Inclusive Education in the Philippines: Through the Eyes of Teachers, Administrators, and Parents of Children with Special Needs PDF

Preview

Summary

SOCIAL SCIENCE DILIMAN 12:1  January – June 2016 ARTICLE Inclusive Education in the Philippines: Through the Eyes of Teachers, Administrators, and Parents of Children with Special Needs Michael Arthus G. Muega 5 – 28 ABSTRACT This article is a study on the knowledge and involvement of schoolteachers...

Description

Accelerat ing t he world's research.

Inclusive Education in the Philippines: Through the Eyes of Teachers, Administrators, and Parents of Children wi... kristan emmanuel salapare

Related papers

Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

T HE PROBLEM AND IT S BACKGROUND Shenalynl Cerenas Educat ion and Urban Societ y School and Formal School Administ rat ors Met amorphosis in t he Philippi… Belinda de Cast ro Shadow Teaching Scheme for Children wit h Aut ism and At t ent ion Deficit -Hyperact ivit y Disorder in Re… sammy guzman

January – June 2016 12:1

SOCIAL SCIENCE DILIMAN ARTICLE

Inclusive Education in the Philippines: Through the Eyes of Teachers, Administrators, and Parents of Children with Special Needs 5 – 28

Michael Arthus G. Muega

ABSTRACT

his article is a study on the knowledge and involvement of schoolteachers, school administrators, and parents of children with special needs (CSN) in the implementation of inclusive education (IE). One set of research questions was aimed at determining the participants’ concept of IE and how they are involved in its practice. he other set of questions was aimed at inding whether there is a signiicant diference among the answers given by the participant groups regarding their concept of and involvement in IE. he problems related to IE were approached using grounded theory and quantitative analysis. Utilizing a modiied survey questionnaire, data was collected from 91 participants who have a irsthand knowledge of and experience with inclusive schools located in Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines. Research hypotheses were tested ater open coding had been completed and an answer was given to each qualitative research question. It has been found that the participants neither question nor resist the practice of inclusion in their respective general education settings. hey admit, however, that they are not sure whether their understanding of IE conforms to widely accepted deinitions. he participants are in doubt whether their claimed practices are potent enough to be responsive to the requirements of high-level inclusive education. No signiicant diference was noted among the participants’ mean scores in the survey of their knowledge of IE and involvement in IE. KEYWORDS

ISSN 1655-1524 Print

ISSN 2012-0796 Online

inclusive education, children with special needs, practice of inclusion, normalization, general education

S S D 12:1 2016

6

Introduction his study stems from the fact that very little is known about the practice of educational inclusion in the Philippines. he absence of a shared approach to education in the country, one that is open to all students, suggests that a strong conceptual basis for inclusive education (IE) remains to be established. his lack of grounding for a sound practice of IE makes it diicult to articulate the reasonable extent of involvement members of the school community must have in the education of children with special needs (CSN). What form IE should take and what requirements must be met (MacBeath, Galton, Steward, MacBeath & Page, 2006) are issues that remain unresolved to the satisfaction of the major stakeholders in IE. So far, the practice of IE in Philippine basic education is largely determined by Department of Education Order No. 72, s. 2009, an outdated directive which does not specify a stable, clear, and deinite process of including CSN in the general education setting. A move to efect high-quality inclusion in Philippine schools is said to be underway, but at present, the Special Education Act (Philippine Senate Bill 3002), which is supposed to determine the practice of inclusion in general education schools, is still under review at the Philippine senate. he continued delay of this bill’s passage into law and which standards should be met in its implementation are issues that continue to defy deinitive resolution. Overseas, Freeman and Alkin have observed that debates on IE and its implications for the lives of CSN have been raging (as cited in Fitch, 2003). Many governments have introduced IE into their respective systems as an attempt to find satisfactory and durable solutions to the many problems besetting the practice of inclusion in different contexts. A multitude of actions have been planned, tested, challenged, and overhauled. There are also educationists who are convinced that standards-based schooling is not just for children without special needs (Jesness, 2002). That is to say, having learning problems does not necessarily lead to the inability to meet requirements of high-quality education (Jesness, 2002). As for the difficulty that one may experience in the early stages of learning, Jesness (2002) seems to view such phenomena as a simple fact of learning, something that should not make schoolteachers push their students to attain what may appear to be a remotely achievable goal at the beginning. The road to success in teaching and learning can be tricky, however, and the attempt to get students to where they should be inevitably carries certain encumbrances (MacBeath et al., 2006), especially on the part of inclusive school personnel and parents of CSN. It is not surprising, therefore, if a number of them have questioned the wisdom behind the policy that suggests they are largely responsible for schoolchildren’s performance in standardsbased tests or in any ordinary general education setting. In June 1994, representatives from 92 countries and 25 international organizations met at the World Conference on Special Needs Education in Salamanca, Spain,

7 M U E G A – Inclusive Education in the Philippines

to promote IE as a global norm. he conference forged and adopted a framework of action that calls for appropriate education for CSN in the general education setting. Arguing that inclusion and participation are human rights, the UNESCO Salamanca Statement asserts that the general education setting should be regarded as a venue of human development open to all schoolchildren, regardless of their physical, emotional, and intellectual states. Inclusive schools are expected to view various categories of diferences as a matter of having unique traits that distinguish individuals from each other. his entails teaching and learning that is tailored according to the learner’s conditions. At this writing, over 140 governments have formally expressed their support for the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) for the implementation of inclusion policies. IE has become the goal of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Education, Science, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and other similar organizations (Paliokosta & Blandford, 2010). he UNESCO continues to push for the institutionalization of inclusionary practices in more countries with the publication of, he Right to Education for Persons with Disabilities: Towards Inclusion. Inclusion International also joined the movement toward inclusion by publishing Better Education for All: A Global Report. Since the promotion of IE in various countries, scholars who have studied its implementation have found that not many school personnel consider this a purely positive development. While the practice of IE is predominantly cognizant of the learners’ individual diferences, inclusive school personnel, together with the parents of CSN and other professionals, are expected to prepare individualized education programs (IEPs) that suit the unique needs of CSN in a general education school. he whole process of IEP preparation poses a gargantuan challenge to the major stakeholders. Even if the school administration does not go through the whole process of creating standardized and procedural IE and IEPs, the possible failure of students in the context of general education is oten blamed on the teacher. And this usually leads to tension among various stakeholders including teachers, administrators, and parents both of CSN and children without special needs. Whether the teacher is accountable for the failure of CSN in the general education setting remains unresolved. Other related disagreements over such concerns continue to generate studies that ofer inconsistent, if not contradictory, explanations, theories, and proposed remedies. Consequently, questions such as, “Which proposed solutions to adopt?”, “In what context?”, and “Why?”, become stubborn issues that saddle the practice of educational inclusion. Despite issues brought about by the practice of IE, new educational approaches in accordance with the principle of education for all were implemented. Such approaches started to evolve in the wake of the institutionalization of inclusion policies. Measures were taken, tested, and revised to address the identiied inadequacies of IE approaches. Apparently, IE in many countries that have long

8

opened the doors of general education to CSN has evolved and has become more responsive to the demands or requirements of high-quality IE. In this study, high-quality IE is deined as the procedural practice of efecting maximum learning among CSN within the general education setting. he notion of high-quality IE may be illustrated by examining the way IE is practiced in the United States. Inclusive American schools have a relatively uniform way of addressing the needs of students with learning problems (Kritzer, 2012; U.S. Department of Education, 2000). he approach is commonly referred to as the “Special Education Process”. It begins with the classroom teacher’s attempt to help the student address his or her learning diiculties. If the teacher’s solutions fail, the matter is brought to a team that will likewise try to address the student’s learning diiculties. he team—referred to as the “Student Study Team”, “Child Study Team”, or “Student Success Team”—consists of the following: school principal or a representative; teacher of student with learning problem; parent of the same student; special education expert; school psychologist; nurse; and other professionals, if necessary. he team studies evidence of the student’s problems (i.e., sample of student work) before ofering solutions. If the proposed solutions later prove to be inefective, the CSN is recommended for assessment to determine if he or she is eligible for special education services. If the student is eligible, a one-year Individualized Educational Program (IEP) is prepared and this is modiied whenever necessary. Parents then are notiied of the learning progress of their child, who will then be re-assessed every three years to determine if he or she is still in need of continued special education services. In the Philippines, what every schoolchild must learn and why it must be learned, regardless of his or her abilities or lack thereof, are issues that have yet to undergo intense debate. Rich and sustained argumentative discussions surrounding IE and special education in the Philippines must be encouraged to discern what is best for all Filipino schoolchildren. Whether the Philippines should adopt the inclusion policy and speciic approaches to IE practiced in other countries and which adjustments to make according to the demands of the country’s own cultural, economic, and social realities—these are serious matters that need immediate attention, for high-quality education is an entitlement all school-aged Filipino children must enjoy, regardless of what they have or lack.

S S D 12:1 2016

Some Problems of IE Here and Overseas he IE movement encourages inclusive schools to establish a continuum of support and services to match the needs of children who require special attention (Salamanca Statement, 1994). Since the institutionalization of IE in diferent countries, nearly all public schools have been morally or legally stripped of their option to turn away exceptional children whose parents or guardians seek for them to be schooled in a general education setting. his development was further facilitated by many organizations’ aggressive call for a satisfactory implementation

9 M U E G A – Inclusive Education in the Philippines

of IE. However, it would later be found in various parts of the world, however, the pursuit of high-quality IE poses many challenges. Many school systems are unable to quickly evolve according to the ideals of IE. In July 2001, South Africa institutionalized IE with the publication of the policy document called, Education White Paper 6 on Special Needs Education: Building an IE and Training System. Naicker (2006) acknowledges that the irst four years of its implementation proved that it is far from perfect in form and substance. A favorable change in the educational system largely depends on the construction of a strong theoretical framework. To build one, stakeholders should introduce reforms in the area of epistemology, special education theory and practices, curriculum, ideology, and politics (Naicker, 2006). his means that inclusion policy should require that teachers be informed appropriately and equipped with skills that will enable them to pave the way for high-level IE. In the Philippines, both in the cities and remote or rural areas, many public schools remain ill-equipped. his could be one of the reasons why many general education teachers in the Philippines doubt their capacity to teach in an inclusive school. In a research by Muega and Echavia (2011), 87 in-service teachers said they are willing to handle and work with professionals for the inclusion of CSN in general education classrooms, but their overall response indicates they are not prepared to take on the challenge of handling students with disorders or disabilities. his problem is further aggravated by the diiculty of meeting other vital requirements of sound IE. At this point, teachers in the Philippines, whether trained or otherwise, will have to accept that they will be spread too thinly in an inclusionary setting because the presence of students with special needs in an oversized group of students, if taken seriously, requires the preparation of more than one lesson plan. While inclusion policy has been already adopted in the Philippines, many schoolteachers have yet to fully appreciate the value of IE (Muega & Echavia, 2011). In Guyana, supporters of inclusion are confronting the same challenges that other developing nations are facing to establish a just and durable IE system. It has been observed that the inappropriate attitude of many toward persons with disabilities remains a major obstacle to IE in Guyana (Adjodhia-Andrews, 2007). Agents of change or educational leaders, however, could work together in order to reconigure Guyanese society’s negative views and attitudes toward people with disabilities and their educational potentials (Adjodhia-Andrews, 2007). Having suicient knowledge of IE enables teachers and school administrators to become more lexible and productive (Naicker, 2006). One of the most neglected components of IE, however, is the laying of its conceptual foundations to ensure that general education teachers, administrators, and parents fully understand and appreciate the ground upon which IE is built. Many researchers—including S. Vaughn, J.S. Schumm, J.S. Jallad, B. Slusher, and L. Samuell (1996) and M.M. Ali, R. Mustapha, and M.Z. Jelas (2006)—have established that when inclusive teaching

10

is not standing on solid knowledge about IE, many teachers are wont to think that inclusion policies are oppressive since they have to operate in a landscape unfamiliar to them (as cited in Khan, 2011). Needless to say, having the right amount of relevant knowledge and skills to get CSN where they ought to be is a necessary condition for the practitioners of IE to succeed in the tricky terrain of inclusion (Adjodhia-Andrews, 2007). Since 1996, training workshops and other initiatives for IE have been conducted in the Philippines. he required services for children with special needs in general education, however, remain unavailable in nearly all public schools. Dizon (2011) pointed out that tooling up for comprehensive IE requires meticulous planning. Workshop-seminars conducted over a weekend, a week, or even a month are insuicient and will not enable inclusive schoolteachers, school administrators, or parents of CSN to meet the standards of high-level IE. To fully satisfy the needs of diverse learners, especially those with developmental disorders or learning disabilities, a government needs to require that high standards of inclusion be met in schools. Inadequate preparation for IE may actually stand in the way of highquality inclusion.

Signiicance of the Study At present, the entire Philippine education system is lacking in the knowledge and resources required for high-quality inclusion. his research presents an evidencebased picture of how IE is practiced in Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines, to give stakeholders in IE an idea of how inclusion is conceptualized and practiced in the Philippines. Since this study identiies important challenges to IE as practiced in Quezon City, having knowledge of such problems can help IE stakeholders, especially in similar developing countries, to decide where to begin and which speciic practices to promote and make available if they wish to facilitate the development of a just and durable IE. his study gives the parents of CSN a broader and deeper picture of where a developing country such as the Philippines might be in terms of IE practice. Such vital information is crucial in aiding parents in their attempt to maximize the learning opportunities of their CSN despite the limited external support system for IE. General education teachers will likewise beneit from this study in that the research suggests inclusionary procedures that may be implemented in the Philippines, even if a signiicant majority of these schools are burdened with very limited resources. Findings from this study can also be used to inform those tasked to revise Philippine Senate Bill 3002 or to institutionalize inclusionary procedures in schools throughout the country.

S S D 12:1 2016

Research Problems his study is concerned with the knowledge and practice of IE among schoolteachers, administrators, and parents whose CSN are attending inclusive schools in Quezon City. he following problems were answered: (1) What is the participants’ concept

Methods

11

of IE?; (2) Is there a signiicant diference among the responses of the parents of CSN, inclusive classroom schoolteachers, and inclusive school administrators in terms of their knowledge of inclusion?; (3) How are the participants involved in IE?; (4) Is there a signiicant diference among the responses of the parents of CSN, inclusive classroom schoolteachers, and inclusive school administrators in terms of their involvement in IE?; and (5) How is IE viewed and practiced? Research problems 1, 3, and 5 were addressed using a modiied survey questionnaire, where the participants were instructed to explain, elaborate, concretize, and/or justify their choice of answers. he themes that emerged from this part of the study are the following: (a) IE equals extra efort to succeed; (b) diversity and education that is responsive to students’ individual needs; (c) lack of basic knowledge; (d) trying to adapt according to the demands of IE; (e) collaborate and communicate; (f) doubts about one’s work; and (g) practice IE regardless of what and how much we know. To address problems 2 and 4, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used. No signiicant diference was found among the mean scores in the survey of the three groups of participants. his suggests that what has been found in response to problems 1 and 3 are most likely true.

Research Design A qualitative–quantitative method of inquiry was employed to answer the problems in this study. Using a customized survey questionnaire, data were collected from respondents or participants who have irsthand knowledge of and experience in inclusive schools in Quezon City. Participants include: inclusive schoolteachers, inclusive school...