A.

Historical/Sociological Bases
(Source: https://www.eenet.org.uk/resources/docs/hist_theorectic.doc)

In 1945 the League of Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In the
field of education, Article 26 of the Declaration proclaims the right of every citizen to an
appropriate education regardless of gender, race, colour and religion. This right is also enshrined
in the constitutions of all independent nations. The question is: To what extent are national
governments guaranteeing the right of 'every' citizen to an 'appropriate' education as we
approach the new millennium? What measures are in place at national and local level to address
imbalances in education?

In almost every country, children and adults are being excluded from formal education
altogether; some of those who go to school do not complete. They are gradually and
deliberately pushed out of the school system because schools are not sensitive to their learning
styles and backgrounds. In a gesture of sympathy some children are sorted out into categories
and placed in separate special schools, away from their peers. This has led to the development
of two separate systems of education within countries, regular and special education. However,
in recent years the rationale for having two parallel national systems of education has been
questioned and the foundations of 'special education' have begun to crumble. The thinking
that has developed during the last 50 years in the disability field has had significant influences
not only on special education but also on practice in regular education. Current thinking and
knowledge demands that the responsibility for ALL learners should remain with the regular
classroom teacher. It is this thinking that we are here to explore during the two days of this
workshop.

The theme, “Inclusive Education: A Challenge for Teacher Education” chosen for the
workshop, provides us with an opportunity to re-examine our thinking and practice in the
context of Namibia, whether we are in special or regular education, especially those of us
interested in teacher education. However, it is important that the re-examination of our
thinking and practice is also set within the wider international context.
We are all now familiar with the 1990 World Declaration on Education for All: Meeting
Basic Learning Needs. The Declaration states that, inter alia:

Basic education should be provided to all children... To this end, basic

education services of quality should be expanded, and
consistent measures must be taken to reduce
disparities (Article 3.1).
(UNESCO, 1998:3)
Despite the rather token mention of special needs at the Jomtien Conference, there is
now greater recognition that the special needs agenda should be viewed as a significant part
of the drive for Education for All (Ainscow, 1995). The idea is that the concept of integration
should be replaced by a move towards inclusive schooling/education. Integration demands
that "additional arrangements will be made to accommodate" pupils with disabilities "within a
system of schooling that remains largely unchanged"; inclusive education, on the other hand,
aims to restructure schools in order to respond to the learning needs of all children (Ainscow,
1995: 1). Thus integration calls for separate arrangements in the regular school for exceptional
children, mainly those traditionally labelled as disabled, through such practices as withdrawal,
remedial education and/or mainstreaming. However, inclusive schooling, in the first instance,
recognizes that special learning needs can arise from social, psychological, economic, linguistic,
cultural as well as physical (or disability) factors, hence the use of the term "children with
special needs" rather than "children with disabilities". Second, it recognizes that any child can
experience difficulty in learning, short-lived or long-term, at any time during the school career
and, therefore, the school must continually review itself to meet the needs of all its learners.

But how has the concept of inclusive education developed? Was it sparked off by the
Jomtien Conference? Who is behind this movement? I, therefore, intend, in this paper, to show
how the inclusive education movement was born and the inclusive education approach can
ensure that the right to an appropriate education is guaranteed. I also want to argue that the
measures currently in place will not guarantee this right unless there are major reforms in the
education systems. The tide is moving towards those reforms, some experiments are already
underway, but obstacles to the changes are indeed great. Perhaps the greatest of these
obstacles is the unwillingness of those who wield different types of power, and thus make
important decisions as to why and who should be excluded from receiving an appropriate
education, to surrender power. Many disability groups, including Disabled People's
International (DPI), have argued that disability is socially constructed; it is the barriers that
society places on certain groups of people that create disability. Mike Oliver, a wheelchair using
professor of social work at Greenwich University, has argued that the politics of disablement
is a lively area of social engagement (Oliver, 1990). A number of sociologists have also argued
that we have the politics of special needs (see, for example, Fulcher, 1989). All these analyses
point to some explanation why some people are excluded from schooling and from receiving
an appropriate education.
Let me now consider first exclusion of persons with special needs in education before
the turn of this century, before I present arguments for inclusion and its obstacles.

Institutionalization of Persons with Disability

The history of disability in Europe is not a subject for celebration in view of the inherent
violation of human rights, as we know them today. People with disabilities (PWDs) were
considered to pose a social threat, to contaminate an otherwise pure human species. People
with disability were killed and used as objects of entertainment. As such, the society had to be
protected from PWDs and the converse was also true, the latter had to be protected from
society. Philanthropists found it imperative that PWDs should be given custodial care. These
attitudes led to PWDs being placed in asylums where they were fed and clothed. Asylums were
not meant to be educational institutions (Pritchard, 1960; Bender, 1970). Some PWDs, mainly
those with physical and intellectual impairments as well as mentally ill persons, were placed in
hospitals for custodial care and treatment. This was the period of institutionalization.

Special schools began to emerge in the 15th Century, starting with those with sensory
impairments. Other disability groups were considered for special schools when public schooling
were expanded. The emphasis in the early special schools was on vocational skills. Their
curriculum was thus different from that in public schools. In addition, these early schools
belonged to private philanthropic organizations. Government involvement came in much later.

It was not until the late 1950s that categorization of people with disabilities into separate
groups and institutionalization began to be questioned. Institutionalization removed PWDs
from the cultural norms of the society to which they rightly belonged. This led to the concept
of normalization, first developed in Scandinavian countries, especially Denmark and Sweden.
Wolfensberger (1972: 28) defined normalization as:
 Utilization of means which are as culturally normative as possible, in order to
establish and/or maintain personal behaviors and characteristics
which are as culturally normative as possible.
Institutions were considered to be artificial and counter-productive. Transfer from
institutions to and integration into, normal community settings required considerable
adjustment. Despite the adjustment problem, it was considered necessary to implement
normalization or de-institutionalization. This process is still going on today, with more and
more mentally ill persons being placed in the community, with some support.

In education, normalization means making maximum use of the regular school system with
a minimum resort to separate facilities. It may, therefore, be argued that normalization gave rise
to the concept of integration. However, normalization did not recognize the existence of a wide
range of individual differences in the society and "the diversity of educational, vocational and
other opportunities that are available to people in the adult world" (Jenkinson, 1997: 12). We
need also to question who and what is 'normal' as well as the value of programmes that ensure
conformity to some predetermined norm of behavior. Under normalization, people's individuality
seems to be overlooked.

Special Education
Despite the criticisms against normalization, attempts have been made to defend the
placement of children and young people with disabilities in special schools and integrated
provision, which are the components of the special education system. It has been argued that
regular classroom teachers are relieved "of the need to devise and implement curricula for
students who appeared unable to learn from normal instruction in the regular class" (Jenkinson,
1997: 13). However, this argument is in itself excluding in that children with disabilities have to
follow a different curriculum from that of the regular school.

The creation of special education introduced several educational problems. I will list only
six here. These are:
1. Children who qualify for special education have something wrong with them that
make it difficult for them to participate in the regular school curriculum; they thus
receive a curriculum that is different from that of their peers.
2. Children with disabilities and other conditions are labelled and excluded from the
mainstream of society. Assessment procedures tend to categorize students and this
has damaging effects on teacher and parent expectations and on the students' self-
concept (Ainscow, 1991; Jenkinson, 1997).
3. Unfair methods of identification and assessment have led to a disproportionate
number of students from ethnic minority groups. For example, in both Europe and
North America black, Asian and Latino-American students are overrepresented in
special schools and programmes; thus special education is being accused of
legalizing racial segregation (Jenkinson, 1997; Wang et al., 1990).
4. The presence of specialists in special education encourages regular classroom
teachers to pass on to others responsibility for children they regard as special
(Ainscow, 1991).
5. Resources that might otherwise be used to provide more flexible and responsive
forms of schooling are channeled into separate provision (Ainscow, 1991).
6. The emphasis on Individualized Educational Plans and task analysis in special
 education tends to lower teacher expectations of the students. In addition, task
analysis and the associated behavioral teaching strategies introduce disjointed
knowledge and skills thus making learning less meaningful to students (Sebba, Byers
and Rose, 1993).

To respond to these apparent weaknesses, integration was seen as a reasonable

arrangement. Integration recognizes the existence of a continuum of services, from the special
school, special class to the regular class with or without support.

Most of the UN declarations have supported special education as a continuum of provision.

Indeed, the UN does not provide leadership in specific fields out of context. Policy proposals
reflect professional thinking, research and practice at the time. For instance, I would like to argue
that policy and legislative developments in the United States and the United Kingdom had the
most significant impact on the activities of the UN and its specialized agencies. The passing of
PL42-142, Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) with its emphasis on the least
restrictive environment in 1975 in the USA and the UK Warnock Report of 1978 and the
subsequent 1981 Education Act abolishing disability categories and introducing the term "special
educational needs" set the scene and basis for international action. One such action was the
endorsement of these developments by the political and professional community in the Sundberg
Declaration adopted at the World Conference on Action and Strategies for Prevention, Education
and Rehabilitation for Persons with Disabilities held at the Spanish city of Torremolinos in
November 1981 (UNESCO, 1981). The emphasis at the Torremolinos Conference was educational
integration, allowing for a continuum from locational, social to functional integration.

Although the terms 'special educational needs' and 'Least Restrictive Environment' call for
abandoning categories of disability and associated labels as well as increased provision in the
regular class, there has not been agreement in practice at national and local level. For example,
in Africa, the 1980s saw the mushrooming of special classes and units in all areas of disability
(e.g. physical, sensory, intellectual, emotional and learning difficulties) despite the purported
abolition of categories (UNESCO, 1985).

Inclusive Schooling
At the same time, in the United States, professional advocacy groups claimed that the
legislation did not go far enough. They, therefore, launched the Regular Education Initiative (REI)
movement, which called for the merging of special and general education into one single system
in which all children attended the regular community school. All special education staff, resources
and learners with special needs, they recommended, should be integrated into the regular school
(Skrtic, 1991). Some countries, such as Australia and New Zealand, left the debate open, but
emphasized on parental choice (Jenkinson, 1997). The United Kingdom, while advocating for
education in the regular class, has introduced, through the Code of Practice, assessment
procedures, which lead to a child being 'statement ' by the Local Education Authority (LEA). The
statement ensures that resources are made available to the child. It is obvious that the concept
of increased parental choice and detailed assessment procedures work against the REI
movement. Indeed, the practice of exclusion is being endorsed.

Alongside the Regular Education Initiative (REI) another movement was initiated by
advocacy groups on severe intellectual impairments, such as The Association for Persons with
Severe Handicaps (TASH), which promoted the rights and well-being of people with severe
intellectual disability (Jenkinson, 1997). This is the inclusive schooling movement. Like the REI, it
proposes the merging of special and general education, but it goes beyond this. It does not
believe in the existence of a continuum of provision, from special school, special class to regular
class. There should be only one unified education system. The proponents of inclusive schooling
call for a restructuring of the school to accommodate all learners and advocate radical changes
to the curriculum, claiming that current curricula were perpetuating exclusion, dividing those
learners who could meet their objectives as they are from those who could not (Ainscow, 1991,
1994; Jenkinson, 1997).

Research on inclusive schooling has focused on school improvement in terms of whole

school responses as well as teaching strategies that include all learners (Ainscow, 1991, 1994).
In the early 1980s UNESCO carried out a survey on teacher education in 14 countries involving
all world regions (UNESCO, 1986). The findings showed that regular classroom teachers were
willing to take on the responsibility for special needs children, but were not confident whether
they had the skills to carry out that task. Most teachers felt they needed training in the special
needs field. These findings suggested the need for in- service training for regular classroom
teachers, through teacher trainers. UNESCO, therefore, set up a project, led by Professor Mel
Ainscow, now at the University of Manchester, to develop materials and teaching strategies that
would meet the need of teachers in inclusive schools. Regional workshops were held for Africa,
(Nairobi, Kenya), Asia (Beijing, China), Middle East (Amman, Jordan), Europe (Romania), Latin
America (Chile) and North America (Canada). Resource Teams were set up for preparing and
trialling materials that had to be culturally relevant. Between 1988 and 1993, the project teams
met, trailed the materials and ran workshops. The outcome was the currently widely distributed
materials, including the Special Needs in the Classroom: Teachers Resources Pack (UNESCO,
1993), Special Needs Classroom A Teacher Guide (Ainscow, 1994) and two videos, Inclusive
Schools and Training video. These materials have been highly beneficial in improving school
practice, giving skills and confidence to regular classroom teachers.

The success of these materials and various experiments carried out on inclusive schooling
in different parts of the world led UNESCO to convene, with assistance of the government of
Spain, the 1994 World Conference at Salamanca. The delegates deliberated on the elimination of
exclusive practices for children and young people with special needs arising from social, economic,
psychological and physical conditions. At the end of the conference, the Salamanca Statement
and Framework for Action was unanimously adopted by acclamation (UNESCO, 1994).

The implications for inclusive schooling are wide. Different countries, regional, local
communities and professionals are at different levels of conceptualization. While some are at the
inclusive, School for All, stage, others are at the special school stage, and still others somewhere
in-between.

Inclusive Education
So far, I have presented educational development in relation to persons with special needs
in terms of schooling. Indeed, education, in the eyes of economists and educational planners, has
been presented in literature as if it existed mainly within the context of schooling. Informal and
non-formal education are often not their concern. Yet those who are excluded from schooling
benefit from these forms of education in order to become usefully contributing members of their
communities. For many individuals with special needs in many countries, these are the only forms
of education.
 Ociiti (1994:19) has described informal education as the "spontaneous learning by
individuals as they interact with their social and physical environment in their process of day-to-
day living... purely on their own initiatives or through the processes of stimulated learning and
directed practice". Non-formal education, on the other hand, is said to cover all forms of learning,
including functional literacy classes, outside the formal, school system. Coombs has described
these non-school forms of learning as the "shadow systems of education" (Cannen, 1996:61).
Economists have traditionally not recognized the significant role of informal and non-formal
learning, and the development of the informal sector, in developing inquiry, reflection, creativity
and locally relevant and appropriate technology and in producing affordable consumer goods,
branding it as traditional and inferior. The economists' position has influenced some
educationalists to consider informal and non-formal learning as an insignificant part of an
education system. It is rarely included in the description and discussion of national education
systems in major textbooks and journals. This omission was obviously the case at the Jomtien
Conference (Fordham, 1991: 173). Fordham argues that the goal of Education for All (EFA) may
not be met if education development relies entirely on existing schools, especially for "out-of-
school children and under-educated and/or underemployed youth and adults" (p. 174) and, I
would quickly add, children and adults with special learning needs. In fact, some people in the
latter group could benefit more from ecologically and culturally relevant non-formal learning.
Indeed, this educational arrangement would augur well with the spirit of the inclusive education
movement which calls for radical changes in the curriculum to include functional skills (Jenkinson,
1997).

On a broader scale, it is now being accepted that the contribution of informal and non-
formal learning and production (learning by doing) in both urban and rural areas, though
unrecorded, is what sustains the life of nations (Bray, Clarke and Stephens, 1986). The ongoing
criticism of the dual economy, as a false classification of the economy into pre-existing and
modern under foreign influence, has led to a movement towards acceptance of the informal sector
as an integral part of a nation's economy. What was needed was a rediversification of indigenous
economy with a view to modernizing it, rather than replacing it. Indeed, the literacy campaigns
of the 1960s and early 1970s with dramatic reductions in illiteracy in some countries have resulted
in the legitimization of informal or non-formal education. This integrative economic view, and
indeed educational involving informal, formal and non-formal creation and transformation of
knowledge (Cannen, 1996) -allows individuals and communities to contribute and benefit from
an expanded range of possibilities or choices in the content to be learned and goods to be
produced (Marglin, 1990). In addition, whilst the formal or modem sector has failed to create
jobs, the informal or "traditional" sector holds greater promise in increasing employment
opportunities. For some young people with profound and/or multiple learning needs, informal and
non-formal learning could be an important complementary option.

But informal and non-formal forms of learning are not new. These are mainly indigenous
forms of education, principles of which could be even used to advantage in the formal settings of
the school (Dovey, 1994). As I have argued elsewhere, indigenous education in Africa was, and
is, inclusive. We need only to consider the principles, which guided indigenous forms of education.
These include (Kisanji, 1998: 58-60):
1. Absence or limited differentiation in space, time and status: indigenous
customary education was available and accessible to all community members,
wherever they were, during waking hours
 2. Relevance of content and methods: the content of education was drawn from the
physical or natural and social environments, both of which were intricately tied to the
religious/'spiritual life of the people
3. Functionality of knowledge and skills: all the knowledge, attitudes and skills
embodied in the curriculum were based on cultural transmission, knowledge creation
and transformation
4. Community orientation: all educational content and practice was based on and
within the community.

I would like to argue that these principles of universality, relevance, functionality and
community localization are essential for a successful inclusive education system. Some of the
teaching approaches and methods considered to facilitate effective learning in schools today are
the natural part of African indigenous education. Here I have in mind co-operative and
collaborative learning and child-to-child learning opportunities. However, due to our veneration
of ideas and systems from outside, perhaps because of our history, we have all along ignored
these practices in our communities, only for research elsewhere to establish their effectiveness
(Hawes, 1988; UNESCO, 1993).

Summary and Conclusion

In this presentation so far, I have attempted to chart the development of social and
educational practice in relation to persons with special needs due to disabilities and other
backgrounds such as social, linguistic and economic experiences. The normalization movement,
which began in Scandinavian countries in the late 1950s, spawned many research activities since
the 1960s in Europe and North America. The concept of normalization was not relevant to Africa;
we did not have institutions. However, it influenced the move towards integration, which was
adopted in all regions of the world. I would like to argue that integration is also alien to Africa
because it does not recognize diversity of human beings. It merely seeks to assimilate those who
are different to learn and behave like everyone else. It also supports the continued existence of
special education as a separate system.

Inclusive schooling, on the other hand, is opposed to the concept and practice of special
education. It demands that schools should change in order to be able to meet the learning needs
of all children in a given community. It seeks to improve the learning outcomes of students in
academic achievements, social skills and personal development. Clearly this is the purpose of the
school improvement movement, which aims to develop schools that are effective for all. Effective
schools see pupils experiencing difficulty in learning ''as indicators of the need for reform"
(Ainscow, 1991: 3). These schools are characterized by (Ainscow, 1991; Hopkins, Ainscow and
West, 1994):
1. Strong administrative leadership and attention to quality of instruction
2. Emphasis on student acquisition of basic skills
3. High expectations for students and confidence among teachers that they can deal with
children's individual needs
4. Commitment to provide a broad and balanced range of curriculum experiences for all
children
5. Orderly, safe climate conducive to teaching and learning
6. Arrangements for supporting individual members of staff through staff development,
using both the workshop and the workplace.
7. Frequent monitoring of student progress
Effective schools are thus closely tied with effective teaching.

School improvement and effective research, which is at the heart of inclusive education,
points to three important needs. First there is the need for quality teacher education involving
pre-service training for all teachers and staff development in the form of advanced studies, the
workshop and the workplace. School heads require additional training in order to play an effective
leadership role. Second, there is the need for further research, especially school-based inquiry in
order to improve practice. Lastly, there is also the need to make formal education relevant in
content and process to the social and cultural environment of learners.
While we are engaged with school improvement and management of change, I would like
to end this presentation with a tacit reminder of the stark reality of life: change is sometimes
painful. When we become used to certain ways of doing things, we tend to resist change. Change
will be more painful to those of us who have made a living out of, and wield some power in,
special education. However, if we believe in Education for All, we need to surrender the power
we hold and work collaboratively to create effective schools and inclusive education.

B. Legal Bases

Inclusive Education: The Philippine Perspective

(Source: http://iamyouinclusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/DepEd-Inclusive-Education-Policy-Framework-Dr-Lorna-Dino.pdf)

General Information On Inclusive Education

◼ FACTS and FIGURES
Children with disabilities who are in school are about 101, 762 (2011-2011).
- Children with disabilities are still combating educational exclusion
- 97.3 % of them are still unreached.
- About 5,916 are mainstreamed in regular classes
- Children of Indigenous peoples number about 12-15 million across the country. These are
spread in seven ethnographic areas with 117 ethno-linguistic groups. Those in the elementary
schools total 639, 483 while 158, 550 are in the secondary schools (2010-2011).
- 140,570 Muslim elementary and secondary pupils are attending ALIVE (Arabic Language
and Islamic Values Education) in public schools
- Street children are about 246, 000 thousand-
75% are children on the streets;
25% are children of the streets;
70 are boys
- Working children are growing in number
- Number of abused children is being tracked down

EDUCATION POLICIES
◼ The right to education is a basic human right.
◼ All children and youth shall have access to quality education.
◼ Inclusive education shall be concerned with all learners, with focus on those who have
traditionally been excluded from educational opportunities.
◼ Support system shall be organized and delivered holistically.

PUBLIC POLICY SUPPORT on INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

 ◼ The 1987 Philippine Constitution
◼ P.D. 603 - The Child and Youth Welfare Code
◼ RA. 7610 – Special Protection of Children against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination Act
◼ R.A. 7277- The Magna Carta for Disabled Persons amended by R.A 9442
◼ Policies and Guidelines in Special Education

PHILIPPINES ADOPTS INTERNATIONAL DOCUMENTS on INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

▪ UN Conventions on the Rights of the Child (1989)
▪ World Declaration on Education for All (1990)
▪ UNESCO Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action (1994)

INCLUSION DEFINED
◼ Reaching out to all learners
◼ Addressing and responding to diversity of needs of all children, youth and adults
◼ Involves changes and modification in content, approaches, structures and strategies

STRATEGIES in INCLUSIVE EDUCATION for DISADVANTAGED LEARNERS

◼ CHILDREN WITH DISABILITES
1. Partial mainstreaming towards inclusion
- students are educated in regular classes at least half the day
- receive additional help or specialized services
- pull-out
2. Full mainstreaming or inclusion
- complete regular instruction
- receive all special services in general classroom

SUSTAINING PROGRAMS for CHILDREN with DISABILITIES

◼ Establishment of 276 Special Education Centers nationwide
◼ Provision of SPED items
◼ Downloading of funds
◼ Sustaining Programs for Children with Disabilities
◼ Conduct of training programs for teachers handling children with various disabilities
◼ Conduct of training for school heads and supervisors
 ◼ Development of instructional materials for children with disabilities
◼ Conduct of advocacy strategies like the SPED caravan in regions and divisions without
SPED centers or without SPED programs
◼ Implementation of various intervention programs, like:
Early Intervention
Transition program
Head start program

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES EDUCATION

◼ Policy actions
To provide access to quality basic education
To ensure the preservation, recognition, promotion and protection of the rights of indigenous
peoples to ancestral domain, cultural identity and heritage
◼ Objective:
The National IP Education Policy Framework operationalized in all schools
Indigenous Peoples Education Activities
◼ Launching of the Philippine’s Response to Indigenous Peoples and Muslim Education
(PRIME)- a facility for IP and ME
◼ Conduct of implementation planning activities for the national, & regional clusters
◼ Celebrating IP month in October
◼ MADRASAH EDUCATION for Muslim Children

◼ Policy action:
To provide acess to quality education
To ensure the preservation, recognition, promotion, and protection of the rights of Muslim
learners to religious identity and heritage

◼ Objective:
Institutionalization of the Madrasah Education Program at all levels in basic education
◼ Madrasah Education for Muslim Children
◼ Development of Madrasah Currriculum for Kindergarten (Tahderiyyah)
◼ Implementation of the Madrasah Curriculum in the elementary level
◼ Development of the Curriculum in the secondary level
◼ Professionalizing the Asatidz through the Accelerated Teacher Education Program now on
its fourth cycle

STREET CHILDREN EDUCATION

◼ Enhancing the implementation of the “Kariton Klasrum” project in partnership with the
Dynamic Teen Company
◼ Street educator, Efren Penaflorida awarded by CNN as Hero of the Year
◼ Conducting stock-taking activities in selected sites that will implement the program

EDUCATION for CHILDREN SEXUALLY ABUSED

◼ Institutionalization of Personal Safety Lessons in both elementary and secondary schools
nationwide
◼ On-going training of trainers for the basic education levels
◼ Coordination with the agencies to ensure the welfare of the sector
ALTERNATIVE DELIVERY MODES for DISADVANTAGED CHILDREN
◼ MISOSA- (Modified In-School and Off-School Approach for elementary)
◼ Open High School Program for secondary
◼ Distance Learning
◼ Modular learning
◼ On-line learning
◼ Home-based learning
◼ Alternative Delivery Modes

CURRENT ISSUES and CHALLENGES

◼ Increasing the holding power of schools over these children
◼ Making existing resources and other support systems adaptable and suitable to the needs
of inclusive education
◼ Mobilizing parents and other duty bearers in supporting inclusive education
◼ Providing post-school support to fully integrate and enable disadvantaged children to
participate in gainful employment or productive work.

SOCIAL BENEFITS
◼ Creates positive social and attitudinal changes in both regular and disadvantaged chidren
such as:
a. Reducing and eliminating prejudices against disabled children
b. Improving self-concept or self-esteem
c. Growth in social cognition
d. Encouraging greater participation in social progress

Challenge
◼ Inclusion may result in overcrowding and lowering of quality of education

ECONOMIC BENEFITS
◼ Leads to higher participation rate, cohort-survival or completion rate
◼ There is higher simple and functional literacy rates.
◼ There is higher employment participation rate.
◼ Enable children to become independent and productive in later years

CHALLENGES
◼ Inclusion education entails additional resources over and above those provided to regular
schools.
◼ Per pupil cost is relatively higher than the regular pupil.

PROPOSED INITIATIVES/RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Ensuring education through early learning intervention
2. Rationalizing the establishment of more centers: special education centers, community
centers, drop-in centers
3. Capability building for teachers of diverse learners at pre service levels
4. Adopting equivalency, testing and acceleration programs to diverse learners

Guiding Principles Policies and Legal Basis of Special Education

(Source: https://www.slideshare.net/hangwanitiassale/guiding-principles-policies-and-legal-bases-of-special-education)
By: Larry B. Saliga T-I Malabog District USEP-Graduate Studies MED-SPED Exceptional Student

General Principles in Special Education

✓ Each child has a Right to Education.
✓ Equal opportunity assurance of quality education to all regardless of their assessed needs
will be fully met. Placing a handicapped student in a normal setting is only the first step
to integration
✓ Educational resources for handicapped students should be comparable to those available
for non-handicapped students and appropriate to meet the special needs of those children,
since these needs have often been long neglected or received unduly low priority.

Special Education services should be:

✓ Individualized, that is based on the assessed and agreed needs of the child.
✓ Locally accessible, that is within reasonable traveling distance of the pupil’s house or
residence.
✓ Comprehensive, that is serving all persons with special needs irrespective of degree of
handicap, such that no child of school age is excluded from educational provision on the
grounds of severity or handicap or receive educational services significantly inferior to
those enjoyed by other students.

Educational services should be made available to children below school age and be
educationally and developmentally oriented. home visiting services should be available starting
from the first weeks of life.
Educational opportunities should also be provided to adolescents and adults, at least on the
same scale as to all others in the community. Abigail had little formal schooling but a quick wit
and was a colorful writer.
Comprehensive programming for disabled persons will require a full range of services: health,
social welfare, rehabilitation, employment and placement.
Failure to educate and train handicapped persons in proportion equal to the provision of
services for the non-handicapped, because of the problem being perceived as a lower priority,
results in later expensive programs to care for the untreated disabled. Further handicapping
conditions results because of the under-development and dependency.

LEGAL BASES FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES

Commonwealth Act No. 3203-

In 1935, A provision in this Act for the care and protection of disabled children. Articles
356 and 259 of the Civil Code of the Philippines mention “the right of every child to live in an
atmosphere conclusive to his physical, moral and intellectual development”, and the concomitant
duty of the government to “promote the full growth of the faculties of every child”.

The Declaration of the Rights of the Child

This declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1959, affirmed that
mankind owes to the child the best it has to give. One of the principles concerned with the
education of children with special needs runs: “The child who is physically, mentally or visually
handicapped shall be given the special treatment, education that are required of his particular
condition.”
Republic Act Nos. 3562 and 5250
Approved on June 13, 1968 respectively, these Acts provided that teachers,
administrators, and supervisors of special education should be trained by the Department of
Education and impoverished.

Presidential Decree No. 603 (PD 603)

The Child and Youth Welfare Code, Article 3, Rights of the Child. Equally important is
Article 74 which provides for the creation of special classes. The Article reads: “Where needs
warrant, there shall be at least one special class in every province, and if possible, special schools
for the physically handicapped, the mentally retarded, the emotionally-disturbed and the specially
gifted.”

Republic Act 7277

Approved on January 22, 1992, Republic Act 7277, otherwise known as the Magna Carta
for Disabled Persons affirms the full participation and total integration of persons with disabilities
into the mainstream of our society.

Goals of Special Education

✓ The ultimate goal of special education shall be the integration or mainstreaming of
learners with special needs into the regular school system and eventually in the
community.
✓ Special Education shall aim to develop the maximum potential of the child with special
needs to enable him to become self-reliant and shall be geared towards providing him
with the opportunities for a full and happy life.

Objectives of Special Education

✓ The specific objectives of special education shall be the development and maximization of
learning competencies, as well as the inculcation of values to make the learners with
special needs a useful and effective member of society
5 Important Special Education Laws
(Source: https://www.masters-in-special-education.com/lists/5-important-special-education-laws/)

Students with disabilities and special needs may need individually planned and systematically
delivered teaching techniques.

Special education programs work to help individuals develop not only their academic skills, but
also the personal skills that help them become self-sufficient members of the community.

Special education programs became obligatory in 1975 to prevent discrimination by public

educational institutions against individuals with disabilities. The National Center for Education
Statistics reported that, as of 2013, approximately 13 percent of all students in public schools
were receiving special education services.

1. Education for All Handicapped Children Act

Passed by Congress in 1975, this was the first special education law directed at students
with physical and mental disabilities. The law stated that public schools must provide children
with special needs with the same opportunities for education as other children. It also required
any public school that received federal funds to provide one free meal a day for these children.
The mission of this act was to:
✓ make special education services accessible to children who require them;
✓ maintain fair and appropriate services for disabled students;
✓ institute systematic evaluation requirements for special education; and
✓ endow federal resources to public schools for the education of disabled students.

2. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, was created in 1990 and is a modification
of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. This law ensures that special needs students
receive appropriate free public education in the least restrictive environment necessary to meet
those students’ needs. It helps students receive the extra assistance they need but allows them
to participate in the same activities as children without special needs whenever possible.

3. No Child Left Behind

In 2001, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, commonly known as the No Child
Left Behind Act, called for schools to be accountable for academic performance of all students,
whether or not they had disabilities. The act requires schools in every state to develop routine
assessments of students’ academic skills. While it does not stipulate that these assessments meet
a national standard, the law does oblige each state to come up with its own criteria for evaluation.
No Child Left Behind provides incentives for schools to demonstrate progress in students with
special needs. It also allows for students to seek alternative options if schools are not meeting
their academic, social or emotional needs.

4. Individualized Education Programs

The IDEA maintains that parents and teachers of children who qualify for special education
must develop an Individualized Education Program, or IEP, that helps establish specific education
for a child’s explicit needs. This requires caregivers to meet initially to determine a child’s eligibility
for an IEP and to come together annually to develop and assess the educational plan.

The student’s educational strategy must be designated in writing and should include an
evaluation and description of the current academic status, measurable goals and objectives,
designation of an instructional setting and placement within that setting and transition services
for children aged 16 or older. An IEP gives parents the right to dispute any issues with the school
district through a neutral third party.

5. Students with Disabilities and Postsecondary School

The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 forbid
discrimination in schools based on disability. This applies to colleges and universities as well as
elementary, middle and high schools. Many students with special needs go on to study at the
postsecondary level, but the laws are slightly different for postsecondary schools. The law does
not require postsecondary schools to provide a free appropriate public education to students, but
it does oblige schools to offer suitable academic adjustments and accessible housing to students
with disabilities.

Whether you’re a student with disabilities or you’re looking to teach children with disabilities, it’s
important to know special education laws. These laws preserve the rights of students and their
families and help integrate students with special needs into society without segregating them.
Although the laws differ slightly from state to state, the acts passed by Congress help to
standardize the treatment of students with special needs across the country.

1. Republic Act No. 7277 (Magna Carta for Disabled Persons): This law mandates
the government to ensure the rehabilitation, self-development, and self-reliance of
disabled persons. It includes provisions for special education programs and
services tailored to the needs of students with disabilities.

2. Republic Act No. 10533 (Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013): Commonly
known as the K to 12 Law, this legislation aims to enhance the quality of basic
education in the Philippines. It includes provisions for inclusive education, which
emphasizes the right of all learners, regardless of their abilities or disabilities, to
access and benefit from quality education.

3. Republic Act No. 10524 (An Act Expanding the Benefits and Privileges of Persons
with Disability): This law reinforces the rights of persons with disabilities, including
access to education and the provision of appropriate support services to ensure
their full participation in society.

4. Department of Education (DepEd) Policies: The DepEd has issued various policies
and guidelines to support inclusive education practices in schools. These include
the implementation of the Special Education (SPED) Program, the creation of
resource centers for inclusive education, and the training of teachers and staff on
inclusive teaching strategies.

5. United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD):

While not a domestic law, the Philippines ratified the UNCRPD in 2008. This
international convention promotes the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities,
including their right to education on an equal basis with others. The principles
outlined in the UNCRPD influence national policies and programs related to special
and inclusive education.

6. Local Government Unit (LGU) Initiatives: Some local government units in the
Philippines have enacted ordinances or established programs to support inclusive
education within their jurisdictions. These initiatives often complement national
laws and policies by providing additional resources and services at the local level.

7. Republic Act No. 9344 is “An Act Establishing a Comprehensive

Juvenile Justice and Welfare System, Creating the Juvenile
Justice and Welfare Council under the Department of Justice,
Appropriating Funds Therefor and For Other Purposes” or
otherwise known as the “Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of
2006”.
- Section 13. ALS in rehabilitation center

8. REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8371

- AN ACT TO RECOGNIZE, PROTECT AND PROMOTE THE RIGHTS OF
INDIGENOUS CULTURAL COMMUNITIES/INDIGENOUS PEOPLES,
CREATING A NATIONAL COMMISSION ON INDIGENOUS PEOPLES,
ESTABLISHING IMPLEMENTING MECHANISMS, APPROPRIATING FUNDS
THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

9. An Act Amending Republic Act No. 7277, Otherwise Known As The “Magna Carta
For Disabled Persons, And For Other Purposes” – RA 9442
10. [Republic Act No. 10665] - AN ACT ESTABLISHING THE OPEN HIGH SCHOOL
SYSTEM IN THE PHILIPPINES AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR
SECTION 1. .Short Title. – This Act shall be known as the “Open High School
System Act”.
SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. – It is hereby declared the policy of the State to
broaden access to relevant quality education through the employment of an
alternative secondary education program that will enable the youth to overcome
personal, geographical, socioeconomic and physical constraints, to encourage
them to complete secondary education. This is in line with the constitutional policy
that mandates the State to “encourage non-formal, informal, and indigenous
learning systems, as well as self-learning, independent, and out-of-school study
programs particularly those that respond to community needs”, as stated in Article
XIV, Section 2, paragraph 4 of the 1987 Constitution.

11. Republic Act No. 11650 - Full Title AN ACT INSTITUTING A POLICY OF
INCLUSION AND SERVICES FOR LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES IN
SUPPORT OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION, ESTABLISHING INCLUSIVE
LEARNING RESOURCE CENTERS OF LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES IN ALL
SCHOOLS DISTRICTS, MUNICIPALITIES AND CITIES, PROVIDING FOR
STANDARDS, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES. Short Title INSTITUTING A POLICY OF INCLUSION AND
SERVICES FOR LEARNERS WITH DISABILITIES IN SUPPORT OF INCLUSIVE
EDUCATION ACT