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.
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 self- direction.
I. 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 depict disability as a source of
fear and ridicule. Even Philippine history has
records of disability through the Apolinario Mabini,
who was unable to walk because of a physically
impairing condition called poliomyelitis.
Society first took notice of those with physical
disabilities because they 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. At best,
they were put on a pedestal and perceived
as Holy Innocents or eternal children who
could do no wrong. (Wolfensberger 1972).
At worst, they were killed or treated as
subhumans devoid of any rights (Kisanji
1999, Wolfensberger 1972).
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) they 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 insight on how
prejudices and discriminations occur
A. The Moral/Religious Model
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.
The middle ground was to see disability as a
test of faith and an opportunity to redeem
oneself through endurance, resilience, 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 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 Retief and
Letsosa 2018) or seizure disorders.
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. Segregated residential schools and
workhouses with dormitories located miles
away from town centers were also erected.
B. The Biomedical/Individual Model
Disability is seen as a medical problem
that resides in the individual. It is a
defect or failure of a bodily system
and as such, is inherently abnormal
and pathological.
✓ The goal of intervention are cure,
amelioration of the physical condition
to the greatest extent possible, and
rehabilitation (i.g. 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.
C. 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 in the two models is in
the concept of habilitation
✓ Anyone whose performance does
not fall within the norm of the
population is automatically deemed
different and deficient. In living
spaces, such persons were shunned
by society.
✓ In educational setting, such students
were advised to transfer schools for a
more specialized type of education
(Clough and Clough & Corbett, 2000). In
workplaces, they segregated or refused
opportunities. Either way, both models
constantly put the PWD at a
disadvantage.
✓ They become easy target of 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.
✓ However, at the extreme, this
collaboration “undermines the
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?
• Beliefs
• Behaviors
• Values systems
Clough (Clough & Corbett 2000)
points out that the social
(sociological) model became society's
reaction to how the biomedical
perspective viewed disability.
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 are 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 a (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 or
their own car. Others would use a skateboard or in
line roller blades. Some people use wheelchairs.
There is, I argue, no normal way to travel a mile."
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.
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“.
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“.
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 a 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 of people and situations."
E. Rights-Based Model and Twin
Track Approach
The rights-based model of disability is
a framework that bears similarities
with the social model.
Degener (2017 in Retief & Letsosa 2018)
argues their 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
policy 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.
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
(4) the teachers, both as rights-holders
and duty-bearers
Twin track approach
• Combines the social model and the
rights-based model.
• A marrying of the two perspectives
allows for holistic changes to occur, with
the option of promoting individual
needs whenever necessary.
WHAT IS SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION?
Merriam;Webster Online defines education as “the
action or process 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 prepare them for a more formal,
systematic, and rigorous type of learning.
According to Prensky (2014) “ the real goal
of education is 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 filling of a pail, but the lightning of a
fire” (Littkey & Grabelle 2004).
Through the pillars of education the International
Commission on Education for the 21st century, 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.
“Pathology of difference” (Clough and Corbett
2000)

A normal distribution showing students

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. Either way, the
fact remains; teaching strategies that normally
work with the average population will not
work the same with those at the extremes.
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
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)
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.
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 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. 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:
- World Education Forum Framework for
Action and the Millenium Summit of the
United Nations, both of which happened in
2000.
- EFA Flagship on the Right to education for
PWDS in 2001.
- UN Disability Convention in 2005.
- UN Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities in 2006
- Education 2030 Framework for Action
following the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development.
The Guidelines for Inclusion (2005) published
by UNESCO enumerates four key elements:
• Inclusion is a process.
• Identification and removal of barriers.
• Presence, participation, and achievement
of all students.
• Emphasis on learners who may be at risk
of marginalized, exclusion, or
underachievement.
 Inclusive education practices by Booth
and Ainscow ( 2002: 3 )
Inclusion in Education Involves:
A. Valuing all students and staff equally
B. Increasing the participation of students in;
and reducing their exclusion from, the
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 and
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 to support learning, rather than
problems to be overcome
G. Acknowledging the right of students to an
education in their locality
H. Improving schools for staff as well as for
students
I. Emphazising the role of schools in building
community and developing values, as well as in
increasing achievement
J. Fostering mutually sustaining relationships
between schools and communities
K. Recognizing that inclusion in education is one
aspect of inclusion in society.
 IV. THE 2030 AGENDA
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 consists of 17 global goals set
by the United Nations for the year 2030, each 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
utmost importance..
 "Philippine Laws for PWDs" (Pangalangan
& Litong, 2014)
• BP 344 (1983) - Accessibility Law
• RA 7277 (1992) - Magna Carta for Disabled
Persons
✓ Equal rights and privileges of PWDs on
employment, education, health,
telecommunications, auxiliary social services,
accessibility, political, and civil rights
✓ Penalties for violations of law
• Administrative Order 35 (2002) - National
Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation (NPDR
Week) every 3rd week of July

• Guidelines in the Admission of Students

with Disabilities in Higher Education and Post-
Secondary Institutions in the Philippines (2004)
• RA 9442 (2007) - Amendment of RA 7277
(Privileges to PWDs)
✓ 20% discount privileges to PWDs
✓ Change name from "Magna Carta for
Disabled Persons" to "Magna Carta for
PWDs"
✓ Added a clause on deliverance from public
ridicule and vilification
• NCDA Administrative Order No. 001, s. 2008-
Guidelines on the Issuance of PWD ID Cards relative
to RA 9442
• RA 10070 (2010) - Amendment of RA 7277
(Implementation of Programs and Services for
PWDs in every province, city, and municipality -
PDAO Law)
• RA 10366 (2013) - Accessible Polling Places for
PWDs and Senior Citizens
• Proclamation No. 688, 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 Positions Reserved for PWDs)
✓ 1% of all government agencies, offices, corps
shall be reserved for PWDs
✓ Private companies with over 100 employees are
encouraged to reserve at least 1% for PWDs
• RA 10754 (2016) - An Act Expanding the Benefits
and Privileges of PWDs
✓ Exemption of VAT on the following sale of
goods and services
✓ 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.