Providing Instruction to Students with Special Needs in Inclusive Classrooms in Ghana: Issues and Challenges

Abstract

Introduction Ghana's commitment towards inclusive education was heightened when it became a signatory to the Salamanca declaration in 1994. This commitment followed several previous piece-meal attempts at meeting the varied needs of persons with disabilities, including their access to general education classrooms. Although there are no accurate statistics on the prevalence of disabilities in Ghana, the National Disability Policy Document (Ministry of Employment and Social Welfare, Federation of Disabled & Ministry of Education, 2000) has suggested (based on estimates from the regions) that the national average is well above 10% of the population. These high estimates of the numbers of persons with a disability, a substantial percentage of whom are children, underscored the need for conscious efforts in pursuing effective measures to provide rehabilitation, education and other services to persons with disabilities. Undoubtedly, the Government of Ghana recognised that if the educational needs of such a substantial percentage of the population were to be met by only special schools, it would require enormous amounts of resources to provide the needed variety of specialists, equipment and space in special education classrooms. It was this recognition that underpinned the Ghanaian Government's drive to ensure that all children (with and without disabilities) attend their local schools through the initiation, in 1992, of the Community-Based Rehabilitation and the Inclusive Education Programs. The implementation of these two programs, aimed at providing services to many persons with disabilities who were without services in the community, entailed the acceptance of the principles underlying the Primary Health Care Project promoted by the World Health Organisation (WHO). Firstly, that it was more important to bring about small improvements for many than to provide the highest standard of care for a privileged few; and secondly, that non-professionals with limited training could provide crucial services (O'Toole, 1989). With respect to education, the evolving local inclusive school environments, it was envisaged, could provide the needed services to students with disabilities who were not able to enrol in the few special schools. This development marked a formal and broader attempt at meeting the needs of students with special needs in local community schools in order to address the enormous difficulties faced by many students with special needs who did not have the opportunity to attend the few scattered special schools. The program involved among others, the use of itinerant peripatetic teachers to liaise with classroom teachers to support students with special needs (Kuyini, 1998; Ofori-Addo, 1994; O'Toole, et al., 1996). Proponents of inclusive education have argued for its implementation on the basis of basic human rights and as a way of providing the same educational experiences for all students (Lipsky & Gartner, 1998; Gresham & MacMillan, 1997; Walker, Ramsey & Gresham, 2004). Inclusion has also been justified on the basis of research, which indicates that it could lead to better academic and social skills for students with special needs (Carlberg & Cavale, 1980; Cole & Meyer, 1991; Freeman & Alkin 2000; Fryxell & Kennedy, 1995; Kennedy, Shulka & Fryxell, 1997; Waldron & McLesky, 1998). In order to achieve the goals of inclusive education, research has identified several key variables that could enhance or impede the success of inclusion. Among the many factors shown to influence the success of providing effective inclusion for students with special needs has been the use of appropriate instructional strategies/ adaptations. Friend and Bursuck (1996, 2002), Mastropieri and Scruggs (2000), OECD (1995), Salend (2001) and Tomlinson (1995) have emphasised the role of instructional adaptation in inclusive settings as an indispensable means for accommodating the needs of students with disabilities. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 50 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.