Situation of Special Education and Teachers Training in Nepal

 

Shyam Prasad Sedai

                                                       Ph.D. Scholar- Education ,UPRTOU

                                                      

            Nepal is landlocked, underdeveloped and geographically almost hilly and mountainous country which lies in Asia. The country lies between the two great countries India and China. The population of Nepal is 22 million. More than 58 % population is illiterate. Education for public was allowed after democracy in 1947 only. Before this there was not any accessibility in education. So, education is started just 60 years back. The physical barriers, lacking in resource (finance, human, information, and technology) in this context .Special Education for special need children is very negligible. Till the date actual data of person with disability (PWD) is not available. WHO estimated 10 % population of the world is suffering by some sort of disability. In developing country 90 % PWDs are out of education. Only 0.1 % PWDs attend higher education. 56 % PWDs live in remote, rural and hilly areas. Difficulty in mobility, mobilize resources, change attitude of the family, community, local authorities, government to provide the opportunity. Lacking in appropriate human resource, the hope of appropriate and enough opportunities for PWDs is miracle. Altogether only 2% of PWDs are getting the services. Education for All is very new concept for Nepal. It is just introduced in policy level. In the context of Nepal Education for All is very big challenge. In the disability aspect it is again more challenge. The attitude of community towards PWDs is gradually changing in positive way. But traditional belief, superstition and lacking in awareness it needs great deals for attitude change.

                There are 13,500 children with disabilities (CWDs) enrolled in the schools run by government and NGOs; of them 8000 children receive scholarship (MWCSW, 2005). There are 330 resource classes, 26 special schools and vocational rehabilitation centers currently in operation for CWDs. The Department of Education (DOE) has continuous support for the education and skills training of children with deafness and hearing impairment, blindness and vision impairment, intellectual and locomotive/mobility impairments for decades.

                There are training courses on special education for teachers teaching special needs children such as deaf, blind and intellectually disabled. In an attempt to train primary, lower secondary and secondary teachers; trainers' training manual was prepared by Special Education Section. The manual covers contents such as human rights, child rights, life skills and non-violent teaching techniques. For the first time, Inclusive Education Section, DOE/MOES has developed a Basic Training package on Inclusive Education in 2062 B.S. This section started providing the training on inclusive education to different educational personnel and selected stakeholders such as, District Education Officers (DEO), School Supervisors, Focal Persons, SMC Members, PTA members, parents/guardians, social workers, HTs, and teachers of schools where inclusive program has been launched.

Since DOE has different training packages for special education teachers and they intended to fulfill the needs of the teachers to be SNE / IE teachers through the development of a comprehensive training package.

Status of teacher training

In order to understand existing status of teacher training, a school survey form was filled (four special schools, three integrated schools and seven inclusive schools) by the field researcher with the help of Head teacher of the concerned school. Regarding the number of trained teachers under the NCED package, data gathered are analyzed below:                  Table 1 Number of trained teachers under the NCED packages

School	Trained	Untrained	Total
Special	3 (5.3)	54 (94.7)	57 (100)
Integrated	49 (75.4)	16 (24.6)	65 (100)
Inclusive	75 (63.0)	44 (37.0)	119 (100)

           Source:    CBS. 2001. Preliminary Results of Population Census 2001

The table clearly shows that in special schools there were only a few number of teachers (5.3%) trained in the NCED packages whereas around one fourth of the teachers (24.6%) teaching in integrated schools were not trained under the same packages. More than one-third of the teachers (37.0%) teaching in inclusive schools were not trained under the same NCED package. Thus, it may be said that very few teachers were trained in the general packages of NCED in special schools than those from the integrated and inclusive schools.

Table 2 Number of teachers by type of special training in special schools

Note: The symbol (*) denotes the vocational course relevant to the special needs children.

School		Name of training	Total number		Trained	Percentage
Deaf		Sign language	23	23		100.0
Blind	Braille		9	6		66.6
	Low vision		9	3		33.3
	Orientation & Mobility		9	2		22.2
	Vocational *		9	1		11.1
Intellectual disability	ID I level (15 days)		11	4		36.3
	ID I & II levels		11	2		18.1
	ID I, II & III levels		11	1		9.1
	ID one month		11	3		27.3
Physical disability	Sewing / weaving (10months)*		16	1		6.2
	Music *		16	1		6.2
	Computer (6 months) *		16	1		6.2

   Source:     Kafle, B.D. 1999. "Inclusive Education in Nepal

Based on the survey of these schools, it was found that all of the teachers teaching in special schools (deaf) were trained in sign language. In the special school related to blind students, some (22.2%) of the teachers were trained in orientation and mobility training, and some (33.3%) in low vision. Similarly, in the special schools related to intellectual disability, only less than one-third of the teachers were found to have been trained in ID one month training (27.3%) and ID I, II and III levels training (9.1%). Similarly, it was found that in the special school related to physical disability, only less than ten percent teachers were trained in each of the vocational courses such as sewing, weaving, music, and computer. Thus, it may be said that in all special schools except for deaf school, teachers were trained in inadequate number to address the needs of students.

Table 3 Number of teachers with special / inclusive training in integrated& inclusive schools

Teachers	Integrated (deaf) (n=1)	Integrated (blind) (n=1)	Integrated (ID) (n=1)	Inclusive (n=7)
Trained(average)	2 (2)	2 (2)	2 (2)	8 (1.1)
Total number	12	46	23	119

Source: UNDP. 2000. Human Development Report 2000

The table shows that two teachers in each integrated school were trained in special education and around a teacher, on an average, in inclusive school was trained in inclusive / special education. Thus, it may be said that there were not adequate number of teachers trained on inclusive education in inclusive schools. From the analysis of the data presented in the table, it seems that, at least two teachers in all integrated and inclusive schools are to be trained on special / inclusive education.

Table 4Number of resource teachers / inclusive teachers by type of training

School	Type of training
	General	Special	Inclusive
Integrated resource teacher (n=3)	3	3	0
Inclusive teachers (n=7)	6	5	2

Source : NPC. 2000. Nepal National Report on Follow-up to the World Summit for Children

   The table shows that none of the resource teachers in integrated schools was trained on inclusive education. The table further shows that, out of seven inclusive teachers, only two teachers (28.6%) were trained on inclusive education and five on special education.                 Table 5Number of license holding teachers

School	License holding	License non holding	Total
Special (n=4)	32 (54.2)	27 (45.8)	59 (100)
Integrated (n=3)	78 (96.3)	3 (3.7)	81 (100)
Inclusive (n=7)	116 (97.4)	3 (2.5)	119 (100)

Source :Dhaubhadel, H.N. 1990. "Development of Special Education in Nepal".

            The table shows that in special schools, there were more than 45%teachers who did not hold license for a teaching profession. The table also shows that more than 95% teachers teaching in integrated and inclusive schools had license for a teaching profession. Thus, it is obvious a need to establish a mechanism to make sure that all teachers hold license, particularly for the teachers teaching in special schools. Table 6Number of Head teachers by type of training

School	General training	Special education	Inclusive training
Special (n=4)	4	3	0
Integrated (n=3)	3	0	0
Inclusive (n=7)	7	0	3

Source :Dhaubhadel, H.N. 1990. "Development of Special Education in Nepal".

                The table shows that none of the Head teachers was trained on inclusive education in special schools, on inclusive and special education in integrated schools and on special education in inclusive schools. The table further shows that less than a half of the Head teachers (3 out of 7) of inclusive schools were trained on inclusive education.

Major Findings

1)       Majority of teachers teaching in integrated and inclusive schools (75.4% & 63% respectively) were found to have been trained in general courses provided by NCED indicating that training on inclusive education is a much sought necessity.

2)       It was found from the school survey that all the teachers in special deaf school were found to have sign language training, 66.6% teachers in special blind school had training in Braille script, 33.3% in low vision and 22.2% orientation and mobility. Only a few number of teachers of special school of intellectually disabled and physically disabled were found to have relevant trainings.

3)       In each integrated school, only the resource teacher had special education training. However, a teacher, on an average, was found to have been trained on inclusive / special education in each inclusive school.

4)       More than forty-five percent of teachers of special schools did not have teaching license whereas in integrated and inclusive schools, more than ninety five percent teachers had their teaching license.

5)       All of the Head teachers of sample schools had general training. Only three out of four Head teachers of special schools had special training and three out of seven Head teachers of inclusive schools had inclusive training.

REFERENCES

1.        Arjyal, M.P. 1999. "Overview of Special Education in Nepal". A Paper presented at the International Training Workshop on Teaching Professional Education Courses, May 26, 1999, Kathmandu Shiksha Campus.

2.        Best, J.W. and Kahn, J.V. 1998. Research in Education. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India.

3.        CBS. 2001. Preliminary Results of Population Census 2001. Kathmandu : Central Bureau of Statistics.

4.        CERID/T.U.  1998. Learning to Teach Through Fun. Kathmandu : Research Centre for Educational Innovation and Development (CERID), T.U.

5.        Dhaubhadel, H.N. 1990a. "Development of Special Education in Nepal". A

6.        paper presented at a seminar on New Directions in Education, Kathmandu : Faculty of Education, Tribhuvan University. March 29, 1990.

7.        Kafle, B.D. 1999. "Inclusive Education in Nepal". A paper presented at the International Training Workshop on Teaching Professional Education Courses. Kathmandu : Kathmandu Shiksha Campus, May 26, 1999.

8.        MOE/SEU. 1997 (2054). Jagaran : A Quarterly Magazine of Special Education Unit. Kathmandu : Ministry of Education, Vol. 10. Marg-Falgun.

9.        MOPE. 1998. Population Projections for Nepal 1996-2016. Vol.1. National and Urban Projections. Kathmandu: HMG/Ministry of Population and Environment, Singh Durbar.

10.     New ERA. 2001. A Situation Analysis on Disability in Nepal Vol. I. Feb. 2001, A Study Report Submitted to National Planning Commission Secretariat, Kathmandu, Nepal

11.     NPC. 2000. Nepal National Report on Follow-up to the World Summit for Children. Kathmandu, Nepal: HMG, National Planning Commission Secretariat.

12.     UN. 1990. Disability Statistics Compendium: Statistics on Special Population Groups, Series Y, (4). New York : United Nations.

13.     UNDP. 2000. Human Development Report 2000. Published for the UNDP by Oxford University Press, New Delhi: YMCA Library Building.

14.     Ysseldyke, I.E., Algozzine, B. and Thurlow, M. 1998. Critical Issues in Special Education. New Delhi: Kanishka Publishers, Distributors.