a review of inclusive education curriculum at primary level in pakistan

International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences Issue 1, 2013

[键入文字] 44

A Review of Inclusive Education Curriculum at primary

level in Pakistan

Samia Rehman Dogar

Federal College of Education, Islamabad

Abstract: The study was designed to review of curriculum of inclusive education at primary level.The procedure of the study involved the selection of 100 students from the public schools of Islamabad randomly. The data was collected through questionnaires. Analysis and interpretation of the data was carried out by the help of the frequencies of the data. Keeping in view the collected data it has been concluded that students learn less with the help of verbal lecture only. Teachers did not use A/V aids for their class room teaching, because A/V aids have not been provided to their institute. Most of the teachers were not trained for teaching inclusive education curriculum. They should be provided training through in-service refresher courses or workshops. It was also concluded that contents are too lengthy and most of the students, feeling bored, start daydreaming during their classes. The Data also shows that curriculum sometimes does not match with the mental level and needs of special students. It is recommended that books should be colorful and Teachers must be trained through workshops/seminar about inclusive educations.

Keywords: inclusive education, curriculum, special children

Introduction

Inclusive Education is a new concept. A few schools are striving to create an inclusive environment through experimentation and various approaches. These approaches include establishing new inclusive schools giving access to children with disabilities to existing school persuading children without disabilities to join special education institute, keeping children with special needs within regular school through in separate classrooms with multigame inclusive class room.

The early name for the method of including children with disabilities or special needs in the "regular" classroom was mainstreaming. Today, by definition, mainstreaming focuses on a student's part-time attendance in regular education groups, while inclusion professes to do just what it says--include all children, regardless of skill level or needs, in age-appropriate

classrooms as long as the guidelines of IDEA are followed--the placement must be an appropriate educational program, and it must be the "least restrictive environment."

Inclusive education means that schools should accommodate all children regardless of their physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic or other conditions. This should include disabled and gifted children, street and working children, children from remote or nomadic populations, children from linguistic, ethnic or cultural minorities and children from other disadvantaged or marginalized areas or groups. (UNESCO, 2003: p4)

Similarly

Inclusive education starts from the belief that the right to education is a basic human right and the foundation for a more just society. A UNESCO


[键入文字] 45

definition of inclusive education. An inclusive education system ensures that all children have equal access to quality education in their community school regardless of their gender, abilities, disabilities, backgrounds, health conditions and circumstances. http://www.education.gov.ck/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=649&Itemid=1 (retrieved at 1:32 am 03/01/2012)

And

Inclusive education is not merely about providing access into mainstream school for pupils who have previously been excluded. It is not about closing down an unacceptable system of segregated provision and dumping those closing down an unacceptable system of segregated provision and dumping those pupils in an unchanged mainstream system. Existing school systems in terms of physical factors, curriculum aspects, teaching expectations and styles, leadership roles. will have to change. This is because inclusive education is about the participation of ALL children and young people and the removal of all forms of exclusionary practic (Barton, 1997: p. 84-85).

Many meanings and approaches highlighted how different ways of seeing the broad picture will influence the detail of practice and provision. Not only are interpretations of what inclusion means contentious, but there are also diverse and conflicting debates in which different approaches are seen as detrimental to the effective development of this area.

Classification of inclusive education

Inclusion has two sub-types: the first is sometimes called regular inclusion or partial inclusion, and the other is full inclusion. "Inclusive practice" is not always inclusive but is a form of integration. For

example, students with special needs are educated in regular classes for nearly all of the day, or at least for more than half of the day. Whenever possible, the students receive any additional help or special instruction in the general classroom, and the student is treated like a full member of the class. However, most specialized services are provided outside a regular classroom, particularly if these services require special equipment or might be disruptive to the rest of the class (such as

speech therapy), and students are pulled out of the regular classroom for these services. In this case, the student occasionally leaves the regular classroom to attend smaller, more intensive

instructional sessions in a resource room, or to receive other related services, such as speech and language therapy,

occupational and/or physical therapy, and social work. This approach can be very

similar to many mainstreaming practices, and may differ in little more than the educational ideals behind it. In the "full inclusion" setting, the students with special needs are always educated alongside students without special needs, as the first and desired option while maintaining appropriate supports and services. Some educators say this might be more effective for the students with special needs.

A mainstreamed student attends some general education classes, typically for less than half the day, and often for less academically rigorous classes. For example, a young student

with significant intellectual

disabilities might be mainstreamed for physical education classes; art classes and storybook time but spend reading and mathematics classes with other students that have similar disabilities. They may have access to a

resource room for remediation of course content. A segregated student attends no classes with non-disabled students. He or she might attend a

special school that only enrolls other students with disabilities, or might be placed in a dedicated, self-contained

http://www.education.gov.ck/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=649&Itemid=1



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_therapy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_room

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_therapy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_therapy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstreaming_in_education

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstreaming_(education)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_disabilities

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_disabilities

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_room

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_school


[键入文字] 46

classroom in a school that also enrolls general education students.(retrived from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusion_(education) on 16-07-2013)

Common practices of inclusive education

Students in an inclusive classroom are generally placed with their chronological age-mates, regardless of whether the students are working above or below the typical academic level for their age. Also, to encourage a sense of belonging, emphasis is placed on the value of friendships. Teachers often nurture a relationship between a student with special needs and a same-age student without a special educational need. Another common

practice is the assignment of a buddy to accompany a student with special needs at all times (for example in the cafeteria, on the playground, on the bus and so on). This is used to show students that a diverse group of people make up a community, that no one type of student is better than another, and to remove any barriers to a friendship that may occur if a student is viewed as "helpless." Such practices reduce the chance for elitism among students in later grades and encourage cooperation among groups.

Teachers use a number of techniques to help build classroom communities:

Games designed to build community

Involving students in solving problems

Songs and books that teach community

Openly dealing with individual differences by discussion

Assigning classroom jobs that build community

Teaching students to look for ways to help each other

Utilizing physical therapy

equipment such as standing

frames, so students who typically use wheelchairs can stand when the other students are standing and more actively participate in activities

(retrived from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusion_(education) on 16-07-2013)

Selection of students for inclusion

Educators generally say that some students with special needs are not good candidates for inclusion.[ Many schools expect a fully included student to be working at or near

grade level, but more fundamental requirements exist: First, being included requires that the student is able to attend

school. Students that are entirely excluded from school (for example, due to long-term hospitalization), or who are educated outside of schools (for example, due to

enrollment in a distance education program) cannot attempt inclusion. Additionally, some students with special needs are poor candidates for inclusion because of their effect on other students. For example, students with severe behavioral problems, such that they represent a serious physical danger to others, are poor candidates for inclusion, because the school has a duty to provide a safe environment to all students and staff.

Finally, some students are not good candidates for inclusion because the normal activities in a general education classroom will prevent them from learning. For example, a student with severe

attention difficulties or extreme sensory

processing disorders might be highly distracted or distressed by the presence of other students working at their desks.

Inclusion needs to be appropriate to the child's unique needs. Most students with special needs do not fall into these extreme categories, as

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusion_(education)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_therapy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_frames

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_frames



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_level

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distance_education

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensory_processing_disorder

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensory_processing_disorder


[键入文字] 47

most students do attend school, are not violent, do not have severe sensory processing disorders, etc. The students that are most commonly included are those with physical disabilities that have no or little effect

on their academic work (diabetes

mellitus, epilepsy, food allergies,

paralysis), students with all types of mild disabilities, and students whose disabilities require relatively few specialized services. .(retrived from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusi

on_(education) on 16-07-2013)

Positive effects of inclusive education

There are many positive effects of inclusions where both the students with special needs along with the other students in the classroom both benefit. Research has shown positive effects for children with disabilities in areas such as reading individualized education program (IEP) goal, improving communication and social skills, increasing positive peer interactions, many educational outcomes, and post school adjustments.

Positive effects on children without disabilities include the development of positive attitudes and perceptions of persons with disabilities and the enhancement of social status with nondisabled peers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusion_(education)

Criticism on inclusive education

Critics of full and partial inclusion include educators, administrators and parents. Full and partial inclusion approaches neglect to acknowledge the fact most students with significant special needs require individualized instruction or highly controlled environments. Thus, general education classroom teachers often are teaching a curriculum while the special education teacher is remediating instruction at the same time. Similarly, a

child with serious inattention problems may be unable to focus in a classroom that contains twenty or more active children. Although with the increase of incidence of disabilities in the student population, this is a circumstance all teachers must contend with, and is not a direct result of inclusion as a concept. Full inclusion may in fact be a way for schools to placate parents and the general public, using the word as a phrase to garner attention for what are in fact illusive efforts to education students with special needs in the general education environment.

Some argue that inclusive schools are not a cost-effective response when compared to cheaper or more effective interventions, such as special education. They argue that special education helps "fix" the special needs students by providing individualized and personalized instruction to meet their unique needs. This is to help students with special needs adjust as quickly as possible to the mainstream of the school and community. Proponents counter that students with special needs are not fully into the mainstream of student life because they are secluded to special education. Some argue that isolating students with special needs may lower their self-esteem and may reduce their ability to deal with other people.

(Retrived from www.buddhischool.com/html/ProfDev/Inclusive_classroom_paper.doc on 17-07-2013 at 6am) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusion_(education)

Benefits of inclusion for students with disabilities

1. Friendships

2. Increased social initiations, relationships and networks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diabetes_mellitus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diabetes_mellitus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epilepsy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_allergies

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paralysis





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_education

http://www.buddhischool.com/html/ProfDev/Inclusive_classroom_paper.doc%20on%2017-07-2013





[键入文字] 48

3. Peer role models for academic, social and behavior skills

4. Increased achievement of IEP goals

5. Greater access to general curriculum

6. Enhanced skill acquisition and generalization

7. Increased inclusion in future environments

8. Greater opportunities for interactions

9. Higher expectations

10. Increased school staff collaboration

11. Increased parent participation

Benefits of inclusion for students without disabilities

1. Meaningful friendships

2. Increased appreciation and acceptance of individual differences

3. Increased understanding and acceptance of diversity

4. Respect for all people

5. Prepares all students for adult life in an inclusive society

6. Opportunities to master activities by practicing and teaching others

7. Greater academic outcomes

8.All students needs are better met, greater resources for everyone

(Retrieved from http://www.kidstogether.org/inclusion/benefitsofinclusion.htm on 13-05-2012)

Statement of problem

The study has been designed to review the Curriculum of Inclusive Education at primary level in Pakistan.

Objective

The major objectives of the study are

1. Identification of the problems faced by special students in curriculum of Inclusive Education

2. Determination of the extent to which the current curricula fulfill the needs of the students and the society. Suggestions to bring improvements in curriculum of Inclusive education are also included

Methodology

The method of the study included the following stages

Population

The population of the study was approximately 1000 students studying at F.G Model Schools, Islamabad.

Sample

Ten Federal Government Junior Model School of Islamabad capital territory were selected as sample of the study out of which 100 students (ten from each school) of primary level and 50(5 teachers from each school) teachers teaching to respective classes were selected as sample of the study.

Research Instrument

Questionnaire was decided as instrument and keeping in view the objective of the study 0.5 likert scale was prepared to collect data from the students included in the sample.

Data Collection

Data was collected through personal visits by using survey method

Data Analysis

After collection of data, percentages were used for the purpose of data analysis through SPSS. The findings and conclusions were drawn and recommendations were made.

http://www.kidstogether.org/inclusion/benefitsofinclusion.htm




[键入文字] 49

Delimitation of study:

Study can be carried out in many dimensions i.e.

1. Teaching methods

2. Student’s evaluation system

3. Students learning level

but due to the constraints of time and resources the study was delimited to the following areas only.

Curriculum only

Primary Level only

Analyses and Presentation of the Data

Students Data

Table 1. Class of students

Class Frequency Percent

Grede2 1 1.0

Grede3 41 41.0

Grede4 53 53.0

Grade5 5 5.0

Total 100 100.0

Table 1 shows that 53 percent respondent are in grade 4 , 41 percent s are in Grade 3,

and 5 percent respondents are studying in grade 5.

Table 2. Age of Students

Table 2 shows 36 percent students are in the age of between 8 and 9 years, 50

percent students are 10 years old and other 14 percent are more than 10 years.

Table 3. I can easily learn from books

Table 3 shows that 35 percent are strongly disagree , 29 percent are disagreed that they cannot easily learn their oral work in

their books and only 13 percent are in favor that they can easily learn oral work in their books.

Age Frequency Percent

8-9 years 36 36.0

10 years 50 50.0

10-15 years 14 14.0

Total 100 100.0

Frequency Percent

Strongly Disagree

35 35.0

Disagree 29 29.0

Neutral 23 23.0

Agree 13 13.0

Total 100 100.0


[键入文字] 50

Table 4. Activity based contents help to stop day dreaming in the classroom

Table 4 shows that 37 percent students are agreed that activity based contents help to stop day dreaming in the classroom but

only 8 percent are in against that activity based contents stop day dreaming in the class room.

Table 5. I think contents enhance my learning ability

Frequency Percent

Strongly Disagree

9 9.0

Disagree 6 6.0

Neutral 16 16.0

Agree 58 58.0

Strongly Agree 11 11.0

Total 100 100.0

Table 5 shows that 58 percent students agreed that contents enhance their learning ability but only 9 percent are

disagreed that content enhance their learning abilities.

Table 6. I can easily understand contents teaches by my teacher

Table 6 shows that 46 percent students are agreed they can easily understand contents teaches by their teacher but only 01

percent are disagreed that they cannot understand contents teaches by their teachers.

Frequency Percent

Strongly Disagree

8 8.0

Disagree 13 13.0

Neutral 15 15.0

Agree 27 27.0

Strongly Agree

37 37.0

Total 100 100.0

Frequency Percent

Strongly Disagree 1 1.0

Disagree 26 26.0

Neutral 25 25.0

Agree 46 46.0


Total 100 100.0


[键入文字] 51

Table 7. My text books are very color full and I am satisfied

Table 7 shows 41 percent students are not satisfied by their books and 28 percent are

agreed that their book is colorful and they are satisfied.

Table 8. Teachers use special teaching aid during the teaching

Table 8 shows 46 percent student are disagree that teachers use special teaching aid during the teaching but 23 percent are

agreed that teachers use special teaching aid during the teaching.

Table 9. I am satisfied with my teacher teaching method

Table 9 shows 29 percent students are not satisfied by their teacher teaching method only 19 percent of respondent are satisfied

by their teaching method and 28% were neutral in their opinion.

Frequency Percent


Disagree 15 15.0

Neutral 8 8.0

Agree 28 28.0


Total 100 100.0

Frequency Percent


Disagree 46 46.0

Neutral 12 12.0

Agree 23 23.0


Total 100 100.0

Frequency Percent


Disagree 29 29.0

Neutral 28 28.0

Agree 19 19.0


Total 100 100.0


[键入文字] 52

Table 10. I feel burden with this curriculum

Table 10 shows 22 percent students are disagreed that they feel burden with this

curriculum is teaching but 52 percent respondent were neutral in their opinion.

Table 11. Curriculums helps to improve my learning abilities

Table 11 shows 40 percent students are agreed that Curriculum is improving their learning ability in class and only 11 percent respondent are disagreed that Curriculum

help to improve their learning abilities and 37 percent respondents were neutral in their opinion.

Table 12. I became able to learn easily with regular students

Table 12 reveals that 43 percent students are disagree that they can learn easily with regular students by same curriculum and

33 percent respondent were neutral in their opinion.

Frequency Percent

Strongly Disagree

3 3.0

Disagree 22 22.0

Neutral 52 52.0

Agree 19 19.0

Strongly Agree

4 4.0

Total 100 100.0

Frequency Percent


Disagree 12 12.0

Neutral 37 37.0

Agree 40 40.0


Total 100 100.0

Frequency Percent


Disagree 44 44.0

Neutral 33 33.0

Agree 7 7.0


Total 100 100.0


[键入文字] 53

Table 13. Contents are comprehensive and too long

Table 13 shows that 54 percent students are agreed that contents of curriculum are comprehensive and too long only 16

percent are disagreed that contents of curriculum are comprehensive and too long.

Table 14. Communication and motivation among students increases by local

Curriculum

Table 14 shows 41 percent students are agreed that Communication and

motivation among students increases by local curriculum.

Table 15. Special students can learn or understand easily contents of curriculum

Frequency Percent


Disagree 30 30.0

Neutral 7 7.0

Agree 14 14.0


Total 100 100.0

Table 15 shows 36 percent students are strongly disagreeing that Special students can learn or understand easily contents of

curriculum. And only 7% were neutral in their opinion.

Frequency Percent


Disagree 12 12.0

Neutral 13 13.0

Agree 54 54.0


Total 100 100.0

Frequency Percent


Disagree 15 15.0

Neutral 31 31.0

Agree 41 41.0


Total 100 100.0


[键入文字] 54

Table 16. I like to participate in the class

Frequency Percent


Disagree 24 24.0

Neutral 8 8.0

Agree 12 12.0


Total 100 100.0

Table 16 shows 40 percent students are strongly disagree that they cannot

participate in the class and give answers as regular students do.

Table 17. A/V aids are available in our institute

Table 17 shows 45 percent students are disagree that A/V aids are available in their institute for learning of contents only 19

percent respondent are agreed that A/V aids are available in their institute for learning of contents.

Table 18. Teachers use A/V aids During class room teaching

Frequency Percent


Disagree 10 10.0

Neutral 20 20.0

Agree 13 13.0


Total 100 100.0

Table 18 shows 45 percent students are disagree that teacher uses A/V aids for teaching only 13 percent are agreed that

teacher use A/V aids for teaching. And 20% were neutral in their opinion.

Frequency Percent


Disagree 16 16.0

Neutral 17 17.0

Agree 19 19.0


Total 100 100.0


[键入文字] 55

Table 19. I feel inferiority complex in my class

Frequency Percent


Disagree 10 10.0

Neutral 56 56.0

Agree 16 16.0


Total 100 100.0

Table 19 shows 56 percent students are not able to give answer that they have

inferiority complex during class and they were neutral in their opinion.

Table 20. I feel shy when I have to answer my teacher before my class fellows

Table 20 shows 41 percent students are agree that they feel shy when they give answer to teacher in front of other students and 18 percent of respondent do

not feel shy when they give answer to teacher in front of students. And also 18% were neutral in their opinion.

Table 21. I think separate curriculum can be adopted for Inclusive Education

Frequency Percent


Disagree 7 7.0

Neutral 11 11.0

Agree 20 20.0


Total 100 100.0

Table 21 shows 49 percent students are strongly agreed and in favor that separate

curriculum can be adopted for Inclusive Education.

Frequency Percent


Disagree 18 18.0

Neutral 18 18.0

Agree 41 41.0


Total 100 100.0


[键入文字] 56

Table 22. Genders of Teachers

Frequency Percent

Male 34 51.5

Female 32 48.5

Total 66 100.0

Table 22 shows 51.5 percent are male teacher and 48.5 are female teacher respondent.

Table 23. Age of Teachers

Age Frequency Percent

Between 20 and 40 26 39.4

Between 40 and 60 40 60.6

Total 66 100.0

Table 23 shows 60.6 percent teacher are in age between 40 years to 60 years old.

Table 24. Academic Qualification of Teachers Table 24 shows 42.4 percent teacher have Bachelor degree and 15.2 have Master degree holder

only 33.3 have Intermediate qualification.

Table 25. Professional Qualifications

Table 25 shows 33.3 percent teacher have degree of B.Ed/BS.Ed 24.2 have PTC/CT/Diploma 25.8

percent have degree of M.A education only 11 percent have M.Ed degree.

Qualification Frequency Percent

F.Sc 22 33.3

B.Sc 28 42.4

M.Sc 10 15.2

Total 66 100.0

Professional Qualification Frequency Percent

PTC/CT/Diploma 16 24.2

B.Ed/BS.Ed 22 33.3

M.A Education 17 25.8

M.Ed 11 16.7

Total 66 100.0


[键入文字] 57

Table 26. Working Experience of teachers

Experience Frequency Percent

1-3 Years 10 15.2

3-5 Years 22 33.3

5-7 Years 17 25.8

7 to above 17 25.8

Total 66 100.0

Table 26 shows that 15.2 percent teachers are 1-3 years experienced 33.3 percent teachers are 3-5 years

experienced and 25.8 percent teachers are 5 and more than 7 years experienced.

Table 27. I am skilled for inclusive based teaching

Frequency Percent


Disagree 14 21.2

Neutral 6 9.1

Agree 25 37.9


Total 66 100.0

Table 27 shows 37.9 percent teacher are skilled in inclusive based teaching.

Table 28. Activity based teaching can make the content interesting for primary students

Frequency Percent


Disagree 11 16.7

Neutral 10 15.2

Agree 34 51.5


Total 66 100.0

Table 28 shows 51.5 percent teachers are agreed that activity

based teaching will make content interesting for primary students


[键入文字] 58

Table 29. I can teach easily syllabus within the academic year

Table 29 shows 37.9 percent teachers are agreed that they can teach easily syllabus within the academic year and 24.2 percent

are disagreed that they can teach easily syllabus within the academic year.

Table 30. Contents are comprehensive but based on activities

Frequency Percent


Disagree 18 27.3

Neutral 10 15.2

Agree 16 24.2


Total 66 100.0

Table 30 shows 27.3 percent teachers are disagree that contents are comprehensive but based on

activities and 24.2 are agreed that contents are comprehensive but based on activities.

Table 31. Institute providing the opportunity to attend the workshops/training

about Inclusive Education Table 31 shows 33.3 percent teacher are disagree that institute

providing the workshops according to syllabus of Inclusive Education.

Frequency Percent


Disagree 16 24.2

Neutral 11 16.7

Agree 25 37.9


Total 66 100.0

Frequency Percent


Disagree 22 33.3

Neutral 11 16.7

Agree 17 25.8


Total 66 100.0


[键入文字] 59

Table 32. Curriculums produce inferiority complex

Frequency Percent


Disagree 12 24.0

Neutral 12 24.0

Agree 14 28.0


Total 50 100.0

Table 32 shows 28.8 percent teacher are agree that curriculum

produce inferiority complex during learning process of students.

Table 33. Curriculums is according to mental level of students

Frequency Percent


Disagree 14 21.2

Neutral 28 42.4

Agree 20 30.3

Total 66 100.0

Table 33 shows 30.3 percent teachers are agree that curriculum based on mental level of students.

Table 34. A/V aids are available in our institute for teaching of contents

Frequency Percent


Disagree 19 28.8

Neutral 16 24.2

Agree 26 39.4


Total 66 100.0

Table 34 shows 28.8 percent teacher are disagree that A/V aids

are available in their institute for teaching of contents.


[键入文字] 60

Table 35. Special students can learn or understand the contents of curriculum easily

Frequency Percent


Disagree 19 28.8

Neutral 9 13.6

Agree 19 28.8


Total 66 100.0

Table 35 shows that 28.8 percent are disagreed that Special students

can learn or understand easily contents of curriculum.

Table 36. It helps to promotes Child-friendly learning environment

Frequency Percent


Disagree 7 10.6

Neutral 23 34.8

Agree 25 37.9


Total 66 100.0

Table 36 shows 37.9 percent teachers are disagree that child-friendly learning environment is

improving through adapting this curriculum and 23% were neutral in their opinion.

Table 37. It produces motivation among student

Frequency Percent


Disagree 12 18.2

Neutral 14 21.2

Agree 25 37.9


Total 66 100.0

Table 37 shows 37.9 percent teachers are agreed that communication and motivation

among students increases by local curriculum.

Table 38. Curriculums fulfill the needs of special students

Frequency Percent


Disagree 15 22.7

Neutral 5 7.6

Agree 18 27.3


Total 66 100.0


[键入文字] 61

Table 38 shows 33.3 percent teachers are strongly disagree that curriculum full fill needs of

inclusive student and 27.3 percent are agreed that curriculum full fill needs of inclusive student.

Table 39. Special become able learn easily with regular students and curriculum

Frequency Percent


Disagree 16 24.2

Neutral 7 10.6

Agree 9 13.6


Total 66 100.0

Table 39 shows 31.8 percent teachers are strongly disagree that special students can

learn easily with regular students by same curriculum.

Table 40. Curriculums is based on research and Need Analysis

Frequency Percent


Disagree 11 16.7

Neutral 14 21.2

Agree 14 21.2


Total 66 100.0

Table 40 shows that 33.3 percent teachers are strongly disagree that curriculum is based on research and modern terms 21.2 percent are agreed that curriculum is based

on research .So most of the teachers says that this curriculum is not based on need analysis and research.

Table 41. Curriculum helps to improve the learning ability of special and regular

Students

Frequency Percent


Disagree 10 15.2

Neutral 16 24.2

Agree 17 25.8


Total 66 100.0

Table 41 shows 25.8 percent teacher are strongly disagree that curriculum is improving learning ability of all the students but 25.8

percent teachers are also agree that curriculum is improving learning ability of all the students.


[键入文字] 62

Table 42. Special students feel a burden with this when curriculum

Frequency Percent


Disagree 4 6.1

Neutral 20 30.3

Agree 22 33.3


Total 66 100.0

Table 42 shows 33.3 percent teachers are agree that special students feel burden with this

curriculum and 30.3 percent respondent are neutral in their opinion.

Table 43. Special students participate in class like regular students

Frequency Percent


Disagree 10 15.2

Neutral 12 18.2

Agree 24 36.4


Total 66 100.0

Table 43 shows 36.4 percent teachers are agree that special

students participate in class a give answers as regular students do.

Table 44. I Attend workshops/seminar about inclusive education

Table 44 shows 25.8 percent teachers are strongly agree that

they attend workshops/seminar about inclusive education.

Frequency Percent


Disagree 9 13.6

Neutral 15 22.7

Agree 12 18.2


Total 66 100.0


[键入文字] 63

Table 45. Institutions have proper arrangement for teaching Inclusive Education curriculum

Table 45 shows 30.3 percent teachers are agree that there is

proper arrangement for teaching Inclusive Education curriculum.

Discussion

5 percent respondents were strongly disagreeing and 29 percent were disagreed that they cannot easily learn their oral work in their books. Similarly 37 percent students were agreed that activity based contents help to stop day dreaming in the classroom but only 8 percent are against the proposition that activity based contents stop day dreaming in the class room.

58 percent students agreed that contents enhance their learning ability but only 9 percent disagreed that content enhance their learning abilities and 46 percent students were agreed they can easily understand contents taught by their teacher but only 1 percent were disagreed that they cannot understand contents taught by their teachers.

41 percent students were not satisfied by their books and 28 percent agreed that their book is colorful and they are satisfied. 46 percent students disagree that teachers use special teaching aid during the teaching but 23 percent agree that teachers use special teaching aid during the teaching

29 percent students were not satisfied by their teacher’s teaching method. Only 19 percent of respondents are satisfied by their teacher's method where as 22 percent students disagree that they feel bored when curriculum is being taught but 52 percent respondents have no answer about this question.

40 percent students were agreed that Curriculum has improved their learning ability in class and only 11 percent respondent are disagree that Curriculum is improving their learning ability in class .37 percent respondent have not shown their opinion.

43 percent students disagree that they can learn easily with regular students by same curriculum and 39 percent respondent have not shown their opinion.

54 percent students were agreed that contents of curriculum are extensive and too long only 16 percent were disagreed that contents of curriculum are extensive and too long, and 41 percent students were agreed that communication and motivation among students increases by local curriculum.

36 percent students were strongly disagree that Special students can learn or understand easily contents of curriculum and 40 percent students were strongly disagreeing that they cannot participate in class and give answers as regular students do.

45 percent students were disagree that A/V aids were available in their institute for learning of contents only 19 percent respondent were agreed that A/V aids were available in their institute for learning of contents

45 percent students were disagree that teacher uses A/V aids for teaching only 13 percent were agreed that teacher uses A/V aids for teaching similarly 56 percent

Frequency Percent


Disagree 20 30.3

Neutral 11 16.7

Agree 11 16.7


Total 66 100.0


[键入文字] 64

students were not able to give answer because they have inferiority complex during class.

41 percent students were agree that they feel shy when they give answer to teacher in front of other students and 19 percent of respondent do not feel shy when they give answer to teacher in front of students.

49 percent students were strongly agreed and in favor that separate curriculum can be adopted for Inclusive Education and 37.9 percent teachers were skilled in inclusive based teaching

51.5 percent teachers were agreed that activity based teaching will make content interesting for primary students similarly 37.9 percent teachers were agreed that they can teach easily syllabus within the academic year.

27.3 percent teachers were disagree that contents were comprehensive but based on activities 33.3 percent teacher were disagree that institute providing the work shops according to syllabus of Inclusive Education and 28.8 percent teacher were agree that curriculum produce inferiority complex during learning process of students

30.3 percent teachers were agree that curriculum based on mental level of students and 28.8 percent teacher were disagree that A/V aids were available in their institute for teaching of contents

28.8 percent teachers were disagree that special students can learn or understand easily contents of curriculum and 37.9 percent teachers were disagree that child-friendly learning environment is improving through adapting to the local content do curriculum

37.9 percent teachers were agreed that communication and motivation among students increases by local curriculum and 33.3 percent teachers were strongly disagree that curriculum full fill the needs of inclusive students.

Conclusions

Following were the major conclusions of the study.

It was concluded that students cannot easily learn the oral work in their books and they are not satisfied by their books as the book is not colorful and not based on activities. it was also concluded that teachers do not use A/V aids during their classroom teaching

Most of the teachers are not skilled in inclusive based teaching and the institutes building their capacity according to the class room and curriculum requirements.

It is also concluded that contents are too lengthy and not activity based.

Most of the students feel bored and start daydreaming during their classroom teaching.

It was concluded that curriculum is not according to our modern, social global and national needs and also does not cater the mental level of special students.

It was concluded that learning level of special students decreases while studying with the normal students and teaching to special children with normal children produces inferiority complex among special students.

Recommendations

Following are the major recommendations of the study.

It is recommended that books should be colorful as the students like colorful text books.

Institutes must focus on the capacity building of their faculty through workshops/seminar.

It is recommended that curriculum should be activities based because activities involve psychomotor domains which give direct and


[键入文字] 65

purposeful experience with results that are permanent and lifelong learning.

A/V aids for activities and class room teaching

should be provided by the institutions because A/V aids are back bone of teaching in inclusive education.

Curriculum should be according to our modern, social global and national needs and also should be according to mental level of special students.