Final Draft

1
FIELD WORK – III

(Course Code: BSW M18)
RESEARCH PROJECT
TITLE: A STUDY ON THE FEEDBACK OF PARENTS ABOUT THE INCLUSIVE

EDUCATION SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE MONTFORT MATRICULATION
HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
Submitted By
ABILASH ROBIN DAS (1801721049033)

PRADEEP S (1801721049059)
ANIRUDH NAMBIAR V (1801721049065)
III YEAR BSW

Date: 26-03-2021
In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
BACHELOR OF SOCIAL WORK
Under Guidance of
PROF. DR. JANICE SHIJI, MA(SW), NET-JRF(UGC)
MADRAS CHRISTIAN COLLEGE

(An Autonomous college affiliated to the University of Madras)
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WORK (SFS)
2
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the project titled “A Study on the Feedback of Parents about the
Inclusive Education Services Provided by the Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary
School” is a record of work done by ABHILASH ROBIN DAS, PRADEEP S, ANIRUDH
NAMBIAR V, full time students of Bachelor of Social Work, Madras Christian College
(Autonomous), Chennai, during the period of their study in the academic year 2018 - 2021. This
project report represents entirely an independent work of the candidates under my supervision
and guidance.
DR. R. BELINDA DR. JANICE SHIJI

HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT RESEARCH GUIDE
3
PREFACE
This project is based on a Study on the Feedback of Parents about the Inclusive Education
Services Provided by the Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School. Inclusive education
is the education system where there is equal attention and educational opportunities given to all
the students in the school inclusive of both children with disabilities as well as normal children.
When the society accepts an educational system, it needs to see to it that the educational system
which it adopts has to include children from all phases of life. As such teachers as educators play
a major role in determining the extent of inclusion.
Inclusion is the need of the hour today in this world and inclusive education fosters the feeling of
inclusion in the minds of children from a very young age. Inclusive education may only be about
children with disabilities studying in regular schools along with regular children, but the concept
of inclusion remains the same.
Inclusive education is primarily affected by the teachers and parents as their role in embracing
this way of educating may play a crucial role in the acceptance of it. As such, the teachers and
parents have specific apprehensions or attitudes that are influenced by a various number of
factors which may force them to rethink whether they need to accept inclusive education, some
parents and teachers for their child’s need a few of them to accept inclusive education. parents
play a major role while admitting their special child in a school which provides inclusive
education.
An attempt has been made to study the feedback of parents about the Inclusive Education
Services Provided by the Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School and as well as
4
identifying some of the parents' view about inclusive education in Montfort Matriculation Higher
Secondary School.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, we would like to thank God Almighty for giving me the strength, confidence and
knowledge to conduct this study and guiding us at every step.
We express our heartfelt thanks to Mr. P. Wilson, Principal, Madras Christian College; Dr. R.
Belinda, Head of the Department of Social Work (SFS) for giving us an opportunity to do the
research.
We would like to thank our research guide and our faculty supervisor, Dr. Janice Shiji for her
valuable support and guidance. We also thank her for her availability to discuss the study at any
time, for her continuous encouragement and also for helping us to complete the research on time.
We also thank the respondents of my study, the management of Montfort Matriculation School
which have given us permission for data collection, the faculty of the department, my seniors,
and my family members for their help and encouragement to complete this project.
ABHILASH ROBIN DAS, PRADEEP S, ANIRUDH NAMBIAR V
5
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO NAME OF THE TABLE PAGE NO
1. Child’s Communication 39
2. Physical Access 40
3. Suitability of Transport 41
4. Curriculum Aspect 43
5. School’s Admission Policy 43
6. Curriculum offered by school 44
7. Range of subjects, courses and qualifications available 46
8. Satisfaction on the level of contact with teachers 47
9. Child’s progress 48
10. Culture of the school 49
11. Positive Attitudes of the Teachers 50
12. Behavioral Problems of the Children 51
13. Specialized Academic Support 51
14. School not Practicing Inclusion 52
15. Specialized Academic Support - More Difficult to Discipline 53
16. Extra - Curricular Activities 54
17. Remedial Schooling Rather than Inclusive Schools 55
18. Children overall education 56
6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Name of the Figure Page No
1. School Placement 40
2. Assessment of their Child’s Needs 42
3. School Resources 42
4. School Fees 45
5. Successful Inclusive Classroom 47
6. Children Socializing 49
7. Extra Academic Support 54
ABSTRACT
7
The study was carried out to find the feedback of the parents towards inclusive education. A total
of 42 parents as respondents were involved in this study. The researchers conducted the research
using the Descriptive Research Design. Descriptive Research is a scientific method which
involves opening and describing an individual without influencing the individual in any way.
The tools used for data collection from the sampling were questionnaires. This questionnaire was
prepared after a considerable and deep understanding of the research problem, discussion with
experienced researchers, extensive study of pertinent literature and contextual imagination. The
tentatively formed questionnaire was pre-tested with few samples to detect the shortcomings.
The questionnaire used in this study included a scale which was derived from various other
scales used to study the feedback/view of the parents towards inclusive education. The
researchers used purposive sampling as a sampling design to study about the inclusive education
in Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School, to get the feedback/views of the parents and
for gathering information. The researchers used purposive sampling in Montfort Matriculation
Higher Secondary School. The respondents in this study are primarily having a positive attitude
towards inculcating inclusive education in Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School, and
are widely aware by the type of disability that the children have when inclusion is decided upon.
As such the parents are helping and motivating their children who are into inclusive education.
Teachers are welcoming in other factors affecting inclusive education such as their experience,
school infrastructure and pedagogy. It can be found that most of the respondents are aware about
what inclusive education is, its advantages as well as the difficulties it brings but still have a
positive attitude towards inclusive education. This is the major outcome of the study. It can be
concluded that if inclusive education can be implemented in regular schools, the teachers and
parents would not be the obstacle towards its realization.
8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
S.NO. CONTENTS PAGE NO
1. Certificate 2
2. Preface 3
3. Acknowledgement 4
4. List of Tables 5
5. List of Figures 6
6. Abstract 7
7. Chapter – I 9
Introduction
8. Chapter – II 28
Review of Literature
9. Chapter – III 37
Analysis and Interpretation
10. Chapter – IV 56
Main Findings and Suggestions
11. Chapter – V 62
Summary and Conclusion
12. Bibliography 68
13. Appendix 76
9
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
10
A STUDY ON THE FEEDBACK OF PARENTS ABOUT THE INCLUSIVE
PART - I
INTRODUCTION:
Inclusive education means a system that accommodates all children regardless of their
physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic or other conditions. Inclusive education is
based on fundamental human rights. It is a child centric method of teaching that capable of
successfully educating all children. Inclusive Education is the driving force for both integration
and inclusion that comes out from a concern for rights of children and young people with special
educational need. It is restructuring schools as communities where all children can learn in the
similar learning environment. Inclusive education is one of the urgent needs of society of twenty
first century to provide equal educational opportunities to all differently able children in their
own locations. It includes good teaching practices, healthy relationship between teacher and
students so that quality of education can be improved for all children in a classroom and help in
the process of development of all children in different ways. The concept of inclusion is based on
the ideas of providing equal opportunities to all children depending upon their individual needs
and diverse nature. Right to belongingness should be one of the prime opportunities to all
children both normal and deficient to value the uniformity in a country.
NEED AND IMPORTANCE OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION
There have been efforts internationally to include children with disabilities in the
educational mainstream. In order to achieve truly inclusive education, we need to think about and
incorporate children with special needs into regular schools. Especially, because these kids face
some sort of barriers to learning and participation in the classroom. As general education
11
classrooms include more and more diverse students, teachers realize the value of accepting each
student as unique. In effective inclusive programs, teachers adapt activities to include all
students, even though their individual goals may be different. We have learned that inclusive
education is a better way to help all students succeed. Researches show that most students learn
and perform better when exposed to the richness of the general education curriculum. The
growing body of research has shown that children do better academically when in inclusive
settings and Inclusion provides opportunities to develop relationships. Some of the benefits
include: friendships, social skills, personal principles, comfort level with people who have
special needs, and caring classroom environments. The most important function of friendships is
to make people feel cared for, loved, and safe. In an inclusive educational setting, low-achieving
students are able to get extra help even though they did not qualify for special education.
Classmates of students with disabilities also experience growth in social cognition, often can
become more aware of the needs of others in inclusive classrooms. An interesting side effect is
that these parents report that they also feel more comfortable with people with special needs
because of their children’s experiences. Students with disabilities can create long-lasting
friendships that would not be otherwise possible, and these friendships can give them the skills to
navigate social relationships later on in life.
HISTORY OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN INDIA:
Along with other parts of the world, India too witnessed the emergence of special schools
for individuals with special needs. The National Curriculum Framework for School Education
(NCFSE) (2000), brought out by the NCERT, recommended inclusive schools for all without
specific reference to pupils with special education needs (SEN) as a way of providing quality
education to all learners. According to NCFSE, segregation or isolation is good neither for
learners with disabilities nor for general learners without disabilities. Societal requirement is that
learners with special needs should be educated along with other learners in inclusive schools,
which are cost effective and have sound pedagogical practices (NCERT, 2000).
The first school for the deaf was set up in Bombay in 1883, and the first school for the
blind was established in Amritsar in 1887. There was a rapid expansion in the number of such
12
institutions. Today, there are more than 3,200 special schools throughout India. Despite
difficulties, (institutions reached out only to a limited number of children, largely urban, and they
were not cost effective) with difficulties and struggles, today India has come a long way.
Currently India has four national institutes for effective implementation of special education
through government schemes.
HISTORY OF MONTFORT MATRICULATION SCHOOL:
VISION:
To impart Holistic Education through various curricular, co-curricular and extra-curricular

activities in order to make fully developed personalities to face the challenges ahead.
MISSION:
To mold responsible, steadfast and dedicated citizens of the country with a committed
partnership with the differently-abled.
ABOUT THE SCHOOL:
Montfort Matriculation School, St. Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016, was started on 10 th June
2002, by the Montfort Brothers of St. Gabriel belonging to the Province of Yercaud under the
guidance of the then provincial superior Rev Bro K K Thomas and the leadership of the then
Principal and Correspondent Rev. Bro George Vaz. Ever since its inception the school has
constantly grown both in size and number. The school was started with 800 students. Montfort
school focuses on imparting holistic education to students providing the best educational
facilities, which help in developing all their faculties. In the modern age of new technologies,
information and technology has become an indispensable component in education, the school has
40 digital classrooms, more than 80 computer systems, Language Lab, Science Activity Lab and
Mathematics Lab in order to enhance activity-based learning as we believe in self-motivated
learning process through trouble-free and faster understanding.
13
Life skill training programmes, career counselling and guidance, personality development and
interpersonal skill developments are part of the curriculum and experts in the field are invited
periodically to address and guide the students.
Montfort school also supports Inclusive Education, currently we have more than 50 students with
various special needs who are autistic, mentally retarded, learning disabled, spastic, physically
challenged, visually challenged, hearing impaired etc., spread across grades from LKG to Std
XII. Students at Montfort are made aware of their social responsibilities towards the less
fortunate counterparts of the society by providing them opportunities to interact and learn in the
mainstream environment. This school is a disability friendly school, extending its hands of
brotherhood to the children with special needs, building a bridge of friendship to the normal
world.
LAWS AND PROGRAMMES:
The Constitution of India (26 November, 1949), clearly states in the Preamble that everyone has
the right to equality of status and of opportunity. The Article 41 of the Directive Principles of the
Indian Constitution supports the right to work, education and public assistance in certain cases
including disablement. Further, Article 45 commits to the provision of free and compulsory
education for all children up to the age of 14 years. The Government of India created the Kothari
Commission in 1964. This commission was created because the Government of India wanted to
create a plan of action to improve the education system. The plan of action created by the
Kothari Commission included people with disabilities, but unfortunately, the Government of
India never implemented it. It reads,
“We now turn to the education of handicapped children. Their education has to be organized not
merely on humanitarian grounds of utility. Proper education generally enables a handicapped
child to overcome largely his or her handicap and make him into a useful citizen. Social justice
also demands it and on an overall view of the problem, however, we feel that experimentation
with integrated programmes is urgently required and every attempt should be made to bring in as
many children in integrated programs.”
14
The Integrated Education of Disabled Children (IEDC) 1974:
The Ministry of Welfare created the Integrated Education of Disabled Children Scheme (IEDC)
in 1974. The scheme provided children with disabilities “financial support for books, school
uniforms, transportation, special equipment and aids,” with the intention of using these aids to
include children in mainstream classrooms. However, the government of India realized that
providing structural changes to the classroom, such as adapted equipment, would not be enough
to integrate children with disabilities into the classroom. Although it was encouraged and partly
funded by UNICEF, fifty percent of the funding was supposed to go through the state
governments. The responsibility was transferred to the Department of Education in 1992. Despite
the fact that this scheme was supposed to be nation-wide, it was implemented in only 10 out of
29 of the states in India.
Sharma (2001) found three major problems with the IEDC. There was a lack of training and
experience of the teachers, a lack of orientation among regular school staff about the problems of
disabled children and their educational needs, and the lack of availability of equipment and
educational materials.
The National Policy on Education, 1986 (NPE, 1986):
The Programme of Action (1992) stresses the need for integrating children with special needs
with other groups. The objective to be achieved as stated in the NPE (1986) is "to integrate the
physically and mentally handicapped with general community as equal partners, to prepare them
for normal growth and to enable them to face life with courage and confidence." Although this
policy was created in 1986, it was not implemented until the Plan of Action was created in 1992.
The 1992 Program of Action (POA), created to implement the 1986 NPE, broadens the 1986
definition of who should be included in mainstream schooling, that “a child with a disability who
can be educated in the general school should not be in the special school.”
The rehabilitation council of Indian Act (1992):
15
The year 1992 was also the year of the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI) Act. The RCI Act
provided standards for rehabilitation professionals; one type of rehabilitation professional being
special education teachers. In essence, the Council and its Act, aims to regulate the quality of
training of Rehabilitation Professionals.
Possibly one of the most important landmark legislations to date in India regarding people with
disabilities is the Persons with disabilities Act (Equal Opportunities, Protection of rights
and Full Participation) 1995. The PWD Act strives to address all major aspects of the
education sector that pertains to students with disabilities. It states that students with disabilities
have the right to access education in a “free and appropriate environment” until they are 18 years
of age, “promoting integration into normal schools.” The PWD Act is supposed to provide
transport facilities, remove architectural barriers, supply free books and other study materials,
grant scholarships, restructure curriculum, and modify the examinations system for the benefit of
students with special needs.
Inclusive education in Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA):
It was launched to achieve the goal of Universalization of Elementary Education. This adopts a
zero-rejection policy and uses an approach of converging various schemes and programmes. The
key objective of SSA in Universalization of Elementary Education (UEE). Three important
aspects of UEE are access, enrolment and retention of all children in 6-14 years of age. A zero-
rejection policy has been adopted under SSA, which ensures that every Child with Special Needs
(CWSN), irrespective of the kind, category and degree of disability, is provided meaningful and
quality education. It covers the following components under education for children with special
needs: -Early detection and identification, functional and formal assessment, Educational
Placement, Aids and appliances, Support services, Teacher training, Resource support,
Individual Educational Plan (IEP), Parental training and community mobilization, Planning and
management, Strengthening of special schools, Removal of Architectural barriers, Research,
Monitoring and evaluation, Girls with disabilities.
The most recent initiative of the Government of India to achieve the goal of universalization of
secondary education (USE) is Rastriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA), aimed at
expanding and improving the standards of secondary education i.e. from class VIII to X and
16
provide his/her educational needs will also be assessed and supplied learning material, aids and
appliances, assistive devices, support services, as per his/her requirement.
The right to education bill:
The Government of India decided to make Amendment 21(A) of the constitution, giving children
between the ages of 6-14 the right to a free, appropriate and compulsory education, into an act. In
2005, the Right to Education Act was drafted by the Ministry of Human Resource Development.
The Right to Education Act was passed in 2009 and put into full effect in 2010.
The action plan for inclusion in education of children and youth with disabilities:
It was extremely important that India create a bill around section 45 and 21 (A) of the
constitution, which became the Right to Education Act which was originally floated in 2005.
However, in the same year, the Ministry of Human Resource Development also drafted the
Action Plan for Inclusion in Education of Children and Youth with Disabilities (IECYD).
This action plan envisions that all children with a disability will have access to mainstream
education. In order to facilitate this, the government, specifically collaborating between the
Rehabilitation Council and the National Council for Teacher’s Education, will ensure that there
are adequate numbers of teachers trained in inclusive Education, as well as the proper physical
and ideological infrastructure to facilitate inclusion in schools.
Reforming past schemes: Inclusive Education of the disabled at the secondary stage
In 2008, the government reformed the Scheme of Integrated Education for Disabled Children
(IEDC) and created the Inclusive Education of the Disabled at the Secondary Stage (IEDSS). It
went into effect on April 1st, 2009. IEDC was reformed to take into account the resources
provided for students with disabilities ages 6-14 under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan.
The objective of IEDSS is to enable the disabled children who have completed eight years of
elementary education to continue their education at the secondary stage in an inclusive
environment in regular schools. IEDSS provides students with disabilities ages 14-18, studying
17
in public or government funded schools, Rs. 3000/- per school year from the central government
to purchase the necessary materials to use to ensure inclusion of the student in the mainstream
school system. This is the first policy that specifically acknowledges the importance of
secondary education for persons with disabilities.
The national policy for people with disabilities:
The most recent policy specifically concerning education and people with disabilities is the
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment’s National Policy for People with Disabilities.
Although this policy was created in 2006, after the 2005 Action Plan, and the two policies were
created under separate ministries, they are very similar in both the ideologies that they were
founded on, as well as the actual changes they are trying to make to the system.
The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (2016):
It is the disability legislation passed by the Indian Parliament to give effect to the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which India ratified in 2007. The Act
replaces the existing Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunity Protection of Rights and Full
Participation) Act, 1995. The number of disabilities recognized under the act has been increased
from 7 (recognized under the Old Act) to 21, and have been elaborately defined. The law
recognizes for the first time three blood disorders namely thalassemia, hemophilia, and sickle
cell disease, intellectual disability, disability caused due to neurological conditions, acid attack
etc. as disabilities. The Act focuses on multiple aspects such as education, skill development,
employment, recreation, rehabilitation, health and social security of persons with disability.
SCALES:
1. What are the parent’s views and understanding of Inclusive Education within a sample of
Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School?
2. What do parents think about the barriers to learn within the classroom?
3. What are the skills parents think they need in order to implement Inclusive Education?
18
4. What are the support structures school providing in the implementation of Inclusive
Education?
5. What are the training programmes parents have participated in involving Inclusive
Education and their perceptions of these training programmes?
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:
The documentation that exists on the effects of inclusion on students without disabilities
has not provided a definitive answer regarding the outcomes of inclusion. The documentation
that is there often has conflicting results or is limited by the sample size or its inability to be
generalized to the greater population. Also, each sample used has unique qualities that cannot be
quantified in a study. More research on this subject needs to be conducted in order to gather a
large base of data so that all unique situations can be included in order to come to some
conclusions about the effects of inclusion on students without disabilities. These students are
often neglected in the inclusion process and their needs need to be determined and met as well.
Children can change the world and education can change the way children perceive the world.
Inclusion refers to all children, because Inclusive Education is one in which all children have
access to quality education in an inclusive environment that provides three components:
● All children mean “children with disabilities, gifted children, homeless children, children
belonging to nomadic groups, children belonging to linguistic minorities, ethnic or
cultural, children with HIV or belonging to any other vulnerable groups” per Salamanca’s
Declaration (1994);
● Quality Education - means creating real opportunities to achieve success in the learning
experience; in other words, the quality of education is not measured in terms of
performance, graduation, infrastructure, technology and comfort, but the system capacity,
the school and the teacher to create learning opportunities for every child;
19
● Inclusive Environment - which means that the environment is welcome, protects and
educates all children, regardless of gender, physical, intellectual, economic, linguistic or
other characteristics (UNESCO).
Inclusive Education is one of the top challenges in today’s world, and whilst educational systems
make efforts to become more inclusive, new teachers must be developed to be more inclusive in
their future practice. The level of the economic stress is high, affecting both adults and children.
It is therefore appropriate to explore the conditions of Inclusive Education in Chennai today and
ask how far the current anxiety about children’s rights is justified – and to ask ourselves: How
can teachers develop their own competencies to become truly inclusive? Is this theme a current
pressing priority for their own training? These important questions were investigated in Montfort
school. The attitudes, opinions and lived experiences of Inclusive Education of future teachers
were investigated and this research is focused on the opportunities created by listening to their
opinions and the challenge is to harness their richness to produce better solutions.
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:
● The current study has several general limitations; most importantly the quality of data is
low as rating scales are more difficult to use in email interviews. Furthermore, parents’
subjective perspectives might be biased. Additionally, it must be assumed that it might be
difficult for parents to judge some of the statements, which describe the situation in the
classroom and the endeavors of teachers, for example the statement whether teachers are
able to deal with behavior and social circumstances of the students. This statement was
assessed very highly in parents. In future research there is a need for reformulating some
of the items and including more perspectives (e.g., also observational data, students’
ratings or teachers’ ratings) to validate the overlap between the parents’ view and the
situation in the classroom. As a consequence, future studies would need to address
variables in a broader context and from several perspectives to get clearer answers why
inclusion still seems to be a matter of ‘who should be included’, instead of providing
equality in educational development for all children. Generally, inclusion is a challenge
for future research, not only because there are local and situational factors influencing
attitudes and perceptions towards inclusive education, which cannot be captured by just
20
asking the involved actors in the field. Even if different research approaches are used,
researchers have to reflect critically what they want to focus on in the highly normative
and political debate about inclusive practices and what they (re) construct by doing so.
● Due to the ethical nature involved in the Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary
School, it is assumed that the respondents will answer the questionnaire truthfully and to
the best of their ability.
● The participants in the research survey were a sample of parents from Montfort
Matriculation Higher Secondary School which may have limited the ability to generalize
results to parents of special children from other schools. Since the survey used in the
study was created by the researcher, no reliability or validity data is available for the
instrument.
● The small number of subjects within each sample group were 42. Only the parents of
Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School students were included for the present
study. This presents a limitation to the nature of the statistical analysis approach used and
the generalizability of the results. Leven’s Test for Homogeneity of Variance (LTHV)
should be performed to test for European equality of variances despite the slightly small
sample size. The test would have confirmed homogeneity and that sample size does not
significantly alter the inferences from the analysis. Hence, the study would be
generalizable to the student population in the inclusion education program at the study
school (which is very clear that almost all special schools would have almost similar
results).
● Finally, the questionnaire was designed exclusively for this study. Although it was
evaluated and approved by a peer group prior to its utilization, it has not been empirically
tested, nor has it been approved as being a valid and reliable instrument. An empirically
supported instrument may have resulted in more identifiable results.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
1. Was there a delay in your child’s communication? If so, to what extent?

2. Please tell us if your child has been diagnosed with any of the following special needs.
21
3. How would you describe your experience of finding a school placement for your child?
4. How would you rate the physical access to your child’s school e.g., ramps, lifts etc.?
5. Have your child’s special educational needs been formally assessed by the Montfort
Matriculation Higher Secondary School?
6. How good are the teachers in dealing with behavioral problems of children?
7. Do the teachers create and maintain successful inclusion classrooms?
8. How satisfied are you with the range of subjects, courses and qualifications available to
your child at the school?
9. How satisfied are you with your child’s overall education?
10. How satisfied are you of the positive attitudes of the teachers towards children?
11. What type of support do your children receive in this school?
12. How much do you consider that your child is making progress according to their ability?
13. How satisfied are you with the child’s social interactions with other children in Montfort
School?
SIGNIFICANCE OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION:
Inclusive system provides a greater chance to the educational system in all children and is
instrumental in changing inequitable attitudes. Schools provide the outline for a child’s first
relationship with the outside world of their families; facilitate the development of social
relationship and interaction. Respect and understanding grow when students of diverse abilities
and backgrounds play, socialize, and learn together.
Here are key findings about the benefits of inclusion for children and families:
● Families’ visions of a typical life for their children can come true: All parents want their
children to be accepted by their peers, have friends and lead “regular” lives. Inclusive
settings can make this vision a reality for many children with disabilities.
● Children develop a positive understanding of themselves and others: When children
attend classes that reflect the similarities and differences of people in the real world, they
learn to appreciate diversity. Respect and understanding grow when children of differing
abilities and cultures play and learn together.
22
● Friendships develop: Schools are important places for children to develop friendships and
learn social skills. Children with and without disabilities learn with and from each other
in inclusive classes.
● Children learn important academic skills: In inclusive classrooms, children with and
without disabilities are expected to learn to read, write and do math. With higher
expectations and good instruction children with disabilities learn academic skills.
● All children learn by being together: Because the philosophy of Inclusive Education is
aimed at helping all children learn, everyone in the class benefits. Children learn at their
own pace and style within a nurturing learning environment. Full inclusion puts students
with special needs in standard classroom environments without testing or demonstration
of skills. Individuals that support full inclusion believe that all children belong in the
same classroom environment no matter what.
PARENTAL ATTITUDE
Attitude is one of the significant factors in effective implementation of Inclusive Education. It

may be considered that positive attitude towards differences of children, resultant in equalization
of educational opportunities. Parents play a significant role in the upbringing, protection and
development of children. Parenting involves providing moral support, companionship, and
ensures good habits and supporting basic needs including education. Hence the attitude of
parents can effectively change the perspective of inclusive education. There is an intimate
relationship between parent and children. Schooling is first applied at home in their daily life
setting. Parent and family members can be important resources if informed, stimulated, entrusted
and prepared in effective ways. The success of an ideal inclusion programme depends on a
strong parent-teacher association group insisting on the importance of parental involvement. It
creates a positive attitude among parents as well as the individuals. Parents play a significant role
in IEP as they have first-hand knowledge of their child’ s strengths and needs.
For a successful implementation of inclusion, positive attitudes seem to be a key-issue (e.g.,

Florian and Spratt 2013). According to Allport (1935) attitudes can be understood as ‘a mental
and neural state of readiness, organized through experience, exerting a directive or dynamic
influence upon the individual’s response to all objects and situations with which it is related’. In
23
the implementation process, various groups of players are involved: students, professionals (class
teachers, special needs teachers, psychologists), school-management, external support groups
(like social and youth welfare, leisure facilities) and of course parents who have – in many
countries – the right to choose a school for their child. However, there are differences between
these groups concerning the concrete implementation and the current situation. Whereas the
amount of research on (student) teachers’ and students’ attitudes has become quite large within
the last years, parents remained a neglected group. Raising children is a ‘natural right of parents.
So, the parents’ attitudes towards a school’s programme, including the implementation of an
inclusive education, are important to promote inclusion. Additionally, for a comprehensive
assessment, the parents’ perspective seems necessary to gain an external view of the practices in
inclusive education.
Therefore, the attitudes and perceptions of parents are set out in the middle of this paper.
Outlining research about the attitudes of parents, the main results are: Parents in general have a
positive or at least a neutral attitude towards inclusive education. Nevertheless, parents agree that
there are benefits for all children by inclusive education. The differences between parents in
general concern three dimensions: Parents’ attitudes are more positive if they are educated to a
higher level and if they have already experienced inclusive education (de Boer, Pijl, and
Minnaert 2010). Parents’ attitudes differ dependent on the type of disability: whereas an
inclusion of children with physical and sensory disabilities is highly supported, the inclusion of
children with behavioral problems and severe cognitive disabilities is considered more skeptical
(Avramidis and Norwich 2002; de Boer, Pijl, and Minnaert 2010; Paseka 2017; Schwab 2018).
Next to attitudes, teaching practices, as well as the available resources, can be listed as crucial
key factors of successful inclusion.
PART- II
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
24
General objectives:
To study the feedback of attitudes of parents from Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary
School regarding Inclusive Education of students with disabilities in the areas of academics,
behavior, and social relationships.
Specific objectives:
The main objectives of the present study are as follows:
1. To study the attitude of parents towards Inclusive Education.

2. To examine the attitude of parents regarding infrastructural facilities provided in schools.
3. To study the attitude of parents towards curricular aspects.
4. To study the attitude of parents towards social aspects.
Research Design:
Descriptive research is a type of research that describes a population, situation, or phenomenon

that is being studied. It focuses on answering the how, what, when, and where questions If a
research problem, rather than the why.
The study requires the descriptive design to identify ‘what’ the attitudes of parents of Montfort
Matriculation School is towards Inclusive Education and ‘what’ are the factors of it. This study
will be specified in detail about the influence of the factors on the attitude of teachers of
Montfort Matric. School towards Inclusive Education.
As the aim of this study was to explore parents' feedback towards Inclusive Education, a
qualitative research design approach appeared to be the appropriate strategy to use. The aim of a
qualitative research design is to understand experiences as they are “lived” or “felt” according to
each individual (Sherman & Webb, 1988). The research was a non-experimental, descriptive
study that used a survey approach to explore the perceptions of educators towards Inclusive
Education. The non-experimental design described by Terre Blanche & Durrheim (2002) was
used to meet the descriptive nature and aims of the study.
SOURCE OF DATA:
25
Primary Source:
Montfort Matriculation School.
Secondary Source:
Journal and websites containing research articles related to the objective.
SAMPLE FRAME:
UNIVERSE:
All the Parents of 150 children who are undergoing Inclusive Education from Montfort
Matriculation Higher
SAMPLE SIZE:
The sample size of the research is 42 parents from Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary
School in Chennai (St Thomas Mount, Chennai 600 - 016).
SAMPLE TECHNIQUE:
Purposive Sample:
A purposive sample is a non-probability sample that is selected based on characteristics of a

population and the objective of the study. Purposive sampling is different from convenience
sampling and is also known as judgmental, selective, or subjective sampling.
Purposive sampling. Also known as judgmental sampling is based on only 42 parents who
gave consent to fill the questionnaire involved in the study. The parents who were not only
willing to participate, who were good enough to access the internet were chosen under
judgmental criteria.
TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION:
26
Tools of Research: Questionnaire: The questionnaire consists of 24 questions. Questionnaire
is the best-known method for data collection by giving them some set of questions and collecting
their responses and opinions and it is an attempt to provide an overview, a comprehensive and
wide-ranging perspective on some subjects based on information obtained from carefully chosen
samples from Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School. We can collect and provide
information by giving them some set of questions and collecting their responses and opinions.
DEFINITIONS AND TERMS:
CONCEPTUAL DEFINITION:
Behavior: The way in which someone conducts oneself or behaves
Attitude: The manner of acting or way of feeling, thinking towards a person, thing or situation.
Effect: A phenomenon that follows and is caused by some previous phenomenon.
Inclusive school: Is one in which you create a school culture of all students having full access to
everything, and that's not just students with disabilities.
Learning Environment: Refers to the diverse physical locations, contexts, and cultures in which
students learn.
Peers: People who are at the same age.
Barriers: Obstacles for something to happen or be achieved.
Statement of problem: A statement of the problem is used in research work as a claim that
outlines the problem addressed by a study.
Questionnaire: Questionnaire is the best-known method for data collection by giving them some
set of questions and collecting their responses and opinions
Statistics: The science of collecting, analyzing, presenting, and interpreting data.
27
Disability: A physical, mental, cognitive, or developmental condition that impairs, interferes
with, or limits a person’s ability to engage in certain tasks or actions or participate in typical
daily activities and interactions.
Operational Definition:
Inclusion: Involves keeping special education students in general education classrooms for some
or all of their classes and bringing support services, if needed, to the child, rather than bringing
the child to the support services (King, 2003).
Inclusive Education (IE): “…all students within a school regardless of their strengths or
weaknesses, or disabilities in any area become part of the school community” (Hyunjeong et al.,
2014, p. 11)
Student with Disabilities: “Means a student with a disability who is entitled to attend public
schools and who, because of mental, physical or emotional reasons, has been identified as having
a disability and who requires special services and programs approved by the department” (“Sec.
300.8 Child with a Disability.” n.d.).
Student without Disabilities: A student that is able to function normally in the classroom and
does not have a documented cognitive, social, or physical impairment.
Cognitive Disabilities: Students displaying significant delays in intelligence, adaptive

functioning, and academic functioning that adversely affect a student's academic performance
(Turnbull, Turnbull, Shank, & Shank, 2004).
Learning Disabilities: Students with difficulty organizing, remembering, and expressing

information. This may be manifested in reading, writing, memory, interpersonal skills, and
motivation (Turnbull, Turnbull, Shank, & Shank, 2004).
Emotional Behavioral Disorder: Students display age inappropriate social, emotional, or

behavioral functioning that unfavorably affects the student's social relationships, personal
adjustment, classroom progress, or work skills (Turnbull, Turnbull, Shank, & Shank, 2004).
ORGANIZATION OF CHAPTERS:
28
CHAPTER I: This chapter gives the introduction of the study.
CHAPTER II: This chapter brings out the previous studies related to the topic.
CHAPTER III: This chapter gives the analysis and interpretation of the data in the study.
CHAPTER IV: This chapter has the major findings and suggestions of the study.
CHAPTER V: This chapter gives the conclusion for the study.
CHAPTER II
29
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The researchers referred to a large number of articles, websites and journals regarding the past
literature about the different aspects of this study of which, the articles which are the most
relevant to this study have been listed below.
BRENDA LYONS GREENE (2017) states that the study indicated that teachers had positive
attitudes toward inclusion teaching practices; however, the teachers also conveyed negative
attitudes toward the philosophical aspects of inclusionary teaching practices, and these attitudes
differed significantly per level of education and teacher training.
SALEM (2013) stressed that the positive attitude towards inclusion of disabled students is one of
the requirements of the success of IE. Not only is the positive attitude of the teacher important,
30
but the positive trend of the society towards inclusion of disabled people is necessary to achieve
the desired success and the aim of IE. Salem stressed that the teacher is the most influential
person in the process of education. When the attitudes and perceptions of the teacher need
changing, the process needs to begin early in the process at the foundation of skill development.
KARP (2011) stated that the success or failure of inclusion programs depends on teaching
strategies and attitudes. The study cited a school performance study at a Chicago high school
with a large number of special education students in which students identified this school as a
failing school. Karp further noted that study teachers commented that students were not
motivated to learn or that their disability made students incapable of learning. These perceptions
had an influence on the success of the school.
SADIOGLU, BILGIN, BATU, AND OKSAL (2013) suggested that elementary teachers
generally have a negative opinion of inclusive education. Sadioğlu et al. revealed inadequacies in
special education instruction from regular education teachers. Sadioğlu et al. said these teachers
need expert support because pre-service and in-service training was insufficient, and they
experienced problems in their classrooms.
SCRUGGS AND MASTROPIERI (1996) found that, for the most part, teachers are very
supportive, on a personal level, with the concept of inclusion. In addition, they are supportive of
the practice of inclusion in the classroom and they believe it is an effective teaching method for
both general education students and special education students. Teachers who responded to the
study were willing to teach inclusion classrooms.
CASSADY (2011) explained that the student population in the IE classroom reflects the
population in the outside world. As students without disabilities learn alongside students with
disabilities in the IE classroom, these students develop awareness and understanding of this
segment of the population as it exists in the outside world.
HUGHES ET AL. (2002) stated that middle and high school students who were educated
alongside disabled peers held more positive views of inclusion. They also believed that the
31
opportunity to interact with disabled classmates helped them to be more understanding of
differences, the needs of others, their own ability to cope with disabilities in their own personal
lives, and their ability to make friends with people who had some type of disability.
COOK (2011) specifically investigated whether teachers’ attitude towards their included
students with disabilities differed as a function of the disability’s severity. The findings
suggested a level of discomfort with knowing how to address the needs of the students identified
as being severely disabled. This supported the need for teachers of inclusive classrooms to
receive appropriate training so that they feel knowledgeable regarding appropriate instructional
techniques to use with severe and obvious disabilities.
HASTINGS AND OAKFORD (2003) found that general education teacher candidates were
also more favorable toward including students with intellectual disabilities than for children with
emotional or behavioral difficulties.
AVRAMIDIS, BAYLISS, & BURDEN (2000) found that teachers in their study are more
willing to accept having a special education student in the classroom who is mildly disabled than
they are willing to have a severely disabled student in the classroom. When questioned as to why
they were less in favor of including more severely disabled students, teachers responded that
they did not have the time to prepare for such students.
DIEBOLD & VONESCHENBACH (1991) found that student variables also appear to play a
role in teacher perception towards inclusion and also found that teachers are generally more
receptive toward including students with mild or high incidence disabilities (e.g., learning
disabilities) and less receptive toward including children with severe or low-incidence
disabilities (e.g., autism) in their regular education classrooms.
REA, MCLAUGHLIN, & WALTER-THOMAS (2002) AND CAWLEY, HAYDEN, CADE

& BAKER-KROCZYNSKI (2002) found that secondary students with mild disabilities tended
to make better educational gains and transitions, attained higher grades in content area courses,
32
earned higher standardized test scores, and attended school more regularly than their
counterparts who were serviced in pull-out special education.
GLAZZARD (2011) indicated that teachers are hesitant and often have a fear having disruptive
students in their classroom. Behavioral interruptions lead to loss of instructional time for all
students, jeopardizing the safety in the classroom that may affect state testing results. In this
article, Glazzard provided an example of a teacher's perceptions towards special education
students with behavior problems and how this negative effect teaching practices.
HWANG AND EVANS (2011) found that younger and less experienced teachers had a more
positive attitude toward IE than older and more experienced teachers. Hwang and Evans revealed
a negative correlation between teacher attitude and their respective years of teaching experience,
such that more experienced gained more negative attitudes.
WOODCOCK (2013) concluded that teacher attitudes often do not change over the teacher’s
career; therefore, preparing teachers for IE is imperative. Woodcock also compared the attitudes
of trainee teachers and experienced teachers towards students with learning disabilities.
Woodcock concluded, “There were no differences in attitudes according to experience with
students with specific learning disabilities.”
ECATERINA MARIA’S (2012) study was designed to identify the major obstacles in
implementing inclusive principles in regular schools and to analyze different aspects of the
teachers’ attitude towards Inclusive Education. A total of 112 teachers completed a questionnaire
which contained 8 categories of items regarding knowledge of specific terminology, practice of
Inclusive Education and prejudices towards children with special needs. The study revealed
significant differences between teachers of different ages regarding the knowledge of main
concepts of inclusion. There are also major confusions regarding the difference between
Inclusive Education and integrated education.
FORLIN AND CHAMBERS (2011) found that when teachers participated in training designed
to improve their confidence with regard to IE, their attitudes also improved significantly.
33
Successful IE requires teachers with positive attitudes, and training is a critical component of
forming these attitudes.
GÖKDERE (2012) explored the differences in perceptions to inclusion for in-service teachers
and teachers who are in a teacher preparation program. Even with the training, pre-service
teachers had low levels of confidence and knowledge, much like the in-service teachers without
training. The only difference proved to be that preservice teachers realized that their attitude and
perceptions toward inclusion would affect their instruction of special education students and
knowing that their attitude was important; pre-service teachers also indicated that they were
more anxious around special education students. The in-service teachers indicated that they had
low knowledge and confidence in teaching special education students.
GAVISH AND SHIMONI (2011)

found that elementary school teachers in Israel believed that the system in place for educating
special needs students in the classroom was disorganized and chaotic. Teachers indicated that
they were not prepared and there was a lack of training to prepare them for inclusion.
EMAN GAAD & LAVINA KHAN (2007) found that primary mainstream teachers in Dubai in
the private sector favor traditional special education service delivery models over full inclusive
practices. These teachers felt students with special educational needs lack skills needed to master
the mainstream regular classroom course content. The teachers also expressed that the heavy
teaching load in the mainstream classroom makes it hard to meet the needs of students with
special educational needs in the private sector.
BARGERHUFF & WHEATLEY (2005) found that a minority of teachers believed that their
coursework had included instruction on categories of disabilities, or on teaching students with
disabilities. However, the majority of university educators surveyed indicated that they believed
this information had been covered in their coursework.
HORNE AND TIMMONS (2011) posited that the support of administration and district
administration must be present. Inclusion must be a part of the schools’ norm and culture.
34
HEYNE, WILKINS, & ANDERSON (2012) stated that the IE classroom allows nondisabled
students to develop the social skills and dispositions needed to interact with this segment of the
population as a responsible and productive member of society.
MCMASTER (2013) explained that successful inclusion is a culmination of the entire school
embracing the inclusion model. Also crucial is a culture of the school that expresses
compassionate and understanding in which differences in students are perceived as a resource.
The staff should be committed to making sure that student needs are identified and intervention
and support services target student needs.
COOK (2011) found that often at times, teachers take their cues and attitudes from the principal
and the other administrators at the school. In a recent study, it was discovered that principals
were often more supportive of inclusion programs than the general education teachers who they
supervised. The less than optimistic attitudes among general education teachers appear to
portend difficulty in introducing and successfully implementing inclusive reforms. However,
these attitudes, as well as their effects on included students, may be mitigated by positive
attitudes of other influential school personnel.
COOK, SEMMEL & GERBER (1998) suggested that the attitudes of administrators are less
frequently measured than the well-documented attitudes of general education teachers. Second,
despite the relative scarcity of research on these educators, their attitudes appear to be critical
determinants of the success of inclusion reforms. The third outcome from the study indicated that
people need to feel respected and have their work valued. In the inclusion process, administrators
need to create a collaborative culture in the school and assist teachers to develop skills required
for collaborative service delivery.
COOK, SEMMEL, AND GERBER (1999) concluded that administrator support is necessary
in the development of inclusion programs. Their study found that often, teachers are resistant to
novel approaches to programs, such as inclusion types of classrooms. In order for change to
35
occur, administrators must first provide support and technical assistance. Second, administrators
need to help teachers gain a better understanding of the purpose of inclusion.
PACE'S (2003) study recommended that principals and other administrators contemplating
Inclusive Education programs need to consider teacher attitudes about inclusion prior to its
implementation. The researchers determined that one-day workshops or one time orientation
meetings were not effective.
SCRUGGS AND MASTROPIERI (1996) reported that positive attitudes of key personnel
were seen as critical prerequisites for successful inclusion. In a review of four decades of
attitudinal research, the study found that 65% of general education teachers indicated support for
the nebulous concept of inclusion.
OBIAKOR ET AL., (2012) states that inclusion can be in the form of one-teach one-assist,
station teaching, and team teachings are examples of teaching in an inclusive classroom. There
are variations to teaching in an inclusive classroom, which must embrace inclusion by
administrators as well as teachers.
BEACHAM AND ROUSE highlighted the role of teacher assistants as the primary resource
used to assist special needs students in the classroom. These findings further supported
recommendations for additional adults to assist with meeting the needs of these students in the
inclusive classroom.
GRAZIANO & NAVARRE (2012) found that to increase the effectiveness of inclusion,
instructors may use the co-teaching model to meet the needs of all students and to provide sport
and collaborative opportunities for regular education teachers. With co-teachers in the classroom,
the classroom teacher and special education teacher share the teaching responsibility in the
classroom. This model provides an opportunity for the special education teacher to collaborate
with the classroom teacher about student learning.
36
COOK (2011) found that it is not only the general education teachers who need to have positive
attitudes for the success of inclusion programs. The results also indicated that successful
inclusion is dependent upon the positive attitude of special education teachers as well.
LOREMAN ET AL, (2005) Teachers are very important for positive implementation of
Inclusive Education as compared to children. Teacher’s cooperation, support and willingness
play a vital role in successful implementation of Inclusive Education programs. We should focus
on teachers and train them how to handle special needs children in Inclusive Education.
GOOD & BROPHY, (2007) concluded that teachers are the key agent in implementation of
Inclusive Education and who showed a positive attitude towards having a positive effect in
implementation of Inclusive Education programs.
The participation of special needs children within an inclusive setting has been increased 60%
during 1988 to 1995 (COOK ET AL, 2000). It is necessary teachers should be best equipped to
handle these students.
ALI AT AL, (2006) with primary and secondary school teachers with the purpose to evaluate
the feelings and perceived knowledge of mainstream and special needs teachers towards
Inclusive Education. The major outcome of this study is that the majority of teachers are willing
to be the positive members in implementation of Inclusive Education.
NAYAK (2008) identified the feelings of parents and teachers towards Inclusive Education. The
findings of this research indicate that teachers are ready to teach the students with disability in an
inclusive environment and same time they are willing to face the challenges during their learning
BATOOL AND MEHMOOD (2000) found that children with visual disability expressed
similar views. In a study on problems faced by children with physical disabilities in ordinary
educational institutions.
37
NOOR AND KHOKHAR (2002) concluded that these children were satisfied with the positive
attitude of administrators, the efforts of their teachers to solve their problems, and their level of
participation in classroom discussion. However, they faced difficulties in commuting to school,
and moving with ease in school buildings.
ALI AT AL (2006) Inclusive Education settings provide a chance of interaction with normal
children and at the same time normal children communicate with special needs, this situation
helps in social development of special need children and at same time interaction helps to
understand each other and decrease unconstructive stereotypes on special needs students.
WAHID & ISHFAQ, (2000), a study was conducted with the purpose to know the perceptions
of university teachers regarding academic capacities of children facing hearing difficulties. The
study concludes that children hearing difficulties can improve their academic skills with help of
training.
DEPPELER & HARVEY (2004) Inclusion is a right, not a special privilege for a select few.
However, inclusion was not an educational practice that could easily, and always successfully
work.
38
CHAPTER III
ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA:
CHILD’S COMMUNICATION:
This table was studied to find out the parent's opinion on delay in their child’s communication
TABLE 1
Response Frequency Percentage %
Normal Delay 7 17%
Mild delay 12 29%
Moderate 14 33%
Has not spoken till now 9 21%
39
Total 42 100%
Table 1 shows that among 42 respondents, it was found that 17% of parents reported that their
children were normal (no delay), 29% of children had mild delay,33% of children had moderate
delay, 21% of children had not spoken till now.
From the above data it can be inferred that there were almost equal numbers of moderate delay
and mild delay in child’s communication. It is to be noted that even children who had not spoken
till then were given admission in Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School which shows
that the school was flexible to admit children with any type of disability.
SCHOOL INFRASTRUCTURE:
School Placement:
FIGURE 1
40
Figure 1 clearly shows that almost 80 % of parents were satisfied with their children getting
placed in the right school. It is obvious that parents' choice of school was right and parents
always wanted their children to be placed in the best school.
Physical Access:
This table was studied to find out the opinion on the physical access to your child’s school e.g.,
ramps, lifts
TABLE 2
Good 33 79%
Neither Good nor Bad 9 21%
Bad 0 0
Total 42 100%
Table 3 shows that among 42 respondents,79% of the parents had good feedback on the physical
access like ramp, lift etc. From the above data it is inferred that almost the majority of parents
were satisfied with the facilities provided in school, but still 21 % of parents were not satisfied
with the physical access.
Suitability of Transport:
This table was studied to find out the parent’s satisfaction with the suitability of the transport
provided for their child
TABLE 3
Satisfied 19 45%
Neither satisfied nor 23 55%

dissatisfied
Dissatisfied 0 0
41
Total 42 100%
Table 4 shows that 45% of parents were satisfied with the suitability of transport provided for
their child. From the above data inferred, it is very clear that parents wanted to make sure that
their children get suitable transport being its own vehicle or school transport. It was found that
55 % were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied which clearly states that these parents wanted the
transport facility could still be improved.
ASSESSMENT OF THEIR CHILD’S NEEDS:
Figure 2 shows that around 62% of parents were satisfied with the assessment of child needs in
Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School. It was surprised to see 32% of the parents felt
dissatisfied with the assessment whereas 6 % remained neutral. The parents’ may be dissatisfied
because the assessment may not have been included in the assessment process.
FIGURE 2
SCHOOL RESOURCES:
Type of support:
42
FIGURE 3
Figure 3 shows that around 40 % of children needed special teaching, one to one teaching for
better understanding of subjects. Around 20% of children needed speech therapy where they had
been delayed in their speech. Most importantly around 25% of children needed a psychologist
for better assessment of their children and they could help their parents to know about their
child’s development and the parents can help their children accordingly.
Curriculum Aspect:
This table was studied to find out the level about the knowledge of special educational needs
teachers is high
TABLE 4
Agree 30 71%
Neutral 11 26%
43
Disagree 1 3%
Total 42 100%
In an inclusive school, the level of teacher’s knowledge on special education is utmost important
to handle a special child. The teachers could also be trained accordingly to the child's needs. It
was found that 71% of parents agreed to the fact that teachers in Montfort matriculation higher
secondary school have knowledge on special education, the reason for 26 % of parents remained
neutral could be taken as the teachers should be still trained in this field to handle the children.
Sufficient teachers should be trained to be placed in special schools.
TABLE 5
This table was studied to find out if the school’s admission policy was favorable for
Agree 32 77%
Neutral 8 20%
Disagree 2 3%
Total 42 100%
It was found that 77 % of parents felt that the school’s admission policy was favorable which
clearly states that the school doesn't make the parents feel pressure in admitting their children.
Parents around 20 % felt neutral, which should be taken noted by the school because these
parents felt some kind of barriers while admitting in school. The parents may not be confident of
their choice of their children getting placed in special school or it could be the reason for initial
assessment done by the school. The parents could have feared their children could get rejected
during admission.
TABLE 6
This table was studied to find out if the curriculum offered by the school was good or not.
44
Agree 32 76%
Neutral 4 10%
Disagree 6 14%
Total 42 100%
Table 6 shows that 76% of parents agreed to the fact that the school's curriculum was good. So
majority of the parents accept this fact. Unfortunately, 14 % of parents disagree to the fact could
be due to unavailability of subjects or teachers.
School Fees:
FIGURE 4
45
Figure 4 clearly shows that the school fees were expensive. This was the main reason why some
parents do not opt special schools for their children. We could not either blame the school
because the school had to pay more for teachers and for infrastructure facilities. In rural areas,
children with disabilities who could not offer to study remain illiterate. The schools must
regulate the fees so that parents shouldn't feel the financial burden. Here in this study, around
65% parents reported that fees were expensive. The 19 % of parents who were financially stable
disagree to the fact. Schools must revise the fees structure so that it justifies with the name
inclusive.
TABLE 7
This table was studied to find out if the parents were satisfied with the range of subjects,
courses and qualifications available to their child at the school.
Agree 27 64%
Neutral 10 24%
Disagree 5 12%
Total 42 100%
46
Table 7 was the most important study because the parents and children have the freedom of
choosing their subjects accordingly. In regular schools, children have to study the prescribed
subjects, but in special schools, the scenario might be different. Another obstacle here was, the
teachers should be available for the subjects chosen by children or else the children had to
choose the subjects with respect to availability of teachers.
From the above data inferred, 64 % of parents agreed to the fact that the school had a range of
subjects. The parents remained neutral because they had no prior knowledge about the subjects
to be chosen, the subjects were chosen purely based on their child’s capability which the school
assessed initially. The reason for 12 % of disagreeing from parents could be due to the
unavailability of subjects the parents had already decided to choose but ended up in
disappointment or unavailability of particular subject teachers.
TABLE 8
This table was studied to find out the extent of satisfaction on the level of contact parents
had with their child’s teacher
Agree 39 93%
Neutral 2 5%
Disagree 1 2%
Total 42 100%
Table 8 shows that 93 % of parents were satisfied with the contact they had with their child’s
teacher which is the utmost important in special education. The teachers must inform the parents
how their children progress under their guidance. Here 7% of parents neither agree nor disagree
to this because the parents might not have got proper updates from their teachers.
FIGURE 5
47
From the above figure, it's inferred that around 90% of parents feel that teachers are creating
successful inclusive classrooms. It is very clear that parents have a positive attitude towards
Montfort school Teachers and the way they handle classrooms. Parents disagree with this fact
around 6% because they might feel teachers have to improve to make classrooms inclusive.
TABLE 9
This table was studied to find out if the parents were informed about their child’s progress
by the school.
Agree 25 60 %
Neutral 6 14%
Disagree 11 26%
Total 42 100%
Table 9 shows that around 60% of the parents believe that they were informed about the progress
of their children by the school. It is clear that the school is accountable to the parents based on
48
children’s progress. Around 14% of the parents preferred to stay neutral and finally, 26% of
parents feel that the school was not interacting with them about their children’s progress.
SOCIAL ASPECT:
Culture of the School
This table was studied to find out a parent's opinion if the culture of the school was favorable for
their children.
TABLE 10
Agree 31 76%
Neutral 6 12%
Disagree 6 12%
Total 42 100%
In this table, 76% of the parents feel that the culture of the school was favorable for their
children and this clearly shows children are comfortable with the environment of the school.
Around 12% of the parents neither agree nor disagree to this, whereas 12% of the parents felt
that the culture of the school was not favorable for their children.
Children Socializing:
FIGURE 6
49
From the above figure, it’s shown that around 80% of the parents feel that their child is
socializing in the school and they do agree. It is very clear that parents in Montfort Matriculation
Higher Secondary School have a positive attitude/approach toward inclusive education and their
child socializing in the school. Around 20% of the respondents are neutral when it comes to
children socializing in the school. We found that there were no respondents who disagreed with
the statement.
Positive attitudes of the teachers
This table was studied to find out whether the teachers had positive behavior towards the
children.
TABLE 11
Satisfaction 27 64%
Neither/Nor 10 30%
50
Dissatisfaction 3 6%
Total 42 100%
In this table, around 64% of the parents are satisfied with the positive behavior of the teachers
towards the children. Around 30% of the parents either or neither got satisfied whereas 3% of the
parents are not satisfied with the positive behavior of the parents towards the children.
TABLE 12
This table was studied to find out how good the teachers dealt with the behavioral
problems of the children.
Agree 35 83%
Neutral 5 12%
Disagree 2 5%
Total 42 100%
In this table, majority of the parents (around 83% of the parents) felt that the teachers were good
enough to deal with the behavioral problems of the children, 12% of the parents neither agree nor
disagree and only 5% of the parents disagree the fact that the teachers still had to be good enough
to deal with the behavioral problems of the children.
PERCEPTION OF PARENTS ON INCLUSION
51
TABLE 13: This table was studied to find out the parents’ response on children who require
specialized academic support were less capable intellectually than the normal children.
Agree 36 86%
Neutral 6 14%
Disagree 0 0%
Total 42 100%
In this table, the majority of the parents (around 86% of the parents) agreed with the fact that the
specialized academic support was less capable intellectually than the normal children, 14% of the
parents stayed neutral with their opinion and no parents disagreed with this fact which clearly
shows that the parents wanted to treat their children equally to normal children.
TABLE 14
This table was studied to find out the parents’ opinion that if they would change their
children to another school, they would look for a school not practicing inclusion.
Agree 8 19%
Neutral 8 19%
Disagree 26 62%
Total 42 100%
In this table, the majority of the parents (around 62% of the parents) disagreed the fact as the
parents don’t want change their children to another school where they don’t practice inclusion
and from this, we can understand that the parents are satisfied with the culture and environment
of the school and it is favorable for their children and decide to continue in this school. Around
19% of the parents neither agree nor disagree with the fact and finally 19% of the parents didn’t
52
want their children to continue in this school to make their children join in another school where
there is no inclusive education which may be also due to expensive fees and may be their
children never showed any progress in academics.
TABLE 15
This table was studied to find out the parents’ feeling that the Children who require
specialized academic support were more difficult to discipline.
Agree 22 52%
Neutral 6 15%
Disagree 14 33%
Total 42 100%
Table 15 shows that 52% of the parents agreed that the Children who require specialized
academic support were more difficult to discipline. It is clear that parents require specialized
academic support from the school when it is more difficult to discipline for the special children.
Around 15% of the parents were neutral when it came to the Children who require specialized
academic support were more difficult to discipline. We found that 33% of the parents disagreed
with the statement that the Children who require specialized academic support were more
difficult to discipline.
53
FIGURE 7
Figure 7 was studied to find out if it was difficult for the parents to help their children in
academics and if they needed extra academic support like special tuition.
From the above figure, it’s shown that around 49% of the parents feel that they face difficulties
while teaching their child. It is clear that most of the parents feel that they have difficulties while
teaching their child. We also found that 32% of the parents were neutral about it and 19% of the
parents disagreed about the fact that they don't face any difficulties while teaching their child.
TABLE 16
This table was studied to find if the parents fully encouraged their children in other extra-
curricular activities
Agree 33 79%
Neutral 7 16%
54
Disagree 2 5%
Total 42 100%
In this table, the majority of the parents that are around 79% of the parents encourage their
children in participating in other extra-curricular activities in the school and this shows that the
parents and their children are very much interested with the extra-curricular activities in the
school. Around 16% of the parents either or neither encourage their children to participate in
extracurricular activities. Only 5% of the parents disagree with the fact and they don’t encourage
their children to participate in extracurricular activities.
TABLE 17
This table was studied to find out the parents’ response on whether there should be a
greater number of inclusive schools and the feeling that learners who require specialized
academic support should remain in specialized or remedial schooling rather than inclusive
schools
Agree 40 96%
Neither Agree nor Disagree 1 2%
Disagree 1 2%
Total 42 100%
In this table, majority of the parents that are around 96% feel that there should be a greater
number of inclusive schools and the feeling that learners who require specialized academic
support should remain in specialized or remedial schooling rather than inclusive schools, 2% of
the parents neither agree or disagree the fact, whereas 2% of the parents completely disagreed the
fact.
55
TABLE 18
This table was studied to find out the parent’s opinion on their child’s overall education in
Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School
Agree 37 88%
Neutral 4 10%
Disagree 1 2%
Total 42 100%
In this table, majority of the parents that are around 88% of the parents felt satisfied on their
child’s overall education in Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary school, 10% of the parents
either or neither felt satisfied whereas, only 2% of the parents completely disagree with the fact
and they are not satisfied with the child’s overall education in this school.
56
CHAPTER IV
MAIN FINDINGS AND

SUGGESTIONS
57
MAIN FINDINGS:
● Thus, the researchers conducted a study with 42 parents and we were able to find out that
parents hold positive attitudes towards the inclusion of children with disabilities in
● Evidence shows that the majority of parents indicated that inclusion was a good option
for their child.
● The findings of this study reveal that the parents of this study do not express a major
concern about whether inclusion would hurt their child emotionally. However, they are
concerned whether their children would be socially accepted by other peers without
disabilities.
● Quality of instruction and availability of support services create a feeling of uncertainty
to parents of children with disabilities about the positive or negative outcomes of
inclusion practices. Nevertheless, parents strongly support their children’s chance to
participate in typical classes, an attitude that to some degree is attributed to their
frustration regarding the provision of special policies.
● Parents appear more confident as regards to best treatment of their children by teachers in
special classes.
● Students’ age emerged as the principal factor that influenced parents’ perceptions about
inclusion, with parents of students aged below 18 years appearing more emotionally
involved and concerned about the future of their children through inclusion practices.
● Parents’ education level and children’s type of disability did not emerge as factors that
influenced parental views about inclusion. Furthermore, 30% of this group indicated to
have concerns about their child’s emotional development, individual instruction and
available services in Montfort schools.
● Only a very small minority of parents accept the inclusion of all children, making no
differences between types of disabilities. Furthermore, descriptive results also made
evident that the experience with inclusive education correlates with more acceptance of
inclusion. Independent of the type of disability, parents with children attending inclusive
58
classes more often accept inclusive education for children with SEN. However, we do not
know whether such positive attitudes derive by having one’s own child in an inclusive
class or whether such an attitude already existed earlier and therefore one’s own child
was consciously sent into an inclusive class.
● The important research question concerns teaching practices in inclusive classes from the
parents’ perspectives. Generally, parents with children who attend inclusive classes
experience a high level of inclusive teaching practices. However, for some details we
have to take a closer look. Looking at the items of personalization, parents assume
teachers in inclusive classes to be more qualified in recognizing strengths and weaknesses
of their students and are therefore more able to support the needs of individual students.
Parents perceive teachers as able to pick up content related to their students’ lives and
personalize their teaching according to the individual students’ needs. According to the
parents’ views, teachers, especially those from inclusive classes, are very engaged as they
try to ensure that all students, especially the ‘weaker ones’, have success and learn a lot
(Florian and Spratt 2013; Tjernberg and Mattson 2014).
● Inclusive education often refers to the needs of students with SEN and not to the needs of
all learners. Likewise, the present study also uses a narrow understanding of inclusion as
a basis for examining the attitudes of parents. Looking closer at items focusing on
differentiation, teachers in inclusive classes seem to have more skills to grasp the
interests of their students: by having a good knowledge-based didactic concept and/or by
using various methods to motivate them in different ways (Florian and Spratt 2013;
Tjernberg and Mattson 2014). This result goes in line with that fact that parents perceive
newer teaching methods that they perhaps do not know from their own educational
biography in school. However, coping with multi-linguistic challenges in class is
independent of whether it is a regular or an inclusive class.
● Another research question focused on the resources parents perceive. The result is quite
astonishing as no significant differences can be found in the parents’ perceptions with
children in inclusive classes. Nevertheless, inclusive classes receive more resources.
Another explanation might be that parents are not aware of such resources and that is the
reason for not assessing them more positively. There are also findings that parents trust
teachers quite well, although the answers of parents with handicapped children show that
59
they have less confidence concerning some aspects and that they feel much more often
exhausted (Paseka 2017). However, perhaps the work of teachers is seen as much more
important than resources. As no objective questions were asked about resources, it might
also be an explanation that the specific assessment method (assessing resources in a
subjective way) led to this outcome. Perhaps parents from inclusive classes perceive
more resources but are also aware of the fact that inclusive schooling requires these
resources. Therefore, they assume a higher need for resources and for this reason parents
from inclusive classes did not rate the subjective resources.
● The last research question focused on the predictors of parents’ attitudes towards
inclusive schooling. Generally, the predictors varied by using attitudes towards different
kinds of SEN as variable outcomes and the effect sizes for all analysis showed only weak
variance elucidation (see Cohen 1988). This indicates that predictors cannot be
interpreted as general, and the overall predictors of parents’ attitudes, and that identifying
predictors of attitudes is a complex task. For instance, a positive effect of the school
setting was found for parents’ attitudes towards the inclusion of students with learning
disabilities, behavioral disorders and mental disabilities. Parents whose children attend
inclusive classes tend to hold a more positive attitude compared to parents whose
children attend regular classes. A reason that this outcome could not be found for
students with physical disabilities might be explained by the fact that parents’ attitudes
towards the inclusion of students with physical disabilities were relatively positive
anyway. Only less than 10 percent of the sample holds a negative attitude towards the
inclusion of students with physical disabilities. Moreover, mothers in comparison to
fathers had a more positive attitude towards the inclusion of students with learning
disabilities and mental disabilities.
● However, for the inclusion of students with physical disabilities and behavioral disorders
no such gender effect occurred. Parents’ educational and (socio) economic background
affect their attitudes towards the inclusion of students with physical and learning
disabilities. The higher the educational level and income the more positive were parents’
attitudes towards the inclusion of students with physical disabilities. For attitudes towards
students with learning disabilities, a paradox effect was found. Parents from lower
educational levels seem to have a more positive attitude towards the inclusion of students
60
with learning disabilities compared to parents with higher educational levels. Also, worth
mentioning, inclusive teaching practices predict parents’ attitudes towards the inclusion
of students with learning disabilities. In this context, a limitation of this study needs to be
addressed: Further, perceived resources (class cancellation) influence parents’ attitudes
towards the inclusion of students with behavioral problems. This indicates that parents
argue that the inclusion of students with behavioral problems seems to be difficult if there
are not enough staff members to minimize the dropping of lessons and instruction time.
SUGGESTIONS:
India is still struggling with the term ― Handicap or Disabilities. The disability is too far from
the reality. Handicap is more understood in a spastic concept and well-integrated in the culture a
common people more relate the term with physical and mentally challenged individual. The
concept of emotional behavior disability (EBD) is not there but juvenile delinquent is understood
and the term learning disability is far from understanding either (Chakraborty-Ghosh, 2008). A
recent interview with a school head mistress (who was trained to be a special educator) from one
of the top metropolitan schools in India, informed the researchers that there were several
obstacles that special education certified teachers face in the employment market. They are: A
teacher with special education certification will not be hired in regular school, rather they will
only be hired in special schools; Very few universities provide special education certification
program and that limits the job opportunities; Majority of parents still don‘t want their non-
disabled child to be educated with disabled child therefore teachers have no role to be part of the
inclusion program. The principal mandates some professional training for her staff to have some
professional development in special education (interview conducted in June 2009). According to
a blog posted by Anusha Balasubramanian, inclusive education in India strives to address the
learning needs of children with special needs, with a particular focus on those who are subject to
being isolated and excluded. And in circumstances, where a former excluded child is given
admission into a mainstream classroom, the outcome of the action is questionable
(Balasubramanian, 2012).
The key barriers of providing inclusive education are
 Inappropriate/inadequate curriculum
 Lack of awareness and affordability among parents and the community,
61
 Lack of resources,
 Lack of trained teachers to provide inclusive education and many more social, political,
and economical barriers.
There are some private schools in the city such as Vatsalya Learning center, CP Ramasamy
foundation trust, National Institute of open schoolings, Sri Sankara Vidyalaya Matriculation
school with NIOS board that has started recently that offer individualized learning programs for
children with special needs. However, no public/government schools are available to support
these initiatives Therefore, it will be intriguing to experience the effective inclusive education
services for children with disabilities and exceptionalities to be educated with their non-disabled
peers. Free and appropriate education is a right, not a privilege. Freedom is earned only when the
opportunities are utilized in productive manner; credibility can be developed with a proactive
approach regardless the presence of disabilities.
The term “Inclusion Education” captures, in one word, an all-embracing societal ideology.
Regarding individuals with disabilities and special education, inclusion secures opportunities for
students with disabilities to learn alongside their non-disabled peers in general education
classrooms. Honestly establishing a successful inclusive classroom varies in complexity, based
upon the challenges created by the disability at hand. However, a knowledgeable approach and
positive attitudes on the parts of parents and teachers proves vital to triumphing over any
obstacles which may emerge.
● Parents have to be more forthcoming and open-minded and trust the teachers when it
comes to Inclusive Education as special schools will only make their children more
different from regular students killing any chance of them trying to lead a regular life.
● Teachers should try to be more aware and gain knowledge about disability and try to be
more ready to handle children with disabilities when the time of inclusion comes.
Experiential learning should be a must for all newly appointed teachers who need to be
appointed based on their expertise in dealing with all types of children. Inclusion is
natural; teachers need to embrace it as their own.
● Management and administrators should make Inclusive Education compulsory in all
classes in all schools so that inclusion is not a choice but a way of life.
62
● Researchers need to be more probing to get correct responses from the respondents and
hence a combination of written scale as well as a questionnaire can be used to get more
effective results.
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND
CONCLUSION
63
SUMMARY:
Although the Government of India has attempted to create policies that are inclusive for people
with disabilities, their implementation efforts have not resulted in an inclusive system of
education. Moreover, the number of students dropping out of school is getting higher, especially
in poverty-stricken areas (Sing, 2016). Das, Kuyini and Desai (2013) examined the current skill
levels of regular primary and secondary school teachers in Delhi, India in order to teach students
with disabilities in inclusive education settings. They reported that nearly 70% of the regular
school teachers had neither received training in special education nor had any experience
teaching students with disabilities. Further, 87% of the teachers did not have access to support
services in their classrooms (Cited in Sing, 2016). Educating children with disabilities alongside
their non-disabled peers is considered one of the better ways to provide education to the
population in India (Shah, 2005, Shah et al., 2014). Sing (2016) suggested following measures
for better implementation of Inclusive Education in India. The Right to Education (RTE) must
apply to all citizens of India. State and central Governments as well as all the other social actors
should recognize the importance of a broadened concept of inclusive education that addresses the
diverse needs of all learners. A policy of inclusion needs to be implemented in all schools and
throughout Indian education system (NCF, 2005). Schools need to become centers that prepare
children for life and ensure that all children, especially the differently abled children from
marginalized sections, and children in difficult circumstances get the maximum benefit of this
critical area of education. The preparation of teachers for rural special education programs
should be planned differently, as the aim of these programs would be to integrate disabled
persons in their own environment and community. As a system, inclusive education should be
flexible. Its flexibility must be reflected in the methods and materials used to give these children
the widest possible access to the regular curriculum. A school-based support team should
develop strategies for the whole school to meet the needs of learners with special educational
64
needs. This team should also be a resource for teachers experiencing problems in their
classrooms. The school has the primary responsibility for helping children learn alongside their
typically developing peers. An inclusive school must enable education structures, systems and
methodologies to meet the needs of all children, particularly those who face the greatest barriers
to achieving their right to education. Parents have a right to be involved in all decision-making
concerning their child. They should be seen as partners in the education process. Where there is
such cooperation, parents have been found to be very important resources for the teachers and
the schools. Bringing special children into the mainstream requires adjustments that schools
need to make in advance. Transport facilities should be altered, so that these children can move
around with relative ease. Architecturally, there should be ramps and wheelchair access
constructed in service areas such as toilets. Student-oriented components, such as medical and
educational assessment, books and stationery, uniforms, transport allowance, reader allowance
and stipend for girls, support services, assistive devices, boarding the lodging facility, therapeutic
services, teaching learning materials, etc should provide according to need of the students.
Differently abled children should be treated equally as the normal children and instead of looking
at them in sympathy their talents and abilities should be recognized for their self-respect and
welfare of the society. Necessary school supplies such as audio learning or textbooks in Braille
should be made available. Suitable modification to the examination system may be required, so
as to eliminate pure mathematical and logical assessments. Teachers' attitudes towards inclusive
education could be formed and developed in the context of an educational system which can
provide some specific conditions in order to have a good practice in this field. Families with
children without disabilities should develop relationships with families with children with
disabilities and be able to make a contribution. In-service training programs of two to three
weeks' duration for general educators and special educators in all the disabilities and in specific
areas of disability should arrange to effectively teach children with disabilities. Those schools
that are committed to taking in children with special needs, then teachers must attend workshops
in order to be adjusted to the child's needs. Periodic evaluation of the training programs and
constant updating to meet the challenges of changing trends in special education should be part
of the planning of teacher preparation. Inclusion should not be the sole responsibility of the
specific class teacher. Everybody should be involved and take responsibility. Training for
teachers should be sustained and ongoing. It should most importantly focus on attitudinal
65
change. The reform of the curriculum should be made in parallel with a proper training for
teachers regarding their knowledge of inclusion and its principles. The curriculum for each of the
above programs should be carefully developed by an expert group which include practicing
special teachers. (Sing, 2016)
CONCLUSION:
In India inclusive education is still developing and there is a need to develop a long-term strategy
in which every step taken ads to the sound base for inclusive education. There is a need to
overcome a major legislative hurdle to make inclusive education more successful. An attitudinal
barrier is another obstacle to reach the goal. Proper provision should be made to change the
attitude of parents as well as the society through education and awareness programmes. Of late
parents are developing a more positive attitude and consciousness regarding the education of
children in Montfort matriculation higher secondary school. More effort is necessary from both
the part of the government as well as the school authority to ensure quality education and
necessary infra-structural facilities should be developed to imbibe a positive attitude among
parents. Training of teachers is another necessity. More emphasis should be provided on
infrastructural development, human resource and manpower development, strengthening material
support to Montfort matriculation higher secondary school to promote effective inclusion in
schools and classrooms.
For implementing inclusion in schools’ various players are involved: teachers, students, parents
and external groups, such as psychologists or leisure trainers. All of them have been considered
as important and influencing variables for successful inclusion over the years. This paper focused
on parents and examined their attitudes towards inclusive education and perceptions about
essential key issues for implementing inclusive schooling: inclusive teaching practices and
adequate resources. The results show that there is still work to be done as such teaching practices
are a challenge for teaching as they go beyond traditional ways of instruction. Therefore,
teachers who want to implement inclusion have to reflect their teaching practice and the
constraints they usually experience by using parents as critical friends to get an external
perspective on their endeavors to meet the needs of their students. Inclusion is a challenge for
schools as they have to rethink the organizational restraints they produce and focus more on the
66
options for change. The index of inclusion gives hints to reflect different dimensions, which
might not only help students with SEN, but all children with their individual strengths and
weaknesses as well as their parents, so that inclusion becomes a matter of fact and not an
extraordinary situation, which schools have to master. For implementing inclusive practice
parents might be strong partners in the community but also in the political arena. Existing studies
make evident that parents who experience inclusion gain a more positive idea about it (de Boer,
Pijl, and Minnaert 2010). Having that in mind schools could be more proactive to get parents
more involved in the practices of their schools to make them aware of what works and what
needs improvement. Starting a dialogue with parents can help to change their attitudes towards
inclusion and make them aware of the chances of inclusive practice for all children, but can also
help to make them strong partners in joint endeavors to improve the pre-conditions for a
successful implementation of inclusion.
Inclusive Education can be used as: a preparatory stage for teaching practice; an integral part of
teaching practice; a supplementary or remedial program for weak teachers; a resource for use of
different subject departments; an optional course for student teachers and in-service course for
improving teaching skills. The students with special education need and students without special
education need to resolve their learning difficulties related to their abilities & Disabilities in
Inclusive Education learning environment approach. Educationists adopt an Inclusive Education
learning environment approach to resolve learning difficulties of the students with special
education needs and students without special education needs, Education planners to enhance the
quality assurance in inclusive learning teaching methodology. Future researchers to expand
research in the domain related to inclusive learning environment approach and learning
difficulties. The cooperation of teachers helps to implement inclusive education program more
successful way (Loreman et al, 2005) Mainstream schools’ teachers and special education
schools’ teachers have different attitude on social aspect of special education and have same
attitude on psychological, academic and general aspects of inclusive education. The researchers
recommend following measures for better implementation of Inclusive Education in India.
1. The Right to Education (RTE) must apply to all citizens of India. State and central
Governments as well as all the other social actors should recognize the importance of a
broadened concept of inclusive education that addresses the diverse needs of all learners.
67
2. A policy of inclusion needs to be implemented in all schools and throughout Indian education
system (NCF, 2005). Schools need to become centers that prepare children for life and ensure
that all children, especially the differently abled children from marginalized sections, and
children in difficult circumstances get the maximum benefit of this critical area of education.
3. The preparation of teachers for rural special education programmes should be planned
differently, as the aim of these programmes would be to integrate disabled persons in their own
environment and community.
4. As a system, inclusive education should be flexible. Its flexibility must be reflected in the
methods and materials used to give these children the widest possible access to the regular
curriculum.
5. A school-based support team should develop strategies for the whole school to meet the needs
of learners with special educational needs. This team should also be a resource for teachers
experiencing problems in their classrooms.
6. The school has the primary responsibility for helping children learn alongside their typically
developing peers. An inclusive school must enable education structures, systems and
methodologies to meet the needs of all children, particularly those who face the greatest barriers
to achieving their right to education.
7. Parents have a right to be involved in all decision-making concerning their child. They should
be seen as partners in the education process. Where there is such co-operation, parents have been
found to be very important resources for the teachers and the schools.
8. Bringing special children into mainstream requires adjustments that schools need to make in
advance. Transport facilities should be altered, so that these children can move around with
relative ease. Architecturally, there should be ramps and wheelchair access constructed in service
areas such as toilets.
9. Student-oriented components, such as medical and educational assessment, books and
stationery, uniforms, transport allowance, reader allowance and stipend for girls, support
services, assistive devices, boarding the lodging facility, therapeutic services, teaching learning
materials, etc. should provide according to need of the students.
10. Differently abled children should be treated equally as the normal children and instead of
looking them in sympathy their talents and abilities should be recognized for their self-respect
and welfare of the society.
68
11. Necessary school supplies such as audio learning or textbooks in Braille should be made
available. Suitable modification to examination system may be required, so as to eliminate pure
mathematical and logical assessments
12. Teachers‟ attitudes towards inclusive education could be formed and developed in the
context of an educational system which can provide some specific conditions in order to have a
good practice in this field.
13. Families with children without disabilities should develop relationships with families with
children with disabilities and be able to make a contribution.
14. In-service training programmes of two to three weeks' duration for general educators and
special educators in all the disabilities and in specific areas of disability should arrange to
effectively teach children with disabilities.
15. Those schools that are committed to taking in children with special needs, then teachers must
attend workshops in order to be adjusted to the child's needs.
16. Periodic evaluation of the training programmes and constant updating to meet the challenges
of changing trends in special education should be part of the planning of teacher preparation.
17. Inclusion should not be the sole responsibility of the specific class teacher. Everybody should
be involved and take responsibility. Training for teachers should be sustained and ongoing. It
should most importantly focus on attitudinal change.
18. The reform of the curriculum should be made in parallel with a proper training for teachers
regarding their knowledge of inclusion and its principles. The curriculum for each of the above
programmes should be carefully developed by an expert group which includes practicing special
teachers.
The researcher suggested following recommendations on the basis of findings:
1) Special training should be arranged for teachers and parents who identify the positive impact
of inclusions.
2) There is need to conduct future research on the same topic with depth information and present
detail comparison of teachers’ qualification, training and inclusive education.
3) The futures research studies should also present successful case studies of inclusive settings so
that teachers and parents can get better understandings on inclusive education.
69
4) The role different organization need to be highlight who are working for creating awareness
on inclusive education in Chennai.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
70
JOURNAL:
● Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P., & Burden, R. (2000). A survey into mainstream teachers'
attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special education needs in the ordinary
school in one local education authority. Educational Psychology, 20(2), 191-225.
● Barger huff, M. E., & Wheatley, M. (2004). Teaching with CLASS: Creating laboratory
access for science students. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(3),308-321.
● Beacham, N., & Rouse, M. (2012). Student teachers' attitudes and beliefs about inclusion
and inclusive practice. Journal of Research In Special Educational Needs, 12(1), 3-11.
doi:10.1111/j.1471-3802.2010.01194. x.
● Bhatnagar, Nisha & Das, Ajay (2014), New Delhi, India. Attitudes of secondary school
teachers towards inclusive education in New Delhi, India. Journal of Research in Special
Education Needs Vol 14, Issue 14 October 2014, Pages 255-263.
● Cambridge-Johnson, Janelle., Hunter-Johnson, Yvonne & Newton, Norisaa GL (2014),
Bahamas. Breaking the Silence of Mainstream Teachers’ Attitude towards Inclusive
Education in the Bahamas: High School Teachers’ Perceptions. The Qualitative Report
2014 Volume 19, Article 84, 1-20.
● Carroll, A. (2003 Summer). Impact of teacher training in special education on the
attitudes of Australia preservice general educators towards people with disabilities.
Teacher Education Quarterly, 14, 39-60.
● Cawley, J. F., Hayden, S., Cade, E., & Baker-Kroczynski, S. (2002). Including students
with disabilities into the general education science classroom. Exceptional Children, 68,
423-435.
71
● Cook, B. G. (2001). A comparison of teachers' attitudes toward their included students
with mild and severe disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 34(4), 203-214.
● Cook, B. G., Semmel, M. L, & Gerber, M. M. (1999). Attitudes of principals and special
education teachers toward the inclusion of students with mild disabilities. Remedial and
Special Education, 20(4), 199-207.
● Ali, M.M., Mustapha, R. and Jelas, Z. M. (2006). An empirical study on teachers’
perceptions towards inclusive education in Malaysia. International Journal of special
Education, Vol. 21 (3).
● Batool, T. & Mehmood, H. (2000). Attitudes of Visually Impaired Children toward their
Inclusion in the Schools of Normal Children. Master’s thesis, University of the Punjab.
Unpublished.
● Bureau of Statistics (1998). Census of Pakistan 1998. Bureau of Statistics, Islamabad.
● Cohen, D. & Hill, H. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The
mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record.
● Cook, B., Tankersley, M., Cook, L., & Landrum, T. (2000). Teachers’ attitudes toward
their included students with disabilities. Exceptional Children.
● Deppeler, J. (2006). Improving inclusive practices in Australian schools: Creating
conditions for university-school collaboration in inquiry. European Journal of Psychology
of Education.
● Deppeler, J., & Harvey, D.H.P., (2004). Validating the British Index for Inclusion for the
Australian context: Stage one. International Journal of Inclusive Education.
● Deppeler, J., Loreman, T., & Sharma, U. (2005). Reconceptualizing specialist support
services in inclusive classrooms, Australasian Journal of Special Education.
● Goodman, J. F., & Bond, L. (1993). The Individualized Educational Program: A
Retrospective Critique. Journal of Special Education.
● Good, T.L., & Brophy, J. (2007). Looking in classrooms. (10th ed.) New York: Harper
Collins.
● Griffiths, C. & Weatherilt, T. (2006). Creating a safe and friendly school: Using the 360-
degree approach. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
72
● Loreman, T., Deppeler, J. & Harvey, D. (2005). Inclusive Education: A practical guide to
supporting diversity in the classroom. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. (Published in UK, USA,
and Canada by Routledge Falmer. Co-published in India by Viva Books).
● Nayak, J. (2008). Attitude of parents and teachers towards inclusive education.
EDUTRACKS, Vol. 7 (6), pp.18-20.
● Noor, N., and Khokhar, S. (2000). The Study of the Problems Faced by the Physically.
● Shehzad, S. (2000). Inclusive Education: Perspective of Services. Paper presented.
● Shrivastava, S.K. (2005). Comparative Education. New Delhi: J.L. Kumar for Amol.
● Sharif, N., & Naz, F. (2002). The Study of Profile of Hearing-Impaired Persons Portrayed
by Print Media. Master’s thesis, University of the Punjab. Unpublished.
● Dapudong, RC (2014), Philippines Teachers' Knowledge and Attitude towards Inclusive
Education: Basis for an Enhanced Professional Development Program. International
Journal of Learning & Development ISSN 2164-4063 2014, Vol. 4, No. 4.
● Diebold, M. H., & VonEschcnbach, J. F. (1991). Teacher educator predictions of regular
classroom teacher perceptions of mainstreaming. Teacher Education and Special
Education, 14, 221-227.
● Forlin, C., & Chambers, D. (2011). Teacher preparation for inclusive education:
Increasing knowledge but raising concerns. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education,
39(1), 17-32. doi:10.1080/1359866X.2010.540850.
● Gaad, Eman; Khan, Lavina (2007). Primary mainstream teacher’s attitudes towards
inclusion of students with special educational needs in the private sector, Dubai.
International Journal of Special Education Vol 22 No 2, 2007.
● Glazzard, J. (2011). Perceptions of the barriers to effective inclusion in one primary
school: Voices of teachers and teaching assistants. Support for Learning, 26(2), 56-63.
● Hastings, R. P., & Oakford, S. (2003). Student teachers' attitudes towards the inclusion of
children with special needs. Educational Psychology, 23, 234- 250.
● Hoy, Anita W & Spero, Rhonda Burke (2005), Ohio, USA. Changes in teacher efficacy
during the early years of teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher
Education 21 (2005) 343- 356.
73
● Malinen, Olli-Pekka., Savolainen, Hannu & Xu, Jiacheng (2011), China. Beijing in-
service teachers’ self-efficacy and attitudes towards inclusive education. Teaching and
Teacher Education 28 (2012) 526-534.
● Maria, Ekaterina (2012). Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education. Procedia -
Social and Behavioral Sciences 33 (2012) 900 – 904.
● Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2004). The Inclusive Classroom: Strategies for
Effective Instruction (2nd ed.).
● Pace, D. (2003). Increasing awareness and understanding of students with disabilities.
Academic Exchange Quarterly, 6, 28-34.
● Rea, P. J., McLaughlin, V. L., & Walter-Thomas, C. (2002). Outcomes for students with
learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs. Exceptional Children, 68, 203-
222.
● Sadioğlu, Ö., Bilgin, A., Batu, S., & Oksal, A. (2013). Problems, expectations, and
suggestions of elementary teachers regarding inclusion. Educational Sciences: Theory &
Practice, 13(3), 1760-1765. doi:10.12738/estp.2013.3.1546.
● Vaughn, S., Elbaun, B. E., Schumm, J. S., & Hughes, M. T. (Sept/Oct 1998). Social
outcomes for students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 31(5),428-437.
● Association for Childhood Education International (2007). Inclusion of school-age
children with disabilities in Ukraine. Gale Group.
● Balasubramanian, A. (2012). Inclusive education for children with special needs.
http: //www. the hindu.com/todays-paper
● Chadha, A. (2003). Perspectives in Special Needs Education in India: A Journey from
Isolation to Inclusion. A paper presented http://www.un.
org.in/Janshala/Janmar03/incluson.htm
● Chatterjee, G., Thakore, D., Raghupathi, H., Parikh, K., & Yasmeen, S. (April 2003). The
movement for inclusive education. India Together from Education World, Bangalore
through Space Share.
● Chakraborty-Ghosh, S. (2008). Understanding behavior disorders: Their perceptions,
acceptance, and treatment—A cross-cultural comparison between India and the United
States. International Journal of Special Education, 23
74
● 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).
● Dasgupta, P. (2007). ―I am not insecure to act with kids who are scene-stealers‖ an
interview with Aamir Khan in retrospect to his movie ‗Taare Zameen Par ‘. Calcutta
Times, December 2007
● Deepa, A (January, 2006). Educating the disabled: Included by law, but little else. in
India Together's multi-part series, " Lens on Education", and is funded through support
from the Indian American Education Foundation, a not-for-profit organisation dedicated
to supporting the education of children with disabilities in India.
● Dubey, B. (2007). Khan I do it, Sir? Calcutta Times, December 2007 [10] Gupte, A., &
Khaan, A (2007). Taare Zameen Par: Every Child is Special. PVR pictures and Aamir
Khaan Production.
● Individual with Disabilities and Education Act (1990, 1997, 2004). United States
Department of Education: Office of Special Education Research Service
● Kalyanpur, M. (2008). "Equality, Quality and Quantity: Challenges in Inclusive
Education Policy
● and Service Provision in India." International Journal of Inclusive Education. 12.3 cited
in Kohama, (2012). Inclusive Education in India: A country in transition.
● Kumar, A. (July 25, 2007). A look at India's access to higher education for people with
disabilities. http://www.miusa.org/ncde/intlopportuneities/indias-jawaharlal-nehru-
university/
● Kolupaeva, A. (2004). Trends in the integration of special education in Ukraine. Modern
trends of special education development (Canada-Ukraine experience) (pp. 142-146).
Kyiv, Ukraine Edmonton, Canada: Naukowy Swit.
● Lakshmi, K (September, 2003). Special or segregated? India Together from Education
World, Bangalore through Space Share,
● Natarajan, J. (2000). Intellectual impairment in India: Government Policies and
Legislation. MINDS ESCAP: Millennium Symposium on Intellectual Disability,
Singapore, 28 Nov-2 Dec, 2000.
● United States Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services. History: Twenty-Five Years of Progress in Educating Children with Disabilities
75
through IDEA. Date of Publication Unknown. http://
www.ed.gov/policy/speced/leg/idea/history.pdf
● The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. ‖
UNESCO, The United Nations. 10 June 2012. Web. 2 November, 2011.
http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALA MA_E.PDF
● Shah, R., Das, A. K., Desai, I. P. and Tiwari, A. (2014). Teachers‟ concerns about
inclusive education in Ahmedabad, India. Journal of Research in Special Educational
Needs.doi:0. 1111/1471-3802.12054
● Singh, J. P. (2004). Rehabilitation Council of India: Pioneering advances in human
resource development for the improvement of services to persons with Disabilities. The
Educator http:// www.icevi.org/publications/educator/January_ 04/article18.htm
● Singh, J. D. (2016). Inclusive education in India – concept, need and challenges.
Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity, Science and English Language. DEC-Jan,
2016, vol. 3/13. www.srji s.com
● Smith, A (2006, July). Teachers urge rethink on inclusion policy.
http://education.guardian.co.uk /ofsted/ story/01828619, 00.html
● International Day of Persons with Disabilities, Edu Info, UNESCO, 2009, Web. 19 April,
2012, http://portal.unesco.org/ education/en/ev.php.
● Making Schools Inclusive: How Change can happen. Save the Children UK, Save the
Children UK, 2008, Web. 11 December, 2011, 12,
http://www.eenet.org.uk/resources/docs/Making%20schools%20 Inclusive
%20SCUK.pdf.
WEBSITE:
● Cassady, J. M. (2011). Teachers' attitudes toward the inclusion of students with autism
and emotional behavioral disorder. Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, 2(7), 5.
Retrieved from http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/
● Gavish, B., & Shimoni, S. (2011). Elementary school teachers' beliefs and perceptions
about the inclusion of children with special needs in their classrooms. Journal of
International Special Needs Education, 14, 49-59. Retrieved from http://jisne.org/?
code=dsne-site
76
● Gökdere, M. (2012). A comparative study of the attitude, concern, and interaction levels
of elementary school teachers and teacher candidates towards inclusive education. Kuram
Ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri, 12(4), 2800+. Retrieved from http://www.estp.com.tr/
● Graziano, K. J., & Navarre, L. A. (2012). Co-teaching in a teacher education classroom:
Collaboration, compromise, and creativity. Issues in Teacher Education, 21(1), 109+.
Retrieved from http://www1.chapman.edu/ITE/
● Heyne, L., Wilkins, V., & Anderson, L. (2012). Social inclusion in the lunchroom and on
the playground at school. Social Advocacy & Systems Change, 3(1), 54-68. Retrieved
from http://webhost1.cortland.edu/sasc/
● Horne, P. E., & Timmons, V. (2011). Making it work: Teachers’ perspectives on
inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 13(3), 273-286. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/tied20/current
● • Hwang, Y., & Evans, D. (2011). Attitudes towards inclusion: Gaps between belief and
practice. International Journal of Special Education, 26(1), 136- 146. Retrieved from
http://www.internationaljournalofspecialed.com/
● Karp, S. (2011). A special push: With a quarter of Marshall's students in special
education, improving their achievement could make or break the turnaround effort.
Catalyst Chicago, 1, 15-18. Retrieved from http://www.catalystchicago.org
● McMaster, C. (2013). Building inclusion from the ground up: A review of whole schools
re culturing programmes for sustaining inclusive change. International Journal of Whole
Schooling, 9(2), 1+. Retrieved from
http://www.wholeschooling.net/Journalof_Whole_Schooling/IJWSIndex.html
● Obiakor, F. E., Harris, M., Mutua, K., Rotatori, A., & Algozzine, B. (2012). Making
inclusion work in general education classrooms. Education & Treatment of Children,
35(3), 477. Retrieved from http://www.educationandtreatmentofchildren.net/
● Sabella, Thomas V (2015), El Salvador. Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion of children
with disabilities in rural El Salvador. Retrived from
https://search.proquest.com/openview/396a429f55d2cbb178092b286e88a13d/ 1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
● Salem, A. A. (2013). The impact of teaching academic education courses on children
with special needs in the ordinary schools on students' attitudes toward inclusion of
77
disabled children. Journal of Education and Learning, 2(2), 112+. Retrieved from
http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jel
● Voltz, Deborah L., Brazil, Nettye & Ford, Alison (2001), Louisville, USA. What Matters
Most in Inclusive Education, a Practical Guide for Moving Forward.
https://doi.org/10.1177/105345120103700105
● Wilczenski, F. L., & Nygren, M. A. (2014). Inclusive education in Poland: Opportunities
and challenges. American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.
Retrieved from https://aaidd.org/docs/default source/boardminutes/systems-change-in-
poland.pdf?sfvrsn=0
APPENDIX
78
A STUDY ON THE FEEDBACK OF PARENTS ABOUT THE INCLUSIVE
The purpose of the study is to determine parents’ opinion about the inclusion of children with
special needs in Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School. The questionnaires are
specifically targeted at parents at Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School. The primary
interest is to identify differences and relationships in attitude with respect to gender, age,
education, teaching level, teaching experience, and experience with special education. In
addition, perceived barriers and training needs related to inclusive education were explored.
Dear Parents:
We are conducting an interview to investigate parents’ opinion towards inclusive education of

children studying in Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School. In our interview, our
objects of investigation are with the parents of students with special educational needs from
Montfort Matriculation Higher Secondary School. This research will help us develop our
services to parents of children with special educational needs in the future. The information you
provide will be helpful for us to understand parents’ opinion towards inclusive education and
practical difficulties implementing inclusive education in practice, and beneficial for providing a
79
more effective support system of inclusive education for all children in future. Please help us by
completing the interview questionnaire. These individual questionnaires will be kept
confidential and anonymous. Thank you for your cooperation!
SECTION I - ABOUT YOU AND YOUR CHILD
In this section of the questionnaire, we would like to gather some background information about
you and your child
1) Family Constellation
S. No Name Age Gender Education Income (Per

Qualification Month)
2) Child’s Grade _____________
3) Was there a delay in your child’s communication? If so, to what extent?
a) Normally (no delay)
80
b) Mild delay
c) Moderate delay
d) Has not spoken till now
4) Please tell us if your child has been diagnosed with any of the following special needs.
a) Developmental Delay
b) Emotional/Behavioral disorders
c) Learning disability
d) Physical Disability
e) Speech/Language impairment
f) ADHD
g) Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD)
h) Other (please specify)
5) In your view, is your child in the right type of school for his or her needs?
a) Yes
b) No
SECTION II – ACCESS TO SCHOOL
81
In this section of the questionnaire, we would like to hear your views on your child’s access to
their school.
6) How would you describe your experience of finding a school placement for your child?
a) Easy
b) Neither/Nor
c) Difficult
7) How would you rate the physical access to your child’s school e.g., ramps, lifts etc.?
a) Good
b) Neither/Nor
c) Poor
8) Does your child receive any support in relation to transport?
a) Yes
b) No
9) How satisfied are you with the suitability of the transport provided for your child?
a) Satisfied
b) Neither/Nor
82
c) Dissatisfied
SECTION III-ASSESSMENT OF YOUR CHILD’S NEEDS
In this section of the questionnaire, we want to explore matters relating to your child’s
assessment of special educational needs.
10) Have your child’s special educational needs been formally assessed by the Montfort
Matriculation Higher Secondary School?
a) Yes
b) No
11) If yes, at what age was your child first assessed? ________________
12) How satisfied were you with the assessment of your child’s needs?
a) Satisfied
b) Neither/nor
c) Dissatisfied
13) Were you involved in your child assessment process?
a) Yes
b) No
SECTION IV– OPINION OF THE PARENTS ABOUT SCHOOL’S

RESOURCES
In this section of the questionnaire, we would like to hear what you think is important to support
your child’s special educational needs in school.
83
14) What indicates the type of support your child receives in this school?
a) Special Needs/Resource Teaching/Guidance Counsellor

b) Speech and Language Therapy
c) Occupational Therapy
d) Physiotherapy
e) Psychologist
f) Psychiatrist
g) School Nurse
h) Other (please specify)
15) Give your opinion about the following aspects of support for children with special
educational needs in your child’s school?
a)SA = Strongly agree, b) A = Agree, c) N = Neutral, d) D = Disagree, e) SD = Strongly disagree
STATEMENT SA A N D SD
1. The level about the knowledge of special

educational needs teachers is high
2. The school’s admission policy is favorable

for inclusive education
3. The curriculum offered by the school is

really good
4. The school fees are expensive
5. The culture of the school environment is

favorable for the children’s special needs
84
SECTION V – YOU, YOUR SCHOOL, AND YOUR TEACHERS.
In this section of the questionnaire, we would like to hear what you think is important about the
relationship between you, your child and the school.
16) How appropriate is your child’s learning to their needs?
a) Appropriate
b) Neither/Nor
c) Inappropriate
17) How much do you consider that your child is making progress according to their ability?
a) Good Progress
b) Neither/Nor
c) No progress at all
18) To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
SA = Strongly agree A = Agree N = Neutral D = Disagree SD = Strongly disagree
1. My child is welcomed by the school
2. My child is included in all aspects of school

life
3. My child is encouraged to make friends and

socialize
4. My child is prepared for life after school

e.g., further education/work
85
5. My views as a parent are sought and
welcomed by the school
6. My child is prepared for life outside school

i.e., making friends
19) When considering each of the following aspects of your child’s education, please rate the
extent of your satisfaction.
a)SA = Strongly agree, b) A = Agree, c) N = Neutral, d) D = Disagree, e) SD = Strongly disagree
1. The level of contact that you have with

your child’s teacher (s)
2. The way in which the school tells you about

your child’s educational needs
3. The way in which the school tells you about

the progress your child is making
4. Your child’s overall education
20)How satisfied are you with the range of subjects, courses and qualifications available to your
child at the school?
a) Satisfied
86
b) Neither/Nor
c) Dissatisfied
21) How much satisfied are you of the positive attitudes of the teachers towards children?
a) Satisfied
b) Neither/Nor
c) Dissatisfied
22) How good are the teachers in dealing with behavioral problems of children?
a) Good
b) Average
c) Poor
23) Do the teachers create and maintain successful inclusion classrooms?
a) Agree
b) Neutral
c) Disagree
SECTION VI – PERCEPTION OF PARENTS ON INCLUSION
24) Please place a tick in the box that best represents your perceptions on inclusion
a) SA = Strongly agree, b) A = Agree, c) N = Neutral, d) D = Disagree, e) SD = Strongly

disagree
87
1. I feel that children who require specialized

academic support are less capable
intellectually than the normal children.
2. If I change my children to another school, I

would look for a school not practicing
inclusion.
3. I feel Children who require specialized

academic support are more difficult to
discipline.
4. I feel that inclusion provides an opportunity

for my children to become casual to a
variety of people in a situation that is
similar to the outside world
5. I feel my children benefit socially from

their interactions with other children in
Montfort School.
6. I feel difficult to help my children in

academics and need extra academic support
like special tuition.
7. I feel my children can cope up with subjects

taught in Montfort school.
8. I fully encourage my children in other

extra-curricular activities
88
9. I feel there should be a greater number of
inclusive schools.
10. I feel that learners who require specialized

academic support should remain in School.
specialized or remedial schooling rather
than inclusive schools
89

Final Draft

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Draft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

FIELD WORK – III

TITLE: A STUDY ON THE FEEDBACK OF PARENTS ABOUT THE INCLUSIVE

ABILASH ROBIN DAS (1801721049033)

III YEAR BSW

BACHELOR OF SOCIAL WORK

PROF. DR. JANICE SHIJI, MA(SW), NET-JRF(UGC)

MADRAS CHRISTIAN COLLEGE

DR. R. BELINDA DR. JANICE SHIJI

ABHILASH ROBIN DAS, PRADEEP S, ANIRUDH NAMBIAR V

TABLE NO NAME OF THE TABLE PAGE NO

5. School’s Admission Policy 43

6. Curriculum offered by school 44

7. Range of subjects, courses and qualifications available 46

8. Satisfaction on the level of contact with teachers 47

10. Culture of the school 49

11. Positive Attitudes of the Teachers 50

12. Behavioral Problems of the Children 51

13. Specialized Academic Support 51

14. School not Practicing Inclusion 52

15. Specialized Academic Support - More Difficult to Discipline 53

16. Extra - Curricular Activities 54

17. Remedial Schooling Rather than Inclusive Schools 55

18. Children overall education 56

Figure No. Name of the Figure Page No

2. Assessment of their Child’s Needs 42

5. Successful Inclusive Classroom 47

7. Extra Academic Support 54

S.NO. CONTENTS PAGE NO

NEED AND IMPORTANCE OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

HISTORY OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN INDIA:

HISTORY OF MONTFORT MATRICULATION SCHOOL:

To impart Holistic Education through various curricular, co-curricular and extra-curricular

ABOUT THE SCHOOL:

LAWS AND PROGRAMMES:

The National Policy on Education, 1986 (NPE, 1986):

The rehabilitation council of Indian Act (1992):

Inclusive education in Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA):

The right to education bill:

The national policy for people with disabilities:

The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (2016):

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:

1. Was there a delay in your child’s communication? If so, to what extent?

SIGNIFICANCE OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION:

Attitude is one of the significant factors in effective implementation of Inclusive Education. It

For a successful implementation of inclusion, positive attitudes seem to be a key-issue (e.g.,

The main objectives of the present study are as follows:

1. To study the attitude of parents towards Inclusive Education.

Descriptive research is a type of research that describes a population, situation, or phenomenon

Montfort Matriculation School.

Journal and websites containing research articles related to the objective.

A purposive sample is a non-probability sample that is selected based on characteristics of a

TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION:

DEFINITIONS AND TERMS:

Behavior: The way in which someone conducts oneself or behaves

Effect: A phenomenon that follows and is caused by some previous phenomenon.

Peers: People who are at the same age.

Barriers: Obstacles for something to happen or be achieved.

Statistics: The science of collecting, analyzing, presenting, and interpreting data.

Cognitive Disabilities: Students displaying significant delays in intelligence, adaptive

Learning Disabilities: Students with difficulty organizing, remembering, and expressing

Emotional Behavioral Disorder: Students display age inappropriate social, emotional, or

CHAPTER V: This chapter gives the conclusion for the study.