DEFINITION OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN KARNATAKA,

SOUTH INDIA.

Course:M.A Special and Inclusive education

Module:

Word Count: 6000

1|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………...3

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Inclusion and its origin………………………………………………………………………4

1.2. Objective……………………………………………………………………………………. 5

1.3. Research question……………………………………………………………………………5

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Origin and concept of Inclusive education…………………………………………………..6

2.2. Definition of Inclusive Education………………………………………………….…….…10

2.3. Inclusion in India……………………………………………………………………………12

3. RESEARCH DESIGN

3.1.Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………

2|Page
 ABSTRACT

India is a country which is vast and diverse in its population, it has also been noted to be a
country which has large discrepancies on income bases. (Alur, 2007). India is the world’s largest
democracy and is also the representative of 17% of the world’s population. (Sharma &
Deppler.2005). it was among the 92 countries in 1994 to sign the Salamanca Declaration which
encouraged the implementation of the principles of inclusive education in the policies or laws
enforced by the governments (UNESCO, 1994). This was the beginning of the other policies
implemented in India such as Persons with Disabilities Act in 1995, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan
(Education for All), 2001 and the Action Plan for Inclusive Education Of Children and Youth
with Disabilities, 2005.

All of the policies implemented have not assigned a clear meaning to the concept of inclusive
education. Wherein, India the educational policies of 2016 has a meager 2 page document on
educating children with special needs. The question arises as to how with there be successful
implementation of inclusion without having the entire educational system aware about inclusion?

The study pursues to understand how the concept in understood in a state like Karnataka, and to
assess if at all inclusion as per the policies is being implemented. The study will be conducted
through qualitative research methods of collecting data and to assess the prospect for change.

Key Words: Indian education, educational policies of India, Inclusive education, Barriers
to Inclusive education in India.

3|Page
 INTRODUCTION

1.1. Inclusion and its origin

“Inclusion is not an experiment to be tested but a value to be followed”.

(Sanjeev & Kumar, 2009, Page,1)

Inclusive education (IE) has been a much debated and politicalize topic surrounding the
schooling of children with a disability and SEN (Armstrong et al., 2010; UN, 2006). The
framework of IE argues for the cohesion of typical learners and non- typical learners to be taught
in the same environment, with the alteration of the curriculum and pedagogy ( Brown et al.,1989;
Hettiarachchi and Das 2014). Such a movement seeks to address discrepancy in the learning
environment as well as promoting respect and acceptance of differences (Brown at al., 1991;
Tapasak & Walther-Thomas, 1999).

Supporting policies of the IE in schools, are the Salamanca Declaration in 1994, and Education
for all (EFA), World Conference on Special Needs Education: Access and Quality, UN
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”(UNESCO,2006; Ainsow et al., 2006). IE
makes passage for all children the right to be educated and to social integration and cohesion
(Ainscow et al., 2006; Armstrong et al., 2010). Therefore, changes in the education structure is
adjusted to meet the needs of children, reflecting a social model of disability as opposed to the
medical model which was prevalent in India till the end of the 1970’s. The concept of integrated
education in India has emerged during the mid-1950, it was based on the medical model of
disability (Sanjeev & Kumar, 2009). Children who were differently abled were educated in a
setting which was segregated and separate till the end of the 1970’s. The reason for this was that
many of the practitioners during this time believed that pupils with sensory, intellectual or
physical disabilities were not capable of being educated in the same settings and activities as
those being provided in mainstream schools (National Council of Educational Research and
Training, 2000).

In India, changes in the educational policies were prominent in the later part of the 20th century
as the number of individuals who were differently abled were growing in number and segregated
educational settings were struggling to keep up with the inflow of these large number of

4|Page
individuals who were trying to access the system the government put into place policies from the
west to keep up with recent times and to incorporate inclusive practices in policies (Singh, 2016).

The focus of this study is to identify if inclusion in the educational setting is evident in
Karnataka,

The paper will elaborate on issues surrounding inclusion in the literature review and move on to
methodology employed in this study and further implications and limitations of this study. A key
component will be the positionality of the researcher and the influence it had on the findings of
the study.

1.1. OBJECTIVE: The study sets out to find the prevalence of inclusive education in Karnataka.

1.2. RESEARCH QUESTION:

Is inclusion in education being implemented in the right manner?

5|Page
2. Literature Review

The literature review will involve in the understanding of the concepts of inclusion and the
numerous consequences which resulted in the development of it. This paper will further look into
the understanding and implementation of the term into the educational setting and elaborate on
the issues surrounding it. The paper will also look at the universal definitions of inclusion and
the definition within India as well and the discrepancies between definition and implementation.
The paper will conclude with the issues surrounding inclusive practices in Karnataka.

2.1. Origin and Concept of Inclusive Education

Inclusive education has been at the forefront since the1900’s in Europe (Hodkinson &
Vikerman,2009), during this period the policies implemented by the government narrowed in on
intergrating students who are differently abled into mainstream school. The criteria then was,
that children who were differently abled needed to adapt themselves in order to fit into
mainstream schools rather than the school adapting the required changes to accommodate these
children (Thomas,1997). Even though, there has been effort made to integrate children who are
differently abled into mainstreams school during the earlier years, the rise of inclusive practice in
education has its origin from the Salamanca Declaration in 1994. The Declaration stated that
children should have the right to education in mainstream schools when follow a child centred
pedagogy which focuses and realises the needs of the child (UNESCO, 1994; Lindsay, 2003;
Gadabgui, 2008). The declaration put forth the argument that education children who are
differently abled alongside typically developing children disarms the discrimination against
them, enlightens the future generations, creates a society which is accepting and attains the goal-
Education For All (Armstrong et al.,2010).

The earlier system of education for children who were differently abled was through segregated
education as opposed to inclusive education. Armstrong et al. (2010) stated that the segregation
between mainstream schools and special schools had its bases on the provision of different
curriculum for different children. During this period, the accessibility of differently abled
children to mainstream schools was based on specific criteria’s and assessment (Hocutt,1996).

6|Page
Individuals in support of differently abled children questioned the then existent model of
education which constrained the access and involvement of differently abled children in
mainstream schools as they rallied for inclusive education (Armstrong et al., 2010). The
supporters primarily challenged the policy by stating that, the level of education attained by a
child maybe dependent on the severity of their disability. Secondly, the needs of the child should
be met through systematic recognition and assessments of their behavior. Lastly, the lack of
resources led to differently abled children being moved from mainstreams schools (Armstrong et
al.,2010).

The disability movement which questioned the policies in the developing countries was the
beginning of the fight for inclusive education. The policies endorsed segregated education which
originated from the eugenics movement and the theory of social Darwinism developed in the late
19th century and early 20th century (Armstrong et al., 2010). Despite the fact that the initial
challenge was targeted towards the policy of mainstreaming and integration through the assertion
from Disability Movements, the individuals who contradicted the traditional special schools and
advocates of inclusion in education brought about the supplanting of the eugenic models with the
idea of "inclusive education" which goes for accomplishing social equity and balance of rights
(Lindsay, 2003). The substitution of eugenic models was on the grounds that it support isolation
which have been found to confine opportunities for individuals with disabilities by marking them
as "abnormal" or "special" (Ainscow, 1999, Ainscow et al., 2006; Armstrong et al., 2010). The
reasons which lead to challenging the provision of segregation as indicated by Armstrong et al.
(2010) additionally emerged because of the expanded acknowledgment of the wide continuum of
human needs and the issues related with policies that barricade educational possibilities for
differently abled children (Armstrong et al., 2010).

Education is an asset not only for the individual but for the country as well as it increase the
chances of getting a job, provides knowledge as well as ensures prosperity (DFID,2006).Since
the Salamanca Declaration there are several meanings across the globe for the term -Inclusive
education. An example of this is, in the UK it is used in context of specials schools to describe
the practices within the schools (Spurgeon,2007). It was argued by Slee (2004) that as time has
passed by the meaning of the term has divulged into many different meanings. Slee (2004), in his
paper stated that he regrets that the term ‘inclusive education’ has lost its novel fundamental

7|Page
meanings which was to reject the medical model and the psychological definitions and
explanations associated with educational difficulties.

Inclusive education in developed countries such as the UK is at its best wherein the resources in
schools are provided for a diverse range of difficulties and needs both, academically and socially.
In comparison developing countries such as India, inclusive education is considered to be
associated with merely human rights and social justice especially the association with UNESCO
education for all policy (Miles & Singal,2009). Although there is an imminent need to have
inclusive educational policies in place, it is also essential to provide high standards of education
to all students. According to Armstrong et al., (2010)The concerns currently are the extremely
love levels of achievements and failures on the part of the educational systems based in
developing countries which are providing low level of attention to the needs of the population,
this may be due to the educational policies being manipulated by external funding agencies who
place their own benefits and agendas ahead of the countries, which in most cases results in
theories of inclusion being implemented in different settings in a different manner.

In spite of the fact that the differentiating motivation of the idea of inclusive education has
additionally affected approach at the global level, in 2006, the United Nations General Assembly
acknowledged the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities which came into compel
in 2008 (United Nations (UN), 2006). Notably, Article 24 of the Convention expresses the rights
to education for differently abled individuals without segregation, giving equivalent prospects by
embracing a inclusive educational framework for all children including children who are
differently abled at all levels of education. The article further asserts that educational frameworks
must implement a fully inclusive approach which guarantee the arrangement of an empowering
setting, that offers help and assets that enhances academic and social improvement of all children
(UN, 2006; Armstrong et al., 2010). Thus, inclusive education implies that the educational
framework must adopt a extensive idea of EFA as it perceives and regard learner's differences,
rights and needs, incorporating the individuals who are susceptible and underestimated as far as
age, sexual orientation, inability, dialect, outcast, HIV/AIDS and TB status among others
(Adoyo, 2007; Gadagbui, 2008).A major characteristic of inclusive education according to
Gadagbui (2008), is that it empowers educational framework to embrace structures and strategies
that addresses the requirements of all children in other to advance an inclusive society. Along

8|Page
these lines, contending from the human right point of view of the inclusive movement, they insist
that all children must be given the privilege to access equal opportunities in mainstream schools
as it is their right to do so (Hocutt, 1996; Ainscow, 2006). They see special schools as
domineering, supporting unequal prospects and rights, prejudicial and unethical (Farrell, 2006).
Nonetheless, supporters of special schools have, still kept up their defending inclusion in
education on moral and good basis does not signify as the concept does not have the best of the
child’s interest (Warnock, 2005 and 2010). In spite of the fact that it is the basic right of a child
to be taught in schools in their neighborhood, it should also be the best education available. This
circumstance brings about clashes in light of the fact that for various reasons a child will most
likely be unable to access education in neighborhood schools and therefore be provided with
segregated setting. Farrell (2006) in this way contends the mistreatment and rejection that
differently abled children need to confront exists in the educational framework which refutes
them the best education as they are compelled to study in inclusive schools due to the policies
implemented by the government. As stated by Warnock (2010) inclusive education creates a
unpleasant situation for the child as they may be present in the class physically but would
emotionally be isolated due to bullying. These situations where in bullying has led to isolation
cannot be considered as inclusion by the activists in the inclusive movement (Frederickson et al,
2007).

Moreover, researchers as mentioned above (Thomas, 1997; Gadagbui, 2008; Armstrong et al,
2010) contended in support of the Salamanca Declaration, which preserves that inclusive
practice in education is about guaranteeing equal rights and to strive towards building a society
wherein each individual are regarded, acknowledged and esteemed. Advocates of having a fully
inclusive educational framework further contend that special schools endorse segregation,
disparagement and alienating specific groups of individuals with the end result being that
students in mainstream schools are unaware and intolerant towards differences and diversity of
individuals that are present in our societies (Thomas, 1997; Armstrong et al., 2010).

Schools are a setting in which children are educated but it should be seen as an example of how
society works, children who demonstrate acts of bullying towards other children do this as they
find them different from typically developing individuals but, such acts are seen as unacceptable
by adults. Kreimeyer et al., 2000; McCain and Antia, 2005; Adoyo, 2007; Gadagbui, 2008;

9|Page
Musengi and Chirshe, 2012., are some of the researchers who have worked in inclusive settings
and have stated social achievement accomplished in inclusive settings where children have
created companionships, shared supplies and engaged in recreational activities together. Such
kids will probably recognize and acknowledge dissimilarities and differences among their peers
and further expand these ideals of tolerance, acceptance and regard for mankind to society as
they develop into adults. These findings bolsters the philosophical underpinning of inclusive
education from contentions of its supporters who say that children can be educated and learn
from their peers, it brings about change in the attitudes of typically developing children and
preparing the children for the life ahead (Bilken et al., 1978).

The inclusive movement began in order to bring about changes in special educational framework
it now moves past its underlying motivation to incorporate issues of integration and diversity in
society (Ainscow et al.,2006).This notion is further supported by Armstrong et al.,(2010) that
the contrasting agendas has brought about disagreements between policies associated with the
idea and how it is applied. This brings into play the agendas in regards to inclusion in education,
an example cited in Armstrong et al.,(2010) - in developed countries inclusion focus on catering
to the diverse needs of the children and improving the schools . Whereas, in developing countries
inclusion is seen social justice. This in itself diminishes the significance of the concept of
inclusion as well as the meaning of the term is unclear. This is implemented in policies in order
to avoid any resistance from the population. As such the manner in which inclusion is defined is
crucial in order for appropriate use in practice.

2.2 Definition of inclusive education

Inclusive education has been defined in numerous ways since the Salamanca Declaration. The
term inclusive education is at times used to define the practices associated with special school in
the UK (Spurgeon,2007).However , with time it has been known to be associated with behavior
and attendance at school as opposed to disability or SEN ( Ainscow et al.,2010). This leaves the
reader to interpret the definition of inclusion on the bases of what is written in the books. The
difficulty in arriving at an explicit and conclusive definition of inclusive education is due to

10 | P a g e
manner in which it was described- it originally was depicted in regards to what it was not rather
than what it is. This can be noted in statements such as “It is not about differently abled students
or children with Disabilities” another example is “Inclusion is not simply a different word for
special education” ( Armstrong et al., 2010,p.29). Clearly such explanations don't state what
inclusive education is and hence don't give what the term expects to change. Among numerous
other authors Dyson (1999), proposes that inclusive education should be depicted in plural terms
which Armstrong et al. (2010) cautions that it reclaims to the concept of inclusive education
being utilized to mean different things.

Disregarding the struggle in concurring a definition for inclusive education, the term is utilized
in the policies issued by the government without a distinct definition. Nonetheless, evidence in
relation to implementation of inclusive strategies which is evident in the literature base support
the positive outcomes of its implementation, even though there has not been a significant
changes made by the inclusive movement in ensuring that the educational framework moves
towards creating an inclusive and equitable society (Armstrong et al., 2010).isolation and
bullying are the most common incidents reported with SEN children, one such incident reported
by Keating and Mirus (2003) was where SEN children In an inclusive schools are secluded and
tormented by their peers who were typically developing wherein, SEN children are anticipated to
develop abilities similar to their peers. The question arises as to why typically developing
children are not expected to develop abilities or skills similar to SEN children. There have been
questions raised in regards to the issues surrounding the practice as there continues to be a
struggle in setting up clear standards and practices which are in line with inclusive practices
(Ainscow et al., 2006; Armstrong et al., 2010).

This brings to light the concept of inclusive education being presented in policies in a rhetoric
manner and the term “inclusive education” being painted in as a positive image in order to avoid
resistance from activists, this will fail to truly consider issue that convey to the fore the reason
and principles of educational practice (Ainscow & Sandill,2010).

There are distinctive routes through which inclusive practices in educational settings are
implemented due to the inability to derive an unambiguous definition of the term (Booth and
Ainscow, 1998; Peter, 2003; Ainscow et al., 2010; Armstrong et al., 2010; Ainscow and
Sandill,2010) . researcher have endeavored by using experience as a bases to derive different

11 | P a g e
definitions and meanings in regards to the idea of inclusive education in order to tackle the issues
surrounding the definition. Ainscow et al., (2006) provided a distinction between a descriptive
and prescriptive definition of inclusion wherein the former one refers to the numerous way in
which inclusion is implemented in practice and the latter refers to the manner in which we
implement it and presume others to do the same with the idea. They additionally provided a
comprehensive definition of inclusion which included acceptance of differences and diversity in
a school setting by both students and staff, Ainscow advocated towards inclusion of marginalized
groups not just children with disabilities and SEN in mainstream schools ( Ainscow et al.,2006).
There was a counter by Armstrong et al.,(2010), with an observation that the difference was
unclear as to the implementation of practice is not different from what the policies state (
Armstrong et al.,2010). This shows that the need for a standardized definition of inclusion in
education is imminent in order to have the appropriate form of practice.

In developed countries such as the UK the policies relating to inclusive education aim towards
improving the resources in the schools, identifying the diversity and the needs of every child.
Whereas, in developing countries such as India the focus even in the educational policies as
recent as 2016 is on:

- Girl child education

- issues around social justice and discrimination

-Zero tolerance towards gender discrimination.

All of the above mentioned points come under social justice. The section relating to Inclusion is
a two page extract on acceptance of SEN in mainstream schools, the content of the policy will be
elaborated on in the next section (National policy on Education, 2016). Hence, it is essential to
clearly define the meaning and implementation of practices in education. As cited in Armstrong
et al., 2010, it is the policy which influences the implementation in practice. This paper will
aspire to understand how inclusion is implemented and how the definition of the term leads to
certain groups being marginalized and excluded due to the definition and policies on inclusion in
India.

12 | P a g e
2.3 Inclusion in India

In India, the origin of inclusive education can be dated back to 1974 with the introduction of
Integrated Education of disabled Children (IEDC) was employed by the Government of India
(GOI) in certain areas of the country. There were changes made to the policies a decade later
with the introduction of the National Policy on Education in 1986 which emphasized that
inequalities in education should be dispersed, while focusing on the needs of the individuals who
have been devoid of equality in the educational setting ( Ministry of Human Resource
Development,1986). The goals set by IEDC were commendable but the statistics in the state of
Karnataka indicate enrollment being about 2% of children with disabilities who attain an
education of which 1% are registered in special schools and the other 1% in integrated
educational framework (Singal, 2006).

Until the 1990’s, children between the age group of 4-16 years of age identified with SEN and
disabilities, which was estimated to be 40 million were rejected access to mainstream education
(Singh,2016). India is a vast country wherein the population with disabilities is so vast, their
needs so complex, and the resources made available if any; are scarce add to that the attitude of
society it only leaves the government to bring about changes in a standardized manner. The
influence of, well- established and clear guidance from the government would be profound and
liberating in the long run (Baquer & Sharma,1997). India was a signatory at the Jometin World
Conference in 1990, where the agenda for “Education For All” (EFA) was set and decreed that
every child will be provided with primary education and to drastically reduce the rate of adult
illiteracy by the year 2000.

The passage of the policy- Persons with Disabilities Act (PWD) in 1995, paved the way for a
turn of events in the education accessible to children with disabilities, a key criteria of this policy
was that inclusion and complete involvement of children with disabilities in mainstream schools.
The law vouched for indiscrimination and that all barriers to education physical and
psychological to be dissolved in order to facilitate inclusion of children with SEN in mainstream
schools (Das et al., 2013). As part of the policy the government was required to provide 3% of
the seats in every state funded school to an individual identified with a disability (Lei, 2007).

The government also introduced “Sarva shiksha Abhiyan” in the year 2000 which was set to
attain universalization of elementary education by the year 2010. Karnataka state has framed a

13 | P a g e
policy on disability in the year of 2007. As per this policy, the Women and Child Development
Department will be the Nodal Department and the office of the Commissioner for Person with
Disabilities will coordinate and monitor the programmes and schemes for persons with disabilities. It
gives importance for Inclusive Education for CWSN through education Department in main stream
schools. Other than these initiations there is no defined policy for the Children With Special Needs in
the State nor there is no any exclusive National Policy with respect to Children With Special Needs.
There has been a programme from where we can understand the intent of the state like: (various
programmes list to be said) for ex.

According to 2011-12, survey conducted under SSA Karnataka 1.62% of total child
population in the age group of 6-14 years are CWDs which is lower than the national
prevalence under SSA of 2 %. The highest number of children identified in various
Districts in descending order are 9709 – Belgaum, 6555 – B’lore Urban, 6420 – Bijapur,
6435 – Bagalkot, 6418 – Bidar, etc.

Special needs is Regular schools in Karnataka have a long history of mainstreaming

children with disabilities with Resource teachers support through IEDC scheme (centrally
sponsored scheme) and a number of projects of GOI and UN agencies like DPEP,
Janashala, Support A Child have been pilot tested here and have provided opportunities
for major learning. Among all the classes studied, 11 classes had children with
disabilities and 2 classes had one child each with some physical problems. Children
with disability comprised of 4% of our sample. The proportion of such children was
very low (generally 2 or 3 in a class of approximately 30 children) but in Soppugudde
Lower Primary School at Tirthahalli, we came across the highest number of children with
disabilities in the class, with a very high percentage of children having intellectual
impairments. However, none of the teachers in any of the classes we studied had a
systematic plan or training to integrate these children within the mainstream school.
Even in the Tirthahalli school which had de facto become a 'special school', the
teacher did not know how to integrate children without disabilities into the school and
come up with a teaching plan that responded to pedagogic requirements of all the children.
Although the parents sent their children to this school in order to ensure that their
children's needs got special attention, the 'special' component of special education was not
systematically planned and implemented.
14 | P a g e
This policy was in line with inclusive practices as well as EFA, as the three key factors were:
Access, enrolment and retention of children aged between 6-14 years. One of the most appealing
features of this policy was the “zero rejection policy” where children irrespective of their cast,
creed or severity of the disability were all entitled to attain a quality and meaningful education
(Singh, 2016). The target date to attain education for all had been set at the year 2015 (Singal,
2006), the goal in the present year has yet to be attained (Singh, 2016).

With the introduction of all these policies the line is blurred between inclusion and integration, in
the 21st century the concept of inclusive education have gained momentum in India not just in the
educational framework but in the media and as mentioned above in the policies as well (Singal,
2006). A problematic situation is that although the term inclusive education has been implied in
policies the delivery of it is more along the principles of integration (Hodkinson & Devarakonda,
2009). According to Singal & Rouse (2003) an essential aspect for the ambiguity of the term
inclusion is due to the term is not indigenous in the Indian context but a concept inherited from
the West. An extract from Singal & Rouse (2003) hits home with the key concern in India at
present:

“The policy movement from integration to inclusion has, in reality, been nothing more than a
‘linguistic one devoid of engagement with more fundamental issues.” (p.363).

In relation to the linguistic shift rather than engaging with the issues, policies interchanging the
term inclusion with integration does not only show the callousness of government officials but
also the lack of understanding on their part about the practical implementations and need of
inclusion in the educational framework in India (Hodkinson & Devarakonda, 2009).

With all of these policies in place mentioning clearly that inclusion is a process of acceptance of
children without any bias which is a key factor in the EFA policy. The census of India
(GOI,2011) estimated that individuals with disability at 26 million which accounts for 2.1% of
the population, which is a large number. Special schools have doubled in number in India in spite
of the government’s implementation of inclusive policies (Miles & Singal, 2010). Hence, even
with the implementation of the policies mentioned above the results do not show a significant
improvement in the inclusive application in the educational setting (Singh, 2016).

15 | P a g e
As such India’s policy on inclusive education is ambiguous and raises the question as to what
and how inclusion is being practiced in the state of Karnataka or if at all it is being implemented
is the reason this study is being conducted.

Though Karnataka has been at the forefront in the implementation of centrally sponsored scheme
on Integrated Education of Disabled Children since 1981 and it has lead several trainings on
Inclusive Education during the DPEP and the Janashala period. The entire work in this area in
Karnataka has taken place under central government schemes and programmes from time to time
(starting from the Integrated Education of Disabled Children –1981 to the more recent District
Primary Education Programme in 1994, the Janashala programme- 1998 and now the Sarva
Shiksha Abhiyan-2001) and these have had limited impact due to their diverse, time-bound and
somewhat duplicating character. Though Karnataka has been a lead state in training but still all
the teaching staff have yet to be covered under any type of training or orientation therefore the
education system is not adequately equipped to be responsive to the needs of children with
disabilities which is vital for achieving the objective of equity and quality in education. During
the survey conducted in 2005, the number of children identified, as CWSN was 81900. Training
was imparted to the teachers as to how to identify various impairments and as a result the
number of CWSN identify in 2006 was 129461. Therefore Karnataka needs to develop a cogent
policy, strategy or an action plan on Inclusive Education of children with special needs that can
address the state specific needs and realities with a long-term vision. Thus, there is a need to put
together a state policy, strategy and action plan for the education of children with special needs,
define the roles and functions of various departments/ functionaries pertaining to this issue and
also identify areas where state

n what reveals the persistence of caste-based segregation of children in primary schools

in rural Karnataka, around 13.7 per cent of Dalit children surveyed in the State have
claimed that their teacher had asked them to sit separately from ‘higher caste’ children
in the classroom, says a study released by the Centre for Study of Social Exclusion and
Inclusive Policy, Mangalore University.

Released on October 18 here, ‘Discrimination and social exclusion: A study on the

development experience of Dalits in Karnataka’ was spread over ten taluks in Belgaum,
Gulbarga, Chitradurga, Mysore and Kolar — chosen for their socio-cultural diversity

16 | P a g e
 and their considerable Scheduled Caste population. Over ten months ending in July
2011, the study enumerated the harassment and discrimination faced by 2,425 Dalit
families or 12,677 people in 50 villages, of which 825 families have children going to
primary school. Discrimination is also seen during midday meals, with around 114
families admitting that their children have had to sit separately during lunch and were
served in a separate set of plates.
3. Research Design

To appropriately address the questions and to attain the objective of this study, the research
method used should be apt. this section will therefore elaborate on the choices and approaches I
will employ for data collection. This section begins with the bases on which the methodology is
used to generate the best fit for this study.

3.1.Methodology

3.1.1. Research Paradigms

The manner in which knowledge is acquired and interpreted is dependent on the research
paradigm (Mertens, 2005; Bogdan & Biklen, 1998,Auerbach & Silverstein,2003). Therefore, the
methodology or paradigm designated to the study positions the objectives, motivation and results
anticipated from it. The choices made in regards to the design, methodology and the methods
will not have a basis without designating a paradigm for the study (Bogdan & Biklen 1998,
p.22). Research paradigms have also been known to be termed as epistemology or ontology or
even research methodology (Neuman, 2000). Hence, the paradigm chosen for this study reflect
upon the researchers views about the world, according to Grix (2004).

Positivist paradigm or positivism can be implemented in this study on the assumption that as we
look at aspects in society and the epistemological underpinning of this paradigm is that our
senses are the bases on which our reality is built (Hughes, 1990; Silverman, 2000; Wiersma,
2000; Mertens, 2005). Data collected in positivist researches are evaluated numerically (Miller &
Brewer, 2003).

17 | P a g e
The interpretivist approach views the world through the lenses of human experiences (Cohen &
Manion, 1994, p.36), they believe that an individual’s reality is constructed from social structure
(Mertens, 2005). Understanding of social phenomenon rooted in people’s interpretation of
situations and experiences in their world is the method employed to gather data (Johnston 1983;
Creswell, 2003, p.8). The paradigm does not begin with a theory but depends on gradually
developing a pattern or meaning throughout the research (Creswell, 2003, p.9). The researcher
commonly utilizes qualitative data collection through interviews, observations, photographs and
documents. For the purpose of this study semi- structured interviews will be the method used
(Bryman, 2004).

3.1.2. Rational For Opting For A Qualitative Methodology

Researchers mainly had two categories in order to conduct research and the differentiating aspect
of the methods was based on data analysis and method of collection. The paradigms are the key
factor for the differences between quantitative and qualitative approaches. Methodologists were
of the view that adopting a stance with either positivist or interpretivist paradigm mean that the
researcher would have to use the approach that is coexistent with the method; i.e. Qualitative or
Quantitative (Brannen, 1992; Robson 1993). Research in the field of education traditionally
followed a quantitative methodology (Burns, 1997) development of a third form of methodology
was identified by Brannen in 1992, which was mixed methods. This method has moved the field
of social sciences including research in the educational field forward (Gorard,2004;
Creswell,2003).

A Qualitative approach hones in on the quality of the research and focus on the understanding of
social phenomenon as opposed to statistical data collection. As mentioned above the method
implements data collection in the form of verbal interviews and observations, this is done in
order to better understand the views of an individual and to uncover their perception and
experiences of the world around them. Data gathered through this form of approach allows room
for reflexivity and as this approach is executed with a limited number of participants, each
participants response may vary from the other and as such provide the researcher with aspects
which were previously overlooked or not raised at all (McCracken,1988;Patton, 1990; Grix,
2004:119-120;Minichiello, 1995). A limitation of this method is that findings cannot be
generalized and there may be difficulties replicating the study in the same form (Patton,1990).

18 | P a g e
The methodology implemented by the researcher for this study is an interpretative qualitative
approach, this is the chosen methodology as the researcher choses to ascertain the understanding
of inclusion in a specific area namely Karnataka and if it is being implemented in educational
settings as prescribed in the policies issued by the Government. The qualitative approach will
allow the researcher to tap into the views of the key facilitators in inclusion namely- head
teachers and teachers state funded school in Karnataka.

3.2. Method

3.2.1. Interview structure and Material

In- depth interviews will be conducted with the Head teachers and teachers in the assigned
schools. The interviews will be conducted with semi- structured questions (refer: appendix) with
a slot of half an hour per session with a maximum of three sessions. The session will be
conducted in an area in the school in which the participants feel comfortable.The sessions will be
recorded with a voice recorder and an interpreter will be present in case any of the participants
feeling comfortable being interviewed in the local dialect in Karnataka namely- Kannada.

3.2.2. Participants and Data collection

The date will be collected in five of the government funded schools in the Mangalore District,
Karnataka. The schools will be selected after acquiring permission from the District Head, the
school management and providing them with the letter from the School Of Education, University
of Nottingham and copies of the information sheets, consent forms and debriefing sheets to brief
them on the purpose of this study. The key individuals required for this study are- Teachers and
Head Teachers and Parents of SEN students in the assigned schools.

Purposive Sampling techniques will be implemented in order to avoid any bias. The intended
number of participants for the study are Head teachers from five public funded schools and Ten
teachers selected at random from those five schools.

3.2.3. Data Analysis

19 | P a g e
Data from the interviews will be analysed with QRS NVivo which is a program to analyse
qualitative data. The Data from the interviews if any of the interviews were conducted in
Kannada will need to be translated to English to enter into the program.

The researcher will also make sure that the actual statements used, as well as the original
transcripts, are evidence based and comprehensively represented (Gillham 2005). By using the
interviewee’s own words the research will be as valid as possible and will reflect the actual
interview, it will not be so much a true picture of the participant but a balanced account of the
interview (Gillham 2005)

3.2.4 Ethical Issues

Conducting any form of research, requires clear guidelines about the study and to be transparent
with the participants (Bell,2005). The first step to gain ethical clearance is from the University
which would allow me to provide the Educational department in India.

The participants should be informed about the implications and benefits of this study. Being a
part of this study could make the participants uncomfortable as it would question their line of
work, as well as make them leave the study. Hence, it is the duty of the interviewer to make the
participants comfortable and to ensure that the participant’s details will be confidential and
assured anonymity and if at a later point they wish to withdraw they could do so. It is also
imperative that the consent forms are signed by the participants (Bell, 2005).

3.3.5. Positionality

The positionality of the researcher is important to understand their world views. The selection of
this topic is due to the increasing number of children who are excluded from schools due to the
inability and irresponsibility on the part of the government. The statistics in in the Census
reported an estimated 30 million children in India were not receiving education in spite of EFA
policy being in place. The interview questions are posed in an open ended manner in order to not
give away my views of the study. Even though without being aware the researcher might be
biased with the views in the smallest of ways therefore, a colleague will be asked to assess and

20 | P a g e
3.3.6. Limitations

Marshall and Rossman (1999) have indicated that there is no perfectly designed piece of
research. Every piece of research will surely have some weakness or limitations and this study
will not be an exception. One of the problems I know I will encounter will be respondents’
expectation of financial rewards after taking part in the interview. This has been the case with
most research of this nature conducted in urban areas of India. I intend to explain to participants
that the research is purely academic and therefore no funding is attached to it. To conclude, the
implications for using qualitative methodological approach will be that if it success will be useful
to other researcher especially in the research on educational practice.

CONCLUSION

To open up the regular school system to disabled children is not an easy task. The policy on inclusion
and mainstreaming can easily become "main dumping" if not implemented carefully. It was, however,
pointed out that a big gap exists between this ideal situation and the present reality. There is an urgent
need for interventions for equipping general teachers with special skills, making general curricula,
teaching methods. Evaluation procedures, learning material disability-sensitive and addressing the
attitudes /needs of other children in the school to ensure such interventions benefits all children.

It should be noted that although the inclusion movement exists in both developed and developing
countries, the implementation of this school change varies not only among nations, but also within
nations (i.e., states and districts). This is especially the case in India where there are vast differences in
urban and rural areas, states that have per capita incomes significantly higher than those where a vast
majority of the population lives below poverty line and the states in north-eastern part of India that
have not benefitted as much with the recent economic boom.

While inclusion as a theory has been largely welcomed, there is a school of thought which expresses
reservations as to whether the ordinary classroom can provide optimal quality education for children
with disabilities. A decisive issue is how students can be ensured optimal education in accordance with
her/his capabilities and needs. But it is widely recognized that segregated education that was being
largely followed the world over during the eighties and early nineties has not brought about the desired
results (Ince 2012).

REFERENCES

Brown, L., Long, E., Udvari-Solner, A., Schwarz, P., VenDeventer, P., et al. (1989, Spring).
Should students with severe intellectual disabilities be based in regular or in special education

21 | P a g e
classrooms in home schools? Journal of the Association of Persons with Severe Handicaps,
14(1): 8-12.

Brown, L., Schwarz, P., Udvari-Solner, A., Kampchroer, E., Johnson, F., Jorgensen, J., &
Gruenewald, L. (1991, Spring). How much time should students with severe intellectual
disabilities spend in regular education classrooms and elsewhere? JASH, 16(1): 39-47.

Hodkinson, A. and Devarakonda, C., 2009. Conceptions of inclusion and inclusive education: A
critical examination of the perspectives and practices of teachers in India. Research in
Education, 82(1), pp.85-99.

Miles, S. and Singal, N., 2010. The Education for All and inclusive education debate: conflict,
contradiction or opportunity?. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(1), pp.1-15.

National Policy on Education ,2016-

http://www.nuepa.org/New/download/NEP2016/ReportNEP.pdf.

Singal, N., 2006. Inclusive education in India: International concept, national

interpretation. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 53(3), pp.351-
369.

Schnorr, R. (1990). Peter? He comes and goes...First graders' perspectives on a part-time

mainstream student. Journal of the Association of Persons with Severe Handicaps, 15(4): 231-
240.

. Sapon-Shevin, M., Ayres, B., & Duncan, J. (1994). Cooperative learning and inclusion. In: J. S.
Thousand, R.A. Villa, & A.I. Nevins, Creativity and Collaborative Learning: A Practical Guide
to Empowering Students and Teachers. (pp. 45-58). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. Wiki.

Racino, J. (1999). Table 6.3: Curriculum for students with severe handicaps. Personnel
Preparation in Disability and Community Life: Toward Universal Approaches to Support. (p.
134). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publishers.

Tapasak, R.C. and Walther-Thomas, C.S., 1999. Evaluation of a first-year inclusion program:
Student perceptions and classroom performance. Journal for Special Educators, 20(4), pp.216-
225.

22 | P a g e
23 | P a g e