SPECIAL EDUCATION TODAY IN INDIA

SPECIAL EDUCATION TODAY IN INDIA Ajay Das and Rina Shah ABSTRACT Similar to Western countries, the early origins of special education in India started with Christian missionaries and nongovernmental agencies which stressed a charity model of serving populations such as the visually, hearing, and cognitively impaired. However after its independence from Great Britain in 1947, the Indian government became more involved in providing educational, rehabilitation, and social services. Thus over the past four decades, India has moved gradually toward an inclusive education model. This chapter discusses the implementation of such a model related to the prevalence and incidence rates of disability in India as well as working within family environments that often involve three to four generations. Also included are challenges that an inclusive education system faces in India, namely, a high level of poverty, appropriate teacher preparation of special education teachers, a lack of binding national laws concerned with inclusive education, a dual governmental administration for special education services, and citizen s and special education professionals strong concern about whether inclusive education practices can be carried out. Special Education International Perspectives: Practices Across the Globe Advances in Special Education, Volume 28, 561 581 Copyright r 2014 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 0270-4013/doi:10.1108/S0270-401320140000028025 561

562 AJAY DAS AND RINA SHAH INTRODUCTION Historically, persons with disabilities in India have enjoyed coexistence with the general mass, though at different times, their treatment and attitudes toward them varied but they were never excluded from society by confinement in institutions. Rather, they lived with their families. As far as education was concerned, even the Gurukula Ashram (educational institutes) promoted the basic educational principles of special education, for example, ascertaining the abilities and needs of each pupil, individualization of teaching targets and methods to match their skills and interests, and preparing them to meet the social expectations of their prospective interests. The famous epic of Mahabharta is evidence that King Dhritrashtra was the king of all India although he was visually impaired. ORIGINS OF SPECIAL EDUCATION However, during more recent times, systematic efforts took place in providing educational and vocational opportunities to individuals with disabilities in India. Starting with Christian missionaries in the 1880s, the charity model became part of the special schools they established (Alur, 2002). For instance, formal educational institutions were established for the blind in 1887, for the deaf in 1888, and for mentally deficient in 1934 (Misra, 2000). After these early establishments in the late 19th century or early 20th century, a growth was seen in the establishment of these institutions in the later half of the 20th century. After independence from Great Britain in 1947, there was a systematic development of special education in India that saw the establishment of 81 schools between 1960 and 1975. By 1979, the number of special education centers was 150. With the establishment of the National Institute for the Mentally Handicapped (NIMH) in 1986 and others soon after, the availability of trained personnel and suitable models of service made the growth of special schools for children with disabilities very significant. PREVALENCE OF DISABILITY IN INDIA According to a UNICEF Report on the Status of Disability in India (2000), there were around 30 million children that had some form of

Special Education Today in India 563 disability. Another report, the sixth All-India Educational Survey reported that of India s 2,000 million school aged children (6 14 years), 20 million require special needs education (Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI), 2000). Although these numbers show a large discrepancy, it is clear that there are a large number of students with special needs that require appropriate educational services. Recognizing the large number of special needs population and regional disparities, the Government of India (GoI) initiated policy reforms and strategies for special needs and inclusive education. The educational system in India has witnessed many changes after the coveted independence from Great Britain in 1947. The post freedom era together with the economic and social development policies in the last four decades have contributed substantially to bringing about an evolution in the overall educational system in India through legislative measures as well as social welfare activities. GOVERNMENT S EFFORTS IN PROVIDING SERVICES The efforts of the GoI over the last four decades have been toward providing a comprehensive range of services for the education of children with disabilities. In particular, inclusive education has been the focus of delivery of instruction to the students with disabilities in the country. In considering the educational provisions made for students with special educational needs in India, Jha (2002) states that while the agenda for inclusion in the West is concentrated mainly on the inclusion of students with physical and intellectual disabilities and those whose learning difficulties are due largely to emotional and behavioral factors, in India the focus extends beyond such groups. They also include children who are educationally deprived due to social and economic reasons, for example, street children, girls in rural areas, children belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, as well as various minorities and groups from diverse social, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds. According to Jha, all these children are considered to have special needs. He argues that what is called special needs in Britain would be considered the normal needs of a large minority of children in India. Hence, the terminology, which has its origins in the medical world of diagnosing the disability in the West, cannot explain the educational deprivation of large numbers of children in the developing countries (Jha, 2002, p. 67).

564 AJAY DAS AND RINA SHAH PROMOTING INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN INDIA The remainder of the chapter focuses on the significant strides made by the GoI toward promoting inclusive education in its national legislation and policies in the recent decades. Some key initiatives in each decade in the last four decades are discussed to illustrate the development of special education services for students with special needs in India. The 1960s The Indian Education Commission, widely known as the Kothari Commission (Kothari, 1966), was the first statutory body which highlighted the issue of children with disabilities in the Plan of Action in 1964 (Alur, 2002; Puri & Abraham, 2004). It made strong recommendations for including children with disabilities into regular schools. Elaborating on the allocation of funds for handicapped children, the commission proposed that: The Ministry of Education should allocate the necessary funds and NCERT should establish a cell for the study of handicapped children. The principal function of the cell would be to keep in touch with the research that is being done in the country and abroad and to prepare material for teachers. (Kothari Commission, 1966, p. 124) The Commission emphasized that (a) the education of children with disabilities should be an inseparable part of the general education system (Azad, 1996, p. 4) and (b) it should be organized, not merely on humanitarian grounds, but also on grounds of utility (Azad, 1996; Puri & Abraham, 2004). Moreover, the Commission set specific targets for four categories of disability to be achieved by 1986: education for about 15 percent of the blind, the deaf, and orthopedically handicapped and 5 percent of the mentally retarded (Panda, 1996; RCI, 2000). In addition, the Commission strongly proposed inclusive education as a model for the delivery of educational services emphasizing that not only was it cost-effective but would also enhance mutual understanding between children with and without disabilities (Panda, 1996; Puri & Abraham, 2004). However, it was apparent that not much had been achieved in realizing the targets set by the commission (Azad, 1996); despite the fact that subsequent to the Kothari Commission recommendations, the 1968 National Education Policy was formulated, which had suggested: (a) the expansion of educational facilities for children with physical and mental disabilities; and (b) to develop integrated program to enable children with disabilities to study in regular schools (Jha, 2002).

Special Education Today in India 565 The 1970s The Ministry of Welfare launched the scheme for Integrated Education for Disabled Children (IEDC) to overcome some of the difficulties faced by the special education system in the country, particularly, limited coverage and a lack of qualified and trained teachers (Dasgupta, 2002). The Central Government provided 50 percent financial assistance to the State Governments for the implementation of the IEDC in regular schools. The objectives of the IEDC included the retention of children with disabilities in the regular school system, preschool training for children with disabilities, and counseling for parents. One hundred percent financial assistance was offered by the central government to: (i) provide facilities for children with disabilities for books and stationery, uniform, transport allowance, readers allowance for blind children, and boarding and lodging charges for these children residing in hostels; (ii) setting up of resource rooms; (iii) resource teacher support in the ratio of 1:8 in respect of all disabled children except those with locomotor disabilities; (iv) survey for identification of disabled children and their assessment; (v) purchase and production of instructional material; (vi) training and orientation of resource teachers and school administrators; and (vii) salary of persons working in an IEDC Cell at the state level to implement and monitor the program. Until 1990, the scheme was implemented in 14 states. In 1999, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting reported that the scheme was being implemented in 26 states and union territories benefiting over 53,000 students enrolled in 14,905 schools. It has been noted that among all the states, Kerala has shown significant progress in implementing this scheme where 4,487 schools were implementing IEDC and serving 12,961 children (Puri & Abraham, 2004). The overall lack of success of this scheme was attributed to a lack of coordination among various departments toward its implementation (Azad, 1996; Pandey & Advani, 1997). Furthermore, issues such as nonavailability of trained and experienced teachers; lack of orientation among school staff on the difficulties of children with disabilities and their educational needs; and nonavailability of equipment and educational materials were stated as major contributory factors in the failure of the program in Maharashtra (Rane, 1983). Consequently, in 1992, the IEDC scheme was revised to overcome some of its limitations. Under the revised scheme, schools involved in the inclusion of students with disabilities were entitled to 100 percent assistance and a full funding provision was made for nongovernment organizations to implement the scheme.

566 AJAY DAS AND RINA SHAH The 1980s The IEDC scheme was followed by the seminal year of International Year for the Disabled Persons (IYDP) in 1981. The United Nations established that all countries should frame legislation for people with disabilities and that was the major thrust of the year. India was one of the first signatories to the resolution proclaiming the year 1981 as the International Year for the Disabled Persons. India demonstrated its commitment toward people with disabilities by endorsing the objectives proposed in the resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly (RCI, 2000). In response to the United Nations initiatives, the GoI enacted a series of legislations and policies to advance integrated education in the country (RCI, 2000). The GoI in its Sixth Five-Year Plan (1980 1985) considered inclusive education for children with disabilities as a priority. Subsequent increased funding for inclusive education and supplementary policies, legislation, and programs indicate the government s dedication in this sphere. In particular, the provision of inclusive education as an integral part of the education system by the GoI is reflected in the National Policy of Education (NPE) (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 1986) and Project Integrated Education for the Disabled (PIED) (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 1987). The 1986 NPE was a major initiative of the GoI toward inclusive education for students with disabilities (RCI, 2000). It envisaged a meaningful partnership between the union and states (National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), 2000). The policy outlined specific steps to integrate the physically and mentally handicapped with the general community as equal partners, to prepare them for normal growth and to face life with courage and confidence (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 1986). The NPE, under its all-encompassing objective of Equal Education Opportunity, proposed the following measures for the education of children with disabilities: (i) wherever it is feasible, the education of children with motor handicaps and other mild handicaps will be common with others; (ii) special schools with hostels will be provided, as far as possible at district headquarters, for severely handicapped children; (iii) adequate arrangements will be made to give vocational training to the disabled; (iv) teachers training programs will be reoriented, in particular for teachers of primary classes, to deal with special difficulties of handicapped children, by including a compulsory special education component in preservice training of general teachers (Dasgupta, 2002); and (v) voluntary effort

Special Education Today in India 567 for the education of the disabled will be encouraged in every possible manner (Jha, 2002, pp. 93 94). The NPE highlighted various issues in relation to children with disabilities, such as, the magnitude of the problem, the approaches to service delivery, the scheme of human and material resources, and nature of linkages between various agencies, in special education, which created the platform for serving children with disabilities as well as highlighted education as the right of the disabled child (RCI, 2000). NCERT, following the guidelines of NPE 1986 and with the assistance of UNICEF and the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), launched PIED for children with disabilities to strengthen the implementation of the IEDC scheme (Dasgupta, 2002). However, this project did not include children with intellectual impairment within its scope (RCI, 2000). This project was undertaken in 10 states/union territories of Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Nagaland, Orissa, Rajasthan, and Delhi. Ten blocks were selected in each state/union territory on the basis of composite area approach, to ensure appropriate coverage. Each of these blocks constituted as a project area and all the schools in that block were required to implement integrated education programs. Furthermore, the idea for clustering schools in the specified project area was to share facilities: instructional materials, instrumental aids, specialized equipment, resource teachers and medical, psychological and social support personnel. One of PIED s main objectives was to improve access for children with disabilities within their own environments and neighborhoods (Alur, 2002). A major component of this project was the training of regular classroom teachers to work with students with disabilities. The teacher training programs were provided at three levels: Level I: All primary school teachers in the project area underwent orientation training for the duration of one week; Level II: Ten percent of the teachers participated in an intensive sixweek training to equip them to handle children with a disability; and Level III: Eight to ten teachers from each block completed a one-year multi-category training program provided by the colleges of NCERT. These teachers were subsequently placed in each project area to function as resource teachers for a cluster of schools (Dasgupta, 2002; Jha, 2002). According to Azad (1996), PIED, resulted in both regular school teachers and students becoming more receptive toward students with disabilities. Azad added that over 9,000 teachers received training to implement

568 AJAY DAS AND RINA SHAH integrated education programs. The success of the PIED project led to an increased commitment by the Department of Education to integrate students with disabilities (Jangira & Ahuja, 1993). An external evaluation of this project in 1994 showed that, not only the enrollment of children with disabilities increased noticeably, but also the retention rate among children with disabilities was higher (approximately 95 percent) than the nondisabled children in the PIED blocks (Dasgupta, 2002; Jha, 2002). In addition, results of the project showed that the achievement of children with disabilities was found to be at par with children without disabilities in both scholastic and non-scholastic activities in schools (Alur & Rioux, 2004; Jha, 2002; RCI, 2000). The 1990s During this period, the GoI spurred various projects, schemes, and legislations to reinforce inclusion programs. Some of the initiatives were: the National Policy of Education-Plan of Action (NPE-POA) (1990 1992); the District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 1994); and perhaps the most significant of these initiatives was the passage of the landmark legislation, The Persons with Disabilities Act of 1995. NPE (1986) was revised in 1992 and is referred to as the NPE-POA (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 1992). The revised act resulted from criticism of the 1986 NPE, namely, due to its lack of commitment to the universalization of elementary education for all children, especially for those with disabilities (Jangira & Ahuja, 1993). In contrast, the 1992 NPE-POA reemphasized the principle of integration by stating that those children who may be enrolled in a special school for the acquisition of daily living skills, plus curriculum skills, communication skills, and basic academic skills should be subsequently integrated in regular schools (Dasgupta, 2002). In addition, all basic education projects, such as, nonformal education, adult education, vocational education, and teacher education schemes, which are funded by the central government, should adhere to the principle of integration (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 1992). Two important features pertaining to training issues in the NPE-POA (1992) were: (i) it focused on the need for incorporating a module on the education of children with disabilities as an integral component in training for educational planners and administrators; and (ii) it upgraded teacher education, especially for primary school teachers by introducing

Special Education Today in India 569 the concept of teacher accountability to the students, their parents, the community, and to their profession as part of teacher training programs. Furthermore, a resolution was made to set up District Institute of Education and Training (DIET) to provide preservice and in-service education to regular school teachers to enhance their skills to meet the needs of students with disabilities in their classrooms. The NPE-POA made an impressive commitment for universal enrollment by the end of the Ninth Five-Year Plan (1997 2002) for children who could be educated in regular primary schools and those who required being educated in special schools or special classes in regular schools (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 1992, p. 18). This administrative initiative further highlighted the GoI s commitment to integrated education. The DPEP, a centrally sponsored scheme, was launched in 1994, with the ultimate goal of achieving universal education. This program laid a special emphasis on the integration of children with mild to moderate disabilities in line with the world trends. The DPEP is noteworthy because it was the first time that primary education had been delinked from the state (Alur, 2002). The DPEP in 1994 1995 with financial support from the World Bank, the European Community, and the United Kingdom s Overseas Development Agency, UNICEF, and the Government of the Netherlands and the GoI became one of the largest programs of the GoI in terms of funding. Approximately 40 billion rupees were budgeted to fund this program in 149 districts, in 14 states. The multiple components of the DPEP were: (i) environment building, development of innovative designs for primary schools, and removal of architectural barriers in existing schools; (ii) the development of teachinglearning materials and research; (iii) provision for regular in-service teacher training conducted by the DIET and the State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT); (iv) activities related to community mobilization; (v) provision for early detection, functional assessment, the use of specialized aids and appliances, and the implementation of individualized educational plans; and (vi) resource support at block/district level with regards to availability of funding for educational aids and appliances as well as placement of a program officer at the DPEP district project office. In addition, nonformal/alternate schooling incorporating a flexible curriculum, informal evaluation criteria, and flexible timings would be promoted (Alur, 2002). Furthermore, an advisory resource group would be formed at the state and national level to guide the overall efforts as well as to provide technical and academic support to integrated education under DPEP (Dasgupta, 2002). The other significant components of this program

570 AJAY DAS AND RINA SHAH were its emphasis to: (i) actively promote the different government agencies and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) at various levels to work in synchronization; (ii) to keep a track of student enrollment, retention, dropouts, and gender-wise specifications through case-studies and statistical records to be compiled annually; and (iii) start primary schools in every village to address the issues of out-of school children and early marriages (Alur, 2002). An evaluation of the DPEP indicated that innovative and practical interventions introduced by the DPEP significantly improved access and retention, as well as quality of education of all students (World Bank, 1997). In the last decade of the millennium, the turning point in the educational provisions for children with disabilities in India was brought about by the enactment of the landmark legislation titled, The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights, and Full Participation) Act of 1995 (Ministry of Law Justice and Company Affairs, 1996). The aforementioned Act was ratified to give effect to the proclamation on the full participation and equality of people with disabilities in the Asian and Pacific region to which India was a signatory at the meeting to launch the Asian and Pacific Decade of Disabled Persons 1993 2002 convened by the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and Pacific (ESCAP) held at Beijing on December 1 5, 1992. This Act, passed by the Indian parliament seeks, inter alia, to create a conducive environment in the country to facilitate equal participation and giving an opportunity to the disabled to join the mainstream and contribute to the process of nation building. An essential aspect of the legislation according to a number of authors (Kulakarni, 2000; Rao, 2000) was the emphasis it placed on the inclusion of students with disabilities into regular schools. For the first time, the inclusion of students with disabilities in regular schools entered the realm of Indian jurisdiction. Consequently, one of the essential features of this Act is that discrimination specifically against persons with disabilities came under the purview of law through grievance redressed machinery established at the central and state levels. With regard to education, it called upon the three tiers of government, namely, national, state/union territories, and local governments to promote inclusive education. The Act charged upon these governments to ensure that all children with disabilities had access to a free and appropriate education until the age of 18 years. Concurrently, the Act entailed that local bodies, NGOs, and all others involved with the education of children with disabilities, would be responsible for implementing its various provisions (Dasgupta, 2002). In addition, Chapter five of the Act

Special Education Today in India 571 articulated the need for establishing open schools and universities and nonformal/alternative education with the aim of facilitating education for students with disabilities. It also emphasized teacher training programs, adaptation of curriculum materials, reform of the examination system, and the promotion of research (Dasgupta, 2002). In addition, for the purpose of effective implementation of the legislation, coordination committees were established at the national and state levels and headed by the commissioners appointed at the central and state level. The role of the Chief Commissioner, who holds important statutory functionary, includes coordinating the work of the State Commissioners, for persons with disabilities, monitoring utilization of funds disbursed by the Central Government, and taking appropriate action to safeguard rights and facilities made available to persons with disabilities (Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, 2004). Furthermore, the commissioners possess the powers to intervene legally for deprivation or violation of the rights of the disabled, including matters of equal opportunity in education (Jha, 2002). The GoI in its Ninth Five-Year Plan (1997 2002) earmarked billion rupees specifically for the provision of integrated education (Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, 2000) in order to expand educational opportunities for children with disabilities in the country. The National Trust Act was established as a statutory body under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment set up under the National Trust for the Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act (Ministry of Law Justice and Company Affairs, 1999). This Act further strengthened the PWD Act of 1995 and had provisions for students with autism, intellectual impairment, and cerebral palsy. The 2000s A number of significant initiatives have taken place in the last decade that further strengthened inclusion movement in India. Some of these initiatives included: Sarva Siksha Abhiyan (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2000), The Action Plan for Inclusion in Education of Children and Youth with Disabilities (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2005), National Policy for Persons with Disabilities (Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, 2006), and Inclusive Education of the Disabled at Secondary Stage (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2009a). Detailed information on these initiatives follows.

572 AJAY DAS AND RINA SHAH The Centrally Sponsored Scheme of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (Education for All movement) (SSA), which was implemented in 2000, set time-bound targets for the achievement of Universal Elementary Education (UEE) by 2010. With a premise of zero rejection, the program provided support for the inclusion of children with disabilities in regular schools at the elementary level. SSA provided an assistance of rupees, namely, 1,200 per special needs child per annum. This money was allocated toward assistive devices, materials in alternative learning formats, and anything else that would assist children with disabilities to be included in mainstream classrooms. Under the scheme, over 2 million children with disabilities were identified and over 1.5 million children with disabilities in the age group 6 14 years were enrolled in regular schools. Under SSA, a continuum of educational options, learning aids and tools, mobility assistance, support services, etc. were made available to students with disabilities. This included education through an open learning system and open schools, alternative schooling, distance education, special schools, wherever necessary home-based education, itinerant teacher model, remedial teaching, part time classes, Community Based Rehabilitation (CBR), and vocational education. Alur and Rioux (2004) however argue that the implementation of SSA was adversely affected due to the inadequate disbursement of financial assistance. The Action Plan for Inclusion in Education of Children and Youth with Disabilities was an ambitious plan that was introduced by the Government to promote the inclusion of students with disabilities in mainstream schools. Under this plan, the first level of intervention was offered through the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) program. This program aimed to reach out to all children aged 0 6 years, and it trained anganwadi workers to detect disabilities in children at an early stage. In addition, this plan included a number of specific objectives including the following: (a) providing home-based learning for persons with severe, multiple, and intellectual disability, (b) modifying physical infrastructure and teaching methodologies to meet the needs of all children including children with special needs, and (c) providing training to preservice teachers about inclusion concepts by including a module on inclusion in their preservice teacher preparation programs and offering professional development opportunities to existing teachers. The National Policy for Persons with Disabilities (2006) recognized that persons with disabilities are valuable human resource for the country and sought to create an environment that provided them with equal opportunities, protection of their rights, and full participation in society. The focus of the policy included prevention of disabilities, rehabilitation measures,

Special Education Today in India 573 and physical rehabilitation strategies. More specifically it involved (a) early detection and intervention, (b) counseling and medical rehabilitation, (c) the use of assistive devices, (d) development of rehabilitation professionals, (e) education for persons with disabilities, (f) economic rehabilitation of persons with disabilities, (g) serving women and children with disabilities, (h) creating barrier free environment, (i) issuing disability certificates, (j) providing social security, (k) the promotion of NGOs, (l) carrying out research, (m) sports, recreation, and cultural life, (n) making amendments and existing acts dealing with the PWDs. SSA specifically supported inclusion of children with special needs at the early childhood education and elementary education level and Inclusive Education for the Disabled at the Secondary Stage (IEDSS) was introduced to provide assistance to students with special needs at secondary level. The scheme for IEDSS was therefore envisaged to enable adolescents with disabilities to have access to secondary education and to improve their enrollment, retention, and achievement in the general education system. Under the scheme every school was proposed to be made disabled-friendly. IEDSS especially aimed to identify students with disabilities at the secondary stage, provide 3,000 rupees per child per annum for instructional materials, and set up model schools in every state to develop replicable practices in inclusive education. Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act (Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2009b) proposed free and compulsory education to all children aged between 6 and 14 years. Also, the Act made it binding that all public and private schools reserve 25 percent of their classroom seats for children from disadvantaged sections. Section 3 of the law stated that disadvantaged sections cover children with disabilities as specified under the PDA. In 2012, a bill was passed by the parliament of India to amend the Act. This bill allowed children with autism, cerebral palsy, intellectual impairment, and multiple disabilities the benefit of choosing to study from home. The bill emphasized that the home schooling option should not become an instrument for schools not wanting to take these children in classrooms. CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN INDIA The movement toward inclusive education has become a major focus in recent education reform in India. In spite of the government s efforts in the

574 AJAY DAS AND RINA SHAH last four decades, less than 1 percent of children with disabilities are educated in inclusive setting (The Hindu, 2013). India s unique problems and characteristics such as poverty, the absence of a binding law for inclusive education, a lack of resources, and its unique cultural and social background are daunting obstacles to the inclusion of children with disabilities into the regular education setting. A high level of poverty in India has been a real challenge for the implementation of inclusive education. In spite of recent economic developments, poverty is rampant in India. World Bank reports that as much as 400 million people in India are living in poverty, that is, living on less than 82 pence a day (The Telegraph, 2013). According to the most recent report published in Business Standard on January 21, 2014, per capita income in India stands at Rupees 68,748 per year which is equivalent to about $1,087. This is significantly below even with developing countries standards. The principal causes of disability inadequate nutrition, faulty childbearing practices, infections from diseases, and accidents are products of poverty and insufficient human services. Thus, the risk of impairment is much greater for the children of the poverty-stricken. The birth of an impaired child or the occurrence of disability in the family, often places additional demands on the limited resources of the family and strains its morale, thrusting it deeper into the morass of poverty. Poverty is also an obstacle to the improvement in educational opportunities for children with disabilities in India. Karna (1999) points out that a large number of children with disabilities live in families where family income is significantly below the poverty level. Many of these children become a part of the child labor force not due to choice but out of compulsion to meet the basic needs of their family. For the majority of these children and their families, subsistence takes precedence to education as they have an immediate need for food and shelter. This notion severely restricts educational opportunities for a vast majority of children let alone children with disabilities. Another significant challenge for the successful implementation of inclusive education in India is the lack of binding laws. There have been several legislations such as PWD Act, RTE Act, and others that have been passed in India which focus on inclusive education. However, in absence of binding clauses such as zero reject, least restrictive environment, due process, and others included in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) which was passed by the United States Congress in 2004, the provisions made in the PWD Act and others did not yield the required outcome in terms of creating equitable educational opportunities for children with disabilities in India. In absence of binding

Special Education Today in India 575 laws, the legislations passed in India emphasizing inclusive education remains nothing but a hollow and empty promise. The lack of resources has been a major hurdle in the implementation of inclusive education in India. A number of authors including Alur (2002), Bhatnagar and Das (2013), and Das, Gichuru, and Singh (2013) pointed out that constraints of resources have been a major barrier in the implementation of inclusion programs in India and therefore, it should be a matter of priority. Alur (2002) further asserts that Policy without funding is no policy at all (p. 25). Jangira (2002) argued that the inclusion education plan can only be successful if the GoI allocates resources based on prevalence of special educational needs. The Working Group Report on Elementary Education and Literacy under the 12th Five-Year Plan (2012 2017) made a number of recommendations to address the resource crunch for inclusive education which included the following: support for inclusive education to be provided at the rate of Rupees 3,000 per year for every child with special needs and 1,000 of these Rupees will be made available for resource teachers; provision of aids and appliances will be provided as needed; and that their will be training of regular school teachers. Another reason for non-realization of the inclusion endeavor in India could be the dual administration of special education in the country. While special schools fall under the administration of Ministry of Social Welfare, inclusive education is the responsibility of the Department of Education in the Ministry of Human Resource Development (Jangira, 2002). In addition, inclusive education to be effective requires the coordination between different sectors of operations, namely, the welfare sector, the women and child development sector, and the health sector. However, there is no cocoordinating system in place either at the central, state, district, or subdistrict levels which hold up the inclusion process at the school level (Jangira, 2002). Furthermore, there is no appropriate regulatory framework to monitor and enforce accountability for the successful implementation of inclusive education programs at all levels (Alur, 2002; Jangira, 2002). Another important challenge is teacher concerns and a lack of supportive attitudes for inclusive education in India. The available research on teacher attitudes and concerns in India indicate that while many general education teachers philosophically support inclusion, most have strong concerns about their ability to implement it successfully (Bhatnagar & Das, 2013; Das, Kuyini, & Desai, 2013; Shah, 2005). For instance, studies have shown that most general education teachers question their ability to teach students with disabilities, and some doubt they will be provided with the resources and support necessary for the programs (Bhatnagar, 2006; Shah,

576 AJAY DAS AND RINA SHAH 2005). Another similar challenge is a lack of trained work force to effectively meet the needs of children with disabilities. A number of researchers have highlighted that the regular school teachers in India have reported not receiving appropriate training in special education instructional methods (e.g., Das, 2001; Jangria, Singh, & Yadav, 1995; Shah, Das, Desai, & Tiwari, 2014). It is rather unfair to ask these teachers to do something that they have not been trained in. WORKING WITH FAMILIES OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES IN INDIA Understanding family structure in India is important in the context of delivering services to children with disabilities. The traditional Western notion of family as having a nuclear structure does not apply to Indian families which may include three or four generations of family members living under one roof. Both joint and nuclear families exist in almost equal proportions in India, but reflect some geographic variations in family structure. In the southern part of India, about 60 percent of the families are nuclear, whereas this proportion is 42 percent in the northern part of the country. The joint family system is, however, shrinking due to industrialization, urbanization, increased mobility, and influence from the Western world (Pinto & Sahur, 2001). Professionals need to be aware of role functions of family members while communicating with them. For example, while men typically assume primary role in key decision making process involving financial and outside home-related aspects, women assume primary role in day-to-day household tasks and implementation of any intervention at home. Professionals, therefore, must adjust their communication accordingly while communicating with family members. Another aspect that needs professionals attention is the changing nature of family in India. While even until a decade ago, majority of the family used to have one member (typically men) who was the primary breadwinner for the family, in the last decade this notion has changed drastically due to increased industrialization and urbanization. This has also resulted in increased number of nuclear families in India. While grandparents or other family members took care of the disabled child earlier, this support system is slowly fading away and exerting increased pressure on the families that have a child with disabilities. In addition, families of children with disabilities in India still have to deal with the stigma associated with disability.

Special Education Today in India 577 This is more prevalent in rural areas. For this reason, inclusive education is a preferred option for many parents in spite of receiving minimal services, in most instances, from the school where their children attend. In the last decade or so, however, mass media has played a significant role in developing awareness among people and reducing the stigma attached with disability. TEACHER PREPARATION While teacher preparation in special education has witnessed a major change in the last two decades in India, it is still lagging behind to meet the demands of increased number of teachers in the country. In order to meet with the demands of special education teachers in the country, the GoI had set up national institutes on various disabilities in the 1980s (e.g., NIMH, National Institute for the Visually Handicapped (NIVH)). These national institutes and their regional centers in various parts of the country became instrumental in offering bachelor s degree or diploma courses in special education. For example, the NIMH started offering a Bachelor s degree course in Mental Retardation (BMR) as early as 1987. Other national institutes started such initiatives as well. The range of courses offered by these institutions and other universities grew rapidly over a period of time. Currently the course offerings include certificate courses that may last for three months to doctoral degree in special education and allied fields. In addition to aiding with the manpower development in the country, these national institutes played a key role in conducting research in special education and developing pedagogy unique to India. The GoI also formed an autonomous body, RCI in 1993 by passing RCI Act in 1992 to regulate the special education and rehabilitation course offered by government agencies and NGOs. RCI has been instrumental in ensuring program quality offered by the teacher training institutions. It regulates and monitors services rendered to persons with disabilities and standardizes syllabi. It also maintains a Central Rehabilitation Register of all qualified professionals and personnel working in the field of Rehabilitation and Special Education in India. According to the latest information obtained from the RCI website, there are 60 different categories of courses offered in special education and allied fields in the country. These courses are both offered through regular as well as distance mode. With regard to the inclusion of children with disabilities and meeting their unique needs in that setting, a number of researchers have highlighted

578 AJAY DAS AND RINA SHAH a lack of preparation among regular teachers in India. For example, Das (2001) conducted a survey of 310 primary and 130 secondary regular school teachers in Delhi and reported that a vast majority of these teachers had never received any training in working with children with special needs. These teachers were nonetheless charged with meeting the needs of all children in their classrooms that were already overcrowded and under resourced. Bhatnagar (2006) and Shah (2005) raised similar concerns regarding teachers lack of preparation for inclusive education. CONCLUSION India appears to be at the crossroads with the implementation of inclusive education. On one hand, the Indian government has demonstrated its determination by implementing a number of policies, programs, and legislations for inclusion in the last four decades; while on the other it faces a number of unique challenges that limits its successful implementation. Policy makers need to address these challenges appropriately to make inclusive education a reality for millions of children with disabilities in India. While research (Singal, 2005; Singal & Rouse, 2003) on inclusive education in India is limited, external research can be evaluated and adopted to meet the unique socio-cultural-educational traditions of India. Similarly, specialized services can be sought from those professionals who have extensive experiences with the implementation of inclusive education in other contexts and an understanding of Indian scenario as well. REFERENCES Alur, M. (2002). Introduction: The social construct of disability. In S. Hearty & M. Alur (Eds.), Education and children with special needs (pp. 21 22). New Delhi: Sage. Alur, M., & Rioux, M. (2004). Included! An exploration of six early education pilot projects for children with disabilities in India. Mumbai: The Spastics Society of India. UNICEF, Canadian International Development Agency, and The Spastics Society of India. Azad, Y. A. (1996). Integration of disabled in common schools: A survey-study of IEDC in the country. New Delhi: National Council of Educational Research and Training. Bhatnagar, N. (2006). Attitudes and concerns of Indian teachers towards integrated education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Victoria University. Bhatnagar, N., & Das, A. K. (2013). Attitudes of secondary school teachers towards inclusive education in New Delhi, India. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs. doi:10.1111/1471-3802.12016

Special Education Today in India 579 Business Standard. (2014). India s per capita income rises to Rs. 5,729 per month. Business Standard. Retrieved from http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/ india-s-per-capita-income-rises-to-rs-5-729-per-month-113020700995_1.html. Accessed on January 21. Das, A. K. (2001). Perceived training needs of regular and secondary school teachers to implement inclusive education programs in Delhi, India. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Melbourne. Das, A. K., Gichuru, M., & Singh, A. (2013). Implementing inclusive education in Delhi, India: Regular school teachers preferences for professional development delivery modes. Professional Development in Education, 39(5), 698 711. Das, A. K., Kuyini, A. B., & Desai, I. P. (2013). Inclusive education in India: Are the teachers prepared? International Journal of Special Education, 28(1), 27 36. Dasgupta, P. R. (2002). Education for the disabled. In S. Hegarty & M. Alur (Eds.), Education and children with special needs (pp. 41 50). New Delhi: Sage. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004). Public Law No. 108-446. United States Congress. Jangira, N. K. (2002). Special education needs of children and young adults: An unfinished agenda. In S. Hegarty & M. Alur (Eds.), Education and children with special needs (pp. 67 76). New Delhi: Sage. Jangira, N. K., & Ahuja, A. (1993). Special education in India. Asia Appraiser, 23(October December), 6 12. Jangira, N. K., Singh, A., & Yadav, S. K. (1995). Teacher policy, training needs and perceived status of teachers. Indian Educational Review, 30(1), 113 122. Jha, M. M. (2002). School without walls: Inclusive education for all. Oxford: Heinemann. Karna, G. N. (1999). United nations and rights of disabled persons: A study in Indian perspective. New Delhi: A.P.H. Publishing Corporation. Kothari, O. S. (Kothari Commission Report, 1966). Report of the Indian education commission 1964 1966. New Delhi: Ministry of Education. Kulakarni, V. R. (2000). Thinking care. Retrieved from cbrnet@vsnl.com. Accessed on March 17. Ministry of Human Resource Development. (1986). National policy on education. New Delhi: Department of Education, Government of India. Ministry of Human Resource Development. (1987). Project integrated education for the disabled. New Delhi: Department of Education, Government of India. Ministry of Human Resource Development. (1992). National policy on education. New Delhi: Department of Education, Government of India. Ministry of Human Resource Development. (1994). DPEP guidelines. New Delhi: Department of Education, Government of India. Ministry of Human Resource Development. (2000). Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan: A programme for the universalization of inclusive education. New Delhi: Department of School Education & Literacy, Government of India. Ministry of Human Resource Development. (2005). The action plan for inclusion in education of children and youth with disabilities. New Delhi: Department of Education, Government of India. Ministry of Human Resource Development. (2009a). Inclusive education of the disabled at secondary stage. New Delhi: Department of School Education and Literacy. Ministry of Human Resource Development. (2009b). Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act. New Delhi: Government of India.

580 AJAY DAS AND RINA SHAH Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. (2000). India 2000: A reference annual. New Delhi: Publication Division. Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. (2004). India 2004: A reference annual. New Delhi: Publication Division. Ministry of Law Justice and Company Affairs. (1996). The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. New Delhi: Government of India. Ministry of Law Justice and Company Affairs. (1999). The National Trust for the Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act. New Delhi: Government of India. Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. (2006). National policy for persons with disabilities. New Delhi: Government of India. Misra, A. (2000). Special education in India. In C. R. Reynolds & E. Fletcher-Janzen (Eds.), Encyclopedia of special education (pp. 86 97). New York, NY: Wiley. NCERT. (2000, July 4 5). UNESCO-NCERT need assessment workshop for Asia Pacific region. International Centre for Special Needs Education. Department of Education of Groups with Special Needs, National Council of Educational Research and Training, New Delhi. Panda, K. C. (1996). Research in special education. Indian Educational Review, 31(2), 1 15. Pandey, R. S., & Advani, L. (1997). Perspectives in disability and rehabilitation. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. Pinto, P. E., & Sahur, N. (2001). Working with people with disabilities: An Indian perspective. Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information & Exchange. Retrieved from http://cirrie.buffalo.edu/culture/monographs/india/#copyright. Accessed on January 19, 2014. Puri, M., & Abraham, G. (2004). Handbook of inclusive education for educators, administrators, and planners. New Delhi: Sage. Rane, A. (1983). An evaluation of the scheme of integrated education for handicapped children based on a study of the working of scheme in Maharashtra. Mumbai: Unit for Child and Youth Research, Tata Institute of Social Sciences. Rao, I. (2000). A comparative study of UN rules and Indian disability act 1995. Retrieved from cbrnet@vsnl.com. Accessed on March 17. Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI). (2000). Status of disability. New Delhi: Rehabilitation Council of India. Shah, R. (2005). Concerns of Indian educators in integrated education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pune. Shah, R., Das, A. K., Desai, I. P., & Tiwari, A. (2014). Teachers concerns about inclusive education in Ahmedabad, India. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs. doi:10.1111/1471-3802.12054 Singal, N. (2005). Mapping the field of inclusive education: A review of the Indian literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 9(4), 331 350. Singal, N., & Rouse, M. (2003). We do inclusion : Practitioner perspectives in some inclusive schools in India. Perspectives in Education, Special Issue: The Inclusion/Exclusion Debate in South Africa and Developing Countries, 21(3), 85 98. The Hindu. (2013). Report says enrolment of disabled children in govt. schools under 1%. The Hindu. Retrieved from http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/report-says-enrolmentof-disabled-children-in-govt-schools-under-1/article5519483.ece. Accessed on January 4, 2014.