CHAPTER 2 ADDRESSING DIVERSITY THROUGH THE YEARS : SPECIAL AND

INCLUSIVE
EDUCATION
Introduction
This chapter shall allow you to look at Special Needs and Inclusive Education from
historical and philosophical contexts. The first step to becoming an effective Special Needs
and/or Inclusive teacher lies not in one's skill to teach strategically, but in one's willingness
and commitment to respect individual differences. As seen in the previous chapter, diversity
is a natural part of every environment and must be perceived as a given rather than an
exception.
How then do we proceed from here? Below are key points to summarize this chapter.

 Everyone has a right to education. Having a disability should not be an

excuse for being deprived access to schools; neither should poverty ,
religion, nor race.
 Inclusive education is an inevitable direction to take and must be properly
understood, appreciated, and prepared for within the context of society being
accepting of individual differences.
 For a nation to be truly inclusive, one must start from a humane perspective
of disability and a transformative mindset on inclusion. Thus, the success of
inclusive education starts with an appreciation and acceptance of diversity,
reinforced by a supportive and genuinely inclusive mind - set among our
general education teachers.

Competencies
This chapter aims for you to develop the following competencies:
1 . the ability to create a safe, inclusive, and culturally responsive learning
environment
for students with additional needs;
2. the ability to use your knowledge of general and specialized curricula to
individualize
learning for students with additional needs; and
3. the ability to demonstrate reflective thinking and professional se direction.

MODELS OF DISABILITY
The concept of disability has been existent for ages. The Bible chronicles the
presence of persons who are blind and crippled who needed to be healed. Cultural
narratives like " The Hunchback of Notre Dame " and " Kampanerang Kuba " depict
disability as a source of fear and ridicule. Even Philippine history has records of disability
through Apolinario Mabini, who was unable to walk because of a physically impairing
condition called poliomyelitis. Clearly, disability cuts across countries, cultures, and
timelines. But perhaps it is part of human nature to react negatively to anything perceived as
different or out of the ordinary. There is often resistance, especially when people are met
with situations that they are unfamiliar with. Persons with disabilities ( PWDs ) are not
exempted from this type of treatment.
 How PWDs were once treated is not something any nation would be proud of.
Historically, people formed opinions and reactions toward disability in a similar pattern. It
was consistent for almost every country: society first took notice of those with physical
disabilities because immediately stood out, then they noticed those with less apparent
developmental conditions because they acted differently. As soon as the " deviants " were "
identified, "segregation, exclusion, isolation, and other forms of violence and cruelty
followed. Prior to the Age of Enlightenment in the 1700s, these were common practices
highly accepted by society. Such practices, which are now considered discriminatory and
violating of human rights, were evident in all aspects of community: living spaces, health
care, education, and work.
For instance, there was a time when the status of PWDS was in question. In earlier times,
PWDs were seen as social threats capable of contaminating an otherwise pure human
species (Kisanji 1999 ). Therefore, as much as communities need to be protected from them,
PWDs also had to be protected from society. Some people saw them as menaces, while
others treated them as objects pity, entertainment, or ridicule. At best, they were put on a
pedestal and perceived as Holy Innocents or eternal children who could do no wrong ( Wolf
1972 ). At worst, they were killed or treated as subhumans devoid of ( Kisanji 1999,
Wolfensberger 1972).
Sociology reminds us that human behavior must always be studied in relation to
cultural, historical, and socio-structural contexts. In fact, to understand why people think or
act the way they do is by looking at what happening to their community at a certain point in
time. Events tend to shape one's beliefs and values system. As such, it is important that we
examine highlights to appreciate man's perspectives on disability ( see Figure 2.1)

Moral/Religious Model Functional/Rehabilitation Model

[Medieval Times/ Age [Medieval Times/ Age of

of Discovery] Discovery]

1500s -1600s 1970s onward

5th to 8th Century Early 1900s – 1970’s

Copernican/Scientific Post-Modern Times

Revolution]

Social Model
Biomedical Model Rights-Based Model
Win Track Approach

Figure 2.1 The evolution of models disability.

 Smart's study in 2004 ( as cited in Retief and Letsosa, 2018 ) emphasizes that
models of disability are important as they serve several purposes : ( 1 ) they provide
definitions of disability, ( 2 ) they offer " explanations of causal and responsibility attributions
" , ( 3 ) they are based on " perceived needs, " ( 4 ) they inform policy, ( 5 ) hey are not "
value - neutral, " ( 6 ) they define the academic disciplines that focus on disability, ( 7 ) they "
shape the self - identity of PWDs, " and ( 8 ) they can provide sight on how prejudices and
discriminations occur. This last statement, in particular, has proven to be very powerful in
helping us see how, to a certain extent, society is unconsciously led to respond to disability.

A. The Moral / Religious Model

The Medieval age is said to have started from AD 476, the year the Western, Roman
Empire fell, and ended toward the early 1800’s, eventually ushering in the Renaissance age
and Age of Discovery. This period saw the Church as one of the most influential figures in
Europe . The idea of God as an all - powerful being was so strong in man's consciousness
that it affected the way society treated PWDS at the time . Parents who bore children with
disabilities were seen from within a spectrum where on one end , God was punishing them
for a sin that needed to be atoned , and at the other extreme , He was blessing the family by
giving them a precious gift that only they an opportunity to redeem oneself through
endurance , resilience , and could care for The middle ground was to see disability as a test
of faith and piety ( Niemann 2005 as cited in Retief and Letsosa 2018 ) .
Such perspectives are rooted in a moral or religious model of disability, which sees
disability as either a blessing or a curse. It is characterized by notions of charity and
caretaking. However, Jackson (2018) adds that persons with disabilities for their vulnerability
and the economic protection is also a primary concern as there is an instinct to protect both
social order which might be disrupted by " deviant members " of society. It is considered the
oldest model of disability and is evident in many religious traditions. For instance, biblical
scripture would refer to persons with chronic illnesses like leprosy as unclean, while those
considered demonically possessed may actually have had mental illnesses (McClure 2007
as cited in a religious model, disability is equated with the sin, evilness, or Retief and
Letsosa 2018 ) or seizure disorders. In one strand of the moral ineptness of either the PWD
or of a PWD's family member. Such a belief can then causes not just the PWD's isolation but
also the exclusion of the entire family unit from communal events (Rimmerman 2013 as cited
in Retief Letsosa 2018 ). On the other hand, for those who view disability as a blessing
disability either becomes one's ticket to heaven or an opportunity toward character
development.
In addition, some cultures who ascribe to a moral/religious model of disability may
also lean toward a type of mystical narrative. Their belief is that disabilities may impair some
senses yet heighten others, thereby " granting him or her ' special abilities to perceive,
reflect, transcend be spiritual " (Olkin 1999 as cited in Retief and Letsosa 2018)
For the most part, the core response to this model was the establishing of
segregated institutions where PWDs could be kept. In the United Kingdom, and Australia,
asylums for the " mentally ill, retardness, degenerates, and defectives " were built ( Jackson
2018 ). Segregated residential schools and workhouses with dormitories located miles away
from town centers were also erected.
Although the moral/religious model is not as dominant now as it used to be during the
Medieval times, the perspective is still reflected in some places where religion plays a huge
influence on daily life.
B. The Biomedical / Individual Model
Historians and scientists alike consider the Copernican Revolution, that is, the
discovery of Nicolaus Copernicus that the center of the universe was the sun and not the
Earth, is one of the most controversial yet significant discoveries of all time. It was
revolutionary and bold because it dared to contradict the Bible as well as then-considered
fundamental truths. But it was a breakthrough that triggered major changes in the fields of
science, philosophy, theology, and education. Most evident was its contribution to scientific
and technological advancements. What was not as apparent was how it paved the way for
people to also shift mind-sets from a religious perspective to a more evidence-based model
of disability called the biomedical (medical) model. Here, PWDs are seen as persons who
are ill and meant to be treated or " made more normal. "Olkin (1999 as cited in Retief &
Letsosa 2018: 2-3) wrote :
" Disability is seen as a medical problem that resides in the individual. It is a defect
in or failure of a bodily system and as such, is inherently abnormal and pathological. The
goals of intervention are cure amelioration of the physical condition to the greatest extent
possible, and rehabilitation (i.e., the adjustment of the person with the disability to the
condition and to the environment) . Persons with disabilities are expected to avail
themselves of the variety of services offered to them and to spend time in the role of patient
or learner being helped by trained professionals " (p.26).
Whereas a moral/religious perspective sees disability as something permanent, the
biomedical ( medical ) model considers disability as a " glitch " the PWD is born into, which
needs assessment and fixing. While Oliver (1990) refers to the model as the individual
model, Nankervis, 2006 as cited in Jackson, 2018, p.3 describes it to be a normative model
based on a person's levels of deficiency " compared to a normative state " (Jackson 2018 ).
Such a perspective pushes forth the idea that PWDs have problems. It also reinforces the
notion that those "without disabilities" (i.e., the able-bodied or typically developing ) are
superior than those with disabilities, and that they have a primary responsibility over the
welfare of the disabled. Most interventions are thus devoted to making sure that the PWD
catches up with through his or her peers—a practice that is very much ingrained in society to
this day (see figure 2,2).

Figure 2.2 The Medical Model of Disability. Reprinted from Taxi Driver Training Pack, n.d., Retrieved
from http://www.ddsg.uk/taxi medical-model.html. Copyright 2003 Democracy Disability and Society
Group.
 It was during the 15th century when more schools for PWDS started to emerge in
Europe. These first special schools were built by private philanthropic institutions. Although
they initially catered only to those with sensory impairments such as deafness and
blindness, other schools soon started accepting other disability types into their student roster
. Interestingly, the curriculum for such educational institutions was different from that of
public schools (Kisanji 1999) . In special schools, the main focus was on building the
vocational skills of students a clear sign that the biomedical model sees PWD as different
from the majority . The idea of institutionalizing or bringing PWD to asylums or hospitals for
custodial care when they have become too difficult to manage also reached its peak with the
reinforcement of the biomedical model (Jackson, 2018; Pritchard, 1960 and Bender, 1970 as
cited in Kisanji, 1999).
C. The Functional / Rehabilitation Model
The scientific breakthroughs experienced from the time of Copernicus up until the
early 1900s brought about changes in all aspects of life, including warfare and the concept of
power. When World War I happened, communities witnessed perfectly healthy people leave
to serve the country only to come back disabled physically, neurologically, or mentally. It was
then that people started to realize that not all disabilities are inborn. Physical and
Occupational Therapies soon became prevalent modes of rehabilitation for much of the
service-related injuries the soldiers sustained (Shaik & SHemjaz 2014) (National
Rehabilitation Information Center, 2018).
The functional/rehabilitation model is quite similar to the biomedical model in that it
sees the PWD as having deficits. These deficits then justify the need to undergo
rehabilitative intervention such as therapies, counseling, and the like in the aim of
reintegrating the disabled into society. The main difference between the two models is in the
concept of habilitation and rehabilitation. The biomedical model often suggests habilitation,
which refers to help given to those whose disabilities are congenital or manifested very early
in life in order to maximize function. On the other hand, the functional/rehabilitation model
refers to the assistance given by professionals to those who have an acquired disability in
the hope of gaining back one's functionality.
The biomedical and rehabilitative models, together with the dawn of clinic-based
assessments in the 1950s and its proliferation during the 1960s onward, show how much
society has placed value on convention, performance, and achievement. Anyone whose
performance does not fall within the norm of a population is automatically deemed different
and deficient. In living spaces, such persons were shunned by society. In educational
settings, such students were advised to transfer schools for a more specialized type of
education (Clough in Clough & Corbett 2000). In workplaces, they were segregated or
refused opportunities. Either way, both models constantly put the PWD at a disadvantage.
They become easy targets for pity or recipients of charitable work. Moreover, both promote
an expert client type of relationship between the " non-disabled " and the disabled, " where
the PWD is automatically perceived as inferior. At the very least, his relational exchange
benefits the client as the expert can help improve his or her state. However, at the extreme,
this collaboration " undermines ne client's dignity by removing the ability to participate in the
simplest, everyday decisions affecting his or her life " (Jean 2012).
D. The Social Model
What we need to understand about models and frameworks is that they have a
strong yet subtle way of influencing a person's beliefs, behaviors, and values systems. For
example, a Filipino born and raised in the United States who comes to the Philippines would
most likely act more American than Filipino, not because he resists his roots but because of
his exposure to Americans, not Filipinos. He may not have been raised this way intentionally
but constant interaction with others of a particular culture can strongly influence a person's
way of life.

Clough ( Clough & Corbett 2000 ) points out that the social (sociological) became
society's reaction to how the biomedical perspective viewed disability. In fact, Mike Oliver, a
lecturer in the 1980s who coined the term " social model " and is considered one of its main
proponents, wrote a position paper directly reacting against how the medical field has been
reinforcing a disabling view of PWDs. According to the sociological response, disability
occurs as a result of society's lack of understanding of individual differences. PWDS are
seen as disabled not because they are deficient but because society " insists " they are
deficient and disadvantaged. Norms, after all, determined by society. Professor David
Pfeiffer challenges the concept of norms:
"It depends upon the concept of normal. That is, being a person with a disability
which limits my mobility means that I do not move about in (so-called) normal way. But what
is the normal way to cover a mile .. ? Some people would walk. Some people would ride a
bicycle or a bus or in a taxi people use wheelchairs. There is, I argue, no normal way to
travel a mile.” (Kaplan 2000: 355).
The underlying principle of the social model of disability is that disability is a social
construct, where standards and limitations that society places on specific groups of people
are what disable a person. With this perspective, everything from government laws to
education to employment opportunities to access to communal facilities take on a different
meaning. For instance, Mara, a person with paraplegia (a condition that causes impaired
functioning of the legs) who uses a motorized wheelchair, should be able to go around on
her own. The mayor in her town put up an elevator by the foot bridge people get to the top
easily without having to climb up the stairs. Although there are facilities in the foot bridge to
get her from one side of the highway to the other, she wonders how she could get to the foot
bridge from her house. Public transportation, unfortunately, is not accessible from her home.
And even if it were, none of the transports would be able to take a wheelchair. Jana, on the
other hand, also has paraplegia but lives in a neighboring town as Mara's, where the local
government provides shuttles for physical disabilities. She has a wheelchair herself, though
it is not motorized. Despite this, Jana is able to go around by herself because her town
provides continuous access from one point to the next. This example shows that what is truly
disabling is not the physical condition the way the medical model would adhere to, but the
lack of opportunities and restrictions given to a person, as the social model would push for
(see Figure 2.3).

Figure 2.3. The Social Model of Disability. Reprinted from Taxi Driver Training Pack, n.d., Retrieved from
http://www.ddsg.uk/taxi social-model.html. Copyright 2003 Democracy Disability and Society Group.
 The World Health Organization (1980) differentiates between disability and
impairment. Impairment is seen as "any loss or abnormality of psychological or anatomical
structure or function" while disability refers to "any restriction or lack (resulting from an
impairment) of ability to perform an activity in the manner or within the range considered
normal for a human being." Most people seem to confuse the two terms, most of the time
equating them to each other. The social model, however, reiterates that impairment should
be seen as a normal aspect of life and when it happens, it should not cause a stir. Instead,
society must plan in anticipation of possible impairment occurrences so as not to disable
anyone. Kaplan (2000) agrees that if disability were to be seen as something natural and
expected, it could change the way we design our systems and our environments. Wendell
(1996 as cited in Kaplan 2000: 356) relates:
"The cultural habit of regarding the condition of the person, not the built environment
or the social organization of activities, as the source of the problem , runs deep . For
example, it took me several years of struggling with the heavy door to my building,
sometimes having to wait until person stronger came along, to realize that the door was an
accessibility problem, not only for me, but for others as well. And I did not notice, until one of
my students pointed it out, that the lack of signs that could be read from a distance at my
university forced people with mobility impairments to expend a lot of energy unnecessarily ,
searching for rooms and offices. Although I have encountered this difficulty myself on days
when walking was exhausting to me, I interpreted it, automatically, as a problem arising from
my illness (as I did with the door), rather than as a problem arising from the built
environment having been created for too narrow a range.
E. The Rights-Based Model and Twin Track Approach
The rights-based model of disability is a framework that bears similarities with the
social model. Although most practitioners see the two as one and the same, Degener (2017
in Retief & Letsosa 2018) argues the explanation, offering a theoretical framework for
disability policy nuances. While the social model reiterates social factors and dynamics that
form our perceptions of disability, the rights-based model "moves beyond explanation,
offering a theoretical framework for disability that emphasizes the human dignity of PWDs "
(Degener 2017: 43). It immediately recognizes the PWDs ' vulnerability and tries to address
this by upholding and safeguarding their identities and rights as human beings. Moreover,
while " the social model is mostly critical of public health policies that advocate the
prevention of impairment, the human rights model recognizes the fact that properly
formulated prevention policy may be regarded as an instance of human rights protection for
PWDs " (Degener 2017: 52) .
A rights-based approach to education ensures that all energies are devoted to the realization
of each learner's right to education. It is built on the principle that education is a basic human
right and therefore all must have access to it. There are four key actors directly involved in
such a model: (1) the government as duty-bearers, (2) the child as the rights-holder (3) the
parents not only as duty-bearers but also as representatives of the child, and (4) the
teachers, both as rights-holders and duty-bearers (Van den Brule-Balescut & Sandkull 2005)
At best, lobbyists and practitioners now promote a twin track approach which
combines the social model and the rights-based model. A marrying the two perspectives
allows for holistic changes to occur, with the option promoting individual needs whenever
necessary. For instance, in education, this would mean allowing a PWD to join the
mainstream, yet be given opportunities for disability-specific programs in case additional
support is needed (Chassy & Josa 2018).
II. WHAT IS SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION?
Merriam - Webster Online (n.d.) defines education as " the action or processes of
teaching someone, especially in a school, college or university". People typically go through
this teaching-learning process following a particular sequence. First, they are educated at
home by their parents; then they go through preschool, which prepares them for a more
formal, systematic, and rigorous type of learning. In elementary, secondary, and tertiary
school people attempt to understand the world through various subjects and different types
of knowledge through typically singular teaching strategies. Most graduates become part of
the workforce while others choose to go beyond tertiary education and pursue higher
academic degrees. Although there are countless of schools and universities in every
country, the education process pretty much stays the same for everyone because the goal
remains the same as well.
According to Prensky (2014), " the real goal of education is becoming- becoming a '
good person' and becoming a more capable person than when you started. "William Butler
Yeats, in the meantime, have said that "education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of
a fire" (Littky & Grabelle 2004). Either way, the importance of lifelong learning cannot be
emphasized enough. Education plays a fundamental role in a human's personal and social
development, given that man is both an individual and a social being; one simply cannot
think of the human person outside the context of a community. It is presumably because of
education that the world now faces problems such as poverty, oppression, and war. Yet, it is
also through education that all these problems are expected to be addressed (Delors 1996).
Through the pillars of education that the International Commission on Education for the 21st
Century, 1996 as cited in Delors, 1996. Espouses, we are taught that education has to
address four aspects of learning: Learning in order to know, learning in order to do, learning
so we can live harmoniously with others, and learning in order to be. Additionally, for the
goals of education to be realized, education itself has to be available and accessible to all.
In its totality, the vision of education for humanity is noble and appropriate. However,
for any given population, statistical data shows that people possess different aptitudes and
skill levels depending on standards or expectations that society ultimately dictates and holds
as true. This is what Clough refers to as a "pathology of difference" (Clough & Corbett 2000).
A normal distribution showing student performance would illustrate that there will always be
those performing closely with each other - what statisticians and educators call the average
population - but there will also always be those who fall at the tail ends of the curve. Those
at the extremes would either possess exceptionally high capabilities or extremely low skill
levels. Sometimes, this is because of a medical, developmental, or neurological disability
that a learner has. Other times, it is because they just happen to be among highly
exceptional people. Either way, the fact remains: teaching strategies that normally work with
the average population will not work the same with those at the extremes. The students
would not be able to learn as fast, as much, and as well as most. With scenarios like these,
one eventually would have to wonder - how does education address this reality? This then
becomes the very definition of Special Education.
Historically, Special Education has been regarded as " an attempt to increase the
fairness of universal public education for exceptional learners " because there are " those
with special difficulties or extraordinary educate abilities in learning" (Kauffman & Hallahan
2005). Acknowledging learner differences, the essence of special education lies in its goal to
educate a certain population of students, particularly those at the tail ends of a normal
statistical distribution of performance (Thomas & Loxley 2001) ( see Figure 2.4). In other
words, special education tries to ensure that those perceived to have difficulties learning will
be taught, albeit in a different way.
The Normal Curve

Figure 2.4. The Normal Distribution of Intelligence

Not everyone reacts to learner diversity the same way. Unfortunately, the default
framework societies seem to operate on remains to be the medical model. As such, simply
asking people to take on a more sociological standpoint appears much more difficult than it
seems. It is unclear as to how society is expected to shift paradigms, Moreover, it is
questionable if we can even reach that point given the discomfort and resistance others have
shown against the social model. It has long been regarded that the key to nation-building is
quality education accessible to all types of learners. This accessibility is the essence of
inclusive education.

III . WHY INCLUSION?

Inclusive education is an educational practice that places students with disabilities in
the general education classroom along with typically developing children under the
supervision and guidance of a general education teacher (Del Corro-Tiangco 2014). It takes
root in special needs education and is anchored on the philosophy that every child has an
inherent right to be educated equally with his peers, no matter how different he or she may
appear to society.
The global arena has been consistently vocal in its stand on children, persons with
disabilities, and education. In as early as 1948, there have already been worldwide
declarations on children and their right to be educated (Universal Declaration of Human
Rights 1948; United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989). In 1990, many
countries banded together for the world declaration of Education for All (EFA), which stated
that all children must have access to complete, free, and compulsory primary education.
Soon after, the UN Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons
with Disabilities (1993) was created. It is in this standard set of rules that each child's right to
education was affirmed. It is also in this directive that the importance of providing education
in integrated and general school settings was first specified. This mandate was immediately
followed by the landmark policy on special education, The Salamanca Statement and
Framework for Action on Special Needs Education (1994), which reiterated that schools
should accommodate all children, including the disabled, the gifted, and the marginalized.
 These ground breaking directives eventually formed the foundation for other
initiatives: the World Education Forum Framework for Action and the Millennium Summit of
the United Nations, both of which happened in 2000; the EFA Flagship on the Right to
Education for PWDS in 2001; the UN Disability Convention in 2005; the UN Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2006; and the Education 2030 Framework for
Action following the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. All of these were created
with the same goal in mind: Inclusion.
The Guidelines for Inclusion (2005) published by UNESCO enumerates four key
elements: (1) that inclusion is a process, that is, "a never-ending search to find better ways
to respond to diversity," (2) that inclusion involves a preventive dimension, specifically in
identifying and removing potential barriers to this process through " collecting, collating, and
evaluating information" for improving policy and practice, (3) that inclusion is all about the "
presence, participation, and achievement " or learning outcomes of all types of students; and
(4) that inclusion puts " particular emphasis on learners who may be at risk of
marginalization, exclusion, or underachievement, and therefore, they must be consistently
monitored and represented in the inclusive process. Figure 2.5 enumerates factors that are
distinctly inclusive (Booth and Ainscow 2002).

Inclusive in Education Involves:

A. Valuing all students and staff equally.
B. Increasing the participation of students in; and reducing their exclusion from
cultures, curricula, and communities of local schools.

C. Restructuring the cultures, policies, and practices in schools so that they respond
to the diversity of students in the locality.

D. Reducing barriers to learning participation for all students, not only those with
impairments or those who are categorized as ‘having special educational needs.’

E. Learning from attempts to overcome barriers to the access and participation of

particular students to make changes for the benefit of students more widely.

F. Viewing the difference between students as resources in support learning, rather

than problems to be overcome.

G. Acknowledging the rights of students to an education in their locality,

H. Improving schools for staff as well as for students.

I. Emphasizing the role of schools in building community and developing values, as

well as an increasing achievement.

J. Fostering mutually sustaining relationships between schools and communities.

K. Recognizing inclusion in education is one aspect of inclusion in society,

Figure 2.5. Inclusive Education Practices by Booth and Ainscow (2002:3)

IV. THE 2030 AGENDA

The goal for inclusion is for every fabric of society to embrace diversity. It is
for this reason that all these treatises state the need for a paradigm shift to address
the issues of inclusion in education. Inclusive education is not merely a call toward
educational reform for those with additional needs. It is simply a call to improve the
quality of education for all learners, because “every learner matters and matters
equally” (UNESCO 2017:12, 2005). This is also reflected in the current framework
being followed for the implementation of inclusive practices, which is the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs).
 The SDGs are considered road maps or blueprints that were developed by
the United Nations to ensure a better and sustainable future for everyone. It contains

Philippine Laws for PWDs (Pangalangan & Litong, 2014)

 BP 344 (1983) – Accessibility Law

 RA 7277 (1992) – Magna Carta for Disabled Persons
o Equal rights and privileges of PWDs on employement, education,
health, telecommunications, anxilliary social services,
accessibility, political, and civil rights.
o Penalties for violations of law.
 Administrative Order 3S (2002) – National Disability Prevention and
Rehabilitation (NPDR Week) every 3rd week of July
 Guidance in the Admission of Students with Disabilities in Higher Education and
Post-Secondary Institutions in the Philippines (2004)
 RA 9242 (2007) – Amendment of RA 7277 (Privileges to PWDs_
o 20% discount privileges to PWDs
o Change name from “Magna Carta fo Disabled Persons to Magna Carta
for PWDs
o Added a clause on deliverance from public ridicule and utilization.
 NCDA Administrative Order No. 001, s.2018- Guidelines on the Issuance of PWD
ID Cards relative to RS 9242
 RA 10070 (2019) – Amendment of RA 7277 (Implementation of Programs and
Services for PWDs in every province, city, nad municipality – PDAO Law.
 RA 10366 *2013) – Accessible Polling Places for PWDs and Senior citizens
 Procalamtion No. 677, s.2013 – Declaring the period of 2013-2022 as the
Philippine Decade of “make the Right Real” for PWDs
 RA 10524 (2013) – Amendment of RA 7277 (Expanding the PositionsReserved for
PWDs)
o 1% of all government agensies, offices, corps shall be reserved for
PWDs
o Private companieswith over 100 employees are encouraged to
reserve at least 1% for PWDs
of 17 global goals set by the United Nations for the year 2030 and addressing one
specific area of development. Of particular interest to the global education
community, however, is SDG 4: “Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education
and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.” United Nations General
Assembly). Therefore, the need to remove all barriers to inclusion by addressing all
forms of exclusion and marginalization is of almost importance.

 RA 10754 (2016) – An Act Expanding the Benefits and Privilefes of PWDs

o Exemption of VAT on the following sale of goods and services
o Inclusion of funeral services
 Civil Service Commission MC No. 20, s.2017 – express lanes for PWDs in all
commercial and government establishments.
 RA 11228 (2019) - Amendment of RA 7277

All PWDs shall be automatically covered by the National Health Insurance

Program (NHIP) of the PhilHealth and that the PhilHealth shall develop exclusive
packages for PWDS that will address their specific health and development needs.