This study reviews the curriculum of inclusive education at the primary level in Pakistan, highlighting significant challenges such as inadequate teacher training, lack of audio-visual aids, and lengthy content that fails to engage students. Data collected from 100 students indicates that many feel they do not learn effectively through verbal lectures alone, suggesting a need for curriculum reform and improved teaching methods. Recommendations include enhancing teacher training and making learning materials more engaging to better fulfill the needs of all students, particularly those with special needs.

1. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
A Review of Inclusive Education Curriculum at primary
level in Pakistan
Samia Rehman Dogar
Federal College of Education, Islamabad
Abstract: The study was designed to review of curriculum of inclusive education at primary
level.The procedure of the study involved the selection of 100 students from the public
schools of Islamabad randomly. The data was collected through questionnaires. Analysis
and interpretation of the data was carried out by the help of the frequencies of the data.
Keeping in view the collected data it has been concluded that students learn less with the
help of verbal lecture only. Teachers did not use A/V aids for their class room teaching,
because A/V aids have not been provided to their institute. Most of the teachers were not
trained for teaching inclusive education curriculum. They should be provided training
through in-service refresher courses or workshops. It was also concluded that contents are
too lengthy and most of the students, feeling bored, start daydreaming during their classes.
The Data also shows that curriculum sometimes does not match with the mental level and
needs of special students. It is recommended that books should be colorful and Teachers
must be trained through workshops/seminar about inclusive educations.
Keywords: inclusive education, curriculum, special children
Introduction
Inclusive Education is a new concept. A few
schools are striving to create an inclusive
environment through experimentation and
various approaches. These approaches
include establishing new inclusive schools
giving access to children with disabilities to
existing school persuading children without
disabilities to join special education
institute, keeping children with special
needs within regular school through in
separate classrooms with multigame
inclusive class room.
The early name for the method of including
children with disabilities or special needs in
the
"regular"
classroom
was
mainstreaming. Today, by definition,
mainstreaming focuses on a student's parttime attendance in regular education
groups, while inclusion professes to do just
what it says--include all children, regardless
of skill level or needs, in age-appropriate
[键入文字]
classrooms as long as the guidelines of
IDEA are followed--the placement must be
an appropriate educational program, and it
must
be
the
"least
restrictive
environment."
Inclusive education means that
schools should accommodate all
children regardless of their physical,
intellectual,
social,
emotional,
linguistic or other conditions. This
should include disabled and gifted
children, street and working children,
children from remote or nomadic
populations, children from linguistic,
ethnic or cultural minorities and
children from other disadvantaged or
marginalized areas or groups.
(UNESCO, 2003: p4)
Similarly
Inclusive education starts from the
belief that the right to education is a
basic human right and the foundation
for a more just society. A UNESCO
44

2. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
definition of inclusive education. An
inclusive education system ensures
that all children have equal access to
quality education in their community
school regardless of their gender,
abilities, disabilities, backgrounds,
health conditions and circumstances.
http://www.education.gov.ck/index.p
hp?option=com_content&task=view&
id=649&Itemid=1 (retrieved at 1:32
am 03/01/2012)
And
Inclusive education is not merely
about providing access into
mainstream school for pupils who
have previously been excluded. It is
not about closing down an
unacceptable system of segregated
provision and dumping those closing
down an unacceptable system of
segregated provision and dumping
those pupils in an unchanged
mainstream system. Existing school
systems in terms of physical factors,
curriculum aspects, teaching
expectations and styles, leadership
roles. will have to change. This is
because inclusive education is about
the participation of ALL children and
young people and the removal of all
forms of exclusionary practic (Barton,
1997: p. 84-85).
Many
meanings
and
approaches
highlighted how different ways of seeing
the broad picture will influence the detail
of practice and provision. Not only are
interpretations of what inclusion means
contentious, but there are also diverse and
conflicting debates in which different
approaches are seen as detrimental to the
effective development of this area.
Classification of inclusive
education
Inclusion has two sub-types: the first is
sometimes called regular inclusion or
partial inclusion, and the other is full
inclusion. "Inclusive practice" is not always
inclusive but is a form of integration. For
[键入文字]
Issue 1, 2013
example, students with special needs are
educated in regular classes for nearly all of
the day, or at least for more than half of
the day. Whenever possible, the students
receive any additional help or special
instruction in the general classroom, and
the student is treated like a full member of
the class. However, most specialized
services are provided outside a regular
classroom, particularly if these services
require special equipment or might be
disruptive to the rest of the class (such as
speech therapy), and students are pulled
out of the regular classroom for these
services. In this case, the student
occasionally leaves the regular classroom
to attend smaller, more intensive
instructional sessions in a resource room,
or to receive other related services, such as
speech
and
language
therapy,
occupational and/or physical therapy,
and social work. This approach can be very
similar to many mainstreaming practices,
and may differ in little more than the
educational ideals behind it. In the "full
inclusion" setting, the students with special
needs are always educated alongside
students without special needs, as the first
and desired option while maintaining
appropriate supports and services. Some
educators say this might be more effective
for the students with special needs.
A mainstreamed student attends
some general education classes,
typically for less than half the day, and
often for less academically rigorous
classes. For example, a young student
with significant intellectual
disabilities might be mainstreamed
for physical education classes; art
classes and storybook time but spend
reading and mathematics classes with
other students that have similar
disabilities. They may have access to a
resource room for remediation of
course content. A segregated student
attends no classes with non-disabled
students. He or she might attend a
special school that only enrolls other
students with disabilities, or might be
placed in a dedicated, self-contained
45

3. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
classroom in a school that also enrolls
general education students.(retrived
from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusion
_(education) on 16-07-2013)
Common practices of inclusive
education
Students in an inclusive classroom are
generally placed with their chronological
age-mates, regardless of whether the
students are working above or below the
typical academic level for their age. Also, to
encourage a sense of belonging, emphasis
is placed on the value of friendships.
Teachers often nurture a relationship
between a student with special needs and
a same-age student without a special
educational need. Another common
practice is the assignment of a buddy to
accompany a student with special needs at
all times (for example in the cafeteria, on
the playground, on the bus and so on). This
is used to show students that a diverse
group of people make up a community,
that no one type of student is better than
another, and to remove any barriers to a
friendship that may occur if a student is
viewed as "helpless." Such practices reduce
the chance for elitism among students in
later grades and encourage cooperation
among groups.
Teachers use a number of techniques to
help build classroom communities:

Games designed to build
community

Involving students in solving
problems

Songs and books that teach
community

Openly dealing with individual
differences by discussion

Assigning classroom jobs that
build community

Teaching students to look for
ways to help each other
[键入文字]

Issue 1, 2013
Utilizing physical therapy
equipment such as standing
frames, so students who typically
use wheelchairs can stand when
the other students are standing
and more actively participate in
activities
(retrived
from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wi
ki/Inclusion_(education)
on 16-07-2013)
Selection of students for
inclusion
Educators generally say that some students
with special needs are not good candidates
for inclusion.[ Many schools expect a fully
included student to be working at or near
grade level, but more fundamental
requirements exist: First, being included
requires that the student is able to attend
school. Students that are entirely excluded
from school (for example, due to long-term
hospitalization), or who are educated
outside of schools (for example, due to
enrollment in a distance education
program) cannot attempt inclusion.
Additionally, some students with special
needs are poor candidates for inclusion
because of their effect on other students.
For example, students with severe
behavioral problems, such that they
represent a serious physical danger to
others, are poor candidates for inclusion,
because the school has a duty to provide a
safe environment to all students and staff.
Finally, some students are not good
candidates for inclusion because the
normal activities in a general education
classroom will prevent them from learning.
For example, a student with severe
attention difficulties or extreme sensory
processing disorders might be highly
distracted or distressed by the presence of
other students working at their desks.
Inclusion needs to be appropriate to
the child's unique needs. Most
students with special needs do not fall
into these extreme categories, as
46

4. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
most students do attend school, are
not violent, do not have severe
sensory processing disorders, etc. The
students that are most commonly
included are those with physical
disabilities that have no or little effect
on their academic work (diabetes
mellitus, epilepsy, food allergies,
paralysis), students with all types of
mild disabilities, and students whose
disabilities require relatively few
specialized services. .(retrived from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusi
on_(education) on 16-07-2013)
Positive effects of inclusive
education
There are many positive effects of
inclusions where both the students with
special needs along with the other
students in the classroom both benefit.
Research has shown positive effects for
children with disabilities in areas such as
reading individualized education program
(IEP) goal, improving communication and
social skills, increasing positive peer
interactions, many educational outcomes,
and post school adjustments.
Positive effects on children without
disabilities include the development
of positive attitudes and perceptions
of persons with disabilities and the
enhancement of social status with
nondisabled peers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusion
_(education)
Criticism on inclusive education
Critics of full and partial inclusion include
educators, administrators and parents. Full
and partial inclusion approaches neglect to
acknowledge the fact most students with
significant
special
needs
require
individualized instruction or highly
controlled environments. Thus, general
education classroom teachers often are
teaching a curriculum while the special
education
teacher
is
remediating
instruction at the same time. Similarly, a
[键入文字]
Issue 1, 2013
child with serious inattention problems
may be unable to focus in a classroom that
contains twenty or more active children.
Although with the increase of incidence of
disabilities in the student population, this is
a circumstance all teachers must contend
with, and is not a direct result of inclusion
as a concept. Full inclusion may in fact be a
way for schools to placate parents and the
general public, using the word as a phrase
to garner attention for what are in fact
illusive efforts to education students with
special needs in the general education
environment.
Some argue that inclusive schools
are not a cost-effective response
when compared to cheaper or
more effective interventions, such
as special education. They argue
that special education helps "fix"
the special needs students by
providing individualized and
personalized instruction to meet
their unique needs. This is to help
students with special needs adjust
as quickly as possible to the
mainstream of the school and
community. Proponents counter
that students with special needs
are not fully into the mainstream
of student life because they are
secluded to special education.
Some argue that isolating students
with special needs may lower their
self-esteem and may reduce their
ability to deal with other people.
(Retrived from
www.buddhischool.com/html/Prof
Dev/Inclusive_classroom_paper.do
c on 17-07-2013 at 6am)
Benefits of inclusion for
students with disabilities
1. Friendships
2.
Increased
social initiations,
relationships and networks
47

5. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
3. Peer role models for academic,
social and behavior skills
4. Increased achievement of IEP goals
5. Greater
curriculum
access
to
general
6. Enhanced skill acquisition and
generalization
7. Increased
environments
inclusion
8.
Greater
interactions
in
future
opportunities
for
school
staff
11. Increased parent participation
The major objectives of the study are
1. Identification of the problems faced
by special students in curriculum of
Inclusive Education
2. Determination of the extent to
which the current curricula fulfill the
needs of the students and the society.
Suggestions to bring improvements in
curriculum of Inclusive education are
also included
The population of the study was
approximately 1000 students studying at
F.G Model Schools, Islamabad.
1. Meaningful friendships
2. Increased appreciation and
acceptance of individual differences
3. Increased understanding
acceptance of diversity
The method of the study included the
following stages
Population
Benefits of inclusion for
students without disabilities
and
4. Respect for all people
5. Prepares all students for adult life in
an inclusive society
6. Opportunities to master activities
by practicing and teaching others
7. Greater academic outcomes
8.All students needs are better met,
greater resources for everyone
(Retrieved
from
http://www.kidstogether.o
rg/inclusion/benefitsofincl
usion.htm on 13-05-2012)
Statement of problem
The study has been designed to review the
Curriculum of Inclusive Education at
primary level in Pakistan.
[键入文字]
Objective
Methodology
9. Higher expectations
10.
Increased
collaboration
Issue 1, 2013
Sample
Ten Federal Government Junior
Model School of Islamabad capital territory
were selected as sample of the study out of
which 100 students (ten from each school)
of primary level and 50(5 teachers from
each school) teachers teaching to
respective classes were selected as sample
of the study.
Research Instrument
Questionnaire was decided as instrument
and keeping in view the objective of the
study 0.5 likert scale was prepared to
collect data from the students included in
the sample.
Data Collection
Data was collected through personal visits
by using survey method
Data Analysis
After collection of data, percentages were
used for the purpose of data analysis
through SPSS. The findings and conclusions
were drawn and recommendations were
made.
48

6. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Delimitation of study:
Curriculum only
Study can be carried out in many
dimensions i.e.
Primary Level only
Analyses and Presentation of
the Data
1. Teaching methods
2. Student’s evaluation system
Students Data
3. Students learning level
but due to the constraints of time and
resources the study was delimited to the
following areas only.
Table 1. Class of students
Class
Grede2
Grede3
Grede4
Grade5
Total
Frequency
Percent
1
1.0
41
41.0
53
53.0
5
5.0
100
100.0
and 5 percent respondents are studying in
Table 1 shows that 53 percent respondent
grade 5.
are in grade 4 , 41 percent s are in Grade 3,
Table 2. Age of Students
Age
8-9 years
10 years
10-15 years
Total
Frequency
36
50
14
100
Percent
36.0
50.0
14.0
100.0
percent students are 10 years old and
other 14 percent are more than 10 years.
Table 2 shows 36 percent students are in
the age of between 8 and 9 years, 50
Table 3. I can easily learn from books
Frequency
Percent
35
35.0
29
23
13
100
29.0
23.0
13.0
100.0
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Total
Table 3 shows that 35 percent are strongly
disagree , 29 percent are disagreed that
they cannot easily learn their oral work in
[键入文字]
their books and only 13 percent are in
favor that they can easily learn oral work in
their books.
49

7. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 4. Activity based contents help to stop day dreaming in the classroom
Frequency
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Total
Percent
8
8.0
13
15
27
13.0
15.0
27.0
37
37.0
100
100.0
only 8 percent are in against that activity
based contents stop day dreaming in the
class room.
Table 4 shows that 37 percent students are
agreed that activity based contents help to
stop day dreaming in the classroom but
Table 5. I think contents enhance my learning ability
Frequency
Percent
9
9.0
6
6.0
16
16.0
58
58.0
11
100
11.0
100.0
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 5 shows that 58 percent students
agreed that contents enhance their
learning ability but only 9 percent are
disagreed that content enhance their
learning abilities.
Table 6. I can easily understand contents teaches by my teacher
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 6 shows that 46 percent students are
agreed they can easily understand contents
teaches by their teacher but only 01
[键入文字]
Frequency
1
26
25
46
2
100
Percent
1.0
26.0
25.0
46.0
2.0
100.0
percent are disagreed that they cannot
understand contents teaches by their
teachers.
50

8. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 7. My text books are very color full and I am satisfied
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Frequency
41
15
8
28
8
100
Table 7 shows 41 percent students are not
satisfied by their books and 28 percent are
Percent
41.0
15.0
8.0
28.0
8.0
100.0
agreed that their book is colorful and they
are satisfied.
Table 8. Teachers use special teaching aid during the teaching
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Frequency
11
46
12
23
8
100
Table 8 shows 46 percent student are
disagree that teachers use special teaching
aid during the teaching but 23 percent are
Percent
11.0
46.0
12.0
23.0
8.0
100.0
agreed that teachers use special teaching
aid during the teaching.
Table 9. I am satisfied with my teacher teaching method
Frequency
Percent
Strongly Disagree
16
16.0
Disagree
29
29.0
Neutral
28
28.0
Agree
19
19.0
Strongly Agree
8
8.0
Total
100
100.0
by their teaching method and 28% were
Table 9 shows 29 percent students are not
neutral in their opinion.
satisfied by their teacher teaching method
only 19 percent of respondent are satisfied
[键入文字]
51

9. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 10. I feel burden with this curriculum
Frequency
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Total
Percent
3
3.0
22
52
19
22.0
52.0
19.0
4
4.0
100
100.0
Table 10 shows 22 percent students are
disagreed that they feel burden with this
curriculum is teaching but 52 percent
respondent were neutral in their opinion.
Table 11. Curriculums helps to improve my learning abilities
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Frequency
2
12
37
40
9
100
Table 11 shows 40 percent students are
agreed that Curriculum is improving their
learning ability in class and only 11 percent
respondent are disagreed that Curriculum
Percent
2.0
12.0
37.0
40.0
9.0
100.0
help to improve their learning abilities and
37 percent respondents were neutral in
their opinion.
Table 12. I became able to learn easily with regular students
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Frequency
15
44
33
7
1
100
Table 12 reveals that 43 percent students
are disagree that they can learn easily with
regular students by same curriculum and
[键入文字]
Percent
15.0
44.0
33.0
7.0
1.0
100.0
33 percent respondent were neutral in
their opinion.
52

10. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 13. Contents are comprehensive and too long
Frequency
17
Percent
17.0
Disagree
12
12.0
Neutral
13
13.0
Agree
54
54.0
Strongly Agree
4
100
4.0
100.0
Strongly Disagree
Total
Table 13 shows that 54 percent students
are agreed that contents of curriculum are
comprehensive and too long only 16
percent are disagreed that contents of
curriculum are comprehensive and too
long.
Table 14. Communication and motivation among students increases by local
Curriculum
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 14 shows 41 percent students are
agreed
that
Communication
and
Frequency
10
15
31
41
3
100
Percent
10.0
15.0
31.0
41.0
3.0
100.0
motivation among students increases by
local curriculum.
Table 15. Special students can learn or understand easily contents of curriculum
Frequency
Percent
Strongly Disagree
36
36.0
Disagree
30
30.0
Neutral
7
7.0
Agree
14
14.0
Strongly Agree
13
13.0
Total
100
100.0
curriculum. And only 7% were neutral in
Table 15 shows 36 percent students are
their opinion.
strongly disagreeing that Special students
can learn or understand easily contents of
[键入文字]
53

11. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 16. I like to participate in the class
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Frequency
46
24
8
12
10
100
Table 16 shows 40 percent students are
strongly disagree that they cannot
Percent
46.0
24.0
8.0
12.0
10.0
100.0
participate in the class and give answers as
regular students do.
Table 17. A/V aids are available in our institute
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Frequency
45
16
17
19
3
100
Table 17 shows 45 percent students are
disagree that A/V aids are available in their
institute for learning of contents only 19
Percent
45.0
16.0
17.0
19.0
3.0
100.0
percent respondent are agreed that A/V
aids are available in their institute for
learning of contents.
Table 18. Teachers use A/V aids During class room teaching
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Frequency
47
10
20
13
10
100
Table 18 shows 45 percent students are
disagree that teacher uses A/V aids for
teaching only 13 percent are agreed that
[键入文字]
Percent
47.0
10.0
20.0
13.0
10.0
100.0
teacher use A/V aids for teaching. And 20%
were neutral in their opinion.
54

12. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 19. I feel inferiority complex in my class
Frequency
Percent
13
13.0
10
10.0
56
56.0
16
16.0
5
5.0
100
100.0
inferiority complex during class and they
Table 19 shows 56 percent students are
were neutral in their opinion.
not able to give answer that they have
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 20. I feel shy when I have to answer my teacher before my class fellows
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 20 shows 41 percent students are
agree that they feel shy when they give
answer to teacher in front of other
students and 18 percent of respondent do
Frequency
6
Percent
6.0
18
18
41
17
100
18.0
18.0
41.0
17.0
100.0
not feel shy when they give answer to
teacher in front of students. And also 18%
were neutral in their opinion.
Table 21. I think separate curriculum can be adopted for Inclusive Education
Frequency
Percent
13
13.0
7
7.0
11
11.0
20
20.0
49
49.0
100
100.0
curriculum can be adopted for Inclusive
Table 21 shows 49 percent students are
Education.
strongly agreed and in favor that separate
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
[键入文字]
55

13. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 22. Genders of Teachers
Frequency
Percent
Male
34
51.5
Female
32
48.5
Total
66
100.0
Table 22 shows 51.5 percent are male
teacher and 48.5 are female teacher
respondent.
Table 23. Age of Teachers
Age
Between 20 and 40
Between 40 and 60
Total
Frequency
26
40
66
Percent
39.4
60.6
100.0
Table 23 shows 60.6 percent
teacher are in age between 40
years to 60 years old.
Table 24. Academic Qualification of Teachers
Qualificati
on
F.Sc
B.Sc
M.Sc
Total
Frequency
22
28
10
66
Table 24 shows 42.4 percent
teacher have Bachelor degree and
15.2 have Master degree holder
Percent
33.3
42.4
15.2
100.0
only 33.3 have
qualification.
Intermediate
Table 25. Professional Qualifications
Professional
Qualification
PTC/CT/Diploma
B.Ed/BS.Ed
M.A Education
M.Ed
Total
Table 25 shows 33.3 percent
teacher have degree of B.Ed/BS.Ed
24.2 have PTC/CT/Diploma 25.8
[键入文字]
Frequency
16
22
17
11
66
Percent
24.2
33.3
25.8
16.7
100.0
percent have degree of M.A
education only 11 percent have
M.Ed degree.
56

14. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 26. Working Experience of teachers
Experience
1-3 Years
3-5 Years
5-7 Years
7 to above
Total
Table 26 shows that 15.2 percent
teachers are 1-3 years experienced
33.3 percent teachers are 3-5 years
Frequency
10
22
17
17
66
Percent
15.2
33.3
25.8
25.8
100.0
experienced and 25.8 percent
teachers are 5 and more than 7
years experienced.
Table 27. I am skilled for inclusive based teaching
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Frequency
6
14
6
25
15
66
Percent
9.1
21.2
9.1
37.9
22.7
100.0
Table 27 shows 37.9 percent
teacher are skilled in inclusive
based teaching.
Table 28. Activity based teaching can make the content interesting for primary
students
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 28 shows 51.5 percent
teachers are agreed that activity
[键入文字]
Frequency
6
11
10
34
5
66
Percent
9.1
16.7
15.2
51.5
7.6
100.0
based teaching will make content
interesting for primary students
57

15. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 29. I can teach easily syllabus within the academic year
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 29 shows 37.9 percent
teachers are agreed that they can
teach easily syllabus within the
academic year and 24.2 percent
Frequency
9
16
11
25
5
66
Percent
13.6
24.2
16.7
37.9
7.6
100.0
are disagreed that they can teach
easily syllabus within the academic
year.
Table 30. Contents are comprehensive but based on activities
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 30 shows 27.3 percent
teachers are disagree that contents
are comprehensive but based on
Frequency
Percent
14
21.2
18
27.3
10
15.2
16
24.2
8
12.1
66
100.0
activities and 24.2 are agreed that
contents are comprehensive but
based on activities.
Table 31. Institute providing the opportunity to attend the workshops/training
about Inclusive Education
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 31 shows 33.3 percent
teacher are disagree that institute
[键入文字]
Frequency
11
22
11
17
5
66
Percent
16.7
33.3
16.7
25.8
7.6
100.0
providing the workshops according
to syllabus of Inclusive Education.
58

16. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 32. Curriculums produce inferiority complex
Frequency
8
Percent
16.0
Disagree
12
24.0
Neutral
12
24.0
Agree
14
28.0
Strongly Agree
4
8.0
Total
50
100.0
Strongly Disagree
Table 32 shows 28.8 percent
teacher are agree that curriculum
produce inferiority complex during
learning process of students.
Table 33. Curriculums is according to mental level of students
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Total
Frequency
4
14
28
20
66
Percent
6.1
21.2
42.4
30.3
100.0
Table 33 shows 30.3 percent
teachers are agree that curriculum
based on mental level of students.
Table 34. A/V aids are available in our institute for teaching of contents
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 34 shows 28.8 percent
teacher are disagree that A/V aids
[键入文字]
Frequency
Percent
1
1.5
19
28.8
16
24.2
26
39.4
4
6.1
66
100.0
are available in their institute for
teaching of contents.
59

17. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 35. Special students can learn or understand the contents of curriculum easily
Strongly Disagree
Frequency
13
Percent
19.7
Disagree
19
28.8
Neutral
9
13.6
Agree
19
28.8
Strongly Agree
6
9.1
Total
66
Table 35 shows that 28.8 percent
are disagreed that Special students
100.0
can learn or understand easily
contents of curriculum.
Table 36. It helps to promotes Child-friendly learning environment
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 36 shows 37.9 percent
teachers are disagree that childfriendly learning environment is
Frequency
Percent
9
13.6
7
10.6
23
34.8
25
37.9
2
3.0
66
100.0
improving through adapting this
curriculum and 23% were neutral
in their opinion.
Table 37. It produces motivation among student
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 37 shows 37.9 percent
teachers
are
agreed
that
communication and motivation
Frequency
Percent
12
18.2
12
18.2
14
21.2
25
37.9
3
4.5
66
100.0
among students increases by local
curriculum.
Table 38. Curriculums fulfill the needs of special students
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
[键入文字]
Frequency
22
15
5
18
6
66
Percent
33.3
22.7
7.6
27.3
9.1
100.0
60

18. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Table 38 shows 33.3 percent
teachers are strongly disagree that
curriculum full fill needs of
Issue 1, 2013
inclusive student and 27.3 percent
are agreed that curriculum full fill
needs of inclusive student.
Table 39. Special become able learn easily with regular students and curriculum
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 39 shows 31.8 percent
teachers are strongly disagree that
special students can
Frequency
Percent
21
31.8
16
24.2
7
10.6
9
13.6
13
19.7
66
100.0
learn easily with regular students
by same curriculum.
Table 40. Curriculums is based on research and Need Analysis
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 40 shows that 33.3 percent
teachers are strongly disagree that
curriculum is based on research
and modern terms 21.2 percent
are agreed that curriculum is based
Frequency
Percent
22
33.3
11
16.7
14
21.2
14
21.2
5
7.6
66
100.0
on research .So most of the
teachers says that this curriculum
is not based on need analysis and
research.
Table 41. Curriculum helps to improve the learning ability of special and regular
Students
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 41 shows 25.8 percent
teacher are strongly disagree that
curriculum is improving learning
ability of all the students but 25.8
[键入文字]
Frequency
Percent
17
25.8
10
15.2
16
24.2
17
25.8
6
9.1
66
100.0
percent teachers are also agree
that curriculum is improving
learning ability of all the students.
61

19. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 42. Special students feel a burden with this when curriculum
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 42 shows 33.3 percent
teachers are agree that special
students feel burden with this
Frequency
Percent
10
15.2
4
6.1
20
30.3
22
33.3
10
15.2
66
100.0
curriculum and
30.3 percent
respondent are neutral in their
opinion.
Table 43. Special students participate in class like regular students
Strongly Disagree
Frequency
10
Percent
15.2
Disagree
10
15.2
Neutral
12
18.2
Agree
24
36.4
Strongly Agree
10
15.2
Total
66
100.0
students participate in class a give
answers as regular students do.
Table 43 shows 36.4 percent
teachers are agree that special
Table 44. I Attend workshops/seminar about inclusive education
Strongly Disagree
Frequency
13
Percent
19.7
Disagree
9
13.6
Neutral
15
22.7
Agree
12
18.2
Strongly Agree
17
25.8
Total
66
Table 44 shows 25.8 percent
teachers are strongly agree that
[键入文字]
100.0
they attend workshops/seminar
about inclusive education.
62

20. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
Table 45. Institutions have proper arrangement for teaching Inclusive Education
curriculum
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Table 45 shows 30.3 percent
teachers are agree that there is
Discussion
5 percent respondents were strongly
disagreeing and 29 percent were disagreed
that they cannot easily learn their oral
work in their books. Similarly 37 percent
students were agreed that activity based
contents help to stop day dreaming in the
classroom but only 8 percent are against
the proposition that activity based
contents stop day dreaming in the class
room.
58 percent students agreed that contents
enhance their learning ability but only 9
percent disagreed that content enhance
their learning abilities and 46 percent
students were agreed they can easily
understand contents taught by their
teacher but only 1 percent were disagreed
that they cannot understand contents
taught by their teachers.
41 percent students were not satisfied by
their books and 28 percent agreed that
their book is colorful and they are satisfied.
46 percent students disagree that teachers
use special teaching aid during the
teaching but 23 percent agree that
teachers use special teaching aid during
the teaching
29 percent students were not satisfied by
their teacher’s teaching method. Only 19
percent of respondents are satisfied by
their teacher's method where as 22
percent students disagree that they feel
bored when curriculum is being taught but
52 percent respondents have no answer
about this question.
[键入文字]
Frequency
16
20
11
11
8
66
Percent
24.2
30.3
16.7
16.7
12.1
100.0
proper arrangement for teaching
Inclusive Education curriculum.
40 percent students were agreed that
Curriculum has improved their learning
ability in class and only 11 percent
respondent are disagree that Curriculum is
improving their learning ability in class .37
percent respondent have not shown their
opinion.
43 percent students disagree that they can
learn easily with regular students by same
curriculum and 39 percent respondent
have not shown their opinion.
54 percent students were agreed that
contents of curriculum are extensive and
too long only 16 percent were disagreed
that contents of curriculum are extensive
and too long, and 41 percent students
were agreed that communication and
motivation among students increases by
local curriculum.
36 percent students were strongly disagree
that Special students can learn or
understand easily contents of curriculum
and 40 percent students were strongly
disagreeing that they cannot participate in
class and give answers as regular students
do.
45 percent students were disagree that
A/V aids were available in their institute for
learning of contents only 19 percent
respondent were agreed that A/V aids
were available in their institute for learning
of contents
45 percent students were disagree that
teacher uses A/V aids for teaching only 13
percent were agreed that teacher uses A/V
aids for teaching similarly 56 percent
63

21. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
students were not able to give answer
because they have inferiority complex
during class.
41 percent students were agree that they
feel shy when they give answer to teacher
in front of other students and 19 percent
of respondent do not feel shy when they
give answer to teacher in front of students.
49 percent students were strongly agreed
and in favor that separate curriculum can
be adopted for Inclusive Education and
37.9 percent teachers were skilled in
inclusive based teaching
51.5 percent teachers were agreed that
activity based teaching will make content
interesting for primary students similarly
37.9 percent teachers were agreed that
they can teach easily syllabus within the
academic year.
27.3 percent teachers were disagree that
contents were comprehensive but based
on activities 33.3 percent teacher were
disagree that institute providing the work
shops according to syllabus of Inclusive
Education and 28.8 percent teacher were
agree that curriculum produce inferiority
complex during learning process of
students
30.3 percent teachers were agree that
curriculum based on mental level of
students and 28.8 percent teacher were
disagree that A/V aids were available in
their institute for teaching of contents
28.8 percent teachers were disagree that
special students can learn or understand
easily contents of curriculum and 37.9
percent teachers were disagree that childfriendly learning environment is improving
through adapting to the local content do
curriculum
37.9 percent teachers were agreed that
communication and motivation among
students increases by local curriculum and
33.3 percent teachers were strongly
disagree that curriculum full fill the needs
of inclusive students.
[键入文字]
Issue 1, 2013
Conclusions
Following
were
the
conclusions of the study.
major

It was concluded that students cannot
easily learn the oral work in their
books and they are not satisfied by
their books as the book is not colorful
and not based on activities. it was also
concluded that teachers do not use
A/V aids during their classroom
teaching

Most of the teachers are not skilled in
inclusive based teaching and the
institutes building their capacity
according to the class room and
curriculum requirements.

It is also concluded that contents are
too lengthy and not activity based.

Most of the students feel bored and
start daydreaming during their
classroom teaching.

It was concluded that curriculum is not
according to our modern, social global
and national needs and also does not
cater the mental level of special
students.

It was concluded that learning level of
special students decreases while
studying with the normal students and
teaching to special children with
normal children produces inferiority
complex among special students.
Recommendations
Following
are
the
major
recommendations of the study.

It is recommended that books should
be colorful as the students like colorful
text books.

Institutes must focus on the capacity
building of their faculty through
workshops/seminar.

It is recommended that curriculum
should be activities based because
activities involve psychomotor
domains which give direct and
64

22. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Social Sciences
Issue 1, 2013
purposeful experience with results
that are permanent and lifelong
learning.


should be provided by the institutions
because A/V aids are back bone of
teaching in inclusive education.
A/V aids for activities and class room
teaching

Curriculum should be according to our
modern, social global and national
needs and also should be according to
mental level of special students.
[键入文字]
65