs to reflect the fact that the nature of their relation to other stakeholders
strongly varies.
o Strength of relation – This refers to the particularly strong relationship that exists between
certain stakeholders. A marker of strength is used to indicate this characteristic.
One criterion that is not used is the favourability of stakeholders to inclusive education. There are two
reasons for this. Firstly, referring back to the second disclaimer mentioned in the introduction,
positions depend on each country. For instance, while the Ministries of Education of certain countries
strongly support inclusive education, others are more reserved. Secondly, there are in many cases
strong variations of positions within a given stakeholder. Parents or teachers for instance, might
position themselves at any point on the spectrum of favourability.
Typology of actors
Based on the two criteria of involvement and influence, the following four key types of actors can be
distinguished:
o High involvement / High influence – These actors are the key actors of inclusive education,
both in terms of their potential to influence decisions and their potential to support
9
implementation. Their support is a sine qua non condition to the success of inclusive
education. The three key actors are parents, teachers and principals.
o High involvement / Low influence – These actors have high potential to support the
implementation of inclusive education, but they generally rely on other actors to make initial
decisions. E.g.: Children with disabilities and their peers.
o Low involvement / High influence – These actors have high potential to influence decisions
regarding inclusive education, though they do not themselves generally take part actively in
their implementation. E.g.: Community leaders or the Ministry of Education.
o Low involvement / Low influence – These actors are secondary actors, but remain relevant
nonetheless. E.g.: Local authorities.
For a summary table of each stakeholder’s score in terms of involvement and influence, see Annex A.
Key strong relations
Based on the fifth criterion, the following three key types of strong relations can be identified:
o Family – This is the relation between children, their parents and other family members.
o Classroom – This is the relation between the teacher and their students, both with and without
disabilities.
o Institutional – These are vertical and hierarchical relations, such as that between the principal
of a school and its teachers.
The main idea here is that any change of position or behaviour of one actor in a strong relation is
likely to have a significant influence on the position or behaviour of other actors in the relation. Thus
for instance, if the principal adopts a position favourable to inclusive education, it is likely that
teachers will themselves shift towards a more favourable position.
10
Part II. Good Practices
In this section, we will present the good practices identified through the case studies. After analysing
the case studies, we have come to identify five main areas of good practices for inclusive education. In
addition to these five clusters of practices that were commonly found among two to four case studies,
we will also mention other individual good practices, which provide insights into how inclusive
education can be implemented more effectively. More detailed information about each case study is
available in Annex B.
Comprehensive approach to inclusive education
Many case studies have shown us that awareness raising activities should target and also involve a
wide range of stakeholders (case studies 2, 5, 7, 8 and 9). A comprehensive approach is important
because inclusive education cannot be implemented effectively by changing perceptions of only
certain groups of the society. Through case study 2 on the Light for the World project implemented in
Cambodia, we noticed that involving civil society actors and local decision makers in awareness
raising activities is important in order to build a greater partnership among different levels of
stakeholders. The project also gives an example of how children with disabilities can be actively
engaged in the process of awareness raising activities. children with disabilities showcase their
talents through public performances, which directly challenges the perceptions of the community
members about children with disabilities.
Meanprasatwittaya School in Thailand (case study 7) also shows how building connections among
different stakeholders is crucial for the successful implementation of inclusive education. For
11
instance, the school created a board whereby a variety of actors, namely parents, business leaders and
religious leaders, came together to increase community-level support for inclusive education. The
school’s distribution of newsletters containing information about the on-going issues related to
inclusive education has also contributed to strengthening the connection between community
members.
Stimulation and Therapeutic Activity Centre based in Philippines (case study 5) has particularly
stressed the importance of involving all stakeholders including provincial governments, local chief
executive, municipal department heads, beneficiaries and civil society organisations for creating
synergy among different partners and also ensuring financial sustainability.
Our case study 8 equally emphasises the need for awareness raising campaigns to be based on a
comprehensive approach, both targeting and involving a variety of stakeholders. Along these lines,
Catholic Relief Services has implemented participatory workshops and community events to
encourage community leaders, teachers and parents of both children with and without disabilities to
share information, identify challenges and discuss ways to move forward.
Students as enablers of inclusive education
We found through case studies 3 and 8 that it is important to encourage all students, both with and
without disabilities, to take part in the process of creating an inclusive learning environment. The
consequence of an absence of such a practice is twofold: (1) teachers would likely have difficulty in
comprehensively capturing and understanding the various learning needs and differences of
individual student and (2) students would tend to be divided into groups of those with disabilities
and those without. Both of these consequences can exclude students from the process of building an
inclusive classroom and position them as passive receivers of education.
The first step for a teacher to benefit from this practice is to educate students about diversity and help
them to understand that every individual has different backgrounds, ideas and needs. In such a way,
students are given opportunity to witness the diversity that exists in their classroom and teachers can
12
prepare and provide education catered to each student’s specific needs. In this process, teachers are
not expected to do the work alone. Instead, all students are welcomed and encouraged to discuss and
freely choose roles that they can take in the process of creating an inclusive learning environment.
Once they have learned about different needs present in their classroom, they can decide what
support they can give to one another to better meet their respective needs.
Dante Rigmalia, a teacher based in Indonesia that has been implementing inclusive education and
runs the Dante Rigmalia Foundation (case study 3) shows that when a child with disabilities is to
become a part of a classroom, a simple way to enable all students to take part in the creation of
inclusive environment can involve democratically deciding who will sit next to the children with
disabilities and who will provide what support for him or her. But it is important to note that this
should only be a part of an ongoing process of witnessing, learning and responding to the diversity of
the entire class and not an exceptional task specifically targeting inclusion of children with
disabilities. When such a process is recognised as an exceptional or an additional task by a teacher
and students, it risks creating an exclusive learning environment, segregating children with
disabilities apart from other students.
Catholic Relief Services (case study 8) also presents an interesting way to encourage all students to
become active contributors of inclusive education. This practice is exemplified through their strategy
of creating ‘circle of friends’ in which children with and without disabilities interact and support each
other. It such ‘network,’ children engage in the process of designing activities and also deciding how
to help their classmates who need support. Here, the children are recognised as a powerful resource.
Active teacher training
Two case studies, 9 and 10, illustrate ways that teachers and other educational professionals can get
more out of trainings. Given that training is key to the success of inclusive schools--without sufficient
preparation teachers feel frustrated and the quality of children’s education suffers--it is vital to design
effective training that will properly equip teachers.
13
Case study 9 shows a good example of participant-oriented, interactive, and dynamic training.
Participants should be led to draw their own conclusions rather than the trainers imposing their own
points of view. The training highlighted in case study 10 emphasises a focus on practice rather than
theory. Case study 10 also shows how incentives can increase participation in trainings; even if
participants are initially reluctant or not interested in the topic, once drawn to a training by incentives,
they can be won over and developed as strong advocates of inclusive education.
Individualised teaching and evaluation methods
Taking into account that each child’s uniqueness is the underlying wisdom beneath efforts to change
the way children learn and are evaluated. Children with disabilities may have specific needs that are
linked with their disabilities, but children without disabilities can also benefit from policies that do
not implement a one-size-fits-all approach.
Two key ways that take into account children’s different learning styles are individualised learning
plans (ILP) and certain nontraditional forms of evaluation.
If, after assessing whether a child with disabilities will be able to thrive in an inclusive mainstream
school, the child is admitted, elaborating an ILP will help to ensure the student’s success. This plan
can be drawn up by the teacher, the parents, and the student him or herself, setting short- and long-
term goals which may or may not align with the main curriculum. It is important to create an ILP that
takes into account the student’s strengths and weaknesses, taking into consideration that each
student has different learning needs. For two examples of ILP’s being implemented, see case studies
7 and 8.
In a similar vein, creating alternative forms of evaluation to the current norm, which is standardised
testing, is another way to allow room for students’ diversity and to create a less stressful way for them
to demonstrate what they have learned. Case studies 6 and 7 provide several models of inclusion of
children with disabilities, with regards to academic expectations, behavioral expectations, and
alternate forms of evaluation.
14
These changes which take into account student’s individuality contribute toward making inclusive
education efforts successful. Yet they are beneficial not just for children with disabilities, but for all
children. Another way to implement inclusive education sustainably is via progressive inclusion. Case
study 4 provides an example of the benefits of moving towards inclusion progressively rather than all
at once. Some children can benefit from inclusion in mainstream education but may also have special
educational needs which a mainstream school cannot properly address. In such cases, children may
have the best of both worlds by spending half the time at a specialised school and half the time at a
mainstream school. Case study 1 illustrates one such situation.
Good practice sharing among teachers
Teachers who do not feel that they have had sufficient training and practical experience before
teaching students with disabilities may experience lack of confidence – they avoid contact with
students with disabilities, unsure of what to do and nervous to make a mistake. Case studies 1, 7 and
8 show that facilitating the exchange of successful practices, pedagogies and methodologies between
teachers may remedy the potential inadequacies of pre-service training.
An NGO ‘Krusar Thmey’ (case study 1) which operates within 14 Cambodian provinces, providing
education for deaf and blind children, incorporated in their practices a mechanism to enable teachers
to learn from each other. The NGO not only enables students from mainstream public schools to
attend some classes at specialised schools, and conversely, for the purpose of their integration, but
they also facilitate such exchanges between teachers. Once a week, teachers from local mainstream
schools are invited to specialised school to learn new practices and pedagogies from teachers who
work in the specialised school. This way, they gain experience which prepares them for cases when
they will have students with disabilities in their own classrooms. It is a very important practice which
allows teachers to rectify their mistaken understandings of work with children with disabilities and
confront their inhibitions.
15
Another successful approach we have found is that of showcasing projects which have succeeded on
the national scale. For instance, the Meanprasatwittaya school in Thailand (case study 7) has been a
successful example of building child-centred and activity-based learning environment which led to it
becoming a nationwide model, with teachers visiting to observe how the school implemented
inclusive and child-centred education.
Our case study 8 on Catholic Relief Services also provides some insights into how teachers can
support each other. The project used an interesting strategy of training the ‘key teachers,’ usually
school vice-principals or district education officers, whose purpose is to assist other teachers in their
school as well as other schools around them in adapting their teaching methods and provide them
with technical support to be more inclusive in their classrooms.
Progressive implementation of inclusive education
Through the examination of the aforementioned case study of Khrousar Thmey school in Cambodia
(case study 1), we have also found that when it comes to the change of local practices the best
approach is to focus on progressive implementation. This is useful, first of all, from the perspective of
students, who may gradually get used to being in a mainstream school and also teachers, who
progressively teach more and more students with disabilities. In Khrousar Thmey students begin in
primary school by attending classes in mainstream schools once a week, spending the rest of their
time in a specialised school, to then be completely included by the time they reach secondary school.
Also, whenever mainstream schools offer courses without specialised pedagogy (for instance
geometry which without special pedagogy cannot be taught to blind students), students with
disabilities have additional classes in a specialised school. This is a very successful example of
cooperation between mainstream and specialised schools that has the interest of students at heart.
Another instance of progressive implementation is seen in Save the Children’s project in Laos (case
study 4). The program started at a pilot school and expanded gradually in clusters of several schools at
a time, eventually forming a network of inclusive schools. On the school level, progressive
16
implementation was also key, introducing inclusive practices one grade per year rather than all at
once. The scaling up process over the course of sixteen years allowed for lasting and effective change
which may not have been possible without the progressive implementation approach.
Other good practices
Strong school leadership support
Meanprasatwittaya School (case study 7) shows that successful implementation of inclusive education
is highly dependent on the school leadership. It is considered that the strong leadership of Mantariga
Witoonchat, the school’s visionary principal, has contributed largely to shaping the school’s direction
towards building an environment supportive for inclusive education. The case study also shows that
sustaining such leadership is equally important so as to maintain the school’s trajectory.
Combined services
The Stimulation and Therapeutic Activity Centre in Philippines (STAC) (case study 5) uses a holistic
approach to providing services for children with disabilities by combining rehabilitation, training and
education activities. For instance, physical therapy is conducted on a regular basis while training
programs are provided to the parents of children with disabilities in order to ensure continuity of
rehabilitation activities beyond hospitals. STAC shows physical therapy and training of the parents in
addition to the educational services can be important elements for ensuring a holistic and a
sustainable development of the children with disabilities.
17
Part III. Recommendations
The final section of this report details our eight recommendations for UNICEF Malaysia. They build on
the previous section, which gave a snapshot of good practices of inclusive education in the Southeast
Asia region. Recommendations 1 and 2 take a bird’s eye view, while Recommendations 3-7 focus on
particular stakeholders. Specifically, Recommendation 3 focuses on children, 4-6 on teachers and 7
on school leadership. The last recommendation touches on the strategic planning of inclusive
education initiatives’ implementation.
1. Develop comprehensive awareness-raising campaigns
UNICEF should pursue its efforts to reinforce the comprehensive approach of its campaigns to raise
awareness on inclusive education. Comprehensive campaigns should target not only particular
stakeholders, such as schools and teachers, but also the general population. This should be done at all
levels, from the local community level to the regional and national level. Indeed, it is necessary to keep
in mind the whole picture – i.e.: society as a whole – while also focusing on certain parts of the picture –
e.g.: individual schools. The most often used means to achieve this are public events and mass media.
The long-term objective of such campaigns is to enhance the widespread recognition of inclusive
education in the society. It is also a fundamental requirement to foster the active involvement of the
general population and generate change towards a positive environment for inclusive education in
the broader social context. Overall, this is necessary for effective and sustainable inclusive education
initiatives to be successful.
18
2. Stimulate connection and involvement of all stakeholders
UNICEF should continue developing the national platform of partners it has created so as to include
all relevant stakeholders involved in inclusive education and strengthen links between them. More
generally, it should aim to promote the development of such relations at all levels to enhance
communication, information sharing, mutual support and strategic partnerships building between
actors.
Compared to Recommendation 1, this recommendation focuses more specifically on empowering
stakeholders to take action and generate change. Connecting and involving all stakeholders is
important because the successful implementation of inclusive education requires building
inclusiveness not only inside schools, but also throughout communities and society as a whole.
3. Empower all children as actors of inclusive education
Empowering all children as actors of inclusive education is a two-step process. Firstly, it requires the
recognition by other stakeholders – mainly parents, teachers and principals – of children’s role in the
process. Children should be seen not only as beneficiaries of, but also as agents of inclusive
education. Secondly, it requires giving them the tools to be actors. This includes providing them with
knowledge on inclusive education, encouraging them to take the initiative and including them in the
decision-making process. It is important to stress that empowering all children means involving
children both with and without disabilities.
Empowering all children not only helps to strengthen the horizontal links between students, but also
transcend the traditionally vertical, institutional relation between teachers and students in order to
make the process more integrated. Furthermore, this contributes to improving the efficiency and
effectiveness of inclusive education, by ensuring the needs of all children are considered and taken
care of, by encouraging children’s sense of ownership of education and by motivating their more
proactive engagement towards implementation of inclusive education.
19
4. Ensure teachers’ sense of ownership of inclusive education practices
In order to ensure that teachers have a sense of ownership over the inclusive education practices they
are meant to use in the classroom, it is essential that they understand the reasons why inclusive
education is needed. Aside from providing the tools of inclusive education, it is therefore crucial to
also explain why and how these are different from traditional education tools. Possible approaches to
increase teachers’ sense of ownership include participant-centred training and incentives, such as the
prospect of a promotion and increased salary.
As the case studies have shown, if teachers do not have a sense of ownership, there is a high
probability that the implementation of inclusive education will fail and that teachers will revert to
traditional education methods. Conversely, ensuring teachers’ sense of ownership increases chances
of success. It additionally stimulates teachers’ creativity and innovation regarding their teaching
methods as well as encouraging them to take more initiative in the process. This is all the more
important since teachers are key actors of education, having both high involvement and high
influence. Their sense of ownership is therefore an essential step towards guaranteeing a positive
shift towards more inclusive education.
5. Promote diversification of teaching methods and resources
Diversifying teaching methods and resources refers not only to introducing technology in the
classroom, but also to revising traditional pedagogy. The latter can already generate significant
changes in the classroom with few efforts and at a low cost. It should therefore be at the basis of any
initiative to promote inclusive education. Additionally, ways of developing the former as a valuable
and cost-efficient asset to the class have already been well researched by UNESCO and UNICEF at the
international level, though they have not yet been systematically implemented at regional and local
levels.
Using a variety of pedagogical approaches benefits not only students with disabilities, but all
students. It is for instance recommended to get students to work in groups and make teaching more
20
interactive. Such approaches recognise that every student has different means of learning and seek as
a consequence to tailor the learning process to each and every one of them individually. This
contributes to the aim of inclusive education to enhance the overall quality of education.
6. Foster good practice sharing between teachers
Teachers should be given the opportunity to share their good practices of inclusive education within
schools and between schools, at all levels and across all levels. Good practice sharing refers not only
to organising meetings, but also to providing tangible possibilities to experience the practice first-
hand. It is also beneficial to promote the systematic documentation of good practices and to make
this documentation publicly available as a resource at the grassroots level. Ideally, teachers would
also share practices with parents, community leaders and other relevant local stakeholders.
Good practice sharing allows teachers to build a strong network, which will have the added value of
give them a sense of community. It may also encourage further innovation in practices since, as the
saying goes, two heads are better than one. Finally, in the long term, it fosters the dissemination of
good practices, which in turn increases their legitimacy and visibility through widespread adoption.
This prepares the ground for progressive policy changes towards inclusive education.
7. Emphasise the indispensability of school leadership support
School leadership refers first and foremost to school principals, but also includes more generally
school administration such as directors and secretaries. Emphasising the indispensability of school
leadership support entails including them in inclusive education initiatives parallel to teacher-
focused activities. The approach touches on the vertical and institutional relation inside inclusive
education.
Emphasising the indispensable school leadership support is crucial because they have the authority
to set the tone of the institution, especially in the hierarchical culture of Southeast Asian countries.
Having strong and proactive school leadership is very powerful in promoting inclusive education.
21
Conversely, when school leaders are against inclusive education, efforts to develop an inclusive
environment can be severely inhibited. Beyond the classroom setting, the atmosphere within the
institution can also have a significant impact on the perception of inclusive education by parents and
to a lesser extent by the community as a whole.
8. Encourage progressive and clustered implementation of inclusive
education
Progressive implementation refers to a long-term process in which the inclusiveness of schools is
built up in gradual strategic phases. Considering that it is difficult for a traditional school to become
inclusive within the timeframe of a single year, inclusive education projects should be designed to be
implemented over several years, focusing each year on a separate grade or set of classes. Clustered
implementation refers to a process in which small groups of schools within the same district initiate
and develop the implementation of inclusive education practices together.
According to the case studies, both a progressive and clustered implementation increases the chances
of success of inclusive education programs. Such an approach also enhances the effectiveness of
projects because they can work hand in hand and support each other to reach their common goal of
becoming inclusive. Finally, this approach is overall more cost-efficient, less time-consuming and
more effective.
22
Conclusion
This report aimed to identify good practices of inclusive education at the grassroots level in six
Southeast Asian countries neighbouring Malaysia. The purpose of this analysis was to provide
guidance and insights for ways that UNICEF Malaysia can extend its efforts to promote and foster
inclusive education.
In order to do so, we followed three steps. Firstly, we outlined the main stakeholders involved in
inclusive education across all six countries and mapped how they are connected. This allowed us to
get a clearer picture of how they interact and influence one another. Secondly, we identified good
practices drawn from our ten case studies. Many of these are present in more than one country.
Finally, on the basis of these findings, we elaborated a set of eight recommendations.
Malaysia has made a small measure of progress toward promoting inclusive education at a top-down
policy level. Nevertheless, the government remains reluctant to fully adapt its educational system to
become more inclusive. Given this reticence, grassroots initiatives are needed to generate changes.
UNICEF Malaysia has already launched innovative programmes – we hope that our recommendations
will provide a basis for further action.
23
Annex A. Stakeholders
In the following annex, information included in the stakeholder power map presented in Part II of this
report is summarised in three tables. The first table focuses on the degree of involvement and
influence of stakeholders. The second table lists non-formal relations between stakeholders. The third
table lists particularly strong relations between stakeholders.
Table 1 – Involvement and influence
Stakeholders Involvement Influence
Children with
Disabilities High Low
Parents High High
Family Medium Medium
Teachers High High
Principal High High
Peers High Low
Parents of Peers Low Medium
Community Leaders Low Medium
DPOs / CSOs* Medium Medium
Teacher Training
Institutions Medium High
Local Authorities Low Low
24
Regional Authorities Low Low Na
tiona
l Aut
horit
ies
Ministry of
Education Medium High
Ministry of
Health
Ministry of
Social Affairs
Low Medium
Other
Ministries Low Low
* Degrees of involvement and influence of DPOs / CSOs vary. Medium level here indicates first and foremost that diversity.
Table 2 – Non-formal relations
Relations Stakeholders
Informal
o Children with Disabilities – Peers o Parents – Parents of Peers o Community Leaders – All other stakeholders
Hybrid o DPOs / CSOs* – All other stakeholders
* The nature of the relation of DPOs / CSOs to other stakeholders varies. Hybrid relations here indicate first and foremost that diversity.
Table 3 – Strong relations
Relations Stakeholders
Family o Children with Disabilities – Parents – Family o Peers – Parents of Peers
Classroom o Children with Disabilities – Teachers – Peers
Institutional
o Principals – Teachers o Ministry of Education – Teacher Training Institutions – Schools o National – Regional – Local authorities
25
Annex B. Case Studies
In the following annex, we will present the case studies that provide the basis of this report’s findings.
Information on key practices and main challenges faced, as well as relevant references will be
detailed for each case individually. Overall, we will present ten cases, coming from six Southeast
Asian countries, namely Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. These cases
are:
o Case Study 1 – Krousar Thmey (New Family) ............................................................................. 26
o Case Study 2 – Light for the World ............................................................................................. 27
o Case Study 3 – Dante Rigmalia Foundation ............................................................................... 30
o Case Study 4 – Save the Children Norway .................................................................................. 33
o Case Study 5 – Stimulation and Therapeutic Activity Centre ...................................................... 37
o Case Study 6 – Guidance Support Programme .......................................................................... 40
o Case Study 7 – Meanprasatwittaya School ................................................................................. 42
o Case Study 8 – Catholic Relief Services ...................................................................................... 45
o Case Study 9 – Save the Children Sweden ................................................................................. 47
o Case Study 10 – NIES Special Needs Teacher Training ............................................................... 50
26
Cambodia
Cambodia is a challenging context for the education of persons with disabilities, with more than half
of them being under 20 years old. Only 10% of the country’s children and youth with disabilities
receive any education. They account for barely 3% of children enrolled in primary school and 40% of
children with disabilities are illiterate. This situation is driven by poverty and a one-size-fits all
approach at the governmental level. Geographical obstacles further impede reaching certain
populations and translating government decisions into grassroots realities.
Case Study 1 – Krousar Thmey (New Family)
By Krousar Thmey (New Family)
Main Objective
The organisation’s main aim includes the creation of the form and content of education for deaf and
blind children. Moreover, the NGO aims at integrating children with and without disabilities through
extra-curricular activities to ensure that they interact on daily basis.
Key Features
The organisation is active in 5 cities and 14 provinces of Cambodia, assisting approximately 2’600
children. Krousar Thmey schools are situated on land donated by the Cambodian government, but
the curriculum and materials are funded through their own resources. The school’s curriculum is
based on the standard curriculum of all other schools in Cambodia, but classes that cannot be taught
in the same manner are adapted. Children with disabilities attend half of their classes in specialised
schools, and another half in mainstream public community schools. This allows for progressive
integration as well as specialised pedagogy. The project achieved both ‘horizontal’ and ‘vertical’
success: students with and without disabilities often interact together outside of classroom settings,
exemplifying the diminishing horizontal barriers between students, and several Krousar Thmey
27
graduates went on to pursue higher education, which is proof of lower vertical barriers to educational
progression. Teachers from local, public schools are also invited to come to special schools to learn
new methodologies of work with deaf and blind students. Furthermore, in order to increase
employability of students with disabilities, they are taught tangible and practical skills – for instance
massage therapy, which is a developing field in Cambodia.
Challenges & Shortcomings
The schools are still suffering from the lack of specialised pedagogies. For instance, geometry is not
taught to blind kids due to lack of pedagogical capacity. The organisation also indicated lack of
reliable data on students with disabilities in the country as well as lack of funding as constraining
elements.
Further Reading
Vachon, M. (2016), NGO Transfers Schools for Blind, Deaf to Government. URL:
https://www.cambodiadaily.com/news/ngo-transfers-schools-for-blind-deaf-to-government-
108648/
Zook, D. (2010). ‘Disability and democracy in Cambodia: an integrative approach to community
building and civic engagement’, Disability & Society, Vol. 25(2), pp. 149-161.
Krousar Thmey (n.d.), Presentation. URL: http://www.krousar-thmey.org/en/about-us/presentation/
Case Study 2 – Light for the World
By Kampot Krong Primary School
Main Objective
The project’s main objective is to bring about changes of behaviour of the relevant stakeholders to
improve the perception and integration of blind and visually impaired students in Kampot Krong
National School.
28
Key Features
The NGO aimed to affect the broader context in which inclusive education advocacy and work is
conducted in Cambodia, and to change how children with disabilities are perceived, by fighting
prejudice and stigma. To realise this goal the project took on a multi-actor perspective, seeking to
affect perceptions at different levels – among policy makers, civil society, government stakeholders,
teacher and broader communities.
The project involved civil society actors and local decision makers in a study trip, a community
awareness raising and progress-monitoring workshop. On the community level, the NGO set to
challenge pre-conceived ideas held by individuals about children with disabilities by showcasing their
talents through public performances. Parents and teachers participated in information sessions.
Community members were also often consulted on the advocacy efforts conducted by the NGO.
These initiatives combined have resulted in greater inclusion of students with disabilities in
mainstream public schools and classrooms. Parents who took part in information sessions started
sending their children to schools, which they did not do before. On the local administration level, the
efforts of the NGO have resulted in greater cooperation between actors – local organisations,
international NGOs and national authorities.
Challenges & Shortcomings
The project leaders stated that the main constraint concerns the fact that achieving behavioural
change takes time and requires a long-term vision and commitment. Moreover, funding and project
cycles are often short-term. This predominant paradigm affects what the NGO can achieve.
Due to time and funding constraints, this project targeted only lower- and mid-ranking officials, but
the project evaluators stated that including higher-ranking officials would have been beneficial. On
the community level, more time would have allowed greater community mobilisation for support of
children with disabilities – their early identification, assisting families in fulfilling their needs.
29
Further Reading
Light for the World (n.d.). ‘A collective Reflection on Actions and Approach to support Learning,
Change and the Promotion of Inclusive Education’. URL: http://www.lightfortheworld.nl/docs/ca
pacity-building/learning-history-inclusive-education-cambodia-%28summary%29.pdf?sfvrsn=8
30
Indonesia
From 2013 to 2014, at the primary education level, the number of students enrolled in special needs
schools was 75’426, while at secondary level the number was 17’157 (OECD 2015,106). In addition
to the gap in the enrolment rates for different levels of education, special needs schools in Indonesia
show higher enrolment of boys than girls due to traditional conceptions about gender. There is also
an enrolment gap among provinces. The Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture (2012)
counted 457 special needs schools in East Java, while only 4 were counted in West Papua. Thus,
addressing a variety of disparities is a major challenge in the context of Indonesia.
Case Study 3 – Dante Rigmalia Foundation
By Gegerkalong Girang primary school (Bandung)
Main Objective
The main objective is to enable all children to receive quality education through (1) awareness raising
campaigns at the community level but also at school and classroom levels, targeting teachers, parents
and students in the classroom; (2) training teachers and other members of the school staff; (3)
knowledge sharing with other institutions within and beyond the Bandung community; and (4) helping
government with implementation of inclusive education in Bandung and other cities of Indonesia.
Key Features
Dante Rigmalia Foundation promotes and implements some interesting classroom level practices in
schools located in and beyond Bandung community, namely (1) classroom organisation that
embraces and nurtures diversity of all students and (2) using inclusive pedagogy skills.
(1) Classroom that embraces and nurtures diversity of all learners
Dante Rigmalia, the founder of the Foundation, particularly emphasises the need to educate students
about diversity and to help them understand the different needs of every individual. Once the aim of
31
education is set in this direction, a teacher is more likely to shift from ‘special needs education’, which
targets particularly those children with disabilities towards ‘inclusive education’, which encompasses
all students. This shift is then reflected in the teaching and learning process as well as in the creation
of a classroom environment, all of which more conducive to responding to the various needs of every
student. This also sets the pathway for every student to actively take a part in the process of organising
a classroom where students decide what support each one can give to one another to better meet
their respective needs.
Apart from the classroom level, it is also important to work in collaboration with the headmasters,
other teachers and administrators to create an inclusive environment in the school in which all
students are respected. Such an educational culture that aims to embrace and nurture diversity would
have relevant implications in the context of Indonesia’s approach to inclusive education, taking into
account gender disparity that has been hindering girls’ access to education.
(2) Using inclusive pedagogy skills
Reinforcing the mistaken idea that there are separate ways to teach students with disabilities and
those without may put teachers under pressure because such a separation will result in an addition of
work to already existing burden of ensuring high performances of the students. There is a need to
combat this dual approach. When teachers realise that what works well for students with disabilities
may work equally well for other students, this can alleviate some of the pressure they feel to teach
different students in different ways. Dante Rigmalia stated in the Enabling Education Review issued
in 2012 that the teaching methods she had adapted for her students with disabilities happened to be
good for all of her students and that her teaching had become clearer for everyone.
Challenges & Shortcomings
The biggest challenges that Dante Rigmalia Foundation has been facing in promoting and
implementing inclusive education are concerned with bureaucracy and ignorance about inclusive
education. In particular, teachers often believe that having students with disabilities will have a
32
negative impact on their school performances, while the government uses strict standards for school
evaluation.
Moreover, it is difficult for students to transition from primary level to secondary level education due
to a lack of secondary schools that can accept them. Some schools struggle to position themselves as
inclusive schools without any certification while others restrict acceptance of students to those with
only certain types of impairments. When students are moved to mainstream schools, there is
oftentimes a lack of understanding of inclusive education and thus, teachers tend to focus on
students with disabilities’ barriers to learning instead of providing quality education for all students.
The consequence of such problems is precisely reflected in the enrolment rate gap between primary
schools and secondary schools. One shortcoming of Dante Rigmalia’s work can be found in its limited
reach. Due to the fact that Indonesia’s education system gives less room for flexible evaluation, the
Foundation’s work to promote and implement inclusive education faces difficulty in reaching the
arena of mainstream education. Implementing inclusive education in the mainstream school system
across different provinces necessitates comprehensive exchanges and collaborations with other
relevant institutions. This itself requires significant amounts of time and costs for a grassroots level
foundation. Nevertheless, the Dante Rigmalia Foundation is working to achieve the wider
implementation of inclusive education beyond the Bandung community.
Further Reading
OECD/Asian Development Bank (2015), ‘Education in Indonesia: Rising to the Challenge’, Paris,
OECD Publishing. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264230750-en
MoEC (2013), ‘Overview of the Education Sector in Indonesia, 2012: Achievements and Challenges’,
Jakarta, Ministry of Education and Culture Publishing.
Sunardi et al. (2011), ‘The Implementation of Inclusive Education for Students with Special Needs in
Indonesia’, Excellence in Higher Education, Vol. 2(1), pp.1-10.
33
Laos
Laos is a State Party to the ICESCR (ratified in 2007), the CRC (1991) and the CRPD (2008). In the past
decades, it has managed to increase enrolment in primary education to reach a net rate of 95%. Yet,
access to quality education is still a challenge. This is especially true for the most vulnerable groups,
which include girls; children whose mother tongue is not Lao – the language of tuition –; children
from economically or socially disadvantaged backgrounds; and, last but not least, children with
disabilities. The rigidity of the education system and the lack of funds, are particular factors that bar
the latter group from being included in mainstream schools. More generally, the country’s context as
both a very diverse – 49 ethnic groups are officially recognised – and poor country exacerbates this
situation.
Case Study 4 – Save the Children Norway
By Save the Children Norway
Main Objective
Save the Children Norway’s project aimed to raise awareness and promote understanding, primarily
among parents, teachers and principals, that quality education must be student-centred and ensure
the participation of all students, especially those from vulnerable groups. Though initially focussing
on the inclusion of children with disabilities, the project later adopted a wider approach considering
that all students experience barriers to learning that must be addressed.
Key Features
Over the course of its sixteen years of action (1993-2009), the project expanded from one pilot school
in the capital, Vientiane, to 539 schools throughout the country. The progressive rolling out of the
project to schools was coordinated by a National Implementation Team – composed of ministerial
officials and staff from the pilot school – and assisted by locally implemented Provincial
34
Implementation Teams and District Implementation Teams. These teams would train staff prior to the
school starting to be inclusive and provide them with technical support thereafter.
When new schools were included in the project, specific attention was given to the following three
elements:
o Schools should only enrol students of the appropriate age in order to avoid being overloaded
with work during the transition period towards inclusiveness. Though this may mean that
schools initially have to refuse enrolment of children not of the appropriate age, therefore
perpetuating their exclusion, it is important to note that this is necessary for the mid to long-
term sustainability and success of the project. If schools are overwhelmed, they risk
abandoning the project.
o Schools should aim to become inclusive progressively, meaning that only classes of one grade
should become inclusive every year. Lao primary education being composed of five grades,
schools should therefore aim to be fully inclusive only after five years. Again, this measure
aims to build capacity progressively in order to ensure the mid to long-term sustainability and
success of the project.
o Schools should join the project in clusters. Typically three schools in the same district would
join the project together as ‘critical friends’ to build their capacities collectively, sharing good
practices and supporting each other in the process. Additionally, schools that are already part
of the project and therefore have more experience would be involved to support the newly
joined schools. As a whole the objective of this strategy is to build a strong local network of
inclusive schools.
The project developed two tools to support the development of inclusive practices. The first tool is the
Five-Point Star, which was used in the project’s training programmes – as well as for the final
evaluation of the project. Five key components of inclusive education in classrooms were identified,
namely the use of a range of different activities; the use of resources; the use of student groupings;
the choice of question styles; and the relevance to real life experiences of students (for more details
see Save the Children Norway 2009, 89-92).
35
The second tool is the Lao School Improvement Tool, which was used to assess school practices and
measure their impact. It was aimed to be used not only for external, but especially for self assessment
of schools. This latter point is important since it is crucial that schools, in collaboration with the local
community, take ownership of their transition to inclusiveness. The tool includes seventeen indicators
(for more details see Save the Children Norway 2009, Appendix B) and a five-stage evaluation process
to help schools identify, implement and monitor key priorities for self improvement.
Overall, Save the Children Norway identified five key factors of success for their project, namely
teachers are motivated and understand the value of inclusive education for the students and the
community as a whole; teachers are well trained, which includes the provision of refresher courses
every three to four years; teachers have the opportunity to observe inclusive classrooms – and not only
receive abstract knowledge through training – and share good practices with other teachers;
principals understand the value of inclusive education, support teachers in developing inclusive
practices and encourage them to share their practices amongst each other and with parents; and local
communities are supportive and involved.
Four key strategies to ensure the participation of all students in the classroom were also identified,
namely giving extra attention to students in difficulty; involving all students to support each other,
ideally by getting students to often work in small groups, changing these groups several times a day
to ensure mix; using resources to support learning; involving parents through homework clubs for
instance to encourage them to support their children.
For concrete and detailed examples of best practices that successfully implement these strategies and
factors, see the three case studies of an inclusive lesson, an inclusive principal and an inclusive
community as well as the testimonies of four students (Save the Children Norway 2009, 105-131).
Challenges & Shortcomings
The main challenges faced by the pilot project were:
o The strain caused by the enrolment of all students wishing to attend the first inclusive school.
36
o The lack of opportunities for teachers to share their experiences or seek advice.
o The initial continued reliance on traditional, teacher-centred pedagogy.
o The teachers’ lack of agency to influence school policy, practices and environment.
o The underdevelopment of parental partnerships.
These challenges were taken into account in the project’s expansion to other schools. Unfortunately
however, teachers continued to have difficulties in developing individualised teaching approaches for
each student as well as accessing support and advice. One factor that contributed to this is the
irregularity of visits from members of Implementation Teams to each school due to the number of
schools and the budgetary constraints. Additionally, retention of staff was challenging due to their
regular transfers and change of positions, highlighting the importance of adopting a broad
perspective within the project that includes vertical and horizontal cross-planning strategies.
Finally, the project had two main shortcomings. Firstly, despite its initial intention to include all
children, it could not include students with the most severe disabilities. This is a common challenge
to most inclusive education projects. Secondly, it found expanding to secondary schools much more
difficult and ultimately less successful than with primary schools.
Further Reading
Save the Children Norway (2009), ‘A Quality Education for All. A History of the Lao PDR Inclusive
Education Project 1993-2009’.
37
Philippines
The government of the Philippines has been supportive of education for children with disabilities.
Efforts have been made such as the implementation of the Republic Act 7277, also known as the
Magna Carta for Disabled Persons, since 1991 and the yearly Presidential awards for child-friendly
cities and municipalities since 1998. Governmental support in the Philippines facilitates the
development of education for children with disabilities, which may distinguish the Philippines from
most other Southeast Asian countries.
Case Study 5 – Stimulation and Therapeutic Activity Centre
By Katipunan ng Maykapansanan sa Pilipinas Inc. (KAMPI – national federation of cross-disabilities organisations) & the Danish Society of Polio and Accident Victims (PTU)
Main Objective
Tubigon’s Stimulation and Therapeutic Activity Centre (STAC) is one of the 138 STAC centres (by 2013)
in the Philippines under the Breaking Barriers for Children and Young Adults with Disabilities (BBCY)
project. The Stimulation and Therapeutic Activity Centre (STAC) was created to ‘provide free
comprehensive rehabilitation services including free physical therapy, occupational therapy, pre-
school training, and school placement for children with disabilities, aged 0 to 14’ (UNICEF n.d.).
Key Features
(1) Clear division of responsibility between KAMPI and Tubigon’s municipal government
KAMPI is ‘in charge of training the parents of CWDs, day care workers, and barangay [smallest
administrative division] health workers’ and ‘transferring knowledge and skills to the LGU (local
government units) to effectively operate the STAC’, while the local government is responsible to ‘look
for a permanent location for the STAC, personnel, equipment, counterpart funding, and ensure the
sustainability of the STAC’ (UNICEF n.d.).
38
(2) Clear schedule of implementation
There are detailed implementation steps, outputs, key implementers, timeframe, budget and
resources planning for each implementation step. Below are the implementation steps with specific
time frame (UNICEF n.d.):
o Establishing target beneficiaries and their corresponding profiles (2 months, December 2007 to January 2008)
o Briefing of STAC implementers (1 month, January 2008) o Establishment of STAC at the temporary location (1.5 years, 2008 to 2009) o Capacity building (2 months) o Official turnover of STAC (1 year, 2010 to 2011 to build the STAC) o Monitoring and evaluation (Yearly)
(3) Services and activities
STAC runs regular services and activities that combine rehabilitation, training and education among
other things (UNICEF n.d.):
Ideally, treatments like physical therapy, occupational therapy and SPED sessions are conducted thrice a week for one to two hours per session. Regular services and activities of the STAC are described below:
a. Doctor evaluation – Entails initial evaluation by a physiatrist or neurologist of the CWDs to identify his or her specific treatments. Subsequent evaluations are conducted, ideally every quarter, to check on the status of the CWDs after treatment. Physiatrists may also recommend CWDs for surgery or medical treatment in hospitals.
b. Physical therapy – Activities designed to maintain, restore, and improve general physical conditioning of CWDs.
c. Occupational therapy – Activities designed to attain the highest level of functioning for daily activities like eating, dressing up, and correct speech.
d. SPED sessions – Activities designed to attain the highest level of cognitive skills like writing and identifying numbers, shapes, color, body parts, etc.
e. Supplemental feeding – Activities are complemented with balanced snacks or meals. f. Socialization activities – Monthly activities for the CWDs and their families. Annual
socialization activities include celebration of Children’s month, National Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation week, and Christmas.
39
g. STAC Parents’ Association (STAC-PA) – Activities include group counseling; socialization; and planning, implementation, and evaluation of STAC-PA activities, which are aimed to empower peer support and self-help groups.
h. Parents’ Training Program – Parents are trained on basic exercises that may be done at home to ensure continuity in rehabilitation.
i. Other activities – Hydrotherapy; fund raising for additional expenses of the STAC, e.g. transportation allowance of parents; and enjoining NGOs to partner with Tubigon STAC to augment budget for operations and assistive equipment for CWDs.
(4) Establishment and development of the project involves participation of all stakeholders
The participation of the provincial government, local chief executive, municipal department heads,
MPDC, barangays, beneficiaries, and civil service organisations is important in addressing issues such
as financial sustainability.
(5) Institutionalised process helps turn over existing projects to the upcoming administration
KAMPI will turn over the centre to the local government after 18 months. KAMPI will also prepare
transition briefings for following governmental administration. Such process helps to institutionalise
the centre and guarantees its sustainability.
Challenges & Shortcomings
When the project was implemented, ‘some of the families of the CWD were not inclined to bring their
children to the STAC even though services were free of charge’ (UNICEF n.d.). After visiting the houses
of these families, the STAC staff understood that transportation costs could be prohibitive. The centre
then helped to raise funds in local community to support these families with transportation costs.
Some parents whose children have mobility disability could not carry their children and travel to the
centre. To solve this, STAC did home visits or provided them with wheelchairs.
There was also a quick turn-over of staff, since employees look for better working opportunities. This
led to demands for constant recruiting and training of new staff. This problem has not yet been solved.
40
Further Reading
Breaking Barriers for Children and YAWDs, Website. URL: https://bbcy.wordpress.com/about-bbcy/
UNICEF (n.d.), ‘Empowering Children with Disabilities: Tubigon’s Stimulation and Therapeutic Activity
Centre’. URL: http://www.unicef.org/philippines/COPCFLG-TubigonBohol.pdf
Case Study 6 – Guidance Support Programme
By O.B. Montessori Centre Inc. (OBMCI)
Main Objective
The GSP makes possible enrolling children with disabilities, classifying them and including them into
the mainstream environment.
Key Features
There are no classes exclusively for students with disabilities. All students with disabilities accepted in
the school will be integrated or mainstreamed to its regular classes. The school provides three
programs to children with disabilities, namely Regular Academic Program, Modified Program and
Non-Graded Program (NISE n.d.):
A. Regular Academic Program
In this program students are enrolled in the regular academic program despite their disabilities, or learning difficulties. Special students who are placed in the regular academic program are required to meet all the academic and behavioral expectations/ standards of the school like any other regular student.
However, they are closely monitored and guided with regard to their behavior and how they may respond to everyday situations taking into consideration their learning/ psychological difficulties.
Special students in this program are considered fully integrated.
B. Modified Program
When the special students are unable to cope with the regular academic program they are mainstreamed thru a modified program. These students are required to meet the minimum
41
academic expectations/ standards of the school.
Modifications in the program may include (a) content and scope (quota of work output) (b) implementation – pace of work; giving of quizzes; seatwork, exams, projects, other written work, etc. (c) special schedules for tests and tutorial sessions.
C. Non-Graded Program
Students who have minimal potential to cope with either the regular or modified program are placed in a non-graded program.
Their program is usually prepared in consultation with psychologists/educational specialist. Teachers implement the individualized learning program in the classroom in lieu of the regular academic program.
Usually, the students in this program do not receive a quantitative progress report card. Instead, a descriptive report card is prepared to evaluate and record the progress of the student based from his/ her individual program.
At times, a ‘shadow teacher’ or SPED teacher may be allowed to stay in the classroom to assist the student.
The major consideration for children under this program is to provide opportunities for the child to interact and develop socially within a normal environment and identify possible vocational options that would allow the child to eventually become a productive member of the society.
Challenges & Shortcomings
Parents of children with disabilities are required to submit the evaluations from professional
consultants. However, this may become an obstacle for those families who cannot afford the services
of such consultants.
Further Reading
O.B. Montessori Centre, Website. URL: http://www.obmontessori.edu.ph/index.php
National Institute of Special Needs Education (NISE) (n.d.), ‘Education of Children with Multiple
Disabilities in the Philippines’. URL: http://www.nise.go.jp/kenshuka/josa/kankobutsu/pub_d/
d-228/d-228_18.pdf
42
Thailand
Thailand has made promising advances for inclusive education at the policy level, but there is still a
need for more change at the school level in order for teachers to feel prepared to teach inclusive
classrooms (Agbenyega & Klibthong 2015). In 1999, the Thai government recognised that
segregation in education had some negative outcomes and since then, there has been a shift from
special education schools to inclusive mainstream schools. Thailand’s national policy grew out of
extensive research, consultation and collaboration with persons with disabilities as key stakeholders.
This participatory process was key in developing effective legislation. Thailand accompanied this
legislation with informational campaigns affirming the right to education for children with
disabilities.
Case Study 7 – Meanprasatwittaya School
By Meanprasatwittaya School
Main Objective
Since 1986, Meanprasatwittaya aimed to provide a child-centred and activity-based learning
environment for its students. As a part of this child-centred philosophy, the school sought to develop
three aspects of children: the intellectual, the physical and the spiritual, calling this the head, hand
and heart approach. Regarding children with disabilities in particular, the school’s main objective was
to enable the students to live in a mainstream environment. Another objective was to provide a
positive model to demonstrate to Thai society the benefits of children of varying abilities studying
together.
Key Features
In addition to the school’s main focus – child-centred and activity-based learning – it was also noted
for its art and music instruction and a flexible and evolving curriculum. Including disadvantaged
43
children was integral to Meanprasatwittaya’s model, more notably children with disabilities, who
formed around ten percent of the student body. The school was so successful that it served as a model
nationwide, with teachers visiting to observe how the school implemented inclusive and child-
centred education.
The admissions process itself – it was a private school – was key to the success of the school’s inclusive
education model. The process helped parents set realistic expectations and determined if the school
was, indeed, apt for a particular child’s situation. Even after initial acceptance, the child was observed
in a mainstream classroom environment to see if the child could be properly included or not.
Children with disabilities who were finally admitted needed a special learning plan elaborated
between teachers and parents. This plan allowed short-term goals to be established; thus, the
children with disabilities were not required to follow a set curriculum. All children were involved in
the process of choosing topics to be studied in their curriculum, in a dialogue with their teachers.
In order to gain community support, the school’s board was made up of a variety of leaders: parents,
business leaders and religious leaders. Another action contributing to the community’s bond with the
school was the distribution of a newsletter to community members informing them of what was
going on.
One key feature of the school was its alternative evaluation method. Rather than relying on
standardised testing and other conventional evaluations, they opted for a different approach. This
approach included a combination of (1) teachers’ daily observation of students’ progress; (2)
portfolios of students’ work; and (3) project-based assessments. Students presented about projects
that they had been working on in groups of mixed abilities.
Challenges & Shortcomings
Much of the success of Meanprasatwittaya School is due to its visionary principal Mantariga
Witoonchat, who in 1986 shaped the school’s new direction. While principals’ leadership is crucial in
building a school’s culture, this strength can also be a weakness. If a good leader is replaced by one
44
who does not share the same vision, the school’s trajectory can shift. This was the case in 2005, when
the Foundation Board managing the school voted to remove Witoonchat from her role as principal,
where she had been active for nearly two decades.
A limitation in terms of this case study, is its applicability to public schools. While it has served as a
model for inclusive education, with people coming to observe and learn from its example, there could
be aspects of the model that prove challenging to implement in mainstream governmental schools.
Another fundamental challenge is the way that disabilities are perceived in Thai society. Due to ideas
about karma, which are part of Buddhism, disability can be viewed as a result of negative actions in a
previous life. This belief can lead to placing blame on persons with disabilities. However, Buddhism
has had an overall positive effect in this particular school, with the religion being an integral part of its
philosophy and activities.
Further Reading
Agbenyega, J. S. and Klibthong, S. (2015), ‘Transforming Thai Preschool Teachers’ Knowledge on
Inclusive Practice: A Collaborative Inquiry’, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 40(7).
Grimes, P. and Witoonchat, M. (2005), ‘Developing innovative inclusive practice at
Meanprasatwittaya School in Bangkok Thailand’, 2nd International Conference on Inclusive
Education, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Voraypanya, S. and Dunlap, D. (2014), ‘Inclusive education in Thailand: practices and challenges’,
International Journal of Inclusive Education, Vol. 18(10), pp. 1014-1028.
45
Vietnam
Only 66.5% of Vietnamese children with disabilities attended primary school in 2009, which is a
significantly lower rate of attendance compared to the national average of 96.8% (UNICEF Vietnam
2015, 10). Legislation to ensure access to education for all children has been adopted at the national
level since 2004 and the government has ratified the CRPD in 2014. However, implementation of
policies in schools is poor, with strong disparities being observed between provinces. The main
barriers to effective implementation are the lack of knowledge and training of school staff about
inclusive education as well as the lack of financial resources to develop inclusiveness in schools.
Stigma against persons with disability in the broader Vietnamese society is also a major challenge.
Case Study 8 – Catholic Relief Services
By Catholic Relief Services
Main Objective
Catholic Relief Services aims through its various projects on disability to promote the inclusion of
persons with disabilities in the Vietnamese society. It focuses especially, but not exclusively, on the
development of inclusive education in schools with the perspective that education has a long-term
impact beyond schools.
Key Features
Key elements to develop an inclusive education project include first of all identifying all relevant
stakeholders, including the less obvious ones such as parents of children without disabilities. Indeed,
investing in teachers alone will provide limited success. Awareness raising campaigns must target
school principals, parents and the wider community so that they become more involved in efforts to
provide an inclusive environment. Some of the initiatives Catholic Relief Services has carried out to
raise awareness include support groups, participatory workshops and community events to bring
46
community leaders, teachers and parents together to share information, discuss challenges and
develop solutions. They also suggest creating ‘circle of friends’ in which children with and without
disabilities interact and support each other.
Beyond awareness, teachers and administrators need to be provided training in inclusive education
practices. Some of the key best practices include tailoring activities so that all students can participate;
sitting children with disabilities amongst their peers, on the same rows rather than isolated at the
front of the class; and finding the right balance between teaching the class as a whole and giving
specific attention to children in areas they have difficulties with. For the latter, individualised
education plans should be systematically drawn up. To help teachers, teaching material should also
be developed. Catholic Relief Services has for instance published a collection of 10 teaching units, 5
for preschools and 5 for primary schools.
One of the key features of Catholic Relief Services’ inclusive education projects is the training of ‘key
teachers’. The main role of key teachers is to assist other teachers in their school as well as other
schools around them in adapting their teaching methods and provide them with technical support to
be more inclusive in their classrooms. According to Catholic Relief Services’ experience, the training of
key teachers is more cost-effective than hiring specialists. Additionally, they may play a role as
advocates of inclusive education to the national authorities, primarily the Ministry of Education, in
order to promote a larger policy shift.
Key teachers are typically vice-principals or district education officers. This is a strategic choice both
because teachers respect their authority and because they are already part of the local community.
They receive specific training in three areas: thematic issues regarding disability and inclusive
education; awareness raising; and coaching. Candidates must typically be motivated to become key
teachers (see specific selection criteria Catholic Relief Services 2010, 18). Incentives, including non-
financial incentives, can however also be provided to increase interest. Examples of incentives include
allocating small travel allowances to key teachers for their monitoring trips; awarding them a
certificate recognising their commitment; and highlighting the fact that their involvement as key
teachers will contribute positively to a career promotion.
47
Overall, the key lessons learned by Catholic Relief Services through its experience are:
o Simultaneous efforts to make the school, family and wider community environment inclusive
are crucial for the success of effective and sustainable inclusive measures in the classroom.
o Multi-level cooperation between stakeholders is necessary and sharing ideas between project
and non-project areas should be encouraged.
o Training is not enough, its application and impact in the classroom must be monitored
through follow-up sessions.
o Training and teaching materials must be regularly updated to remain suitable and relevant.
Further Reading
Catholic Relief Services (2007), ‘Inclusive Education for Children with Disabilities’.
Catholic Relief Services (2010), ‘Preparing Teachers for Inclusive Education’.
Case Study 9 – Save the Children Sweden
By Save the Children Sweden
Main Objective
The main objective of the workshops organised by Save the Children Sweden is to raise awareness
among all relevant stakeholders at the local level of the importance of inclusive education and further
promote cooperation to implement inclusiveness in schools and the wider communities.
Key Features
Each workshop is divided in three parts:
Parts Details
Part 1. Background concepts o 1.1. Introducing concepts. Participants discuss the meaning of concepts such as integration, inclusive
48
education, inclusive schools, normalisation and mainstream in order to share a common language (see suggested definitions Save the Children Sweden 1995, 20f.).
o 1.2. Analysing and understanding the historical aspects of rehabilitation. Participants are invited to understand the distinctions between the traditional, medical and social models of viewing disability.
Part 2. Community involvement o 2.1. Understanding the role of the local community. Participants reflect on what a community is and how it can be involved in promoting a cause.
o 2.2. Exploring attitudes and values of the local community. Participants identify the future their community aspires to reach and how persons with disabilities fit into this vision.
o 2.3. Discussing labelling within the community. Participants are first invited to identify arguments used in favour of segregation, secondly to come up with counter-arguments in favour of inclusion and finally to present both types of arguments in the form of a role play.
o 2.4. Formulating new educational principles. Participants brainstorm and formulate key principles they want their schools to apply, such as: ‘All children have the right to be together in the community of a regular classroom.’
Part 3. School environment Participants are invited to reflect on how they can act within the school to implement the educational principles identified previously. For this final part, each type of stakeholder receives a different training:
o Principals. They are first invited to identify obstacles to implementing inclusiveness in their schools. Then they reflect on how to turn these obstacles into possibilities by finding potential solutions and strategies. Finally, they
49
identify specific individuals in the school as well as the community that can support them in implementing these solutions and strategies.
o Administrators. Their training focuses on developing organisational and managerial skills in order to plan and implement effective inclusive education programmes. For instance, they plan out in detail the first month of implementation and identify first steps to involve the community in the process.
o Teachers. Their training is divided in two parts, firstly an introduction to inclusive education concepts and secondly a focused introduction to different types of impairments. Teachers that participate in the training make the commitment to train other teachers in their school for a 1-3 day course.
One of the key ideas promoted in the last section is the creation of children’s networks. The aim of
these networks is to alter the fact that children ‘constitute a powerful but little used resource’ (Save
the Children Sweden 1995, 33). Indeed, children are an important actor of inclusive education. They
should be fully involved in planning activities and implementing inclusiveness. The network would
be composed in its core of a school’s children, both with and without disabilities. Teachers, principal,
parents and families as well as any other relevant actor (e.g.: health service) should also be included
as peripheral members of the network.
Regarding the working methods of these workshops, it is crucial to emphasis its participant-oriented
approach. The philosophy behind this approach is that participants should be given the tools to
themselves become aware of their own potential to make inclusive education a reality. The method
does not therefore provide any ready-made answers, but rather invites participants to develop
answers themselves, at their own pace and based on their own experiences. Brainstorming sessions
and discussions are at the centre of the workshop to foster creativity and cooperation.
50
Related to this point is the broader one that ‘developing Inclusive Education is a process which must
be allowed to take time’ (Save the Children Sweden 1995, 19). Stakeholders must be given the
opportunity to familiarise themselves with the concept of inclusive education, understand the reasons
of its importance by comparing arguments for and against it and develop their own approaches and
strategies to implementing it. ‘Only by allowing each individual this opportunity to reach his or her
own conclusions can the programme be anchored in local life.’ (Save the Children Sweden 1995, 19)
Further Reading
Save the Children Sweden (1995), ‘Towards Inclusive Education. The Vietnamese Experience’
Case Study 10 – NIES Special Needs Teacher Training
By National Institute of Education Sciences (NIES) & Save the Children Sweden
Main Objective
The project aims to provide teacher training modules in inclusive education. These modules are
integrated to the in-service upgrading course primary school teachers with twelve years of formal
education and two years of formal pre-service training (so called ’12+2’ teachers) must follow to
receive the TTC Certificate and the status of ’12+3’ teachers. This certificate is necessary to have
professional teaching career prospects.
Key Features
The pilot project was constituted of twelve modules, representing thirty units of theory and practice in
inclusive education. This represents half the units that teachers must validate to receive the TTC
Certificate, the other half being obtained in core curriculum subjects. In subsequent revised models,
the number of units remained stable, but the number of modules was lowered to seven as emphasis
was increasingly placed on practice rather than theory.
51
The breakdown of modules is as follows (Save the Children Sweden 2003, 73):
Parts Modules
Part 1. Basic knowledge
o Module 1. Overview on education for children with disabilities (3 units)
o Module 2. Inclusive education for children with disabilities (5 units)
Part 2. Specialised knowledge o Module 3. Education for children with hearing disabilities (5 units)
o Module 4. Education for children with difficulties learning and moving (5 units)
o Module 5. Education for children with difficulties seeing (5 units)
o Module 6. Education for children with language difficulties (4 units)
Part 3. Pedagogical practice o Module 7. Pedagogical practice (3 units)
For a more detailed breakdown of units, see Save the Children Sweden 2003, 74ff.
Challenges & Shortcomings
The main challenge faced is getting teachers to want to participate in the training. ‘The NIES Pilot is
conscious of the fact that the motivation of the trainees is initially simply to upgrade their
qualification and not at all because they are interested in children with disabilities, let alone in the
concept of IE.’ (Save the Children Sweden 2003, 22f.). Yet, interviews with teachers after their training
indicate that they were pleased with the training and would recommend it.
This means that the training is a success, but that teachers need to be incentivised to participate in the
first place. To do so, either the module must be mandatory in the upgrading course or other
incentives must be provided such as the prospect of a higher pay and promotion. To provide support
in recruiting new participants, teachers having previously followed the training should be asked to
actively promote the training among fellow teachers.
52
Amongst the shortcomings of the project, the most sensitive one is linked to the observation that
teachers are not aware of whether or how they teach differently after compared to before the training.
This is because ‘there is very little opportunity within the curriculum for teachers to compare
pedagogical approaches, and relate it to their own experiences’ (Save the Children Sweden 2003,
29). One factor of this is the length of the training, which is very short, namely two 10-week
semesters. Some participants suggested that 15-week semesters would be more appropriate.
Another shortcoming regards the (im)balance between practice and theory. The module of practice
represents only three units, each of forty-five minutes. The idea that teachers participating in this in-
service training do not need much practice because they are already experienced is a misconception.
Inclusive education introduces such an important shift in pedagogical methods, that practice is
necessary. Therefore the ratio of units allocated to practice should be significantly increased. Doing so
might in fact also contribute to finding a solution to the first shortcoming. The report makes three
additional suggestions to improve the quality of the practice module:
o Using teachers that are already trained in inclusive education as ‘teaching practice supervisors’
to increase the number of classrooms available for practical training.
o Introducing team-teaching, in other words pairing up participants for the practical training so
that they can learn together.
o Setting up inclusion resource units in teacher training centres as a place to centralise
information, resources and best practices for present and past participants.
A final remark of the report is that any project around inclusive education should not let the best be
the enemy of the good. Indeed, while achieving high standards of inclusiveness is always the
ultimate objective, this should not be a barrier to letting experience guide improvement of practices.
Further Reading
Save the Children Sweden (2003), ‘Evaluation of the Teacher Training Components for Inclusive
Education in Vietnam’