the journal of the international association of special ... 2007.pdf · the journal of the...

The Journalof the

International Associationof

Special Education

Spring 2007

Vol. 8, No. 1

Schedule of Eventsfor

Tenth Biennial International ConferenceUniversity of Hong Kong

June 10 -14, 2007

The Journal of the International A

ssociation of Special Education

Spring 2007 Vol. 8, N

o. 1

Official Journalof the

International Association of Special Education

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education 2007 8(1) 1

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education

Volume 8 / Number 1 Spring 2007CONTENTS

Note from the EditorsGregPraterJamieTimmerman................................................................................................................................. 3

Special RecognitionBernadetaSzczupal............................................................................................................................... 4

Special Education in Hong Kong: Background, Contemporary Trends and Issues in Programs for Learners with Disabilities

Ming-GonJohnLianAndrewChung-yeeTseAlisonManChingLi............................................................................................................................ 5

Teachers’ Practice as a Marginalization Factor in the Process for Inclusive Education in CyprusPanayiotisAngelidesCharalambosVrasidasConstantiaCharalambous................................................................................................................... 20

School Personnel’s Professional Development Needs and Skill Level with Functional Behavior Assessments in Ten Midwestern States in the United States: Analysis and Issues

SekharS.PindiproluStephanieM.PetersonHollieBergloff.................................................................................................................................... 31

Comparison of Perceptions of Inclusion Between University Instructors and Students with Disabilities in Ukraine

SharonA.Raver-LampmanKaterynaKolchenko........................................................................................................................... 43

Evaluation of a Pilot Project on Inclusive Education in India

AnupriyaChadha................................................................................................................................ 54

Special Education in Southern Africa: Current Challenges and Future ThreatsMorganChitiyoGeorgeChitiyo.................................................................................................................................... 61

2 The Journal of the International Association of Special Education 2007 8(1)

Cultural Barriers to South Indian Families’ Access to Services and Educational Goals for Their Children with Disabilities

MayaKalyanpurI.P.Gowramma.................................................................................................................................... 69

Programs for Children with Special Needs in Iran: The Importance of Early InterventionMokhtarMalekpour........................................................................................................................... 83

From Special Schools to Inclusive Education: The Way Forward for Developing Countries South of the Sahara

JohnCharema...................................................................................................................................... 88

PRAXIS ArticleThe Four Square Vocabulary Instruction Strategy

WardA.CockrumSherryL.Markel................................................................................................................................. 98

PRAXIS Guidelines.................................................................................................................................... 101Conference Information............................................................................................................................. 102Submission Guidelines................................................................................................................................ 106Membership Information........................................................................................................................... 107


Note from the Editors

Welcometothe2007editionofThe Journal of the International Association of Special Education (JIASE).ThisisthethirdissueofTheJIASEthatisbeingsupportedinpartforpublicationbyNorthernArizonaUniversityinFlagstaff,Arizona,USA.

WewouldliketothankourAssociateEditor,Malgorzata(Gosia)SekulowiczandourConsultingEditorsfortheirvaluablecontributions.Also,wewouldliketothankandmoreformallyintroduceKateHaynes,ChizukoYamada, and Howard E. Zlamal,Assistants to the Editor. OurAssistants to the Editor are pursuing graduatedegreesinSpecialEducationatNorthernArizonaUniversity(NAU).

Meet the 2007 Assistants to the Editor

Kate Haynes received a Bachelors degree from the University of Wolverhampton (1999) in English andAmericanStudiesandreceivedherMastersdegreeinEarlyChildhoodEducationfromNAUin2005.ShehasthreeyearsteachingexperienceinearlychildhoodinWalsallandWolverhampton,England.MissHaynestaughtstudentswithavarietyofdisabilitiesfromages3to11.Shehopestousehercurrentgraduateworkinspecialeducationtoenablehertobetterservethestudentsinherclassroomwithspecialneeds.

ChizukoYamadareceivedherBachelorsdegreefromKyotoSangyoUniversity(1987)inEconomics.ShereceivedasecondBachelorsdegreefromNAU(1993)inSociology.ShereceivedaMastersdegreefromNAU(2002)inAppliedSociology.SheiscurrentlylivinginFlagstaffwithherhusbandand5-year-olddaughter.Shehopestomastereffectiveinclusiveclassroomsstrategiesasaresultofherspecialeducationtraining.

HowardE.ZlamalreceivedaBachelorsdegree(2005)inModernLanguageswithaminorinMusicfromNAU. Howard is fluent in English, Spanish, German, and French. He was raised is Sedona, Arizona in the United States.HowardhasgivenpresentationsonAspergerSyndrome invarious locations in theUnitedStates.Hismastersprogramemphasizestheinclusionofstudentswithspecialneedsintothegeneraleducationclassroom.

Journal Updates

We have recently acquired approval from the executive board to place The JIASE on our website at:http://www.iase.org.Journaleditionswillbeaccessibleonthewebsiteafterbeingpublishedforoneyear.TheJIASEiscurrentlyindexedintwodatabases:EBSCO(asEducationResearchComplete)andH.W.Wilson.

Please joinusat the2007conference inHongKong,alongwithMalgorzata (Gosia)Sekulowicz, forourpresentation on The JIASE. We will be providing an overview of The JIASE. The presentation will reviewthesubmissionguidelinesanddiscuss typesofarticlesacceptedforpublication.Wethinkitwouldbeagreatopportunity for potential authors to interact and get feedback from us and our consulting editors. Please find our specialrecognitionofanoutstandingconsultingeditor,BernadetaSzczupal,onthefollowingpage.WehopetoseeyouinHongKong.

Sincerely,

GregPrater,EditorJamieTimmerman,ManagingEditor


Special Recognition

Bernadeta Szczupal, Ph.D.MariaGrzegorzewskaAcademyofSpecialEducation

Warsaw,PolandConsultingEditor,JIASE

[email protected]@wp.pl

[email protected]

ThisyearTheJIASEwouldliketorecognizeDr.BernadetaSzczupal,consultingeditor,forherremarkablecontributiontoTheJIASE.Dr.SzczupalwrotetwoextendedsummariesinPolishofthe2005and2006editionsofTheJIASEwithinTheJournaltitled“Czlowiek-Niepelnosprawnosc-Spoleczenstwo”thattranslatesto“Man-Disability-Society”inEnglish.Dr.SzczupalisplanningtocontinuesummarizingfutureeditionsoftheJIASEintoPolish.Thecompletereferencestothesejournalarticlesare:

Szczupal,B.(2005).TheJournaloftheInternationalAssociationofSpecialEducation:Spring2005,volume6,number1.Czlowiek-Niepelnosprawnosc-Spoleczenstwo, 2,207-219.

Szczupal,B.(2006).TheJournaloftheInternationalAssociationofSpecialEducation:Spring2006,volume7,number1.Czlowiek-Niepelnosprawnosc-Spoleczenstwo, 4,163-179.

Dr.SzczupalisanacademicteacheremployedattheMaria Grzegorzewska Academy of Special Education in Warsaw, Poland. Her scientific and research activities relate mainly to psychological and social functioning of youth with motor disabilities. The effect of these activities are published in 118 scientific works in several languages (Polish,English,Italian,Czech,RussianandBelarusian),theyincludefourbooks.Mostofherpublishedworksrelatetoyouthwithdisabilitiesandarelinkedtotheirinterests,valuesystem,feelingsoflonelinessandsocialandprofessionalrehabilitation.Alsoincludingtheuseofbibliotherapyandhippotherapyinworkingwithchildrenwithdisabilities,andthesituationinthelabourmarketforindividualswithdisabilities.

Dr.Szczupalhasgivennumeroustalksatinternationalandnationalconferencesandcongresses;shehasalsoheldmanytrainingpositionsinGermany,Austria,Netherlands,andtheUnitedKingdom.SheisamemberofTheInternationalAssociationofSpecialEducation,PolishNeuropsychologicalSociety,PolishSocietyofSpecialEducationandTheEdwinE.GordonPolishSociety.

AtpresentsheisanactiveparticipantofthePolish-GermanProject“Integrationofdisabledemployees-womenandmenandheavilydisabledpersonsinthePolish-Germantrans-borderregion”(“IntegrationvonBehindertenund Schwerbehinderten Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmern in der Deutsch-Polnischen Grenzregion”),realized by ISB–Gesellschaft für Integration, Sozialforschung und Betriebspädagogik gGmbH (ISB gGmbH)with its seat in Berlin, Germany. She collaborates with numerous scientific and methodological centers and other specialeducationentitieswithinPoland,lecturingandconductingtrainingforlibrarians,teachersandstudents.Shehasalsoworkedasateacherinagrammarschoolinachildren’shospital.

Dr. Bernadeta Szczupal


Special Education in Hong Kong: Background, Contemporary Trends and Issues in Programs for Learners with Disabilities

Ming-Gon John LianHonoraryDirector

CentreforAdvancementinSpecialEducation(CASE)TheUniversityofHongKong

[email protected]

Andrew Chung-yee TseAdministrativeDirector


[email protected]

Alison Man Ching LiExecutive Officer


[email protected]

Abstract

Since the handover of the sovereignty from the United Kingdom to the People’s Republic of China in 1997, there have been a series of change, development, and related issues in special education programs for learners with disabilities in Hong Kong. In this paper, we try to describe the background and recent trends, issues, and implications that have evolved in the past 10 years, including curriculum reform, inclusive education, change of academic structure, and quality-level school program advancement, which have directly or indirectly led to specific program enhancement in more appropriate assessment, curriculum tailoring, effective instructional strategies, information/instructional and assistive technology, parental involvement and home-school partnership, program effectiveness evaluation, and action research. The conclusion pinpoints current needs in further staff development, local and international networking, and overall team efforts.

Aspecialadministrative region(SAR) thatwasunder Great Britain’s ruling as a colony for thepast hundred years, Hong Kong’s sovereignty wasreturnedtoChinain1997.Sincethen,theHKSARhas gone through a series of paradigm shifts in itseducationalprogramsandserviceswiththeevolutionofnewtrendsthatarecloselyrelatedtoschoolingoflearnerswithdisabilities.ThepurposeofthispaperistodescribethebackgroundandcontemporarytrendsandissuesregardingspecialneedseducationinHongKong.

Background

Like many other Asian countries and areas,educational programs and services for studentswith special needs were initiated and provided bymissionaries during, or before, the first two thirds of thepastcentury(i.e.,thelate1890sthrough1960s).The government became actively involved in thelate1970swhencompulsoryeducationwaswidelyimplementedandchildrenwithdisabilitiesbegantohaveequalrightstogeneralschooleducation(Lian,2005;Poon-McBrayer&Lian,2002).


TheHongKongCouncilofSocialWelfare(1995)estimated that, in theyearof2004, therewouldbe310,000 persons with disabilities in the HKSAR,which includes Hong Kong Island, Kowloon, andtheNewTerritories.Amongtheseindividuals,20%to25%(i.e.,62,000to77,500)wouldbeschool-agechildrenwithoneormoreofthefollowingdisablingconditions: intellectual disabilities, formerly called“mental handicap” or “MH” (44.9%), physicaldisabilities, formerly called “physical handicap”or “PHH” (29.0%), mental illness (8.8%), hearingimpairments (5.0%), speech impairments (3.6%),emotional/behavioral disorders, formerly called“maladjustment”(2.5%),andautism(0.5%)(Poon-McBrayer&Lian,2002).

At present, there are 63 (as compared to 74 in2004) special education schools in Hong Kong,serving 7,697 (as compared to 10,082 in 2004)students with sensory, physical, mental, emotional/behavioral, and/or multiple disabilities (CommitteeonHome-schoolCo-operation&HongKongSpecialSchool Council, 2002; Education and ManpowerBureau,2006a).Thesespecialschoolsco-existwithover1,244(ascomparedto1,286in2004)primary-andsecondary-levelmainstreamschoolswhichserveatotalof904,304(ascomparedto986,015in2004)nondisabled and inclusive education (IE), formerlycalled“integrated,”students.Theratioofstudentsinspecial education programs to those in the generaleducation system is 1:117 (as compared to 1:93 in2004).Severalfactorsmayhavecausedthedecreaseof statistical figures such as the drop of birth rate andtheincreaseofstudentswithdisabilitiesthatareintegratedintoclassroomsinmainstreamschools.

Most of the special education schools wereestablished between the 1960s and 1970s by non-profit and charity organizations or parental groups (e.g., the Caritas Church, Heep HongAssociation,Hong Chi Association, Hong Kong Red Cross,and the Po Leung Kok non-profit organization). One school was established as early as 1879--the Ebenezer School and Centre for the VisuallyImpaired (Poon-McBrayer & Lian, 2002).A seriesofeducationalprogramshavealsobeenprovidedincertainmainstreamschoolsinthepasttwodecades,

including resource classes, school-based remedialprograms, peripatetic teaching services, advisoryservices,aswellasrelatedservices,e.g.,audiologyand speech therapy services (Poon-McBrayer &Lian,2002).

After adopting specific approaches and programs suchastaskanalysisalongwithshapingandchainingtechniques (Snell&Brown,2000;Wolery,Ault,&Doyle,1992),precision teaching,curriculum-basedmeasurement (CBM), conductive education, andoutcome-based assessment and instruction (Liang,2003) in thepast twodecades, schoolpractitionershave recently been trying to cope with a series ofevolutional changes in special education practices.Thisincludestherecentcurriculumreform,inclusionof students with special education needs (SEN),changeofacademicstructure,andqualitylevelschoolprogramadvancement,“sothattheirdedicatedeffortscan be more effective in enhancing their students’potentialforinclusiveschoolingand/orlivinginaninclusivecommunity”(Lian,2004a,p.127).

Evolutional Changes

RecentchangesinHongKongincludecurriculumreform,inclusionofstudentswithspecialeducationneeds, change of academic structure, and quality-levelschoolprogramadvancement.

Curriculum Reform

Due to the “rapid- and constant-changing aswell as technology-demanding modern life” intoday’s Asian countries and areas, as well as theglobalizationeffect,theEducationCommission(EC)(2000) in Hong Kong recommended an educationreform that was “geared toward life-long learningandwhole-persondevelopment”(Lian,2001a,p.1).Inresponsetothisrecommendation,theCurriculumDevelopment Council (CDC) led the “Learningto Learn” curriculum reform in an attempt to“provideallstudentswithessentiallife-longlearningexperiences for whole person development in thedomains of ethics, intellect, physical development,social skills and aesthetics, according to individual


potentials,sothatallstudentscouldbecomeactive,responsible, and contributing members of society,the nation and the world” (CDC, 2000, p. 17).Aspinpointed by Li (2006), “In this changing worldof the 21st century, our younger generation needstobeequippedwithabroadbasedknowledge,highadaptability,independentthinkingandtheabilityforlife-longlearning”(p.3).

This wave of curriculum reform causedcritical concerns regarding teaching and learning(Cheng, 2001). It also provided special educationpractitionerswithanopportunityforadvancingtheirschool-based curricula, along with developmentof effective teaching strategies, for students withsensory, physical, intellectual, and other disablingconditions(Lian,2001a).Duringthepastsixyears,mostspecialeducationschoolsaswellasmainstreamschoolshaveworkedtodevelopandadvanceschool-based curricula using the CDC-promoted ninegenericskillsineightkeylearningareas(KLAs)asa guideline (Education Commission, 2006; Fung,Lian,&Ng,2002;Lian,2001a,2001c,2001d,2001e,2003a,2003c,2004a,2004c,2004d,2006;Lian,Li-Cheung,Fung,&Ng,2002,2003).Theninegenericskills include: collaboration skills; communicationskills;creativity;criticalthinkingskills;informationtechnologyskills;numeracyskills;problemsolvingskills;self-managementskills;andstudyskills.Theeightkeylearningareas(KLAs)are:Chineselanguageeducation; English language education; technologyeducation;personal,socialandhumanitieseducation;artseducation;andphysicaleducation.

Moreover, since the past few years, there havebeen more consensuses among policy makers andthefrontlinepractitionersonthe“onecurriculumforall”conceptandeffort.Inessence,learnerswithandwithoutdisabilitiesaretobeexposedto,andtaughtwith, the samecurriculumwithuniversal aimsandinstructional objectives, for fulfilling each of the learners’life-longgoalsintheinclusivecommunity.Oneoftheexamplesisthatlocalschoolsforchildrenwithspecialneedsmayworkindividually,ortogetheras a team, in an attempt to develop the school-basedcurriculum,oracross-schoolcurriculumandassessmentpackagesuchasthe“SAME”(Systematic

ApproachmatchingMainstreamEducation)system(Li & Tse, 2006; Lian, 2006, 2007), which makesthe central (i.e., government-enhanced) curriculumaccessibleforlearnerswithmildtosevereintellectualdisabilities(Ayres,2006;Humphreys,2006,2007).

Inclusion of Students with SEN

The increasing awareness and appreciation ofhumandiversityandtheconceptandeffortsofequalopportunity have led to inclusive education forstudentswithspecialeducationneedsinHongKongwhich,accordingtotheEducationDepartment(ED)(2000) (a previous governmental agency under theEducationandManpowerBureau),canbetracedbackto the1970s.Most of the efforts for advancement,however,wereinitiatedinthelate1990s,especiallywhentheEDstartedthewhole-schoolapproachpilotproject.As of the 2006-2007 academic year, therehavebeen292schoolsthathaveparticipatedinthisproject(ascomparedto117in2005)(EMB,2006b),whilemostothershavealsobeenprovidedwithpre-service and in-service programs and support, suchas the 30-hour Introductory Course on IntegratedEducation (Lian, Poon-McBrayer, & Tam, 2001)and related school-based support. Much discussionand related dissemination of successful efforts, aswell as controversial issues, have taken place inthe past 10 years since the Salamanca Declaration(e.g., Lian, 2004b; Lian,Woo, Hui, & Lum, 2004;Poon-McBrayer, 2002; Sin & To, 2000, 2001;Special Education Society of Hong Kong, 2003,2004; Yeung & Lian, 2004). The indicators listedby theEMB(2004a)havebeenrecommendedasaguideforevaluatingqualityandsuccessofinclusiveeducation.

Change of Academic Structure

During the past three years, the Hong Kongeducation systemproposedby theEMBhasbegantomoveintothe“3plus3plus4”academicstructure(CDC&HKEAA,2004;EMB,2004b),thatis,threeyearsofjuniorhigh,threeyearsofseniorhigh,andfour years of college/university education after the


primaryorbasicschoolprograms.Therehavebeenan extensive number of concerns and preferencesthatareexpressedbyspecialeducationpractitionersand/or advocates (Chan, 2005; Cheung, 2005;Chiu,2006;Lian,2005;SpecialEducationSocietyof Hong Kong, 2005, 2006; Hong Kong SpecialSchoolCouncil,2004).Chiu(2006)pinpointedthatthecurriculumgoingalongwith thenewacademicstructureneedstoincludebothquantityandqualityof students’ learning and application to real lifesituations,whiletheeducationprogramsneedtobeengagedinordertopreparestudentswithdisabilitiesforsuccessfultransitionfromjuniorandseniorhighschooltoqualityandproductivepost-secondarylifein the community (Gilson&Lian,2006).For this,the Curriculum Development Council (CDC) anditsCommitteeonSpecialEducationNeeds(CSEN)have developed corresponding guides for the corecurriculum(i.e., language,mathematics,andliberalstudy), career-oriented study (COS), electives, andexperience-based learning (EMB, 2006c, 2006d;Chan.2006).

Quality-Level School Program Advancement

Hargreaves (1995) stated that the “patterns ofeducational reform are greatly influenced by social forces” (in Lo, 2004, p. 161). Due to a variety ofsocial andsocietal changes,practitioners in specialeducation and mainstream school programs havefound the urgent need to upgrade and advancespecific classroom programs for students with mild to severe,multipledisabilities.Thiseffortforschools’transformationcanbeobservedthroughco-existingandconsistentstaffdevelopmentseminarsorcamps,localandregionalvisitsandexchanges(e.g.,Taipei,Shanghai) and, especially, the application for, andimplementation of, Quality Education Fund (QEF)projectstopromoteschooltransformationforhigherlevel of achievement in teaching and learning.Examplesofschoolprojectssupportedby theQEFinclude(1)the“MultimediaClassroomforChildrenwithDisabilities”(Shek,Lian,&Ng,2000);(2)the“AdvancementofaLearning-basedSchool”projectof The LotusAssociation of Hong Kong Chi Yun

School(Lian,2003b);(3)the“ToolforEvaluation/re-evaluation for Self-advancement” project ofthe J.F.K.Centre (2006), and (4) the “EnhancingProfessionalism-Meeting with Success” project ofthe Fortress Hill Methodist Middle School (2003)and its teammate, theChiLinBuddhistSecondarySchool.

Specific Program Enhancement

Due to the major influencing events (i.e., the evolutionalchanges)mentionedabove,practitionersin programs for students with disabilities haveworkedtogetherinanattempttoachievesuccessfulandhealthytransformationoftheirspecialeducationor mainstream school programs. These effortsare consistent with contemporary trends in othercountriesandareas(e.g.,Ashman,2006;Fuchs,D.,2006;Fuchs,L.,2006;Kim,2006;Lee&Budzisz,2004; Poon-McBrayer & Lian, 2002; Ryndak &Alper, 1996; Stopka, Goodman, & Siders, 1997;Thomas, 1996; Wolery et al., 1992; Wu, 2006),whichareinthedirectionofappropriateassessmentandcurriculumtailoring.

Appropriate Assessment

Assessment approaches that are appropriatefor students with disabilities include alternative,authentic/functional, and portfolio assessmentand additional assessment adaptations, for norm-referenced and criterion-referenced assessment(NRA/CRA)toco-existandtheinformalapproachestosupplementandhelpup theshortcomingsof theformal and/or standardized system of assessment(Fuchs, L., 2006; Lian, 2000a; Poon-McBrayer &Lian,2002). Inaddition,assessmentpracticesneedtobedirectlylinkedtoteachingindividualstudentswith special education needs (Spinelli, 2004) andgiveanopportunity toachieve toward thepersonaloutcome (Hong Chi Association, 2006) or thelearning-outcome framework (LOF) (EMB, 2006c,2006d).Likeprogramsinothercountriesandareas,theexaminationsystems inHongKongneed tobemore flexible and test taker-friendly. So far, increasing


adaptations have been engaged and implemented,including less rigid time limits, more acceptanceof non-standardized procedure, use of adaptiveequipment as well as assistive technology devices,and the arrangement of school-based assessment(SBA).Theenvironmentalassessment,intheformatofcasestudyandcriterion-referencedmeasurement(CRM),plusongoing support togoalongwith thetraditionalevaluationsystemisatitsbeginningstagefor more successful inclusive education (Ayres,2006;EMB,2004a;Lian&Deng,2003b).Aseriesof staffdevelopment seminarsalso started tobringthe concept of authentic and functional assessmenttotheattentionofthefrontlinepractitioners--thetypeofassessmentwhichfocusesontargetbehaviorsorskillsinareal-lifecontext(i.e.,authenticassessment)and the assessment which is based on the purposeandcontentsthatwillbecloselyrelatedtorealdailylife and thebeliefof self-determination (HongChiAssociation, 2006; John F. Kennedy Centre, 2006;Taylor,2000;Venn,2000).

Theecologicalapproachtriestoassessastudentand his or her school, home and/or communityenvironment as a single whole unit, while thecurriculum-based assessment (CBA) will try (1) tofind a student’s prerequisites and readiness to learn before teaching toward specific curriculum goals and objectives;aswellas(2)toevaluatehis/herprogressandlearningachievementafterteachinginacriterion-referencedmanner(Lian,2000a;Liang,2003).

Theconceptandapproachofportfolioassessmentconsistofaseriesofastudent’sinformationandrelatedmaterialsthatareputtogethertoforma“portfolio,”suchasachild’slearningprogressreport,outcomesor products of specific target behavior, video about his/her communication or other performance (e.g.,verbalexpressivelanguage,motorcoordination,self-helpskills,orutilizationofanassistive technologydevice); examples of completed tasks; teachers,parents, or other students’ comments; certificates andawards;andsoon.Astaffdevelopmentseminaron portfolio assessment may focus on gatheringand presenting information relating to individualfeaturing, personal wish, teacher and parentalexpectation,learninggoalsandfavoriteinstructional

strategies, social perspectives and friendship,academic and nonacademic achievements, withattachmentsofphotosand/orvideoclippings(videotapes,VCDsandDVDs) (e.g.,Lian,2001b,2002).In fact, this may contribute to, or supplement, anynewaccessibleassessmenttoolssuchastheSAMEpackagewithanevaluationyardsticksimilartothePscaledevelopedintheUnitedKingdom,whichmayalsohaveapotentialtofacilitateandenhanceinclusionofstudentswithdisabilitiesinthemainstreamschoolprograms(Aryes,2006).

Through various adaptations in assessment,students have a better opportunity to be moreappropriately appraised and evaluated before,during,andafterteaching.Recentschool-basedstaffdevelopmentseminars,aswellasthegovernmentalteacher in-service workshops in Hong Kong (e.g.,through the Special Education Resource Centreand/or the Educational Psychology Department inthe Regional Education Office of the EMB), have enabled special education and mainstream schoolpractitioners advance their competencies for theeducational consumers with mild to severe mentalandmultipledisabilities.

Curriculum Tailoring

Ingeneral,teachersofstudentswithdisabilities,especially at mild level, try to follow as muchas possible the curriculum guides given by theCurriculum Development Council (1996a, 1996b,1997, 1998, 1999), and the standard curriculumemployed in the mainstream schools (Poon-McBrayer & Lian, 2002). In the case of studentswhosedisablingconditionsareatmoderatetosevere/profound level, further adaptations are necessary,including a functional curriculum which is closelyrelatedtostudents’currentandfuturedailylife,andresults of ecological inventory. These adaptationsarebasedon the contemporary concept and effortsofprogrammedenvironment,life-longplanning,andcurriculumintegration.Relatedachievementsincludeschool-basedcurriculumdevelopment that isbasedontheninegenericskillsandtheeightkeylearningareas (KLAs) as promotedby theCDC (2000).To


sortoutaway thatwouldmaintain theaims in thetraditionalcurriculum,i.e.,perceptualandconceptualdevelopment, gross and fine motor development, language and communication development, socialand emotional development and elimination ofmaladaptiveand/orchallengingbehaviors,self-helpskill development, and pre-academic/academic orfunctional academic development, and the newlyinfusedgenericskillsandKLAsresulting fromthecurriculumreform,schoolpractitionerstriedtolearnandworkontechniquesofcurriculumintegration–forstudentstoexperiencemultipleareasofknowledgebuildingandskilldevelopmentinainter-connectedformatsothesestudentscanachieveaholisticgoalwhich ismostpractical for theircurrentand futureenvironment (Hong Kong Special School Council,2002). Through successful curriculum integrationand teaching according to specific stages in the life span, “students can do further advanced learning,including learning through projects for holisticdevelopment,whichnotonlystrengthenspracticalityof learning contents but also builds each student’sportfolio” (Lian, 2003d). In addition, curriculumintegrationcanalsoguidepractitionerstogowiththecontemporary trends of programmed environment,ecologicalapproach,andlifelonglearningforlongerlasting effectiveness of instruction provided to thestudents with mild to severe mental and multipledisabilities(Pang,Shum,&Lian,inpress).

ThesuccessfulexperienceintheUnitedKingdom,through a series of the P scale (i.e., a downwardextension of a curriculum-based measuringinstrument), PACE (i.e, the P-scales Assessmentof the National Curriculum from EQUALS), andEQUALS(i.e.,EntitlementandQualityEducationforPupils with Severe Learning Difficulties) for making thenationalcurriculumaccessibleforstudentswithlearning difficulties, has recently led to the forming ofSAMEforlearnerswithintellectualandmultipledisabilitiesinHongKong.Usingthisnewcurriculumand assessment package, teachers are enabled toraise standards of attainment of students’ learning(Humphreys,2006).

Related Implications

For the appropriate assessment and curriculumtailoring to be effective and successful, concurrentadvancements in special educationandmainstreamschool programs as well as related implications inthefollowingareasneedtobeaddressed,includingeffective instructional strategies, information/instructional and assistive technology, parentalinvolvementandhome-schoolpartnership,programeffectivenessevaluation,andactionresearch.

Effective Instructional Strategies

“A well-developed and advanced curriculum,along with criterion-referenced assessment (CRA)approaches, cannot go without effective teachingstrategies for the best benefits and outcomes of students with mild to severe mental and multipledisabilities” (Lian,2004a,p.125).Aseriesofstaffdevelopment seminars have been conducted tointroduce effective instructional strategies to field practitioners(e.g.,Lian,2001b,2002).Thefollowinginstructional strategies have been recommended asappropriateandeffectiveinHongKong:presentationof objects, pictures, or other stimuli; sensory- andotherperceptual-motorintegration;oral,written,andothercueinganddirections;conductiveinstruction;modeling and demonstration; physical promptingand verbal reminders; positive reinforcement;time delay techniques; concrete, ecological, andholisticapproaches;self-initiated learningandself-monitoring/evaluation; task analysis, shaping andchaining techniques; problem-solving approachand problem-based learning (PBL); multipleopportunities with repeated practices; reciprocalteaching;integrativelearning;functionalassessment;community-based curriculum; peer support andcooperative learning; and parental involvementand home-school partnership. In addition, thesestaff development seminars include approaches forenhancingfurtherprogressoflearning:understandingcauses of low responsiveness; development ofappropriate teaching units and lessons; increase ofmotivation (i.e., teacher enthusiasm; clear lesson


objectives; active teaching and learning activities;relating lesson to real life; and use of effectivemultimedia materials, audio-visual equipment, andinteractiveinformationandinstructionaltechnology);preparationofstudents’learningprerequisites;changeofinstructionalmethodsoractivities;teachingintheactual environment; teamwork with support fromtherapists,socialworkers,educationalpsychologies,and other professionals; enhancement of students’communication skills; use of conductive educationas well as other structured instructional strategiessuch as Project STEPS and Project TEACCH;use of adaptive equipment, computer-facilitatedstoriesorgames, and assistive technologydevices;enhancementoftrustandfriendshipbetweenteachingpersonnelandstudents;useofappropriateassessmentinstruments and measuring systems; considerationof students’ physical, cognitive, and psychosocialstatus; avoidance of students’ excessive absence;visiting other classes and schools; mainstreamschool practitioners’ and students’ assistance andsupport;andincreaseofstudents’aswellasteachingpersonnel’s leisure activities (EMB, 2006b; Hui &Yung,1992;Lau,Yuen,&Lian,2006;Lian,2003b;Poon-McBrayer,2002;Wong&Lian,2006).

Information/Instructional and Assistive Technology

Effective education of students with variousdisabling conditions in special education andmainstreamschoolsinHongKonghasenteredtheerawith urgent need for advancement in practitioners’competenciesaswellasschoolprograms’facilitationwith information/instructional technology (IT) and/or assistive technology (AT) (Lau, Yuen, & Lian,2006;Poon-McBrayer&Lian,2002;Wong&Lian,2006).BothITandATmayhelpandsupportstudents’learning and increase independence and efficiency in communication (e.g., alternative and augmentativecommunication, or AAC), mobility, environmentalcontrol,functionaldailylivingininclusiveschoolandcommunity,andmanyotherperspectives(Lian,1994,1999,2004e,2004f;Shek,Lian,&Ng,2000;Shook&McPerson,2006).Arecentsurveyfoundimmediateneedforfurtherstaffdevelopmentandpromotionof

IT/ATinspecialeducationandmainstreamschoolsinHongKongaswellasShanghai,China(Bakken&Lian,2003).

Parental Involvement and Home-school Partnership

Education of students with mild to severeintellectualandmultipledisabilitiescannotreachitsmost promising accomplishment without parentalinvolvement and support. Recent surveys amongparents of children attending schools providingprograms for students with physical, sensory,mental, and other disabling conditions in HongKong and Taiwan revealed specific family needs and an effective approach for more productiveteamwork between parents and field practitioners which requires advanced staff development andguidedwholeschoolimplementation(Kwan&Lian,2004;Lian,2003e;Lian&Yeh,2002).Progress inthishasbeenobservedinbothspecialeducationandmainstreamschoolswithmoreextensive focusandimplementation and more efficient practice. Through a series of staff development seminars, frontlinepractitionersareencouraged to take the three-stageapproach(i.e.,gettingtoknowthefamily,providingfamily with information, and team working withfamily)tosuccessfullyteamworkwithparentsandletstudents benefit in the home-school partnership for best practices in special education and mainstreamschoolprogramsandrelatedservices(Lian&Aloia,1994;Poon-McBrayer&Lian,2002).

Program Effectiveness Evaluation

Evaluationofstudents’progressinlearningandenhancement of functional performance towardinclusiveandappropriatecurriculumandinstructionalgoalsandobjectiveshavebeenurgentlyneededandthe center of focus among special education andmainstreamschoolpractitionersservingstudentswithspecial needs. Due to the nature of their disablingconditions, evaluation of students’ entry-levelperformance(i.e.,throughpre-teachingassessment),ongoing advancement in learning and building oftarget behaviors and skills as well as cognition/


metacognition (i.e., through probe and formativecheckup),andexit-stageachievement(i.e.,throughsummative evaluation) needs to be conductedprogram-wide(e.g.,groupevaluationthroughbasict tests, analysis of variance, and/or analysis of co-variance)aswellasindividualized(e.g.,casestudy,curriculum-based measurement, and portfolioassessment). The concepts and ideas of holisticand ecological approach for and through project-or problem-based learning and life-long planninghave been introduced to the field practitioners for moreextensiveandextensiveimplementation(Lian,2000a,2000b).

Action Research

Field practitioners have also started to becomeaware of the need and importance of conductingaction research in their school environments andprofessional fields (e.g., Caritas Jockey Club Lok Yan School, 2004; Fortress Hill MethodistSecondary School, 2003; Lian, 2004c). Throughstaffdevelopmentseminarsandon-siteconsultancy,both group survey projects and single-case studieshave been proposed, designed and implemented.These provide teachers and other school personnelas researchers with data-based findings as well as structuredexperiencesintheprocessforevenhigherlevel of program advancement. Outcomes of theseactionresearchstudiesaredisseminatedforsharingandadvancedpracticesamongspecialeducationandmainstreamschools(e.g.,Chung&Lian,2003;Lian&Deng,2003a,2003b;Pong,Chan,Lau,&Li,2003;Tang,2003).

Conclusions

The evolutional changes described above, i.e.,curriculumreform,inclusionofstudentswithSEN,changeofacademicstructure,andquality-levelschoolprogramadvancement,havebecomecriticalfactorsfor influencing the recent program enhancement in appropriate assessment and curriculum adaptation.These changes reflect the contemporary trends in Hong Kong and issues relating to effective

instructional strategies, information/instructionaland assistive technology, parental involvement andhome-schoolpartnership,andactionresearch.Fieldpractitioners need to continue working together onTransdisciplinary teams for thorough acquaintancewith the evolutional changes in the field and, based on which, march forward onto better educationprogramsandservicesforstudentswithdisabilities.Inaddition, frontlinepractitionersneed tocontinueseeking opportunities for professional growth plusmore internal (i.e., local and across schools) andexternal(i.e.,overseasandinternational)connectionsandexchangeofsuccessfulprogramsandexperiences.Therehavebeeninitialaccomplishmentsandfurtherachievementsinpromisingandbestpracticescanbeexpected.

References

Ashman,A.(2006,June2).The impact of education reforms on special education in Australia.Paperpresented at International Special EducationConference,HongKong.

Ayres, J. (2006, May).The use of P scale analysistopromoteinclusivepractice.CASE News, 2(1),3-6.

Bakken, J., & Lian, M-G.J. (2003, April 11).Teachers’ perceptions and knowledge of assistive technologies: Cross-cultural view.Council for Exceptional Children Convention,Seattle,USA.

Caritas Jockey Club Lok Yan School. (2004,February 9). Research on teaching. [Online]http://www.lys.edu.hk/lys.htm.

Chan, G. (2006, November 30). The recent development in the new senior secondary liberal study subject. Keynote speech, AnnualConference of Hong Kong Special SchoolCouncil,Kowloon,HongKong.


Chan, K.K. (2005,April 25). Some point of viewregardingspecialeducation,PTU News,2.

Cheng, Y.C. (2001). Challenges, strategies and international implications.PaperpresentedattheFirstInternationalForumonEducationReform,Bangkok,Thailand.

Cheung, M.K. (2005,April 11). Fighting for equalrightsofspecialeducation.PTU News,1.

Chiu, J.S. (2006, September 25). Still insufficient practical discussion: Worries and challenges ofthenewseniorsecondarycurriculum.PTU News, 512,2.

CommitteeonHome-SchoolCo-operation,&HongKongSpecialSchoolCouncil.(2002,November).An overview of special schools. Hong Kong:HipTongPublished.

Chung, S.H., & Lian, M-G.J. (2003). Assisting astudent with severe cognitive disabilities tocontrolinjuriousbehaviors.Hong Kong Special Education Forum, 6(1),84-96.

Curriculum Development Council. (1996a). Guide to curriculum for hearing impaired children.HongKong:CurriculumDevelopmentInstitute,EducationDepartment.

Curriculum Development Council. (1996b). Guide to curriculum for visually impaired children.HongKong:CurriculumDevelopmentInstitute,EducationDepartment.

CurriculumDevelopmentCouncil.(1997).Guide to curriculum for mentally handicapped children.HongKong:CurriculumDevelopmentInstitute,EducationDepartment.

Curriculum Development Council. (1998). Guide to curriculum for hearing maladjusted children.HongKong:CurriculumDevelopmentInstitute,EducationDepartment.

Curriculum Development Council. (1999). Guide to curriculum for physically handicapped children.HongKong:CurriculumDevelopmentInstitute,EducationDepartment.

Curriculum Development Council. (2000,November).Learning to learn: The way forward in curriculum development. Hong Kong:Curriculum Development Institute, EducationDepartment.

Curriculum Development Council, & Hong KongExaminationsandAssessmentAuthority.(2004,October). Proposed care and elective subject frameworks for the new senior secondary curriculum. Hong Kong: Education andManpowerBureau.

Education and Manpower Bureau. (2004a, April).Catering for student differences: Indicators for inclusion.HongKong:EMB.

EducationandManpowerBureau.(2004b,October).Reforming the academic structure for senior secondary education and higher education—Actions for investing in the future.HongKong:GovernmentLogisticsDepartment.

Education and Manpower Bureau. (2006a,August 4). Figures and statistics. [Online]http://www.emb.gov.hk.

Education and Manpower Bureau. (2006b,November 17). Whole-school approach to integrated education. [Online] http://www.emb.gov.hk.

EducationandManpowerBureau.(2006c,January).Action for the future: Further consultation on career-oriented studies and the new senior secondary academic structure for special schools.HongKong:TheGovernmentLogisticsDepartment.


EducationandManpowerBureau.(2006d,August).Action for the future: Career-oriented studies and the new senior secondary academic structure for special schools. Hong Kong: The GovernmentLogisticsDepartment.

Education Commission. (2000, September). Life long learning and all-round development: Recommendations for Hong Kong Education Reform. Hong Kong Governmental PrintingBureau.

EducationCommission.(2006,December).Progress report on the education reform (4).HongKong:TheGovernmentLogisticsDepartment.

EducationDepartment.(2000).Towards integration.HongKong:Author.

Fortress Hill Methodist School. (2003). Enhancing professionalism: Meeting the success. QEFproject.FortressHill,HongKong.

Fuchs, D. (2006, June 2). On the changing definitions of learning disabilities and what it means for special education: A cautionary tale.Keynote speech, International Conference onSpecialEducation,HongKong.

Fuchs, L.S. (2006, June 3). Monitoring student progress in the classroom to enhance teacher planning and student learning.Keynotespeech,International Conference on Special Education,HongKong.

Fung, C.M., Lian, M-G.J., & Ng, KH. (2002,December). Developing generic skills-oriented,school-based curriculum for students withseverecognitivedisabilities.Hong Kong Special Education Forum, 5(1),73-85.

Gilson, C.L., & Lian, M-G.J. (2006, June 2). AnAmerican perspective on transition for students with disabilities.PaperpresentedatInternationalConferenceonSpecialEducation,HongKong.

Hargreaves, A. (1995). Changing teachers, changing times.London:Cassell.

Hong Chi Association. (2006). Personal outcome: Assessment for students.HongKong:HCA.

HongKongCouncilofSocialWelfare.(1995,May).White paper on rehabilitation: A better tomorrow for all. [Online] http://swik.socialnet.org.hk/swik1/C400/c402/hk/Erehab.htm#C4C37.

Hong Kong Special School Council. (2002).Directory of Hong Kong Special Education Schools. Hong Kong: Concordia PublishingServices.

Hong Kong Special School Council. (2004,December 20). Suggestions for restructuring high school and higher education academic system.HongKong:SSC.

Hui, E.K.P., & Yung, K.K. (1992). Teaching in Hong Kong: Helping pupils with learning difficulties.HongKong:Longman.

Humphreys,K.(2006,June8-10).Enabling teachers to raise standards of attainment for pupils with learning difficulties in special schools.WorkshoponEquals,Kowloon,HongKong.

Humphreys, K. (2007, January 7). Inclusion: It all starts with the SAME curriculum.MardenForumonSpecialEducationandRehabilitation,CentreforAdvancement inSpecialEducation,Facultyof Education, University of Hong Kong, HongKong.

John F. Kennedy Centre. (2006, December).Evaluation/re-evaluation for self-advancement: Developing a self-inspection tool in a school for children with physical disabilities. QEFProject.HongKong:Author.


Kim,Y-W.(2006,June2).The impact of education reforms on special education in Korea. Paperpresented at International Special EducationConference,HongKong.

Kwan, W.F.I., & Lian, M-G.J. (2004). Parental involvement in integration of children with physical disabilities in mainstreaming schools in Hong Kong. Unpublished manuscript, theUniversityofHongKong,HongKong.

Lau, F.K., Yuen, A.H.K., & Lian, M-G.J. (2006,February6).Enhancingvocabularyperformance.Proceedings of the IT in Education Conference,HongKong,85-93.

Lee, E., & Budzisz, M.G. (2004). Quashing the rhetoric reform: An educational design that reaches all children. Lanham, MD: ScarecrowEducation.

Li, A. (2006, December). Foreword. In EducationCommission, Progress report on education reform (p. 3). Hong Kong: The GovernmentLogisticsDepartment.

Li, A.M.C., & Tse, A.T.Y. (2006). The SAME project: Stage one. Unpublished informationdocument, Centre for Advancement in SpecialEducation, Faculty of Education, University ofHongKong,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J. (1994, April 22). Instructional technology: Experiences and perspectives and adaptive devices for technology. College ofEducation Technology Retreat, Illinois StateUniversity,Normal,Illinois,USA.

Lian, M-G.J. (1999, September). Assistivetechnologies for individuals with physicaldisabilities,Sino-US-Canada Sci-Tech Newsbrief, 7(9),1-2.

Lian,M-G.J.(2000a).Assessing exceptional learners for educational programming. Unpublishedmonograph, Illinois State University, Normal,Illinois,USA.

Lian, M-G.J. (2000b). Teaching students with physical and multiple disabilities: A PHH teacher handbook.Normal,IL:CommunicationServices,IllinoisStateUniversity.

Lian, M-G.J. (2001a). The learning-to-learncurriculum reform in Hong Kong and schooleducation for children with severe disabilities.Journal of Asia-Pacific Special education, 1(1),1-21.

Lian, M-G.J. (2001b, March 3). Enhancing instructional effectiveness for students with severe cognitive disabilities.StaffDevelopmentSeminar, Po Leung Kuk Mr. and Mrs. ChanPak Keung Tsing Yi School, Tsing Yi, NewTerritories,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J. (2001c, April 21). Curriculum development for children with severe cognitive disabilities. Joint Staff Development Seminar,Po Leung Kuk Mr. and Mrs. Chan Pak KeungTsing Yi School and Hong Chi Pinehill No. 3School,NewTerritories,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J. (2001d, October 8). Restructuring learning objectives in key areas of a school-based curriculum.SeedProjectoftheCurriculumDevelopment Institute (CDI), Hong KongEducationDepartment,Wanchai,HongKong.

Lian,M-G.J.(2001e,December).ConnectingHongKong curriculum reform and development ofcurriculum in schools for children with severementaldisabilities.Hong Kong Special Education Forum, 4(1),62-81.


Lian, M-G.J. (2002, January 3). Enhancing instructional effectiveness. Staff developmentseminar, Caritas Lok Kan School, Wan Chai,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J. (2003a, June 21). Assessing genericskills of students with severe intellectualdisabilities. Ten school teachers in-serviceseminar of the Hong Kong Education andManpower Bureau Seed Grant Project of“Constructingaschool-basedcurriculumonthebasisofgenericskills,”CurriculumDevelopmentInstitute,Kowloon,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J. (2003b, August 18-19). Educatingchildren with severe cognitive disabilities:Advancing a high quality learning schooland related theories and practices. QEF StaffDevelopment Seminars, the Lotus Associationof Hong Kong ChiYun School, Sham Sui Po,NT,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J. (2003c, August 26). Generic skillsbasedcurriculumdevelopmentforstudentswithmoderate and multiple cognitive disabilities.QEF Staff Development Seminars, T.W.G.Hs.Kwan Fong Kai Chi School, Kowloon, HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J. (2003d, December 12). Curriculum development and integration for students with significant disabilities in Hong Kong and Taiwan.Paper presented at TASH Conference, Boston,USA.

Lian, M-G.J. (2003e, July 16). Family Needs and Parental Expectations for Children with Different Levels of Learning Difficulties.PaperpresentedattheLearningConference,NationalInstituteofEducation,London.

Lian, M-G.J. (2004a). Curriculum and assessmentadaptationsforstudentswithmildtosevereandmultipledisabilitiesinHongKong.Asia-Pacific Journal of Inclusive Education, 1(1),123-142.

Lian, M-G.J. (2004b). Inclusive education: Theoryand practice. Hong Kong Special Education Forum, 7(1),57-74.

Lian, M-G.J. (2004c, March 27). Action research: Purpose, design, and strategies. StaffDevelopment seminar, PLK Chan Pak KeungTsingYiSchool,TsingYi,NT,HongKong.

Lian,M-G.J.(2004d,March20).Enhancing generic skills in students with severe cognitive and multiple disabilities. QEF Staff DevelopmentSeminars,TheLotusAssociationofHongKongChiYunSchool,ShamSuiPo,Kowloon,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J. (2004e, June 19). School-based curriculum development for enhancing nine generic skills among students with severe cognitive disabilities. Teacher Seminar, theSunnyside School, Tseung Kuen O, Kowloon,HongKong.

Lian,M-G.J.(2004f).Alternativeandaugmentativecommunication: New opportunities for personswith speech and language disabilities. HongKong: INSTEP, Faculty of Education, theUniversityofHongKong.

Lian, M-G.J. (2005). Three plus three plus four:Advancing special education programs. CASE Newsletter, 1(1),3-4.

Lian, M-G.J. (2006, December 14). Directions for new senior secondary curriculum and our efforts. Teacher seminar, the Evangelize ChinaFellowshipHolyWordSchool,Kowloon,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J. (2007, January 16). The research procedure to validate the SAME for learners with intellectual disabilities.PaperpresentedatLearning,DevelopmentandDiversityResearchRetreat, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, HongKong.


Lian, M-G.J., & Aloia, G.F. (1994). Parentalresponses,roles,andresponsibilities.InS.Alper,P. J. Schloss,&C.N.Schloss (Eds.). Families of students with disabilities: Consultation and advocacy(pp.51-93).Boston:Allyn&Bacon.

Lian, M-G.J., & Deng, M. (2003a). Satisfaction survey among parents and young adults with cognitive disabilities.ResearchGrantProject,theFangling Centre, Hong Chi Association, HongKong.

Lian,M-G.J.,&Deng,M.(2003b). Effectiveness of selected service delivery models for enhancing inclusive education.ResearchGrantProject,theHong Chi Association Tsui Lam MorninghillSchool,NewTerritories,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J., Li-Cheung, C.Y.C., Fung, C.M., &Ng, K.H. (2002). Restructuring a school-based curriculum with reference to generic skills from a cross-curricular perspective: A case study in an SMH (severely mentally handicapped) School. [Governmental document]Hong Kong:EducationDepartment-CurriculumDevelopmentInstitute.

Lian, M-G.J., Li-Cheung, C.Y.C., Fung, C.M., &Ng, K.H. (2003). Constructing a school-based curriculum on the basis of the generic skills from a cross-curricular perspective” – An experience of a special school for students with severe intellectual disabilities. [Governmentaldocument]HongKong:CurriculumDevelopmentInstitute,EducationandManpowerBureau.

Lian, M-G.J., Poon-McBrayer, K., & Tam,K.Y.B. (2000). 30-hour Introductory Course on Integrated Education. Staff developmentproposal funded by Hong Kong EducationDepartment,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J., Woo, E.Y.C., Hui, S.C.Y., & Lum,R.C.W. (2004, April 24). Inclusive education: Trends, philosophy, principles, and the whole school approach. Faculty of Education 20thAnniversary Forum, University of Hong Kong,HongKong.

Lian, M-G.J., & Yeh, C.C. (2002). Parents’perceptions of their children with disabilities,inclusive education, and related servicesin Taiwan. Journal of Asia-Pacific Special Education, 2(1),75-91.

Liang, Y.S.F. (2003). Effects of using curriculum- based measurement in teaching children with severe and multiple disabilities basic communication skills. B.Ed. Dissertation,UniversityofHongKong,HongKong.

Lo, Y.C.J. (2004). Curriculum reform. In M. Bray&R.Koo(Eds),Education and society in Hong Kong and Macao: Comparative perspectives on continuity and change(pp.161-174).HongKong:Comparative Education Research Association,theUniversityofHongKong.

Pang,S.W.,Shum,S.F.,&Lian,M-G.J. (Inpress).Life long planning for students with severecognitivedisabilities.Caritas Annual Report.

Pong,C.K.W.,Chan,D.M.C.,Lau,C.L.,Li,E.P.Y.(2003). Peer ambassador programs of theinclusiveschools. Hong Kong Special Education Forum, 6(1),59-75.

Poon-McBrayer, K. (2002). Meeting special needs in mainstreaming classrooms. Hong Kong:Longman.

Poon-McBrayerK.,&Lian,M-G.J.(2002).Special Needs Education: Children with Exceptionalities.HongKong:TheChineseUniversityPress.


Ryndak, D.L., & Alper, S. (1996). Curriculum contents for students with moderate and severe disabilities in inclusive settings. NeedhamHeights,MA:AllynandBacon.

Shek, W.K., Lian, M-G.J., & Ng, K.H. (2000).Multimedia classroom for children with disabilities. Quality Education Fund GrantProject,CaritasLokKanSchool,Wanchai,HongKong.

Shook, J., & McPherson, R. (2006, March 30).AAC from A to Z: The use of augmentative and alternative communication to meet diversity needs.AACSymposium,HongKong.

Sin, K.F., & To, S.H. (Eds) (2000). Making integration successful: Teachers’ views and reflections.HongKong:HongKongInstituteofEducation.

Sin, K.F., & To, S.H. (Eds) (2001). Making integration successful: From theory to practice.HongKong:HongKongInstituteofEducation.

Snell,M.,&Brown,F.(Eds)(2000).Instruction of students with severe disabilities(5thed.).UpperSaddleRiver,NJ:Merrill.

Special Education Society of Hong Kong.(2003, October 25). Annual Conference on“MainstreamingSpecialEducation–TerminatingPoint or an Opportunity for Special EducationSchools?”WanChai,HongKong.

Special Education Society of Hong Kong. (2004,May 29). Annual Conference on “Behind theInclusiveClassroom,”WanChai,HongKong.

Special Education Society of Hong Kong. (2005).Suggestions for restructuring high school and higher education academic system.HongKong:SESHK.

Special Education Society of Hong Kong. (2006,December 12). Meeting minutes of the TaskForceonConcernsinCurriculumDevelopment.HongKong:SESHK.

Spinelli, C.G. (2004, December 2). Assessment practices and application for students with special needs: Linking testing directly to teaching.Keynote speech at Hong Kong Red Cross“The Challenge of Diversity: Meeting SpecialEducation Needs in the Era ofAccountability”Conference,HongKong.

Stopka,C.,Goodman,A.,&Siders,C.(1997,Fall).Activityideasforstudentswithsevere/profound/multipledisabilities.PALAESTRA,42.

Tang, T.K.M. (2003). Effects of a reinforcement-based toilet training procedure for a studentwithsevere intellectualdisabilities,Hong Kong Special Education Forum, 6(1).76-83.

Taylor, R.L. (2000). Assessment of exceptional students: Educational and psychological procedures(5thed.).Boston:AllyandBacon.

Thomas,G.E.(1996).Teaching students with mental retardation: A life goal curriculum planning approach.EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Merrill.

Venn, J.J. (2000). Assessing students with special needs.UpperSaddleRiver,NJ:Merrill.

Wolery, M., Ault, M.J., & Doyle, P.M. (1992).Teaching students with moderate to severe disabilities: Use of response prompting strategies.NewYork:Longman.

Wong,W.L.J.,&Lian,M-G.J.(2006,June2).Effects of computer games on social interaction of adults with autism. Paper presented at InternationalConferenceonSpecialEducation,HongKong.


Wu,W.T. (2006, June 2). The impact of education reform on special education in Taiwan. Paperpresented at International Special EducationConference,HongKong.

Yeung,J.Y.P.,&Lian,M-G.J.(2004).Perceptions and expectations of students with visual impairments regarding inclusive education.Unpublishedmanuscript,theUniversityofHongKong,HongKong.

About the Authors

Ming-Gon John Lian was a junior high schoolteacher in Taiwan and a classroom teacher andprogram coordinator as well as a recreation leaderandsupervisorforchildrenwithsevereandmultipledisabilities in Texas before he joined faculty atIllinoisStateUniversity.Currently, John teaches attheUniversityofHongKongandservesasHonoraryDirectorof theCentre forAdvancement inSpecialEducation(CASE)inthefacultyofEducation.

Andrew Chung-yee Tse was a speech therapistandateacherinHongKongteacherscollegesbeforehe joined Hong Kong Red Cross John F. KennedyCentreandservedastheprincipal.Currently,AndrewisAdministrativeDirectorofCASEattheUniversityofHongKong.

AlisonMan-ChingLiwasateacherandcurriculumcoordinatorinschoolsforchildrenwithmoderatetosevereintellectualdisabilities.Currently,sheservesas Executive Officer in CASE at the University of HongKong.


Teachers’ Practice as a Marginalization Factor in the Process for Inclusive Education in Cyprus

Panayiotis Angelides Intercollege,Cyprus

[email protected]@globalsoftmail.com

Charalambos VrasidasIntercollege,Cyprus

Constantia CharalambousIntercollege,Cyprus

Abstract

In recent years there is an intense effort around the world for integrating children considered as having special needs in their neighborhood schools. The function of special education in Cyprus has been criticized as failing because it failed to include all children in teaching by providing them with equal opportunities to learning. In this paper, using the interpretive model of research we studied teachers’ practices as a factor of marginalization of certain children, how they marginalize their pupils, and attempted to understand how marginalization, a result of teachers’ practice, works. Through data analysis it indicated that some teachers marginalize children considered as having special needs.

Introduction

Throughouttheworld,thereisanintenseeffortto integrate children considered as having specialneedsintheirneighborhoodschools.InCyprus,theHouseofParliamentpassedalawgivingallchildrentherighttoattendtheirneighborhoodschooltogetherwith their age-mates (Cyprus Republic, 1999).According to this legislation children categorizedas having special needs receive support fromspecialists or ‘special education’. Those serviceshave traditionally been provided individually insegregated environments. The way that specialeducationfunctionsinCyprushasbeencriticizedbyanumberofscholars(e.g.Angelides,2004;Phtiaka,2000) because it failed to include all children inteaching, providing them equal opportunities forlearning.

Studyingthedifferentformsofmarginalizationthatappear inCyprusschools inpreviousresearch(Angelides, Charalambous & Vrasidas, 2004) andgiventhatthereareeffortsfromtheeducationalsystem

to implement inclusive education, different factorsthatseemed tosubservemarginalizationemerged.The most important of them were the educationalsystem, teachersandchildren.Childrenasafactorofmarginalizationwerestudiedinapreviousstudywecarriedout(Angelides&Charalambous,2005)in which we investigated how children’s actionsmightmarginalize theirclassmates.Movingnowastepforward,inthisstudy,wefocusonteachersasafactorofmarginalizationofsomechildren,andtrytobetterunderstandthefunctionofmarginalizationthat is a result of teachers’ practice. Many studieshavebeenpublished inwhich teachersarepointedout as a barrier to inclusion and as a factor ofmarginalization(e.g.Pandeliadou,1992;Pijl,1995).Ourstudyattemptstopenetrateinagreaterdepthinthewaysinwhichteachersmaymarginalizechildrenconsideredashavingspecialneeds.Ourpurposeisto develop a richer understanding of the way thatteachers function in order to give suggestions forovercomingbarrierstoparticipationinteachingandlearning.


We first consider the relation between inclusive educationandmarginalizationandthenwediscussthe methodology we used. We then present theanalysis of our data and the major findings. Finally, we study the implications of teachers’ practice asa marginalization factor of children categorizedas having special needs and we give particularsuggestionsforminimizingmarginalization.

Inclusive Education and Marginalization

Inmanycountriesoftheworld,butalsoinCyprusinparticular,theintegrationofchildrenconsideredashavingspecialneedsintheirneighboringschoolshas been enacted without previously having thenecessary infrastructure. In the past, childrencategorizedashavingspecialneedswereeducatedseparately from their age-mates. The perceptionthat education should be provided to all childrenregardlessoftheirdifferencesandneedshasledtothedevelopmentof inclusiveeducation.Basedon thisphilosophychildrenseenashavingspecialneedsaretreatedasindividualswithequalrightswithalltheotherchildrenandtheyreceiveequalopportunitiestoteachingandlearning.Thephilosophyofinclusiveeducationdoesnotsimplyrefertotheplacementofchildrenwithspecialneedsintonormalschools,butitisalsoconcernedwiththeconditionsunderwhichwe can educate effectively all children (Barton,1997).

Nevertheless, many children experiencemarginalization (Messiou, 2002) and among themare many children that have been categorized ashaving special needs. Marginalization accordingto the Webster’s Dictionary (1994) is the act ofexcludingorignoringsomebodybyrelegatinghim/hertotheouteredgeofagroup.AccordingtoDickie-Clark(1966)themarginalsituationsintheliteratureare often clearly hierarchical or can be thought ofinhierarchicalterms.Theverynotionof‘marginal’,Dickie-Clark continues, suggests ‘limits orboundariesofsomekindaswellasthejuxtapositionof entities’ (p. 28). In this paper marginalizationmeansamarginalpositioninrelationtoeducation,eitheracademicallyorsocially.

Many studies point out this fact and highlightfactors (i.e. policy, curriculum) that reinforce themarginalization of children considered as havingspecial needs (Ainscow, 1998; Booth &Ainscow,1998;Vlachou,1997).Teachersasamarginalizationfactorappearsquiteoften (e.g.Pandeliadou,1992;Pijl,1995)without,however,thesestudiestoanalyzein depth how and why teachers may marginalizechildren defined as having special needs. The existing literature mainly presents case studiesof marginalized pupils without paying particularattention to the function of marginalization that isa result of teachers’ practice (e.g.Allan, 1998). Inthe educational environment of Cyprus where thisresearchwascarriedouttherearenootherstudies,which examine the ways or practices in whichteachersmarginalizetheirpupils.Therefore,inthisstudywewilltrytoanalyzedeeperandmakesenseofhowandwhyteachersmarginalizecertainchildren.

The Cyprus Context

The education service in Cyprus is highlycentralised.TheMinistryofEducationandCulture(MEC) controls the curriculum, the textbooks andtheotherresourcesneededtodeliverit.LocalschoolboardsarefundedbytheMinistryandtheirroleisrestricted tomattersofbuilding,maintenance, andsupplies. Schools are directly controlled by theMinistry via the inspectorate and the school headteachers,thelatterhavinglessdevolvedresponsibilitythaninmanyothereducationalsystems.

Education is compulsory in the early years,beginningattheageofthreeyears,anditiswithintheparents’jurisdictiontodecidewhetherandwhenthey should arrange aplacement for their childrenin a public or private nursery school. Primaryschoolsprovideasix-yearcompulsoryprogrammefor children who have attained five years and nine months.Secondaryeducationextendsoversixyears(12-18). It is divided in two cycles: the lower orgymnasium(12-15)and theupperorLyceum(15-18). In Cyprus education is compulsory up to theage of fifteen and almost 100 per cent of students


reachthislevel(Hansen,1993)becauseeducationinCyprushasahighpriorityinallsocialgroups.

In Cyprus the provision for children withdisabilities has traditionally taken place in specialschools,segregatedfromtheirpeers(Barnard,1997;Hansen,1993). In1979 thispracticewas legalisedbythelawforspecialeducation(CyprusRepublic,1979). The most important provision of this lawwas that disabled children should be educated insegregatedsettings.The1979lawwasinforceuntil1999whenanewlawwaspassed(CyprusRepublic,1999).Despitethefactthatthenewlawgivestherighttoallchildrentoattendtheirneighbouringschool,ithasbeencriticised forcontinuing tospeakonlyof‘childrenwithspecialneeds’(Phtiaka,1999).

DuringthelastdecadethegovernmentofCyprushas encouraged and supported the education ofchildrenconsideredashavingspecialneedswithinthe mainstream educational system. Furthermore,a‘special’teacherforthesupportofthesechildrenhasbeenplacedinalmostallschools.Inmostcases‘special’ teachersarepart timersandcover twoorthree schools per week. They are obliged by theMECtohavealittleroomasaclassroomwheretheyteacheachpupilindividually.Insomeschoolswherethere are too many pupils seen as having specialneeds,specialteachersteachthemingroupsoftwoorthree.

Methodology

Thetheoreticalandepistemologicalbackgroundof our study followed the interpretive model ofresearch that is based on the three basic premisesof symbolic interactionism, as these have beendeveloped by Blumer (1969). The first premise is that humanbeings act towards thingson thebasisofthemeaningsthatthethingshaveforthem.Thesecondpremiseisthatthemeaningsofsuchthingsderive from, or arise out of, the social interactionthatonehaswithone’s fellows.The thirdpremiseis that these meanings are handled in, and modified through,aninterpretativeprocessusedbythepersonindealingwiththingshe/sheencounters.

Theemphasisof interpretiveresearchisonthemeanings in action of the actors involved, whichmeanings traditional research has pushed aside asnon-important, attempting to explain behaviouras a result of a set of factors. To understand themeaningsofactorsandtheiractionstheresearcherhas to study them innaturallyoccurring situationsand not in highly controlled laboratory settings.Traditional approaches focusedonbehaviouronly,whereasinterpretiveresearchstudiestheactionsofparticipants.Anactionistheobservablebehaviour,plus the meaning attached to it by the actor. InBlumer’s (1969) words, in traditional researchapproaches,“meaningiseithertakenforgrantedandthuspushedasideasunimportantoritisregardedasamereneutrallinkbetweenthefactorsresponsiblefor human behaviour and this behaviour as theproduct of such factors” (p. 2). We collected datafromobservationsthatillustrateteachers’observablebehaviour and during the interviews we attemptedtodecipher themultiplemeanings thatparticipantsassignedtotheirbehaviours.

Forstudyingteachers’practiceasamarginalizationfactorwestudiedtwoclassesoftwodifferentschoolswhere we tried to understand the way teachers’practice works within the context of Cyprus law,whichgivestherighttoallchildrentobeeducatedintheschooloftheirneighborhood,receivingequalopportunities to teaching and learning. The twoclasseswe examinedwere selected since theyhadthenecessaryconditionsweneeded toaddressourresearchquestions.Forcollectingourdata, amongothers, the following approaches were followed:Observation of children and teachers duringtheir participation in the classroom, collection ofdocumentsandmaterialsthatwereusedinteachingduring our observations, interviews with childrenand teachers, official documents, and collection of demographic data (see Table 1). Another methodused for collectingdataand that iswidelyused ininterpretiveresearchistheresearchdiary(Burgess,1982).Allresearcherskeptaresearchdiaryinwhichwe documented our thoughts, anxieties, problems,andissues thatemergedduringdatacollectionandduringthewholedurationofthestudy.Furthermore,


the research diary worked as a reflective journal where we reflected on our experiences from the research site. In this way we used our writing todeveloparicherunderstandingofthephenomenonunderinvestigation.

Table1

Maintainingaresearchdiaryandwritingmemosisacommonpracticeininterpretiveresearchaswellasingroundedtheoryapproaches(Glaser&Strauss,1967). Within the diary we documented thingssuchastheoreticalwrite-upsaboutideas,concepts,categoriesandtheirrelationshipsastheystriketheresearcher while in the field and or during data analysis.Thediaryincludestheresearcher’snotetoherselfabout thedata, ideas,method,andthe like.It is a narrative representation of the researcher’sunderstandingofcertainaspectsof the study.Thisprocedure is used to keep trackof emerging ideasandcategories,stimulatedfurtheranalysisanddatacollection,andservesasameansforthedevelopmentofassertionsandtheoryintegration.Asananalyticalprocess, writing a research diary helped us in filling out the analytic properties of the descriptive datacollected. Subtle connections may also emergeduringtheprocessofkeepingtheresearchdiary.

Forparticipatoryobservationwefocusedontwoclasses in which pupils defined as having special needs were included. Pseudonyms were used toprotect the identities of all participants. The first was a first grade class in which there were two boys, Anastasis and Stavros, who had been classified as having speech disorders and serious learningdifficulties. Anastasis was also classified as a “child with mild mental retardation.” The second classwe studiedwasa fourthgrade inwhich therewas

Yiannis, who was classified as having dyslexia. Besides participant observation we interviewedall teachers that taught thesechildren, thechildrenthemselves,aswellastheheadteachersofthosetwoschools.

For analyzing our data we followed the twosuggestedstagesofErickson(1986):inductiveanddeductive. Upon entering the inductive stage weorganized all the transcripts, field notes, summary sheets, and documents and used data displays,concept maps, and tables to illustrate findings of the study.Afterwecollectedandorganizedallthedata,wereadthroughthedatathreetimesandtriedtogainanoverallunderstandingofwhatwashappeningintheparticularcourse.Aswereadthroughthedata,questionscametomind.Wewrotenotesandmemosabout those issues and events that struck us andbegan to generate assertions. The inductive stageof data analysis is very open-ended and it is thestage inwhich the researchergenerates assertions.Assertionsarepropositionalstatementsthatindicaterelationships and generalizations in the data andwhichtheresearcherbelievesaretrue.

Oncewegeneratedassertionsfromthedataasawhole,weenteredthedeductivestage.Inthisstagewe engaged in detailed examination of the dataand looked for data to confirm or disconfirm our assertions.Towarranttheassertionsweincorporatedgeneral descriptions, particular descriptions, andinterpretive commentary, each of which served adifferent purpose. Particular descriptions warrantthe assertions made about the setting.The generaldescriptionsestablishthepatternsofgeneralizationofthestudy.Theinterpretivecommentaryprovidesthe reader with the things that are missing fromthe descriptions, and illustrates the researcher’sinterpretationoftheevent.Wedevelopedvignetteswhichallowedustopresenta“sliceoflife”fromthesettinginawaythatillustratesthekeycharacteristicsofeachsituation.

Teachers’ Practice as a Marginalization Factor

Analyzing our data we formulated twoassertions.These were formed on the basis of theemergingthemesfromourdata.First,teachersoften

Hours of Interviews and Observations

Interviews Observations

Teachers Children Teachers Children

Frequency 9 11 33 12

Totalhours 6 5 165 60


marginalize children considered as having specialneeds through practices that we considered theyexecuted unintentionally. Second, those teachersoften marginalize children categorized as havingspecial needs consciously and with practices theyorganized in advance. These issues overlap, areinterrelated, and difficult to separate. We deliberately divided these issues to help the reader understandthe arguments and findings of our research.

Unconscious Marginalization

Through the analysis of our data it seemedthat teachers with certain behaviours, perhapsunconsciously, often seem to marginalize childrenconsidered as having special needs. All threechildrenwestudiedindifferentinstancesseemedtobemarginalizedbytheirteachersthroughpractices,whichwerenotdoneonpurpose,butweconsideredthatthey‘emerged’unconsciously.

Below we present a vignette with which weattempt to support our assertion. It comes fromthe second school in which Yiannis studied. Thebehaviourof the teacherandespecially theway inwhichsheprovidesfeedbacktowronganswers,aswell as the unequal allocation of opportunities forparticipation in the lesson marginalizes Yiannis,causing him emotions of inferiority, sadness andisolation.

Vignette

It was a rainy day. In Yiannis’s class Mrs. Despina, the teacher, taught Greek language. The title of that day’s text was ‘Space war’. After reading the text the teacher began doing questions for comprehension, asking children to find the answers from their text. In one of them she turned her sight to Yiannis and by smiling she told him: ‘Could you help us answer this question?’ Yiannis smiled too and said ‘yes’. He thought a little bit and gave an answer that was wrong. Listening to this wrong answer the teacher changed her tone; she became stricter, and said: ‘what is going to happen with you finally Yiannis? Have you thought of the answer you gave me?’ Many

children laughed at the response of the teacher. The teacher did not say anything but she continued her questions. Yiannis seemed to be sad and his eyes became red. A girl told the teacher: ‘Mrs. Despina Yiannis is crying’. ‘Of course, he cries. Wouldn’t you do the same if they made fun of you for something you said?’ the teacher answered.

The next day, again during a Greek language lesson, Mrs. Despina asked different questions for the day’s text. In one of them Yiannis raised his hand (for the first time within that lesson) in order to answer. Mrs. Despina looked towards all pupils who raised their hands, she saw Yiannis, but she asked Chris, another boy, to answer. It was the fourth answer that Chris gave until that stage of the lesson. A few minutes later Mrs. Despina made another question and by smiling addressed it to Yiannis who did not raise his hand. Yiannis immediately began searching in his book to find the answer. At the same time two or three pupils called out the answer. Yiannis stopped searching and slowly gave the answer. Mrs. Despina without any response moved to the next question.

IntheabovestorywecanseethewayinwhichtheteachertreatedYiannis.Hemadeamistakethatdonotseemtoderivefromlazinessorinattentionbutitseemstohaveitsrootsintheproblemofdyslexia.Mrs.Despina,likehisotherteachers,maysometimesforgetthatthischildhasdyslexia,somethingthatmaygenerate difficulties in reading and understanding of texts.Inaddition,teachersmightnotbefullytrainedin issues of special learning difficulties, and for the abovecaseinparticularfordyslexia,somethingthatmight contribute to marginalizing certain pupils.Thus, it seems that the teacher unconsciously, andassherespondstoallpupilswhomakeanobviousmistake, she comments negatively about Yiannis’answer.Thisfactsparksoffthelaughterbyoftherestof the children. Yiannis is emotionally influenced by thecriticalcommentandcries.

The next day in another incident the teacher,despitethefactthatYiannisraiseshishandataskingpermissiontotalk,sheasksanotherpupilwhohadparticipatedalotinthelessonuptothatpointandgenerally was a pupil who actively participated tolessonsdaily,andignoresforsomereasonYiannis.


Then, she asks Yiannis specifically to answer a question.WhileYiannislooksfortheanswerinhisbook some of his classmates call out the answerand Yiannis just repeats it. The teacher respondsneithertoYiannis’answernortotheansweroftheother children. She could, for example, reinforceYianniswitha‘welldone’ortoaskfromtheotherchildrennot tocallout theanswerswhen theyarenotasked,somethingthat,webelieve,inbothcaseswould encourage Yiannis to make further effortduring lessons. In contrast, she ignores everythingand carries on, something that, in our opinion,marginalizesYiannis.

AnalyzingMrs.Despina’sbehaviour,whatseemsto prevail is that she wants to help her pupil butshecannot,andeventhoughitisnotherintention,she marginalizes him. Different factors seem toinfluence her teaching, like the heavy curriculum, thepressurefromhersuperiorsthatshehastocoverthesubjectbytheendoftheyear,thelackofsupportby the educational system as well as the insufficient trainingshehadinher initial trainingasa teacher.Shesaidduringherinterview:

Imayknowsometimesthathedidn’tunderstandanythingofwhatIsaidbutIcarryonthelessonbecause there is pressure from the time and Ihave to covermy subject… IhaveneverbeentaughthowIshould treatachildwithdyslexiaor another child with a problem, and nobodyfrom the Ministry of Education has everbeen interested to help, not only me but othercolleaguesaswell.Generally, Yiannis seems to be marginalized

by his teachers and their teaching practices. Thisstatement can be reinforced by an incident weobserved during a science lesson. To a questionby the teacher, Mr. Costas,Yiannis gave a wronganswer and the teachers’ response made in anintensetonewas:‘No,Yiannis,youmadeamistakeagain’.Yiannisafterthisincidentseemedtobeself-isolated,hedidnotraisehishandagaininordertotalkduringthelesson;hejustscribbledonapieceofpaperusinghispencil.

DiscussinglaterwithMr.Costas,notonlyabouttheparticularincident,butalsogenerallyaboutthe

marginalizationofcertainpupils,heacknowledgedthatsometimeshemightmarginalizesomepupils:

Perhaps sometimes it happens… I won’t hidethatmanytimes,withoutbeingaware,IdosomethingsandlaterIbecomeconsciousthatpupilsfeltbad.Sometimes,asteachers,wemarginalizesome children… Sometimes, for instance, IcaughtmyselfignoringYiannis.Idonotspendtime to explain his questions, or some othertimesIrespondintensivelytosomeofhiswronganswers.FromMr.Costas’wordsitseemsthatmanytimes

hemarginalizeschildrenwithhisbehaviourandhisteaching approach that follows in the classroom.Variousresearchers,especiallyintheU.S.,obtainedsimilar findings. They report differences in teaching behavioursamongteacherswhoperceivedthatsomechildrenwerelessabletoachievebecauseofcertaindifferences (see for example, Edmonds, 1982;McLeskey&Grizzle,1992).

Conscious Marginalization

The second assertion, as it emerged from ourdata,isthatsometeachersoftenmarginalizechildrencategorizedashavingspecialneedsconsciouslyandwithpracticesthatappeartobeplannedinadvance.Through the analysis of our data this issue keepscomingupagainandagain.Ofcourse,thedistinctionbetweenthisthemeandthepreviousoneisnotalwaysclear.Sometimesthetwothemesappearmixed.Thefollowingvignetteshowsanexampleofconsciousmarginalization of children considered as havingspecialneedsbytheplannedactivitiesoftheteacher.ThedataofthisvignettecamefromobservationinMrs.Olga’sclass.

Vignette

Mrs. Olga was the teacher of Anastasis and Stavros. Mrs. Athina was the ‘special’ teacher of the school. Mrs. Athina usually used segregation practices for teaching children described as having special needs. Namely, she withdrew them from their class and taught them individually in a separate


room. After some discussions we had with the two teachers a suggestion was made that Mrs. Athina, instead of teaching the two boys individually in a separate room, during this time to go into their class, together with Mrs. Olga, where the two teachers will teach collaboratively in a collaborative style of co-teaching. Mrs. Athina was very happy to do so. Although Mrs. Olga was not very enthusiastic about it she accepted to get involved in the collaboration. From the next day Mrs. Athina began entering the class; she sat in a group of five children, among them was Anastasis and Stavros, and helped the group during Mrs. Olga’s teaching. During the first few days the comments of the teachers were positive. One day of the second week Mrs. Athina declared that she would not co-teach again with Mrs. Olga. The reason was an incident that happened during that day. In particular, Mrs. Athina sat with the two boys and helped them during a lesson. Mrs. Olga taught and at some point reached a certain stage where she would give to all pupils a handout with some exercises. She began giving one handout to each child. When she reached Anastasis and Stavros who sat with Mrs. Athina, she continued without giving them a handout.

Inthisstorywecanseethetwoteacherstryingtocooperatewithinthecontextofinclusiveeducationinordertoteachcollaboratively,inthesameclassroom,thechildrenconsideredashavingspecialneeds.Atthebeginningthingsseemedtobegoingwellbutintheprocesstheclassteacherappearstobedeviatingfromtheinitialplanandconsciously,inthepresenceofthe‘special’teacher,marginalizethetwochildren.She overlooked them and does not give them ahandout with the exercises for the lesson. Talkingwith her later on, she justified her action saying that thetwoboysatthatparticulartimewereundertheresponsibility of the ‘special’ teacher who workedwith them, and moreover, the two children wouldnotbeabletodotheexercisesofthehandout.

Analyzingthebehaviourofthisteacherwecouldargue that Mrs. Olga consciously did not give ahandouttothetwoboysassomethingweconsideredto be a marginalization practice. Through ourobservations, the interviews with the two teachersand also through the unofficial discussions we

hadwiththemuntiltheendoftheyear,Mrs.Olgaconsideredthattheexistenceofthetwochildreninherclasspreventedherfrom‘doingher jobasshewanted’,asshesaidduringadiscussionwehadwithher. Her attitude was negative from the beginningalthoughsheacceptedMrs.Athinatoenterherclassbecauseof the‘pressure’putonherwhenshewasasked to do this collaboration, and in order not toappear as having a negative approach towardsthe two boys. Subsequent to the beginning of thiscollaboration,dayafterday it increasinglyseemedthat Mrs. Olga did not want Mrs. Athina comingin her class although she did not say anything inpublic.Sheseemedtobefeelingthatherspacewasthreatened,herindependenceasateacherwaslimitedandgenerally thather freedomtodowhatevershewantedinherclasswasrestricted.ThepresenceofMrs.Athinaintheclassseemedtoputpressureandstressonher,somethingthatgraduallyledhertotheincidentoftheabovevignette.

Throughourpreviousresearch(e.g.Angelides&Charalambous, 2005) we found that many teachersappeartobeconsciouslynegativelyorientedtowardsinclusive education as well as towards pupilsconsidered as having special needs because theirinterestsarenotserved(i.e.quietclass,coverageofthe curriculum, high results). Vlachou-Balafouti &Zoniou-Sideris(2000)reportanexampleofateacherfrom a Greek school who had a negative attitudetowardschildrenconsideredashavingspecialneeds.Although they state that this example could becharacterizedasanovertexpressionofprejudiceanddiscriminationtheyalsopointoutthatitisdangeroustocriticizetheteacher’snegativeattitudeinisolationfromthewidercontextwithinwhichsucharesponsewascreated.

In other research again conducted in Greece,Pandeliadou(1992)foundthat‘ordinary’teachershavenegative attitudes against the inclusion of childrenconsidered as having special needs. In particular, itwas found thatmainstream teachers consciouslydonotwanttomarginalizepupilscategorizedashavingspecial needs and considered that these attitudesinfluence the successfulness of inclusive education in Greece.


Discussing the Two Assertions

Despitethefactthatwedividedtheresponsesofteachers in conscious and unconscious we believethat if we analyze their actions further in order tosearch in agreaterdepth for factors thatmight liebehind thosebehaviourswhat seems toprevails isthat thebehavioursof these teachers asderived toagreatdegreefromdevelopmentcontextofspecialeducation in Cyprus. The response of teachersshouldbestudiedwithinthewidercontextofspecialeducation because as Armstrong, Armstrong andBarton(2000)argue:

Thepursuitofaninclusivesocietyinvolvesaverydifficult and demanding struggle against those cultural, ideological and material forces whichcombinetogenerateandlegitimizepoliciesandpracticesofexclusion.Inseekingtounderstandthepresentinordertochangeit,itisnecessary,forexample, toexplore someof the imagesofthepastandhowthesebothinformandbecomeincorporatedintoourcurrentfutureendeavours.(p.3)Thus,wecansearchforfactorsthatlaybehind

these attitudes and behaviours and say that thenegative attitude of teachers might be a result ofthehistorical,socialandculturalcontextofspecialeducationinCyprus(Phtiaka,2000).

Historically, special education in Cyprus tookplace in segregated settings with ‘special’ and‘ordinary’teacherstohavecompletelydifferentroles.Eventodaytheybelongtodifferentdepartmentsatthe Ministry of Education and Culture. There arethreespecialeducationinspectorsthatareresponsiblefor all ‘special’ teachers, while ‘ordinary’ teachersaretheresponsibilitiesof‘generalinspectors’.Thisdivision, therefore, creates different job tasks anddifferent understandings of their roles in schools,whichmightgeneratethebehavioursthatappearintheabovevignettes.

Consequently, the behaviour and responses ofthe teacher involved in the above vignettes mightbe determined by the historical context of specialeducation development in Cyprus. The roles andviewsthateachgroupacquiredevolvedthroughthis

development,aswellastheviewsfordealingwithchildren defined as having special needs seems to be in conflict with the philosophy of inclusive education and as result of this conflict children considered as havingspecialneedsaremarginalized.

Discussion

The above analysis substantiates the positionthatmanytimesteachers’practicesseemtoactasafactorofmarginalizationforchildrencategorizedashavingspecialneeds.Thismarginalizationseemstobequitecomplexandwithitsdifferentformsnottobeclear,buttobeoverlappingandinterpenetrating.Wehaveseenmarginalizationcomingfromteacherstoappearintwointerconnectedforms:unconsciousmarginalizationandconsciousmarginalization.

It is important to note that during this projectmany difficulties emerged because of the complex natureofmarginalization.Ourcentralproblemwastoformulateourassertionssincethedifferentformsofmarginalizationwereinterrelated,interconnectedand difficult to separate. As we have already said wehaddeliberatelydividedtheseissuestohelpthereader to understand the arguments and findings of ourresearch.Atthebeginningofourdataanalysiswehadconsideredthehistoricaloverviewasoneofourassertionsbutintheprocessofanalysiswerealizedthatwedidnothaveenoughempiricalevidencetosupportit,soweusedittosupportthediscussionofthe twoassertions.Asweweregenerally trying toidentifybarrierstoparticipationandlearningandthenpresentingsuggestionsforovercomingthesebarriersin relation to the historical overview we realizedthe importance of Fulcher’s (1989) argument thateducational policies are created through strugglesthat occur across a series of interconnected levelswithinaneducationsystem.

In addition, it would be interesting to discussthelanguageof‘specialneeds’inrelationtoitsusewithin discussions of ‘inclusive education’ and itsvalidity when applied to specific children. The use oftheterm‘specialneeds’mightbeseentofurthercontribute to the marginalization of the childreninvolved in the study. We have used it, however,


because this is the term used by the Cyprus law(CyprusRepublic,1999).Moreover,thisdiscussionraisesquestionsaboutthelabelsthatthesechildrenhavebeengiven in relation to theirbehaviour andinteractionsintheirclassrooms.

The implications of the above analysis couldbe related to the initial training and in-serviceeducation of teachers. We will not do it thoughbecauseweconsider that for this issue there are alot of writings and we do not need to return (seefor example, Ainscow, 1998; Angelides, 2004;Angelides&Zembylas,2003;Vlachou,1997).Wewilltry,however,toconnecttheimplicationoftheaboveanalysiswiththesupportthattheMinistryofEducationinCyprusprovidestoteachers.

Previous research found out that teachers veryoften refer to the support they receive from theirsuperiors and generally the Ministry of Education(see,Angelides,2004;Angelides,Stylianou&Leigh,2003).Thisfactmightbethecaseinourstateofaffairsand teachers like Mrs. Despina, Mrs. Olga, Mrs.AthinaandMrCostasmightnothavethenecessarysupport from the Ministry of Education. Teacherwho have in their classes children categorized ashavingspecialneedsseemtobealoneandwhichevereffortsdonearedonefromtheirowninitiative.Webelieve that all teachers, and those who have intheir classes children considered as having specialneedsinparticular,needsupportinordertobeableto provide more quality education and in order toincrease theparticipationofallof theirpupils.Wesuggest that thewayschools functionand thewayteachersareallocatedtoclassesinparticularshouldbereformedinordertohavemorethanoneteacherintheclassroom,ifnotforthewholedayatleastforsomehours.Inaddition,itwouldbegoodtointroducetheroleofteachingassistant.Atthemomentthereistheroleofthe‘escortassistants’thatmainlysupportchildrenconsideredashavingspecialneedsintermsofsafetyandtransportation.Includingotherrolesaswellinordergraduallytoreachtheroleofateachingassistantcanexpandthisrole.

Support to teachers can be provided withthe organization and function by the Ministry ofEducation of programs of collaborative models of

action research (Ainscow, 1998; Angelides, 2003;Evans,Lunt,Wedell,&Dyson,1999),whereteacherswillcollaboratewitheachotherorwithacademicsorinspectorsforinvestigatingtheirpractice,payingparticular attention to issues that preoccupy themlike the issue of teaching children considered ashavingspecialneeds.Inthiswayteacherswillhavethechancetochoosethesubjectofstudy,todiscussitwithan‘outsider’andtoreachsomedifferentiatedpractices.

For developing inclusive practices Ainscow,Howes, Farrell and Frankham (2003) argue thatschools should become communities of practice.Wenger (1998) proposed the four dimensions oflearning as they are worked out in action fromwithincommunitiesofpracticeframework:learningasdoing(practice),learningasbecoming(identity),learning as experience (meaning), and learning asbelonging (community). Communities of practiceare groups of individuals bound by what they dotogether—e.g.fromengagingininformaldiscussionstosolvingproblems—andbywhattheyhavelearnedthroughtheirmutualengagementintheseactivities.Rulesofengagementwithinacommunityofpracticeare constantly renegotiated although there is ashared repertoire of communal activities, routines,discoursesandsoonthatmembershavedevelopedovertime.Thus,communitiesofpracticehavebeentheorizedassitesofmutuallearningandasimportantcontributorstothesuccessofknowledge-dependentorganizations(Vrasidas&Zembylas,2004).

TheideathatlearningisaparticipativeprocessanditisbasedondialoguecangobacktotheSocratesera. Contemporary educational models recognizecommunitiesofpractice and learning as importantmodes of promoting a multidimensional learning,highlighting that knowledge does not exclusivelyexistwithineachindividualbutinthegroup(Lave&Wenger,1991).Withinthecommunityoflearningindividuals think, reflect, and interpret facts and situations.Thismodelisofparticularimportanceifwethinkofthecontemporaryneedsthatarecreatedinacontinuallychangingworldinwhichindividualsareincreasinglybasedongroupknowledgethatnopersonprocessesbyitself.


Incommunitiesofpracticeteachersareorganizedin a collaborative network where they share theirexperiences with their colleagues, they interactmoreoftenbetween themandwhicheveractivitiesarenot ‘privateaffairs’butpartof thecommunity.The development of schools in Cyprus, therefore,in communities of practice may bridge the gap ofteacherssupportbecausethesupportwilltakeplaceinschoolswiththepossiblehelpofcertain‘outsiders’(i.e.inspectors,educationalconsultants,academics).This idea, Ainscow et al. (2003) argues can beexpandedintogroupsofschools.Forexample,fouror five schools can create a collaborative network wheretheywillshareanddiscusstheirexperiences.

References

Ainscow, M. (1998). Developing inclusiveclassrooms (transl). In E. Tafa (Ed.) Including children with and without learning and behaviour problems(pp.25-54).Athens:EllinikaGrammata.[InGreek]

Ainscow, M., Howes,A., Farrell, P. & Frankham,J. (2003).Makingsenseof thedevelopmentofinclusivepractices.European Journal of Special Needs Education, 18(2),227-242.

Allan, J. (1998). Scotland: Mainstreaming at themargins.InT.Booth&M.Ainscow(Eds.)From them to us: An international study of inclusion in education. London:Routledge.

Angelides,P.(2004).InclusiveeducationinCyprus(?). In P. Angelides & G. Mavroidis (Eds.)Educational innovation for the school of the future.Athens,Greece:TypothitoPublications.

Angelides,P.(2003).Usingcollaborativemodelsofinquiry for teacher professional development.Improving Schools, 6(1),20-28.

Angelides,P.&Charalambous,C.(2005).Inclusiveeducation in preprimary schools: Identification ofsomebarriers.In:P.Angelides(Ed.)Inclusive education: From the margin to inclusion.Limassol,Cyprus:Kyproepeia.

Angelides, P., Charalambous, C., & Vrasidas, C.(2004). Reflections on policy and practice of inclusive education in pre-primary schools inCyprus. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 18(2),211-223.

Angelides, P., Stylianou, T., & Leigh, J. (2003).Forging a multicultural education ethos inCyprus: Reflections on policy and practice. Intercultural Education, 14(1),57-66.

Angelides, P. & Zembylas, M. (2003). StaffdevelopmentinCyprus:Deconstructionofsometraditional perceptions. Sygxroni Ekpaideysi, 129,107-113.[InGreek]

Armstrong,F.,Armstrong,D.,&Barton,L.(2000).Introduction: What is this book about. In F.Armstrong, D.Armstrong, & L. Barton (Eds.)Inclusive education: Policy, contexts and comparative perspectives (pp. 1-11). London:DavidFulton.

Barnard, A. (1997). Report to the ministry of education of Cyprus: Integration of children with special educational needs.NewcastleUponTyne,U.K.

Barton, L. (1997). Inclusive education: Romantic,subversiveorrealistic?International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1(3),231-242.

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method.EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:PrenticeHall.

Booth,T.&Ainscow,M.(Eds.)(1998).From them to us: An international study of inclusion in education.London:Routledge.


Burgess, R.G. (1982). Keeping a research diary.Cambridge Journal of Education, 2(1),75-83.

CyprusRepublic(1999).Lawforeducatingchildrenwith special needs. Official Gazette of the Republic, N113,338-350.

Cyprus Republic (1979). The special education law.N.47/1979.Nicosia,Cyprus:GovernmentPrinter.

Dickie-Clark,H.F. (1966).The marginal situation.London:Routledge&KeaganPaul.

Edmonds, R. (1982). On school improvement.Educational Leadership, 40,13-15.

Erickson,F.(1986).Qualitativemethodsinresearchonteaching.InWittrock,M.C.(Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 119-161). NewYork,NY:Macmillan.

Evans,J.,Lunt,I.,Wedell,K.&Dyson,A.(1999).Collaborating for effectiveness: Empowering schools to be effective. Buckingham: OpenUniversityPress.

Fulcher, G. (1989). Disabling policies? A comparative approach to education policy and disability.London:Falmer.

Glaser,B.G.,&Strauss,A.L.(1967).The discovery of grounded theory. London: Weidenfield and Nicolson.

Hansen, J. (1993). Cyprus educational service for handicapped students: Report from a UNESCO-mission to Cyprus. Copenhagen, Denmark:UNESCO.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.Cambridge:UniversityofCambridgePress.

McLeskey,J.,&Grizzle,K.(1992).Graderetentionratesamongstudentswith learningdisabilities.Exceptional Children, 58(6),548-554.

Messiou, K. (2002). Marginalization in primaryschools:Listeningtochildren’svoices.Support for Learning, 17(3),117-121.

Pandeliadou, S. (1992). Educating students withspecial needs: Content and perspectives.Paper presented at the first Greek Educational Symposium,Komotini,Greece.

Phtiaka, H. (2000).Where are we come from andwhere are we going? Cyprus governmentand special education. In A. Kypriotakis(Ed.) Proceeding of a Conference on Special Education,Rethymno,Crete.

Phtiaka, H. (1999). Disability, human rights andeducation. InF.Armstrong&L.Barton (Eds.)Disability, human rights and education: A comparative approach. Buckingham: OpenUniversityPress.

Pijl,S.J. (1995).The recourses for regular schoolswith special needs students: An internationalperspective. In C. Clark, A. Dyson, & A.Millward (Eds.) Towards inclusive schools. London:DavidFulton.

Vlachou, A. (1997). Struggles for inclusive education. Buckingham:OpenUniversityPress.

Vrasidas, C., & Zembylas, M. (2004). Aninteractional framework for professionaldevelopment of teachers. Paper presented atthe e-learning International 2004 conference,Edinburgh,UK.

Vlachou-Balafouti, A., & Zoniou-Sideris, A.(2000). Greek policy practices in the area ofspecial/inclusive education. In F. Armstrong,D. Armstrong, & L. Barton (Eds.), Inclusive education: Policy, contexts and comparative perspectives(pp.27-41).London:Fulton.

Webster’s NewWorld Dictionary. (3rd ed.)(1994).NewYork,NY:PrenticeHall.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.


School Personnel’s Professional Development Needs and Skill Level with Functional Behavior Assessments in Ten Midwestern States in the United

States: Analysis and Issues

Sekhar S. Pindiprolu, Ph.D.AssistantProfessorofSpecialEducation

[email protected]

Stephanie M. Peterson, Ph.D.ProfessorofSpecialEducation

[email protected]

Hollie Berglof, M.S.ResearchAssistant

[email protected]

Abstract

The amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) require states address the training needs of in-service and pre-service personnel for developing and implementing positive intervention strategies (Gable, Quinn, Rutherford, & Howell, 1998; Shelladay & Stichter, 1999; The Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice, 1998). However, there are few published studies of the professional development needs of people working in public school settings. In this study, we conducted a regional survey of special and general educators, administrators, and support personnel to elicit their own professional development needs as well as their colleagues’ needs in a variety of areas related to special education. The results suggest that (a) the school personnel have a strong training need in developing interventions for problem behaviors and functional behavior assessments; (b) there were some differences in the priority areas for professional development among the administrators, support staff, and teachers; and (c) there were differences between special and general education teacher’s rankings of their professional development needs and the format for professional development. The implications of these findings for pre-and in-service training for teachers and other educators are discussed.

IntheUnitedStatesofAmerica,theIndividualswithDisabilitiesEducationAct(IDEA)isafederalspecialeducationlawthatmandatesfree,appropriate,publiceducationforstudentswithdisabilitiesintheleastrestrictiveenvironments.Thislawprovides(a)definitions of disabilities and eligibility conditions to receive special education and related services;(b) financial assistance to assist states with the educationofstudentswithdisabilitiesbetweenages3to21;(c)guidelinestostatestoprotecttherights

of students with disabilities and their families; (d)grants(i.e.,federalmonies)tostatestoprovideearlyinterventionservicesforinfantsandtoddlersat-riskor with disabilities; and (e) support for personnelpreparation activities, technical assistance, andresearchtoimprovetheeducationofstudentswithdisabilities.

TherecentamendmentstotheIndividualswithDisabilities Education Act (IDEA 1997 & IDEIA2004)requireschoolstoconductfunctionalbehavior


assessments(FBAs)toaddressproblembehaviorsofstudentswithdisabilities.Further,IDEAamendmentsrequire that states address the professionaldevelopmentneedsofinservice(i.e.,whoarealreadyworking in schools) and preservice (i.e., who arebeing trained at the institutes of higher education)personnelfordevelopingandimplementingpositiveintervention strategies (Gable, Quinn, Rutherford,& Howell, 1998; Shelladay & Stichter, 1999;TheCenter for Effective Collaboration and Practice,1998).

Functional Behavior Assessments

Functional behavior assessments are defined as “combining descriptive and experimentalmethodstodeterminewhetherproblembehaviorispositivelyreinforcedviaattentionand/ortangibles-or sensory stimulation-or negatively reinforcedvia escape from either task demands or aversivesensorystimulation”(Umbreit,1995,p.267).Thereare multiple advantages of identifying functionsof problem behaviors. First, effectiveness of thetreatment increases when treatments are matchedto the function of the problem behavior (Gable,1996). Second, identification of functions helps rule out interventions that would not be effective,i.e.,implementingtime-outinterventionsforescapefunctions. Third, identifying functions facilitiesgeneralization of treatment effectiveness acrossdifferent topographiesofproblembehavior (Iwata,Vollmer,Zarcone,&Rodgers,1993).

Functional assessment procedures are broadlyclassified into three categories: Indirect or informant procedures, direct procedures or descriptiveanalysis, and functional analysis or experimentalanalysis (Gable, 1996; Iwata et al., 1993; Ward,1998). Information from informant methods helpsin (a) defining problem behavior(s), (b) narrowing down variables affecting a problem behavior, and(c)formulatinghypothesizedfunctionsofaproblembehavior (Ward, 1998). Information from directobservationsishelpfulinformulatinghypothesizedfunction(s)ofaproblembehavior(s)(Choi&Kim,1998).Functionalanalysisorexperimentalanalysis

involves systematic manipulation of variables thatarehypothesizedasmaintainingproblembehaviors(Gable, 1996). Experimental analysis helps inverifyingtheroleoftheeventsintriggeringproblembehaviors (Iwata et al., 1993). The Amendmentsof IDEA do not mandate any specific methods or procedures for identifying the functions of abehavior (The Center for Effective Collaboration,1998). However, it is generally accepted in the field ofbehavioranalysisthatmultiplemethodsorsourcesofinformationprovidemoreaccurateinformationonaproblembehaviorthanasinglesourceormethodofinformation.

There are few published studies of theprofessionaldevelopmentneedsintheareaofFBAof people working in public school settings. In asurveybytheNationalAssociationofStateDirectorsofSpecialEducation(NASDSE;1998),29ofthe35StateDirectorsindicatedthattheirstateswere(a)intheprocessofdevelopingpoliciesonhowtoconductFBAsand(b)planningstaffdevelopmentrelatedtoFBAs. Further, staff development and training infunctional analysis was ranked third as a priorityareaofneedfortechnicalassistance.

Nelson,Roberts,Rutherford,Mathur,andAaroe(1999) conducted a statewide survey to examinethe views of special education administrators andschoolpsychologistsontheeffectiveness,usability,suitability, and practicality of functional behaviorassessment procedures. The sample consisted of216 administrators and school psychologists. Bothgroups were supportive of the use of FBAs forchroniclow-levelproblembehaviorssuchasoff-taskbehavior, non-compliance, and so forth. However,bothgroupswereuncertainas to theeffectiveness,usability, and suitability of FBAs procedures fordealing with unique low frequency behaviors thatoftenleadtosuspensionsandexpulsionsofstudentswithdisabilities.Both thegroups also expressedaconcernthatteachersdonothavetraininginFBAsandmightbeunwillingtoconductFBAs.

Desrochers, Hile, and Williams-Moseley(1997) conducted a national survey to identifythe prac-titioners’ use of functional behavioralassessment, frequently used FBA procedures, and


practitioners’ utilization of assessment resultswhendevelopingan interventionplan.Thesampleconsistedof300psychologistswhoweremembersof theAmericanAssociationonMentalRetardation(AAMR). Practitioners reported FBAs were usefulin assessing variables affecting problem behaviorsandindevelopinginterventionprograms.Further,thepractitioners’ indicated that indirect and descriptivemethods of FBA were more frequently used thanexperimental analyses to empirically identifybehavioral function (i.e., procedures developed byIwata,Dorsey,Slifer,Bauman,&Richman,1994).

In a survey study conducted inAustralia, Little(2005) examined the types of behavior reportedby secondary teachers as problematic and theirpreferred methods of professional development formanagingproblembehaviors.Theresultsofthestudyindicatedthat(a)talkingoutofturn,hinderingothers,idleness,anddisobediencewereratedbyteachersastroublesome,frequentlyoccurringbehaviorsand(b)teacherspreferredin-servicetrainingandadvicefromother teachers as the highly acceptable methods ofprofessionaldevelopment.

AlthoughtheabovestudiesprovideevidenceforprofessionaldevelopmentinbehavioralinterventionsandFBAskills,fewstudiesthatsurveytheneedsofboth the general and special educators in the areaof functional behavior assessments and behavioralinterventions can be found. That is, do specialand general educators view FBA and behavioralinterventionsasanareainwhichtheyneedprofessionaldevelopment? Although it seems intuitive thatsuch training is necessary as a result of the IDEAamendments, few studies have been undertaken tosubstantiate this claim. The purposes of the studywere to (a) elicit the professional developmentneeds of inservice school personnel (i.e., teachers,administrators, and support personnel), (b) exploredifferences in professional development needs ofadministrators, teachers, and support staff, and (c)explore differences in professional developmentneedsofspecialandgeneraleducationprofessionals.

Method

Participants

Surveysweremailedto450specialandgeneraleducation personnel (i.e., teachers, administrators,andsupportstaff)workinginschools(i.e.,inservicepersonnel) in the states of North Dakota, SouthDakota, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Nebraska,Montana,Arizona, Kansas, and New Mexico.ThelistsofinservicepersonnelwereobtainedfromtheMountainPlainsRegionalResourceCenteratUtahState University, state offices of education, and state education Websites. Some state offices of education were unable or unwilling to provide a list of allspecial and general education personnel. In thesecases, only a list of general and special educationadministratorswasprovided.Whenacompletelistof general and special education school personnelwasavailable,surveysweresenttoevery4thpersononthelist.Whenonlynamesofadministratorswereavailable, a package of surveys was sent to eachadministrator,alongwithacoverletterthataskedhimorhertodistributeonesurveytoaspecialeducationteacher, a general education teacher, one membersupportpersonnel, andoneadministrator (averbalagreementtodistributethesurveywasobtainedfromtheadministratorviae-mailortelephonebeforethesurveysweresenttothatadministrator).

Survey

Atwo-pagequestionnairewasdesignedtocollectinformationregarding(a)practitioners’demographics,(b) their professional development needs, (c) theircolleagues’ professional development needs, (d)theircurrentskilllevelinFBA,(e)preferredmethodfor professional development, and (f) most highlyneededarea(s)ofprofessionaldevelopmentforstaffintheirschooldistrict(acopyofthequestionnaireisavailablefromtheauthors).Underdemographics,participantsindicatedtheirprimaryrole(i.e.,teacher,administrator, support staff, or other), their field (i.e.,specialeducation,generaleducation,orother),and whether they worked at the school, district,


or state level. Under professional developmentneeds and colleagues’ training needs, participantsranked their perceived need for professionaldevelopmentfromthefollowing11areas:assistivetechnology, early childhood intervention, effectiveteaching procedures, effective collaboration skills,individualized education program development,inclusion strategies, interventions for behavioralproblems,functionalbehaviorassessment,restraintprocedures, positive and negative reinforcementstrategies,andtransitionservices.

Under current skill level in FBA, participantsindicated their skill level in eight FBA areas:interviewing caregivers, defining problem behaviors such that they can be observed and quantified, recording procedures for measuring problembehaviors, predicting problem behavior basedon observations, analyzing observational datato determine the purpose of problem behaviors,developing intervention plans to decrease problembehavior,conductingongoingassessmentofchangesinbehaviorduetointervention,testinghypothesizedfunctionsoftheproblembehavior.A4-pointLikertscale (none, low, moderate, and high) was usedto elicit the training needs and skill level of thepractitioners.

Under preferred method of inservice delivery,the participants indicated their preferred formatof professional development from nine options:university course, two-way satellite transmission,cooperative work groups at school site, series ofbrief workshops, Web-based courses, CD-ROMmaterials, videotapes, books and other writtenmaterials,andall-dayworkshop.Thelastitemaskedtheparticipants to indicate themosthighlyneededarea(s)ofprofessionaldevelopmentforstaffworkingwithdisabilities in theirschooldistrictandwasanopen-endedquestion.

Thequestionnairewasconstructedbythesecondauthor,whohas12yearsofexperienceinteachingFBAandbehaviormanagementcourses.Theitemswereselectedbasedonherpreviousexperiencewithin-serviceandpre-servicetraining.FacultymembersintheDepartmentofSpecialEducationatUtahStateUniversitythenreviewedthequestionnaireforfacevalidity.The reviewers were experienced behavior

analysts,eachhavingatleast12yearsofexperiencein the field of special education and behavioral assessment.Thereviewersreadthequestionnaireandcommentedontheitemsonthequestionnaire.Thequestionnairewasrevised,basedonthecomments,beforeitwasmailedtotheparticipantsofthestudy.

Procedure

Thefrontpageofthequestionnairecontainedacoverletterthatdescribedthepurposeofthestudy,issues addressing confidentiality, and information on a potential $50 cash award (i.e., a drawing wouldbe held of all returned surveys, and the surveydrawn would receive a $50 cash reward). Thequestionnaire and a stamped return envelope weremailedtotheinservicepersonnelworkinginthetenstatespreviouslylisted.Thenon-respondentswerecontacted throughphone and e-mail 4weeks afterthe original mailing to remind them to completeandreturntheirsurveys.ThethirdauthorenteredthedatafromthequestionnairesintotheStatisticalPackage for the Social Sciences Program (SPSS),double-checkingthedataentriesforaccuracy.

Results

Outofthe450surveyssent,157werereturned,foratotalreturnrateof34.8%.Oneofthesurveyswasnotincludedinthedataanalysis,astherespondentdid not answer a majority of the questions. Therespondents were predominantly from the field of special education (82.1%; n =128).Administratorsconstituted 38.5% of the respondents (n = 60),teachers33.3%(n=52)andsupportstaff9.6%(n=15).Theremaining18.6%(n=29)indicatedthattheirjobdutiesdidnotfallintoanyofthesecategoriesbymarking“other.” Fortypercent(n=62)of therespondentswereworkingattheschoollevel,34%(n=53)atthedistrictlevel,and20.5%(n=32)atthestatelevel.Amongtheteachers,30.8%(n=16)were general educators and 65.4% (n = 34) werespecial educators. The administrators and supportstaff were predominantly from special education(91.7%[n=55]oftheadministratorsand80%[n= 12] of the support staff). As the administrators


andsupportpersonnel(whoresponded)weremainlyfrom special education, only differences betweenspecial and general education teachers’ perceptionof professional development needs and skill levelwithFBAwereexplored.

Respondents’ Rating of Their Professional Development Needs

Overall,thethreemostfrequentlycitedneedareasidentified by all respondents were: (1) intervention forbehavioralproblems,(2)FBA,and(3)inclusionstrategies(seeTable1).Whenthedatawereanalyzedaccordingtotheprimaryroleoftherespondents,itwasfoundthattheadministratorsandsupportstaffidentified the same three areas for professional developmentasrankinghighest inneed(seeTable1). The administrators also indicated a need forprofessional development in transition procedures.Supportstaffindicatedeffectiveteachingproceduresandeffectivecollaborationskills(atiewithinclusionstrategies;seeTable1)asareasinwhichprofessionaldevelopment was also needed. For teachers, thethreemostfrequentlycitedareasofneedwere:(1)intervention for behavioral problems, (2) effectiveteaching procedures, and (3) inclusion strategies.When the data were analyzed by professionalassignment of teachers, teachers differed in theirrankings of areas of professional development.General education teachers rated intervention forbehavioralproblems,effectiveteachingprocedures,and effective collaboration skills as their top needareas, while the special education teachers ratedintervention for behavioral problems, inclusionstrategies, and functional behavior assessments astheirtopthreeneedareas(seeTable1).

Respondents’ Ratings of Colleagues’ Professional Development Needs

Overall, therespondentsperceivedinterventionfor behavioral problems, effective teachingprocedures,andinclusionstrategiesasthetopthreeareasofneedforprofessionaldevelopmentfortheircolleagues(seeTable2).Whenthedatawereanalyzed

for the various sub-groups of the respondents,administrators identified interventions for behavioral problems,FBA,andtransitionservicesandeffectiveteachingprocedures(whichwererankedasequallyimportant)asthreetopneedareasfortheircolleagues(seeTable2).Forsupportstaff,theareasfortrainingwereinterventionforbehavioralproblems,positiveand negative reinforcement strategies, and both

Table1

Top Three Professional Development Need Areas of Subgroups

Respondents Top three areas of need forprofessionaldevelopment(N)

Meana Modea Percentage ratedhigh(n)

Overall Intervention for behavioralproblems(155)

2.99 3 32%(50)

Functionalbehavioralassessments(155)

2.71 3 21%(33)

Inclusionstrategies(155) 2.65 3 16%(24)

GeneralTeachers

Interventions for behavioralproblems(16)

3.19 3 38%(6)

Effectiveteachingprocedures(16)

3.06 3 25%(4)

Effective collaboration skills(16)

2.81 3 19%(3)

Sped.Teachers

Interventions for behavioralproblems(34)

3.12 4 38%(13)



2.74 3 21%(7)

Administrators Interventions for behavioralproblems(59)

2.98 3 31%(18)


2.73 3 22%(13)


Transitionservices(59) 2.63 2 19%(11)

SupportStaff Interventionsforbehavioralproblems(15)

3.07 4 40%(6)


3.00 3 33%(5)

InclusionStrategies(15) 2.87 4 40%(6)


2.87 2 33%(5)

Effectivecollaborationskills(15)

2.87 2 33%(5)

aTherangewas1to4and1=None,2=Low,3=Moderate,and4=High


FBAandeffectiveteachingprocedures(whichwererankedasequallyimportant).

Teachers identified interventions in behavioral problems, effective teaching procedures, andinclusion strategiesas the top threeneedareas fortheir colleagues. When analyzed by professionalassignment, the general education teachersindicatedinterventionsforbehavioralproblemsandeffectiveteachingprocedures,positiveandnegativereinforcementstrategies,andeffectivecollaborationskills as need areas for their colleagues. Specialeducatorsindicatedthatinterventionsforbehavioralproblems, effective teaching procedures, andinclusionstrategiesasareasinwhichtheircolleaguesneedprofessionaldevelopment(seeTable2).

There were some differences in the teachers’ownperceivedneedareasandtheirperceivedneedsoftheircolleagues.Thegeneraleducationteachersdid not identify FBA as a priority training needfor themselves or their colleagues. However, thespecial education teachers identified professional developmentinFBAasatrainingneedforthembutnot for their colleagues. Both the groups identified interventions forbehavioralproblemsasapriorityprofessional development need for them and theircolleagues.

Respondents’ Perception of Their Skill Level with FBA

Overall,therespondentsratedtheirskillslevelsas lowintheareasof(1)hypothesis testingof thepurpose of the problem behavior, (2) conductingongoingassessmentofchanges inbehaviordue tointervention, and (3) both developing interventionplanstodecreaseproblembehaviorand/orincreasedesire behaviors and interviewing caregiversregarding problem behaviors (rankings for thesetwoareaswereratedaslowbyanequalnumberofrespondents, see Table 3). Some differences werefoundboth in rankingandpriority areaswhen thedatawasanalyzedbyprimaryrole.Administratorsindicatedtheirskilllevelswerelowin(1)hypothesistestingofthepurposeoftheproblembehavior,(2)conductingongoingassessmentofchangesinbehavior

due to intervention, and (3) recording proceduresfor measuring problem behaviors as the three lowskill areas (see Table 3). Support staff indicatedtheirskillswerelowin(1)hypothesistestingofthepurposeoftheproblembehavior,(2)bothconductingongoingassessmentofchanges inbehaviordue tointervention and analyzing observational data todetermine the purpose of problem behavior (the

Table2

Top Three Professional Development Need Areas for Colleagues

Role Topthreeneedareas(N) Meana Modea Percentageratedhigh(n)

Overall Interventionforbehavioralproblems(148)

3.45 4 52%(77)


3.17 3 35%(52)


GeneralTeachers

Interventionsforbehavioralproblems(14)

3.07 3 14%(2)


3.07 3 20%(3)

Positiveandnegativereinforcement(15)

3.93 3 13%(2)

Effectivecollaborationskills(15)

2.80 3 13%(2)

Sped.Teachers

Interventionsforbehavioralproblems(33)

3.61 4 70%(23)

Effectiveteachingprocedures 3.39 4 52%(17)

Administrators Interventionsforbehavioralproblems(56)

3.48 4 55%(31)


3.27 4 45%(25)


3.12 3 30%(17)

Transitionservices(58) 3.12 3 38%(22)

SupportStaff Interventionsforbehavioralproblems(15)

3.53 4 53%(8)

Positiveandnegativereinforcement(15)

3.47 4 53%(8)


3.47 4 53%(8)


3.27 3 40%(6)


3.27 3 40%(6)



rankingsforthesetwoareaswereratedaslowbyanequalnumberofrespondents),and(3)developingintervention plans to decrease problem behaviorsand/orincreasedesiredbehaviors(seeTable3).

Teachersindicatedtheirskillswerelowin:(1)hypothesis testing of the purpose of the problembehavior, (2) interviewing caregivers regardingproblem behaviors, and (3) both recordingprocedures for measuring problem behaviors anddevelopinginterventionplanstodecreaseproblembehaviors or increase desired behaviors (therankingsforthesetwoareaswereratedaslowbyanequalnumberofrespondents).

Whenthedatawereanalyzedfordifferencesinperceivedskillsbasedonprofessionalassignment,general educators indicated that they were leastskilled in (1) interviewing caregivers regardingproblem behaviors, (2) both hypothesis testing ofthepurposeoftheproblembehaviorandrecordingprocedures for measuring problem behavior (therankings for these two were rated as low by anequalnumberofrespondents),and(3)conductingongoing assessment of changes in behavior dueto intervention (see Table 3). Special educatorsindicated that they were least skilled in (1)hypothesis testing of the purpose of the problembehavior, (2) interviewing caregivers regardingproblembehaviors,and(3)developinginterventionplanstodecreaseproblembehaviorsortoincreasedesiredbehaviors(seeTable3).

The analyses of responses from individualswho comprised the “other” category (respondentswho were predominantly from special education)indicated that (a) intervention for behavioralproblemswasapriorityprofessionaldevelopmentneedforthemselves,(b)interventionforbehavioralproblemswasapriorityprofessionaldevelopmentneedfortheircolleagues,and(c)thattheyperceivedthemselvesashavinglowskilllevelsintheareaofhypothesis testing of the purpose of the problembehavior. This group of respondents indicatedprofessional development in assistive technologyas a priority training need for themselves andfor their colleagues. They also indicated a need

for professional development in FBA for theircolleagues.

Preferred Method of Professional Development

Overall,thepreferredmethodsofprofessionaldevelopmentwere(1)all-dayworkshop(n=40),

Table3

Skill Areas of Functional Behavioral Assessments Identified for Professional Development

Role Skillareasratedlowproficiency (N)

Meana Modea Percentagelowornone

Overall Hypothesistesting(153) 2.56 3 48%(73)

Conductingongoingassessment(153)

2.75 3 38%(58)

Developinginterventionplans(153)

2.79 3 33%(51)

Interviewingcaregivers(153) 2.79 3 28%(43)

GeneralTeachers


Hypothesistesting(16) 2.00 2 81%(13)

Recordingprocedures(16) 2.00 2 81%(13)


2.13 2 68%(11)

Sped.Teachers

Hypothesistesting(34) 2.47 3 47%(16)



2.85 3 30%(10)

Administrators Hypothesistesting(59) 2.68 3 42%(25)


2.83 3 33%(19)

Recordingprocedures(59) 2.92 3 24%(14)

SupportStaff Hypothesistesting(15) 2.33 3 53%(8)


2.40 2 53%(8)

Analyzingobservationaldata(15)

2.40 2 53%(8)


2.47 3 47%(7)



(2)cooperativeworkgroupsatworksites(n=36),and (3) seriesofbriefworkshops (n=26). Moreteachers (general and special), administrators, andsupportstaffindicatedapreferenceforcooperativework at school site as their preferred method ofprofessional development. However, 13 of therespondents from the “other” category indicatedthatall-dayworkshopsweretheirpreferredmethodof professional development. When analyzed fordifferences between special and general educationteachers, ahigherpercentageofgeneral educationteachers indicated cooperative work at school site(50%)andahigherpercentageofspecialeducationteachersindicatedall-dayworkshopastheirpreferredmethodofprofessionaldevelopment(35%).Thirtyonepercentof theadministratorsand36%of thesupport staff indicated cooperative work at schoolsite as their preferred method of professionaldevelopment.

Areas of Training for Staff in Their School District

The last question was open-ended and askedrespondents to identify the highest need areas ofprofessional development for staff working withstudents with disabilities in their school district.The responses obtained from the question werecategorizedinto25areasbytheauthors(seeTable4). Overall training in FBA and interventions forbehavioralproblemscomprisedthemostfrequentlycitedareaoftrainingneed(n=67).Thesecondmostfrequently identified area of need was professional development in inclusion strategies (n = 43). Thethirdmostfrequentlycitedcategoryoftrainingneedsidentified by the respondents was effective teaching strategies (n = 21). This pattern was found to beconsistent when data were analyzed for teachers(and by professional assignment), administrators,andsupportstaff(seeTable4).

Discussion

The purpose of the study was to identify theneedsofschoolpersonnel,particularlyintheareasofFBAandbehavioralmanagementandtoexplore

the differences in training needs between specialand general education personnel. We also wanted

Table4

Areas in Need of Professional Development for Staff Working in Their School District

Areas

GenEd

(n=15)

Sped

(n=34)

Admin

(n=55)

SupportStaff(n=14)

Behavioralmanagementskills(FBA) 8 13 24 9

Collaboration/Teamwork - 3 5 1

TeachingStrategies 2 4 11 1

Staffevaluation - - 2 1

Inclusion/LRE/accommodations 3 13 18 1

Transitionplanning - 1 7 2

Gen.Ed.traininginspecialeducation 1 3 6 2

Literacytraining - - 3 -

Timemanagement/planning - - 3 -

Bilingualeducation - - 1 -

Academicassessment 1 - 1 -

Parentalinvolvementstrategies 1 1 - 1

IEPdevelopment - 2 - 1

Hearingimpaired/deaf/blindstrategies - - 2 -

Autisminterventions - - 1 1

Prereferralprocessesskills - 1 2 -

Staffmotivationstrategies - - - 1

Staffcommunication - - - 1

Assistivetechnology - 2 1 -

Trainingparaprofessionals 1 2 1 1

Mental/emotionalillness - 2 - -

Standards-basededucation - 1 6 -

Other 2 6 10 5

IDEAupdates - 2 1 -

Note.Somerespondentsindicatedmultipleareasofneed.


to know if there were differences in professionaldevelopmentneedsbyadministrators,teachers,andsupport personnel.Because the administrators andsupport staff, who responded to the survey, werepredominantly from the field of special education, analyseswereundertakenfordifferencesintrainingneedsbetweenspecialandgeneraleducationteachers.The results of the study indicated that the schoolpersonnel perceive a strong need for professionaldevelopment in developing interventions forbehavioral problems and in FBA skills. Further,almostallthesubgroupsofrespondentsindicatedalowskilllevelinhypothesistestingandconductingfunctional analysis. However, it was interestingto note that there were differences in the priorityareas for professional development among theadministrators,supportstaff,andteachers;aswellasbetweenthespecialandgeneraleducationteachers’rankingsoftheirtrainingneeds,theircolleagues,andtheirpreferredformatofprofessionaldevelopment.

There are several implications these resultshaveforresearchandpractice.First, thereappearstobeastrongneedforprofessionaldevelopmentinassessmentandinterventionsforproblembehaviorsfor all the in-service school personnel. Thus, thedevelopment of training tools and research oneffectiveinstructionalmethodologiesintheareasofFBAandinterventionsforproblembehaviorshouldbe encouraged. This finding is also corroborated by theresultsfromtheopen-endedquestionthataskedforhighlyneededarea(s)of training toworkwithchildrenwithdisabilities.Weaskedtheopen-endedquestion to obtain an “unprompted” suggestion ofwhatprofessionaldevelopmentneedseducatorshad.Similarly,allthesub-groupsindicatedinterventionforbehavioralproblemsas theirperceivedpriorityprofessionaldevelopmentneedfortheircolleagues.Thissuggeststhattheschoolpersonnel(a)perceivemanaging behavioral problems as a significant issue,(b)recognizetheroleofallschoolpersonnelinmanagingproblembehavior,and(c)perceivethatthey and their colleagues may not have adequateknowledge and skills to develop interventions forbehavioralproblems.

The above finding suggests the need for appro-priateprofessionaldevelopmentprogramsinbehaviormanagement and functional behavior assessmentfor in-service personnel. In addition, perhapsincreased emphasis on behavior management andfunctional behavioral assessment is warranted forpre-servicepersonnel aswell, considering the factthat these individualswill soonbecome in-servicepersonnel. Shellady and Stichter (1999) providedguidelines for developing training programs onfunctionalbehaviorassessmentaswellassuggestedcontent that should be included in such trainingfor in-service and pre-service personnel. Theyalsoemphasizeelicitingtheneedsofthein-servicepersonnel through questionnaires and focusingthe professional development on areas of needidentified by various school personnel. In this study we asked for both the professional developmentneedareasofthein-servicepersonnelandalsotheformats for delivering professional developmentaspreferredbytheschoolpersonnel.Forexample,in thepresent study,agreaternumberof teachers,administrators, and support personnel indicatedcooperativegroupsatworksitesas theirpreferredmethod of professional development. We believethat when professional development is conductedbasedontheschoolpersonnelneedsandthedeliveryformatthepersonnelprefer,itislikelytobevaluedandeffective.

Asstatedabove,itmaybeimportantforinstitutesofhighereducationtoprovidemoreintensetraininginFBAskillsandbehaviormanagementproceduresaspartoftheirteachereducationcurricula.IncreasingtrainingofFBAandbehaviormanagement inpre-service programs may better prepare in-serviceteachersmoreadequatelyforthechallengestheyfaceintheirroleasateacher;andtheschoolssystemstobeincompliancewiththenewIDEAamendments.However,therearefewpublishedstudiesthathaveinvestigated effective methods of training pre-and inservice personnel in the areas of FBA andbehavioral interventions (see Chandler, Dahlquist,Repp,&Feltz,1999;Vaughn,Hales,Bush,&Fox,1998;Ward,1998).Thus,aneedexistsforadditionalstudies investigating effective methods of training


schoolpersonnel (bothpre-serviceand in-service)inFBAandbehavioralinterventions.

Interestingly, allof the respondentsexcept thegeneral education teachers indicated training infunctionalbehavioralassessmentasapriorityareafor professional development. It may be that thegeneral educators see special education teachersand/orotherschoolpersonnelastheprimaryschoolpersonnelresponsibleforconductingthefunctionalbehavioral assessments. General educationalpersonnelalsomaynotbeawareoftheroleofFBAindesigningappropriateinterventions.

Among the skills required to complete FBAs,themajorityoftheparticipantsindicatedthattheirskilllevelswerelowintheareaofhypothesistestingof thepurposeof theproblembehavior.However,generaleducationteachersratedtheirskillsaslowerin the area of interviewing caregivers regardingproblem behaviors. This difference in perceivedskill deficits between general and special educators maybeduetothedifferentialrolesplayedbygeneraland special education personnel in conductingFBAsandmanagingproblembehavior,aswellastheperceivedimportanceofeachoftheseskills.

There were additional differences in theprofessional development areas identified as needed across subgroups and especially between specialeducationteachersandgeneraleducationteachers.For example, the general education teachersidentified effective teaching procedures and collaborationskillsasareas inwhich theyneededprofessionaldevelopment,whilespecialeducationteacherswereconcernedaboutFBA,interventions,and inclusion strategies. Administrators indicateda need for professional development in transitionservices. This finding suggests that the professional development needs of school personnel are likelydeterminedbytheirrolesandresponsibilities.Thus,separate professional development programs maybeneededonacontinuousbasistomeetthediverseneedsoftheschoolpersonnel.

Recently in a special issue of The Journal ofSpecial Education, Cook and Schirmer (2003)examined the question of “what is special aboutspecialeducation”andconcludedthattheeffective

practices/techniques were not being implementedin the classrooms as designed, which in turn waspreventing real improvements in the education ofstudents with special needs. Our results indicatethattheteachersmaynotbeawareoforadequatelytrainedineffectiveresearch-basedpracticesandtheyneedmoretraining(andsupport)forimplementingthemintheclassroom.Thus,thereexistsaneedtoconstantly monitor the needs of school personneland to design appropriate in-service programs tomeettheirneeds.

One other interesting finding of the study is the respondentsindicatedalowpreferencefordistance/electronic formats of professional development.Distance/electronic formats have a potential to beveryeffectivetoolsforprovidingon-goingsupporttotheschoolpersonnelandinestablishingrelationshipbetweenthefacultyatinstitutesofhighereducationand the school personnel.The low preference forthis type of professional development, however,suggests thatschoolpersonnelmaynotbewillingtoparticipateinsuchventures.

Thisstudyisnotwithoutitslimitations,whichmay have affected the external validity of thefindings. First, the return rate of the questionnaires waspoor,despiteourattemptstocontactparticipantsandremindthemtoreturnthesurveys.Theaveragereturn rate for surveys reported in literature is50% to 60% (see Bouck, 2005; Conderman &Katsiyannis, 2002; Flowers, Ahlgrim-Delzell,Browder, & Spooner, 2005). In addition, a fewrespondentsdidnotanswerallthequestionsonthesurvey.Insuchcases,weattemptedtocompletethesurvey by calling the respondent if s/he providedhis/hercontactinformationonthequestionnaire.Insomecases,however,thiswasnotpossiblebecausecontactinformationwasnotprovided.Second,thesample of individuals who received surveys wasnot selected in a random fashion. Although weattempted to mail surveys randomly to differentschooldistricts,weareunabletoobtainaddressofschoolsandnamesofteachersfromstatedepartmentsof education due to confidentiality issues. In many cases, we were only allowed to send surveys tospecific individuals at the state or local levels, who


then agreed to distribute the surveys to specific individuals at the state or local levels, who thenagreedtodistributethesurveysonourbehalf.Third,the lack of adequate representation of personnelfromgeneraleducation(duetoalackofresponse)limits the generalizability of the results. Finally,some of the topics for professional developmentlisted in the questionnaire were broadly defined. For example,InclusionStrategiescouldmeandifferentthings for different professionals. Hence, therecould have been a differential perception of whatInclusionStrategiesmighthavemeant for eachofthesub-groupsofschoolpersonnelwhoparticipatedinthestudy.Further,researchshouldbeundertakentoaddresstheabovelimitations.

Toconclude,theresultsofthestudyresonatewiththe findings of earlier research on the professional developmentneedsofteachers.TheresultsindicateaneedforprofessionaldevelopmentintheareaofFBA and interventions for behavioral problems.This study also extends the limited literature byexamining the professional development needs ofbothregularandspecialeducationteachersandotherschoolpersonnelintheareaofFBAskillsandtheirpreferredmethodsofprofessionaldevelopment.Webelieve that obtaining information on the schoolpersonnel overall needs, specific skill level, and preferred method of professional developmentassists faculty at institutes of higher education indesigning and delivering effective professionaldevelopment that meets their individual needs.Eventhoughtheprofessionaldevelopmentmodels,servicesforstudentswithdisabilities,andneedsofschool personnel might vary across countries, wehopethattheinstrumentandmethodologysharedinthe study will assist faculty at institutes of highereducation in other countries with their efforts inplanningandmeetingtheprofessionaldevelopmentneedsoftheirschoolpersonnel.

References

Bouck, E.C. (2005). Secondary special educators:Perspectives of preservice preparation andsatisfaction. Teacher Education and Special Education, 28(2),125-139.

Choi, H. & Kim, U. (1998). Research digest:Functional assessment for individual withproblem behaviors. Diagnostique, 23(4), 227-242.

Conderman, G. & Katsiyannis. A. (2002).InstructionalIssuesandPrecticesinSecondarySpecial Education. Remedial and Special Education, 23(3),169-179.

Cook, B.G., & Schirmer, B.R. (2003). What isspecial about special education: Overview andanalysis. The Journal of Special Education, 37(3),200-205.

Chandler, L.K., Dahlquist, C.M., Repp, A.C., &

Feltz, C. (1999). The effects of team-basedfunctionalassessmentonthebehaviorofstudentsin classroom settings. Exceptional Children, 66(1),101-122.

Desrochers, M.N., Hile, M.G., & Williams-Moseley, T.L. (1997). Survey of functionalassessment procedures used with individualswho display mental retardation and severeproblembehaviors.American Journal on Mental Retardation, 101,535-546.

Flowers, C.,Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Browder, D., &Spooner, F. (2005). Teachers’ perceptions ofalternateassessments.Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30(2),81-92.

Gable,R.A.(1996).Acriticalanalysisoffunctionalassessment: Issues for researchers andpractitioners. Behavioral Disorders, 22(1), 36-40.


Gable, R.A., Quinn, M.M., Rutherford, R.B.,& Howell, K. (1998). Addressing problembehaviors in schools: Use of functionalassessments and behavior intervention plans.Preventing School Failure, 42(3),106-119.

Individuals with Disabilities Education ActAmendments of 1997, Public law 105-17.(1997).Title20,U.S.C.1400-1487;U.SStatuesatLarge,111,37-157.

IndividualswithDisabilitiesEducationImprovementAct of 2004, P.L. 108-446, 20 U.S.C. 1400 etseq.

Iwata,B.A.,Dorsey,M.F.,Slifer,K.J.,Bauman,K.E.& Richman, G.S. (1994). Toward a functionalanalysis of self-injury. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(2),197-209.

Iwata,B.A.,Vollmer,T.R.,Zarcone,J.R.&Rodgers,T.A. (1993). Treatment classification and selectionbasedonbehavioralfunction.InR.V.Houton&S.Axelrod(Eds.),Behavioranalysisandtreatment(pp.101-125).NewYork:PlenumPress.

Little, E. (2005). Secondary school teachers’perception of students’ problem behaviors.Educational Psychology, 25(4),369-377.

NationalAssociation of State Directors of SpecialEducation. (1998). Quick Turn Around: Functional Behavioral Assessment State Policies & Procedures.

Nelson, R.J., Roberts, M.L., Rutherford, R.B.,Mathur,S.R.,&Aaroe,L.A.(1999).Astatewidesurvey of special education and schoolpsychologists regarding functional behavioralassessments. Education and Treatment of Children, 22(3),267-279.

Shellady, S. & Stichter, J.P. (1999). Trainingpreservice and inservice educators to conductfunctional assessments: Initial issues andimplications.Preventing School Failure, 43(4),154-159.

TheCenterforEffectiveCollaborationandPractice.(1998). Addressing student problem behavior: An IEP team’s introduction to functional behavioral assessment and behavior intervention plans.RetrievedDecember8,2006,fromhttp://cecp.air.org/fba/problembehavior/main.htm.

Umbreit, J. (1995). Functional assessment andintervention in a regular classroom settingfor the disruptive behavior of a student withattention deficit hyperactive disorder. Behavioral Disorder, 20(4),267-278.

Vaughn,K.,Hales,C.,Bush,M.,&Fox,J.(1998).East Tennessee State University’s “Makea Difference” project: Using a team-basedconsultative model to conduct functionalbehavioral assessments. Preventing School Failure, 43(1),24-30.

Ward, S.M. (1998). Functional behavioral assessment: An evaluation of continuing education variables related to support staff use in school settings. Unpublished doctoraldissertation,IowaStateUniversity,Ames.

Authors’ NoteTheauthorswouldliketothankthedirectorsthat

helpeddisseminatethesurveys,thefacultymembersin the Department of Special Education at UtahState University that reviewed the questionnaire,and the reviewers for the suggestions. AddresscorrespondencetoSekharS.Pindiprolu,Departmentof Early Childhood, Physical, and SpecialEducation,MailStop954,2801W.BancroftStreet,


Comparison of Perceptions of Inclusion Between University Instructors and Students with Disabilities in Ukraine

Sharon A. Raver-Lampman, Ph.D.OldDominionUniversity

[email protected]

Kateryna Kolchenko, Ph.D.ProrectorofScienceandForeignAffairs

OpenInternationalUniversityofHumanDevelopmentkolchenko@vmurol.com.ua

Abstract

Ukraine is currently involved in a heated debate about inclusion at all levels of education. This debate has become part of the country’s efforts to improve human rights. Prior to independence in 1991, students with disabilities in Ukraine who desired higher education were not permitted to attend universities. How instructors and students with disabilities perceive the process of integration is important for Ukraine’s continued movement toward becoming an egalitarian society. This study examined the differences in attitude regarding inclusion and university life between university instructors and students with special needs attending Open International University of Human Development “UKRAINE,” the only Ukrainian university that welcomes students with disabilities. Results revealed no significant differences in the attitudes of the two groups. However, when individual questions were analyzed, instructors and students differed in their perception of instructors’ willingness to change locations of classes if they were unsuitable for students with physical disabilities, instructors’ willingness to change their teaching style to communicate with students with disabilities, and instructors’ ability to make students with disabilities feel accepted. Nonetheless, both instructors and students rated their experience with integrated university education as satisfactory.

Ukraine, the second largest country inEurope, is located in Eastern Europe, borderingPoland, Romania, Moldova and Russia. Sinceindependence from the former Soviet Union in1991, the Ukrainian government has experiencedresistance to governmental reforms and todaystruggles to improve the legislative frameworkforbusiness, to increase productivity and to managelandprivatization(Benardo,&Silber,2005;BureauofEuropeanandEurasianAffairs,2003).

Special Education in Ukraine

In 2004, 1.8% of all children in Ukraine wereregisteredashavingdisabilities(Zasenko,2004).ThespecialeducationsysteminUkraineisanetworkof

specialschools,manyofthemoperatingasboardingschools for children with specific disabilities (Csanyi,2004).Thesespecialschoolsofferchildren6to12yearsofschooling.Recently,schoolingforchildrenwithsomespecialneedssuchasblindnessandhearingimpairmentshavebeenextendedto13years(Bondar,2004).Familieshavecometorelyonthesespecialschoolsbecausetheyprovidechildrenspecializedsocialandeducationaltraining(Bondar,2004). Historically, children with disabilities whodesired education after secondary school attendedtechnicalandvocationalschoolsandcolleges,someofwhichareboardingschools,orenrolledinspecialtrainingcoursesdesigned for thedisabled (SystemoftheEducationofUkraine,2001).


Inclusion

Attitude Changes Regarding Inclusion.Integration or inclusion, teaching students withspecialneedswithpeersinregulareducationsettingshasgainedsomeattentioninthelastdecadeinUkraine(Bondar,2004;Kolupayeva,2004;Zasenko,2004).Theattentionhasbeenprimarilyleadbymovementsfor civil rights from international organizationssuch as United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (1994) andthe Open Society Institute and Soros FoundationNetwork (2006). Currently, the Ukrainian Step byStepFoundation(2003)ismanagingacountry-wideresearchprojectevaluatingfullandpartialinclusionin17 regionsof the country.Despite thiswork, itisunlikelythatUkraine’sSpecialEducationsystemwill be changed significantly in the next few years. At present, the country lacks governmental andcommunity support for comprehensive integration(Zasenko,2004).

Inclusion in Higher Education. In Ukraine,higher education is viewed as a constituent ofnational education (Korsak, 1998).There are over200 state-owned and non-governmental highereducation establishments under the Ministry ofEducation and Science in Ukraine (System of theEducationofUkraine,2001).Priortoindependence,students with disabilities who desired highereducationwerenotpermittedtoattenduniversities.Theironlyoptionwasvocationaleducation.Since1999, students with disabilities have been able toattend Open International University of HumanDevelopment“UKRAINE.”

Instructors Attitudes Toward Inclusion in Higher Education. Several studies have investigated theattitudes of instructors teaching students withdisabilities in American colleges and universities(Vogel,Leyser,Wyland,&Brulle,1999;Burgstahler,Ducolos, &Torcette, 2000; Scott,Weishaar, Park,&Jewell,2004).Although instructors reportmorepositive attitudes toward inclusion today than inthe early 1970s, instructors still report tensionregarding the fairness of providing additionalsupport for students with disabilities (Burgstahler

et. al., 2000; Leyser, Vogel, Wyland, & Brulle,1998). American universities have earnestlycomplied with the Individuals with DisabilitiesEducationAct (IDEA) (2004) since its passage in1975. These universities have eliminated physicalbarriers to ensure accessibility, made adjustmentsin scheduling and locations, and offered a formalsystemofaccommodationstostudents(Burgstahler,2003;Sahlen&Lehmann,2006;Thompson,2004).

Nonetheless, attitudes that students withdisabilitiesfacefromtheirprofessorsmayalsolimitacademicaccessibilityandopportunity.IntheUnitedStates,Babbit,Burbach,andIntcovich(1979)foundthat university students with disabilities believedthat their instructors viewed them negatively. Tenyears later, the National Science Foundation taskforce(1989)foundthatnegativeattitudeswerestillthe single most significant barrier in universities for individuals with disabilities.The literature hasexamined instructors’attitudesand thefactors thatinfluence more positive impressions of students with disabilities in the United States (Burgstahler,2003; Leyser, 1990). However, no research whichhas examined international university students’perceptions of inclusion, and no research hascompared the attitudes of instructors and studentsinanEasternEuropeancountry.Thus,thepurposeof this study was to compare the perceptions ofinstructors and studentswithdisabilities regardinginclusion and university life in a university inUkraine.

Method

Participants and Setting

Theparticipantsofthisstudywere80studentswith disabilities attending Open InternationalUniversity of Human Development “Ukraine” inKyiv, Ukraine and 39 instructors from the sameuniversity teaching in the colleges of Law andBusiness, Languages and Journalism, SocialTechnologies, and Economics. Respondentsvolunteered forparticipation in thestudyknowingtheir identity would remain confidential. Open


International University of Human Development“Ukraine” is a private, nonprofit university with approximately 25, 000 students, about 19% ofwhom are reported to have visual, hearing, healthand physical disabilities.At this point, this is theonlyuniversity inUkraineadmittingstudentswithdisabilitieswhomeetadmissionrequirements.

Of the thirty-nine instructors who participatedin thestudy,about56%hadaPh.D.orequivalentandabout56%hadbeenteachingattheuniversitylevel formore than10years (seeTable l).Thirty-threepercentweremaleand67%werefemale.The80 student respondents were 45% male and 55%female(SeeTable2).Thelargestdisabilityreportedby students was “health impairments.” Some ofthe conditions considered health impairments inUkraine, such as mild asthma and mild visualimpairment,wouldbecorrectableorwouldnotbeconsideredadisabilityintheUnitedStates.

Procedures

Instructorsandstudentscompleteda19-questionopinion survey. Respondents’ were informed thattheir responses would be anonymous. No timerestrictionsweregiven.Bothinstructorsandstudentswithdisabilitiescompleted thesurvey in thesameroom.Studentswithblindnessorvisualimpairmentshad the survey read to them and their responsesrecorded. Students with hearing impairments hadthesurveysignedtothemwithanUkrainianversionofAmericanSignLanguage(ASL).Studentsunabletowrite their responseson thesurveyformduetophysicaldisabilitiesusedascribe.

Measures. A modified version of the Disability AwarenessInventoryreportedbyScottetal.(2004)and originally adapted from Baggett (1994) wasgiven to participants.The new version was calledThe Student/Instructor Perceptions of UniversityLife and InclusionSurvey (seeFigure1) andwastranslatedintoUkrainian.Instructors’andstudents’surveys asked the same questions, but from thepointofviewofeitheraninstructororastudent.Forexample,Question6onthestudents’surveystatedthefollowing:“Facultyarewillingtomodifyoraltertestingproceduresifitplacesastudentwithadisabilityatadisadvantagesuchasallowingteststobegiven

Table1

Characteristics of Instructor Respondents

CharacteristicsPercentageof

Respondents(n=39)

Male 33.00%

Female 67.00%

LevelofEducation

Ph.D./equivalent 56.52%

Masters 26.09%

Bachelors 17.39%

YearsTeachingatUniversityLevel

Morethan10years 55.82%

Lessthan10years 44.18%

Experience Teaching StudentswithDisabilities

58.00%

Table2

Characteristics of Student Respondents

CharacteristicsPercentageof

Respondents(n=80)

Male 45%

Female 55%

UndergraduateStudent 92%

GraduateStudent 8%

Motor/PhysicalDisabilities 25%

HealthDisabilities 40%

Visual/HearingDisabilities 35%


fromatapeorwithenlargedprint(seeFigure1).”Thesamequestionontheinstructors’surveystated:“The form of an exam should be modified or alteredifthetestingprocedureputsastudentwithadisabilityatadisadvantage.”Respondentsindicatedtheir opinionby circling responses from“stronglydisagree”to“stronglyagree.”

Inaddition,instructorscompleteddemographicquestions such as the number of years teachingin higher education and whether they had taughtstudentswithdisabilitiesduringtheircareer.Students’demographicquestionsaskedthemtoidentifytheiryearof studyanddisability category.Bothgroupsanswered five open-ended questions designed to gatherqualitativeinformation.Instructors’questionsaskedabouttheirexperienceteachingstudentswithdisabilities. Students’ questions asked about theirimpressions of attending an integrated universityandtheirinteractionwithinstructorsandpeers.

1StronglyDisagree2Disagree3Noopinion4Agree5StronglyAgree

1.FacultymakemefeelcomfortablewhenIdiscussaccommodationsand/ormydisability.

1 2 3 4 5

2.Facultyasksquestionswhichcommunicatetomethattheycareaboutmeandmyperformanceintheirclass.

1 2 3 4 5

3.Facultyareaswillingtoanswermyquestionsinclassastheyareanyotherstudent’squestions.

1 2 3 4 5

4.Facultyarewillingtoallowadditionaltimeforexamswhenitisrequested.

1 2 3 4 5

5.Facultyarewillingtochangethelocationofaclasstoaccommodateastudentwithaphysicaldisability.

1 2 3 4 5

6.Facultyarewillingtomodifyoraltertestingproceduresifitplacesastudentwithadisabilityatadisadvantagesuchasallowingteststobegivenfromatapeorenlarged.

1 2 3 4 5

7.Facultyarewillingtoallowspecialaids(e.g.,taperecorder,assistivedevicessuchasabrailler)andservices(e.g.,signlanguageinterpreter)forstudentswithadisabilityintheirclasses.

1 2 3 4 5

8.Facultyarewillingtomodifytheirteachingstyletoensurecommunicationwithstudentswithdisabilities.

1 2 3 4 5

9.Facultymakestudentswithdisabilitiesfeelaccepted.

1 2 3 4 5

10. Universityanddepartmentaladmissionsrequirementsshouldbemodified for students with disabilities.

1 2 3 4 5

11. Studentswithdisabilitiesshouldexperiencethesameprivileges/experiencesinuniversitylifeasstudentswithoutdisabilities.

1 2 3 4 5

12. Studentswithdisabilitiesshouldbesuccessfulinmydiscipline/major/field.

1 2 3 4 5

13. Practitionersandemployersinmydiscipline/major/field recruit and hire personswithdisabilities.

1 2 3 4 5

Figure 1. Students’ Perceptions of University Life and Inclusion Survey.

Research Design

AFisher’sExactTestwasusedtodetermineifa statistically significant difference existed between thetwogroups(instructorsandstudents).Analysisof demographic information was reported inpercentages.Responses to“open-ended”questionsweretabulated.


Results

No significant difference in the overall perceptionsofuniversitylifeandinclusionbetweeninstructors and students with disabilities in thisuniversity were found (p = 0.5729). However,whensurveyquestionswereanalyzedindividually,three questions revealed significant differences in

perceptions (see Table 3). The first question dealt withinstructors’willingnesstochangelocationsforstudentswithphysicaldisabilities(p=0.0001).Thesecondquestiondealtwith instructors’willingnesstochangetheirteachingstyletocommunicatewithstudents (p = 0.0029). The third question asked

Table3

Survey Questions with Significant Differences Between Instructor and Student Perceptions

Percentage%

Perceptions* Faculty Student

StronglyDisagree 0.00 6.25

Disagree 4.55 30.00

NoOpinion 11.36 27.50

Agree 63.64 21.25

StronglyAgree 20.45 15.00

*Question: Faculty are willing to change the locations of a class to accommodate a student with a physical disability (p = 0.0001).

Percentage%

Perceptions** Faculty Student


Disagree 2.27 18.75


Agree 52.27 36.25


**Question: Faculty are willing to change their teaching style to ensure communication with students with disabilities (p = 0.0029).

Percentage%

Perceptions*** Faculty Student


Disagree 0.00 10.26


Agree 43.18 43.59


***Question: Faculty make students with disabilities feel accepted (p = 0.0014).

CollegeofEconomics:“Iwouldlikeadditionalhelpwiththeintegratingprocess.”

“Iwouldliketohavespecialcoursesforstudentswithdisabilities.”

“I would like to have additional classes forstudentswithdisabilitiestopreparethembetterforregularuniversityclasses.”

CollegeofLaw:“I would like to continue teaching students inintegratedgroups.”

“Iwanttocreatespecialgroupsforstudentswithdisabilities.”

“I want more speakers/lecturers with goodexperience of working with people withdisabilities.”

“They need special extra classes for studentswithdisabilitiestohelpthemmeetthedemandsoftheacademicprogram.”

“I need special printed materials for studentswithdisabilities.”

“Iwouldlikethebeststudentswithdisabilitiestohelpusintheeducationalprocessbygivinglecturesandsoon.”

“We need a special library for students withdisabilities.”

Figure 2. Instructor Comments to Open-Ended Question: “What would you like to share about your perceptions regarding university students with disabilities and their inclusion into society?”


whether instructorsmadestudentswithdisabilitiesfeelaccepted(p=0.0014).

Amajorityofstudentsreportedthatinstructorsmade them feel comfortable discussing theirdisability(73%).Forty-sixpercentoftheinstructorsindicatedthattheydidnotbelieveitwasnecessaryfor them tomake students feel accepted.StudentsfromtheCollegeofEconomicsreportedthehighestpercentagethat“stronglyagreed”withthisstatement(93%).

Overhalfofthestudentsreportedthey“stronglyagreed”thattheywouldbesuccessfulintheirchosenfield (56%), while 25% of the instructors reported feeling this way. Similarly, 42% of the students

reportedthatthey“stronglyagreed”thatemployerswould hire them in their field. Eighteen percent of theinstructorsreportedfeelingthatway.

Instructors’ and students’ responses to open-endedquestions,organizedbycollege,arepresentedinTables5and6. Instructors from theCollegeofSocialTechnologiesandtheCollegeofLanguagesand Journalism did not complete any open-endedquestions. Only thirty-six percent of all instructorand student respondents answered the open-endedquestions.Figure2 lists faculty impressionsaboutstudentswithdisabilitiesandthestudents’inclusioninto Ukrainian society. Comments suggested thatinstructorswereambivalentaboutintegratedclassesforstudentswithdisabilitiesanddesiredadditionalsupport. Figure 3 lists students’ comments abouttheir future integration into Ukrainian society.Students’commentsalsotendedtofocusonadesireforadditionalresources.

CollegeofEconomics: “I would like all people with disabilities to beable to have good conditions for studying at theuniversity.”“Iwouldliketomakestudyingattheuniversityforstudentswithdisabilitiesaseasyaspossible.”

CollegeofLawandBusiness:“I would like to see the number of qualified sign-languageinterpretersincreased.”

CollegeofLanguagesandJournalism:“Studentswithdisabilitiesneedmorescholarshipssotheycangotouniversity.”“There is a need to increase the number of sign-languageinterpreters.”“Students with disabilities would profit from exchange programs to other universities in othercountries.”“Apersonwithadisabilityisnotapersonwhoishelplessandcannothelphimorherself.”

CollegeofSocialTechnologies:“Iwanttohelppeopleandletthemknowwhatcanbedone.”“I believe I will find a job and feed my family.”“Iamjust likeeveryonebut Ihavepoorvision. Iwanttomakeadifference.”

Figure 3. Student Comments to Open-Ended Question: “What would you like to share about your future inclusion into society?”

Table4

Instructors’ Responses to Demographic/Opinion Questions based on College in the Open International University of Human Development “UKRAINE”

Question

Haveyoutaughtastudentwitha

disabilitybefore?

Howwouldyourateyourexperience

teachingstudentswithdisabilities?

CollegeofEconomics 56%100%“verysatisfactory”

CollegeofLawandBusiness

30%14%“very

satisfactory”

66%“satisfactory”

20%noresponse

CollegeofLanguagesandJournalism

Noresponses Noresponses

CollegeofSocialTechnologies

Noresponses Noresponses


Instructors from the College of Economicsidentified themselves as teaching courses in Business, Economics, Engineering, and Mathematics. Overone-half of the instructors from this college whoanswereddemographicquestionsreportedtheyhadpreviously taught students with disabilities (seeTable4).Alloftheseinstructorsratedtheirinclusionexperienceas“verysatisfactory.”Instructorsfromthe College of Law indicated they taught classesin Law Education, International Business, andInternationalLaw.Approximatelyone-thirdoftheserespondentsreportedtheyhadtaughtstudentswithdisabilities before. Sixty-six percent rated theirexperience as “satisfactory” (see Table 7). Bothinstructors (88%) and students (85%) rated theirexperience with integrated university education assatisfactory.

Discussion

In 1995, Ukraine ratified the European Convention forHumanRightsgrantingsocialprotectiontothosewith disabilities. The law provided some financial support,reducedratesonpublictransportation,andencouragedemployment.However,thelawdidnotextend to equality in education, including highereducation.Although this law is comprehensive byinternationalstandards,itisunevenlyenforcedandpenaltiesfornotcomplyingwiththelawarerarelyissued. For example, according to Ukrainian law,all businesses must fill 4% of their workforce with individuals with disabilities. However, in practice,manyemployerseithercompletelyignorethelaworonly hire individuals with mild health disabilities,suchasasthma(Vilkos,2005).

Asanation,Ukraineappearstohavearealdesireto change its cultural views and practices towardindividuals with disabilities. It has partnered withseveralinternationalnongovernmentalorganizationstoadvocateforandprotectchildrenwithdisabilities(Open Society Institute and Soros FoundationsNetwork,2006).Itparticipatedinthe2003EuropeanYearofPeoplewithDisabilitiesthatwasdedicatedto promoting the positive contributions of personswith disabilities and in reducing discrimination

(Division of International Special Education andServices, 2004). However, no unified commitment from the central government regarding inclusiveeducation or comprehensive societal integrationhasbeenissued.Asillustratedbytheresultsofthisstudy, social change seems to be occurring belowthelevelofthecentralgovernmentalasindividuals,individualbusinesses,schoolsanduniversitiestakethetaskofintegrationanddisabilityrightsforwardwiththeirownindividualinitiatives.

Forthestudentswithdisabilitieswhoparticipatedin this study, attendance at Open InternationalUniversity of Human Development “UKRAINE”was their first encounter with peers without disabilities. For students without disabilities, thisuniversity provided them their first interaction with peerswithdisabilities.Integrationoccursinclasses,and in formal and informal social activities. Thesame is true for instructors. The first time most of theinstructorsinthisstudyinteractedwithstudentswith disabilities was when a student entered theirclass. Considering this, it is impressive that theresults revealed that both instructors and studentswith disabilities were satisfied with their experience inanintegrateduniversity.

Many of the instructors and students appearedsurprised by a survey that was interested in theiropinions, and asked many questions about howthe information would be used before they werewillingtocompletethesurvey.Approximately30%of the surveys from both instructors and studentshad omitted responses. This, and the low rate ofinstructorandstudentresponsestotheopen-endedquestions, may be attributable to a holdover fromSovietrule.Thereseemedtobeapervasiveconcernabout reprisals and a strong need for reassurancethat individual identities would not be revealed.Thisobservationshouldbeconsideredwhenfutureresearchisdevelopedwhichisopinion-driven.

Despite the fact that Open InternationalUniversityofHumanDevelopment“UKRAINE”hasbeeneducatingstudentswithdisabilitiessince1999,accommodations have been provided informally,on a case-by-case basis. American universitieshave offered accommodations to students with


disabilitiesforover35years.However,theconceptof “reasonable accommodations” (Author, 2004)inprimary, secondaryorhigher education settingsis new to most Ukrainian educators.A reasonableaccommodation makes it possible for a studentwithadisabilitytoparticipatefullyinaneducationprogram, and makes it possible for the instructorto fairly evaluate the student’s understanding ofmaterial without interference from the student’sdisability (Association on Higher Education andDisability, 2004). In essence, survey questionsasked students how well instructors providedaccommodationsandinstructors’questionsaskedifthey believed that certain accommodations shouldbeoffered.Thesupportsandadaptationsinstructorsprovidedwereinformalandinconsistentifoneusedthe American definition of the term. Understanding theinformalwayofintegratinguniversitystudentsinUkraine,itisimpressivethatnodifferenceswerefound in theperceptionsorattitudesof instructorsandthestudentstheytaught.

The few differences that were noted in surveyresponseswhenindividualquestionswereanalyzedmay be explained by the case-by-case manner inwhich accommodations were provided as wellas limitations of the university studied. Althoughinstructorsreportedtheywerewillingtochangetheircommunicationstylestoensurecommunicationwithstudentswithdisabilities,studentsatthisuniversitydidnotagreewithinstructors’perceptions.Similarly,although instructors reported that they werewilling tochange the locationofaclass if itwereunsuitable for a student with a physical disability,themajorityof students reported that theydidnotseethisinpractice.Inreality,noneofthemultiplecampuses of Open International University ofHumanDevelopment“UKRAINE”wereaccessiblewhichmirrorsUkrainiansociety.Thatis,sidewalks,businesses,andpublictransportationcontinuetobeinaccessible.ThisisasituationthatwillneedtobeaddressedifUkrainecontinuestoexpressaninterestinincludingitscitizenswithdisabilities.

Ingeneral,thestudentsinthisstudyweremoreoptimistic about being successful in their chosenfield than were instructors. This could be because

instructorshadmorematurityandappreciationforthe depths of discrimination students may haveto face when they graduated. In general, publicattitudestowarddifferencesinUkrainearenegativeandisolating(Vilkos,2005).Instructorsandstudentsfrom the College of Languages and Journalismwere the most optimistic about employment aftergraduation. This could be because many of thestudents were enrolled in the English LanguageTranslationdegreeprogram.Since translationmaybe handled outside formal business settings, itmay be that students and instructors believed thatstudentswouldnotbesubjectedtothesamelevelsof discrimination that students enrolled in other,morevisiblecareerswouldhavetoencounter.

Students in theCollegeofEconomicsreportedthat instructors made them feel more comfortablediscussing their disability than instructors inthe College of Law. This might be attributed tothe fact that all the instructors in the College ofEconomics reported having “very successful”teachingexperienceswithstudentswithdisabilities,whileinstructorsintheothercollegemayhavehadfewercontactswithstudentsormayhavehadlessrewarding experiences. To advance inclusion inhighereducationsettings,trainingmustbeprovidedfor instructors so they are better able to meet theindividual needs of students.After this study wasconcluded, formal training in inclusive practiceswas offered to instructors and students whovolunteered. Instructors participated in seminarsthat defined accommodations, discussed appropriate accommodations for students with differentdisabilities, confidentiality and procedures for improving learning in integratedgroups. Studentsreceivedtrainingintheaccommodationsinstructorswould be able to provide, learned procedures forrequesting accommodations, and discussed self-advocacy(Raver,inpress).Itisclearfromtheresultsof this study that administrators, instructors, andstudentsattheUkrainianuniversitywerecommittedtomovingUkrainetowarditsgoalofanegalitariansociety,onesmallstepatatime.


Limitations of the Study

Itisnotpossibletogeneralizetheresultsofthisstudyduetothesamplesize,thefactthatinstructorand student respondents were volunteers, and thatonly one university was studied. More researchprobing public opinion about integration andinstructor-studentrelationshipsisneededinUkraineandinternationally.

Conclusions

NodifferenceswerefoundintheperceptionsofinclusionanduniversitylifebetweeninstructorsandstudentswithdisabilitiesintheUkrainianuniversitystudied.However,instructorsandstudentsdifferedin their perception of instructors’ willingness tochangelocationsofclassesiftheywereunsuitablefor students, instructors’ willingness to changetheir teaching style to communicate with studentswith disabilities, and instructors’ ability to makestudentswithdisabilitiesfeelaccepted.Open-endedresponses revealed that instructors and students intheCollegeofLanguagesandJournalismwerethemost optimistic about being employed in their field followinggraduation.Bothinstructorsandstudentswith disabilities described their experience withintegrateduniversityeducationassatisfactory.

References

Association on Higher Education andDisability (AHEAD). (2004). AHEAD publications. Retrieved July 1, 2006, fromhttp://www.netwalk.com.

Author.(2004).An instructor’s guide to reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities.Virginia Commonwealth University, Office of EEO/AAServices.RetrievedJuly1,2006fromhttp://www.students.vcu.edu.

Babbit, C., Burbach, H., & Intcovich, M. (1979).Physically handicapped college students andtheir professors: A comparison. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 8,125-140.

Baggett, D. (1994). A study of instructor’s awareness of students with disabilities. PaperpresentedattheannualconferenceoftheNationalAssociation for Developmental Education,KansasCity,MO.

Benardo,L.,&Silber,L. (2005).Ukraine’sdreamisnotdead—yet.The Globe and Mail, October 6,4.

Bondar, V. (2004). Special education for disabledpeopleinUkraine:Innovationandexperiments.InAuthor,Modern Trends of Special Education Development: Canada-Ukraine Experience(pp.99-106), Kyiv, Ukraine: University UkrainaPress.

Burgstahler,S.,Duclos,R.,&Turcotte,M.(2000).

Preliminary findings: Instructors, teaching assistants, and student perceptions regarding accommodating students with disabilities in postsecondary environments. Seattle, WA:Disabilities,Opportunities,Internetworking,andTechnologyattheUniversityofWashington.

Burgstahler, S. (2003). DO-IT: Helping studentswithdisabilitiestransitiontocollegeandcareers.National Center on Secondary Education andTransition,Improving Secondary Education and Transition Services through Research: Research to Practice Brief. September, 2 (3). RetrievedJuly3,2006,fromhttp://www.ncset.org.

Bureau of European and EurasianAffairs. (2003).Ukraine.RetrievedJanuary5,2005,from

http://state.gov.


Csanyi, Y. (2004). Experience of transforming education provision for children with disabilities in central European countries.ELTEUniversity,Budapest European Committee, Ministry ofChildren and Youth and Sports, Ministry ofEducationReport.

Division of International Special Education andServices Association. (2004). European yearof people with disabilities—2003. Council for Exceptional Children. Retreived July 4, 2004,fromhttp://www.cec.sped.org.

Individuals with Disabilities EducationImprovementAct.(2004).U.S.DepartmentofEducation, Public Law 108-446. Washington,DC.

Kolupayeva,A.(2004).TrendsintheintegrationofspecialeducationinUkraine.InAuthor,Modern Trends of Special Education Development: Canada-Ukraine Experience (pp. 142-146).Kyiv,Ukraine:UniversityUkrainaPress.

Korsak, K. (1998). Evolution of continuouseducationinUkraine(1990-1998).International Personnel Academy, National University/Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. RetrievedJuly5,2006,fromhttp://eucen.org/conferences/past/Warsaw1998/ukraina.

Leyser,Y.(1990).Asurveyofinstructors’attitudesand accommodations for students withdisabilities.Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 7,97-107.

Leyser, Y., Vogel, S., Wyland, S., & Brulle, A.(1998). Instructors attitudes and practicesregardingstudentswithdisabilities:TwodecadesafterimplementationofSection504.Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 13(5),5-19.

National Science Foundation Task Force Report(1989). Changing America: The new face of science and engineering. Washington, DC:NationalScienceFoundation.

Open Society Institute and Soros FoundationsNetwork (2006). Educational policy toward inclusion: International experience and Ukrainian perspectives.RetrievedJuly2,2006,fromhttp://soros.org.

Raver, S.A. (in press). Comparison of attitudesregarding university inclusion among studentswith disabilities in the United States andUkraine.Journal of International Special Needs Education.

Sahlen, C.A. & Lehmann, J. (2006). RequestingaccommodationsinhigherEducation.Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(3),28-34.

Scott,V.,Weishaar,M.,Park,J.,&Jewell,J.(2004).Acomparisonofinstructorsattitudesofcollegestudents with disabilities from South Korea,Ukraine and the United States. Journal of International Special Needs Education, 7, 43-49.

System of the Education of Ukraine (2001).Ministry of Education and Science ofUkraine. Retrieved August 15, 2006 fromhttp://www.education.gov.ua.

Thompson, S.J. (2004). Choosing and usingaccommodationsandassessments.CEC Today, 10(6),12-18.

Ukrainian Step by Step Foundation(2003). International Step by StepAssociation. Retrieved July l, 2006, fromhttp://issa.nl/network/ukraine.


United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization(UNESCO).(1994).The salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education.Paris,FR:UNESCO.

Vilkos,Y.(2005).Disabledfacingoutdatedattitudes.Kyiv Post, 12(22),3.

Vogel, S., Leyser, Y., Wyland, S., & Brulle, A.(1999). Students with learning disabilities inhigher education: Instructors attitudes andpractices. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 14(3),173-186.

Zasenko,V. (2004).Special education inUkraine:Current conditions and the search for newperspectives. In Author, Modern Trends of Special Education Development: Canada-Ukraine Experience (pp. 121-126). Kyiv,Ukraine:UniversityUkrainaPress.

About the Authors

SharonRaver-Lampman,Ph.D.isaprofessorofSpecial Education at Old Dominion University inNorfolk,Virginia.ShetaughtasaFulbrightScholarat the Open International University of HumanDevelopment “Ukraine” January-July, 2005. Dr.KaterynaKolchenkoistheProrectorofScienceandForeign Affairs at Open International Universityof Human Development “UKRAINE” in Kyiv,Ukraine.SpecialappreciationtoDr.PetroTalachuk,PresidentoftheOpenInternationalUniversity,Dr.KaterynaKolchenko,andAnnaMazarskafortheirassistancewithtranslationanddatacollectionforthisstudyandtheirunendingwillingnesstoadvocateforindividualswithspecialneeds.AppreciationisalsoextendedtoDr.YihaoDengforassistancewithdataanalysis.

Partial support for this work was funded byan Old Dominion University Faculty SummerResearch Fellowship Grant Project #993008.Dr. Raver-Lampman can be contacted [email protected]@vmurol.com.ua


Evaluation of a Pilot Project on Inclusive Education in India

Anupriya Chadha, Ph. D.SeniorConsultant

InclusiveEducationfortheProgrammeonEducationForAll(SarvaShikshaAbhiyan)[email protected]

Abstract

This evaluation study, conducted in 2005, examined the impact of the pilot Programme of Inclusive Education of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment in two States of India: Karnataka and Uttar-Pradesh (U.P.). The dual objective of this evaluation was to assess the usefulness of the programme for children with disabilities and the community at large as well as to establish a fundamental basis for developing guidelines for future programmes on inclusive education. Data was mainly collected through a questionnaire and by carrying out focus group discussions with various target groups. The data documented disability-wise enrollment, provision of assistive devices, learning achievement of Children With Disabilities (CWD), impact of teacher-training, peer acceptance, barrier-free access, development of teaching-learning material and resource support for Children With Disabilities. Findings (CWDs) of the study have been discussed.

Introduction

In India, the concept of inclusive educationemerged in 1960s (before the 1960s, the CWDswereeducatedonlyinspecialschools)withafewexperimentsbyInternationalAgencieswhoplacedchildrenwithvisualimpairmentsinregularschools.The first initiative of the Government came in the form of the Integrated Education of DisabledChildren (IEDC) Scheme in 1974. Since 1987India has implemented various programmes totarget Children With Disabilities (CWDs). Theseprogrammes broadly fall into two categories: first solelyaiminginclusionlike theProjectIntegratedEducationfortheDisabled(PIED)andtheUnitedNationsDevelopmentProgramme(UNDP)AssistedProjectonInclusiveEducation.ThesecondcategoryincludesprogrammessolelyaimingUniversalizationofElementaryEducationand InclusiveEducationincluded as an important component towardsfulfillment of this objective. The District Primary EducationProgramme,JanshalaandEducationForAllCampaign(SarvaShikshaAbhiyan)wouldfallinthiscategory.

Fivemajorprogrammes/experimentshavebeenlaunchedinIndiaoninclusionsince1987.However,no studies have been conducted on inclusiveeducation. These studies would provide detailedinformationabouttheimplementationofinclusion,includingtheissuesandproblemsrelatedtoit.Thus,intheyear2004,theGovernmentofIndiadecidedtoevaluatethepilotproject“SupporttoChildrenwithDisabilities”.Thisproject,launchedin2000,wasacollaborativeeffortoftheGovernmentofIndiaandUNDP toachievemainstreamingofchildrenwithdisabilities.

Background

Toachievethetargetofmainstreamingofchildrenwithdisabilitiesinregularschools,GovernmentofIndiaincollaborationwithUNDPinitiatedaprojectentitled “Support to Children with Disabilities”.Thispilotprojectadoptedaholisticapproachandstressed on local/community initiatives. Its broadobjectives included: (a) to sensitize,mobilize andbuildthecapacityofcommunitiesinsub-programmesitestorespondeffectivelytotheneedsofchildrenwithdisabilities,(b)toincreasethesensitivityand


buildthecapacityoftheprimaryeducationstructure/system to respond effectively to the educationalneedsofchildrenwithdisabilities, (c) toestablishan effective convergence of existing developmentprogrammesforeffectiveinclusionofchildrenwithdisabilities in general primary schools, and (d) toimprovetheinfrastructureoftheschoolandmakethemaccessibletothedisabledchildrenandtherebyimproveenrollmentandretentionlevels.

TheprojectwasimplementedinthetwoStates(U.P. and Karnataka) of India. The project didundertake a number of significant initiatives to reach outtoCWD,whichincludedcommunityawarenessprogammes, identification and enrollment of CWD,providingspecialeducationteachersupport,assistive devices to CWD, teacher training andhome-basededucationtochildrenwithsevereandprofound disabilities. However, an evaluation ofthese interventionshad tobeundertaken toassessthatuptowhatextenttheycouldbemainstreamedinthesystem.

Objectives of the evaluation study

The study was undertaken with the followingobjectives:

1. Analytical study of attendance rates ofCWDsenrolledinregularschools.

2. AssessmentoftrainingofKAP(Knowledge,Aptitude, Practice) of trained teachers,school principals, and pre-school teacherswith a special focus on the teachingmethodology adopted by the teachers forincludingCWD.

3. Impact assessment of the home-based education and itinerant teachersprogramme.

4. StudyofsuitabilityandacceptabilityofaidsandappliancesprovidedtoCWDs.

5. Identification of gaps in the programme.

Procedure

The first step was the development of a comprehensivetool.Acomprehensivequestionnaire

was designed consisting of Questions, InterviewSchedulesandFormatforCaseStudies.Aftertooldevelopment,20volunteers(tenvolunteerseachfromthetwoStateswereselected.OnlythoseindividualswhohadexposuretotheareaofeducationofCWDwere selected as volunteers. Through training onthetooldeveloped,eachvolunteerwasassignedacertain number of schools, homes and pre-schoolcentres,whichhe/shehadtovisittocollectthedatabasedonthetool.Eachvolunteerwasalsosupposedtoconductfocusgroupdiscussionswiththeitinerantteachers, general teachers having CWDs in theirclassrooms,head-mastersofalltheschoolsvisited,five parents, two community leaders, two peers fromeachschool,twoCWDsfromeachschoolandonepre-schoolworker.

Sampling

Purposive random sampling was used in thestudy. The schools were selected on the criteriawhere:(a)atleastthree-fourCWDwereenrolledintheschoolsand(b)theprogrammewasimplementedfortwoyears.Afterthecriteriawereestablished,thevolunteersselected theschoolsmeeting theabovecriteriainarandommanner.

Sample Size

The sample comprised 284 schools and 20homes of CWDs. The total number of CWD inthese schools was 1170. In addition, focus groupdiscussionswerealsoheldwith the following:35resource teachers,419regular teachers,284head-masters, 100 parents, 20 community leaders, 20pre-schoolworkers,568peers,and568CWDs.

Design of the Study

An exploratory and investigative design wasadopted for the study. The qualitative aspects ofinclusionlikepeeracceptance,learningachievement,use of teaching-learning material (TLM), teacher-child relationship, mode of teaching, classroomorganization, use of remedial teaching etc. were


explored.Oneoftheunstatedobjectivesofthestudyto find out what had worked well and what had not andtotakethediscussionforwardforfurtherstudy.The questions in the questionnaire and interviewschedulesweredesignedinawaytosolicitin-depthinformationregardingthequalityofprogrammeinall itsvariedaspects.Visits toschools,pre-schoolcentresandhomesofCWDswerealsoundertakeninboththeStates.

Major Findings of the Study

1. In both the States the enrollment of boyswith disabilities was more than the girlswithdisabilities.

2. Theenrollmentofchildrenwithorthopaedicimpairment was more as compared to anyothercategoryofCWDs.

3. InboththeStates,CWDsshowedsatisfactoryattendance,therebydispellingthebeliefthatCWDsusuallydropout.

4. Children with orthopaedic impairmentshowedmaximumachievementinlearningascomparedtoothergroupsofCWDs.

5. InboththeStatesmorethan80%ofschoolstakenupforthestudyhadTLM,butitwasnotbeingusedbytheteachers.

6. Asfarasclassroomorganization,mostofthechildrenwereseated in rows,ascomparedto those sitting in circles or small groups.Similarly,inboththestatesmorethan50%schools used the traditional lecture basedteaching method as compared to activitybasedteachingcomprisinggames.

7. CWDs showed better performance inlearning when they were seated in circlesorsmallgroupsascomparedtowhentheywereseatedinrows.

8. MostoftheteacherswantedhelpofaspecialeducationteacherwhendealingwithCWDsintheirclassrooms.

9. A fewer number of schools had handicapfriendlyaccessinboththestates.

Discussion

Attendance Rate

The first finding is the attendance rate of CWD was satisfactory. On an average, 32.8% had anattendanceratebetween91-100%,46.1%disabledchildren had an attendance rate between 70-90%and21.10%CWDhadattendanceratebetween60-75%.

Enrollment by Gender

This study revealed that more boys (61.08%)thangirls (38.92%)attended regular school. Thisis consistent with the national picture. Lowerenrollment of girls in school is usually attributedto factors such as domestic chores, lack of socialsecurity,distancefromhometoschool,siblingcare,lackofgirls’toiletsintheschoolsandagenerallowprioritygiventotheeducationofgirls,especiallyiftheyhavesomedisability.

Enrollment by Disability

Childrenwithanorthopaedicdisabilityhadthehighest enrollment (40.1%) followed by childrenwithmentalretardationchildren(22.5%).Childrenwith a hearing disability came next at 19% andchildren with a visual impairment were the leastenrolled at 13.95%.Generally speaking either thechildrenwithorthopaedicimpairmentorwithmildmentalretardationconstitutethelargestpercentageofchildrenattendingregularschools. Onereasonfor this may be that most of the children withorthopaedicimpairmentchildrenrequirenospecialeducational support. On the other hand childrenwith mental retardation, though requiring specialeducationalsupportintheformofitinerantteacherand specialTLM, do not require special assistivedevices.Asfaraschildrenwithhearingandvisualimpairmentareconcerned,thereisageneralmythinthecommunityatlargethattotallyblindchildrencannotgotoregularschools.


Achievement by Disability Category

Asfaraseducationalachievementwasconcerned,it was the highest in children with orthopaedicimpairment (60.75%), followed by children withhearing impairment (19.35%), then children withvisual impairment (16.10%) and finally children withmentalretardation(3.35%)inthatorder.Thiswasbecausebothchildrenwithvisualdisabilityandhearingimpairmentrequirefairlyintensivesupportservices,atleast,attheprimarylevel.

Classroom curriculum

Eighty-five point five percent of schools selected forthestudyhadTLM(88.2%inU.P.and82.7%inKarnataka),but itwasnot inuseexceptwhentheteacherswereaskedtodemonstrateitsuse.PossiblereasonforlackofuseofTLMbyteacherswaslackof adequate training in its development and use.Probably,morerigoroustrainingisrequiredfortheteacherstoenablethemtounderstandthevalueofusingTLMtoenhanceconceptcomprehension.

Classroom organization

In both the States, seating arrangement in themajorityoftheclasseswasinrows(57%),followedby small group seating (25.75%). The leastcommon seating arrangement was students sittingincircles(15.2%).Theseatingarrangementhasanimportantbearingon the learningof the children.Generallyit isseenthatchild-to-childlearningispromotedmorewhenchildrenare seated in smallgroupsandcircles.Thestudyalsoattemptedtoseethe relationship between classroom organizationand students’ achievement. It was observed thatthe performance of the CWD was best when theclassroomwasorganizedincirclesorsmallgroups.Studentperformancewaslessenedwhentheseatingarrangementwasinrows.

Mode of teaching

A finding of this study was that across all the classroomorganizations,lecturebasedmethodsof

teachingtrendcontinuedtoremainthemainteachingstyle.Perhaps,teacherswouldneedtobetrainedonhowactivities/groupworkcanbeinterspersedwiththemainclassroomtransaction.Thestudyshowedthat57%teachersusedthetraditionallecturebasedteaching, only 8.1% used games while teachingvarious concepts, 27.5% made use of activitiesandonly7.35%usedbothgamesandactivities toenhanceconceptmasteryofCWD.Themajorityof the teachers continued to use the traditionalapproachoflecturebasedteaching,inspiteoftheincreased emphasis being given to activity/ need-based, child – centric teaching, which is so vitalforinclusion.Therefore,morestressshouldbelaidduring the training process on activity-based andhowactivitiescanbeusedindifferentways.

Classroom organization and mode of teaching

Another finding of this study was that across all theclassroomorganizations,lecturebasedmethodsof teaching trend continued to remain the mainteaching style. When the classroom organizationwasincircles,62.4%teacherstaughtinthelecturemode, 27.1% adopted the play-way mode andonly 10.5% used activities while teaching. Whenthe children were sitting in rows, 61.6% teachersusedlectures,25.6madeuseofgamesand11.7%didactivity-basedteaching.Whileinsmallgroups,47.2%usedlectures,16.8%didplay-wayactivitiesand35.9%interspersedactivitieswith thecontentbeing taught. Perhaps, teachers would need tobe trained on how activities/group work can beinterspersedwiththemainclassroomtransaction.

Need for extra support

Eighty-five point four percent teachers in this study reported that they needed more support forteachingCWD.ThisisbecausetheteachersstatedthattheyhavenotbeentrainedwellenoughtoprovideindividualizedneedbasedattentiontoCWD,anotherimportant factor related togoodquality inclusion.This implies that theentire teacher trainingon IEwouldneedare-looktoaccommodatethosefacetsand concerns emerging from actual needs of the


childaswellastheteachers,ratherthanimposingadisabilityfocusedprogrammeonto the teacherswithoutgivingdueconsiderationtothesituationinwhichtheywork.

Type of support

Although 82% teachers covered in this studymentioned that they had received training onIE, 91.85% teachers wanted help from a specialeducationteacherorwantedmoretrainingonIE.Arelativelylessnumberofteachers(8.15%)wantedmoreTLM tobedeveloped forCWD. Whateverthe kind of support required by the teacher, theimportantfactthatemergedwasthatforinclusiontobesuccessful,need-basedsupporthadtobeprovidedtoCWD.Assistanceofaspecialeducationteachermaybevitalinmanycases.Therefore,somecarefulthought has to be given to evolving a pertinentmechanismtoprovideappropriatesupportservicesincludingmoreinteractionbetweengeneralteacherand special education teacher and more remedialteaching services by the itinerant teacher to thoseCWDwhoneedit.

Use of Assistive Devices

MostoftheCWDasshowninthisstudywerenotusingspecialaidsandappliances.Outofthetotalnumberofchildrenwithvisualimpairmentenrolled,only18.9%ofthemwereusingvisualaids,30.15%of the enrolled children with hearing impairmentwereusinghearingaidsand24.8%oftheenrolledchildren with orthopaedic impairment were usingassistivedevices.Thestudydidnotattempttolookat reasons for this.However, someof the reasonsbehind this trendareparents /childnot trainedontheuseofaidsandappliances,breaking/wear/tearofaidsandappliances,childnotusedtousingthedevice/equipmentprovidedandpoorqualityoftheequipment provided. Future studies should lookintotheexactreasonssothatappropriatemeasurescouldbetakenupatthenationallevel.

IE friendly support

Accessibility of schools remained an issue inboththeStates.Outofthe284schoolstakenupforthestudy,only29.71%schoolshadramps,25.25%schools had toilet modifications, 9.75% schools had resource centers/ rooms. 89.36% schools hadadequate lighting.Theoverallsituationwas thatarelativelysmallnumberofschoolswerehandicap-accessible.Thisisanareaofconcernmainlyduetoincompleteunderstandingof thetermbarrier-freeaccess(BFA)andlackofinnovativeideas.BFAismainly limited to providing ramps and handrails,mainly catering to the needs of children withorthopaedicimpairment.ThescopeofthetermBFAhasnotyetexpandedtoincludechildrenwithvisualand hearing impairments. Intensive preparation isrequired to make the schools more congenial forthese children, both in terms of their access andretention.Similarly,notmanyschoolshadresourcerooms. This is another significant finding because CWD might not benefit as much when taught by a specialeducationteacherintheregularclassroom.Hence,somestrategyshouldbedevisedtoenablethespecialeducationteachertoteachCWDseparately,wherenecessary.

Feelings of Peers towards CWD

The majority of children without disabilitiesinterviewed had warm, interpersonal relationshipwithCWD.Thisissupplementedwiththefactthat97.1% of peers interviewed said that they madefriendswithCWD.ThepeersalsovisitedhomesofCWDandtooksupportfromthem.

Feelings of CWD

Ninety-eightpercentof theCWDin the studylikedattendingschools.Oneofthemainreasonsforthiscouldbebecausealltheschoolshadachievedahighlevelofsocialinclusionbetweendisabledandnon-disabledchildren.28.2%CWDdidexperiencedifficulty in understanding in what was taught in the class. This calls for orienting the teacher to


moreinnovativewaysofteaching,basedonchild-centeredpedagogy.71.85%CWDwerefrankandopenwiththeirteacher.Thisisagoodbeginninginthewaythechildrenarerelatingtoteachers.33.1%CWDreportedthattheyfacedproblemsincomingtoschooland21%wantedmoreassistanceinschoolelatedactivities.

Reactions of Parents

Regardingthehome-basededucationprogramme,90%oftheparentsexpressedsatisfactionwiththeprogrammeandthesupportprovidedbytheitinerantteacher.However,alltheparentsexpressedastrongneedformoreandlongertraining,counselingandguidance.

Impact of Itinerant Teaching

No inclusion without appropriate support andservices. In a country like India, support servicesmainly come in the form of trained teachers oritinerant teachers. The functioning of itinerantteachers, as indicated by the study, is an area ofconcernandleavesmuchtobedesired.Only21.50%itinerant teachersprovidedsupport toCWDalongwithparentsandregularteachers.42.5%providedsupport only to parents and teachers and 23.3%onlytoteachersand12.7%onlytoCWD.Anotherfactorrelatedtoinclusiveeducationisafrequencyofvisitoftheitinerantteacherstotheschools.Thisstudy showed that only 12.5% itinerant teachersvisited schools four times a month. 25% of themvisited the schools thrice amonthand45% twicea month. 17.5% visited the school ONLY once amonth. This is a serious factor affecting the efficacy of inclusive education. Only 13.3% of itinerantteachers spent3-4hours in the school and38.5%ofthemspentonly1–2hourswithCWDineachschoolvisit.Itinerantteachersthemselvesexpressedaneedtospendmoretimewiththeregularteachersand CWD. The entire system of itinerant supportneeds considerable improvement to enhance itseffectiveness,bothtoteachersandCWD.Onlythenwill the CWD and others involved reap full benefits fromtheprogrammeofinclusiveeducation.

Perceptions of General Education Teachers

Ten point five percent teachers had not been oriented to inclusive education, while 90.5% hadreceivedtrainingonIE.Thetraininghadequippedthem with the basic skills of teaching CWD inregular schools. After training, their perceptionregarding the potential of CWD had undergonesignificant change. Only a small number (10.2%) feltthatthetrainingwasinadequateandcouldhavebeenmore.

Observations of Pre- School Workers

EarlychildhoodinclusionisimportanttopromoteparticipationofCWDintheclassroomenvironmentandtodevelopfriendshipsintheformativeperiodofchildgrowth.Pre-schooleducationofCWDhastobeacollaborativeeffortinvolvingparents,itinerantteachersandearlyeducationteachers/workers.95%ofthepre-schoolworkersinterviewedinthisstudyreceivedtrainingoninclusion.But65%ofthemfeltthatthetrainingwasnotadequateandexpressedaneedformoretraining.70%ofthemexpressedtheneedforthecenterstobebetterequippedintermsofresourcesandplay-waymaterial.

Conclusion

Although this programme was not countrywide, our evaluation and findings have found issues relevant to the initiationof IEprogrammesthroughoutthecountry.Ithasraisedissuesrelatedto education and comprehensive care of CWD.Suchissuesneedtobeaddressedsothatappropriatesolutions emerge. The timing of the study isparticularly relevant because the Government ofIndiahaslaunchedtheEducationForAllCampaignwithastrongcomponentofeducatingchildrenwithdisabilities.Thus,thereisscopeforimplementingthe findings and suggestions of the study in the education of children with CWD. The time isripe for initiating immediateaction in this regard,especiallyinnationalprogrammes.

Itisnottheintentionoftheinvestigatortoclaimthat this study provides comprehensive solutions


toallproblemsofCWD.Butitopensthedoortobetter understanding of CWDs, their educationalneedsandmethodsofeducatingthem.

Education For All has been one of the mostcherishedgoalsofIndia.Italsohasanelementofquality improvement, which can be achieved bysomeofthestrategiesusedinthisprogramme.Butit shouldbeemphasized that this studymarks thebeginning of a journey towards universalizationofinclusiveeducation.Agreatdealofmoreworkandresearchneedstobeundertakentoconcretize,diversifyandimprovepedagogical,educationalandthesociologicalstrategies topromotebest interestofCWD.

References

Options for Change. (1999). Ministry of HumanResourceDevelopment,GovernmentofIndia.

Responding to Children With Special Needs – AManual for Planning & Implementation ofInclusiveEducationinSSA.(2006).MinistryofHumanResourceDevelopment,GovernmentofIndia.

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan Framework ForImplementation. (2001). Ministry of HumanResourceDevelopment,GovernmentofIndia.

Support to Children With Disabilities-A LearningExperience. (2003). Ministry of Social JusticeandEmpowerment,GovernmentofIndia.

Towards Inclusive Schools in DPEP. (2003).Ministry of Human Resource Development,GovernmentofIndia.


Special Education in Southern Africa: Current Challenges and Future Threats

Morgan Chitiyo, Ph.D.AssistantProfessor,EducationalPsychologyandSpecialEducation

[email protected]

George ChitiyoPh.D.Candidate

CollegeofEducationTennesseeTechnologicalUniversity

Abstract

There is heightened concern about the need to provide effective special education services around the world. There is also evidence showing that most countries have either legislation already in place or are currently designing legislation to govern the provision of education services and protect the rights of children and families challenged by disabilities. However, despite this positive development, most developing countries face innumerable challenges in their quest to provide effective special education services to their populace. This paper identifies some of the challenges and threats that countries in Southern Africa face in their endeavor to meet the educational needs of their children and families who are challenged by disabilities and provides recommendations on how to mitigate some of the factors in order to enhance development of special education services in this region.

Introduction

Theneedtoprovideeffectivespecialeducationservices for children and families challenged bydisabilitieshasheightenedovertheyearsacrosstheglobe. The United Nations Educational, Scientific andCulturalOrganization (UNESCO) (1996), forinstance,reportedthat48outof52ofitsmembercountriesthatwereinvestigatedbetween1994and1995indicatedthattheyhadlegislationpertainingto special needs education while the remainderreported having proposals. However, despite thispositive development, special needs education isstillquiterudimentaryinmostdevelopingcountrieswithmostofthemexperiencingchallengesintheirattempt to address the educational needs of theirpopulace. Specific challenges, like poverty, cultural influences, lack of resources and lack of governmental support have been implicated as major obstaclesthreatening the provision of special educational

servicestochildrenchallengedbydisabilities.Thispaperexaminesextantliteraturetoidentifysomeofthesechallengesin thecontextofSouthernAfricaand in doing so it draws specific examples from the following SouthernAfrican countries: Zimbabwe,Zambia, Botswana, Namibia, Lesotho, and SouthAfricaalbeitnotcomparatively.

Specific Challenges

Until recently, special education has not beenhigh on the list of governmental priorities inmost Southern African countries. In Botswana,for example, the government did not take directresponsibility in the education of people withdisabilities until 1984 (Abosi, 2000). Zimbabwedidnothaveanationalpolicyonspecialeducationuntil 1980 when the country obtained politicalindependence from Britain. Prior to 1980, thegovernment’sinvolvementinspecialeducationwas


quite minimal (Peresuh & Barcham, 1998). ThelackofnationalpolicyinZimbabweledtolackofcoordinationamongthedifferentserviceproviderswhich include charitable organizations, churches,and Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs).This further compromised the quality of servicesavailablesincetherewasnonationalpolicytoensureaccountability.Inspiteofthefactthatsomeofthesecountries have legislation dealing with specialeducation, the effective implementation of thesepoliciesstillposestremendouschallengesinsomecountries.Kalabula (1993)observed thatalthoughZambia has had an articulated national policy onspecial education since 1977, that policy has notbeen well implemented and that implementationhas been gradual and difficult. Kalabula partially attributes this to the non specification of special needs education in the country’s 1966 EducationAct.

Thelackoflegislativesupportinmostcountriesofsub-SaharanAfricahasalsoaffectedgovernmentalprioritization. For example, the World Bankreportedthat“publicsectoreducationexpendituresareallocateddisproportionatelytohigherlevelsofeducation,andaredirectedmoretowardacademicthan technical and general skills upgrading (andeven less to special needs areas)” (World Bank,2000).Table1showspercentagesofexpendituresbySouthernAfricancountriesoneducationfortheyears1990and2000-2002.Itappearsthateducationranks low among governments’ priorities asevidenced by the low proportions of fiscal resources devotedtothesectorbythegovernments.Overthedecadeallthesixcountries,exceptLesotho,reducedtheirexpendituresoneducationasapercentageofnationalincome.

Not surprisingly, special education has reliedon charity from churches and humanitarianorganizations since the colonial period in mostSouthernAfricancountries(Kabzems&Chimedza,2002; Peresuh & Barcham, 1998). Althoughthis model provided access to special educationservicesformanypeoplewithdisabilities,thelackof coordination among the different organizationscompromisedthequalityoftheseservices.

Poverty is another significant factor stifling the development of special education in SouthernAfrica. The poor have limited access to goodquality land, are dependent on farming for theirincome (as they receive little off-farm incomeand small remittances), are less educated, live inlargerhouseholds,and,aremostoftenunemployed.Economically, poverty is usually defined relative to asetstandardofliving,usuallyapovertydatumlinewhichisnormallyusedtorefertoanestimatedbareminimumlevelofincomethatisneededtosecurethenecessitiesoflife.TheaveragerateofpovertyforSub-SaharanAfricaasawholeis47percent(WorldBank,2000).AccordingtotheHumanDevelopmentIndex(HDI)rankingsof2003,mostoftheSouthernAfrican countries scored low on the HDI rankingreflecting a low quality of life in those countries, averystrongindicatorofpoverty.SeeTable2forsomeofthepovertyIndicatorsforthesixSouthernAfricancountries.

Table1

Public Expenditure on Education

Expenditureasa%ofGDP

Country 1990 2000-2002*

Namibia 7.9 7.2

Botswana 6.2 2.2

Zimbabwe 7.7 4.7

Lesotho 6.2 10.4

Zambia 2.4 2.0

SouthAfrica 5.9 5.3

Source: UNDP (2006)Note: Expenditure is provided as a % of GDP* Data refer to the most recent year available during the period specified.

InSouthAfrica,mostAfricanchildrenattendingschoolarebornandraisedinpoverty(Gwala-Ogisi,Nkabinde, & Rodriguez, 1998). In Zimbabwe,povertyismorepronouncedinruralareas,andthemajorityofthepoor(88percent)liveinruralareas.Communal farming areas have 76 percent of thepoorand82percentoftheverypoorinZimbabwe(World Bank, 2000). Carter and May (2001)positedthatapartfromthe8%whowerefoundtobechronicallypoor,theother92%werecandidatesfordynamicpovertyinthelongterm.InZambia,poverty has been on the increase since almostthreedecades ago.According toKalabula (2000),the increasingpovertyof theZambianpeoplehasinhibitedaccesstosuitableeducationandtraining.Kasonde-Ng’anduandMoberg(2001)corroboratethis by stating that out of the 32% of school-agechildren,inZambia,whodonotattendschool,mostareexcludedforeconomicreasons.

A country’s level of poverty can also beexplained in terms of its rate of unemployment.TherateofunemploymentinmostoftheSouthern

African countries is high as shown in Table 3.Zimbabwe has the highest unemployment rate of80%coupledwithanequivalentpercentageofthepopulationlivingbelowthepovertyline.Botswana’sunemployment rate has been recently reported tohavereachedanall-timehighofabout24percent(UnitedNationsPressRelease,2005).Almostallofthesixcountrieshavehalfoftheirpopulationlivingbelowthepovertyline.

Withlittleornoresources,poorfamiliesarenotabletosendtheirchildrentoschool.Thesituationisworseforchildrenwithdisabilitiesbecausetheyhave special needs which require more financial resources(Heward,2006)andwhenfamiliescannotraise the money for school fees or transportation,children with disabilities become the first to stay home (Kabzems & Chimedza, 2002). In the caseof Southern Africa some children cannot go toschool because theirmobility is restricted as theydonothavewheelchairs,orevencrutches.Besides,

Table2

GDP Per Capita and Human Development Index Rank

Country

HumanDevelopmentIndexRank

GDPPerCapita(US$)

Namibia 125 2,307

Botswana 131 3,983

Zimbabwe 151 190

Lesotho 149 549

Zambia 165 398

SouthAfrica 121 3,551

Source: Human Development Report (2006); United National Statistics Division (2006); Per capita gross domestic product in US dollars from the database of the National Accounts Section of the UN Statistics Division as of 1 July 2004.

Table3

Unemployment and Population below Poverty Line

CountryUnemployment

RankPop.Below

PovertyLine

Botswana23.8%(2004)

30.3%(2003)

Namibia35.0%(1998)

35.0%-56%(2005)*

Zambia50.0%

(2000est.)86%

(1993)

Zimbabwe80.0%

(2005est.)80.0%

(2004est.)

Lesotho45.0%(2002)

49.0%(1999)

SouthAfrica26.6%

(2005est.)50.0%

(2000est.)

Source: The World Factbook (2006).*34.9% of the population live on $1 per day and 55.8% live on $2 per day.



most schools do not have the required resources,suchasBrailleequipmentforstudentswithvisualimpairments,tocaterforstudentswithavarietyofdisabilities. Matale (2000) identified shortage of specialmaterialsandequipment inschoolsasoneof the constraints retarding the progress towardsinclusive schooling for children with disabilitiesin Botswana. Even if the children were to go toschool, children with disabilities are particularlydisadvantaged because schools lack the rightfacilities.Hillmanand Jenkner (2004)highlightedthat only 5 percent of learning-disabled Africanchildrenwhoneedspecialeducationgotoschool,whereas70percentofthemcouldattendiftheschoolshadtherightfacilities(Hillman&Jenkner,2004).AfurtherconstraintinBotswanawastheplanhatchedby the government in 2003 to reintroduce schoolfees for those entering junior secondary schoolbeginningfromJanuary2006.Thefeesarepeggedat a rate of five percent of the individual student’s educationcostperannum.AccordingtotheUnitedNations Press Release (2005), the introduction ofschoolfeesisadangerousstepbackwardsandanyshort-termbudgetarygainsfromthere-introductionofschoolfeeswillhaveregrettableandinevitableeconomicandsocialcostsinthemediumandlong-term.

Botswanaalsohasanotherpeculiarproblemofsparse communities, a result of the country beingmostlyadesert.Thissituationlimitstheprovisionofbasicservices,suchashealthandeducation,asgovernment struggles to reach every community(UnitedNationsPressRelease,2005).Inadditiontoconstrainingaccessibility,effortstoreachthesparsecommunities also strain the government’s alreadylimitedresources.

The shortage of qualified professionals in the area of special education is another major threatto the provision of special education in SouthernAfrica.The2004nationalreportonthedevelopmentofeducationinNamibia,forexample,statesthatthecountryhasbeenunabletoprovideadequateskilledhuman resources requisite for the developmentof its entire education system (Ministry of BasicEducation,SportsandCulture,2004).SouthAfrica,

theeconomicpowerhouseofSouthernAfrica,hasuntil recently paid limited attention to qualifications ofAfricanteachersresultinginmanyAfricanschoolsbeing staffed with unqualified special education teachers (Gwala-Ogisi, Nkabinde, & Rodriguez,1998). Similarly, Abosi (2000) reported an acuteshortageofspecialistteachersandlackoftrainingfacilities in Botswana. Lesotho is no exceptionas Kabzems and Chimedza (2002) reported thatmany teachers in Lesotho were unqualified and “national figures for teacher qualification in 1994 reported that over a quarter of all primary schoolteachers in the country were without the full pre-service qualifications” (p155). Chitiyo (2006) noted thatZimbabwealso suffers fromhavinga limitednumberoftrainedspecialeducationteachers.Thisis inspiteof the introductionofspecialeducationteachertrainingprogramsatlocalinstitutions,e.g.theUnitedCollegeofEducationandtheUniversityofZimbabwein1983and1994respectively(Peresuh&Barcham,1998).Inastudyofschoolpsychologypractices in East and Southern Africa, Mpofu,Zindi,OaklandandPeresuh(1997)found that thenumber of school psychologists ranged from 51inZimbabwe(thehighest)tononeinLesothoandSwaziland (lowest). Not surprisingly, this severelackofadequateprofessionalsinspecialeducationcompromises the delivery of quality services tochildrenandfamilieschallengedbydisabilities.

Theshortageofspecialeducationprofessionalshasbeenaggravatedbyaseverebraindrainwhichisacommonphenomenonamongmostdevelopingcountries.Since1999,about500000professionalshave emigrated from Zimbabwe because of thepolitical and economic crisis facing the country(The Financial Gazette, 2003). Mattes, Crush andRichmond(2000)reportedthatanestimated233,609people left SouthAfrica to settle abroad between1989and1997andonly35%oftheemigrantswereofficially accounted for by official data-collection methods. In addition to depriving the country ofthemuch-neededhumancapacity,themovementofprofessionalsalsodiminishesthegovernment’staxbase,whichhasfurtherimplicationsonfundingforeducation.


Social and cultural factors have also played aroleinobstructingtheprogressofspecialeducationprovisioninSouthernAfrica.Untilrecently,peoplewithdisabilitiesdidnotcommandrespect inmostAfricansocieties(Chitiyo&Wheeler,2005)andinsomesocietiestheywereevenconsideredburdensto the family and to the community (Kabzems &Chimedza,2002).SeveralBantulanguagessuchasShona,whichisspokeninZimbabwe,andSwahili,spokeninthenorthernpartofZambiaandintherestofEastAfrica,oftenhavederogatory terminologyusedtorefertopeoplewithdisabilities.AccordingtoKabzemsandChimedzasuchderogatory termsreinforcethelesserstatusofpeoplewithdisabilities.Similar attitudes have been observed in Zambiawhere Kalabula (2000) states that parents feelashamed and embarrassed to divulge informationabouttheirchildrenwithdisabilities.Unfortunately,this attitude prevents children with disabilitiesfromaccessingeducationsince theyendupbeingcloistered.

Parental involvement is crucial to promotingpositive outcomes for children with special needs(Turnbull & Turnbull, 2001). Consequently,some industrialized countries have designed lawsregulating the collaboration between teachersand parents of children with disabilities. In theUSA,forexample,the1997reauthorizationoftheIndividualswithDisabilitiesEducationAct(IDEA)requirescollaborationbetweenschoolsandfamiliesofchildrenwithdisabilities(Heward,2006).Oneofthereasonsforthesupportforfamilyinvolvement,accordingtoHeward,isthatresearchandpracticehavedemonstratedthateducationaleffectivenessisenhancedwhenparentsandfamiliesare involved.Unfortunately, many African parents do notparticipate in the education of their children withdisabilities(Gwala-Ogisi,Nkabinde,&Rodriguez,1998). Gwala-Ogisi and colleagues ascribe thisto lack of education and access to knowledge.Chitiyo and Wheeler (2005) suggest this couldbe a result of poverty and the lack of policiesgoverningthedeliveryofspecialeducationinthesecountries.Whateverthecauses,thelackofparentalparticipation limits the effectiveness of specialeducationservicesinSouthernAfrica.

Future Threats

The future of special education in SouthernAfricaistremendouslythreatenedbytheHIV/AIDSpandemic.Thisregionisthemostaffectedbythispandemic,whereatleast12.3millionchildrenhavebeenorphanedby thepandemic (UNICEF,2004).InZimbabwealonemorethan800,000childrenareestimatedtohavebeenorphanedbyAIDS(UNAIDS,2004)whileNamibia is estimated tohave around70,000AIDSorphans(MinistryofBasicEducation,SportsandCulture,2004). HIV/AIDSnegativelyaffect the welfare of people with disabilities bycreating economic insecurity due to the sicknessandsubsequentdeathsofthemostproductivegroupof thepopulationwhich in turnraises the levelofpoverty.Povertycreateslivingconditionsthatcanlead to mild and moderate disabilities (Nkabinde,1997) because families in poverty are unable toprovide adequate nutrition, health care, housing,andchildcare(Turnbull&Turnbull,2001).If thecurrentHIV/AIDStrend inSouthernAfrica isnotreversed, the number of vulnerable children andthe incidenceofdisabilities in theregionwill risestrainingthealreadylimitedresourcesandfacilitiesfurther.

SinceHIV/AIDSaffectsmainlytheproductivegroup (15-49 years of age), it is postulated thatthe pandemic will worsen the shortage of specialeducationprofessionalsandthisproblemwilllikelypersist into the future. Some governments havealreadybeguntotrainspecialeducationprofessionalstoprovideservicesforchildrenincertaincategoriesofdisabilitieslikevisualandhearingimpairments.However, as the region develops from a moreagrarian society to a more industrialized societywhere more sophisticated skills will be required,it is postulated that some erstwhile unrecognizedtypes of disabilities like mild mental retardationare more likely to become more noticeable andmore“disabling”therebyintensifyingtheneedforspecialeducationprofessionals.Assuch,althoughsome SouthernAfrican governments are likely totrain more special education professionals, a deficit inthisareaislikelytopersist,atleastintheshortterm.


Conclusion and Recommendations

Over the past few decades, Southern Africancountrieshavebeengrapplingwithmanyproblemswhichhavehindereddevelopmentinmanysectorsincluding special education.Poverty is oneof thefactors which continue threatening the effectivedevelopment of special education in this region.Across the region, the majority live in absolutepoverty and chances of breaking the cycle ofpoverty are not promising as many factors suchas governance issues, politics, and policy mattersare involved. Another factor peculiar to thisregion which is stifling the progress of special education provision is the magnitude of the HIV/AIDS pandemic. This pandemic has made manyhouseholds economically insecure and has mademanychildrenvulnerableandcreatedmanyorphanstherebyheighteningtheneedforspecialeducationinaregionwherespecialeducationprovisionisstillquite a fledgling phenomenon. Special education in SouthernAfrica isalsodoggedby theshortageofqualified professionals in the field, a problem which is further compounded by a severe brain drainbedevilingtheregion.

In anutshell, a concoctionof poverty, lackofspecial education professionals, lack of and poorimplementation of national policies on specialeducation, lack of governmental support, lack offamily involvement, and socio-cultural factorshas stymied the progress of special education inthe Southern African region. Unfortunately, theenormityoftheHIV/AIDSpandemicandaseverebraindraincurrentlyfacingtheregionposeaseverethreattothefutureofspecialeducationdampeningtheprospectsofanimmediatepanacea.

However, governments may do a number ofthingstomitigatetheimpactofthesefactors.First,governments need to give greater attention tospecialneedschildren,includingorphansandothervulnerablechildren.Inadditiontoenactingpoliciesfavorabletothedevelopmentofspecialeducation,thereisneedtostaff,equip,andprovideadequateresources to the sector to ensure that vulnerablechildren and those challenged by disabilities arenot left behind.Also, in addition toproviding the

advocacythatisrequiredfortheirchildren,familiesofchildrenwithdisabilitiesneedtocollaboratewithschoolsinordertomaximizepositiveoutcomesfortheirchildren.Familiescouldprovidehome-basedsupport that may be required in the training ofchildrenwithdisabilities.Schoolscanpromotetheeffectivenessofthiscollaborationbyprovidinganytraining to theconcernedparentsonhowtoassisttheir child at home in order to facilitate the efficacy ofinterventions.

Furthermore,governmentsmayneedtoconsiderpromoting the training of more special educationpersonnelandimprovingtheirconditionsofserviceinordertoretaintheirservicesandcounterthebraindrainwhichhasdeprivedanhistoricallyunderstaffedarea.Thereisalsoneedforgovernmentstoformalizeand promote collaboration among professionalswho provide different services to children withspecial needs. For example, physicians, speechtherapists,psychologists,counselors,amongothers,can help special educators by providing themwith information which may help in designingspecializedinstructionwhichaddressestheneedsofchildrenwithcertainconditions.Suchcollaboration,which undoubtedly requires the training of moreprofessionals,haspotentialofyieldinginnumerablebenefits for children and families challenged by disabilities.

Finally, governments need to accentuate thepreventionofdisabilitiesbytargetingandprovidingpreventiveinterventionservicestochildrenwhoareat risk for developing specific disabilities. Preventive services may include development projects thatpromote theeradicationofpoverty,maternalpre-/peri- and postnatal screening for specific conditions whichmayresultincertaindisabilitieslikeblindnessand mental retardation. Also, governments couldpromote childhood early intervention services toamelioratetheimpactofcertainconditionsamongchildrenat risk fordevelopingcertaindisabilities.Theutilityof these strategieshasbeen repeatedlydemonstratedinmanyindustrializedcountriessuchas theUnitedStates,Canada,andBritainandcanhelp children and families who are challenged bydisabilitiesintheSouthernAfricanregionaswell.


References

Abosi, O.C. (2000). Trends and issues in specialeducationinBotswana.The Journal of Special education, 34(1),48-53.

Carter,M.andMay,J.(2001).World development. 29(12), 1987-2006. Retrieved July 11, 2006,from http://www.tessproject.com/products/seminars&training/seminar%20series/Assets_Materials/One_Kind_of_Freedom.pdf.

Chitiyo,M.(2006).SpecialeducationinZimbabwe:issuesandtrends.The Journal of the International Association of Special Education, 7(1),22-27.

Chitiyo, M. & Wheeler, J.J. (2005). ThedevelopmentofspecialeducationinZimbabwe.The International Journal of Special Education, 19(2),46-52.

Gwala-Ogisi, N., Nkabinde, Z. & Rodriguez,L. (1998). The social context of the specialeducation debate in South Africa. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 13(1),72-85.

Heward, L. (2006). Exceptional children: anintroductiontospecialeducation.(8thed.).NewJersey:MerrillPrenticeHall.

Hillman, A.L., & Jenkner E. (2004). EducatingChildren in Poor Countries. InternationalMonetaryFund,Economic IssuesNo.33.

Human Development Report (2006). BeyondScarcity:power,poverty,and theglobalwatercrisis.RetrievedDecember16,2006,fromhttp://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/statistics/indicators/26.html.

Kabzems,V.&Chimedza,R.(2002).DevelopmentassistancedisabilityandeducationinSouthernAfrica.DisabilityandSociety,17(2),147-157.

Kalabula, M.D. (2000, July). Inclusive educationinAfrica: a myth or reality?A Zambian casestudy. Paper presented at the InternationalSpecial Education Congress 2000. Universityof Manchester. Retrieved July 22, 2006, fromhttp://www.isec2000.org.uk/abstracts/papers_k/kalabula_1.htm.

Kalabula,D.(1993).SpecialeducationinZambia,inR.J.Michael&G.Upton, (Eds),The view finder: expanding boundaries and perspectives in special education (pp. 45-47). New York:AdvertisingArtsandPromotions.

Kasonde-Ng’andu, S., & Moberg, S. (2001).Movingtowardsinclusiveeducation:abaselinestudy on the special educational needs in thenorth-westernandwesternprovincesofZambia.Education Sector Support Program. Ministryof Education in Zambia/ Ministry for ForeignAffairsofFinland.

Matale, J.L. (2000). Special education needs as an integral part of Botswana education system: a move towards inclusive education. PaperpresentedattheInternationalSpecialEducationCongress 2000. University of Manchester.Retrieved on July 22, 2006, from http://www.isec2000.org.uk/abstracts/papers_m/matale_1.htm.

Mattes,R.,Crush,J.,&Richmond,W.(2000).Thebrain gain: skilled migrants and immigrationpolicyinpost-apartheidSouthAfrica.Southern African Migration Project (SAMP). MigrationPolicySeriesNo.20.

Ministry of Basic Education, Sports and Culture,(2004).National reporton thedevelopmentofeducationinNamibia,Windhoek,Namibia.

Mpofu, E., Zindi, F., Oakland, T. & Peresuh, M.(1997).SchoolpsychologypracticesinEastandSouthernAfrica:specialeducators’perspectives.The Journal of Special Education, 31,387-402.


Nkabinde, Z. (1997). An analysis of educationalchallenges in the new SouthAfrica. Lanham,MD:UniversityPressofAmerica.

Peresuh, M., & Barcham, L. (1998). Specialeducation provision in Zimbabwe. British Journal of Special Education, 25(2),75-80.

The Financial Gazette. (2003). Retrieved on May10, 2006, from http://www.fingaz.co.zw/fingaz/2003/july/july17/4396.shtml.

TheWorldFactbook.RetrievedJune8,2006,fromhttps://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/.

Turnbull, A.P. & Turnbull, H.R.III. (2001).Families, professionals, and exceptionality: collaborating for empowerment(4thEd.).NewJersey:MerrillPrenticeHall.

UNAIDS.(2004).2004ReportontheGlobalAIDSEpidemic; 4th Global Report. Retrieved onJune 8, 2006, from http://www.unaids.org/bangkok2004/GAR2004_pdf/UNAIDSGlobalReport2004_en.pdf.

UNICEF. (2004). Children on the Brink: A JointReport of New Orphan Estimates and aFrameworkforAction.RetrievedJuly10,2006,fromhttp://www.unicef.org/publications/index_22212.html.

UNDP. (2006). Human Development ReportsIndicators. Retrieved August 15, 2006, fromhttp://hdr.undp.org/statistics/data/indicators.cfm?x=101&y=1&z=1.

UNESCO.(1996).Legislationpertainingtospecialneeds education. Retrieved July 23, 2006,from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0010/001055/105593e.pdf.

United Nations Press Release. (2005). SpecialRapporteurOnRightToEducation,ConcludesVisitToBotswana,4October2005.RetrievedMay 15, 2006, from http://www.sarpn.org.za/documents/d0001656/index.php.

United Nations Statistics Division. (2006).RetrievedAugust15,2006,fromhttp://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/socind/inc-eco.htm.

WorldBank.(2000).HouseholdArchives,PovertyAssessment Summaries. Retrieved June 8,2006, from http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/dg/povertys.nsf/0/aacb0508f0ba718e85256b22005c3e45?OpenDocument.


Cultural Barriers to South Indian Families’ Access to Services and Educational Goals for Their Children with Disabilities

Maya Kalyanpur, Ph.D.DepartmentofSpecialEducation

[email protected]

I.P. Gowramma, Ph.D.

All-IndiaInstituteofSpeechandHearingMysore,India

Abstract

Using semi-structured interviews and focus groups, a study of twelve parents of preschoolers and young adults with disabilities in India revealed the cultural and social barriers to families’ access to services and their educational goals for their child. Concerns common to both groups included difficulty of accessing information on services in a culture that continues to hold traditional negative perceptions of disability and lacks the infrastructure for dissemination of information. Specific concerns related to setting educational and work-related goals for their child, as the parents of the preschool children identified “learning to speak” and the parents of the young adults “an appropriate job” as primary goals, within the constraints of a multilingual, caste-based society.

Studiesonfamiliesofchildrenwithdisabilitiesindicate that cultural factors strongly influence families’ attitudes towards disability, coping andhelp-seeking behavior (Ingstad & Whyte, 1995).Current research on culturally diverse families inthe U.S. identifies several reasons for their limited access to services and low participation in theeducationaldecision-makingprocess.Theseincludelanguage barriers, financial constraints that preclude taking time off from work or finding child care or transportation to attend meetings or volunteer inschool, and unfamiliarity with the educationalsystem that results in a lack of knowledge aboutservice availability or legal rights (for a review,see Turnbull, Turnbull, Erwin & Soodak, 2006).The influence of culture as barriers to parental participation and access to services has also beenrepeated in other countries. For instance, familiesoperating within the South African culture ofapartheidandoppressionweresocializednottogetinvolvedintheirchild’seducationandtoabdicatetheir responsibility to the government (Gwalla-

Ogisi, Nkabinde & Rodriguez, 1998), whileJapanesemothers,immersedinaculturewherethemotheristhechild’s“secondteacher”,areactivelyinvolved in their disabled child’s education (Abe,1998).

Despite evidence that the concerns are verydifferent for families at two significant life cycle stages, preschool and the transition to schooland young adulthood and the transition to work(Turnbull,etal.,2006),fewstudieshaveinvestigatedthese differences in culturally diverse families.Astudycomparingdifferencesinthedevelopmentofself-determination in young adults in the US andTaiwan, for instance, found that while Taiwaneseparentswerelesslikelytofosterself-determinationin their children than theAmerican parents, bothgroups identified this as a more important goal for their secondary school-age children than theprimaryschool-agechildren(Zhang,Wehmeyer&Chen,2005).

Most research on families of children withdisabilities in India concludes that the child


places a tremendous burden on the family(Annapurna, 1997; Gandotra, 1991; Gupta &Singhal,2005;Peshawaria,Menon,Ganguly,Roy,Rajam Pillay & Gupta, 1998; Sen & Tuli, 1991;Shanmugavelayutham, 1999; Srivastava, 2004).Contributory factors include lack of information,mothers’ lack of education and negative attitudesamong extended family members. A few studiesindicatethatparentsalsorespondpositivelytotheirchild with disabilities. For instance, Alur (2001)found a strong community response and supportnetworkavailabletolow-incomeparentsinwesternIndia,andRao(2001;2006)highlightsthestrengthsofBengalimothersineasternIndiaintheircapacityto adjust anddemand similar adjustments to theirchild from their communities. Similarly, studyingmothersofchildrenwithvisualimpairmentsinruralSouth India, Jacob (2005) found that “contented”mothersreliedon the traditionofsupportexistingintheirfamilyorcommunity,ratherthansuccessineducation,toensurethefuturesecurityoftheirchild,while“seeker”mothersbelievedthateducationwasthekeytoensuringeconomicindependencethrougha good job or marriage.Although Sen and Tuli’sstudy (1991) is the only one that looked at a specific agegroup,thatofyoungadults,itdoesnotidentifyparental concerns relating to this life cycle stage.Thisstudywasdevelopedinresponse to theneedtolearnabouttheparticularconcernsofparentsofpreschool children and young adults, and identifies someculturalbarrierstoIndianfamilies’accesstoservices and educational goals for their childrenwithdisabilities.

AlthoughtheIndiangovernmenthasdevelopedinclusive education programs for children withdisabilities, the provision of the majority ofservices continues to remain the domain of non-governmental organizations, or NGOs, in theformofspecialschools(Kalyanpur,inpress;Rao,Narayan&Mani,2005).Further,astudyofparents’perceptions of NGO services found that althoughmost middle-class, educated, urban parents weredissatisfied with the services they received, they stillpreferred toplace their childwithdisabilitiesinaspecialschoolastheycouldaffordthefeesandbecauseofthegeneralperceptionthatgovernment

schoolsofferevenpoorerqualityeducation(GovindRao&Prakasam,2003).However,thefactremainsthatover94%ofchildrenwithdisabilitiesinIndiado not receive any educational services (NationalSampleSurveyOrganization,2003).

Regionaldisparitiesineconomicdevelopment,differences in language, tradition, and religionfurtheraffectserviceprovision.Withinthiscontextof limited resources and, particularly, lack oftrainedteachers,theinvolvementofparentsintheirchild’s education is predominantly perceived interms of supplementing teachers’ roles as trainersandeducatorsfortheirchildren(Gupta&Singhal,2005; Peshawaria, et al., 1998). For instance, inGupta and Singhal’s study (2005), families ofchildrenwithautisminSouthIndiawereroutinelyinvolved in the interventionprogramdesignedforthechild.Similarly,trainingmotherswasaprimaryobjectiveofSeva inAction, an early interventionprograminSouthIndia(Rao,1997).Onthewhole,however,familiesareforcedtocarefortheirdisabledmemberwithoutanyprofessionalortechnologicalsupport (Thomas & Thomas, 2002), or to spendconsiderableamountsoftimeandmoneyinseekingservices(Aluri&Karanth,2002).

Method

Participants

Twelve Indian parents of children withdisabilities were interviewed (see Table 1), usingsemi-structured, ethnographic interviews, to learntheir perspectives on the services and educationalgoalsfortheirchild.Thisinterviewformatismostconducivetoelicitthekindofinformationthestudysought and allow theparticipants to identify theirownconcerns(Strauss&Corbin,1998).Althougha few open-ended questions (e.g., how did you find outaboutthisservice?Whatsortofjobwouldyoulike your son/daughter to have?) were brought tothe interview and asked to start the conversation,follow-up questions were developed as itproceeded.Whilethepreschoolchildrenattendeda government-funded speech and hearing clinic,theolderchildrenattendedaprivatepre-vocational


school, in a mid-sized city in South India. The five mothers of the young adults were interviewed infocusgroups,whiletheparentsofthepreschoolers(five mothers and two fathers of five children in all) wereinterviewedeitherindividuallyorasacouple.Parent participants were paid a small honorariumfortheirtime.Theinterviewstookoveranhourand

wereconductedintheparents’preferredlanguage.Theparentsbroughttheirchildtotheinterview.Theyounger children sat quietly beside their parent/swhile the young adults occupied themselves withdrawing and similar activities in a small groupout of our hearing. For triangulation, data alsoincludedobservationsofparents’interactionwitha

Table1

Demographic Data on Participants

Mother’sname ReligionLanguage

spokenChild’sname Sex Age

TypeofDisability

Mary Christian English Johnny M 5 Speechdelayandhyperactivity

Bhanu(mother)Raghu(father)

Hindu Kannada Ramu M 5 Hearingimpairment,mildautism

Sumitra(mother)Devdutt(father)

Hindu Kannada Pranay M 4 Learningdisability

Rose Christian Malayalam Albert M 4 Autism

Namita Hindu Telugu Kaushal M 5 Mentalretardation

Meera Hindu Kannada Rahul M 16 Mildmentalretardation,hearingimpairment

Vimala Hindu Kannada Vikram M 15 Learningdisabilities

Lakshmi Hindu Kannada Pankaj M 16 Mentalretardation

Sushila Hindu Kannada Maitreyi F 16 Mentalretardation

Ratnamma Hindu Kannada Dilip M 14 Autistic


psychologist and a vocational teacher. Field notesweremaintainedontheseobservations,whichwereanalyzed for evidence and corroboration of theparents’concerns regarding their interactionswithprofessionals.

Alltheparticipantsrangedfrommiddleclasstoaffluent socio-economic status and belonged to upper castes. The mothers had completed pre-universitycoursesatthecommunitycollegeequivalent;noneworked outside the home. Their husbands werevariouslyemployedasmanagersinabankorservice-based company (one was in the Middle East), orwereself-employedasownersofasmallindustrialcompanyorlargecoffeeestate.TwofamilieswereChristian,therestHindu.Ofthetenchildren,whoseagesrangedbetween4to16years,nineweremale.The types of disability among the preschoolersincluded,withcognitivedelays,autism,speechandlanguage impairments, and hearing impairments,and among the young adults, included learningdisabilitiesandmilddevelopmentaldisabilities.Thenamesofallparticipantshavebeenchanged.

Data Collection and Analysis

All the parents who came to the clinic orthe vocational center during the week of sampleselectionwereapproachedbythelocalliaisonandaskediftheywerewillingtobeinterviewed.Alltheparents chose to be interviewed outside the homeand interviews were conducted with those whoshowedupatthefocusgrouporindividualmeetingvenues.

Interviews were taped, transcribed, andtranslated into English. Each interview was thencheckedforreliabilityoftranslationbyaresearcherfluent in both English and the original language of the interview. Data were analyzed inductivelyin a recursive process of constant comparisonthrough coding and thematic analysis (Strauss &Corbin, 1998). For instance, the two groups wereinterviewed separately based on research that theissuesofparentsofpreschoolersandyoungadultsarequitedifferent.Althoughthiswasborneoutinour analysis of the findings, some common concerns alsoemerged.

Findings

Findings revealed concerns common to bothgroups of parents as well as specific to each. A common concern was the difficulty of accessing informationonservicesinaculturethatcontinuestoholdtraditionalnegativeperceptionsofdisabilityand lacks the infrastructure for dissemination ofinformation. Specific concerns related to setting educational goals for their preschooler and work-relatedgoalsfortheyoungadult.Thepreschoolers’parents focused on acquisition of language skillsasaprimaryeducationalgoal,whiletheparentsofthe young adults identified an appropriate job as a primarygoal.Although families around theworldmay share these concerns, the cultural influences ofamultilingualandcaste-basedsocietyprovideauniquely Indian flavor.

Barriers to Accessing Services

All the parents expressed their frustrationabout the difficulty in accessing services. Familial attitudestowardsdisabilitywereaprimarybarrier,asparentsstruggledtoovercomenegativeresponsesto atypical behavior and development.Additionalbarriersincludednegativeprofessionalattitudesinanenvironmentthatdoesnotsupportparentalrightsandhas limited infrastructurefordisseminationofinformationaboutservices.

Negative Familial Attitudes Towards Disability. Familial attitude towards disability was a majorcultural influence on parents’ access to services, magnified by the significant role family support, bothnuclearandextended,playswithintheIndiancontext, a finding substantiated in other research (Coleridge,2000;Persha&Rao,2003).Themothersmaintained a strong emotional bond with theirhusbands’ family, allowing their in-laws to play acentral role in raising the children and influencing any decisions to seek or continue with services.Forinstance,whenoneofthepreschooler’sfatherleft for the Middle East to earn more money, hisparentsinsistedthatthemotherleaveheroldersonwith them and move to the city to seek servicesforherpreschoolson.Nowsheworriedthat,ifthe


boy failed toshowadequate improvement,her in-lawsmightrefusetohaveherhusband’sremittancecontinuetopayfortheseservices.

Manyof theparents livedwith theknowledgethat their child was an embarrassment to theirfamilies, particularly if their child demonstratedcognitive impairments or socially inappropriatebehaviors.Asthemotherofapreschoolersaid,

When guests came to our home, my in-lawswarnedmenottocomeoutsidewithmychild.Theyscoldedmeandaccusedmeforeverythinghedoes.Theycomparehimwithotherchildrenand they say, “He is mad”. Sometimes whenI heard such complaints from my in-laws, Ithoughtaboutcommittingsuicide.Supportcamemoreeasilywhenthefamilycould

believe that the child would eventually “becomenormal”.Forexample,onemotherbelievedthatherson’spaternalgrandparentsweremoreacceptingofhimbecausehisnormalphysicalappearancehelpedhimtoblendinwithhispeers.Asaresult,theparentshaddelayedaccessingservices,includingdiagnosticvisits to physicians; for fear that they might find their concerns for their child justified. One woman’s mother-in-lawaskedhertowaitwhenshementionedthatshehadnoticedsomedevelopmentalproblemsin her 6-month-old son because to acknowledgethathergrandsonmighthavesomeproblemswastoadmitfailureinherlineage.

Studies indicate that these feelings of shameand embarrassment, often resulting in lack ofsupportbyextendedfamilymembers,arecommonamong Indian families (Peshawaria & Menon,1991; Peshawaria, et al., 1998). Two culturalfactors play a role here. First, the sociocentricorientation, or the emphasis on the importance offamilytiesthatincludesextendedfamilymembersas well (Konantambigi, 1996), often leads to theperception that the stigma of the disability reflects ontheentirefamily,resultingineldersrejectingthemotherorthechildorboth.Coleridge(2000)foundthatAfghani familieswouldoften claim that theirchildren became mentally retarded after a rocketattack in order to conceal the congenital natureof the disability. Second, the focus on behavioral

conformity (Daley & Seligman, 2002; Srinivasan& Karlan, 1997) places children with disabilitieswhomanifestbehavioralchallengesatgreaterriskofrejectionthan,forinstance,deafchildrenwhoarelesslikelytodeviatefromtheseexpectations(Miles,1997;Parasnis,DeCaro,&Raman,1996).SenandTuli (1991) noted that the mothers in their studystopped going out for social occasions or invitingpeopletotheirhomeinfearofembarrassmentabouttheiradolescentson’sinappropriatebehavior.

Negative Professional Attitudes.Parentswerealsofrustratedbythenegativeattitudestheyencounteredfrom professionals, ranging from unhelpfulnessto disapproval at parents’ noncompliance. In thisstudy, the parents repeatedly spoke of serviceagenciesthatrefusedadmissiontotheirchildrenonvariousgrounds,includingineducabilityrelatingtoseverity of disability, or age in terms of the childbeing too young to benefit from intervention, and havingtoaccepttheseunilateraldecisions.AlthoughparentsofchildrenwithdisabilitiesintheUSmayexperience similar reactions from professionals,factorslinkedtothehistoricaldevelopmentofspecialeducationservicesprovideastarkcontrast.Unlikethe US where parental participation is one of thefoundationalprinciplesofIDEAthatemergesfromtherights-basedindividualisticmilieuofAmericansociety (Kalyanpur & Harry, 2004), in the Indiancollectivisticculture,parentshavenorights,neitherbylegalnorbysocio-culturalsanction(Alur,2001).Albeithistorically,parentsintheUSwereforcedtoplay the passive role of recipients of professionaldecisions (Turnbull, et al., 2006), legislation thatmandates parent participation and a professionalandsocietalethosthatacceptsandexpectsparentsto advocate on behalf of their child have givenparents both the authority and opportunity to doso,asituationthatdoesnotprevail inIndia(Alur,2001).

Among these Indian mothers, there was animplicit understanding that a parent could not bea professional, illustrated, for instance, by theirfrequentself-deprecatorycommentthat,“afterall,weareonlytheparents,”andbytheirinitialassumptionthat thepurposeof the focusgroup interviewwas


forthemtolistenandlearnwhiletheprofessionalstalkedandledthemeeting.Thiscleardividebetweenthe role of professional and parent (Peshawaria &Menon,1991)contrastswiththesituationintheUSwheremanyprofessionalsarethemselvesparentsofchildrenwithdisabilities,and,indeed,beingaparentis a desideratum for certain professional positionsinvolvingparentaladvocacy.Additionally,moresothaninanyothercountry,manyparents,particularlymothers, forced into theroleofservicedevelopershistorically, havevoluntarily acquiredprofessionalcredentialization.

This assumption of professional authorityasserteditselfinallinteractionswiththeparentsinthisstudy,whorespondedwithcompleteacquiescence.This dynamic is implicit in the situations parentsdescribed, as the following examples illustrate.Sometimestheprofessionalswereunhelpful.Asthemotherofapreschoolersaid:

Parentswereneverallowedinsidetoobservethetherapy.Oncethechildistakeninside,whattheydoisunknowntous.(Even)whenIasked,Iwasnottold.

Similarly,aparentchosenottorevealthatshesawlittleimprovementinherson:

Becausetherewasnootheroption,evenifIfelttherewasnoimprovement,Icouldnotactuallysaythistotheprofessionals.IfItoldthem,Iwasafraidtheywouldsay,don’tcome.The dynamic of professional authority versus

parental acquiescencewasmoreovert inobservedinteractions, as the professionals often adopteda bullying tone when they interpreted a parent’sbehaviorasbeingnoncompliant.Whenonemothermentionedthatherhusbandhadmadeseveralvisitsto thecity fromtheneighboringhomestate toseeher and her son, the psychologist demanded toknow,“ThenwhydoesyourhusbandnevercometotheClinic?”Onepreschooler’smother’sadmissionthat she had three children prompted the personalquestion,“Whyhaveyounot followedany familyplanning?”

Similarly, when the mother of a 14-year-old boy stated that she planned to send her son,after he completed his school leaving certificate

examinations (a diploma equivalency examinationsimilartoaGED),toworkinafactorythathersisterownedbecausehewouldgetthesupportsheneededthere, the vocational teacher pointed out that theboy was an artist, suggesting that the mother wasunwilling to nurture his artistic side because “hermain ambition is that he must be self-sufficient and earnmoremoney.”

Theparentsweredistressedthattheyoftenhadtodealwithprofessionaldisapprovalthattheyhad“delayed”bringing theirchild to theclinicdespiteobvious indications of impairment, seeing it asan implication that somehow the families were toblame.WhenBhanu, describingher son’s delayeddevelopmental milestones, admitted that she “hadnot taken much care (notice) at that time,” thepsychologistscolded:

Already you had your first son. Why didn’t you comparehisdevelopmentwithyourotherson?Uptoninemonths,youhavenotbotheredtodoanything.While in some cases, the families had indeed

been reluctant to seek services hoping to delaythebadnews, inothercases, ironically, itwas theprofessionalsthemselveswhohadcausedthedelay.Asa16-year-old’smotherdescribed:

During delivery, the children’s specialist waspresent.Buthedidnotsayanything.Thechildwouldfallsickandwasseverelyweak.Stilltheydidnotdiagnoseanything.Lack of Information. Families in developing

countries like India (Aluri & Karanth, 2002;Srivastava, 2004), Indonesia (Hamid, 1993) andChina (Chen & Simeonsson, 1994) have identified the lackof informationas aprimaryconcern.Theprocess by which the South Indian parents in thisstudy found a service that met their child’s needscan only be described as serendipitous. Only oneparentwasamemberofaparentorganizationandappeared togetmostofher information from thatsource.Otherparentsattempted toget informationfrom physicians and other professionals, oftenunsuccessfully.Indeed,despiteitsdisadvantages,themostcommonsourceofinformationwasthefamily.The uniqueness of this group becomes apparent


whenoneconsidersthatotherstudiesofmiddle-classparticipants (who are more likely to be educated)foundthatthemoreeducatedthemother,themorelikelyshewastoworkoutsidethehome,facilitatingheraccessandability to seekout informationandcommunity resources (Hamid, 1993; Srivastava,2004).Althoughthemothersinthisstudywerebothmiddleclassandeducated,noneworkedoutsidethehome, possibly because of their high caste status,restrictingtheiraccesstoinformation.

Althoughparentsofchildrenwithdisabilitiesinthe US also struggle to find appropriate services, the processofidentifyingtheseservicesisfacilitatedbylegislationandmuchmorestreamlinedthanitisinmany developing countries (Chen & Simeonsson,1994; Hamid, 1993; Peshawaria et al., 1998).Neonatalservicesbecomeavailablewhenachildisidentified at risk of or with a disability at birth, while aphonecalltoChildFindcanresultinaprofessionalevaluation to determine the type of disability andappropriateintervention.Inaddition,theIndividualswith Disabilities Act (IDEA), the legal mandateforafree,appropriatepubliceducationintheleastrestrictive environment, provides further specificity of service. Stemming from the establishment ofparent organizations and similar advocacygroups,parent-to-parentnetworkshavebecomeanintegralaspect of information dissemination, amongother purposes, in the US. Finally, for parentsmotivated to conduct their own research on whatmight be available, there are alternative sourcesof information: in order of preference, parentorganizations,professionals,friends,andbooksandmagazines in libraries(Marden&Nicholas,1997)while,morerecently,theInternetservesasamajorclearinghouse(Turnbull,etal.,2006).

Therewerebroadersocialandpolitical factorsthatfurtheraffectedtheseparents’lackofinformation.Forone,legislationforpeoplewithdisabilitiesisarecentevent(forareviewoftheselegislations,seeMisra,2000).However,noneoftheseActsensuresparental rights to services (Pandey, Chirimar &D’Souza, 2005). It is significant that among this group,onlyonemotherknewofoneAct.

Foranother,themajorityofservicesareprovidedto children through private or non-government

organizations that charge fees. However, regulareducationprivateschoolswillrarelyadmitstudentswith disabilities because of the societal pressuresforacademicsuccess(Premji,2005)andtheregulareducationcurriculumisnotadaptedforstudentswithdisabilities(Misra,2000).Further,mostservicestendtobelocatedinurbanareas,particularlythebiggercities(GovindRao&Reddy,2004).Asaresult,poordisseminationandascarcityofresourcescombinedto make access to services difficult.

Initially,theparentssearchedlocally,visitingthefamilyphysicianiftheylivedinsmalltownsorintheremotehills.However,theseruralareasorsmalltowns either had no services at all or the servicesprovedunsatisfactoryovertime.WhenRosereturnedfromthecitytoherhometownwithadiagnosisofautism for her son, the local pediatrician “did notknowanythingaboutautismandtold[her] thathewas hearing this [word] for the first time.” Coming quicklytotermswiththelackofresourcesintheirimmediatevicinityorbasedontherecommendationsofthelocalmedicalexpert,theythencasttheirnetwidertoconsideroptionsthatmightbeavailableinlargercities.

Whileallthemothersintheyoungadultgrouplivedinthecityinwhichthestudywasconducted,it is noteworthy that four out of five mothers from the preschool group had moved to it because itofferedmoreservicesforchildrenwithdisabilities,leavingsmallertowns,someinneighboringstates,or remote, rural areas.The renown and reputationofafacilitydrewthem.Theycameforashortstaytoavailofits“outpatient”servicesandthenstayedon,rentingasmallapartmentandvisitingthefamilyonweekendsandoverthesummer.Itisevenmoresignificant that all the mothers in the young adult group and two in the preschool group had furtherspentanextendedperiodoftimerangingfromtwomonths to two years in a neighboring metropolis,about300kilometersaway,lookingforappropriateservices. This willingness to relocate in order toreceiveservices,oftenatgreatpersonalcost,isnotuncommon among middle-class families with achildwithadisability(Mukherjee,2003).

In summary, parents’ access to services wasimpeded by various cultural influences, including


familial and societal attitudes towards disability,a milieu of professional authority, and inadequateinfrastructure for information dissemination. Thenext section identifies concerns specific to each group,theparentsofthepreschoolersandtheparentsoftheyoungadults.

Barriers to Meeting Educational Goals

Besides the common concern about accessingservices, each group had specific concerns relating to their goals for their child. The parents of thepreschoolerswantedtheirchildtoacquireappropriatelanguage, or “learn to speak”, to transition to aregular school while the second group of parentswanted their young adult to acquire the skills totransitionto“anappropriatejob.”Theimplicationsofthesegoalsarediscussedwithinthecontextofthemultilingual and caste-based society in which thefamilieslived.

Learning “To Speak” in a Multilingual Society. The preschoolers’ parents perceived languageacquisitionor“learningtospeak”asthebenchmarkfor their child becoming normal and being ableto transition to regular school. The followingstatement was fairly typical of the mothers of thepreschoolers:

Whenhelearnstospeakandbecomenormal,hecanstopgoing(totheClinic)andgotoschool.ThatisallIprayfor.However, two cultural factors complicated the

situation for these Indian preschoolers. One, Indiahas one national language, Hindi, and 18 regionallanguages,witheachstatehaving itsownregionallanguage(Ramaa,2000).English,asaninternationallanguage,iscompulsoryinschools.InSouthIndia,each of the four main states has an official language andeverychildisexpectedtolearntospeak,read,and write the state regional language, Hindi, andEnglish. As a result, although one language maypredominate in a specific region or state, residents will typically be multilingual, as the official language andthespokenlanguagemaynotcoincide.

The preschoolers in this study had cognitiveimpairments that had contributed to delays inspeech and language acquisition. Some of them

had adequate receptive, but very little expressivelanguage in a regional language depending uponwhich part of South India they came, and noknowledgeofHindiorEnglish.Sincetheirteachersat the preschool Clinic also came from differentpartsofIndia, theytoospokeavarietyofregionallanguages.Asanationalinstitute,Englishwasboththe medium of instruction and the one commonlanguage, so all the preschoolers were introducedtoitas theylearnt theEnglishalphabetandwordsinEnglisheachletterstartedwith.Insomecases,astudentmightbeplacedwitha teacherwhospokethe same regional language, which was helpful ifthechildwasstrugglingwithEnglish,butthiswasnotalwaysthecase.Thiscreatedasituationwherechildren who had been diagnosed with languagedelaywere receiving speechand language therapyina languageunfamiliar,evenforeign, to thembyteacherswhodidnotalwaysspeakthelanguagetheywerefamiliarwith.

The second cultural influence lies in the significance that the parents did not object to their children being introduced to English, althoughtheysawthemstrugglingwithit,becausetheysawits acquisition as being directly linked with socialmobility.Given thesocietalpressure foreconomicsuccess(Premji,2005),learningEnglish,thevehicletobetterjobsandthereforeabetterlifestyle(Pinto&Sahu,2001),wasanaturalcorollarytolearningtospeak.Asresearchonbilingualeducationindicatesthatacquisitionofasecondlanguagepriortomasteryof the first has been found to often result in children strugglingtomasterboth(Germanos-Koutsounadis,2001), the presence of language delay can beexpectedtoimpactlanguageacquisitionfurther.

Finding an “Appropriate Job” in a Caste-Based Society. Specific issues the parents of the young adults raised were related to the difficulties they faced finding jobs for their children, given the caste barriersandfamilialstigmathatplacedconstraintsonappropriatenessofcertaintypesofemployment,andthepaucityofgovernment-fundedopportunitiesforemploymentforpersonswithintellectualdisabilities.Thosejobsthatwereconsideredsuitableaccordingto caste required a certain level of competency in


money management, and generated additionalconcernsabouttheirdaughters’andsons’safety.

Caste in India is a major determinant of aperson’soccupation(Beteille,1992).Despiteseveralgovernmentaleffortstoameliorateitseffectsthroughaffirmative action, this situation continues to prevail (Persha & Rao, 2003; Thomas & Thomas, 2002).The parameters of the caste system relegate thoseoccupations that are considered menial and lowly,suchascarpentryandshoemaking, tomembersoflower castes, and only those belonging to a highcaste, such as Brahmin, are permitted to occupypositionsofhigherstandingandstatus.Whenstrictlyobserved,thecastesystemrestrictsjoboptionsforall itsmemberswherebyacobblermaynotaspireto any other profession, and, by the same token,members of high castes would be defiled if they pursuedavocationthatrequiredmanuallabor.Whatthis meant for these young adults is that, despitetheircognitiveimpairmentsthatmademanuallabormore compatible with their strengths, their uppercaste status precluded the possibility of pursuingjobs that would require fewer intellectual skills.ThressiakuttyandGovindRao(2001),describingtheeffortsofprofessionalstodevelopatransitionplanfora17-year-oldboywithmildmentalretardationandcerebralpalsy,notethat,“astheboybelongedto an upper middle class joint family having abusinessbackground,theparentswerekeenthathisjobshouldsuittheirsocioeconomicstatus(p.49).”He was found the job of issuing receipts, using abillingmachinethatcouldbeoperatedfromasittingposition,inhisfather’scompany.

Another limitation was that most of thegovernment-fundedprogramsfocusonrehabilitationforadultswithphysicaldisabilities,and,additionally,areavailableprimarily in the largercities (GovindRao & Reddy, 2004). In the city in which theseparentslived,therewasonlyonefacility,aprivateagency that offered vocational opportunities foryoungadultswithdisabilitiesinashelteredworkshopenvironment.Asthiscateredmainlytostudentswithmoderatedevelopmentaldisabilities,theparentshadrejectedthisoptionasbeinginappropriatefortheirchildrenwhomtheysawashavinglesschallenging

needs and benefiting from a more inclusive job environment.

A final constraint was the concern regarding their child’spersonalsafety,astheparentsfelttheirchild’sdisabilityrenderedthemespeciallyvulnerable.Thisreluctance,basedonfears“bothrealandimagined”(Sen&Tuli,1991)hascontributedtothestereotypeof the over-protective parent among professionals(Peshawaria, et al., 1998; Zoengpani, 2005). Themother of the 16-year-old daughter worried aboutthepossibilityofsexualabuseorexploitation:

There is screen-printing training available, butonlyoneladyworksattheinstitution.Therestare gents. So it is a risky place to send a girlthere.Theotherparentsworriedthatanunscrupulous

public could exploit their sons. As one parentdescribed:

Itisveryeasytoexploitthem.Theshopwallahscheat them. Even the auto (rickshaw) driversbehaveinadifferentway.Theysay,themoneyyouhavegivenis less(thanthefare)anddropthem off in some very far away places, eventhoughhehasenoughmoney.Identifyingtheappropriatejob,asaresult,was

proving a daunting task.Options theparentswerewillingtoconsiderasbeingwithintheseconstraintswere, for the boys, managing a telephone booth,a Xerox shop, or a mechanical workshop, jobsthat require money management skills and for thegirls, typing which requires literacy skills. Moneymanagement, then,wasanecessaryprerequisite toindependence.Asoneparentstated:

We wish him to have a normal life. The onlyproblem is he does not have money concepts.He goes to the shops (to run errands and buygroceries) boldly and regularly. Whateverchange they give, he brings back. He can’tmanagechange.Thatishisweakpoint.Ifhecanunderstandhowtocountthemoney,hecanlivewithoutothers’help.Interestingly, rather than depending upon

formalnetworks,liketheschool,theparentslookedwithin the informal, family network to find these appropriate jobs, because this way, they couldensurethatthejobmetallthreecriteriaofmatching


thecastestatus,providingasafeworkenvironment,and the accommodations and support the youngadult would need. One mother was determined tofind her 16-year-old son a job in her sister’s factory wherehewouldgetthesupportsheneeded,besafe,and earn enough to be independent, at the risk ofdefying the pre-vocational teacher who believedthat,withhis talents,hecouldbecomeamusician– a job the mother believed was too competitiveandtheearningsuncertain.Anothermothersaidsheintended“toopenashop”wherehersoncouldbeaccommodatedandsupported.

Negative familial and societal attitudes and alackof information inhibit parents’ efforts to seekintervention and special education services whilethecomplexitiesof amultilingual andcaste-basedsocietyimpedetherealizationofthegoalsthattheirpreschool child learn to speak or their adolescentacquireanappropriatejob.Thenextsectiondiscussesimplicationsforprofessionals.

Implications for Professionals

The small sample size of this study limits itsgeneralizability.Additionally, the fathers’ separateopinionsandperspectiveswerenotelicitednorwereextendedfamilymembersinterviewedindeferenceto the mothers’ preference. Yet, despite theselimitations, the findings merit serious consideration and have significant implications for professionals.

As Coleridge (2000) notes, any developmenteffort must be seen through the filter of culture. Further, India is a culture in transition (Thomas& Thomas, 2002; Srinivasan & Karlan, 1997).Coleridge (2000) asserts that while modernizinginfluences, such as television, the Internet, mass migrationandtourismhaveaffectedurbandwellersso that the global culture is manifested in superficial matterssuchasfood,entertainment,anddress,corevalues,suchasthoserelatingtoclass,marriage,andfamilylife,areslowertochange,eveninurbanareas.Asheputsit,“middleandupperclassyoungmeninBombay and Bangalore dressed in trendy westernclothes and designer sunglasses may still marrywivesselectedbytheirparentsonstrictlycastelines

(p.25).”Ontheotherhand,SrinivasanandKarlan(1997) suggest that these very same modernizinginfluences in a climate of fierce global economic competitionhavecontributedtoradicalchangesinchild-rearingpracticesandfamilylifestylesamongurbanfamilies,astraditionalvaluesofcooperationandinherentstatusgraduallygivewaytothemorewesternvaluesof individualismandearnedstatus.Similarly,BoyceandLysack(2000)suggestthatthedifficulties parents face in finding appropriate jobs could “foreshadow increasing tensions betweenpeople with disabilities and able-bodied persons,as commercial enterprises, in aneffort to improveefficiency and enhance market shares, might prefer torecruitfast-working,able-bodiedemployeesandviewjobaccommodationsforpeoplewithdisabilitiesto be luxuries they can ill afford” (p. 35). On theflip side, as the economy shifts towards the service sector, theupsurge in theneed for soft skills,oralessabrasiveinterpersonalcommunicationstylethatisglobally-responsive(Jasrotia,2005),mayimproveatleastsomeoutwardaspectsofparent-professionalinteractions,ifnotthecurrentimbeddedhierarchicalstructureandtheimbalanceofpower.

Itiscrucialthatprofessionalsunderstandandtakeintoconsiderationtheselargerculturalandsocietalinfluences when working with families of children withdisabilities.However,thecomplexityofthesefactorsdoesnotallowforsimplesolutions.Attemptsby professionals to become more responsive tofamily needs by eliciting parents’ preferences forwhich language theywant theirpreschoolchild tolearn and providing instruction in it, creates someethical dilemmas. On the one hand, driven by theknowledgethatEnglishis“thepassporttotheworldof the educated elite” (Pinto & Sahu, 2001, p. 8),parentsmaychooseEnglishagainstthebestinterestsofthechild,while,ontheother,parentswhochoosea regional language are closing future educationaloptions for their child. Similarly, asking youngadults what their fathers or uncles do for a livingis an effective family-responsive strategy (Shevin,1986, cited in Kalyanpur, 1996). However, whilethemoreintellectualoccupationsofthemiddleclassmaynotbeanappropriateoptionforanintellectually


challengedyoungadult,bythesametoken,familiesmaynotwishtheiryoungadulttoengageinapursuitthatmightbemore suited tohisorher abilitybutwouldbedeemedunsuitablebythem.

How, then, is a professional to respond?KalyanpurandHarry(2004)havesuggestedtheneedforculturalreciprocitywherebyprofessionalsengagein a discourse with families towards developing acompromise that is acceptable to both parties. Aprimarystepwouldbetodevelopanawarenessofthe imbeddedculturalvaluesor the larger societalinfluences in professional recommendations for a service or families’ preferences. This is followedbyinformingparentsofthevalues,helpingthemtounderstand the consequencesof theirdecisionandallowingthemthedignityofrisk.Suchanapproachalso enables professionals to avoid stereotypingparents and begin to understand the factors thatinfluence parents’ decisions and coping behavior. Learning about the parents’ fear for their youngadult’ssafetywithinthecontextofanunscrupulouspublic;professionalsmaybelessinclinedtodismissthisasover-protectivebehaviorandtoofferoptionsthatrespondtothisconcern.

On a broader level, professionals can alsoworktocreategreaterdisabilityawarenesstowardschanging negative attitudes shame as feelings ofshame among extended family members and non-acceptanceamongthelargercommunity(Bwana&Kyohere,2002).Thishasincludedfund-raisingandvariety entertainment socials by private agenciesand government-sponsored messages in the media(Thomas & Thomas, 2002). When convinced byoutreachserviceprofessionalsof thepotential inachildwithdisabilities,extendedfamilymembershavebecome more willing to (a) mention the existenceofadisabledchild,and(b)enrollthedisabledchildin a school (M.Alur, personal communication,September 27, 2005). Acknowledging the role oftheextendedfamilyandinvolvingtheminpositiveways, suchas including them in the inputprocessandinvitingthemintotheclassroomtoobserve,canhelptoamelioratenegativeattitudessothatchangecanoccurinsmall,incrementalsteps.

References

Abe,Y.(1998).SpecialeducationreforminJapan.European Journal of Special Needs Education, 13(3),86-97.

Alur, M. (2001). Some cultural and moralimplications of inclusive education in India:A personal view. Journal of Moral Education, 30(3),287-292.

Aluri, U., & Karanth, P. (2002). Rehabilitationfacilities available for children with autism/PDD inBangalore city:A survey.Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, 13(2), 115-124.

Annapurna, M. (1997). Mentally handicapped children and family stress. New Delhi, India:DiscoveryPublishingHouse.

Beteille, A. (1992). The backward classes in contemporary India. Delhi: Oxford UniversityPress.

Boyce, W. & Lysack, C. (2000). Communityparticipation: Uncovering its meanings incommunity-based rehabilitation. Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal,Specialissue:CBRinTransition(pp.28-39).

Bwana,O.&Kyohere,O. (2002).Parents’ role incommunity-based rehabilitation. In S. Hartley(Ed.) Community-based rehabilitation: A participatory strategy in Africa.(pp.117–126).London:UniversityCollegePress.

Chen,J.,&Simeonsson,R.J.(1994).Childdisabilityand family needs in the People’s Republic ofChina. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research,17,25-37.

Coleridge, P. (2000). Disability and culture. Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal,Specialissue:CBRinTransition.(pp.14-27).


Daley,T.C. & Seligman, M.D. (2002). Diagnosticconceptualization of autism among Indianpsychiatrists, psychologists, and pediatricians.Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32(1),13-23.

Gandotra, V. (1991). A comparative analysis oftimemanagementbymothersoforthopedicallyhandicappedandmentallyretardedchildren.InS. Bharat & M. Desai, (Eds.). Research on families with problems in India,volumeII(pp.327-334).Bombay,India:TataInstituteofSocialSciences.

Germanos-Koutsounadis,V. (2001). The needs ofnon-English speaking background childrenwithadisability.International Journal of Early Childhood, 33(1),26-33.

GovindRao,L.&Prakasam,S.B.(2003).Parents’perceptions of quality of special educationservicesinNGOs.Edutracks,February,33-39.

Govind Rao, L. & Reddy, S.H.K. (2004).Organizational aspects of special schools formentally retardation in India. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 27(2),127-133.

Gupta, A., & Singhal, N. (2005). Psychosocialsupport for families of children with autism.Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, 16(2),62-83.

Gwalla-Ogisi, N., Nkabinde, Z., & Rodriguez,L. (1998). The social context of the specialeducation debate in South Africa. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 13(1),72-75.

Hamid,A.Y.S.(1993).Child-family characteristics and coping patterns of Indonesian families with a mentally retarded child.Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation, Catholic University, WashingtonDC.

Ingstad, B. & Whyte, S.R. (1995). Disability and culture. Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress.

Jacob, N. (2005). Educating children with visualimpairments in rural South India: examiningmaternal belief profiles. Disability & Society, 20(3),277-291.

Jasrotia, P. (2005). Selling hard skillsthrough soft skills. HCL Traininghttp://www.hclinfosystems.com/hr_train.htm(RetrievedOctober21,2005).

Kalyanpur, M. (1996). The influence of western specialeducationoncommunity-basedservicesinIndia.Disability & Society, 11(2),249-270.

Kalyanpur, M. (in press). Equity, quality andquantity: Accomplishments and continuingchallenges in inclusive education policy andserviceprovisioninIndia.International Journal of Inclusive Education.

Kalyanpur, M. & Harry, B. (2004). Culture in special education: Building reciprocal family-professional relationships.Baltimore:Brookes.

Konantambigi,R.M.(August,1996).Beliefs about child, childhood and upbringing: A crucial component of the developmental niche. Paperpresented at the International Society for theStudyofBehavioralDevelopment,Quebec.

Marden,M.&Nicholas,D.(1997).Theinformationneedsofparents.International Journal of Early Childhood, 29(2)33-38.

Miles,M.(1997).DisabledlearnersinSouthAsia:Lessonsfromthepastforeducationalexporters.International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 44(2),97-104.

Misra,A.(2000).SpecialeducationinIndia:Currentstatusand futuredirections.DISES Journal, 3,6-11.


Mukherjee,T.R.(2003).The mind tree: A miraculous child through the silence of autism.NewYork:ArcadePublishing.

National Sample Survey Organization [NSSO](2003). Disabled persons in India, NSS 58th round.(NewDelhi,GovernmentofIndia).

Pandey, S., Chirimar, P, & D’Souza, D. (2005).Disability and the law. New Delhi: DisabilityRightsLawNetwork.

Parasnis, I., DeCaro, J.J., & Raman, M.L. (1996).AttitudesofteachersandparentsinIndiatowardcareer choices for deaf and hearing people.American Annals of the Deaf, 141(4),303-308.

Persha, A.J. & Rao, V.R.P.S. (2003). Early intervention to intra-uterine growth retardation (IUGR) children at risk for developmental delay. Secunderabad: National Institute for theMentallyHandicapped.

Peshawaria, R. & Menon, D.K. (1991). WorkingwithfamiliesofchildrenwithmentalhandicapinIndia:Variousmodels.Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 4(4),345-351.

Peshawaria,R.,Menon,D.K.,Ganguly,R.,Roy,S.,RajamPillay,P.R.S.,&Gupta,S.(1998).Astudyof facilitators and inhibitors that affect copingin parents of children with mental retardationinIndia.Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, 9(1),1-9.

Pinto,P.E.&Sahu,N.(2001).Working with persons with disabilities: An Indian perspective.Buffalo,NY: Center for International RehabilitationResearchInformationandExchange.

Premji,A.Z.(January14,2005).Dancingintherain.The Times of India,p.10.

Ramaa, S. (2000). Two decades of research onlearningdisabilities in India.Dyslexia, 6, 268-283.

Rao, I. (1997). Special educational needs in earlchildhood care: An inclusive early childhoodeducationprogramme.InUNESCO(Ed.).First steps: Stories on inclusion in early childhood education(pp.61-69).Paris:UNESCO.

Rao, L.G., Narayan, J, & Mani, M.N.G. (2005).Status of education of children with disabilities.Secunderabad:NationalInstitutefortheMentallyHandicapped.

Rao, S. (2006). Parameters of normality andcultural constructions of ‘mental retardation’:perspectives of Bengali families. Disability & Society, 21(2),159-178.

Rao,S.(2001).“Alittleinconvenience”:PerspectivesofBengalifamiliesofchildrenwithdisabilitiesonlabelingandinclusion.Disability & Society, 16(4),531-548.

Sen,A.,&Tuli,K. (1991).Agonies of the familyhaving a mentally handicapped child. In S.Bharat&M.Desai,(Eds.).Research on families with problems in India, volume II (pp. 299-312). Bombay, India: Tata Institute of SocialSciences.

Shanmugavelayutham,K.(1999).Mentally retarded

children and their families: Challenges ahead.NewDelhi,India:MittalPublications.

Srinivasan, B. & Karlan, G.R. (1997). Culturallyresponsive early intervention programs: Issuesin India. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 44(4),367-385.

Srivastava,P.(2004).A study of the role of parental support in the education of children with mental retardation. Unpublished master’s thesis,OsmaniaUniversity,Hyderabad,India.


Strauss,A.&Corbin,J.(1998).Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 2nd ed. NewburyPark,CA:Sage.

Thomas,M.&Thomas,M.J. (2002).Anoverviewof disability issues in SouthAsia. Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, 13(2),62-84.

Thressiakutty, A.T. & Govinda Rao, L. (2001).Transition of persons with mental retardation from school to work. Secunderabad, India: NationalInstitutefortheMentallyHandicapped.

Turnbull, A., Turnbull, R., Erwin, E. & Soodak,L. (2006). Families, professionals, and exceptionality: Positive outcomes through partnerships and trust, 5th ed. Upper saddleRiver,NJ:Merrill-PrenticeHall.

Zhang, D., Wehmeyer, M.L. & Chen, L.J (2005).Parentandteacherengagement infosteringtheself-determination of students with disabilities.Remedial and Special Education, 26(1),55-64.

Zoengpani. (2005). Psychometric evaluation ofparental rearing practices: A study of Mizo.Disabilities and Impairments, 19(1),35-43.

The authors thank the Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information and Exchange (CIRRIE) for making this research possible, and Dr. S. Ramaa, Regional Institute of Education, Mysore, India, for facilitation and support of the project.


Programs for Children with Special Needs in Iran: The Importance of Early Intervention

Mokhtar Malekpour, Ph.D.ProfessorofSpecialEducation

[email protected]

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to discuss programs that serve children with special needs in Iran, as well as early intervention. These programs are provided through two separate governmental organizations: the Well-Fare Department, and Special Education Organization. These programs include different types of habilitation services such as (a) vocational training, (b) speech therapy, occupational therapy, (c) community based rehabilitation and (d) special education services that are offered in special schools. Other programs consist of inclusive education and recently, early intervention. Private sectors carry out most early intervention programs in Iran. Since there is some evidence which indicate that children do not benefit enough from inclusive education, therefore the efficacy of such program needs to be investigated.

Service Delivery System for Children with Special Needs in Iran

In Iran, there are two organizations whichundertake training children with special needs:the Well-Fare Department and Special EducationOrganization.

Well-Fare Department

Thisdepartmentisresponsibleforhabilitationofall typesofchildrenwithspecialneeds. Itprovidesserviceactivitiessuchasvocationaltraining,speechtherapy, occupational therapy and social-behavioraltraining.Italsoofferscommunitybasedrehabilitation(CBR)aswellasrunning largeresidential facilitiesforchildrenthatareseverelyandprofoundlymentallyretarded.

Special Education Organization

This organization is primarily responsible forthe education of children with special needs. Thisincludeschildrenthatareblind,thedeafandmildlymentallyretarded.Thespecialeducationorganizationrunsspecialschoolsandinclusiveeducation.Special

schoolsystemshavetwolevels:(a)primaryschoolsand (b) intermediate schools. Prior to entering aprimaryschool,achildwithspecialneedshastogothroughapreschoolclassinordertobecomefamiliarwith early mental concepts and self-help skills.Attheprimarylevel,childrenreceiveacademictrainingsuch as reading, writing, and mathematics. At theintermediate level,studentswithdisabilitiesreceivebothacademicandvocationaltraining.

Inclusive Education

The inclusive education program for childrenwith borderline intelligence began in 1999 in Iran.The goals of implementing inclusive educationincludedesegregation,decreasingthecostsofspecialeducationprograms,observingtherightofdisabledchildrenand topayattention to theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organizations (UNESCO)guidelines.

When this program started in Iran, regularteacherswerenottrainedhowtocopewithchildren’slearning and behavioral problems in their classes.In general, personnel in regular schools that wereresponsibleforthisimportantjobwerenotprepared.Asaresultofthisshortcomingmanyproblemsbegan


to emerge and still continue. Because of lack ofresearchit isnotclear towhatextent thisprogramhasbeensuccessful.According toauthor’sclinicalexperienceaswellasmanyteachers’reports,manychildren who participate in inclusive education donotreceiveapropereducationandtheydonotgainmore social skills when compared to children inspecialschools.Currently,intheauthor’sopinion,itappears that inclusive education has failed to fulfill itsgoals.

The Need for Early Intervention

The aim of early intervention programs foryoung children with special needs is to enablepractitioners, parents and trainers to provide andimplement comprehensive techniques in order toactivate the child’s sensory-motor development,speech,cognition,andsocial–emotionalbehavior.

Early intervention programs try to decreasebiological and environmental difficulties in young children (under age six), and help those childrenwho are at risk of disability. Biological difficulties include prematurely, respiratory problems, braindamage, genetic problems, infectious diseases,toxinanddrugs.Theenvironmentalfactorsthatmayexpose theyoung children to the riskof disabilityarelackofparentalliteracy,economicandnutritionproblems, family stress, large size of family andincorrectbeliefsregardingchildrearingmethods.

Smith,GroenandWynn(2000),statethat,afteryearsofdebatingwhetherornotearlyinterventionhelpschildrenwithdevelopmentaldelays,researchershave largely come to agree on a middle ground:Early intervention is beneficial for many children. Studies suggest that early intervention programscan enhance the neurodevelopmental outcome ofpremature infants (Blair, Ramey, & Hardin, 1995;Guralnick,1996).

Inacollaborativestudy, infantsenrolled in theearlyinterventionprogramhadmeanIQscoresthatwere significantly higher than the control group at 5-year follow up (Brooks-Gunn et al., 1994;McCarton, Wallace, & Bennett 1995). This was

especiallytrueforthoseinfantswithmilddelaysandlowsocioeconomicstatus.

With regard to these facts, the use of earlyintervention programs is justifiable. In these programsall educational andhabilitationactivitieswhicharefocusedonthechildandparentalguidanceareemployed.

Agrowingawarenessofthemutualrelationshipsbetweenearlydevelopmentandthecontextswithinwhich it occurs has significantly affected daily practice inearly intervention.Anunderstandingofthe mutual influence among domains is especially important when children have specific disabilities in one domain that may interfere with optimaldevelopment in other domains, as when a motordisabilityimpedesthechild’sopportunitytoexplore.Interventionmayfocusnotonlyonremediationofthemotordisability,butalsoonprovidingexperiencesthatpreventpotentialnegativeimpactsoncognitive,social,oremotionaldevelopment.Childandcontextfunctionasasystemsuchthatchangesineitherthechild’s abilities or in the context will influence the dynamicbalancebetweenthem;bothareimportantintheintervention(McCollum,2002).

One important point has to be considered inimplementing early intervention, that is, effectiveintervention should be based on an individualprogram in order to adapt defined goals with child’s needsandabilities.

With regard to three factors that is, biological,psychological,andsocialwhichareassociatedwithhumanproblems,itisrecommendedthatweconsiderthechildasabiopsychosocialentity.Byconsideringthis, early intervention programs can better dealwiththechild’sproblems,becausethismodeltakesintoaccountallproblemsassociatedwiththechild’sdisability.Therefore,inearlyinterventionprograms,a multidisciplinary approach (team) has to beinvolved.Themulti-disciplinaryteammembersmayconsistofPhysiotherapist,OccupationalTherapist,SpeechTherapist, DevelopmentalTherapist (Earlyintervention trainer), Music Therapist, ComputerTherapist,andPreschooltrainer.


Early Intervention in Iran

Until recently, most professionals who workwith children with special needs in Iran did notknowaboutearlyinterventionprogramsorabouttherationale and efficacy of these programs. In 1990, itwasdecidedtointroduceandtoimplementtheseprograms in the cityof Isfahan in Iran; the authorwasfacedwithoppositionsonthepartofWell-FareDepartmentauthorities.Presumably, thereasonfortheseoppositionswasthelackofknowledgeaboutthenatureofdisabilitiesandtheimportanceofearlyexperiences.Therefore, one essential ingredient ofSpecialEducationwasmissing in Iran.Hence, theauthorattemptedtointroducethismovementaswellas its positive effects.The results ofmany studieshaveshownthatearlyinterventioncouldhelpmanyat-riskchildrenaswellaschildrenwithadisability.TheauthordecidedtoinformtheprofessionalsandWell-Fare Department authorities about the efficacy ofearly interventionprogramsinIran.Todoso,apilotstudywasimplementedwithasmallgroupofyoung children with mild mental disabilities.ThisstudywaspublishedinResearchBulletinofIsfahanUniversityin1992.Theresultsofthisstudyshowedthat these children improved in many aspects ofdevelopment such as motor activities, speech,cognition, and social-emotional skills (Malekpour,1992).Theresultsofthisstudyactedasasparkforprofessionals as well as authorities to think abouttheseprograms.Today,theWell-FareDepartmentandsomeprivatecenterscarryoutearlyinterventionprogramsinIran.

Traditionally, all efforts were based on thisideathatchildrenwithspecialneedshaveonetypeof problem. While, we know that these childrendifferfromeachotherintermsofthenatureoftheirproblems. In this regard, Greenspan and Wieder(1998)stressthateachchildhashis/herownnervoussystem and mental process. Therefore, each childshould be treated according to his/her specific nervous system.Practitioners andparents should recognizethe child’s specific patterns. These patterns not onlyincludethechild’sbiologicalprocessbutalsoinclude how the child communicates with his/her

environment.Throughunderstandingthesepatterns,we can provide a proper intervention procedurewhich fits the child’s needs.

Early Intervention Programs Can Not be Sustained Without Parent’s Active Participation

Since, in early intervention, the emphasis isplacedonthedevelopmentofthechild’smilestonesprogressionandtheinteractionbetweentheparent’sand theirchildren,allowingparents toactasearlyinterventionists.

The various activities which parents could usein early intervention are: early stimulation, home-basedprograms,aselfhelpgroup,storytelling,play,nurseryschools,andtapedorvideoedinformation.For example, storytelling has recently emergedas a cognitive skill in the process of intellectualdevelopment (Yikim, 1999).Also, nursery schoolscanprovideanormalenvironmentinsuchawaythatthechildwithspecialneedshasnormalbehavioralpatternstoimitate.Theseactivitiescouldhelpachilddevelopintheareasofmotor,languageandcognitionas well as socialization and self-help skills. As aresult of parental activities and participation withthechild,theteachercouldsharetheirinformationabout the child’s strengths and weaknesses withmulti-disciplinaryteamaccordingtotheirknowledgeand experiences.The relationship between parentsandtheprofessionalshasagreatimpactonachild’developmental progress. Parental activities couldserveasearlyinterventionsforthedevelopmentofthechildwithspecialneeds.Theseearlyexperiencesplayakeyroleinchild’sbraindevelopment.Recentbrain research indicates that the young brain isheavily influenced by different environmental influences at particular points in its development (Schore, 1997). Thus, whereas adequate nutritionin the mother influences fetal brain development, social interaction shapes the brain’s developmentafterbirth.


The Significance of Neural Plasticity and the Influence of Environment

During infancy thehumanbrain isveryplasticand flexible, compared to other mammals it is, at birth,relativelyunderdeveloped(Kolb&Whishaw,1996).Thakker(2000),statesthatthehumaninfantis born comparatively premature and during the first yearoflifeitsbraingrowsrapidly.

Since the brain develops in a hierarchicalfashionfromfewercomplexes(brainstem)tomorecomplexes(limbicsystemandcorticalareas) therewillnecessarybedifferentcriticalperiodsforC.N.S.andbrainorganization(Schore,1997).

The notion of neural plasticity means, in spiteof the fact, that neurons which sustain an injurycould not be replaced; adjacent neurons could beactivated by environmental stimuli. Therefore,despitelosingsomeneurons,bypossessingmillionsofbraincells,theinfantisstillabletocontinuehislearning.Thismaybebecausethenewbornbrainisrelativelyundifferentiatedandsubstantialfunctionalreorganizationofundamagedtissuecancompensateforthelossofinfractedtissue(Mackintosh,1995).Therefore,theinfantbrainismuchmoremalleable(plastic) than the adult brain and is literallyconstructedbyexperience.Hence,thehumanbraingrowthistosomeextentcontextdependent,meaningthat it is influenced by environmental factors.

Siegel(1998),statesthatchild’searlyexperiencesmake a significant role in brain development. That is to say, neural connections are made andbeing reinforced based on the quality and type ofexperience.

It can be inferred that, experience in the formof formal or informal education influences brain structure in humans. Shonkoff and Phillips (2001)expressthat,braindevelopmentisaffectedbyearlyexperiences.Stermer(1997)also,stressesthatchild’sneuraldevelopmentcanbedisruptedbecauseoflackofsensoryexperience.

Siegel (1998) stresses that an infant’s first experiences can play a major role in braindevelopment. Neural connections are created orstrengtheneddependingon the typeandqualityof

experience.Likewise,alackofstimulationmayleadtoaslowingdownofterminationofsynapticgrowth.Alsoimportantinthisprocessistheroleofgeneticinformation that has the basis for environmentalinput(Greenough&Black,1992).Inessence,genesandexperienceinteractinneuraldevelopment(withgenemappingoutabroadoutlinefordevelopmentand experience filling in the detail). Central to this interaction is the concept of “critical periods”whichreferstothefactthatsometypesoraspectsofdevelopmentaredependentonexperienceoccurringataparticular time (Greenough,Black&Wallace,1987). As noted by Siegel (1998) “Genes do notexist inavacuum,but requireexperience for theirexpression.Genesareactivatedbyexperience”(p.3).Siegel alsodiscusses themost important aspect ofexperience in the first few years of life, which is of course the relationship between infant andcaregiver.

Conclusion

The Iran system includes habilitation for alltypesofchildrenwithspecialneeds,specialschools,inclusive education, as well as early intervention.With regards to inclusive education, additionalresearch and resources are needed to ensure thatit will be successful. Neural plasticity and earlyexperienceshavearemarkableimpactonremediationor decreasing the biological and environmentaldifficulties in young disabled children or in those infants who are at risk of disability. Also, parentinvolvement in early intervention programs is akey factor in successful interventions. This meansthatparenteducationprogramsmaybeusedtohelpparentssetuprichenvironmentsforexplorationandotheractivitiessuchasplay.

References

Blair, C., Ramey, C.T., & Hardin, J.M. (1995).Early intervention for low birth weight,prematureinfants:Participationandintellectualdevelopment. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 99,542-554.


Brooks - Gunn, J., McCarton, C.M., Casey, P.H.,McCormik,M.C.,Bauer,C.R.,Bernbaum,J.C.,Tyson, J., Swanson, M., Bennet, F.C., Scott,D.T.,Tonascia,J.,&Meinert,C.L.(1994).Earlyintervention in low - birth -weight prematureinfants: Results through age 5 years from theinfanthealthanddevelopmentprogram.Journal of the American Medical Association, 272,1257-1262.

Greenough, W.T. & Black, J.E. (1992). Inductionofbrain structurebyexperience:Substrates forcognitivedevelopment.InM.R.GunnarandC.A. Nelson (Eds.), Developmental behavioral neuroscience: The Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, 24,155-200.

Greenough, W.T., Black, J.E. & Wallace, C.S.(1987).Experienceandbraindevelopment.Child Development, 58,539-559.

Greenspan,S.L.&Wieder.S.(1998).The child with special needs.Massachusetts:PerseusBooks.

Guralnick, M.J. (Ed). (1996). The effectiveness of early intervention.Baltimore:PaulH.Brookes.

Kolb,B.&Whishaw,I.Q.(1996).Fundamentals of human neuropsychology (4th Ed.). New York:W.H.FreemanandCompany.

McCarton, C.M., Wallace, I.F., & Bennet, F.C.(1995).Preventive interventionswith lowbirthweightprematureinfants:Anevaluationoftheirsuccess.Seminars in perinatalogy, 19,330–340.

Mackintosh,N. (1995).Understanding your brain.London:UsbornPublishingLtd.UsbornHouse.

Malekpour, M. (1992). Early intervention andintegration. Research Bulletin of Isfahan University, 4,99-114.Isfahan,Iran.

McCollum, J.A. (2002). Influencing the development of young children with disabilities: Currentthemesinearlyintervention.Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 7,4-9.

Shonkoff,J.P.&Phillips,D.A.(2001).Fromneuronstoneighborhood:Thescienceofearlychildhooddevelopment:Zero to Three, 5,4-7.

Schore,R.(1997).Rethinking the brain-new insights into early development.NewYork:FamiliesandWorkInstitute.

Siegel, D.J. (1998).The developing mind:Towardaneurobiologyofinterpersonalexperience.The Signal, 6,1-10.

Smith, T., Groen, A.D., & Wynn, J.W. (2000).Randomizedtrialofintensiveearlyinterventionfor children with pervasive developmentaldisorder.American Journal of Mental Retardation, 105,4,269-285.

Stermer, J. (1997).Homevisit givekids a chance.Chicago Tribune, 16.

Thakker,J.(2000).Premature babies: The importance of early intervention. New Zealand: UniversityofCanterbury.Christchurch.

Yikim, S. (1999). The effect of storytelling andpretendplayoncognitiveprocesses,short-termand long- term narrative recall. Child Study Journal, 26,173.


From Special Schools to Inclusive Education: The Way Forward for Developing Countries South of the Sahara

Dr. John CharemaPrincipal,MophatoPrivateSchool

FrancistownBotswana

[email protected]

Abstract

Persons with disabilities, especially children and the young continue to be the most disadvantaged groups in all societies (Hegarty & Alur, 2002). They manifest a number of limitations and are subjected to social discrimination, impoverished educational experiences and above all, very limited work opportunities. In developing countries, where unemployment and under-employment is high, and resources are scarce, the scope of preventing or curing, either partially or fully, and educating, training and rehabilitating the disabled is limited. This is even worse in rural areas. It is ironic that although research [United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, (UNESCO) 1996] indicates that 87% of the disabled population, in developing countries, lives in rural areas, almost all the education and training institutions for people with disabilities are located in urban areas.

This paper is concerned with the challenges that developing countries face in implementing Inclusive Education. These challenges include, lack of relevant research information, inadequate support services, lack of appropriate facilities and materials, inadequate training programs and ineffective policies and legislation. Considering financial constraints and political instability experienced in most developing countries, “practical” suggestions are given. These include, establishment of village or rural resource and research centers, mobile units and community-based support systems.

Introduction

Developing countries can no longer affordto keep on theorizing about inclusion whilemillionsofchildrenwithdisabilitiescontinuetobemarginalized,segregated,viewedasobjectsofpityand disadvantaged both in school and in society.Timehascomeforprofessionals,parentsandheadsofgovernmentsofdevelopingcountriestopulltheirresources together and create equal opportunities,conducivelearningenvironmentsandsocialjusticefor children with disabilities. It is now widelyaccepted that children with disabilities should beeducated alongside their age peers and be treatedas full members of their community Developingcountries are lagging behind in keeping abreastwiththechangesinspecialeducation.Majorfactors

that retard progress in implementing InclusiveEducation(IE)inthesecountriesarelackoffundingforinformativeresearch,lackofadequateresourcesto equip, facilitate and expand the provision forchildren with special needs, misdirection of fundstowards political security, corruption, limitedpersonnel training programs, inadequate qualified personnel, the absence of enabling legislation andlimitedsupportservices.Withoutaccurateresearchfigures, most developing countries do not know the sizeof theirproblemin termsof thepopulationofschool going age children with disabilities, whomthey need to provide for. Policies that support theeducation of children with disabilities shouldreasonablymatchtheavailableresourcesinacountryandbeenforcedinordertoachieveresults.Withtheimplementationofinclusiveeducation,allchildren,


boysandgirlsinrural,urban,andsuburbanareas,atpre-schools,elementaryandsecondarylevelareabletoenjoythecompanyoftheirpeersandtheactivitiesof the regular school settings. While it is everyperson’sinherentrighttoparticipatefullyinsociety,translating thisphilosophy into reality isaprocessthat requires collaboration, teamwork, flexibility, a willingnesstotakerisks,andsupportfromawholearray of individuals, services and institutions.Thegoalofinclusiveeducationistoprepareallchildrenfor productive lives, as full participating membersoftheircommunity.Itmustbenotedthatinclusionshouldnotimplydumpingorplacingchildrenwithspecialneedsinregularclassroomswithoutadequatesupport,relevantmaterialsandappropriateservices,neither should it mean placing undue burdens onteachers and peers. Successful inclusive educationrequirescarefulassessment,planning,andadaptationof curriculum, provision of appropriate teachingmaterials,adequatesupportandpartnership.

Relevant Research Information

Developing countries south of Sahara need toupdate their research figures in order for them to have full knowledge of the size of their problemsconcerningchildrenwithdisabilitiestobeprovidedfor. Most of the figures they have are five to ten years behind(Grol,2000;Kisanji,1995),ortheyrelyonUnitedNations(UN)estimates.Thereisnoreliableinformation about types and incidence of specialeducational needs in developing countries. TheWorld Health Organization (WHO) concludes that40%ofthepopulationindevelopingcountrieshasadisability,withabout10%ofschoolgoingage.Validandreliableassessmentrecordsdonotexistinmostdevelopingcountries(Grol,2000).Itisimportantforthesecountriestoembarkonseriousinvestigationorresearch in order to come up with accurate figures that will help them to plan and provide adequateresources for inclusive education. The JomtienconferenceheldinThailandhadthegoal“EducationForAllby2000”byprovidingfreeeducationto200million children worldwide. According to United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural

Organization, (UNESCO) (1994), 16 countries insub-SaharanAfricaaccount foralmostallchildreninAfricabetweensixandelevenyears.Thereportindicates that this regionaccounts forone-thirdoftheworld’schildrenwhoareoutofschool.Astudycarried out by Grol (2000) in Botswana, Kenya,Nigeria and Zimbabwe, indicates that programsin the area of special educational needs are underrepresentedandhavepoor,verylittleornon-existentdocumentedliterature. Theauthor pointsout thatlack of written and documented research appearsto be a specific African problem. This will make developing countries continue to import westernliteratureandideologiesthatmaynotworkintheirsituations. Documented literature relevant to theeconomic, cultural and political developments indeveloping countries is thin and sparse.Thereforeprofessionals who are keen to carry out researchin this area grapple for funds and informationto equip the working personnel with up to datereading materials. Economic and socio politicalfactorsaffectequityandqualityinbothgeneralandspecial education (UNESCO, 1993). A necessaryprecondition toappropriatepolicyformulationandprogramstrategyisavailabilityofdata.Itisevidentthatthereareconsiderabledatagapsindevelopingcountries and this makes it difficult for planning, implementing and supporting inclusive education.Therefore, it is imperative that research centersbe established to generate data that will provideup-to-date statistics for informative planning andimplementationofinclusiveprograms.

Support for Inclusion

Childrenwithdisabilities,whoareintegratedinregularschools,wouldneedadditionalprovisionandsupport in order to benefit socially, psychologically and educationally from any existing educationsystem. Most support systems offer a range ofdelivery services and placement alternatives forpupils with special educational needs.Approachesofthesupportoffereddifferfromcountrytocountrydependingontheadministration,qualityofpersonnelinvolved and the economic resources available.


While there is consensus on the implementationofinclusion,it isthewriter’sviewthatdevelopingcountrieshavenotyetreachedthepointwhereeveryschoolinalldevelopingcountrieshastoimplementinclusiveeducation.Althoughevidenceindicatesthatwholesale inclusive education is widely supportedduetothepositivesocialandeducationaloutcomesitcanproduceforlearnerswithspecialneeds(Mills,Cole, Jenkin, & Dale, 1998; Vaughn, Elbaum,Schumm & Hughs, 1998; Waldron & McLeskey,1998) developing countries still have a long waybeforetheycanreachthatstage.Itisimportanttoensure that all children who are included are benefiting fromtheprogramotherwiseregularschoolsbecomea dumping ground for children with disabilities inthenameofinclusion(Blunkett,2000;Vaughnetal.,1998;Winter,2000).Researchindicatesthatregularschoolteachers in developing countries expresspositiveattitudes towards the inclusionofchildrenwith disabilities (Mittler & Platt, 1995). Evidenceclearlysuggests thatwhere inclusion isadequatelyimplemented by the provision of the right supportservices, it provides numerous benefits to children withspecialneeds(UNESCO,2000;Winter,2000;WorldBank,2002).

Inclusiveprogramsaredesirable indevelopingcountries in that it is estimated that 80% of theworld’spopulationofpeoplewithdisabilitiesliveindevelopingcountriesofAsia,Africa,theCaribbean,LatinAmericaandtheMiddleEast,some150millionof thembeingchildren,butonly2%are receivingany form of special needs services (UNESCO,1993). A well-structured funding arrangement isdesirableformeetingthecostofprovidingadequateeducationalservicesforchildrenwithdisabilitiesininclusiveschools.Duetolackofrelevantresearch,data available on funding educational services ininclusive schools is at best scanty. Carrington &Robinson (2004) assert that in general, it appearsthat with the prevailing economic and politicalturbulence, in many developing countries, specialeducationservicesarenotbeingadequatelyfunded.World Bank (1996) reports show that educationalservices are deteriorating as a result of severedecreaseinfundinginmanyAfricancountries.The

SalamancaDeclarationin1994inItalyattheWorldCongress on special needs education reaffirmed the commitment of the world community (includingdeveloping countries), to give the highest policyandbudgetaryprioritytowardsinclusiveeducation,in order to include all children regardless ofindividual differences and disabilities (UNESCO,1994).Research indicates that inmanydevelopingcountries it remains the case that special needsprovisionwillnotbeapriorityofgovernmentpolicyand expenditure (Brohier, 1995; Kisanji, 1995;McConkey & O’Toole, 1995). According to Mba(1995)someofthereasonsgivenarethat;

1. the needs of the “normal” who are in themajority have to be met first prior to meeting thoseofindividualswithspecialneedswhoareintheminority.

2. due to lack of awareness of the potentialsof people with disabilities, expenditurefor services for people with disabilities isconsidered“awasteofscarcefunds”.

3. meetingtheneedsofcitizenswithdisabilitiesisconsidered“toocostly”,withoutreturn.

It remains the case that in several developingcountries financial provision for the education and other needs of individuals with disabilitiesis undertaken largely by non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs) (Fisher & Kennedy, 2001).A review of the situation (UNESCO, 1995) ofspecialeducation indevelopingcountries indicatesthat in twenty-six of them NGOs were consideredthemajorsourceoffunding,whileinseveralother,NGOs provide up to 40% of the costs of specialneedsprovision.

Facilities and Materials

Inadequatefacilitiesandlackofrelevantmaterialsisoneofthemajorobstaclestotheimplementationofinclusiveeducationindevelopingcountries(Charema&Peresuh,1996).AstudycarriedoutbyKristensenand Kristensen (1997) in Uganda and another byKisanji(1995)inTanzania,bothindicatethatinmostregularschoolswherechildrenwithdisabilitieswereintegrated,therequiredmaterialswerenotprovided


or were inadequate. Another study carried out inZambiabyKatwishi(1988)indicatesthattherewerenospecialistteachersinmostmainstreamschoolstoprovideimportantadvisoryservicesthatwouldassistregularteacherswithmanaginglearnerswithspecialneeds who were being integrated. In his researchstudyinZimbabwe,Charema(1990)indicatesthatinsomeof themainstreamschoolswherechildrenwithhearing impairmentswere integrated,hearingaidshadnobatteries,andorcords,someoftheearmoulds were chipped, some speech trainers werenotworking,andtherewerenosparepartstohavethemrepaired.Accordingtothewriter’sexperiencesin Zimbabwe, when he worked for the Jairos JiriAssociationforpeoplewithdisabilities,someofthewheel chairs were old fashioned and cumbersometopush.Onecouldnotwheeloneselfandthereforeneeded someone all the time, which deprived himof independence and privacy. There is need fordeveloping countries to make use of indigenousproductstomanufactureequipmentthatcanbeusedand serviced within the country. Due to financial crisis, there is a shortage of foreign currency toimport the much-needed equipment. Some peoplewith disabilities in Zimbabwe are making wheelchairs,andcalipersforpeoplewithdisabilities,usingimprovised materials. Other developing countriescanalsomakeuseoftheavailableresourcestomakesomeoftheequipmentinsteadofwaitingfordonoragenciestoprovidethem.

It is unfortunate that some of the funds meantfor children with special needs, are misdirectedtowards other causes thereby disadvantaging therightfulrecipients.Corruptionandpowertoruleforaslongasoneliveshavebecomethemajorcancerindevelopingcountries,andthereforefundsaredivertedtowardspolitical security andpersonalgain (Grol,2000).Ozoji (1995)states thatmost institutions indeveloping countries do not have the basic unitsandmaterialsnecessarytoprovideadequatespecialneedseducation.InAsia,Kholi(1993)reportsthatinstitutional facilities are grossly inadequate in allcountries in the continent as they are serving lessthan1%ofthepopulationwithspecialneeds.

Training Programs

Inadequate personnel training programs is oneof the problems faced by developing countries.Successful inclusive education programs requirethe services of different professionals who assistin identification, referral, diagnosis, treatment and training (Eleweke & Rodda, 2000). World Bank(2004)reportsthatadequatelytrainedprofessionalsare required in the provision of meaningfuleducationalservices tochildrenwithspecialneedsin regular schools. Meanwhile, research indicatesthatmostdevelopingcountriessouthoftheSaharahavetrainingprogramsforteachersofspecialneeds(Enon, 1997; Kisanji, 1996; Peresuh,Adenigba &Ogonda,1997),yetdevelopingcountrieslacktrainingprograms for other specialist professionals neededto support inclusion. Engelbrecht & Chris (1998)enforce that inclusive education demands relevanttrainingandsupportforallteachers.Thereareveryfew training programs for specialists personnelsuch as educational audiologists, physiotherapists,occupational therapists, speech and languagepathologists and communication support workerssuchas interpreters. Lackof relevant literature interms of cultural values and beliefs and financial constraints in developing countries, is a cause forconcern when one considers the adequacy of theteacher trainingprograms thatmainlyuseWesternideologiesandliteraturethatrefertomaterialsthatarenonexistentindevelopingcountries.

Policy and Legislation

Developing countries lack mandatorypolicies and legislation that support the effectiveimplementationofinclusionprograms(Grol,2000).These are essential to ensure that the requiredservices are provided and the basis for qualitycontrol and monitoring is in place. According toZindi(1997), in theorymanydevelopingcountriesshow interest in the education of children withspecial educational needs but realistically some ofthemarenotabletocarryouttheirgoodintentionsdue to lack of money. Some developing countries


developsplendidpolicyplanstostimulateprogramsthateducatechildrenwithspecialeducationalneedsinordertotemptdonorstodonatefundsbutfailtoimplement theprograms (Zindi,1997).Mandatorypoliciesandlawsarenecessaryintheimplementationof inclusive programs in that if enforced, they arelikely to produce protective safeguards whichguarantee the rights of the beneficiary to receive specific services, time of onset and phase plans, consequential effect for non-compliance, room forlitigation,accountability,evaluationandmonitoringprocedures (Eleweke, 1998). While financial constraintsandpoortechnologyarecrucialfactorsindevelopingcountries,politicalcorruption,ruthlesslycripplestheeffectivenessofpolicyandlegislation,hence the need for mandatory laws. A study byUNESCO(1996)showsthatspecialneedsprovisionin52membernationsindicateclearlythatlegislationisneededtoensurerightsofpeoplewithdisabilitiesto equal rights and opportunities.This can furtherhelp in securing the resources needed to translateabstractrightsintopracticalentitlements.Researchindicatesthatindevelopedcountriestheimportanceandpositiveimpactsofmandatorylawsandpolicieson the implementation of inclusive programs arerecognized (Ballard, 1996; Etscheidt, & Bartlet,1999;Harvey,1998).Consideringtheimportanceofenforcingpoliciesandlawsintheimplementationofinclusiveprogramsinordertorealizetheprovisionofappropriateservicesforindividualswithdisabilities,inclusive education in developing countries willremain at an embryonic stage due the absence ofmandatory laws and legislation influencing the provisionoftheseservices.

Suggestions for implementing inclusive education

Duetotheprevailingeconomicanddevelopmentaldifficulties in many developing countries, achieving Western-type notions of inclusive education willremain unrealistic. It is important to put in placestrategies that can bring beneficial inclusive education withinreachoftheteemingmillionsofindividualswith disabilities in developing countries. Effective

inclusiveeducationrequiresschoolorganizationstoaddressprofessionaldevelopmentontwolevels:re-culturing of the schools to reflect inclusive beliefs and values and enhancement of teacher skills andknowledge to address the learning needs of allstudents. There is need for change in policy andteachingpractice to allow fordiversity.Change insocietal attitude is one major factor that has greatinfluence on inclusive education. Although resource constraintsimpedetheprovisionandimplementationof inclusiveeducation indevelopingcountries, themajorproblemgoesbeyondthis.Ithasitsrootsinattitudesandperceptionsofthemainstreamsociety.There iswidespread ignorance regardingdisabilityandthepotentialthatpeoplewithdisabilitieshavetobecomeproductiveandself-reliantmembersofthesociety.Once this attitudinal ‘barrier’ that prevailsin the mind-set of the society is broken, inclusionis likely to enjoy the support of the immediatecommunityandsocietyatlarge.

With a positive attitude towards disability itwould be easy to form associations that advancethe concerns of people with disabilities. Theseassociations can mobilize support for inclusiveeducation.A number of countries have taken thisroute just like in developed countries and it ispaying off. For example to mention but a few ofsuchassociations, the ‘HelenKeller International’,a NGO that provides assistance for the educationand rehabilitation of the blind. The ‘Fellowshipfor Advancement of the Visually Handicapped’(FAVH)isaNGOthatprovidesskillsandfundsforprojects. The ‘Bangladesh Deaf Women’s WelfareAssociation’, provides training skills in sewingto women. The ‘Royal Institute of the Deaf’, the‘SpasticAssociation’,the‘AssociationofPeoplewithDisabilities’,the‘NationalCouncilforExceptionalChildren’thelistisendless.Ifdevelopingcountriescan have many of such associations, they act aspressure groups and a lot more could be achievedthrough lobbying and support towards changingsociety’sattitudes towardspeoplewithdisabilities.Such associations can also be used towards theimplementationofcommunityinclusiveprograms.


Theassociationscouldbebroughtintowardstheestablishmentofvillage/ruralresourceandresearchcenters. Due to limited funds and poor transportsystems, schools sometimes run for long periodswithout the necessary teaching materials neededfor children with special needs. With the help ofgovernments and NGOs, resource and researchcenters could be established and stocked up withrelevantmaterialsappropriatetobeusedbychildrenwith disabilities in inclusive schools. Locallyproduced teaching and learning materials couldbedevelopedandkept in these centers.A teamofresearch personnel in the field of special education couldbeappointedtoworkinsuchcentersproducingrelevantstatisticsofschoolgoingagechildrenwithdisabilities. The team could be tasked to researchinto the possibility of using locally produced rawmaterials to produce relevant teaching materials.Thecenterscouldalsoproduceliteratureonasmallscale.Theover-dependenceofdevelopingcountriesin terms of literature and teaching materials fromdeveloped countries hampers the implementationandsustainabilityof inclusiveeducation.Membersof the community with the help of specialistpersonnelcouldrunthesecenters.Anyfundsfromdonor agencies couldbeused to import items thatthe centers would not be able to produce. Thiswould alleviate the problem of having to import‘everything’. If these associations collaborateharmoniously and relentlessly, they would be ableto influence governments and policy makers to enact enablingconditionsforspecialneedsprovision.Theywouldalsolobbyforreasonablefundingallocationsfor improved special needs facilities.Mobile unitscouldbeestablishedtodistributeteachingmaterials,conductawarenesscampaignsandrestockresourceand research centers. Alternatively, these coulddistribute materials and information in schoolsthat run inclusive programs. The establishment ofrural resource centers has been found to be usefuland successful in Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Chinaand Thailand (Wahab, 1997). It is imperative thatresource and research centers be established togeneratedata thatwillprovideup-to-datestatistics

for informative planning and implementation ofinclusiveprograms.

Community Based Rehabilitation (CBR) hasproventobeoneofthemostsuccessfulprogramsruninruralareasandcouldbeusedtoenhanceinclusiveeducation. Research findings (Krishna, 1995; Marfo, 1994; Mariga & McConkey, 1986; McConkey &O’Toole, 1995) indicate that CBR programs havebeenhighlysuccessfulindevelopingcountries.Itisestimatedthatmostofthedisadvantagedchildrenwithdisabilitiesliveinruralorsemi-urbancommunitieswhere the level of awareness and facilities arelimited, general development is backward androadshampersuppliestoreachthepeople(Mittler,2000; O’Toole, 1991). If inclusive education wastobeimplementedinthewayofCBR,familiesandmembersofthecommunitycouldbetrainedandthenbefullyinvolvedinsupportingcommunityschoolsthatruninclusionprograms.Itwouldthereforestandto reason that inclusive education would be moreeffective when run in the immediate environmentby the people of that community. The advantageof implementing inclusiveeducation throughCBRisthattheprogramtakesamulti-facetedapproach,thus engaging in public awareness, prevention ofdisability,educationondisability,availablemedicalequipment and treatment, social, psychologicaland vocational programs. CBR programs that areinoperationindevelopingcountriesaremakinganimpactonspecialneedsprovisionandrehabilitation(Eleweke&Rodda,2000).Therearesomeprogramsthathavebeenrunwithsomesuccessinsomeofthedevelopingcountries,forinstanceGuyana(O’Toole,1995); India (Krishna, 1995; Roa, 1997); Lesotho(Khatleli&Mariga,1995);Mexico(Werner,1995);Philippines (McGlade & Aquino, 1995); Uganda(Chaudhury&Zinkin,1995);Vietnam(Hai&Nhan,1995); Zanzibar (Khalfan, 1992); and Zimbabwe(Mariga & McConkey, 1986). With appropriatepolicies and legislation put in place, adequatesupport and proper planning, inclusive educationcan be implemented successfully with most of itschallengesmet.

Governments should be encouraged to appointcompanies that can produce local materials and


equipment to be used in special needs provisions.Training colleges should be adequately equippedto train specialist personnel such as educationalpsychologists, educational audiologists, speechandlanguagetherapists,signlanguageinterpreters,physiotherapistsandguidancecounselors.Longtermand short term in-service programs should be runforteacherswhoteachchildrenwithspecialneeds.Schools and organizations that promote inclusiveeducationcanalsogivesuchteachersopportunitiesto upgrade themselves through seminars andworkshopsheldonaregularbasis.

Conclusion

If developing countries south of the Saharaare to implement effective programs for inclusiveeducationandtoachieveEducationForAll(EFA),the international organizations, NGOs and donorshavetodirecttheireffortstowardsthedevelopmentofnationalcapacitiesforpolicy-makingandsystemmanagement.They also have to continue bridgingforwardtheconcernsofmarginalizedandcurrentlyexcluded groups. In addition there should bedissemination of information and ideas, networkbuilding,improvementofaccessandsupporttothedevelopmentofinclusiveeducation.Resourcecentersshouldbeestablishedinruralareas,supportingandfeedingschoolsthatruninclusiveprogramswiththenecessarymaterials,equipmentandtechnicaladvicetheyrequiretofunctionsmoothly.ItisimportantthatifUNESCOistorunorsupportinclusiveprogramsinanyofthedevelopingcountries,theemphasisonall theactivitiesshouldhavepractical implicationstakingintoaccountthesocial,economicandpoliticalcontextsofthosecountries.Thereisneedfordonoragenciestoadapttheirmethodsandusethepersonnelin those particular countries in order to suit thecultural backgrounds of the developing countriesthey help or else the programs will flop as soon as foreignpersonnelturntheirbacksaway.Developingcountriesshouldtraintheirpersonneltouselocallyavailableresourcesinordertoimproviseandsustaininclusive education. There should be co-operationbetween donor organizations and indigenousrelevantpersonnelinthecountriesinvolved.Theseinclude officials in education, policy makers and otherrelatedrelevantpersonnel.

Children with disabilities have immensepotentials, which remain untapped. Throughinclusiveeducation,thesepotentialscanbeexploitedand put to productive and profitable use to benefit the family,thesocietyandthecountry.Whiletheidealisstillalongwayfrombeingrealizedindevelopingcountries, the issue of considering children withdisabilities as aneglectedbut extremely importantsub-group of the population merits immediatecontinuousattention.


References

Ballard, K.B. (1996). Inclusive education in NewZealand: Culture, Concept and Ideology.Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(1), 33-45.

Brohier, B. (1995). Funding Services. In B.O’Toole&R.McConkey(Eds.),Innovations in developing countries for people with disabilities (pp. 227-241). Chorley, Lancashire: LisieuxHall.

Blunkett,D.(2000).Raising Aspirations in the 21st Century.London,DepartmentofEducationandEmployment.

Carrington,S.,&Robinson,R.(2004).Acasestudyof inclusive school development: a journey oflearning. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 8(2), 141-153.

Charema, J. (1990). Integration of primary school children with hearing impairments in Zimbabwe.Unpublished MEd. Thesis, University ofManchester,England.

Charema,J.,&Peresuh,M.(1996).Support Services for Special Educational Needs: Proposed models for countries south of the Sahara. Kampala,MakerereUniversity/UNISE.

Chaudhury, G., & Zinkin, P. (1995). Disabilityprogrammes in community. In P. Zinkin & H.McConachie (Eds.). Disabled children and developing countries (pp.152-182). London,MacKeith.

Eleweke, C.J. (1998). A review of institutionalserviceprovision and rehabilitation inNigeria:Thebestwayforward.African Journal of Special Education, 3(2), 41-49 Kampala, MakerereUniversity/UNISE.

Eleweke, C.J., & Rodda, M. (2000). EnhancingInclusive Education in Developing Countries.International Special Education Congress 2000 University of Manchester,England.

Engelbrecht, P., & Chris, F. (1998). Pre-serviceteachers’ acceptance of and social interactionswithpersonswithdisabilities:TheSouthAfricanscene. African Journal of Special Needs, 3(1), 1-10.

Enon,J.C.(1997).Teachers’perceptionsonlearningdifficulties among students in Uganda. African Journal of Special Needs, 2 (1), 16-24Kampala,MakerereUniversity/UNISE.

Etscheidt, S.K., & Bartlet, L. (1999). The IDEAamendments:Afourstepapproachdeterminingsupplementary aids and services. Exceptional Children, 65(2), 163-174.

Fisher,D.,&Kennedy,C.(2001).Inclusive middle schools.London,BrookesPublishingCo.

Grol, C.E. (2000). The education of pupils withspecial educational needs in Africa, lookedat within the African context. International Special Education Congress 2000 University of Manchester.

Hai, T.T., & Nhan, N.T. (1995). Linking withprimary health care services: ExperiencesfromVietman. InB.O’Toole&R.McConkey(Eds.). Innovations in developing countries for people with disabilities (pp.199-210).Chorley,Lancashire:LisieuxHall.

Harvey, J.M. (1998). Inclusion, the law andplacement decisions: Implications for schoolpsychologists.Psychology in the Schools, 35(2), 145-152.

Hegarty, S., & Alur, M. (2002). Education and Children with Special Needs:FromSegregationtoInclusion.NewDelhi,Sage.


Katwishi,S.C. (1988).Problemsofmainstreaminghearing impaired pupils in Zambia. The Education of the Deaf Current Perspectives, 3, 1856-1859.

Khalfan,H.K.(1992)CBRinZanzibar.CBR News, 12, 4-5.

Khatleli,P.,&Mariga,L.(1995). Schoolsforall:NationalplanninginLesotho.InB.O’Toole&R.McConkey(Eds.).Innovations in developing countries for people with disabilities (pp.135-160).Chorley,Lancashire:LisieuxHall.

Kholi, T. (1993). Special education in Asia. InP. Mittler, R. Brouillette, & D. Harris (Eds.). Special needs education (pp.118-129).

Kisanji, J. (1995). Attitudes and beliefs aboutdisability in Tanzania. In B. O’Toole & R.McConkey (eds.), Innovations in developing countries for people with disabilities (pp. 227-241).Chorley,Lancashire:LisieuxHall.

Kisanji, J. (1996). The Relevance of IndegenousCustomary Education Principles in theFormulationofSpecialNeedsEducationPolicy.African Journal of Special Needs 1(2), 59-74Kampala,MakerereUniversity/UNISE.

Krishna,V. (1995).Sustainability of a community-based program with regard to leprosy-affected persons in India. Unpublished PhD. Thesis,UniversityofManchester,England.

Kristensen, K., & Kristensen, K. (1997). SpecialNeeds Education in a school for all. African Journal of Special Needs 1(2), 59-74Kampala,MakerereUniversity/UNISE.

Marfo, K. (1994). Introduction. In M.J. Thorburn& K. Marfo (Eds.), Practical approaches tochildhood disabilities in developing countries:Insights from experience and research (pp. 3-14).Tampa,Florida,GlobalAge.

Mariga, L., & McConkey, R. (1986). Home-based programs for mentally handicapped persons in rural areas in Zimbabwe. Brazil: 9th ILSMHConferencepaper.

Mba,P.O.(1995).Special education and vocational rehabilitation.Ibadan,Nigeria:Codat.

McConkey, R., & O’Toole, B. (1995). Towards anewmillennium.InB.O’Toole&R.McConkey(Eds.). Innovations in developing countries for people with disabilities (pp.227-241).Chorley,Lancashire:LisieuxHall.

McGlade, B., & Aquino, R. (1995). Mothersof disabled workers as CBR workers. In B.O’Toole&R.McConkey(Eds.).Innovations in developing countries for people with disabilities (pp. 227-241). Chorley, Lancashire: LisieuxHall.

Mills, P.E., Cole, K.N., Jenkin, J.R., & Dale, P.S.(1998). Effects of different levels of inclusionon pre-scholars with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 65(1), 75-90.

Mittler, P. (2000). Working towards Inclusive Education.London,FultonPublishers.

Mittler, P., & Platt, P. (1995). Evaluation of Inte-gration Pilot Program in Lesotho. Report toSave the Children Fund (UK) and Ministry ofEducationLesotho.

Peresuh, M., Adenigba, S.A., Ogonda, G. (1997).Perspectives in Special Needs Education inNigeria,Kenya,andZimbabwe.African Journal of Special Needs Education. 2(1), 9-15.Kampala,MakerereUniversity/UNISE.

O’Toole, B. (1991). Guide to community based rehabilitation services.Paris,UNESCO.


O’Toole, B. (1995). Mobilizing communitiesin Guyana. In B. O’Toole & R. McConkey(Eds.). Innovations in developing countries for people with disabilities (pp. 65-104). Chorley,Lancashire:LisieuxHall.

Ozoji, E.D. (1995). Special education perspectivesfor the future. In E.D. Ozoji& I.A. Nwazuoke(Eds.). Professionalism in special education in Nigeria (pp. 174-180). Jos, Nigeria: NationalCouncilforExceptionalChildren.

Roa, I. (1997). Special educational needs in earlychildhood care: An inclusive early childhoodeducationprogram.In first steps-Stories on early childhood inclusive education (pp.55-64).Paris,United Nations Educational, Scientific, and CulturalOrganization.

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (1993). The Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Disabled Persons.Paris,Author.

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (1994). World Conference onspecial needs education: Access and equality. Salamanca, Spain, June 7-10.Paris,Author.

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (1995). A review of the present situation in special education.Paris,Author.

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (1996). Legislation pertaining to special needs education.Paris,Author.

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (2000). Inclusion in Education: The participation of disabled learners;EducationforAll2000.

Vaughn,S.,Elbaum,B.E.,Schumm,J.S.,&Hughs,M.T.(1998).SocialOutcomesforstudentswithand without learning difficulties in inclusive classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(5), 428-436.

Wahab,F.(1997).Empowering the rural disabled in Asia and the Pacific.FAOBangladesh.

Waldron,N.L.,&McLeskey,J.(1998).Theeffectsofaninclusiveschoolprogramonstudentswithmildandseverelearningdisabilities.Exceptional Children, 64(3), 395-405.

Werner, D. (1995). Strengthen the role of disabledpeople in community-based rehabilitationprograms.InB.O’Toole&R.McConkey(Eds.).Innovations in developing countries for people with disabilities (pp.15-28)Chorley,Lancashire:LisieuxHall.

Winter,S. (2000).“Peer power as an instructional resource,” Paper presented to InternationalSpecial Education Congress, Manchester, July24-28.

World Bank. (1996). Retraining teaching capacity in African Universities. Washington, D.C: TheWorldBank.

World Bank. (2002). Globalization, Growth and Poverty: Making globalization work for thepoor.

World Bank. (2004). Vulnerable Populations, Children with Disabilities and Inclusive Education.Washington,D.C:TheWorldBank.

Zindi, F. (1997). Special Education in Africa.Gaborone,TasallsPublishingCo.


The Four Square Strategy is an instructionalapproachthatlinksthepriorknowledgeofastudentwithanewvocabularyword.Inaclassroombasedstudy (Eeds & Cockrum, 1985), this approachwas demonstrated to be effective with all students“especially for those students designated as beinglessable.”The“lessable”studentsincludedstudentslabeled as having special needs. The vocabularyinstruction technique may also be effective withstudents learning English as a second language(ESL).

Thefundamentalstepinthisinstructionalstrategyis to help the student recall an experience that defines thenewvocabularyword.This“willhelpstudentsusepriorknowledgetoincreasevocabulary”(Shanker&Ekwall,2003).Oncethestudentisabletorecallandverbalize a defining experience the remaining steps are designed to label that experiencewith the newwordandtoreinforcethelinkbetweentherecalledexperienceandthenewword.

Steps for Using the Four Square Strategy

Example OneTeaching an uncommon English word to English

language users.InthisexampletheinstructionsforusingtheFourSquareStrategywithnativespeakersofEnglisharelisted.Thewordthatisbeingtaughtinthisexampleis‘extravaganza’.

1. Studentsaregivenablanksheetofpaperandaskedtofolditintofourths.

2. Have the students write ‘extravaganza’ insquareone.

3. Use the word in a non-defining context. In this example: “We saw the extravaganza.”Thisshows thegrammatical functionof theword.

4. Now ask the students a question that leadsthem to recall an experience they havehad, which can be used to define the word extravaganza. In this example the questioncould be, “Have you ever been to a veryexciting or spectacular fireworks show or someother typeofexcitingshow?”Haveafewstudentssharetheirexperiencesandlabeltheexperiencewiththeword‘extravaganza.’

Forinstance,ifastudentsaid,“Isawthegreatestfireworks show. There were hundreds of rockets shootingintotheair.”Youwouldsaytothemthattheshow they saw was an extravaganza. Each studentwho shares an appropriate defining experience needs to have the experience labeled as being anextravaganza.

5. In the second square have each studentwrite their own experience of being at an‘extravaganza’.Besuretheyincludethewordextravaganzainthewriting.

Forinstance,astudentmightwrite,“Iwasattheschoolband’s show lastweek. Iwas sittingon the‘edgeofmyseat’throughthewholeshow.Itreallywasanextravaganza.”

6. Havethestudentswriteanon-exampleinthethird square, something that was definitely not an extravaganza. Once again, be surethey include the word extravaganza in thewriting.

The Four Square Vocabulary Instruction Strategy

Ward A. Cockrum, Ph.D.NorthernArizonaUniversity

[email protected]

Sherry L. Markel, Ph.D.NorthernArizonaUniversity

[email protected]


For instance, a student might write, “I almostfellasleepatthetalentshowyesterday.Itwasveryboring.Itwasnotanextravaganza.”

7. Inthefourthsquare,havethestudentswriteadefinition of the word ‘extravaganza’ in their ownwords.Theyshouldusethewordinthedefinition they write.

For instance, a student might write, “Anextravaganza is an exciting or spectacular show.”(seeFigure1)

1

Extravaganza

2

I was at the school band’sshowlastweek.Iwassittingon the ‘edge of my seat’throughthewholeshow.Itreallywasanextravaganza.

3

I almost fell asleep at thetalent show yesterday. Itwasveryboring.Itwasnotanextravaganza.

4

Anextravaganzaisanexcitingorspectacularshow.

Figure 1. Extravaganza Four Square

Example Two

Teaching an English word to ESL students.TheinstructionsforusingtheFourSquareStrategywithstudentsforwhomEnglishisasecondlanguagearefound in the steps below. The word that is beingtaughtinthisexampleis‘cave’.

1. Studentsaregivenablanksheetofpaperandaskedtofolditintofourths.

2. Have the students write the English word‘cave’insquareone.Alsohavethestudentswritethewordfromtheirnativelanguagefor‘cave.’

3. Use the word in a non-defining context. In thisexample:“Wesawthecave.”Thisshowsthe grammatical function of the word. UseEnglishwords thestudentsalreadyknowinthe non-defining context.

4. Now ask the students a question that leadsthem to recall an experience they have hadwhich can be used to define the word cave. Inthisexamplethequestioncouldbe,“Haveyoueverbeen toadarkhole in theEarth?”The question, to help the students recall adefining experience, is done in the student’s first language. Have a few students share their experiences in their first language and then label the experience with the Englishword‘cave.’

For instance, if a student said, “Weused lightsto see where we were going when we went into a(thewordcaveinthechild’snativelanguage).”Youwouldsay to thechild that inEnglish thatplace iscalledacave.Eachstudentwhosharesanappropriatedefining experience in his or her own language needs tohavetheexperiencelabeledwiththeEnglishword‘cave.’

5. Inthesecondsquarehaveeachstudentwritetheir own experience related to the word‘cave’.BesuretheyincludetheEnglishwordcaveinthewriting,eveniftheremainderofthewritingisintheirnativelanguage.

For instance,a studentmightwrite, “Itwasverydarkanddampwhenwewentintothe‘cave’.Isawalotoflimestoneformations.”

6. Havethestudentswriteanon-exampleinthethird square, something that was definitely not a ‘cave’ or related to the word ‘cave.’Onceagain,besurethestudentsincludetheEnglishwordcaveinthewriting,eveniftherestofthewordsarenotinEnglish.

For instance, a student might write, “My skinturnedredfromsittinginthesunonthebeach.Thatneverhappensinacave.”

7. Inthefourthsquare,havethestudentswritea definition of the word ‘cave’ in their own words. They should use the word ‘cave’ inthe definition they wrote.


Forinstance,astudentmightwrite,“Acaveisanundergroundtunnelorroom.”(seeFigure2)

1

cave

2

It was very dark and dampwhenwewentintothecave.I saw a lot of limestoneformations.

3

My skin turned red fromsitting in the sun on thebeach. Thatneverhappensinacave.

4

A cave is an undergroundtunnelorroom.

Figure 2. Cave Four Square: Other than the target word (cave), all other words written would be in the child’s first language.

Summary of Strategy

WehavefoundthatfourwordsadayareusuallybestforvocabularyinstructionusingtheFourSquareStrategy.Oncethestudentsbecamefamiliarwiththesteps a word can be taught in four to five minutes. Wealsofoundthatspendingtimemakingsureeachstudent had thought of a personal experience thatdefined the target word with vivid details of that experience,wasessentialinprovidingthecognitivelink to insure they learned and remembered themeaningofthetargetword.Thestepsbecomeveryeasy to remember after youhaveused the strategyafewtimes.Someteachershaveexperimentedwithsimplified versions of the strategy, but the basic steps remained: a) write the new word, b) elicit adefining experience, c) label the experience, d) write the defining experience, e) write a non-defining experience, and end by f) writing the definition of thenewword.

References

Eeds,M.,&Cockrum,W.A.(1985).Teachingwordmeaningsbyexpandingschematavs.dictionaryworkvs.readingincontext.Journal of Reading, 28,492-497.

Shanker,J.L.,&Ekwall,E.E.(2003). Locating and correcting reading difficulties. Upper SaddleRiver,NJ:Merrill.


PRAXIS

Call for Papers and Submission Guidelines

ThePRAXISsectionofthisjournalisintendedforreaderstobeabletoimmediatelyapplythemethods/strategiesdescribedinthearticlesintheirclassrooms.Thesemethods/strategiesmaybenewanduniqueideasortheycanbeeffectivemethods/strategiesthatsometeachershavebeenusingandbelievethatbypublishingthosemanymoreteacherscouldimplementthemintheirclassrooms.Thearticlesshouldbeapproximatelythreetosixpagesand describe in detail a specific teaching strategy or informal assessment method. The articles should include specific instructions on how to develop and implement the methods/strategies. The methods/strategies should requirenouniquematerialsfordevelopment.ThesearticlesaretobesubmittedfollowingthesamesubmissionguidelinesandwillgothroughthesamereviewprocessasallThe Journal of the International Association of Special Educationarticleswiththeexceptionofincludinganabstract.(See submission guidelines)Theformatforthesearticlesshouldincludeanintroduction,step-by-stepdirections,materials/examplesofchartsorgraphsifneeded,conclusionsandreferences.

Weencourageyoutoconsidersubmittingmethods/strategiesthatyouhaveusedwithstudentswithdisabilitiesandthinkwouldbeofinteresttoourreaders.BothclassroomteachersanduniversityinstructorsarewelcometosubmitarticlesforconsiderationforpublicationinthePRAXISsectionofthejournal.


INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIONOF SPECIAL EDUCATION

in collaboration with

The Faculty of Education and Centre for Advancement in Special Education,

University of Hong Kong

TENTH BIENNIAL CONFERENCEJune 10-14, 2007

HONG KONG

Global Challenges in Special Needs Education:Past, Present, and Future

conference_letter size.indd 1 8/23/2006 9:24:49 AM


IASE 10TH BIENNIAL CONFERENCE REGISTRATION INFORMATION

JUNE 10 - 14, 2007Registration Overview: Please register early to avoid a late fee of $50.00 USD. A registration form is included, or you may download it from the IASE website at: www.iase.org. E-mail confirmation will be sent upon receipt of your registration.

Conference Materials: Conference materials may be picked up between 1:00-6:00 p.m. on Sunday, June 10, 2007 at the IASE registration desk. You can find the registration desk at the University of Hong Kong (HKU) in the Rayson Huang Theater Building Foyer. You can also drop off your auction item. Each individual is asked to bring an item from his/her country for the auction to be held at the Gala Dinner at the Jumbo Kingdom “floating” Restaurant.

Accommodation Options:HOTELS IN HONG KONG

(all rates subject to 13% service charge and government tax)Identify yourself with IASE—International Association of Special Education 10th Biennial Conference

(1) ISLAND PACIFIC HOTEL – 80 Superior Rooms or Deluxe Harbourview Rooms (“best room available on the day your reservation is received”) HK$488 (about US $63.00 per night) for 1 or 2 people Fax: 852 2803 0384E-Mail Reservations: [email protected]

(2) NOVOTEL CENTURY HARBOURVIEW – 50 Superior Rooms HK$550 (about US $71.00 per night); Deluxe Harbourview Rooms HK$700 (about US $91.00 per night) for 1 or 2 peopleFax: 852 2213 6998E-Mail Reservations: [email protected]

(3) IBIS NORTHPOINT HOTEL – Very tiny but new rooms some distance from HKU (but very near the Star Ferry, bus and tram to HKU) HK$339 (about US $44.00 per night)E-Mail Reservations: [email protected]

(4) ROBERT BLACK COLLEGE (on HKU campus) – 30 Rooms (including Breakfast) - HK$480 Single Occupancy (about US $62.00 per night); HK$520 Double Occupancy (about US $67.00 per night). These rooms will require you to be able to climb a number of stairs.For these rooms contact Alison Li at [email protected]

Transportation: You will arrive into the Hong Kong International Airport. From the airport, the train is readily accessible and requires no climbing stairs with your luggage. You can get a train ticket at the airport and take a train to Central Station and from there take a taxi to your hotel and to the University of Hong Kong. A cab from the airport will cost approximately $40 USD.

Reception: The Vice-Chancellor’s Reception, included in your registration, will be held on Sunday from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in Loke Yew Hall.

Gala Dinner/Auction: The Gala Dinner, included in your registration, will be held at the Jumbo Restaurant in Hong Kong. Ethnic dress is encouraged. Accompanying the dinner is our biennial auction. Please bring items from your country to contribute to the auction. You can drop items off at the registration desk. All proceeds go to the Marge Csapo Scholarship Fund.

Children’s Art: To showcase children’s art projects from your home country, please bring them to the conference registration desk. Children’s art work will also be sold. For booth space or more information, contact Helen Beneke at [email protected]

Conference Proceedings: The proceedings of the conference will be available at the conference and can be picked up at the registration desk.

For more information: contact Conference Chair, Bev Johns, at [email protected]


SCHEDULE FOR THE CONFERENCE SATURDAY, JUNE 9Optional Tour: Saturday Afternoon (1 p.m. to 5 p.m.) $19.00 USD Shopping with Mary Gale, Kim, and YK Lee SUNDAY, JUNE 10Optional Tour: Sunday Morning (9:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.) $44.00 USD Half-Day Hong Kong Island Tour (including cost for sampan ride)Conference Registration Desk: 1 p.m. to 6 p.m. Auction Items can be dropped off at the Registration Desk.Tour Desk (including Box Lunch sales): 1 p.m. to 6 p.m.Vice-Chancellor’s Reception, Loke Yew Hall, HKU, 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.

MONDAY, JUNE 11 Opening of Registration Desk, Tour Desk, Morning Coffee at 8:30 a.m.Opening of Exhibits (including student art display) at 8:30 a.m.Opening Ceremony and Keynote at 9 a.m.Conference Sessions, 10:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.Optional Tour: Monday Night (7:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.) $22.00 USD Open-top Bus Night Tour

TUESDAY, JUNE 12Opening of Registration Desk, Tour Desk, Morning Coffee, Exhibits at 8:30 a.m.Keynote 9 a.m., Conference Sessions, 10:15 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.Gala Dinner, Jumbo Kingdom “floating” Restaurant, 7 p.m. Silent Auction & Cash Bar, 8 p.m. Dinner (with Chinese musicians and Lion Dance)

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13IASE General Business Meeting, 8 a.m.Opening of Registration Desk, Tour Desk, Morning Coffee, Exhibits at 8:30 a.m.Keynote 9 a.m., Conference Sessions 10:15 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.Optional Tour: Wednesday Night (5:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.) $64.00 USD Highlight of the Night Tour (including cruise with dinner buffet)

THURSDAY, JUNE 14 IASE Board Meeting (open to membership)—7:00 a.m.Optional Tour: Thursday Morning (9 a.m. to 1 p.m.) $10.00 USD Special tour of two Hong Kong exceptional schools

FRIDAY, JUNE 15 Optional Tour: Friday Morning (8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m.) $50.00 USD Land Between Tour (including Lunch)Optional Tour: Friday Morning (9 a.m. to 2 p.m.) $38.00 USD Heritage Tour

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS WILL INCLUDE:

MICHAEL HARDMAN, UNIVERSITY OF UTAH, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH“Politics and Policies that Impact Special Education Around the World”

Michael L. Hardman is Professor and Chair of the Department of Special Education and the Department of Teaching and Learning at the University of Utah. He also serves as the University of Utah Coordinator for the National Center for Community of Caring. In 2004-2005, Dr. Hardman was appointed the Matthew J. Guglielmo Endowed Chair at California State University, Los Angeles, and the Governor’s Representative to the California Advisory Commission on Special Education. Additionally, Dr. Hardman is Senior Education Advisor to the Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr. Foundation in Washington, D.C., and a member of the Board of Directors for the Council for Exceptional Children.

KATHLEEN LANE, VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE“Identifying and Supporting Students at Risk for Learning and Behavioral Problems:

Effective Interventions Around the World”

Kathleen Lynne Lane is assistant professor in the Department of Special Education at Vanderbilt University and an investigator in the Vanderbilt Kennedy Center. Dr. Lane is the primary investigator of Project WRITE, a Goal Area 2 Grant funded through the Institute for Educational Sciences. Project WRITE will examine the efficacy of writing interventions for students with emotional and behavioral disorders who are also poor writers. She is also the PI of an OSEP directed project studying positive behavior support at the high school level and the PI of a field-initiated project studying prevention of behavior disorders at the elementary level. She serves on 5 editorial boards including Exceptional Children, the Journal of Special Education, and Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. Dr. Lane has authored three books and published over 60 refereed journal articles and book chapters.

PLENARY SESSIONSEach day immediately after lunch there will be plenary sessions led by the following experts:

DISTANCE LEARNING—ROBERT A. GABLE, OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY, NORFOLK, VIRGINIABEHAVIORAL ISSUES AROUND THE WORLD—MARY GALE BUDZISZ, RETIRED SPECIAL EDUCATOR

and T. SARASWATHI DEVI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF LEBENSHILFE, VISAKHAPATNAM,INDIAWHAT DOES THE FUTURE HOLD FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION—PERSONNEL PREPARATION AND MORE—

LYNDAL M. BULLOCK, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS, DENTON


REGISTRATION FORMIASE 10TH BIENNIAL CONFERENCE

HONG KONG • JUNE 10-14, 2007Please complete a separate registration form for each participant. Duplicate this form as needed. Make checks or money orders payable to IASE. Mail to: IASE Hong Kong, c/o Dr. Lyndal M. Bullock, University of North Texas, P. O. Box 310860, Denton, Texas, 76203-0860, USA. Telephone 940-565-3583; (Fax) 940-565-4055. You may pay by credit card. IASE Federal ID# 43-1974089

Method of Payment to “IASE” (Check one) ___Cash ___Check/Money Order ___Credit Card (see below)

Credit Card #: Exp.: Month Year

CVV* #:

Print name as it appears on credit card:

Credit Card Billing Address:

City, State, Zip:

Signature:


SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

The Journal of the International Association of Special Education

Articles that have not been previously published are not under review by any other publication and meet the IASE mission statement aims are invited for review. Both research articles and articles for practitioners will be given equal preference. Please indicate if this is a PRAXIS article.

Mission StatementInternational Association of Special EducationTheaimsoftheIASEaretopromoteprofessionalexchangeamongspecialeducatorsallovertheworld,todevelopspecialeducationasadisciplineandprofession,toencourageinternationalcooperationandcollaborativeinternationalresearch,topromotecontinuingeducationofitsmembersbyorganizingconferences,andtofosterinternationalcommunicationinspecialeducationthroughTheJournaloftheInternationalAssociationofSpecialEducation.

StyleTotal length of the manuscript is not to exceed 20 pages and should include all references, charts, figures, and tables. Articles submitted should follow the guidelines of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, fifth addition.

Word ProcessingUsingAmericanEnglish,manuscriptsaretobetypedinMicrosoftWordusing12pointTimesregularface(noboldoritalics).Theentiredocumentshouldbedoubledspacedwith.75marginsallaround.(top, bottom, left, and right).However,onlyputonespacein between sentences. Tables, charts, figures, and or illustrations should fit in a 3 � width column and are to be on separate pages at theendofthemanuscript.Additionally,acopyofanyphotos,illustrationsorothergraphicsmustbeattachedelectronicallyinjpegformat.ThisaidsintheprintingprocessforcompatibilitywiththeMacintoshcomputersthatprintersuse.ReferencesaretobeinAPAstylewithhangingindents.(If you do not have access to Microsoft Word please contact us)

Cover PageIncludethisinformationonaseparatesheet

• Titleofthemanuscript• Dateofsubmission• Author’sname,completemailingaddress,businessandhometelephonenumbers• Institutional affiliation, address, e-mail address, and fax number.

AbstractOnaseparatesheetofpaperatthebeginningofthemanuscriptdescribetheessenceofthemanuscriptin100–150words.

FormE-mail–Attachasonedocumentinthefollowingorder:Abstract,CoverPage,[email protected] graphics will of course be attached separately. You will receive an e-mail confirming that we received your attachment.

If the article cannot be electronically sent then please:

Mail –Sendtwo(2)hardcopiesofthemanuscript,abstract,andcoverpagealongwiththisinformationonaCDtothemailingaddresslistedbelow.Includeaself-addressedpostcard(we will provide postage)sowecannotifyyouwehavereceivedyourmanuscript.

Mailing AddressManuscripts,editorialcorrespondence,andquestionsshouldbesentto:

CollegeofEducationGregPrater

NorthernArizonaUniversityPOBox5774

Flagstaff,AZ86011-5774Phone:928-523-8979•Fax:928-523-1929

E-mail:[email protected]

Authors will be notified of the receipt of their manuscripts by the return postcard and/or e-mail as noted above. After an initial review by the editors, those manuscripts that meet established specifications will be sent to members of the Professional Journal Committee for further editing and reviewing. The journal editors reserve the right to make editorial changes. It is the responsibility of the author(s) to ensure the accuracy of the content in their articles. Also, it is the responsibility of the author(s) to obtain appropriate permission and ensure the ethical treatment of research participants. Points of view and opinions are those of the individual authors and are not necessarily those of the International Association of Special Education.


Inte

rnat

iona

lAss

ocia

tion

ofSp

ecia

lEdu

catio

n

FOST

ERIN

GA

GLOB

ALEX

CHAN

GEOF

IDEA

S&

INFO

RMAT

ION

IASE

MAI

LING

ADDR

ESS

&CO

NTAC

TIN

FORM

ATIO

N:Dr

.Pau

laLe

itz,I

ASE

Trea

sure

r

8220

67th

St.C

t.N.

W.

Gig

Harb

ourW

A98

335

USA

Tel:

(253

)857

6573

Fax:

(253

)530

4320

Emai

l:le

itzhp

h@pl

u.ed

u

Web

site

:ww

w.ia

se.o

rg

MEM

BERS

HIP

FORM

JANU

ARY

1st-

DECE

MBE

R31

st

Regu

larM

embe

rshi

p...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.US

$50

Regu

lar+

Spon

sor.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.US

$70

Unive

rsity

Stud

ent.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

...US

$20

Deve

lopi

ngCo

untry

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

..US

$20

Inst

itutio

ns...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....U

S$7

0

Dona

tion

toM

arg

Csap

o

Scho

lars

hip

Fund

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

..US

$___

____

Tota

lAm

ount

Encl

osed

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

..US

$___

____

(PleasePrintC

learly)

Nam

e__

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

Addr

ess_

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

_

Phon

e__

____

____

____

____

____

Fax

____

____

____

____

____

____

__

Emai

l___

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

_

Occu

patio

n___

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

___

PERS

ONIW

OULD

LIKE

TOSP

ONSO

R:

Nam

e__

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

_

Addr

ess_

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

_

Emai

l___

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

_

PAYM

ENT

INFO

RMAT

ION:

*Che

que

VISA

M

aste

rCar

d

Card

Num

ber_

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

__Ex

p.Da

te__

____

Card

hold

erNa

me

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

___

Sign

atur

e__

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

__

Plea

sefo

rwar

dth

eco

mpl

eted

mem

bers

hip

form

,alo

ngwi

thyo

urpa

ymen

t,to

the

IASE

Mai

ling

Addr

ess

-Th

eIA

SEth

anks

you

for

your

supp

ort.

*Mak

ech

eque

paya

ble

toIA

SE–

USfu

nds

only.

FOST

ERIN

GA

GLOB

ALEX

CHAN

GEOF

IDEA

S&

INFO

RMAT

ION

Inte

rnat

iona

lAss

ocia

tion

ofSp

ecia

lEdu

catio

n

The

IASE

isa

regi

ster

ed50

1(c)

3no

t-fo

r-pr

ofit

orga

niza

tion

inth

eUn

ited

Stat

es.


WHA

TIS

THE

IASE

?

Foun

ded

in19

89,

the

IASE

isan

orga

niza

tion

ofpr

ofes

sion

als

who

are

dedi

cate

dto

impr

ovin

gth

equ

ality

oflif

ean

dse

rvic

e

deliv

ery

fora

llin

divid

uals

iden

tifie

das

havin

gsp

ecia

lnee

ds.

Mem

bers

incl

ude

teac

hers

,te

ache

rtr

aine

rs,

prof

esso

rs,

spee

chcl

inic

ians

,ps

ycho

logi

sts,

heal

thca

repr

ovid

ers,

soci

al

wor

kers

,co

unse

lors

,fa

mily

mem

bers

and

thos

eas

soci

ated

with

rela

ted

disc

iplin

es.

AIM

SOF

THE

IASE

1.To

prom

ote

prof

essi

onal

exch

ange

amon

gsp

ecia

ledu

cato

rs

allo

vert

hew

orld

.

2.To

deve

lop

spec

iale

duca

tion

asa

disc

iplin

ean

dpr

ofes

sion

.

3.To

enco

urag

ein

tern

atio

nal

coop

erat

ion

and

colla

bora

tive

inte

rnat

iona

lres

earc

h.

4.To

prom

ote

cont

inui

nged

ucat

ion

ofits

mem

bers

byor

gani

zing

conf

eren

ces

indi

ffere

ntco

untri

esar

ound

the

wor

ld.

5.To

fost

erin

tern

atio

nalc

omm

unic

atio

nin

spec

iale

duca

tion

thro

ugh

the

Jour

nal

ofth

eIn

tern

atio

nal

Asso

ciat

ion

of

Spec

ialE

duca

tion.

VOLU

NTEE

RSE

RVIC

EPR

OJEC

T

The

IASE

has

esta

blis

hed

aVo

lunt

eer

Serv

ice

Com

mitt

eeto

faci

litat

eth

eid

entif

icat

ion

ofsp

ecia

led

ucat

iona

lne

eds

in

deve

lopi

ngco

untri

esan

dco

nnec

ta

volu

ntee

rre

sour

cepe

rson

who

isan

IASE

mem

ber.

Ther

eis

ash

orta

geof

expe

rtise

in

spec

iale

duca

tion

inm

any

deve

lopi

ngco

untri

esan

dth

eIA

SEha

s

man

ym

embe

rsw

ithva

stsp

ecia

led

ucat

iona

lex

perie

nce

who

can

prov

ide

volu

ntee

ras

sist

ance

durin

gth

eir

retir

emen

t,

sabb

atic

alye

aror

sum

mer

holid

ays.

Visi

tou

rw

ebsi

teat

ww

w.ia

se.o

rgfo

ran

appl

icat

ion

form

and

addi

tiona

linf

orm

atio

n

onth

eVo

lunt

eerS

ervic

ePr

ojec

t.

MAR

GCS

APO

SCHO

LARS

HIP

FUND

The

Mar

gCs

apo

Scho

lars

hip

Fund

was

crea

ted

intri

bute

toth

is

foun

ding

mem

ber,

men

tor

and

lead

erof

the

IASE

.Th

ese

scho

lars

hips

ofpa

rtial

fund

ing,

for

IASE

mem

bers

from

deve

lopi

ngco

untri

es,

prov

ide

som

efin

anci

alsu

ppor

tto

atte

nd

bien

nial

conf

eren

ces.

Visi

tou

rw

ebsi

teat

ww

w.ia

se.o

rgfo

ran

appl

icat

ion

form

.

MEM

BERS

HIP

REPR

ESEN

TSA

GLOB

ALCO

MM

UNIT

Y

ANNU

ALIA

SEM

EMBE

RSHI

PBE

NEFI

TS

Indi

vidua

lm

embe

rsan

dor

gani

zatio

nsbe

long

ing

toth

eIA

SE

rece

iveth

efo

llow

ing

bene

fits:

Jour

nalo

fthe

Inte

rnat

iona

lAss

ocia

tion

ofSp

ecia

lEdu

catio

n

Annu

ntia

tus,

the

new

slet

tero

fthe

Inte

rnat

iona

lAss

ocia

tion

ofSp

ecia

lEdu

catio

n

Redu

ced

regi

stra

tion

fees

toat

tend

the

IASE

bien

nial

conf

eren

ce

Prof

essi

onal

Deve

lopm

ento

ppor

tuni

ties,

such

asm

akin

ga

conf

eren

cepr

esen

tatio

nan

d/or

havin

gre

sear

chpu

blis

hed

Volu

ntee

rSer

vice

Proj

ecto

ppor

tuni

ties

BECO

MIN

GA

SPON

SORI

NGM

EMBE

R

Ifyo

uw

ould

like

tobe

com

ea

spon

sor,

plea

sein

dica

teth

e

pers

on’s

nam

e,m

ailin

gad

dres

san

dem

ail

addr

ess

onth

e

mem

bers

hip

form

and

encl

ose

your

paym

ent.

The

IASE

has

com

pile

dth

ena

mes

ofpe

ople

from

deve

lopi

ng

coun

tries

who

requ

est

spon

sors

,bu

tdu

eto

finan

cial

rest

rictio

ns,t

hey

are

unab

leto

pay

mem

bers

hip

fees

.(If

you

do

noth

ave

the

nam

eof

ape

rson

tosp

onso

r,th

eIA

SEw

illid

entif

y

som

eone

fory

ou.)

Your

gene

rosi

tyan

dsu

ppor

tare

grea

tlyap

prec

iate

d.

Aust

ralia

Aust

ria

Bots

wan

a

Braz

il

Cana

da

Chile

Chin

a

Croa

tia

Cypr

us

Egyp

t

ElSa

lvad

or

Engl

and

Esto

nia

Finl

and

Germ

any

Guam

Hung

ary

Indi

a

Indo

nesi

a

Iran

Isra

el

Jam

aica

Japa

n

Keny

a

Mal

aysi

a

Mon

tene

gro

Mor

occo

Mya

nmar

Nam

ibia

Neth

erla

nds

New

Guin

ea

New

Zeal

and

Nige

ria

Norw

ay

Paki

stan

Phili

ppin

es

Pola

nd

Portu

gal

Rom

ania

Scot

land

Sing

apor

e

Slov

enia

Sout

hAf

rica

Sout

hKo

rea

Swed

en

Switz

erla

nd

Taiw

an

Tanz

ania

Thai

land

Turk

ey

Unite

dAr

abEm

irate

s

Unite

dSt

ates

Wal

es

Zam

bia

SPIHSRENTRAPNOITACINU

MMOC

EGNAHCXELANOISSEFORP

the journal of the international association of special ... 2007.pdf · the journal of the...

Documents