Uttarakhand disability situation analysis document
Community Health Global Network (CHGN)
Uttarakhand Disability Situation Analysis
[pic]
[pic]
Sana-e-Zehra Haidry (310730)
The University of Melbourne
Acknowledgement
This report is a compilation of information collected from variety of resources. It aims to create awareness about the current situation regarding disabilities amongst the people of / member cluster organizations of Community Health Global Network (CHGN) of Uttarakhand.
Table of Content
1. Introduction
2. Uttarakhand Health & Population Policy
3. Background
Definition and Classification of Disability
4. Prevalence
Distribution Of Pwds In India And Predominant Forms Of Disability
Socio-Economic Profiling
5. Stake Holders
Stakeholder Categories
6. Legislation
Policies For Disability In India
7. Health Of Pwds
Causes Of Disability In India
Age Of Onset Of Disability:
Use Of Health Services By Pwd
Factors Affecting Pwd Access To Health Care
8. Education Of Pwds
9. Employement Of Pwds
10. Service Providers And Services Available[1]
11. References/Resources
12. Annexure
Profile of Non-Governmental Organizations of/for Persons with Disabilities
INTRODUCTION
Uttarakhand, formerly part of Uttarpardesh became the 27th state of the Republic of India on November 9, 2000. Most of the northern parts of the state are part of Greater Himalayan ranges, covered by the high Himalayan peaks and glaciers. According to Census 2001, the total population of Uttarakhand is 8,489,349 and out of this 194769 persons are living with disability. The Department of Social Welfare is the concerned authority for the welfare of People with Disability (PWD) in Uttarakhand.
[pic]
{}
UTTARAKHAND HEALTH & POPULATION POLICY
Policy Objectives
To address the health issuses of Uttarakhand, Government formulated a comprehensive, integrated, state-specific health and population policy. Many of these policy targets are related to the disability prevention.
Health Objectives
• Eradicate polio by 2007.
• Reduce the level of leprosy to below 1 per 10,000 population by December 2007 (Uttarakhand has achieved P/R -0.72/10000)
• Reduce mortality from tuberculosis, malaria, and other vector and water-borne diseases by 50 percent by 2010.
• Reduce prevalence of blindness from around 1 to 0.3 percent by 2010.
• Reduce Iodine Deficiency Disorder (IDD) by 50 percent of the present level by 2010.
• Reduce RTIs to below 10 percent among men and women by 2007.
• Increase awareness on HIV/AIDS.
In the 11th five year plan (2007-2012) the objective of Directorate of Medical Health & Family Welfare is "Health for All".
Under this
• To provide medical heath services in states remotest and disadvantaged blocks 3080 new subcenters will be established 275 new PHCs 35 new CHCs
• Apart from the above in district Bageshwar and Champawat specialist hospitals will be established.
• To reduce neo natal mortality, neo natal intensive care units will be established in all districts, in order to reduce neo natal mortality.
• To establish & strengthen emergency services in 10 district hospitals situated in national road routes in order to respond to road accidents and natural disasters. Further, it is proposed to establish 5 new blood banks.
• To strengthen paramedical staff and to train nurses, a nursing institute will be established in Dehradun.
• To serve difficult and disadvantaged areas 10 Mobile Hospital Vans will be acquired.
BACKGROUND
The term “persons with disabilities” applies to all persons who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments that, in the face of various negative attitudes or physical obstacles, may prevent those persons from participating fully in society. However, this is not an exhaustive definition of those who may claim protection under the Convention; nor does this definition exclude broader categories of persons with disabilities found in national law, including persons with short-term disabilities or persons who had disabilities in the past.
A person with disabilities may be regarded as such in one society or setting, but not in another. In most parts of the world, there are deep and persistent negative stereotypes and prejudices against persons with certain conditions and differences. These attitudes determine who is considered to be a person with a disability and perpetuate the negative image of persons with disabilities. The language used to refer to persons with disabilities plays a significant role in creating and maintaining negative stereotypes. Terms such as “crippled” or “mentally retarded” are clearly derogative. Others, such as “wheelchair-bound,” emphasize the disability rather than the person. Historically, society has often failed to use the terms that persons with disabilities use to define themselves or has forced people to define themselves using terms with which they are uncomfortable.
Approximately 10 per cent of the world’s population lives with a disability—the world’s largest minority. This number is increasing because of population growth, medical advances and the ageing process (WHO). It is estimated that 20 per cent of the world’s poorest people have a disability and tend to be regarded in their own communities as the most disadvantaged (World Bank). Disability rates are significantly higher among groups with lower educational attainment in the countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). On average, 19 per cent of less-educated people have disabilities, compared to 11 per cent among better-educated people (OECD). Mortality for children with disabilities may be as high as 80 per cent in countries where under-five mortality, as a whole, has fallen to below 20 per cent. In some cases, it seems as if disabled children are being “weeded out.” (Department for International Development, United Kingdom)
Definition and Classification of Disability
India ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on October 1, 2007. The drafters of this Convention were clear that disability should be seen as the result of the interaction between a person and his/her environment, that disability is not something that resides in the individual as the result of some impairment. This Convention recognizes that disability is an evolving concept and that legislation may be adapted to reflect positive changes within society. Persons with Disabilities in India are defined according to The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act of 1995 and are identified in seven categories of disability:
1. Blindness
Refers to a condition where a person suffers from any of the following conditions, namely:
• Total absence of sight
• Visual acuity not exceeding 6/60 or 20/200 (Snellen) in the better eye with correcting lenses
• Limitation of the field of vision subtending an angle of 20 degree or worse
2. Low Vision
• "Person with low vision" means a person with impairment of visual functioning even after treatment or standard refractive correction but who uses or is potentially capable of using vision for the planning or execution of a task with appropriate assistive device.
• 3. Leprosy-cured
Means any person who has been cured of leprosy but is suffering from
• Loss of sensation in hands or feet as well as loss of sensation and paresis in the eye and eye-lid but with no manifest deformity
• Manifest deformity and paresis but having sufficient mobility in their hands and feet to enable them to engage in normal economic activity
• Extreme physical deformity as well as advanced age which prevents him from undertaking any gainful occupation, and the expression "leprosy cured" shall be construed accordingly
4. Hearing Impairment
• Loss of sixty decibels or more in the better ear in the conversational range of frequencies
5. Locomotor/Movement Disability
• Means disability of the bones, joints or muscles leading to substantial restriction of the movement of the limbs or any form of cerebral palsy
6. Intellectually Disabled
• Means a conduction of arrested or incomplete development of mind of a person which is specially characterized by sub-normality of the intelligence
7. Mental Illness
• Means any mental disorder other than intellectually disabled
This act provides for both preventive and promotional aspects of rehabilitation like education, employment and vocational training, job reservation, research and manpower development, creation of barrier-free environment, rehabilitation of persons with disability, unemployment allowance for the disabled, special insurance scheme for the disabled employees and establishment of homes for persons with severe disability etc.
India follows a twin track approach in dealing with disabilities. A twin track approach is the leading strategy in making development inclusive to people with disabilities. It is essential in meeting the Millennium Development Goals and protecting disabled people’s rights. A twin track approach to disability asks for specific action in policies to support people with disabilities, in addition to mainstream attention for disability in all policy areas. The global numbers on disabled people that are officially put forward by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and UNESCO are alarming. Alongside mainstream attention for disability, special attention for people with disabilities in development co-operation is essential to meet the Millennium Development Goals in 2015. Moreover, the twin track approach assures protection of disabled people’s human rights.
PREVALENCE
Distribution of PWDs in India and Predominant forms of disability
As per the 2001 census more than 21 million people (i.e. 2.1% of population) are suffering from disabilities in India. 12.6 million males and 9.3 million females. Among the five types of disabilities on which data has been collected, 48.5% were visual of the reminders 27.9% were related to movement, 10.3% were related to mental, 7.5% to speech and 5.8% to hearing. The disabled by sex follow a similar pattern except for that the proportion of disabled females is higher in the category in seeing and in hearing.
Across the country, the highest number of disabled has been reported from the state of Uttar Pradesh (3.6 million). 194,769 PWDs were recorded in Uttarakhand including visual 85,668, speech 16,749, hearing 15,990, movement 56,474 and mental 19,888. Significant numbers of disabled have also been reported from the state like Bihar (1.9 million), West Bengal (1.8million), Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra (1.6 million each). Tamil Nadu is the only state, which has a higher number of disabled females than males. Among the states, Arunachal Pradesh has the highest proportion of disabled males (66.6%) and lowest proportion of female disabled. Status of disability in India as per various variables is well depicted through these graphs ():
|[pic] | |
| | |
|[pic] | |
| | |
|[pic] | |
| | |
|[pic] | |
| | |
|[pic] | |
| | |
|[pic] | |
| | |
|[pic] | |
| | |
|[pic] | |
Socio-economic profiling
Disabled people also have significantly lower employment rates than average, and this gap has been increasing over the past 15 years. The large majority of PWD in India are capable of productive work. Despite this fact, the employment rate of disabled people is lower (about 60 percent on average) than in the general population, with the gap widening in the 1990s. Those in rural areas and the better educated (those with post graduate education or vocational training) have relatively better prospects of employment relative to other disabled people. People with certain types of disabilities, e.g. hearing, speech and locomotor disabilities, and those with disability since birth also have better chances of employment. Mental illness and particularly mental retardation have a strong negative impact on the probability of being employed, even in cases where such disabilities are not severe. Public sector initiatives have had only very marginal impact on employment outcomes for disabled people.
STAKE HOLDERS
Any person, group or organization that is affected by or affects the structure and operations related to disabilities, are stakeholders.
Stakeholder Categories
• Consumer and family groups
Representatives or associations of persons with disabilities and their families, mutual help groups, advocacy organizations representing the interests of people with disabilities.
• General health workers
Representatives from different types of general health facilities, as well as trade unions and other organizations that represent their interests.
• Providers
Managers and administrators of public and private services and institutions concerned with disabilities.
• Government agencies
Including heads of government and ministries of internal affairs, finance, trade and industry, justice, police, health, education, employment (labour), environment, housing, and social welfare, and local governments, municipalities and parliaments.
• Academic institutions
Especially those that train psychiatrists, psychologists, nurses, social workers, other health professionals and technicians.
• Professional associations
Such as those of psychiatrists, psychologists, general practitioners, nurses, occupational therapists and social workers. - Profit and not-for-profit professional non-governmental organizations (NGOs): including those involved in a variety of work related to mental health and those specifically providing care, treatment and rehabilitation services to persons with disabilities and mental disorders.
• Traditional health workers
Healers associated with traditional, religious and alternative systems of health.
• Other special interest groups
Such as minority organizations, including groups representing indigenous ethnic minorities.
• Other people and groups
e.g. national and local leaders, politicians, political parties, trade unions and the business community.
LEGISLATION
Policies for disability in India
India has a long experience of policy and practice with respect to disability, including collection of census information on disability from as early as 1872, and special schools and institutions operating since the 19th century. Like many countries, it also had specific provision for people with mental illness and retardation under the Indian Lunacy Act of 1912. The Constitution of India acknowledged also general state obligations to PWD in Article 41, and the State List under “Relief of the disabled and unemployable”. Subsequently, specific measures such as employment concessions were introduced from the 1960s. However, it was not until the 1980s that policy commitment to full participation of PWD in Indian society evolved. The outcomes of this policy shift were realized in several key pieces of legislation discussed below:
1. The Rehabilitation Council of India Act, 1992 –
Provides for regulation and monitoring of the training of professionals and personnel in the field of rehabilitation, promoting research in the field of rehabilitation and special education, and the maintenance of the central rehabilitation register (Foundation for International Training and regional and Sustainable Development Department, 2005, p.7).
The act also registers professionals/personnel working in the area of disability and conducts bridge courses for those teachers/rehabilitation workers with prior experience but no formal training in the field of disability (Disabled people’s organisations-Denmark, 2002, p.24).
2. The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 –
It is a comprehensive legislation that spells out the responsibility of the State toward the prevention of disabilities; protection of rights of persons with disabilities; and provision of medical care, education, training, employment, and rehabilitation to persons with disabilities. The Act also includes a commitment to create barrier free environments for persons with disabilities, and owns the responsibility to remove any discrimination against persons with disabilities in sharing development benefits and to counteract any situation resulting in abuse and exploitation of persons with disabilities (Foundation for International Training and regional and Sustainable Development Department, 2005, p.6; Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, 1996).
3. The National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 –
Under this Act, provisions have been made to appoint guardians for persons over the age of 18 years with autism, mental retardation, or multiple disabilities in the event of death or illness of their primary caregiver (Foundation for International Training and regional and Sustainable Development Department, 2005, p.7).
HEALTH aspects of Disability in India
In India disability is seen within a disease framework. Hence, PWD are viewed as “patients” in need of “treatment”. Empirical evidence also comes predominantly from the medical discipline, focusing on causes of disability and clinical trials; although some recent studies have focused on poverty correlates and social stigma issues that affect PWD. There is little information on access to health for PWD or their general and disability-specific health needs - except whether “treatment” was sought for the disability. Moreover, data do not allow an analysis of supply and quality of services available to PWD, and the extent to which this affects demand.
Causes of Disability in India
Age of onset of disability:
The age profile of disability onset varies sharply by category of disability. Some notable patterns stand out: onset of mental disabilities is concentrated in childhood and 20-30, resulting in the lowest average age of onset. Mental Retardation is more focused on the earliest years and mental illness becomes more pronounced in young adulthood. In contrast, visual disabilities are much more associated with ageing, and have the oldest mean age of onset. Whilst hearing disabilities exhibit a more pronounced dual peak, they are also on average subject to later average onset. Both locomotor and speech disabilities are more concentrated in younger ages also, with the highest onset in the early years of life in both cases, and a more noticeable second wave of onset for speech disabilities around age 60.
The main causes of visual disabilities are primarily age-related, with cataract and other age-related issues being the chief causes. The major share of visual disability is thus preventable and occurs due to lack of treatment. In a national estimate, Dandona et al estimate that almost two-thirds of blindness is preventable or treatable. If there is no change in the current trend of blindness, the study estimates that the number of blind persons in India would increase to 24.1 million in 2010, and to 31.6 million in 2020. If effective strategies are put in place to eliminate cataract, blindness in 15.6 million persons would be prevented by 2020, and 78 million blind person-years. Similarly, if effective strategies are implemented to eliminate refractive error blindness and corneal disease/glaucoma, another 7.8 million persons would be prevented from being blind in 2020, and 111 million blind person-years.
Table 3.1: Causes of Visual Disabilities (for Individuals with Single Disability (i.e Visual Only)
|Cause |Percent |
|Cataract |23.4 |
|Old age |23.0 |
|Corneal opacity/other eye errors |20.0 |
|Not Known |9.8 |
|Other |5.6 |
|Glaucoma |5.3 |
|Burns or injury |4.7 |
|Small pox |4.1 |
|Medical/surgical intervention |2.6 |
|Childhood diarrhea |0.7 |
|Sore eyes after first month |0.9 |
Source: Das (2006), based on NSS 58th round.
The major cause for both speech and hearing disabilities is illness and disease. In addition, over 21 percent of all hearing disabilities are due to old age. The importance of non-specific causes in these categories highlights that disability is intrinsically related to other public health issues, and that increasing access to better quality care is an important step towards reducing disabilities. This has implications not only for prevention but for diagnostic facilities and technology, and referral and rehabilitation services.
|Percent |Cause - Hearing Disability |Cause - Speech Disability |Percent |
|21.3 |Old age |Voice disorder |12.6 |
|18.6 |Discharge |Paralysis |11.9 |
|8.7 |Other |Other |8.3 |
|5.3 |Burns and injury |Burns and injury |0.9 |
|2.1 |Noise |Cleft palate |4.5 |
|1.6 |Medical/surgical intervention |Medical/surgical intervention |3.8 |
|0.7 |Rubella |Mental illness |2.8 |
|0.01 |Not Known |Hearing Impairment |1.6 |
|23.0 |Other illness |Old age |1.1 |
|Other illness |25.2 |
|Not Known |21.7 |
Causes of Hearing and Speech Disabilities - 2002
| |
|Cause |Percent |
|Polio |30.9 |
|Burns and Injury |28.5 |
|Other illness and disease |12.7 |
|Stroke |6.3 |
|Not Known |4.5 |
|Other |4.5 |
|Arthritis |3.0 |
|Old age |2.8 |
|Leprosy |2.2 |
|Medical/surgical |2.2 |
|intervention | |
|Cerebral Palsy |2.1 |
|TB |0.4 |
| |
Table 3.4: Causes of Locomotor Disability - 2002
Source: Das (2006), based on NSS 58th round.
Movement disability is the category which is undergoing the most rapid change in causal profile. For the current group of locomotor disabled people, polio remains the highest single cause, accounting for almost a third of all locomotor disability. However, burns and injuries are also a major share, and once more non-specific causes account for over 20 percent of total.
|Table 3.5: Causes of Mental |
|Disability - 2002 |
|Other |41.65 |
|Not known |36.31 |
|Serious illness in |11.97 |
|childhood | |
|Head injury in |3.83 |
|childhood | |
|Heredity |3.17 |
|Pregnancy/birth |3.01 |
|related | |
|Source: Das (2006), using NSS |
|58th round |
Estimates of mental disabilities in India remain particularly problematic. This is driven by various challenges, including identification skills of health providers, families and surveyors, and stronger social stigma attached to such conditions. A large proportion of mental disability in India is preventable, including disabilities arise from prenatal incidents, maternal illhealth, malnutrition, traffic accidents or workplace injuries. The many causes of disability, and the unclear genesis of some disabilities, make it difficult to define comprehensively the scope of interventions and public policies that impact the level and nature of disability in India.
Use of Health Services by PWD
Persons with disabilities face problems in obtaining adequate health services. The physical access to health service is a major hurdle for people with disabilities to reach and utilize these services. Also, the employment-based private insurance system adversely affects access to private health insurance, particularly for individuals with disabilities who are self-employed or employed by small firms; limitations in the range of services covered under public programs may require that an individual be institutionalized to receive needed services, people with disabilities often forego employment opportunities in order to maintain public health insurance; and the range of services covered by insurance often restricts coverage of services important for persons with disabilities to achieve independence.
The most interesting set of services being offered to PWD in India are Community Based Rehabilitation (CBR), which has been effective in rural areas in addressing the primary care and therapeutic needs of people with PWD. Surprisingly, this mode of service delivery is missing from the PWD Act. CBR has been promoted with particular strength in south India, often with initial international funding through NGOs. At the same time, CBR strategies have constantly been evolving in response to changing needs, times and criticisms. Despite this, CBR has to date been implemented in only around 100 (of around 600 total) districts, and only 6 percent of villages have coverage of rehabilitation services within 10 kilometres.
While there is no single CBR model, most CBR initiatives share a range of common objectives and features, i.e. to: (i) deinstitutionalize medical care, working with PWD in their communities; (ii) expand PWD access to rehabilitation services; (iii) demedicalize social responses to disability and thereby help reduce social stigma; and (iv) shift investments away from curative to preventive measures. The concept is institutionally flexible and can be operationalized by communities, NGOs and government, separately or in partnerships. Local level identification, training and technology development is encouraged, involving not only disabled people and their families but teachers, healers and religious leaders.
Factors affecting PWD access to health care
It is clear that much remains to be done to improve the response of health systems to disability, both in terms of prevention and in terms of access to treatment and rehabilitation services. While specific interventions and services for prevention and treatment of disability are needed, improvements in the general public health and health delivery systems will have the most significant benefits in the area of disability: The analysis points to one overwhelming conclusion: the major share of disability is caused by poor access to health services, malnutrition and diseases that are particular to developing countries. Thus, prevention of disability is intrinsically related to reform of the public health system. It is also clear that prevention of disability is also dependent on policies and actions outside the health system, including in the areas of road and workplace safety, water and sanitation, and nutritional interventions. Given capacity constraints, improving the health sector’s response to disability may most feasibly happen in two phases. The first phase would concentrate on scaling up the community. This would include an improved certification system, promotion of CBR (including awareness raising and stigma reduction), and enhancing micronutrient supplementation (including food fortification) and immunization. The supply side interventions would also need to include health workforce interventions, training of general duty medical officers in disability certification, and of community volunteers. The second phase would focus on improved referral systems between levels of the health system, including increased supply of therapists and support for establishment of therapy centers in rural areas. It would also likely involve networking of hospitals and specialized centres, possibly with support from the private corporate sector.
EDUCATION OF PWDS
Education is critical to expanding the life prospects of people with disabilities. In addition, the socialization of children with disabilities (CWD) through education assumes an unusually important role in societies such as India where social exclusion of PWD is significant. Despite its importance, educational outcomes for children and adults with disabilities remain very poor. Illiteracy rates both for all PWD and for school-age disabled children remain much higher than the general population, and school attendance among school age CWD massively lags behind that of non-disabled children. Disability is a cause of 30% non school attendees. International evidence suggests that the educational outcomes of non-disabled students can also be improved by inclusion of CWD in integrated classes.
In India, almost three quarters of those with severe disabilities are illiterate, and even for those with mild disabilities, the illiteracy rate is around half. For the severely disabled, just over 10 percent have achieved middle school or higher education, while even for moderately disabled people the share is only 20 percent.
CWD education attendance and attainment by severity, 2002
|Educational indicator |Severe PWD |Moderate PWD |Mild PWD |
|Goes to school |25.7% |56.3% |67.9% |
|Illiterate |72.2% |42.6% |34.9% |
|Primary or less |26.4% |52.0% |58.2% |
|Middle |1.5% |5.3% |6.8% |
|Secondary |0.0% |0.1% |0.0% |
|Higher |0.0% |0.0% |0.0% |
Source: NSS, 58th round. Bank staff estimates.
More than most areas of policy with regard to people with disabilities, the education sector has been relatively progressive in policy terms. It has also in principle committed to a progressive menu of options for delivering education to children with special needs. However, it is clearly struggling to turn policy into effective practice for a variety of reasons. It seems that there is a major need to get the basics right: identify children with disabilities more effectively; make the content and format of what they learn relevant and accessible; have resources available with adequate outreach to teachers and children; and work through various channels to convince families and communities that educating children with disabilities is worthwhile. However, all this needs strategic direction on inclusive education at state and lower levels of the system which in most states still appears to be lacking to date, though examples such as Gujarat and Tamil Nadu provide guidance on how this can begin to happen.
Since the implementation of the Persons with Disability Act (PWD), 1995 India has overcome a major ‘legislative hurdle’ to promote inclusive education (Sharma & Deppeler 2005). According to National Sample Survey Organisation (2003) the number of persons with disability in India was estimated to be 18.49 million during July to December, 2002. They formed about 1.8 percent of the total population. About 55 percent of persons with disability in India were illiterate and about 9 percent completed ‘secondary and above’ level of education. There have been programs initiated by the Indian government in collaboration with UNICEF, for example, the Project Integrated Education for the Disabled (PIED) (Singal, 2005) launched in 1987 and with UNESCO, the Teacher Education Pack launched in 1991 (Singal, 2005) which laid emphasis on training both in-service and pre-service teachers’ in meeting the needs of persons with disabilities. On the perceived success of PIED Ministry of Welfare, Central Government of India, in 1974 launched Integrated Education of Disabled Children (IEDC) (Kalyanpur, 2008), which supported the retention and integration of children with disabilities in regular classrooms (Sharma & Deppeler, 2005). According to Singal (2005) these programs have failed to sustain these initiatives and have been unable to upscale to a national level. One of the reasons for the failure of IEDC was non availability of trained and experienced teachers (Rane, 1983, cited in Sharma & Deppeler, 2005). In response to these concerns the government of India implemented the Education for All (EFA) initiative, the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan (SSA) in 2003 and developed policies on the education of people with disabilities such as; The Right to Education Bill 2005, The Action Plan for Inclusion in Education of Children and Youth with Disabilities (IECYD) 2005, and the National Policy for Persons with Disabilities, 2006 (Kalyanpur, 2008, p. 244).
Policy Implementation: Case Study of Inclusive Education
In spite of these efforts, UNESCO (1999) reports indicated that the implementation of inclusive education in India remained at a very preliminary stage. This evidence is consistent with other experiences of developing countries where inclusive education has been legislatively adopted but educational and other benefits of inclusion have not been achieved (Eleweke & Rodda, 2002). Some of the reasons posited for the lack of progress towards inclusive education, include: 1) the shortage of trained teachers at pre-service level (Kalyanpur, 2008; Sharma & Deppeler, 2005; Singal, 2005), and 2) the existence of ‘categorical’ disabilities model, which emphasises training of ‘specialist teachers’ and ‘special schools’ for student placement (Kisanji, 1993). In India, people having children with disabilities think that the most appropriate option for educating children with disabilities is still considered to be special schools (Alur & Natarajan, 2000). In India educational institutions have traditionally focused on preparing the pre-service teachers to teach in either regular classes or in special education facilities. This has resulted in most teachers in regular schools believing that they do not have the required skills to cater for students with special needs in their classrooms (Thirumurthy & Jayaraman, 2007; Sharma & Deppeler, 2005). As the movement towards inclusive education for children with disabilities has gained momentum in India (Parasuram, 2006), successful implementation of such policies largely depends on teachers having the knowledge, skills and competencies necessary to make it work (Winter, 2006). The importance of requirements for trained professionals has been emphasised in order to provide meaningful educational services to students with special needs in regular classrooms (Eleweke & Rodda, 2002). As India is the worlds second most populous country substantial resources will be required to address the challenges of providing inclusive education to all children.
EMPLOYEMENT OF PWDS
Employment is a critical element of independent living, and previous research has found that it is a primary aspiration of people with disabilities in India. The large majority of PWD in India are capable of productive work, in the bulk of cases without the need for aids or appliances. All categories of PWD have employment rates below the general population average. However, employment rates vary sharply by type of disability, with those with mental illness, mental retardation and visual disabilities having very low employment rates at one extreme and those with hearing disabilities with employment rates around 94 percent of the rate of the general working age population, and those with speech and locomotor disabilities having employment rates above those of the average for disabled people. In addition, those with more severe disabilities have an employment rate around 22 percent (about 10 percentage points) below those with moderate disabilities, or around 45 percent below the rate of the general population.
SERVICE PROVIDERS AND SERVICES AVAILABLE[2]
In Uttar Pardesh:
|Uttar Pradesh Special Schools |
|Pragnarayan Mook Badhir Vidyalaya |
|Sasni Gate |
|Aligarh - 202001 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|U.P. Deaf And Dumb Institute |
|4/7, Malviya Road |
|George Town |
|Allahabad - 211002 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
| |
|Govt. Deaf And Dumb School |
|Civil Lines |
|Bareilly |
|Bareilly - 243003 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Rajkiya Mook Badhir Vidyalaya |
|Jaynarayan Varma Road |
|Fatehagarh |
|Fatehagarh - |
|Uttar Pradesh |
| |
|Asha Vidyalay For The Deaf |
|252, G.T. Road |
|Ghaziabad - 201001 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Rajkiya Mook Badhir Vidyalaya |
|Mohalla Humayunpur |
|Po. Gorakhnath |
|Gorakhpur - 273015 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
| |
|Institute Of Speech, Hearing & Mental Health |
|239, 'M' Block |
|Kidwainagar |
|Kanpur - 208011 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
| Jyoti School For The Deaf |
|Bithoor Kalan |
|Bithoor |
|Kanpur - 209201 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
| |
|Adarsh Mook Badhir Vidyalaya |
|Lakhimpur Kheri - 262601 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Ashok Public Sch.For Blind & Deaf Children |
|130 'K' Shakti Nagar |
|Faizabad Road |
|Lucknow - |
|Uttar Pradesh |
| |
|N.C. Chaturvedi School For The Deaf |
|Aishbagh |
|Tilak Nagar |
|Lucknow - 226004 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Sarswati Normal School For The Deaf |
|273/54 Rajendra Nagar |
|Lucknow - 226004 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
| |
|Shishu Seva Dham Badhir Vidyalaya |
|Mii/26, Mahavidya Colony |
|Iind Phase |
|Mathura - 281003 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Mook Badhir Vidyalaya |
|221, West End Road |
|Meerut Cantt |
|Meerut - 250001 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
| |
|Roorkee School For The Deaf |
|University Of Roorkee |
|Roorkee - 247667 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Saraswati Dral School For The Deaf |
|13, Station Road |
|Near Poojan Hotel |
|Sitapur - 261001 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
| |
|Bimal Chandra Ghosh School For Deaf |
|D-53/104-A, Chhot Gaibi |
|Varanasi - 221010 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Nav Vani Shool For Hearing Impaired |
|Koirajpur |
|Po.Harahua |
|Varanasi - 221105 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
| |
| |
| |
|Uttar Pradesh Vocational Training Centres |
|Address Of The Vocational Training Centre |
|Course Being Offered |
| |
|Pragnarayan Mook Badhir Vidyalaya |
|Sasni Gate |
|Aligarh - 202001 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring, Book Binding |
| |
|U.P. Deaf And Dumb Institute |
|4/7, Malviya Road |
|George Town |
|Allahabad - 211002 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring, Carpentary, Canning |
| |
|Govt. Deaf And Dumb School |
|Civil Lines |
|Bareilly |
|Bareilly - 243003 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring, Cutting, Carpentary, Cane Work |
| |
|Rajkiya Mook Badhir Vidyalaya |
|Jaynarayan Varma Road |
|Fatehagarh |
|Fatehagarh - |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Sewing |
| |
|Asha Vidyalay For The Deaf |
|252, G.T. Road |
|Ghaziabad - 201001 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring, Welder, Art & Craft |
| |
|Rajkiya Mook Badhir Vidyalaya |
|Mohalla Humayunpur |
|Po. Gorakhnath |
|Gorakhpur - 273015 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring, Drawing |
| |
|Adarsh Mook Badhir Vidyalaya |
|Lakhimpur Kheri - 262601 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring, Embroidary |
| |
|Ashok Public Sch.For Blind & Deaf Children |
|130 'K' Shakti Nagar |
|Faizabad Road |
|Lucknow - |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Stiching & Embroidary |
| |
|N.C. Chaturvedi School For The Deaf |
|Aishbagh |
|Tilak Nagar |
|Lucknow - 226004 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring, Printing |
| |
|Sarswati Normal School For The Deaf |
|273/54 Rajendra Nagar |
|Lucknow - 226004 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Sewing |
| |
|Shishu Seva Dham Badhir Vidyalaya |
|Mii/26, Mahavidya Colony |
|Iind Phase |
|Mathura - 281003 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring, Craft |
| |
|Mook Badhir Vidyalaya |
|221, West End Road |
|Meerut Cantt |
|Meerut - 250001 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring, Knitting |
| |
|Roorkee School For The Deaf |
|University Of Roorkee |
|Roorkee - 247667 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Comp.Trng.,Painting, Sketching, Photography, Screen Printing, Carpentary, Cooking |
| |
|Saraswati Dral School For The Deaf |
|13, Station Road |
|Near Poojan Hotel |
|Sitapur - 261001 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring & Craft |
| |
|District Rehabilitation Centre Referred To Institutions For |
|Jagdishpur |
|Sultanpur - 227809 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring, Candel Making |
| |
|Bimal Chandra Ghosh School For Deaf |
|D-53/104-A, |
|Varanasi - 221010 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Sewing, Knitting, Tailoring, Press Printing, Chhot Gaibi Printing, Carpentary, Dyeing. |
| |
|Nav Vani Shool For Hearing Impaired Koirajpur |
|Po.Harahua |
|Varanasi - 221105 |
|Uttar Pradesh |
|Tailoring |
| |
| |
| |
|The Ministry Of Social Justice & Empowerment Is Entrusted With The Welfare, Social Justice & Empowerment Of Disadvantaged And |
|Marginalised Section Of The Society Like Scheduled Caste, Backward Classes, Person With Disabilities, Aged Persons, And Victims |
|Of Drug Abuse Etc. |
| |
|Basic Objective Of The Policies, Programmes, Law And Institution Of The Indian Welfare System Is To Bring The Target Groups Into |
|The Main Stream Of Development By Making Them Self-Reliant |
| |
|The Ministry Infrastructure Includes - |
|National Institutes |
|Rehabilitation Council Of India (Rci) |
|National Handicapped Finance & Development Corporation (Nhfdc) |
|Artificial Limbs Manufacturing Corporation Of India (Alimco) |
|National Trust For Welfare Of Persons With Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation And Multiple Disabilities |
|District Rehabilitation Centres (Drcs) |
|Regional Rehabilitation Training Centres (Rrtcs) |
|Office Of The Chief Commissioner For Persons With Disabilities |
|District Disability Rehabilitation Centres |
{The Details Of The Above Are Available At }
In India
Government organizations and public providers of facilities to PWDs:
1. Ali Yavar Jung National Instiute for the Hearing Handicapped {}
2. Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities {}
3. Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment {}
4. National Institute for the Mentally Handicapped (NIMH) {}
5. National Institute for the Orthopaedically Handicapped; National Institute for the Visually Handicapped {}
6. National Trust {}
7. Rehabilitation Council of India {}
NGOs
Local disability service providers
1. Association for the Welfare of the Handicapped {}
2. Blind Peoples Association {}
3. Devnar Foundation for the Blind {}
4. Indian Institute of Cerebral Palsy {}
5. Jan Madhyam{ 12_02/children/ janmadhyam .shtml}
6. Karnataka Parents' Association for Mentally Retarded Citizens {}
7. Manovikas Kendra Rehabilitation and Research Institute for the Handicapped (MRIH) { }
8. National Center for Promotion of Barrier-Free Environment for Disabled Persons {}
9. National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People {}
10. National Federation of Parents' Associations for Persons with mental Handicap/Retardation, Autism, Cerebral Palsy and Multiple Disabilities (PARIVAAR) { }
11. Spastics Society of Northern India (SSNI) { }
12. Spastics Society of Tamil Nadu {}
13. SWEEKAAR Rehabilitation Institute for Handicapped {}
14. Thakur Hari Prasad Institute of Research and Rehabilitation for the Mentally Handicapped (THPI) {}
Schools (either with inclusive education, or special schools)
1. Assisi School for the Deaf
2. DISHA Center for Special Education
3. The Center for Special Education
4. The Janey Centre for Special Education
Vocational Training Centers
1. Raghudeu Vocational Rehabilitation Centre
2. Sir Hurkisondas Nurrotamdas Hospital
3. Vocational Rehabilitation Centre for Handicapped Women
4. Vocational Rehabilitation Centre for the Handicapped
5. Vocational Rehabilitation Training Center for the Blind
6. Worth Trust
Hospitals/Rehabilitation Centers
1. Akshay Pratishthan Rehabilitation Center
2. District Disability Rehabilitation Centers
3. Sindhu Sevak Sangh-Jalaram Hospital
4. KKM Leprosy Rehabilitation Centre, Nala Pani Road, Dehradun
International
INGOs
1. Action Aid India ()
2. CBM ()
3. Disabled People's International ()
4. Handicap International ()
5. Helen Keller Service Society for the Disabled (helen-)
6. Hope Worldwide ()
7. Rehabilitation International ()
References and Bibliography
Alghazo, E.M., Dodeen, H. & Algaryouti, I.A. (2003). Attitudes of pre-service teachers towards persons with disabilities: predictions for the success of inclusion. College Student Journal; 37(4), 515
Almog, O. & Shechtman, Z. (2007). Teachers’ democratic and efficacy beliefs and styles of coping with behavioural problems of pupils with special needs. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 22(2), 115–129.
Allsopp, D.H., DeMarie, D., McHatton, P.A. & Doone, E. (2006). Bridging the gap between theory and practice: connecting Courses with field experience. Teacher Education Quarterly, 33(1), 19.
Almedom, A.M., Blumenthal, U. & Manderson, L. (1997). Hygiene evaluation procedures: approaches and methods for assessing water - and sanitation – related hygiene pactices. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from .
Alur, M. & Natarajan, P. (2000). Developing sustainable educational inclusion policy and practice: UK, South Africa, Brazil and India: an international research project – final report (Mumbai, Spastics Society of India).
Aronson, J. (1994). A pragmatic view of thematic analysis. The Qualitative Report, 2(1). Retrieved November 18, 2008, from
Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P. & Burden, R. (2000). Student teachers' attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the ordinary school. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 277-293
Beattie, J.R., Anderson, R.J. & Antonak, R.F. (1997). Modifying attitudes of prospective educators towards student with disabilities and their integration into the regular classrooms. The Journal of Psychology, 131(3), 245-259.
Beyea, S.C. & Nicoll, L.H. (2000). Learn more using focus groups. Association of Operating Room Nurses (AORN) Journal, 71(4), 897-900.
Bishop, A. & Jones, P. (2002). Promoting inclusive practice primary initial teacher training: influencing hearts as well as mind. Support for learning, 17(2)
Boyatzis, R.E. (1998). Transforming q alitative information: thematic analysis and code development. SAGE Publication.
Bradshaw, L. & Mundia, L. (2005). Understanding pre-service teachers’ construct of disability: a met cognitive process. Disability & Society, 20(5), 563–574.
Brannen, J. (2005). Mixed methods research: A discussion paper. ESRC National Centre for Research Methods Review Paper. Available from .
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in Psychology. Retrieved November 18, 2008, from
Brownlee, J. & Carrington, S. (2000). Opportunities for authentic experience and reflection: a teaching program designed to change attitudes towards disability for pre service teachers. Support for learning, 15(3).
Burke, K. & Sutherland, C. (2004). Attitudes towards inclusion: knowledge vs. experience. Education, 125(2), 163
Campbell, J. & Gilmore, L. (2003). Changing student teachers’ attitudes towards disability and inclusion. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 28(4), 369–37.
Canada International Development Research Centre (2008). Module 10C: focus group discussion. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from .
Carrington, S. (2000). Accommodating the needs of diverse learners: The impact of teachers' beliefs on classroom practice. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Brisbane: University of Queensland.
Carrington, S. & Brownlee, J. (2001). Preparing teachers to support inclusion: the benefits of interaction between a group of pre service teachers and a teaching assistant who is disabled. Teaching Education, 12(3), 347-357
Carroll, A., Forlin, C. & Jobling, A. (2003). The impact of teacher training in special education on the attitudes of Australian preservice general educators towards people with disabilities. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(3), 65
Chacon, C.T. (2005). Teachers’ perceived efficacy among English as foreign language teachers in middle schools in Venezuela. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 257–272.
Cheung, H.Y. (2006). The measurement of teacher efficacy: Hong Kong primary in-service teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 32(4), 435–451.
Cook, B.G. (2002). Inclusive attitudes and strengths and weaknesses of pre service general education enrolled in a curriculum infusion teacher preparation program. Teacher Education and special education, 25(3), 262-277.
Corsini, R. J. (1999). The dictionary of psychology. Ann Arbor, MI, Braun–Brumfield.
David, J.L. (2008). Collaborative enquiry. Educational Leadership, 66(4), 87.
Delhi University (2008). B.Ed. prospectus 2008-2009. Retrieved on October 20, 2008, from .
DeVellies, R.F. (1991). Scale development: theory and application. California: Sage Publication
Disabled people’s organisations-Denmark (2002). Country strategy India. Retrieved November 11, 2008, from
Eleweke, C.J. & Rodda, M. (2002). The challenge of enhancing inclusive education in developing countries. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 6(2), 113-126.
Erdinc, C. (2008). The teaching efficacy beliefs of pre-service teachers in the USA and Turkey. Journal of Education for Teaching, 34(1), 33–44
Evans, P. (2004). Educating students with special needs: a comparison of inclusion practices in OECD Countries. Education Canada, 44 (1), 32-35.
Ferguson, D.L. (2008). International trends in inclusive education: the continuing challenge to teach each one and everyone. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 23(2), 109–120.
Fever, J.V. & Lombaerts, K. (2003). First-year university students of educational sciences on inclusive education: attitudes and convictions in Flanders. European Journal of Teacher Education, 26(2).
Forlin, C. (1995). Educators’ beliefs about inclusive practices in Western Australia. British Journal of Special Education, 22(4), 179-185.
Forlin, C. (2003). Pre service teacher education-involvement of students with intellectual disabilities. International Journal of learning, 10, 317-326.
Forlin, C., Jobling, A., & Carroll, A. (2001). Pre service teachers’ discomfort levels toward people with disabilities. The Journal of International Special Needs Education, 4, 32-38.
Forlin, C., Loreman, T., Sharma, U. & Earle, C. (2007). Demographic differences in changing pre-service teachers’ attitudes, sentiments and concerns about inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–15.
Foundation for International Training and regional and Sustainable Development Department (2005). Disabled people in development; India country report. Asian Development Bank. Retrieved November 11, 2008, from .
Gibson, S. & Dembo, M.H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: a construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 669-682.
Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (2008). Amity institute of education. Retrieved October 20, 2008, from ,
Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (2008). Army institute of education. Retrieved October 20, 2008, from .
Guskey, T. R. & Passaro, P. D. (1994). Teacher efficacy: a study of construct dimensions. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 627–643.
Hastings, R.P. & Oakford, S. (2003). Student teachers’ attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special needs. Educational Psychology, 23(1).
Hergenrather, K. & Rhodes S. (2007). Exploring undergraduate student attitudes toward persons with disabilities: application of Disability Social Relationship Scale. Rehabilitation Counselling Bulletin, 50(2), 66.
Hopper, T., & Stogre, T. (2004). Influence of school integrated teacher education on elementary teacher’s motivation to teach physical education. Physical and Health Education, 69(4), 43–46.
Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk, A. E. (1993). Teachers' sense of efficacy and the organizational health of schools. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 355-372.
Jelas, J.M. (2000). Perceptions of inclusive practices: The Malaysian perspective Educational Review, 52(2), 187.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2004). Educational research: quantitative, qualitative and mixed approaches. Boston: Pearson Ed Inc., p.28-53.
Jones, M.N., Thorn, C.R., Chow, P., Thompson, I.S. & Wilde, C. (2002). Equifinality: parents' and students' attitudes towards student-centred approach to integration. Education, 122(3), 624.
Jones, N. & Sumner, A. (2009). Does Mixed Methods Research Matter to Understanding Childhood Well-Being? Social Indicators Research, 90(1), 33-51.
Joseph, D.H., Griffin, M. & Sullivan, E.D. (2000). Videotaped focus groups: transforming a therapeutic strategy into a research tool. Nursing Forum, 35(1), 15-20.
Jung, W.S. (2007). Pre service teachers training for successful inclusion. Education, 128(1), 106-114.
Kalyanpur, M. (2008). Equality, quality and quantity: challenges in inclusive education policy and service provision in India. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(3), 243-262.
Kearney, C. A., & Durand, V. M. (1992). How prepared are our teachers for mainstreamed classroom settings? A survey of postsecondary schools of education in New York State. Exceptional Children, 59, 6-11
Kisanji, J. (1993). Special education in Africa. In Mittler P., Brouillette, R. & Harris D. (Eds.). Special Needs Education (pp. 158-172), London: Kogan Page.
Lambe, J. (2007). Student teachers, special educational needs and inclusion education: reviewing the potential for problem based e-learning pedagogy to support practice. Journal of Education for Teaching, 33(3), 359–377.
Lambe, J. & Bones, R. (2006). Student teachers’ attitudes to inclusion: implications for initial teacher education in Northern Ireland. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–17.
Lambe, J. & Bones, R. (2006). Student teachers’ perceptions about inclusive classroom teaching in Northern Ireland prior to teaching practice experience. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 21(2), 167–186.
Lancaster, J. & Bain, A. (2007). The design of inclusive education courses and the self-efficacy of preservice teacher education students. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 54(2), 245–256.
Loreman, T., Earle, C. & Sharma, U. (2007). The development of an instrument for measuring pre service teachers’ sentiments, attitudes, and concerns about inclusive education. International Journal of Special Education, 22(2), 150-159.
Marshall, J., Stojanovik, V. & Ralph, S. (2002). ‘I never even gave it a second thought’: PGCE students’ attitudes towards the inclusion of children with speech and language impairments. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 37(4), 475–48.
Martinez, R.S. (2003). Impact of a graduate class on attitudes toward inclusion, perceived teaching efficacy and knowledge about adapting instruction for children with disabilities in inclusive settings. Teacher Development, 7(3).
Mdikana, A., Ntshangase, S. & Mayekiso, T. (2007). Pre service educators’ attitudes towards nclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(1), 125-131.
Mertler, C. A. (2004). Secondary teachers’ assessment literacy: does classroom experience make a difference? American Secondary Education, 33(1), 49–64.
Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs (1996). PWD ACT, 1995, The Persons with Disabilities (equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation act). Retrieved November 12, 2008, from .
Moeller, A.J. & Ishii-Jordan, S. (1996). Teacher efficacy: a model for teacher development and inclusion. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6(3), 293-310
Moran, A. (2007). Can a competence or standards model facilitate an inclusive approach to teacher education? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–17.
National Sample Survey Organisation (2003). Disabled persons in India, NSS 58th round (New Delhi, Government of India). Retrieved November 13, 2008, from .
Norwich, B. (2008). Dilemmas of difference, inclusion and disability: international perspectives and future directions. London: Routledge.
Nyland, B. (2004). Pre service teachers’ experience of inclusion. Academic Exchange
Oskamp, S. (1991). Attitudes and opinion. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall.
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 19(2), 139–158.
Parasuram, K. (2006). Variables that affect teachers’ attitudes towards disability and inclusive education in Mumbai, India. Disability & Society, 21(3), 231–242.
Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual third edition. Allen and Unwin (A&U).
Pearson, S. (2007). Preparing for inclusive education: the pre-course experiences of prospective secondary school teachers on a UK-based training course. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 7(2), 124–135.
Pearson, S. & Cambers, G. (2005). A successful recipe? Aspects of the initial training of secondary teachers of foreign languages. Support for Learning, 20(3).
Pierson, M.R. & Howell, E.J. (2006). Pre service teachers’ perception on inclusion. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10(3) ,169.
Proctor, R. & Niemeyer, J.A. (2001). Pre service teachers’ beliefs about inclusion: implementation for early intervention educators. Journal of Early Intervention, 24(1), 55-66.
Rane, A. (1983). An evaluation of the scheme of integrated education for handicapped children based on a study of the working of scheme in Maharashtra. Bombay: Unit for Child and Youth Research, Tata Institute of Social Sciences. Cited in Sharma, U. & Deppeler, J. (2005). Integrated education in India: challenges and prospects. Disability Studies Quarterly, 25(1).
Richards, G. & Clough, P. (2004). ITE students' attitudes to inclusion. Research in Education, 72, 77.
Rizzo, T.L. & Lavay, B. (2000). Inclusion: why the confusion? Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 71(4), 32-36.
Romi, S. & Leyser, Y. (2006). Exploring inclusion pre service training needs: a study of variables associated with attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 21(1), 85–105.
Soodak, L.C. & Podell, D.M. (1994). Teachers’ thinking about difficult-to-teach students. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 44-51.
Soodak, L. C. & Podell, D. M. (1997). Efficacy and experience: perceptions of efficacy among pre service and practicing teachers. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 30(4), 214–221.
Shade, R.A. & Stewart, R. (2001). General education and special education pre service teachers’ attitude towards inclusion. Preventing School Failure, 46(1), 37.
Sharma, U. (2007). Change in Australian pre service teachers’ efficacy, attitude, concerns and sentiments to implement inclusive education as a result of completing a subject in special education. Submitted for the proceedings of Paris International Conference on education, Economy & Society, 17-19 July, 2008.
Sharma, U. (2001). The attitudes and concerns of school principals and teachers regarding the integration of students with disabilities in regular classrooms in Delhi, India. Unpublished PH.D. Thesis, The University of Melbourne, Parkville.
Sharma, U. & Deppeler, J. (2005). Integrated education in India: Challenges and Prospects. Disabilities Studies Quarterly, 25(1).
Sharma, U., Forlin, C., Loreman, T. & Earle, C. (2006). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes, concerns and sentiments about inclusive education: an international comparison of the novice pre service teachers. International Journal of Special Education, 21(2).
Singal, N. (2005). Mapping the field of inclusive education: a review of the Indian literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 9(4), 331–350.
Smith, M.K. & Smith, K.E. (2000). ‘I believe in inclusion, But...’: regular education early childhood teachers’ perceptions of successful inclusion. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 14, 161-180.
Soodak, L.C. & Podell, D.M. (1994). Teachers’ thinking about difficult-to-teach students. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 44-51.
Sprague, M.M. & Pennell, D.P. (2000). The power of partners: preparing pre service teachers for education. Clearing House, 73(3), 168-170.
Stamopoulos, E. (2006). Empowering pre service teachers to embrace diversity. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 31(4), 30-39.
Steele, J.L. & Boudett, K.P. (2008). The collaborative advantage. Educational Leadership, 66(4), 54.
Stella, C.S.C., Forlin, C. & Lan, A.M. (2007). The influence of inclusive education course on attitude change of pre service secondary teachers in Hong Kong. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35(2), 161–179.
Suzuki, K., Morimoto, I., Mizukami, E., Otsuka, H. & Isahara, H. (2009). An exploratory study for analysing interactional processes of group discussion: the case of a focus group interview. AI & Society, 23(2), 233-250.
Symeou, L. (2008). From school-family links to social capital: urban and rural distinctions in teacher and parent networks in Cyprus. Urban Education, 43(6), 696.
Thirumurthy, V. & Jayaraman, B. (2007). Special education in India at the crossroads. Childhood Education, 83(6), 380.
Thomas, A. & Johnson, H. (2002). Not only reinforcing but also different stories: combining case studies and survey to investigate how postgraduate programmes can build capacity for development policy and management. Paper for ‘Combined Methods’ conference, 1–2 July 2002. Swansea: Centre for Development Studies.
Titone, C. (2005). The philosophy of inclusion: roadblocks and remedies for the teacher and the teacher educators. The Journal of Educational Thought, 39(1), 7.
Trochim, W.M.K. (2006). Research method knowledge base. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from .
Tschannen-Moran, M. & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783–805.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A. & Hoy, W.K. (1998). Teacher Efficacy: its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202-248.
UNESCO (1994). World Conference on Special Needs Education: Access and Equality. Salamanca, Spain, 7-10 June.
UNESCO (1999). Welcoming schools: students with disability in regular classroom.
Wertheim, C. & Leyser, Y. (2002). Efficacy beliefs, background variables, and differentiated instruction of Israeli prospective teachers. Journal of Educational Research, 96, 54-63.
Winter, E.C. (2006). Preparing new teachers for inclusion schools and classroom. Support for Learning, 21(2).
Woolfolk, Hoy A. & Sperob, R.B. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 343–356.
Yuker, H. (1994). Variables that influence attitudes toward people with disabilities: conclusions from the data. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9(5), 3–22.
Resources
Asian Development Bank, Asian Development Outlook 2003, India, 2003
Asian Development Bank, Key Indicators 2003, Volume 34, 2003
International Labour Office, Moving Forward Toward Decent Work for People with Disabilities, Examples of good Practices in Vocational Training and Employment from Asia and the Pacific, 2003
Japan International Cooperation Agency, Planning and Evaluation Department, Country Profile on Disability, The Republic of India, March 2002
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Annual Report 2002-2003
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Country Report - India.
Office of the Registrar General, India. Census of India 2001. March 2001
Tamhane, V.M., Assistant Director, Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India, Disability Related Question in Indian Census, February 2002
Vadan, Sundar R., Commissioner, Disabled Welfare, Empowerment of Differentially Abled, Strategies For Implementation of Annual Action Plan 2003-2004 and Multi Sectoral Coordination
Websites:
Asian Development Bank
Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities: disabilities.nic.in
Daisy Consortium
Department of Statistics, Ministry of Planning and Programme Implementation
Disability India Network
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment: socialjustice.nic.in National Institute for the Mentally Handicapped: National Institute for the Orthopaedically Handicapped nioh
National Institute for the Visually Handicapped
National Trust .in
Office of the Registrar General, Census of India Rehabilitation Council of India: rehabcouncil.nic.in
Rehabilitation International rehab-
The World Bank
United Nations
United Nations Children's Fund
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the
Pacific
Annexure
Profile of Non-Governmental Organizations of/for Persons with Disabilities
Local Organizations
| |Organization |Address |Phone/Fax |
|1. |Association for the Welfare of the Handicapped |M Square Complex Pavamani |Tel: 91-0495-720-601 |
| | |Rd. PO Box 59 Calicut, |Tel: 91-0495-720-028 |
| | |Kerala |Email: awhelt@md3..in |
| |This organization works for the advancement of the disabled and works in collaboration with the Alzheimer's Related Disorders Society |
| |and the Hemophilia Society. They serve PWDs that have the following types of disabilities; Cerebral palsy/spastic, hearing impaired, |
| |mentally handicapped, orthopedically impaired, slow learner and the visually impaired. |
|2. |Blind Peoples Association |Dr. Vikram Sarabhai Road, |Tel: 91-79-630-4070 |
| | |Vastrapur, Ahmedabad 380015 |Fax: 91-79-630-0106 |
| | |Gujarat | |
| |The BPA was formed by a group of blind people in 1954 as a recreation club. Today, it serves not only the blind but people with all |
| |categories of disability − hearing impaired, mentally challenged, locomotor disabled, multiply disabled including deaf-blind, and the |
| |elderly. The organization has received the National Award and FICCI Award. They are recognized by the Rehabilitation Council of India, |
| |the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, CAPART, as a nodal agency. |
|3. |Devnar Foundation for the Blind |Plot No. 185, Road No.1West |Tel: 91-40-27-803-686 |
| | |Marredpally, Secunderabad |Fax: 91-40-27-703-686 |
| | |500026 |Email: saibaba_goud@ |
| |The Foundation was established in 1991 and currently operates a school with over 220 students housed in buildings owned by the |
| |Foundation and provides CBR programs, parental and genetic counseling and operates Braille printing presses. The Foundation also manages|
| |the Ramananda Centre for Advance Learning and Research for the visually impaired vocational training. |
|4. |Indian Institute of Cerebral Palsy |P35/1, Taratolla Road, |Tel: 91-33-240-1348 |
| | |Kolkata 700088 West Bengal |Fax: 91-33-240-1417 |
| |The West Bengal Spastics Society was formed in May 1974 and became the Spastics Society of Eastern India in 1981 and is currently the |
| |Indian Institute of Cerebral Palsy. The Institute is a nationally recognized professional institute for training and research. |
|5. |Jan Madhyam |148, Zamroodpur New Delhi |Tel: 91-11-6474913 |
| | |110048 |Fax: 91-11-6473525 |
| | | |Email: janmadhyam1@ |
| |Jan Madhyam provides disability awareness and holistic development through creative work and training programs, while integrating the |
| |disabled into their existing programs. |
|6. |Karnataka Parents' Association for Mentally Retarded |AMH Compound Bangalore |Tel: 91-656-3267 |
| |Citizens |560029 |Fax: 91-656-4608 |
| | | |Email: jpkpamrc@ |
| |The Association was formed in 1978 and began providing teacher training programs in the field of intellectual disabilities and specific |
| |learning disabilities and autism. Since its formation, the Association has trained over 1,000 special educators and provides three |
| |diploma courses. The Association also organizes workshops, seminars and awareness programs. |
|7. |Manovikas Kendra Rehabilitation and Research Institute |482 Madudah, Plot 1-24 Sec. |Tel:91-33-442-8275 |
| |for the Handicapped (MRIH) |J, Eastern Metropolitan |Fax: 91-33-442-8275 |
| | |Bypass Kolkata 700107 |Email:mvkendra@cal2..in |
| |The Institute has been in operation for over 28 years providing special education and vocational training while conducting early |
| |intervention and parental counseling. The Institute also operates a research and diagnostic unit and conducts CBR and prevention and |
| |public awareness campaigns |
|8. |National Center for Promotion of Barrier-Free |B-181, Mansarovar Garden, |Email: samarthyaindia@ and |
| |Environment for Disabled Persons (Samarthya) |New Delhi |sanjeevsach@ |
| | | |Phone: (91-11) 9810558321 |
| | | |Fax: (91-11) 41019389 |
| |Samarthya roughly translates as "Capability". Its prime goal is to encourage the innate potential of persons with disabilities, instill |
| |confidence and to sensitize and create awareness about disability related issues including accessibility. Its main motto is "Let's make |
| |the world accessible". |
|9. |National Centre for Promotion of Employment for |25, Green Park Extension, |Tel: 91-11-685-4306 |
| |Disabled People |Yusuf Sarai, New Delhi - |Fax: 91-11-696-3030 |
| | |110016 |Email: ncpedp@ |
| |The NCPEDP is a non-profit organization working as an interface between government, industry, international agencies and the voluntary |
| |sectors towards increased employment opportunities for disabled people. |
|10. |National Federation of Parents' Associations for |A-2520 Netaji Nagar New |Tel: 91-688-6708 |
| |Persons with mental Handicap/Retardation, Autism, |Delhi 110023 |Fax: 91-331-6674 |
| |Cerebral Palsy and Multiple Disabilities (PARIVAAR) | |Email:jagdishmehta@ |
| |PARIVAAR was formed in 1995 and is recognized by the Government as an APEX organization representing over 100 parents' associations |
| |across India. The Federation is a member of Inclusion International, the world body of Parents' Associations of PWDs. |
|11. |Spastics Society of Northern India (SSNI) |2, Balbir Saxena marg, Hauz |Tel: 91-656-9107 |
| | |Khas New Delhi |Email: ssni@.in |
| |SSNI provides technical rehabilitation inputs, such as special education therapy, assessment, vocational training, rural and urban |
| |community based rehabilitation, awareness, advocacy. It receives some form of financial assistance or grants from the Ministry of Social|
| |Justice and Empowerment. |
|12. |Spastics Society of Tamil Nadu |Opp.T.T.t.I. Taramani Rd. |Tel: 91-40-235-4651, (02) 591 - 4242 |
| | |Chennai 600113 Tamil Nadu, |Fax: 91-44-235-0047 |
| | |India | |
| |The Spastics Society of Tamil Nadu was founded in 1981 as a welfare provision organization. The Society is dedicated to the empowerment |
| |of people with disabilities through human resource development, community inclusion and participation. They aim to provide people with |
| |disabilities the best possible opportunity to participate in community life through education, employment and rehabilitation services. |
| |They operate three special education centers, which provide education at all levels to meet the needs of children with disabilities and |
| |are recognized as a State-level Training Center on disability for governmental personnel, ECCD and educational sectors. |
|13. |SWEEKAAR Rehabilitation Institute for Handicapped |Upkaar Complex, Upkaar |Tel: 91-40-2784-3338 |
| | |Junction Secunderabad 500003|Fax: 91-40-2781-0731 |
| | |Andhra Pradesh |Email: info@ |
| |Sweekaar is a non-profit organization with over 26 years of service to the mentally handicapped, physically disabled, and others. The |
| |Institute services over 1,900 people per day in providing service delivery, training, awareness and community participation programs. |
|14. |Thakur Hari Prasad Institute of Research and |Vivekanandanagar, |Tel: 91-40-404-4735 |
| |Rehabilitation for the Mentally Handicapped (THPI) |Dilsukhnagar Hyderabad |Email: thpigyd@ |
| | |500060 A.P. | |
| |THPI was established in 1968 as a rehabilitation center for children. Today it is an institute employing more than 250 professional and |
| |paraprofessionals in paediatrics, clinical psychology, special education, speech pathology, psychiatry, occupational, hydro, art and |
| |music therapies. In 1992, the THPI Community-Based Rural Project was established and serves approximately 36 villages. |
International Organizations
| |Organization |Address |Phone/Fax |
|1. |ActionAid India |C-88, South Ex. - II New Delhi-110 049 |Tel: 91-11-516-40571 |
| |ActionAid India has been a development funding agency since 1972, and works with organizations to reach out to the |
| |marginalized and socially deprived sections in the country. ActionAid India works with a professional team located in 14 |
| |regional offices and the country head office in New Delhi. ActionAid supports approximately 300 voluntary organizations |
| |across India. |
|2. |Disabled People's International |B5-199 Ground Floor Safdarjung Enclave |Tel: 91-11-617-6062 |
| | |New Delhi 110016 |Fax: 91-11-278-4146 |
| | | |Email: ncped@nde..in |
| |Disabled Peoples' International is a network of national organizations or assemblies of disabled people, established to |
| |promote human rights of disabled people through full participation, equalization of opportunity and development. The goals of|
| |DPI are to promote the human rights of disabled persons, promote economic and social integration of disabled persons and |
| |develop and support organizations of disabled persons worldwide. |
|3. |Helen Keller Service Society for the |Vizhiyagam, Viswanathapuram, Madurai, |Tel: 91-452-641446 |
| |Disabled |625014 Thamil Nadu |Fax: 91-452-641490 |
| |The Helen Keller Service Society is a voluntary organization established in 1979. The organization implements service |
| |projects for the welfare of the disabled in Tamil Nadu, founded by Dr G Thiruvasagam for the service of people in the field |
| |of welfare of the disabled in rural areas. |
|4. |Hope Worldwide |D-32 Jangpura Extention New Delhi 110014 |Tel: 91-11-2431-4130 |
| |india. | |Fax: 91-11-2431-9672 |
| | | |Email: mark_templer@ |
| |Hope Worldwide began operations in India in 1991 and currently has over 80 programs across 17 cities that meet the needs of |
| |the urban poor including PWDs. |
|5. |Rehabilitation International |Thakur Hari Prasad Institute of Research |Tel: 91-40-404-2143 |
| |rehab- |and Rehab. for the Mentally Handicapped |Fax: 91-40-404-5292 |
| | |"Sishu Niketan" Vivekanand Nagar Dilsukh |Email: thpihyd@ |
| | |Nagar Hyderabad, 500660 | |
| |Rehabilitation International is a worldwide network of people with disabilities, service providers and government agencies |
| |working together to improve the quality of life for disabled people and their families. Founded in 1922, it now has more than|
| |200 member organizations in 90 nations. |
[pic]
Source: {}
-----------------------
[1] Who engage in disability specific activities and/or are working on mainstreaming disability into their activities
[2] Who engage in disability specific activities and/or are working on mainstreaming disability into their activities
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- system analysis document template
- situation analysis outline
- situation analysis definition marketing
- situation analysis in marketing plan
- situation analysis template
- situation analysis example pdf
- marketing situation analysis example
- situation analysis marketing plan
- situation analysis definition
- situation analysis in marketing
- situation analysis template word
- situation analysis essay