National Seminar on
Partnership of Government and
Non-Government Organizations for
Inclusive Education
(October 15-17, 2003)
Report
National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration
17-B, Sri Aurobindo Marg, New Delhi- 110016
Edited for publication by Prof. Sudesh Mukhopadhyay
National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA)
17-B, Sri Aurobindo Marg
New Delhi – 110016
First Published: January 2004 by NIEPA
© NIEPA
Copies are available from:
Deputy Publication Officer
National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA)
17-B, Sri Aurobindo Marg
New Delhi – 110016
Fax: 91-11-26853041, 26865180
E-mail: [email protected]
Printed at: M/s Anil Offset & Packagings (P) Ltd. Delhi
Foreword
India has been implementing integrated education for the disabled children since 1974 as
a centrally sponsored scheme. Presently it is located in the Department of Education of the
Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India. National Institute of
Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA) and National Council of Educational
Research and Training (NCERT) are the apex organizations dealing with policy, planning and
implementation of Inclusive Education. The Technical Support Group of Ed.CIL has emerged as
a strong agency to facilitate the States and UTs for planning and implementing the IED
component under DPEP and SSA. While universal coverage has been planned under DPEP and
SSA, States have been implementing IEDC scheme in select blocks with IEDC cell being located
usually in the State Council of Educational Research and Training. The scheme provides funds
for establishment of resource center, identification and assessment of children, teacher training
and assistive devices and equipments.
NGOs have emerged as a strong support system for inclusive education. Besides the
government supported programmes and activities, many private and aided schools as well as
NGOs have been implementing inclusive education at their own initiative. Flexibility being
offered by the Boards of Examination, especially the National Institute of Open Learning, has
further facilitated this process. Over the years, schools are becoming more and more responsive
to quality concerns including educational needs of children due to attention being drawn to
improved pedagogical practices under DPEP and SSA.
There are many partners who need to come together and strengthen these efforts further.
The National Seminar organized by the Educational Policy Unit of NIEPA from 15-17 October
2003 is one of such efforts. We, at NIEPA, are happy to share the deliberations and
recommendations with the larger audience. I hope this Report will generate more ideas for
vitalizing the networking and partnership for making Inclusion a reality.
I take this opportunity to thank Ms. Kumud Bansal, Additional Secretary, MHRD, for
inaugurating the Seminar and also other officials of the MHRD for their involvement and
support. I also thank the participants from all over the country and different organizations for
their valuable contributions. Lastly, I record my appreciation for Dr Sudesh Mukhopadhyay,
Senior Fellow and Head, Educational Policy Unit, for the academic preparation and efficient
management of the Seminar.
New Delhi
January, 2004
B P Khandelwal
Director, NIEPA
Preface
Inclusive Education has evolved as a movement to challenge exclusionary policies and
practices and has gained ground over the past decade to become a favoured approach in
addressing the learning needs of all students in regular schools and classrooms. International
initiatives from the United Nations, UNESCO, UNICEF, the World Bank and elsewhere jointly
have added up to a growing consensus that all children have the right to be educated together,
regardless of their physical, intellectual, emotional, social, linguistic or other conditions, and that
inclusion makes good educational and social sense.
A decade of international instruments and documents, such as 1989 UN Convention on
the Right of the Child; 1990 World Conference on Education for All: Meeting Basic Learning
Needs; and the United Nations Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons
with Disabilities, 1993, have greatly promoted the principle of inclusive education. Today, the
Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education provides the
clearest and most un-equivocal call for inclusive education. It has reinforced the ideas expressed
in the other international instruments (UNESCO, 1999). It was recorded that regular schools with
the inclusive orientation are the most effective means of combating discriminatory attitudes,
creating welcoming communities, building on inclusive society and achieving education for all.
Moreover, they provide an effective education to the majority of children and improve the
efficiency and ultimately the cost effectiveness of the entire education system.
Inclusion is to be seen as part of the wider struggle to overcome exclusive discourse and
practices, and against the ideology that each individual is completely separate and independent.
Inclusion is about the improving of schooling. Rather than being a marginal theme concerned
with how a relatively small group of pupils might be attached to mainstream schools, it lays the
foundations for an approach that could lead to the transformation of the system itself.
In preparation to the Dakar Forum, a comprehensive review was carried out in every
country based on a broad framework provided by UNESCO. The reviews were shared in a series
of sub-regional and regional meetings among the member states and international agencies. The
EFA Assessment 2000 initially had a provision to assess inclusive education. This was discussed
and reported under the section on improving quality and equity of education for all. It is
observed that concern about inclusion has evolved from a struggle on behalf of children 'having
special needs' into one that challenges all exclusionary policies and practices in education as they
relate to curriculum, culture and local centres of learning. Instead of focusing on preparing
children to fit into existing schools, the new emphasis focuses on preparing schools so that they
can deliberately reach out to all children. It also recognizes that gains in access have not always
been accompanied by increases in quality. However, the goals as finally adopted did not make a
specific reference to these assertions, though these are implicit in all the six goals. Hence, as
part of Post Dakar action, we all need to make an effort to develop indicators for monitoring
inclusion.
Dakar, Senegal, also witnessed NGO Consultation on Education for All International
Consultation of NGOs. Nearly 300 NGOs who gathered in Dakar on April 24-25 to discuss
Education for All, believe that Education for All is achievable if governments and international
agencies commit themselves to the following:
•
There is a need to renew the commitment to education as a right as expressed in UN’s
Declaration on Human Rights, paragraph 26; the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 13; and the Convention of the Right of
the Child, Article 28.
•
There must be a commitment to providing free quality basic education for all
children, youth and adults. Equity in quality must be ensured at all levels. All direct
costs of basic education have to be removed.
•
There must be a clear commitment to ensure that quality education for all includes all
the marginalized and excluded groups like the disabled, ethnic minorities, internally
displaced persons and refugees.
•
There must be a clear statement that education is a core responsibility of the state.
The basic purpose got defeated due to the lack of sufficient data and information on the
issue. It could be one of the reasons that there has been no explicit mention of children and youth
with disabilities in any of the Dakar goals. Before the next review of the Dakar Goals, may be
the governments and NGOs would come together, first for the National Plans of Action for EFA
and then make a collective and well-informed case for inclusive education as an integral strategy
for reaching the EFA goals.
India has been an Inclusive Society if one looks at the general philosophy of life,
especially the family life. However, all is not perfect. We need to make much more conscious
efforts to really give that confidence to persons and children with disabilities, by including them
in policy making and other related decisions. Let us learn from the past and get ready to answer
if not immediately, but in a decade or so whether we are really on way to become inclusive as
governments, people and society (you can change the order of this listing!).
This National Seminar is a step forward towards that realization. We take this opportunity
to thank all the persons – participant of the Seminar, Officials of the MHRD, Director NIEPA,
and all the faculty members and staff – for making this Seminar inclusive and effective.
New Delhi
January, 2004
Sudesh Mukhopadhyay
Jayanti Prakash
Contents
Foreword
iii
Preface
v
Introduction
1
Objectives
2
Participants
2
Report of Proceedings
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Inauguration
Session I: Presentation of Theme Paper
Session II: NGO Perspectives
Session III: Universities' Perspective
Session IV: Perspective of Government Agencies
Session V: Panel Discussion- Themes for Policy Planning
and Implementation
Session VI: Workshop on EDUSAT and Implications for
Inclusive Education; Group Work on Consultative Issues
Session VII: Group Work on Thematic Areas and Adopting
Recommendations of the Seminar
3
3
4
7
8
10
11
17
Annexures
I Schedule of Proceedings
II List of Participants
III List of Papers Presented and Circulated
27
29
37
National Seminar on Partnership of Government and
Non-Government Organizations for Inclusive Education
(October 15-17, 2003)
Introduction
The efforts of the government over the last two and a half decades have been aimed at
providing comprehensive range of services for education of children with disabilities. The
inclusive education programme is now operating as a full-fledged programme under DPEP and
SSA. The SSA provides for Rs1200 per child allocation for this group of children, programme
interventions by government and/ or NGOs to form the part of plans for access, retention and
quality elementary education. The programme attempts to break the rigidity and gives flexibility
and discretion to implementing agencies to allocate the funds as per needs. More than 20 years of
experience of implementing IED, on a continuum of selected schools in selected blocks to the
present provision of all children in all schools, has indicated the need of partnership beyond
Government agencies. Through constitutional provisions, PWD Act and other instruments,
Government continues to be the main player in the field, the other partners being NGOs,
communities and universities in the implementation of inclusive education.
In India, NGOs have always been active in serving the cause of children and persons with
disabilities. Over the years, the NGOs approach has witnessed increased strength of
commitment, professional soundness and favourable attitude towards inclusive education. NGOs
play a significant role in initiating, supporting and implementing a variety of services for special
needs children. The promotion of integrated as well as inclusive education is another area where
NGOs play a major role. In this tremendous task, the contribution of NGOs has been noteworthy.
The existing policy encourages NGOs to initiate, undertake and implement services, projects and
programmes to ensure full development of people with disabilities. The policy at present favours
the expansion of NGOs.
At present, the involvement of NGOs in Government schemes has been to implement
components of IEDC Scheme, providing training to teachers and acting as resource and
consultant agencies. This is more visible in some states where NGOs have been involved as a
planned measure by the Government departments/agencies to facilitate the implementation of
inclusive education activities. Although NGOs normally do not administer large budgets, they
often have considerable expertise and grassroot level experience that can and should be,
constructively utilized in all stages of project and programme development and implementation.
With their innovative approaches and greater outreach, NGOs have the vast potential to act in
equal partnership with the Government.
Though greater funds have been laid out for educating children with disabilities, the huge
task is difficult to be undertaken by the Government alone. A collaborative relationship between
the Government and NGOs would not only supplement but also support each other in achieving
education for all. The analysis of and deliberations on the role of NGOs and Government
initiatives to involve NGOs in the field of education of children with disabilities in this context is
essential to collate emerging perspectives and provide inputs for developing a nurturing
partnership relationship. The issue of importance is to analyze the role of NGOs in the larger
social context and their capacity of sustainability so that a meaningful relationship can be created
and the NGOs can be supported to perform to the best of their abilities.
Objectives
Seminar was designed to be a forum for bringing together perspectives of people from
different fields, i.e., government agencies, NGOs and university departments actively supporting
the inclusive education programmes in different states across the country. Presentations in the
seminar covered such aspects, which have potential for the partnership of the Government and
non-government organizations for inclusive education especially under SSA. These aspects are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Alternative models of inclusion and strategies;
Planning processes required for estimating and addressing the number of children for
inclusion in regular schools (disability-wise, rural, urban, boys and girls);
Methods and strategies for educational and functional assessment;
Role of NGOs for the implementation of this component;
Strengths and weaknesses of the strategies being followed; and
Recommendations and suggestions for further improvements.
NIEPA expects to bring out a Concept Paper and recommendations to facilitate Policy
Interventions and Planning Strategies to have a more effective reachout to children and youth
with special education needs. The brainstorming, sharing experiences and concerns facilitated to
know the other side of the coin and also indicated ways and strategies to evolve a comprehensive
approach for synergetic Government-NGO partnership.
Participants
The participants included officials from the Ministry of Human Resource Development,
Government of India, State Governments, other Government Agencies, representatives from
NGOs, University Departments and Private Schools, etc., working in the area of inclusive
education (See Annexure II for list of participants).
Report of Proceedings
The Seminar started with inauguration and was followed by theme paper presentation.
There were three sessions devoted to presentations of NGOs, Universities and Government
perspectives by their respective representatives. This was followed by presentation on
‘EDUSAT- Its Implications for Inclusive Education’ involving group work by the participants on
consultative issues pertaining to the theme. MHRD circulated the Draft IEDC Scheme to get
suggestions from the participants as the scheme is under revision. A session was devoted to
group work for evolving a scheme on inclusive education. Lastly, Seminar Recommendations
were presented and modifications made as per suggestions of the participants (See Annexure III
for the list of papers presented and circulated).
2
Inauguration∗
The Seminar was inaugurated by the chief guest, Ms Kumud Bansal, Additional
Secretary, MHRD. Prof Marmar Mukhopadhyay, Joint Director NIEPA, welcomed the
participants and introduced the chief guest. He observed that for every major social change and
transformation, we needed crusaders and technical experts. The chief guest and the participants
represented the same.
Prof BP Khandelwal identified areas of concern for the promotion of inclusive education
as: identification, diagnosis and preparing children for inclusive education, as listed in the Plan
of Action.
Ms Bansal in her inaugural address laid emphasis on the following areas in respect of
promotion of inclusive education:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Training and awareness of teachers.
Sensitization of implementers and the education planners.
Involvement of community.
Documentation of success stories of children.
Including component as regard education of children with disabilities in the teacher
training programmes.
Documenting examples of successful implementation of programmes on inclusive
education.
Promoting network of different organizations working for inclusive education.
Session I: Presentation of Theme Paper∗∗
In this Session, Theme Paper, "Government-NGO Partnership in Inclusive Education in
India: Issues and Challenges" was presented by Prof Sudesh Mukhopadhyay. Prof
Mukhopadhyay highlighted the following areas in her presentation:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
∗
Importance of reaching the unreached – While 2.5 percent children have some
disabilities, coverage is just 1% of Children with Disabilities (CWDs).There is need
for expanding coverage. The quality of education should be at least at par with
education of any other child.
Understanding and addressing regional disparities.
Focus on Education - A Fundamental Right of a CWD
Hardest to reach are girls, CWDs, migratory children and working children.
Importance of partnership among Government, NGOs, National Institutes,
Universities, Persons with Disabilities, Parents and Community.
Involvement of policy formulators and implementers; its mechanism needs to be
worked out.
The role of Civic Societies should be clarified.
NGOs are now emerging as resource centers instead of mere service providers.
Chairperson: Prof BP Khandelwal, Director, NIEPA.
Chairperson: Dr AK Ambasht, Ex-chairman, National Institute of Open Schooling.
∗∗
3
•
•
•
Universities are still not showing commitment towards children with disabilities.
They need to get more activated and develop interface with current developments.
Need for ensuring and promoting networking among different departments.
Private schools, mostly in urban areas, have already taken some initiatives for
promotion of inclusive education. More focus is required on children in rural areas as
well.
Challenges ahead are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Expansion of school facilities.
Creation of political will and inter-departmental taskforce.
Orientation of special schools as resource centers.
Use of new media for information sharing and advocacy. EDUSAT is the new reality.
Planned and trusted partnership with focus upon transparency, accountability and
sustainability.
Need of empowerment of CWDs to enhance visibility, evaluate medical model, and
to cover special-need children in the education process.
Developing mechanism for manpower planning, making institutions inclusive and
seeking participation of stakeholders.
Deliberating on role of NGOs and seeking their participation.
Planning a consortium on inclusive education.
Observations
The Chairperson raised a variety of issues concerning scattered nature of population,
existence of fewer NGOs in remote areas, lack of involvement of NGOs working at grassroot in
policy formulation, role of MHRD for promotion of education and shifting of education of
CWDs to MHRD. He observed that this would require more flexibility and information sharing.
The system imposes upon the child to follow a certain procedure of examination etc. All teachers
needed to be covered, empowered, sensitized and provided with information. EDUSAT might
address some of these issues. It was, however, essential to develop material in this regard.
Response from participants indicated that there was no need to create Department of
Special Education in the Universities. Involvement of parents in the programme was essential.
The first reference to inclusion was made in Sargent Report of 1944 – there have been changes in
phraseology over the years. First of all, meaning of inclusive education should be clarified. The
Sargent Report also mentioned that such education should be monitored by the Department of
Education. Reference was also made to Salamanca Declaration for understanding the concept of
inclusive education.
Session II: NGO Perspectives∗
In this Session, there were seven presentations from NGOs’ representatives and a teacher.
Dr Madhumita Puri's presentation, "Inclusion: Some Challenges for Policy Makers"
focussed on curriculum development, involvement of schools, role of NGOs and readiness of
∗
Chairperson: Dr Bhushan Punani, Executive Director, Blind Persons Association, Ahemadabad.
4
children. According to her, the intervention includes element of special intervention. That may
not make it inclusive. Schools are not ready for inclusive education. Unless we design schools
for such children, education may never be possible. Inclusive education is coming in two phases:
first phase covering the physically challenged, and the second phase covering children with
intellectual disabilities. Inclusive education should be a people’s movement, and we should face
the realities. Curriculum transactions have to be different. There is a need to prepare for school
readiness, acting as a bridge from special to inclusive education. Specific needs of CWDs should
be identified. The school has to change to become inclusive.
Shri Ashwini Agarwal, Executive Director, National Association of the Blind, Delhi, in
his presentation, "The Role of NGOs like NAB (Delhi) for Preparing the Children with
Disabilities for Inclusion – Theory and Practice", dealt with the efforts of his organization and
the role of its various units in promoting inclusive education. The organization has been
supporting schools for inclusion by providing support services with the help of the following
units:
•
•
•
•
•
Preparatory Unit – to prepare a child for integration, especially in case of totally blind
children.
Multiple Handicapped Unit – for children with additional disabilities with ratio of
1:4. There is a need for such resource units at Cluster level or District level.
Material Production Centre – Regular schools need Braille material and the same is
provided by the Center.
Talking Book Studio – for providing talking books to all blind children.
Computer Training – Training to the trainers as well as students is imparted at this
unit.
These units together make possible inclusion of children with disabilities. Some of the
problems faced are that there are children with different needs to which the schools may not
respond. Diversities of family background, age, and extent of disability have to be understood
and addressed.
Dr Rita Malhotra from Amar Jyoti made a presentation on “Experiences of Collaborating
with Government in Implementing IEDC in Two Blocks in UP.”
Dr Sangita Agarwal, a MCD Teacher, made a presentation on "Issues of Inclusion in an
Urban Scenario and Experiences of Partnership with NGOs." According to her, the issues of
inclusion include involving parents and staff, motivating of local bodies, and making procedure,
classroom, and participation of people inclusive. The process of inclusion involves:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Changing mind-set of community and parents.
Convincing the Government officials
Convincing parents of the non-disabled children for acceptance of special need
children.
Making process of admission inclusive.
Making school and classroom inclusive.
Making inspection inclusive.
Provision of access and assistive devices.
Making community inclusive.
5
•
•
•
Making peer group inclusive.
Involvement and participation of organizations.
Sensitization of politicians.
She made some suggestions on teacher education and said that: teacher aids should also
be provided; all BEd courses should deal with CWDs as a mandate; BEd courses should include
course on disability; and that regular teachers must be provide support as a mandate.
Ms Varsha Hooja on behalf of Ms Mithu Alur of the Spastic Society of India presented a
paper on "Policy Changes: Innovative Sustainable Models of Inclusive Education for Children
with Disabilities." The paper focused on growth and spread of special services, inclusive
education and shifts in ideology.
According to her, there was little collaboration among NGOs and most NGOs were
working on medical model. Reach of NGOs was minimal, and there was a lack of conceptual
framework for inclusive education, which is needed under one Ministry – MHRD. The speaker
presented Model of Inclusion created by Spastics Society of India having the following elements:
•
•
•
•
•
Desegregation at the pre-primary level – inclusive nursery.
Capacity building –training to tackle all the disabilities.
Resource agency is still required.
Community empowerment – with external support only in terms of technical
component.
Good education where every child is addressed.
The speaker made the following recommendations:
•
•
•
•
•
Incorporate disabled friendly feature in the environment.
Resource centres rather than a special school are required, though special schools for
the time being may still be needed.
To have a nodal training agency.
Government should consult NGOs while drafting policy, seeking their inputs.
All India Inclusion Alliance for involving more people with disabilities at the policy
level.
Ms Renu Singh from AADI (earlier Spastics Society of Northern India), presented a
paper on "Forging Alliances -The Way Ahead." According to the speaker, there is a need to
develop reciprocal expectations between NGOs and the Government. Partnership and
collaboration are required between Government organizations & NGOs. According to her, NGOs
are the path makers. Major role of NGOs has been self-advocacy, however, they need to be
transparent in their working. Government has to be the nodal agency. There should be a
framework for collaboration. Transparent consultation with NGOs is essential.
Shri Mathaivanan from IHRDC made a presentation on "Inclusion: Coimbatore
Experience." It focused on implementation of IEDC under SSA in Coimbatore District.
Committees were formed at different levels, and one-day orientation was provided to block
supervisors, all teachers and teacher educators. Orientation of other officials, ICDS workers,
panchayat level workers and resource teachers was also provided. In turn, these trainers provided
6
training at the block level. A three days’ orientation to the NGOs concerned was also done. A
common survey format was prepared. Medical screening camps were organized, involving
medical authorities as well. In every block, medical training was conducted. The support of the
Government officials was forthcoming. The scheme is being successfully implemented.
Observations
The Session Chairman, while concluding the Session proceedings, pointed that all the
models of education are bound to stay and grow. It is essential to bring change in our outlook
and approach. The inclusion, however, has to be our ultimate goal and we have to strive to
change the system, especially education system to accommodate children with disabilities.
The participants responded by saying that every child has a right to education. All
children can be a part of inclusive design. Inclusive approach should be followed in
extracurricular activities. Inclusive education is not a model – one needs to look at overall
change in the design of education.
Session III: Universities' Perspective∗
Ms Sreekumari Kartha from CBR Network presented a paper on "NGO Perceptive on
Partnership with Government and Universities". The presentation dealt with importance of
partnership, mobilization of school system and needed changes in academic and professional
environment. An active partnership between Universities and NGOs is required and roles of each
partner should be well explained. Promoting convergence between different university
departments and starting of disability specific programmes with the involvement of NGOs would
be important. Role of Universities is in offering disability specific courses at different levels and
thus developing human resource. The speaker shared the information that Bangalore University
would be launching a variety of courses through distant mode – modular with credit facility as a
result of collaborative efforts between Govt. and NGOs.
Dr Lina Kashyap of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, in her presentation "Facilitating
Inclusive Education through Networking" focused on efforts of the universities' faculty in
improving the implementation status of IEDC Scheme in Maharashtra state and also networking
of NGOs with Government agencies. The speaker emphasized the importance of psycho-social
preparation of children and parents, awareness building through lectures at B Ed and M Ed levels
and admitting students with disabilities.
Dr Sushma Sharma, Kurukshetra University, in her presentation, "Index for Inclusion and
Reviewing the Status of IEDC – Case of Haryana" dealt with the present status of
implementation of the scheme and reasons of its failure. She suggested that there should be a
Task Force for Inclusion including all the stakeholders.
Dr Smriti Swarup, Director and Dean, SNDT Women’s University, spoke on "University
Partnership in Fostering Inclusion". She emphasized on the role of Universities in the triangular
partnership of Government and NGOs. According to her, support of Universities is not sought
for implementation of SSA. Universities have worked at the level of participation and
involvement and not at the level of partnership. Also, there is no link between what is needed
∗
Chairperson: Prof N K Jangira, Sr Education Specialist, World Bank.
7
and what is offered in courses. People may not be experts – Government should identify nodal
agencies and give them support. Universities can help to develop and standardize the curricula,
identification of needs of children, presenting live examples, demonstration models, developing
technical material, conducting research studies and making examination system flexible.
Obervations
Dr Jangira presented his views on Networking between Universities. He said that PWD
Act and Fundamental Rights have included PWDs and provide for equal educational
opportunities for ALL. Universities are going to be held accountable in this case. Following are
the issues to expand and respond to educational needs of all children who come to Universities:
1. What the Universities have done to improve access of persons with disabilities in
their own campuses and courses?
2. What they have done to change others and train others in this respect?
3. Curriculum adjustment – flexibility is essential.
4. What are the changes made in the system for student assessment for providing equal
opportunities to all children?
5. Programme should be measured in terms of process and output, ie, grant given and
progress made.
The policies and schemes should be modified according to the need of the situation. It is
not the resources but the implementation planning that makes a difference. Indicators have to be
developed for measuring success of programmes.
The participants agreed to these views and observed that Universities have potential and
means but are yet to take a proactive position.
Session IV: Perspective of Government Agencies∗
This session had two presentations and it offered an opportunity to reflect on IEDC
Scheme.
Dr Janak Verma from NCERT presented a paper on "Partnership of Government-NGOs
to Promote Inclusive Education". According to her, overhauling of regular education is required
with combined efforts of the Government and NGOs. All children should learn together and
diverse needs of all children should be recognized. Major concern is to provide education for a
cohesive society covering all children with special needs and all disadvantaged groups. In the
evaluation of performance of IEDC, NGOs have pointed out that rigid attitude of the
Government, and delay in sanction of projects act as hindrance to implementation of IEDC. Only
those NGOs have been successful where community participation has been sought. Following
factors were responsible for success in these educational programmes:
•
•
∗
Participation and involvement of community (Shikhsa Karmi).
Active partnership with Govt. (Lok Jumbish).
Chairperson: Shri S P Gaur, Joint Secretary, Department of Secondary and Higher Education, MHRD.
8
The speaker made following suggestions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Innovative approaches needs to be generated.
Linkages in area are essential.
More committed NGOs need to be involved.
Concerted efforts need to be made for convergence.
Rigid attitude of the Government is a stumbling block; flexible attitude is required.
Sensitization of Government machinery is required.
Removal of administrative & procedural delays for the approval of projects.
Short and simple procedure for the sanction of projects.
Release of funds in the beginning of the year.
Development of guidelines for encouraging participation of NGOs.
Shri Gopal Krishna Agarwal, Director, Shikshit Yuva Sewa Samiti, presented a paper on
"A Model of Inclusive Education: Turning the Wheels." He informed that the Samiti is
implementing IEDC scheme in Basti District of Uttar Pradesh and shared experiences of the
same. He was of the opinion that involving development administration at the block, inputs of
resource teachers and using existing infrastructure have enhanced enrolment. According to Shri
Agarwal, following steps are facilitating effective implementation:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Involvement of all the local organizations.
Organisation of Medical Camps at block level for certification with the participation
of trained personnel for getting privileges and concession.
For assistive devices, networking has been easy due to participation and support of
district magistrate and DDRC providing access.
Training of local level functionaries, teachers, parents.
Basing the resource teacher at cluster level and a cluster resource center.
Networking with different Government departments.
Observations
The presentation was followed by a discussion on identifying genuity of NGOs by the
Government. According to one opinion, certification does not fit in the system of inclusive
education. Each and every child has a right to get admission to each school.
Since IEDC Scheme is under revision, Draft IEDC Scheme was circulated by MHRD for
response from the participants. The Scheme was discussed at various junctures during the
session, including Session VII. Some of the amendments to Scheme suggested by the
participants in this Session are:
•
•
•
•
•
The Scheme should be in consonance with PWD Act, and disability should be defined
as per other laws.
The Scheme should spell out clear responsibilities of Special Teachers.
National Institutes should be made responsible for training of teachers.
Teacher training should include teaching methodology in an inclusive setting framed
and approved by the NCTE.
Introducing multi-category teacher training.
9
•
Removal of 40 % disability criteria to expand the outreach.
Session V: Panel Discussion- Themes for Policy Planning and Implementation∗
The three panelists presented the summary inputs from the earlier four sessions and
facilitated the identification of the themes for group work to be undertaken in the forthcoming
session. The outcome of this session is reflected in the report of Group Work on Thematic Areas
discussed in Session VII.
Some of the issues highlighted by the panelists and participants for evolving the scheme
of inclusive education are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Curriculum modification does not call for a different curriculum; focus should be on
curriculum adaptation.
Shift in attitude is very essential.
There is a need for evaluation reforms.
Even at present, external support is required in terms of NGOs, special schools,
rehabilitation professional and others.
Policy on Inclusive Education should mention that students with disability should be
encouraged to go for higher education. Instead of mentioning age of 18 years, the
mention should be that of Senior Secondary level education.
There should be element of education of CWDs in all training programmes of
teachers.
The policy should have conceptual clarity and rest of provisions should be in
speaking terms – both elements of availability and accessibility should be considered.
Policy should not be drafted in isolation; it should be based on other such
instruments.
The policy should enlist objectives in the beginning itself. Two aspects of
accommodation and assimilation should be considered.
Universities should publicize their research studies. It should be made mandatory that
abstract of all research studies be sent to the Special Education Departments.
Policy should mention that all children are to be treated equally and can get admission
in any school of the country. Equitable grant for those schools may be provided to
such schools.
Guidelines for the head of institutions should be included in the scheme.
Too much assessment and certification has become counter productive. Many schools
refuse admission to such children when IEDC scheme does not exist. Such children
may have been otherwise admitted.
Teacher education system must include mandatory component on disability. There
should be a provision regarding qualification of the teachers. Importance of
professional training – comparable to international standards – should be emphasized.
Distance Education can be a possible alternative.
∗
Chairperson: Dr Bhushan Punani, Executive Director, Blind People’s Association, Ahmedabad.
There were three panelists comprising Dr J P Singh, Member Secretary, Rehabilitation Council of India; Prof
Neerja Shukla, Head, Department of Education of Groups with Special Needs, NCERT; and Prof Smriti Swarup,
Dean and Director, SNDT Women’s University.
10
•
•
•
Multi-category teacher training programme for IEDC as every teacher needs to be
trained and there is a strong need for integrating it with other training programmes.
In-service teachers also need to be covered. Incentives may be provided for training
of teachers.
NGOs and Special Schools should widen their role as resource & training centers.
We will still need special teachers. To deal with children having severe disabilities,
special educators are required.
Session VI: Workshop on EDUSAT and Implications for Inclusive Education∗
Prof M Mukhopadhyay made a presentation on "EDUSAT and Implications for Inclusive
Education." He said that the launch of EDUSAT is going to open new possibilities in this area of
inclusive education. First time in the world, the whole nation will be educated through
educational satellite. There are going to be 72 channels – 2 channels for each state. The two
National Channels, each in Hindi and English, would focus on:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Language learning,
Sports and youth development,
Science & Technology literacy,
Health channel,
Toddlers channel, and
Gold channel.
These would be supported by:
•
•
•
•
•
Broadcast,
Interactive television,
Video conferencing,
Computer conferencing, and
Courseware archival & retrieval.
Group recommendations were sought from the participants on Consultative Issues. These
are:
I.
II.
III.
IV.
How can EDUSAT be used for Inclusive Education?
What kind of technology is needed to support education of the challenged learners?
What will be software requirement to support inclusive education?
What kind of capacity building will be needed to support inclusive education through
EDUSAT?
V. Which agency should plan, execute and monitor?
Different kinds of technology and techniques are to be utilized for catering to all children
with disabilities. All programmes should demonstrate inclusion of children with disabilities
shown as an integral part in all the activities. Focus should be on children with disabilities, their
teachers, parents and the people involved. Inclusive education should be an essential part of
∗
Prof M Mukhopadhyay, Joint Director, NIEPA.
11
teachers' training, pre-service as well as in-service. People at all levels should be provided
training and orientation. The group work of the participants is summarized and reported below.
Group Work on Consultative Issues for EDUSAT and Implications for Inclusive Education
Group 1∗
The Group dealt with two questions:
I) How can EDUSAT be used for Inclusive Education? and
II) What kind of technology is needed to support education of the challenged learners?
The Group discussed the question at length and deliberated in terms of requirements of
challenged learners for inclusive society. The technology needed to match the requirements
disability-wise is:
Visually Challenged Learners
1) Audio description should be needed for all visuals to facilitate the comprehension of
VIS.
2) Proper colour contrast be emphasized and taken care of while preparing programmes.
3) Enlarge screen monitor technology should be made available at receiving ends, i.e.,
schools.
4) Programmes should be interesting to make learners glued to the programme e.g.
Bangladesh question paper discussion program.
5) For Visually Impaired Students (VIS) photoverbal reading (Shabda Chitra) be utilized
for explaining various concepts.
6) Proper intonations, more expressive explanations need be emphasized for developing
programmes for VIS.
Hearing Disabled Learners
1)
2)
3)
4)
Audio signals must have visual equivalents simultaneously.
Subtitles need be given along with all programmes.
Sign language should be used in corner box wherever possible.
Close-ups for speech (lip) reading could be stressed at the time of production of the
programme.
Intellectually Challenged Learners
1) Language should be simple and precise.
2) Lots of illustrations related to life experiences should be provided.
3) Drilling should be emphasized while developing programmes for intellectually
challenged learners.
4) Story telling technique to be utilized to its maximum.
∗
Group Members: Dr S R Mittal, Shri Ashwini Agarwal, Dr N Kalia, Dr S Usha, Dr M Devi, and Dr Sushama
Sharma.
12
5) Options should be provided according to different categories of learning disabilities
and according to the diversified needs of the individual.
6) Awareness about the intellectual disability and sensitization about disability to
parents, society, teachers, and school administrators and techniques for dealing with
such an issue at physical, emotional and intellectual level be stressed with
illustrations, and success stories be emphasized while designing programmes to be
telecast through EDUSAT.
General Observations
1) Accessing archives should be made available through technology to all challenged
learners
2) Clear mechanism for providing aids and appliances for education and rehabilitation of
PWD be made along with the facilities to purchase these in case parents are interested
in these for inclusive settings.
The aspects of inclusive education, which need to be considered, are:
1) Focus on parents, teachers, educators and learners with disabilities.
2) Teaching learning process –pedagogical perspective.
3) Inbuilt system for the preparation of the learners. Important for teacher to establish
entry points for learners.
4) Motivation is also important.
5) Evaluation of outcome of learning
6) Self-evaluation as an ongoing mechanism.
Operating Mechanisms:
1) Teaching learning sessions may be repeated. Allow time to assimilate the learning.
There should be chat session between the teacher and learner.
2) There should be interpreter within the studio who should be able to explain.
3) Dummy audience in the camera may also be posed.
Group 2∗
The Group dealt with the following question:
III) What would be the software requirement to support I E?
The Group discussed in detail about the issue and has the following suggestions:
1. Every programme developed should be entitled for ALL – without any labels.
2. Programmes should be developed right from the level of parenthood to educate and
prevent disabilities such as nutritional etc.
3. Programmes should be developed for parents of new born, including those with birth
defects, their family members and others on how to cope with the situation, helping
∗
Group Members: Dr Sreekumari Kartha, Ms Sudha Atre, Ms Padmavathy Vijayan, Shri Gopalakrishnan, Mrs
Shubha Chandrasekhar and Shri Madhukar Pande.
13
the child to develop to his/her maximum potential, giving information and techniques
on early identification, assessment, stimulation to prevent secondary handicaps etc.
that can be utilized even by every mother/ grandparents etc in the child's own family
environment, without using any technical jargons, by giving easy to understand
demonstrated examples.
4. Programmes should be developed for all levels of human life span - new born,
infants, toddlers, pre-school children, primary school children, secondary, high school
and post-school levels, adults, women and senior citizens. Such programmes should
have an important component for disabled persons in parallel with that for nondisabled persons, but with no segregation.
5. There should be programmes to create awareness/sensitization of human environment
amongst parents, siblings, family members, community members, teachers,
administrative officials, management and village panchayat and incorporating
positive examples of parents/family/community members etc. who have accepted
children with disabilities like any other child in the family and community.
6. Every body working behind and for the programme should be sensitized.
7. While developing programmes for the educational purpose aspects, such as barrier
free environment with easy access to classrooms, toilets, water facilities, seating
arrangements, blackboard, teaching materials, playground etc. should be shown as a
built-in component and not a separate entity.
8. The teaching materials used should be multi-sensory and should be used both by
normal and disabled children on an equal basis. Such application of materials and
methodology should be shown in the programmes as it happens in the classrooms.
9. All programmes should be a combination of audio and video and colorful with
enough sound applications to catch the attention of all.
10. Programmes should have the components of dance, drama, music, stories and all art
forms.
11. While projecting modified classrooms, children with disabilities should also be
projected equally with other children.
12. Programmes on extracurricular activities including children/persons with disabilities,
should also be developed.
13. Any programmes made should be developed from the background of those schools or
settings that have already achieved inclusion/near inclusion of children/persons with
disabilities i.e. in the natural settings, to avoid artificiality.
14. Any video-audio recording should preferably be done from the real classroom/or set
up, as it actually happens, e.g. where one can see how a teacher teaches, how the
children react, ways used for teaching, materials used, forming groups for group
activities, peer tutoring, child to child learning, etc, and positive steps and
achievements should be highlighted.
15. The efforts made by peers to include children with disabilities should be given
sufficient importance.
16. Every programme should ideally start, if possible, with a success story - told by a
parent, sibling, a teacher, a headmaster, a community worker, a council member, a
District Collector, a Chief Executive Officer, a Health Officer, an ANM, an
Anganwadi worker, etc. to be followed by what went into that achievement and
inclusion and the steps to be taken further.
17. While developing programmes, care should be taken to use locally available
resources for making mobility aids, teaching materials, language, etc.
14
18. Monitoring the programmes, assessing the achievements, etc, should be done on par
with the normative levels as far as possible.
19. While preparing programmes for the senior citizens, emphasis should be given to how
much more they can contribute to the society while keeping themselves engaged
through forums and self-help groups, etc.
20. Programmes should be developed especially for girls/women with disabilities.
Group 3∗
The two questions that the Group discussed were:
I) How can EDUSAT be used for Inclusive Education?
IV) What kind of capacity building will be needed to support Inclusive Education through
EDUSAT?
The Group felt that EDUSAT must not be used as a substitute of practical training.
However, it could be an extremely viable medium to supplement and effect different viewer
knowledge. Since Inclusive Education has various stakeholders, the major areas of influence are:
Teacher Education
a)
b)
c)
d)
In-Service Training (General Education Teachers & other Professionals in the field)
Master Trainers (DIET's, University Faculty, RCI Trained Professionals)
Pre- Service Training (B Ed, B El.Ed, Distance Education Courses)
Training of Para Educators
EDUSAT must be used for sensitizing and highlighting impact of Inclusive Education for
the following target groups:
Community
•
•
•
Policy Makers
Bureaucrats/ Administrators
Community Workers-PRI's, IEDC, ICDS Workers
Parent Groups
•
•
Parents of persons with disabilities
Parents of other children
Children
•
∗
The programmes should be effective, child centered using the principles of
constructivism in all areas of development, e.g. physical, ethical and value education
etc.
Group Members: Ms Varsha Hooja, Shri Gopal Krishan Agarwal , Smt Shaildulari, Shri N Singh,
Dr SS Tripathi , Shri S K Misra , Shri D S Thakur and Ms Renu Singh.
15
Adolescents
•
Vocational education and employment generation needs to be addressed along with
other adolescent related issues.
Adults & Geriatric Population
•
The different needs of these groups ranging from entertainment to information
sharing, needs to be catered effectively.
On capacity building, the Group recommended that
•
•
•
•
EDUSAT must be linked to professional development, evaluation and feedback
mechanisms.
Teacher Guides and Manuals should be prepared.
Creation of a nodal agency for Capacity Building at the State and National levels,
using resources available in the community.
Training for effective use and production of EDUSAT programmes.
EDUSAT should not be used as substitute but used as supplement. Important components
should be – teacher training, in-service and pre-service; training of community workers and para
workers. EDUSAT should be learner centered. Capacity Building should be at all levels
following multipronged approach. Development of material is an important component. People
at all levels should be involved.
•
•
•
•
•
Parents and children are important target group.
Success stories highlighting impact of inclusion should be included.
More than teaching and information-sharing focus should be on value education.
Intervention and prevention and convergence among different stakeholders.
Geriatric – life span approach should be followed and focus should be on Vocational
Education.
Group 4∗
The Group dealt with two questions:
I) How can EDUSAT be used for Inclusive Education?
V) Which agency should plan, execute and monitor?
During the Group discussions, three aspects of inclusive education emerged as under:
1. Target Population: The target population needs to be identified before designing the
programmes. The programmes may be varied according to the needs of the target
population, ie, teachers, parents and children with disabilities etc.
∗
The Group Members: Prof Lina Kashyap, Ms Mamta Agarwal, Dr Sangeeta Agarwal,
Shri VR Mathivanan and Prof Smriti Swarup
16
2. Teaching-Learning Process: This includes the following•
•
•
•
The teacher should have good knowledge of the content, pedagogical principles
and skills.
Both teacher and learner need to be mentally prepared to accept the change in the
delivery system.
The entry level of the learners at a given time must be determined prior to
learning.
The teaching-learning process would take care of stronger/weaker modalities of
the learners and their motivation.
Evaluation:
•
•
•
Checking outcomes.
Self-evaluation.
Built-in system of reinforcement.
Pre-decided evaluation procedures would facilitate achievement of objectives.
3. The Operating Mechanism: To cater to the individual learning needs of the learners,
interpreters may be present in the studio at the time of delivery of the sessions. Inbetween the main telecast and repeat telecast session, time may be alloted for "chat
sessions" where a learner would have a chance to clear his doubts, if any, after
assimilation of the content. To make the session more reality oriented, dummy
audience may be present within the studio.
For planning, executing and monitoring, following need to be identified:
•
•
•
Nodal agencies.
Existing resources.
Pooling of resources.
The identified organizations will have to be delegated responsibilities with proper role
clarification.
Session VII: Group Work on Thematic Areas and Adopting Recommendations of the
Seminar∗
Besides the outputs from the three-hour workshop on use of Education Satellite
EDUSAT for Inclusive Education, there were other significant areas for policy implications that
emerged from the overall recommendations of the Seminar as well as the Thematic Group Work.
These were presented to the participants in the Concluding Session. Shri Zachariah stressed on
covering the unreached children with disabilities under inclusive education. According to him, it
∗
Chairperson: Shri Nabakishore Singh, Director, Secondary and Higher Education, MHRD, and Shri Job Zachariah,
Director, Elementary Education and Literacy, MHRD.
17
was a stupendous task, which cannot be achieved without the help of NGOs. The Government
should assure that there are no roadblocks for NGOs’ participation for which the
recommendations from participants were welcomed.
Framework for the Group Work that evolved as a result of Session V was as under:
A.
Training and Orientation of Educational Administrators
1.
2.
3.
4.
Levels - State, District, etc.
Expected Outcomes
Contents/Inputs
Who should do
- NIEPA’s Role
- NGOs
- Universities
- Any other
5. Time-Frame and Mechanisms
B.
Creating Forums for Sharing Policy, Plans and Progress for Inclusive Education
1. Can there be a consortium?
- Name
- Goals
-Memberships
- Functions
- Location
- Administrative + Financial Implications
2. Can we have annual, once in two years a conference on Inclusive Education with
partnerships of Government, NGOs, Private Sectors, Parents?
C.
Documenting Good Practices in Inclusive Education
(NIEPA has provisions for publishing)
-
D.
How to collect?
Who decides which are good practices?
Time-frame for collection
What all should it reflect?
Recommendations for Evolving the Scheme for Inclusive Education
Four groups of the participants worked on the above areas. The output of the group work
is summarized as below:
A.
Training and Orientation of Educational Administrators ∗
The Group Members felt that the training and orientation should be conducted at different
levels, viz, (i) State level; (ii) District level; (iii) Block level; (iv) Panchayat level.
∗
Group Members: Shri V R Mathivanan, Shri Gopal Krishan Agarwal , Shri Ashwini Agarwal,
Dr N Kalia, Dr M Devi and Dr Sushama Sharma.
18
Officials requiring training/orientation
State level:
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
Director, Secondary Education
Director, School Education
Deputy Director, School Education
State Project Director/SSA
Director of Elementary Education
Commissioner of Disabled
District level:
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
vii)
viii)
ix)
District Collector
District Rural Development Officer
District Rehabilitation Officer
Chief Education Officer
District Elementary Education Officer
Headmasters
Teachers
Parents of Disabled
Disabled themselves
Block level:
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
vii)
viii)
Block Development Officers
Block Resource Centre Supervisors
Assistant Elementary Education Officers
NGOs
Parents-Teachers Association Members
DIET Members
Parents of the Disabled
Disabled themselves
Panchayat level:
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
vii)
viii)
ix)
x)
xi)
xii)
xiii)
Panchayat President
Headmasters
Parents-Teachers Association President
Self-Help Group Members
Ward Member
NGOs
Teacher Representative
Health Workers
ICDS Workers
Anganwadi Workers
Village Administrative Officers
Parents of Disabled
Disabled people themselves
19
NIEPA, SCERT, Universities and NGOs can conduct state level training. SCERT,
Universities, and NGOs under the Chairmanship of Secretary, Education Department, can
conduct district level training. Block level training can be conducted by the NGOs under the
Chairmanship of a District Collector. Panchayat level training can be conducted by NGOs under
the Chairmanship of BDOs. The training contents for the above said training programmes are as
follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Understanding abilities of the disabled.
Educational services available for the disabled.
Educational needs of the disabled children.
Assistive devices for the disabled children.
Government concessions and facilities.
Overview of causes and prevention of disabilities.
Magnitude of prevalence of disabilities.
Early intervention.
Inclusive education and community based rehabilitation.
Budgeting
Resource Group formation to monitor and capacity building at the district level.
The duration of the training programme at the state level could be 3 days, at district level
four days, block level four days, and at the panchayat level the training can be limited to two
days. The expected outcomes of the training are:
•
•
•
•
•
Change in attitude towards disability.
Understanding the educational needs of disabled children.
Inclusive educational concepts.
Implementation strategies, providing appropriate devices.
Monitoring evaluation system.
NIEPA and NCERT can coordinate in following activities:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Formulating policy and planning.
Developing framework/guidelines.
Overall coordination and networking.
Identifying universities and NGOs to conduct the training.
Conducting workshops, seminars at the regional level.
Conducting researches and impact studies on training needs for improvement in
training modules etc.
The training curricula planned by RCI can be made use of to conduct training
programmes at different levels.
Time-Frame: Once in three years, revision may be required.
20
B.
Creating Forums for Sharing Policy, Plans and Progress for Inclusive Education∗
The Group recommended following for planning a consortium:
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
Can there be a Consortium? YES.
Name: Consortium for Inclusive Education.
This consortium should be a pressure group. The consortium should deliberate the
essence of Gandhi’s Basic Education, which is very appropriate for creating inclusive
learning settings.
Goal: Promote and implement the concept of inclusive education in partnership with
Government, Universities, NGOs and other private organizations as well as
individuals.
Location: May be on a rotation basis.
Members:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
vi)
vii)
viii)
ix)
Membership: May be decided in the first meeting of the members.
Meeting: Twice a year.
Location: NIEPA should start it initially and may be carried out on a rotation basis.
Functions:
•
•
•
•
•
∗
NIEPA
NCERT
RCI
Boards of School Education
Universities
NGOs (urban and rural)
Parents
Disabled persons
MHRD
Education Department
NCTE
NIE
To restructure the existing BEd programme into a 4-year inclusive programme.
The eligibility for such a programme may be intermediate.
To ensure that in all service training programmes, children with disabilities are
the central concern.
To create structural changes towards shifting education of the disabled and special
education from Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment to MHRD as in the
case of 96% of the countries of world.
Rethink and review the existing system, propose and implement changes in the
evaluation system throughout the country.
Amended PWD Act should be made applicable to all private institutions also.
Group Members: Dr. Sreekumari Kartha, Mrs Sudha Atre, Mrs.Padmavathy, Shri Gopalakrishnan, Shri M.M. Jha
and Shri Madhukar Pande
21
C.
Documenting Good Practices in Inclusive Education∗
The Group made the following recommendations:
i)
ii)
iii)
Centre should direct the States to collect information through District Education
Heads regarding good inclusive practices. District Education Head would invite
successful inclusive practices from field workers, teachers, and headmasters.
Invitation should include some key points: assessment, curricular adaptations,
teaching strategies, support services with photographs in three different settings with
results in the last three years.
Good practices in Inclusive Education would be evaluated at three stages:
•
•
•
iv)
District level
State level
National Level
Time-frame for information collections at these levels should be:
a) District level: 3 months
b) State level: 2 months
c) National level: 2 months
v)
Thus information thus collected should reflect:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
D.
What was the status at the point of entry?
What were the entry behaviours of the learner – physical, social, educational, and
emotional?
What were the difficulties faced by the learner in and out of the classroom?
What were the difficulties faced by the learner and teacher before implementing
inclusive practices?
What were the inclusive practices in terms of teaching strategies, curriculum
adaptations, aids and appliances, and TLM used with time-frame?
What were the experiences with the community, family, parent, and siblings?
What were the experiences of the peer groups?
What were the experiences of the school teaching and non-teaching staff?
What steps were taken to enhance the accessibility?
Evolving the Scheme of Inclusive Education and the Partnerships∗
This Special Group was framed for discussing the IEDC Scheme that is under revision.
The Group discussed the draft IEDC Scheme that was circulated by MHRD for suggestions from
the participants. The final report is being prepared by Sri Nabakishore Singh.
∗
∗
Group Members: Shri Ashwini Agarwal, Ms Mamta Agarwal and Dr. Sushama Sharma
Chairperson: Shri O Nabakishore Singh, Director, Secondary and Higher Education, MHRD.
Group Members: Dr B P Punani, Ms Renu Singh, Dr S R Mittal, Ms Rajul Padmanabham, Prof K G Rastogi, Dr
Sangeeta Agarwal, Dr N K Ambasht, Dr S S Tripathi and Ms S Usha.
22
Adoption of Seminar Recommendations
The participants of the National Seminar on Partnership of Government and NonGovernment Organizations for Inclusive Education, organized by NIEPA in New Delhi during
15-17 October 2003:
Recognised the urgent need for achieving the target of “Education for All”,
education now being a Fundamental Right of every child, the provisions of Persons with
Disabilities Act, 1995 regarding education for all Persons with Disabilities being mandatory and
considering inclusive education as the most important mechanism of reaching all unreached
children of school age;
Appreciating the concept of inclusive education, the participants identified the
challenges in terms of creating and making accessible schools; creation of political will,
constitution of inter-departmental task force; orientation of special schools as resource centers;
planned and trusted partnership; focus upon transparency, accountability & sustainability;
empowerment and of persons with disabilities to enhance their visibility; develop mechanism for
manpower planning; making institutions inclusive and seeking participation of stakeholders; use
of mass media for information sharing and advocacy including effective use of EDUSAT in this
respect; deliberation on role of NGOs for seeking their participation and above all planning a
consortium on inclusive education;
After deliberating for three days on these challenges, the participants made the
following RECOMMENDATIONS:
1)
Knowing that promotion of Inclusive Education has to be a multi-pronged
approach, efforts must be made to promote partnership among Government, NGOs,
National Institutes, State and Sub-state level institutes, Universities, parents and
community through a mechanism of mutual respect, challenge, effective
implementation and developing collaborative relations; by means of sensitizing and
seeking active participation of policy planners, programme implementers, members
of community, teachers and family members; ensuring equal opportunities for quality
education of all Persons with Disabilities within an inclusive environment.
2)
Considering the principal of Inclusive Education and education being a
Fundamental Right, all programmes promoting EFA must include ALL persons with
disabilities.
3)
Knowing that the education of children with disabilities is at the stage of
transition from special to inclusion and in view of the constraints of the present
school system, the special schools should assume the responsibility of imparting child
preparatory services, teacher orientation, parent counseling, training in the use of
assistive devices and should emerge as also resource centers – a bridge between
special and inclusive education with the objective of making the school system
inclusive.
4)
Realizing the importance of providing support services to children with
disabilities, Resource Centers, for the time being, be established at the cluster level
with the provision of services of Resource Teachers, assistive devices, educational
23
material and other specific inputs, for example, providing support to children with
multiple disabilities, with the objective that ultimately the school system must be
entrusted with these responsibilities.
5)
Agreeing to the thoughts that Inclusive Education is not a model, there should be
an overall change in the design of education system, thus not confining inclusive
approach to only academic activities, it should be extended to cover co-curricular
activities, sports, life skills, vocational as well as professional training etc. Similarly,
all dimensions of education including admission, school premises, classroom,
provision of access, assistive devices, inspection and evaluation should be made
inclusive.
6)
Conscious of the fact that availing disability certificates* from medical authorities
being cumbersome, time consuming and expensive, the certification in respect of
extent and nature of disability may be issued by the qualified Rehabilitation
Professional with the only exception that when such certificates are required for
availing concessions and facilities, medical authorities may be approached.
7)
Realizing the importance of systemic changes in whole environment, the NGOs
and Universities need to be entrusted the responsibility of imparting orientation and
training to different stakeholders including teachers & teacher educators, officials,
ICDS workers and Panchayat level workers; and they should ensure involvement of
medical authorities, education administration, suppliers of assistive devices and
educational devices etc; through networking, partnership and inter-agency
collaboration.
Apart from their major role in human resource development, the Universities should
take appropriate measures to improve access and provide equal opportunities to
students with disabilities to all their courses and services through appropriate
curriculum adjustment, assessment and examination with a scope for flexibility, and
promote and disseminate need based research in areas of education of children with
disabilities.
8)
Understanding importance of developing effective case material, efforts should be
made by institutes like NCERT, National Institutes and NIEPA to document success
stories of inclusive education, example of successful implementation and outcomes of
initiatives on inclusion.
9)
Appreciating the initiative of the Ministry of Human Resource Development for
revising the IEDC Scheme, the participants unanimously desired that instead of
revising the scheme, a new scheme on “inclusive education” should be evolved in
consonance with the provisions of PWD Act, National Trust Act, SSA and other such
initiatives.
The major suggestions in this regard included: definition of disability should be as
adopted in the various Acts; need for spelling out areas of responsibilities of teachers,
*
It may be noted that there was difference of opinion on this recommendation that could not be resolved. This
would need more debates and reflections.
24
National Institutes for PWDs, NCERT, NIEPA, NIOS and Universities etc. to be
made responsible for training of teachers, and to include teaching methodology;
include NCTE and RCI in this system; introducing multi-category teacher training;
removing 40 % criteria of disability; strategies for training of teachers, covering all
extent of disabilities; clarifying its objectives & outcomes; doing away with the
concept of limitation of age, instead covering children upto senior secondary level of
education; ensuring element of education of persons with disabilities in each and
every teacher training programme; both elements of availability and accessibility of
services to be included, above all, it should be drafted with the participation of NGOs,
professionals and persons with disabilities.
10)
Applauding the launch of EDUSAT and recognizing the important role of spacebased network in promotion of education, Inclusive Education must find a place in
this technological revolution; this mode not being a substitute but a supplement to ongoing efforts; ensuring access to all children with disabilities through the use of
technology, hardware and software; projecting positive images about inclusion;
taking the concept of “Education for All” further; highlighting achievement of
successful cases of inclusion; and allocating appropriate resources and organizing
sensitization of all the stakeholders.
Last but the least, a Task Force at NIEPA should be created for preparing a Plan of
Action to pursue the implementation of these recommendations and for followup with different
systems and ensuring that inclusive education becomes a reality.
The Seminar ended with thanking all the participants and resource persons for their
support and participation in the Seminar.
25
26
Annexure I
Schedule of Proceedings
15 October, 2003
0930 hrs
Registration
1000 hrs
Welcome: Prof M. Mukhopadhyay, Joint Director NIEPA
Inauguration: Ms Kumud Bansal, Additional Secretary, MHRD
Chairperson: Prof B P Khandelwal, Director, NIEPA
Workshop Setting: Prof Sudesh Mukhopadhyay, Head Educational Policy Unit,
NIEPA
1130 hrs
Tea Break
1200 hrs
Presentation of Theme Paper: Prof Sudesh Mukhopadhyay
Chairperson: Dr N K Ambasht, Ex-Chairman, NIOS
1315 hrs
Lunch
1400 hrs
NGOs Perspective: Presentations by NGOs
Chairperson: Dr Bhushan Punani, Executive Director, BPA
Papers Presented:
Dr Madhumita Puri
Shri Ashwini Agarwal
Dr Rita Malhotra
Dr Sangita Agarwal
Ms Varsha Hooja
Ms Renu Singh
Shri Mathivanan
Inclusion: Some Challenges for Policy Makers
The Role of NGOs like NAB (Delhi) for Preparing the Children
with Disabilities for Inclusion- Theory and Practice
Experiences of Collaborating with Government in Implementing
IEDC
Issues of Inclusion in an Urban Scenario and Experiences of
Partnership with NGOs.
Policy Changes: Innovative Sustainable Models of Inclusive
Education for Children with Disabilities
Forging Alliances -The Way Ahead
Inclusion: Coimbatore Experience
16 October, 2003
0930 hrs
Universities’ Perspective: Presentations by Universities
Chairperson: Prof N K Jangira, Sr Education Specialist, The World Bank
27
Papers Presented:
Ms Sreekumari Kartha
Dr Lina Kashyap
Ms Sushma Sharma
Dr Smriti Swarup
Dr Premavathy Vijayan
1130 hrs
NGOs Perceptive on Partnership with Government Universities
(Presenter on behalf of Indumati Rao)
Facilitating Inclusive Education through Networking
Index for Inclusion and Reviewing the Status of IEDC Case of
Haryana
University Partnership in Fostering Inclusion
Promoting Inclusive Education in India
Tea Break
1200 hrs
Perspective of Government Agencies
Chairperson: Shri S P Gaur, Joint Secretary, Department of Secondary and
Higher Education, MHRD
Papers Presented:
Dr Janak Verma
Shri G K Agarwal
Partnership of Government-NGOs to Promote Inclusive Education
A Model of Inclusive Education: Turning the Wheels
1330 hrs
Lunch
1430 hrs
Panel Discussion: Identifying Themes for Policy, Planning and Implementation
Chairperson: Dr Bhushan Punani, BPA
Panelists: Dr J P Singh, Member Secretary RCI; Prof Neerja Shukla, Head,
DEGSN, NCERT; Prof Smriti Swarup, Head, Dept of Special
Education, SNDT University.
17 October, 2003
0930 hrs
Workshop on EDUSAT and Its Implications for Inclusive Education
Chairperson: Prof M Mukhopadhyay, Joint Director, NIEPA
Group Work on Consultative Issues
1200 hrs
Adoption of Recommendations of the Seminar
1300 hrs
Lunch
1400 hrs
Group Work on Thematic Areas
1530 hrs
Presentations of Group Reports and Conclusions
Chairpersons: Shri Job Zachariah, Director, Department of Elementary
Education and Literacy; and Shri O Nabakishore Singh, Director,
IEDC, Department of Secondary and Higher Education, MHRD
28
Annexure II
List of Participants
Andhra Pradesh
Shri V Sanu
State Project Officer (IED)
SSA, 4th Floor, Corporation Buildings
Palayam,
Thiruvananthapuram
Assam
Ms Arzoo Dutta
State Programme Officer
IED, SSA, APSAP, DPEP, Assam, (Near DPI)
Kahilipara, Guwahati – 781019
Fax: 0361-2386452, 2380134
Chattisgarh
Smt Shaildulari Sarwa
Astt Director
State Project Office
Rajiv Gandhi Shiksha Mission
Raipur-492001
Dr S S Tripathi
Vidya Bharati Parijat Niketan
Ring Road Chowk
Mahadev Government School
Raipur
Ph 0771-22411665.
Delhi
Shri Ashwini Agarwal
Executive Director
The National Association for the Blind,
Sector V, R K Puram
New Delhi
29
Mrs S Ahlawat
Director, DPPI
DAV Managing Committee
New Delhi
Ph 9818286246, 26193008
Dr N K Ambasht
19A/522
Noida-201301
Ms Shubha Chandrashekhar
Special Educator
Delhi Public School Society
New Delhi
Email: [email protected]
Shri S P Gaur
Joint Secretary (Secondary and Higher Education)
MHRD
Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi-110001
Fax: 26853041
Dr N K Jangira
Sr Educational Specialist
The World Bank
New Delhi Office
70, Lodhi Estate
New Delhi-110003
Shri M M Jha
D-F/118, Satya Marg
Chanakyapuri
New Delhi
Dr Neelam Kalia
Head, Deptt of Psychology
Kamala Nehru College
New Delhi
Ph 26494881, 9811272012
Dr Rita Malhotra
Director
Centre for Special Education & Child Guidance
Amar Jyoti Rehabilitation & Research Centre
Karkardooma, Vikas Marg
Delhi-110092
Email: [email protected]
Ph 22375205; Fax 2237252
30
Shri S K Mishra
Astt Director (Acad.)
Rehabilitation Council of India
23-A, Shivaji Marg
New Delhi -110015
Ph. 25913016
Dr S R Mittal
Reader, Deptt of Education
Jamia Millia Islamia
Jamia Nagar
New Delhi
Ms Renu Mittal
F-Block, East of Kailash
New Delhi-110065
Ms Madhumita Puri
Sector A, Pocket B, 1305
Vasant Kunj,
New Delhi-110017
Shri Madhukar Pandey
MHRD
515/B Wing
Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi - 110001
Dr K G Rastogi
E-923, Saraswati Vihar
Pitam Pura,
Delhi-110035
Ph 27010623
Shri Vijay S Sharma
National Association for the Blind
RK Puram, Sector V
New Delhi
Ph. 9810114344
Prof Neerja Shukla
Prof and Head
DEGSN
NCERT
17-B, Aurobindo Marg
New Delhi - 110016
31
Dr J P Singh
Member Secretary
Rehabilitation Council of India
23-A, Shivaji Marg
(near Karampura Complex)
New Delhi
Fax: 25911967
Ms Renu Singh
Director
School for Rehabilitation Sciences
Action for Ability Development and Inclusion (SSNI)
2, Balbir Saxena Marg
Hauz Khas
New Delhi-110016
Shri O Nabakishore Singh
Director (Secondry and Higher Education)
MHRD, Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi-110001
Fax: 26853041
Dr V P Singh
SCERT, Delhi
Defence Colony
New Delhi-110024
Ph: 24623541
Dr Shyam Sunder Tripathi
Vidya Bharati
Sarswati Bal Mandir Parisar
Ring Road, Nehru Nagar
New Delhi-110065
Ph: 26320013, 26320126
Dr Janak Verma
Reader
Department of Education of Groups With Special Needs
NCERT
17-B, Sri Aurobindo Marg
New Delhi-110016
Shri Job Zachariah
Director
Department of Elementary Education and Literacy
MHRD
Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi-110001
32
Gujarat
Dr Bhushan Punani
Executive Director
Blind People’s Association
Jagdish Patel Chowk
Surdas Marg
Ahemdabad-380015
Haryana
Shri Rajnesh Sharma
Haryana Prathmik Shiksha Prayojna Parishad
SCO-170, Section 17-C
Chandigarh
Dr Sushma Sharma
Reader in Special Education
Kurukshetra University
Kurukshetra
Karnataka
Smt S N Meera Devi
Sr Programme Officer
(Inclusive Education)
State Project Office
Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan
Bangalore
Dr Srikumari Kartha
Regional Coordinator
CBR Network (South Asia)
134, 1st Block, 6th Main, 3rd Phase
III Stage, BSK
Bangalore-560085
E-mail: [email protected]
Ph: 91-80-6724273/6724221
Smt S Usha
Joint Director
State Project Office
Sarva Shikha Abhiyan
Bangalore
33
Maharashtra
Ms Varsha Hooja
Spastics Society of India
KC Marg, Bandra Reclamation
Bandra(W)
Mumbai-400050
Ms Lina Kashyap
Tata Institute of Social Sciences
PO Box No.8313
Sion-Trombay Road
Deonar, Mumbai-400088
Ph: 5563290-96
Fax: 91-22-5562912
Prof Smriti Swarup
Dean and Director, SNDT Women’s University
Sir Vithaldas Vidya Vihar
Juhu Road, Santacruz (West)
Mumbai-400049
Uttranchal
Ms Sudha Atreya
I/C IED, SSA Uttaranchal Sabhi ke Liye Shiksha Parishad
State Project Office
Shiksha Sakul
Sahstra Dhara Road
Mayur Vihar
Dehradun
Email: [email protected]
Ph: 0135-2781941,42,43
Uttar Pradesh
Ms Mamta Agrawal
U P Education for All Project Board
Vidya Bhawan, Nishatganj
Lucknow-226007
Email: updpep@sancharnet,net.in
Ph: (O) 2780562
Fax: 2781123,2781128
Shri Gopal Krishna Agrawal
Director, Shikshit Yuva Seva Samiti
Pandey Bazaar, Basti (UP)
Ph: 05542-242280
34
Tamil Nadu
Dr V R Mathivanan
Dy Director
International Human Resource Development Centre
(IHRDC) for the Disabled
Sri Ramakrishna Mission Vidyalaya
SRKV Post
Coimbatore-641020
Ms Rajul Padmanabhan
Deputy Director
Vidyasagar
Spastic Society of Tamil Nadu
Opp TTTI, Taramani Road
Chennai-600013 (TN)
35
36
NIEPA Faculty
Director
B P Khandelwal
Email: [email protected]
Joint Director
M Mukhopadhyay
Email: [email protected]
Educational Planning Unit
Biswal, K K; Associate Fellow
Snehi, Neeru, Associate Fellow
Email: [email protected]
Educational Administration Unit
Akhtar, Najma; Sr Fellow & Head
Josephine, Y; Associate Fellow
Narula, Manju; Research & Training Associate
Tyagi, R S; Associate Fellow
Murthy N K; Associate Fellow
Email: [email protected]
Educational Finance Unit
Tilak, J B G; Senior Fellow & Head
Rani, Geeta; Associate Fellow
Reddy, A N; Research & Training Associate
Email: [email protected]
Ph: 26861320
Educational Policy Unit
Mukhopadhyay, S; Senior Fellow & Head
Bandhopadhyay, Madhumita; Associate Fellow
Prakash, Jayanti; Project Assistant
Email: [email protected]
Ph: 26862389
School & Non-Formal Education Unit
Govinda, R; Senior Fellow & Head
Juneja, Nalini; Fellow
Sood, Neelam; Fellow
Diwan, Rashmi; Associate Fellow
Malik, S K; Research & Training Associate
Email: [email protected]
Ph: 26861320
37
Higher Education Unit
Bhushan, Sudhanshu; Sr Fellow
Wizarat, Kausar; Research & Training Associate
Email: [email protected]
International Unit
Sujatha, K; Senior Fellow & Head
Panda, B K; Project Fellow
Mohanty, N K; Associate Fellow
Raju, V P S; Research & Training Associate
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 26861913
Sub-National Systems Unit
Menon, Pramila; Fellow and Incharge Head
Zaidi, S M I A; Fellow
Jalali, J; Associate Fellow
Email: [email protected]
O.R.S.M. Unit
Mehta, Arun C; Fellow
Srinivas, K; Systems Analyst
Chug, Sunita; Research & Training Associate
Email: [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]
Ph: 26514810
Library & Documentation Centre
Makol, Deepak; Librarian
Thakur, D S; Documentation Officer
Email: [email protected]
Ph: 26862507
38
Annexure III
List of Papers Presented and Circulated
Session I: Theme Paper
Prof S Mukhopadhyay Government-NGO Partnership in Inclusive Education in India: Issues and
Challenges
Session II: NGO Perspectives
Dr Madhumita Puri
Inclusion: Some Challenges for Policy Makers
Shri Ashwini Agarwal The Role of NGOs like NAB (Delhi) for Preparing the Children with Disabilities
for Inclusion- Theory and Practice
Dr Rita Malhotra
Experiences of Collaborating with Government in Implementing IEDC
Dr Sangita Agarwal
Issues of Inclusion in an Urban Scenario and Experiences of Partnership with
NGOs
Ms Varsha Hooja
Policy Changes: Innovative Sustainable Models of Inclusive Education for
Children with Disabilities (Presenter on behalf of Ms Mithu Alur)
Ms Renu Singh
Forging Alliances -The Way Ahead
Shri Mathivanan
Inclusion: Coimbatore Experience
Session III: Universities Perspectives
Dr Sreekumari Kartha NGO Perceptive on Partnership with Government and Universities (Presenter on
behalf of Dr Indumathi Rao)
Dr Lina Kashyap
Facilitating Inclusive Education through Networking
Dr Sushma Sharma
Index for Inclusion and Reviewing the Status of IEDC – Case of Haryana
Dr Smriti Swarup
University Partnership in Fostering Inclusion
Dr Premavathy Vijayan Promoting Inclusive Education in India
Session IV: Perspective of Government Agencies
Dr Janak Verma
Shri G K Agarwal
Partnership of Government-NGOs to Promote Inclusive Education
A Model of Inclusive Education: Turning the Wheels
List of Papers Circulated:
Dr Bhushan Punani
Integrated Education for Children with Disabilities
Shri M M Jha
Inclusive Education Training Initiative, Note on Inclusive Education
Prof S Mukhopadhyay Voices from the Other Side
and Ms Jayanti Prakash
The Papers are being compiled as NIEPA Publication.
39
SELECT PUBLICATIONS OF NIEPA
Total Quality Management in Education by Marmar Mukhopadhyay, 2001, NIEPA, New
Delhi, pp. xviii+255, Rs. 350 (also available in HINDI).
Governance of School Education in India edited by Marmar Mukhopadhyay and R.S. Tyagi,
2001, NIEPA, New Delhi, pp. xxi+340, Rs. 500.
Educational Policies in India: Analysis and Review of Promise and Performance edited by K.
Sudha Rao, 2002, NIEPA, New Delhi, pp. xiv+501, Rs. 600.
Secondary Education: The Challenges Ahead edited by Marmar Mukhopadhyay and Manju
Narula, 2002, NIEPA, New Delhi, pp. xiv+450, Rs. 450 (Paperback)
Globalisation and Challenges for Education compiled by Yazali Josephine, 2003, New
Delhi, Shipra Publications, 2003, pp. 784, Rs. 1250.
Financing Education in India edited by Jandhyala B.G. Tilak, 2003, New Delhi, Ravi Books,
2003, pp. 315, Rs. 500.
Education, Society and Development: National and International Perspectives edited by
Jandhyala B.G. Tilak, New Delhi, APH Publishing Corporation, 2003, pp. 650, Rs. 1295/Management of School Education in India edited by Neelam Sood, New Delhi, APH
Publishing Corporation, 2003, pp. 217, Rs. 495.
Community Participation and Empowerment in Primary Education edited by R. Govinda and
Rashmi Diwan, New Delhi, SAGE, 2003, pp. 255, Rs. 480.
National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration
17-B, Sri Aurobindo Marg, New Delhi- 110016
Phone: 26962120, 26962126; E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.niepa.org
40