APPENDIX I: Questionnaires for teachers…………………………………………131

APPENDIX II: Interview guide for head teachers………………………………….140

APPENDIX III: Table for sample size determination...…………………………….142

APPENDIX IV: Public schools in Eldoret municipality.…………………………..143

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

EARC-Educational Assessment Resource Centre

EFA-Education for All

FPE- Free Primary Education

GOK-Government of Kenya

ILO-International Labour Organization

KIE-Kenya Institute of Education

KIDC- Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development

KISE-Kenya Institute of Special Education

LRE- Least Restricted Environment

MDGs-Millennium Development Goals

MEO-Municipal Education Officer

MOE-Ministry of Education

NGO's- Non-Governmental Organizations

OVCs- Orphans and Vulnerable Children

QASOs- Quality Assurance and Standards Officers

ROK-Republic of Kenya

SNE-Special Needs Education

SPSS-Statistical Package for Social Sciences

TIRET- Totally Integrated Quality Education and Training

UNESCO-United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UPE-Universal Primary Education

USA-United States of America

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

1.1 Introduction

This is the introductory chapter of this thesis. It presents the statement of the research problem, the purpose of the study, the main research objectives, specific objectives, research questions, justification for the study, significance of the study, definition of terms used and the theoretical framework.

1.2 Background to the problem

The initial precept of virtually all educational systems is that each child should receive full-time instruction in school. The main response to the overwhelming pressure of demand for education leads to scarcity of resources such as classrooms, teachers, books, and many others. According to UNESCO (2009), integration is increasingly understood more broadly as a reform that supports and welcomes diversity amongst all learners. Under this broader definition of integration, steps should also be taken to eliminate discrimination and provide accommodations for all students who are at a disadvantage because of some reason other than disability.

According to Randiki (2002), Education for All handicapped children act was enacted in 1975 although the origin of special education can be traced back to 1829 when New England Asylum was established, followed by Massachusetts schools for idiots in South Boston in 1859 (Fisher, 1995). In Uganda it was started by Sir Andrew Cohen in 1952 while Kenya saw the importance of addressing diverse needs in education after independence in 1963. Various committees and commissions were appointed to look into the education system hence the government’s strategy of education for all as a Millennium Development Goal (MDG) and Vision 2030. The government of Kenya is committed to the protection and provision of equal opportunities to persons with special needs. It has developed a number of policy guidelines for special needs education (SNE) dating back to 1964.

The Government of Kenya is committed to the provision of equal access to quality and relevant education and training opportunities for all Kenyans therefore, declared Free Primary Education (FPE) for all Kenyans in 2003 irrespective of their status. The implementation of FPE is critical to the attainment of Universal Primary Education which is a key milestone towards achievement of the Education for All (EFA) goals. This makes it obvious and noticeable in schools that there are learners with special needs hence the integrative approach.

Vision 2030 strategy is to enforce the Children’s Act to eliminate child labour as well as other retrogressive practices causing vulnerabilities among children, empower people with special needs to make them self-supporting; enhance support to orphans and vulnerable children (OVC) reduce dependency by empowering them with knowledge, skills and attitudes (GOK,2007). However, to this end, majority of learners with special needs in Kenya do not access educational services. For instance, in 1999 there were only 22,000 learners with special needs and disabilities enrolled in special school units and integrated programmes. This number rose to 26,885 in 2003. This compares poorly proportionally with general education which is offered to average learners. Currently, there are over 1100 units and 100 public special schools in the country which include vocational and technical institutions that cater for learners with special needs (GOK, 2007). The current status in Eldoret municipality is that there are two special schools and 11 public primary schools with special units attached to them for children’s interaction during break time and other informal forums. The units have a total enrolment of 244 learners who have been assessed for placement. Public primary schools admit learners with mild challenges to be taught alongside ‘normal’ children so long as the disability is not so severe that requires special attention in a special school.

Initially, special education was catering for impairments such as mental, physical, hearing and visual (Omolo, 2002). The stipulation by Dunn (1993) necessitated the emergence of integrative philosophy. These include the traumatized, street children, homeless or orphaned, child labourers, those living with HIV/AIDS, epileptic, emotional and behavioural disorders, specific learning difficulties, gifted and talented, orphaned, abused, displaced, those with albinism, among others. However, educational opportunities for children (learners) with special needs are a major challenge to the education sector. The national education system has been characterized by lack of systems and facilities that respond to the challenges faced by learners with special needs.

However, integrated education implementation remains a sensitive debate among educators and stakeholders alike. Studies cited by Schulman (1980) showed that in some ancient (and even current) cultures, people afflicted with certain exceptionalities were thought to be accursed by gods. Others looked at them as insane, dregs of society, bad omens or as being incapable of engaging in gainful employment. These perceptions have slowly been changing over time. The changing perceptions have led to the emergence of integrative education philosophy as a way of educating people with exceptionalities.

Winzer (2004) confirms that many countries (both developed and developing) have adopted and inculcated the policy of integration in their education policies. Nigeria for example, adopts the policy of integration in her National Policy on Education. The policy stipulates the integration of special needs students into regular classrooms, and free education for exceptional students at all levels. In practice however, it is only one state out of over thirty states that has actually started the implementation of the integrative education at the primary school levels, other states of the federation in Nigeria are just starting up by creating a unit in each of the schools for their integrative classrooms. Studies however assert that the integrative schools lack adequate technology equipment and incentives needed to provide special needs education in Nigeria.

Studies on special education and integration suggest that the programs face many challenges. They demand special equipment, face inadequate specially trained teachers, lack incentives for available specially trained teachers and lack proper administration and supervision of management. These examples illustrate some of the challenges of the programme in Nigeria, thus, the researchers are interested in investigating the attitude of the teachers in the education of the special needs children in our general education. Ajuwon (2008) also comments on the obvious benefits of the integrative education paradigm, that is, children are more likely to learn social skills in an environment that approximates to normal conditions of growth.

According to Kenya Institute of Special Education (KISE, 2000), inclusive education refers to a philosophy of ensuring that schools, centres of learning and educational systems were open to all children. Children should not be excluded from the society’s activities due to disabilities, economic, physical or otherwise backgrounds. In support of this view Ndurumo (1993) notes that people with special needs in education were capable of benefiting from education and vocational norms if they were given appropriate support. Effective integration succeeds or fails in a school building and there are many factors that impinge on the school among them, educational policies, allocation of resources and public attitudes. All of these are brought together and tested in learning experiences of children in the school. The curriculum, attitudes of staff, social structure, physical arrangement, allocation of resources within the classroom, and skills of teachers are elements of the school’s educational ecology (Susan and Eames, 2013). However, despite the many problems they may be having, learners with special needs in education have to be included in the primary school curriculum under the integration strategy. They must learn and compete favourably with the rest of the learners and as a result, involvement of teachers in educational reform and innovation is crucial. Teachers’ familiarity, skills and knowledge play a big role. And for teachers to be effective in their work, relevant facilities and resources are critical, and integration of learners with special needs being an innovation has its own challenges. As the pamphlet on Educational Planning, A World Survey of Problems and Prospects (UNESCO, 2008, p.79) states:

There is practically complete agreement in theory on the view that great changes are inevitable, but in practice, every positive innovation encounters the most vigorous opposition. Education is a realm of tradition, and resistance to change springs up in the most varied quarters, ranging from the teachers themselves, the administrators, the parents and pupils.

Republic Of Kenya (2012) asserts that generally, access and participation of pupils with special needs is low and their needs are not specifically met in their various forms of learning difficulty. Further it states that the emphasis on academic performance and examinations creates an unfavourable learning environment for children with special needs. This poses challenges to the integration of children with special needs in regular classrooms. Integration of special needs education is an innovation in the education system in Kenya. It is as a result of The Presidential Working Party on Education and Manpower Training for the Next Decade and Beyond, ROK, (1988) in The Kamunge Report. The committee emphasized the strengthening of the provision of education for learners with special needs in education in the regular classroom. Similarly the Koech Report (1998/9: 148) noted:

Special education is a program of instruction designed to meet the unique needs of a child with special educational needs. It includes classroom integration …these handicaps interfere with regular education unless modification and related services, equipment and specially trained teachers are provided.

Several countries note that socio-psychological resistance to reform is the major problem, perhaps more stubborn, than the financial problem itself (Bishop, 1985). the education system in Kenya also faces diverse challenges. It is therefore, the aim of the researcher to examine some factors influencing integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools of Eldoret municipality, Kenya.

1.3 Statement of the problem

The right of every child to education is proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and was forcefully reaffirmed by the World Declaration on Education for All (UNESCO,1994). An education system, despite its inadequacies has its ultimate purpose, which is the transformation of individuals and society (Wilcox, 1992). The Kenya government is providing Free Primary Education for all Kenyans. This goal will only be achieved when the universal right to education extends to individuals with special needs in the country (MOEST, 2001). According to KISE (2002), poor coordination of activities of SNE service providers has led to duplication, substandard and unregulated provision of services to learners with special needs, (ROK, 1998/1999) and hindered the realization of the Ministry of Education’s goal of providing quality services to learners with special needs. Research studies in this area indicate that integration of children with special needs is going on in public primary schools as per the government policy and it is the school that must be adjusted to meet the needs of all the children (UNESCO, 1997)

In its Bill of Rights, the new Constitution has strongly focused on equity issues, targeting discrimination faced by various marginalized groups, including persons with disabilities (GoK, 2010). One of the goals of Vision 2030 is to integrate special needs education into learning and training institutions. The constitution prohibits all forms of discrimination on the grounds of disability. For example, a school may not discriminate against persons in the terms and conditions of education on which the education is offered. The aspect of integration, however, is so complex. It requires an investigation into some factors such as teachers, physical resources, school administration, among others which are key in the implementation of any innovation since they influence its success or failure. It was, therefore, the concern of the researcher to investigate the preparedness and suitability of public primary schools for integration of learners with special needs. It is in the school setting where implementation of educational innovations takes place making it necessary to investigate the status of some factors and find out whether the school profile is such that integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools can be successful.

1.4 Purpose of the study

The purpose of this research was to investigate school factors that influenced the integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality.

1.5 Objectives

The main objective was to investigate school factors influencing integration of learners with special needs in regular classrooms in Eldoret municipality. The study was guided by the following specific objectives:

To find out the extent to which teachers’ familiarity with the integration process influenced integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

To investigate the extent to which availability of physical facilities and resources influenced integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

To examine the extent to which teachers’ preparedness influenced integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

To investigate whether the school administrative support influenced integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

1.6 Research questions

The main research question was to find out to what extent did factors in the school influence integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality. In order to achieve the above objectives, the study was guided by the following research questions:

To what extent does teachers’ familiarity with the integration process influence integration of learners with special needs public primary schools?

To what extent does availability of physical facilities and resources influence integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools?

To what extent does teachers’ preparedness influence integration of learners with special needs public primary schools?

Does the school administrative support influence integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools?

1.7 Justification of the study

Integration calls for a re-appraisal of available approaches to expand Special Needs Education services to all children. This modern approach of integration is where diverse learners are catered for within the neighbourhood primary school of choice other than in special schools only (MOEST, 2001). In Eldoret municipality there are two special schools, one for the mentally challenged and the other for those hard of hearing. There are also 12 public primary schools integrating learners with special needs with an enrolment of 244 which is a very small fraction compared to the diversity and number of children with special needs who attend public primary schools irrespective of their challenges probably due to convenience. This poses a challenge to the preparedness and suitability of schools to integrate them, hence this study.

UNESCO(1997) on educational reforms cites that major challenges in implementing an innovation like integration of special needs education in regular classrooms usually have been in the areas of staffing, training, quality assurance, awareness, attitudes, examinations, curriculum development and learning / teaching materials, among others. It is therefore important to examine some of the factors that influence integration because this where the implementation takes place (Gary and Andrew, 2001) and it is for this reason that this study on factors influencing integration of learners with special needs in education in Eldoret municipality was undertaken. This will help to identify some possible barriers and loopholes to education for learners with special needs in relation to integration and contribute to the rich field of knowledge and inspire scholars to conduct more research in this field.

1.8 Significance of the study

The findings of this study were hoped to contribute to the wealth of knowledge and assist in harmonizing education offered to children with special needs together with the ‘normal’ ones. It would also help teachers to cater for the diverse needs of children in their schools. Similarly, would help create a barrier free environment for children with special needs. All children would have equal opportunities to access education in friendlier environment. The findings of this study can assist the Kenya Institute of Education (KIE) which is now Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development ( KICD), which is responsible for developing curricula in Kenya, develop a relevant curriculum that can benefit the participants in integrated education not only in primary schools in Eldoret municipality but also in other similar schools in the country.

A modified curriculum caters for needs of individual learners and is not necessarily examinations oriented. The study findings can provide useful lessons at regulatory, infrastructural, and instructional functional levels for what is needed for learners with special education needs to succeed in public primary school environments. It is hoped to assist teachers in usage of appropriate teaching methods and in the development of appropriate learning resources. The results are hoped to contribute to in-service programmes like workshops and seminars for integration.

1.9 Scope of the study

Oso and Onen (2005) refer to scope as delimitations, which are a description of the boundary of the study in terms of content, sample size, geographical and theoretical coverage. A survey research design was used in this study. Mugenda and Mugenda (1999) define a survey as an attempt to collect data from members of a population in order to determine the current status of that population with respect to one or more variables. This study was confined to public primary schools in Eldoret municipality. It attempted to investigate the school factors that influence integration of learners with special needs in education by exploring teachers’ familiarity with the process of integration, availability of physical facilities, teachers’ qualification and provision of administrative support. It sought to get information from teachers and head teachers of the selected schools. Teachers are crucial in implementing any educational innovation; they translate the curriculum through instruction in order to achieve prescribed objectives while head teachers act as a bridge between policy makers and the school where integration takes place.

1.10 Limitations of the study

The limitations of this study included dependence upon the cooperation of respondents. An appeal was made through school administration to purposely develop trust. Diversity of special needs in education would lead to varied responses. The construction of a self-administered questionnaire to elicit information from the respondents was adopted to cater for the varied responses. Since the questionnaire is the most frequently used tool for data collection in urban schools, a number of the respondents were uncooperative and seemed to have lost interest in filling it and so larger samples per school were targeted in order to come up with a more representative sample. Visitation to some schools was more than once because of their programmes such as teachers’ seminars and examinations which were going on while others were not in session due to other zonal activities.

1.11 Assumptions of the study

The assumptions of the study were that respondents would cooperate and would be willing to provide the required data for the study and that the findings would contribute to successful integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

1.12 Theoretical framework

The study was guided by a model by Gross, Giaquinta and Bernstein (1971), on diffusing and implementing educational innovations in school organizations as cited by Rogers (1995). According to this model the impact of innovations can be optimized, by studying the relationship of innovative behavior to three classes of variables: user characteristic variables, innovation attribute variables, and diffusion strategy variables. The individual user of the innovation, in this case, the learner with special needs, is very important. Innovation attributes may be examined in terms of relationship to user requirements and resources. Adoption of an innovation will not occur if there are substantial discrepancies between requirements, tendencies, and resources specific to a potential user and to the orientation and nature of the innovation. Selecting appropriate diffusion strategies is the third dimension in the triad and seeks to explain how, why and at what rate the innovation is communicated. The school, where curriculum implementation occurs must be ready and willing to receive the innovation. Its infrastructure, tradition, expectation, administrative set up and resources must be considered for successful implementation, hence the study on school factors influencing integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

Bennis and Schein (2002) provide some conceptual guides to categorizing strategies into two broad stages: initiation (adoption) and implementation stage. During initiation stage the user is aware of the existence of an innovation, consolidates his interests in pursuing it, formulates positive attitudes about it, and finally decides to make some commitments to take action. During implementation stage the user makes attempts to implement on trial basis and may continue if the trial is satisfying and finally institutionalize it. However, these conceptual categories are of limited utility to the educational planner or change agent who is confronted with the problem of deciding on the most efficacious ways to diffuse educational innovations. Prior to the consideration of strategies, however, it is important to determine objectives for the diffusion efforts and the utility functions to be ascribed to each objective, in this study, the integration of special needs learners to public primary schools.

The basic observations about change that follow can serve as general guides to thinking about educational change. They are insights into the phenomenon of educational change that provide important orientations prior to launching into any particular change project. Integration is complex and requires that school factors be consolidated in terms of process preparedness for it to succeed. This study looked at some of the school factors that may influence integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

The adopting school may often lack the necessary manpower resources to coordinate and trouble-shoot once an innovation is being implemented. The innovations that have been more widely diffused and implemented have been those with built-in implementation support. That support takes the form of training or consultation both at the trial stage and at the implementation stage. This whole area of investigating conditions that facilitate implementation within the school, as contrasted to the actual adoption of educational innovations, needs to be explored more fully. It is therefore, important to ascertain some factors influencing the integration of learners with special needs into public schools.

Cawley, Hayden, Cade, and Baker-Kroczynski (2002) agree that integration in education is about restructuring school cultures, policies and practices so that they respond to the diversity of students in their locality. It sees individual differences not as problems to be fixed, but as opportunities for enriching learning and for education systems to embrace change. It is a dynamic, continuing process of facilitating the participation of all students including those with special needs. School factors are perceived to be integral to the implementation of integrative education. Gross model states that planning for the diffusion of educational innovations involves an examination of the interactions of user characteristics, innovation attributes, and diffusion strategies. These, he says, relate to innovative organizational behavior and as these variables are influenced by environmental constraints impinging upon the school organization. Implementing integration of special needs education into regular classrooms therefore, just like any other change or innovation, is not an exception. Integration is a complex and detailed process which has its demands and requirements. The factors which were investigated in this study were the influence of teachers’ familiarity with the process of integration, availability of physical facilities and resources, teachers’ preparedness and the school administrative support. This study therefore, utilized the model when investigating the school factors that influence integration of learners with special needs in Eldoret municipality.

1.13 Conceptual framework

This is a scheme of concepts or variables that were used in order to achieve the set objectives. All extraneous variables were adequately controlled for their effects (Oso and Onen, 2005). It was ascertained that these were day schools and all the learners had basic support from parents or guardians for them to be integrated in public primary schools and the following were the variables of the study.

The figure 1.1 shows the conceptual framework of this study.

Independent variables Dependent Variable

Figure 1.1: Conceptual Framework

Source: Researcher, 2013

As shown in figure 1.1, the independent variables of the study were teachers’ familiarity with special needs education curriculum, availability of facilities and resources, teachers’ preparedness and provision of school administrative support while the dependent variable was successful integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools. The study sought to investigate how some factors in the school influenced integration of learners with special needs into regular classrooms.

1.14 Operational definition of terms

Administrative support: These are multiple support activities performed by the administration in order for an organization to function. In this study they are the school duties undertaken by head teachers in overseeing the implementation of integrative education in regular primary schools for the integration to function.

Attitudes: Attitudes are settled ways of thinking or feeling, typically reflected in a person’s behavior (Bussiness Dictionary, 2012). In this study they are the predispositions or tendencies by teachers to respond positively or negatively towards learners with special needs.

Awareness: This is knowledge or understanding of a subject, issue or situation. In this study it is the teachers’ knowledge or understanding of learners with special needs and of the requirements of their integration in regular primary schools.

Children with special needs: These are young people usually under 18 years who are challenged either physically, mentally, emotionally or socially. This study is an investigation of some school factors that influence their learning in regular schools.

Curriculum: It is a plan for learning whereby objectives determine what learning is important (Wiles and Bondi, 1984). In this study it is a plan to achieve the objectives of integration of learners with special needs to regular classrooms.

Differentiated Curriculum: This is adapting the curriculum to meet the unique needs of learners by making modifications in complexity of depth and pacing (Bosch, 2008). In this study it is the modification of the curriculum to suit learners with special needs who are taught alongside the ‘normal’ ones in regular classrooms.

Facilities: Facilities are spaces or equipment necessary for doing something. In this study they are amenities provided for learners with special educational needs to facilitate their integration.

Factors: Aspects that influence whether an event happens or the way it happens. In this study, they are those aspects that influence integration of children with special needs.

Familiarity: This means being well known to or easily recognized by someone. This study investigated teachers’ familiarity with the process of integration of children with special needs to regular classrooms.

Inclusive education: This is deliberately aiming at involving all types of people or action of including someone or something in a group. In this study it refers to the philosophy of ensuring that schools or centres of learning are open to all children irrespective of their biological challenges (Peters, 2001).

Influence: The effect that a person or thing has on someone else’s decisions, opinions, behaviour or on the way something happens. According to this study it is the extent to which integration of learners with special needs is affected.

Integration: This is the process of combining with other things in a single unit or system (Watkins, 2010). This study is an investigation of school factors influencing placing children with special needs in regular classrooms where they can learn with 'normal' children.

Knowledge: Information and skills acquired through experience or education. According to this study, it is the theoretical or practical understanding of teachers for learners with special needs.

Mainstream: These are systems which are considered ordinary or normal and accepted or used by most children (Macmillan 2002).In the context of education, and in this study, it is the practice of educating students with special needs in regular classes.

‘Normal’ children: These are learners who are the way they are expected to be and are not unusual or surprising in any way. These are average children who routinely learn in large groups setting that don’t allow them to stand out or contribute in unique ways (Holland, 2000).This study is an investigation of children who are challenged yet they are placed in regular schools to learn together with the ‘normal’ children.

Ordinary Curriculum: This is the curriculum which is used to teach ‘normal’ pupils in schools regular schools. In this study it is the curriculum used to teach both ‘normal’ learners and those integrated in public schools.

Preparedness: A state of being ready for something. In this study it is the teachers’ readiness to integrate learners with special needs in regular classrooms.

Primary Schools: This is a place where children usually between ages four and fourteen years go to be taught or receive formal instruction in particular subjects and character modification in order to take up adult roles in the society.

In this study these are schools which admit ‘normal’ children together with those with special needs to learn together.

Regular classrooms: This refers to the mainstream classroom which follows the curriculum that is prepared for the average ability learners (KISE, 2002). In this study they are classrooms which accommodate both ‘normal’ and those learners with special needs.

Resources: A resource is a stock or supply of money, materials, staff, and other assets that can be drawn on by a person or organization in order to function effectively (Schonwetter, 2008). In this study they are the assets like toilets which learners with special needs can benefit from in a regular school.

School factors: School factors are aspects in the school that influence whether an event happens or the way it happens (Macmillan, 2002). This study is an investigation of some factors in a school that influence integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

Special needs: These are particular needs of people who are physically, mentally or socially disabled. This study holds that these are learners who require special support or attention during their stay in school for optimum learning to take place.

Special Needs Education: This is education offered to people with particular needs. According to study it refers to education which provides appropriate modification in curriculum, teaching methods, educational resources, medium of communication or the learning environment to cater for learners with special needs.

Special school: This is a school for children who have a disability of mind or body, therefore making them have special needs.

Skills: A skill is the natural or learned capacity to carry out pre-determined tasks through experience or training. This study is an investigation of the expertise teachers have in dealing with learners with special educational needs.

Training: This is the acquisition of knowledge, skills and competencies as a result of teaching of vocational or practical experiences. In this study it is the preparation teachers undergo in preparation for their professional practice.

1.15 Chapter summary

Currently there is an international shift towards integrative education, a means of education according to which the learner is schooled in the least restrictive environment possible, to overcome his or her challenges to learning and development. This chapter has discussed the introduction to the study which seeks to investigate to what extent some factors in the school influenced integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Introduction

The aim of this chapter was to examine studies and views by other scholars on school factors that influenced integrated education for learners with special needs in a regular classroom. Various areas were reviewed including what special education was, policy statements on integration in a regular classroom and the general learning environment as created by the teacher, as well as the school administrative support.

2.2 Integration in regular classrooms

Society has a way of nurturing its young members to help them attain relevant knowledge, skills and attitudes to enable them take up adult roles. Education encompasses the art of transmitting values and knowledge from one generation to the next in a given society. This view is supported by Malusu (1997) who defines education as a process of acquiring and developing the accumulated and new knowledge, wisdom, values, attitudes and skills as a result of growth, maturation and learning, which could be best utilized by the individual in a changing society.

Integration is a system used mainly to facilitate children with special needs attend ordinary schools that provide minimal modifications to accommodate learners with special needs (Stainback and Stainback, 1996). Integrative learning is a theory describing a movement toward integrated lessons which help students to make connections across curricula either formally or informally under the guidance of a teacher. It comes in many varieties- skills, knowledge, experiences and practices. It involves making connections within or between fields, between curriculum, co curriculum or academic knowledge and practices (Huber, Hutchings and Galer, 2005). It is the participation of learners with special educational needs in regular education without demanding changes in the curricular provision. Such children are expected to adapt to the regular school arrangement. The goal of integration that all participants in any society should aim at achieving is to ensure that all persons regardless of their economic, physical or any other difference are not excluded from any of society’s activities (GOK, 2003).It is to provide the most appropriate education to all children in the most enabling environment without discrimination, and in this case, in the regular school.

Inclusion refers to changing of attitudes and environments to meet the diverse needs to facilitate participation of persons with special needs on equal basis with others in society (Patterson, 2000). It is the participation of learners with special educational needs in regular education without demanding changes in the curricular provision. In this approach, students with special educational needs spend all, or at least more than half of the school day with students who do not have special educational needs. Because inclusion can require substantial modification of the general curriculum, most school use it only for selected students with mild to moderate special needs, as an accepted best practice. Specialized services may be provided inside or outside the regular classroom, depending on the type of service. Students may occasionally leave the regular classroom to attend a smaller, or more intensive instructional sessions in a resource room, or receive other related services that might require specialized equipment or might be disruptive to the rest of the class, such as speech and language therapy, or might require greater privacy such as counseling sessions with a social worker (Turnbull, 2002).

The word integration, however, has different names according to different regions. In America, it is called mainstreaming. Mainstreaming has generally been used to refer to the selective placement of special education students in one or more regular education classes. Studies show that both the developing and developed countries alike are striving to promote integration of learners with special in regular schools Cope and Anderson, (1997, p.7) argue that:

Among the many strands, which contributed to this current interest in integration, a major one is the gradual change in society’s attitude towards the handicapped. There is increasing recognition that no hard and fast line separates those who are and are not handicapped.

In Europe a committee of Enquiry into Special Education known as The Warnock Committee generated the Department of Education and Science to review the educational provision in England, Scotland and Wales for those with special needs. Integration of learners with special needs in regular schools to learn with peers was significant using the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) which was one in which the students with special educational needs could be paralleled in a regular school programme (Heward and Olansky, 1984). Ndirangu, Omiti and Waiyiaki (2004), quoting the Republic of Kenya Report (1976) said the Least Restrictive Environment (L.R.E) was achieved by placing students with special education needs with their peers in regular classrooms.

Similarly, Palestine also adopted integration as a strategy by the Ministry of education for reaching the goal of Education for All (EFA) consistent with the Jomtien Declaration of 1990. The ministry adopted integration as a priority to address the diversity of learning needs of children with learning difficulties.

Shiundu and Omulando (1992) contend that the background of innovation in African systems of education is rooted in the historical context of general development on the continent prior to independence of most of its countries. The restricted and extremely limited facilities for education, the low quality education and largely irrelevant education have all contributed to the need for change in the education system. Integration of learners with special needs to regular primary schools is one of the most recent innovations in education.

KISE (2000) outlines integration as a goal that all participants in any society should aim at achieving, to ensure that all persons regardless of their economic, physical or any difference were not excluded from any of the society’s activities. The government is aware that special education has not been mainstreamed in all education sub-sectors and programmes. The situation is compounded by inappropriate infrastructure, inadequate facilities and lack of equipment. This makes it difficult to integrate special education in regular education. This study therefore sought to investigate the preparedness of public schools to integrate learners with special needs.

The gender policy in education singles out education for learners with special needs as an area of specific focus. This policy states in part that to increase participation, retention and completion for learners with special needs, the government will provide an enabling (legal and policy) environment for such learners. This will be done through flexing curriculum, providing trained personnel, equipment and facilities and ensuring accommodative physical infrastructure (Kowalski and Rizzo, 1996). The guiding objectives of this study led examination of some of these factors that influence integration of learners with special needs.

International declarations such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child and the World Conference on Special Needs Education in Spain compelled nations to embrace integrated education. Literature reviewed reveal that developed countries such as, the US and Britain have established laws and acts which have streamlined the provision of service delivery for learners with special needs in regular school settings. In Kenya, the idea of integration of such learners was suggested more than 40 years ago, yet not much has been achieved. Although various education commissions such as the Ominde Commission (1964), the Gachathi Commission (1976), the Kamunge Commission (1988) and the Koech Report (1998) have for a long time advocated for integration of learners with special needs, very few schools are actively integrated. The Government of' Kenya gazetted the "People with Disabilities Act, 2003" which became a law in 2004, stipulates the need to provide education to people with disabilities without discrimination and in a more accommodative environment and prepare them for future roles in society.

The Ominde Report, which is a Kenyan Education Commission, recommended that children with mild special needs in education be integrated to learn in regular schools. The National Education Commission of 1976 also known as the Gachathi Report similarly recommended several measures to address SNE. Other government initiatives to develop policy guidelines include the Presidential working Committee commonly known as The Kamunge report, (ROK, 1988), on education and training for this decade and beyond, which emphasized deployment of SNE inspectors at district level and The Totally Integrated Quality Education and training task force (TIQET) or The Koech report, (ROK, 1998) which recommended the establishment of a national special education advisory board noted that there is no comprehensive SNE policy or legal framework on SNE despite existence of various policy guidelines on SNE.

UNESCO (1996) provides a comprehensive legal framework which outlaws all forms of discriminative treatment of persons with disability. This includes access to education and training. It provides for adaptation of infrastructural, socio-economic and environmental facilities to ensure that there is a conducive environment for persons with special needs. The Children act (GOK, 2001) harmonizes all existing laws and policy on children into one document. The act aims at improving the well-being of all children. The act therefore, provides a legal environment through which reinforcement of the rights of learners with special needs can be realized.

The Session paper no. 1 of (2005), underscores the government’s commitment to ensuring that special needs learners have equal access to quality and relevant education. It provides the overall policy framework for the education sector. The paper references the necessary legal context within which education and training, including SNE shall be designed, developed and implemented in Kenya.

Vision 2030 mainstreams equity in all aspects of society. Kenya’s journey towards prosperity also involves the building of a just cohesive society that enjoys equitable social development in a clean and secure environment. This quest is the basis of transformation of our society in seven key social sectors: Education and Training; Health; Water and Sanitation; the environment; Housing and Urbanization; as well as in Gender, Youth, Sports and culture, as well as equality and Poverty Eradication. It also makes special provisions for Kenyans with various disabilities and previously marginalized communities. Under education and training Kenya will provide globally competitive quality education, training and research to her citizens for development and enhanced individual well-being. The overall goal is to reduce illiteracy by increasing access to education, improving the transition rate from primary to secondary schools, and raising the quality and relevance of education. Other goals include the integration of all special needs into learning and training institutions, achieving an 80% adult literacy rate, increasing the school enrolment rate to 95% and increasing the transition rate to technical institutions and universities from 3% to 8% by 2012. Public and private universities were encouraged to expand enrolment, with an emphasis on science and technology courses. Vulnerable groups include widows and widowers, orphans and children at risk, persons with disabilities, under-age mothers, the poor of the poorest, internally and externally displaced persons and the elderly. All these groups are faced with multiple challenges in their daily life, such as high levels of poverty and various forms of deprivation. The majority of orphans in the country, for instance, are under the care of elderly grandparents or relatives, who themselves are struggling to earn a living (Ismael, 2012).

Integration in education is an approach to educating pupils with special educational needs in ordinary regular classrooms. Under this model, pupils with special needs spend most of or all their time with ‘normal’ learners. According to Hallahan and Weiss (1997), Education for All Handicapped Children Act enacted into law in November, 1975 in USA has been a treasure for Kenya’s education system to borrow from. It provides procedural safe guards to ensure appropriate identification, evaluation and placement for children with special needs. The challenge, however, is how to constructively understand and implement integration in the best educational interest of all children. The problems of school policies, structures and attitudes may arise (Turnbull, 1997). As a system problem, integration affects all participants in the education system, from the child to the Ministry of Education. Leadership in planning and implementing integration is extremely important. At school level the head teacher, as the educational leader has to provide necessary guidance and direction. Teachers have to be prepared in attitude and provided with relevant knowledge and skills to handle children with special needs. Parents and the community as a whole should be aware of their role in providing education to learners with special needs alongside those who are considered as normal.

The right to an education in the FPE setting in Kenya recognizes that there are practices in traditional education systems that exclude some of the children, yet studies on educational gains of children in special classes indicate that children with special needs in education did better academically in regular classrooms (Dunn, 1993), and Kenya is taking a systematic approach in formulating policy and implementing integration (Government of Kenya, 1999). In the past, the process by which children were identified, labeled and placed them in special classes had been criticized for the negative effects the process had on children. Integration, just like any other innovation has its own challenges. Any innovation cannot be assimilated unless its ‘meaning’ is shared. Fullan (2013, p.297) observes that:

No one can resolve the crisis of reintegration on behalf of another. Every attempt to pre-empt conflict, argument, protest by rational planning, can only be abortive; however reasonable the proposed changes, the process of implementing them must still allow the impulse of rejection to play itself out.

The National Institute of Special Needs Education (NISE) Policy Framework (UNESCO, 2009) cites one of the objectives of integration as to increase enrolment and promote values which enhance access to education and retention. The government places emphasis on integrative education through regular schools for learners with special needs and disabilities as opposed to the practice of using special schools and special units attached to regular schools. However, special schools and units are essential for learners with severe special needs and disabilities in the areas of hearing, visual, mental and serious physical challenges. Inclusive education approach will increase access to education for children with special needs. The government under the FPE programme is facilitating provision of additional capitation grants to facilitate implementation of inclusive education. The funds are provided to learners with special needs and disabilities enrolled in both special education institutions, units attached to regular schools and integrated programs.

The International Community is in agreement that education is the main driver in the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (The Session Paper No. 1, 2005). There have been various policies and trends regarding provision of Special Needs Education (SNE). Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948, p. 102), for example states that:

Every child has a right to education, which shall be free and compulsory. All are entitled to all the rights without discrimination of any kind such as race, colour, sex, birth or any other status.

This forms an important basis for education for all children in the world regardless of special needs. Consequently, The World Convention on Education for All commonly known as The Jomtien World Declaration on Education for All (UNESCO, 1990, p. 7), states that:

Every person–child, youth and adult–shall be able to benefit from educational opportunities designed to meet their basic learning needs. These needs comprise essential learning tools and basic learning content required by human beings to be able to survive, …to make informed decisions and to continue learning.

The Salamanca World Conference on Special Needs Education (UNESCO,1994, p. 4) also stated that:

We, the delegates of the World Conference on Special Needs Education representing ninety-two governments and twenty-five international organizations,…special educational needs within the regular education system, and further hereby endorse the Framework for Action on Special Needs Education, that governments and organizations may be guided by the spirit of its provisions and recommendations.

The Dakar Framework for Action (UNESCO, 2000, p. 77)is a re-affirmation of the vision set out in the World Declaration on Education for All in Jomtien a decade ago. It expresses the international community’s collective commitment to pursue a broad-based strategy for ensuring that the basic learning needs of every child, youth and adult are met within a generation and sustained thereafter. It states:

We, the participants in the World Conference on Education for All, reaffirm the right of all people to education…and of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. There has never been a more propitious time to commit ourselves to providing basic learning opportunities for all the people of the world.

4

It advocated for education for all children in an inclusive setting. However, this did not have a worldwide impact, as stakeholders didn’t make deliberate attempts to implement the recommendations (KISE, 2002). Supportive policies in the social, cultural, and economic sectors are required in order to realize the full provision and utilization of basic education for individual and societal improvement. The provision of basic education for all depends on political commitment and political will backed by appropriate fiscal measures and reinforced by educational policy reforms and institutional strengthening. Suitable economic, trade, labour, employment and health policies will enhance learners’ incentives and contributions to societal development. In Uganda for example, Universal Primary Education (UPE) as an education policy provides opportunities to all school going age children regardless of sex or ability. In Palestine the Ministry of Education adopted, as a priority to address the diversity of learning needs of children and young people with disabilities and learning difficulties (UNISE, 2000). Kenya is also making an attempt at national level to provide free primary education and subsidized secondary education although, in the classroom, where integration is supposed to take place, it appears wanting. This study aims at investigating some factors influencing integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools whose objectives according to KISE (2009, p.12) include:

Providing a comprehensive educational plan that modifies the curriculum to give maximum opportunity to children with special needs in order for them to become productive members of society

Developing positive attitudes in parents, teachers, peers and the community at large towards children with special needs

Providing equal opportunities to all children to share knowledge, resources and experiences

Suggesting approaches to accommodate all children in regular classes regardless of their disabilities or abilities

Developing and implementing a curriculum that is flexible and accessible to all children

Reaching the unreached children and youth within regular education

Facilitating inclusion of the learner in all aspects of life

Identifying and minimizing barriers to learning and development

Minimizing the effects of disabilities on the child

ROK (2009) highlights the status of Special Needs Education in Kenya's having started after the end of the Second World War and has since been offered mainly in four categories of children with disabilities, namely; children with hearing impairment, mental handicap, visual impairment and those with physical handicap. Education to those children was only offered in special school until the 1970s when units and integrated programmes were initiated. Special needs education has continued to expand and currently includes various categories of learners with/who: hearing impairment, visual impairment, physical impairment, epilepsy, mental handicaps, emotional and behavioral disorders, learning disabilities (LD), speech and language disorders, multiple handicaps, albinism, other health impairment, are gifted and talented, are deafened, are orphaned, are abused, are living in the streets, are heading households, are nomadic/pastoral communities, are Internally displaced, among others. Many of these categories of learners are found in regular primary schools and the study aimed at investing the readiness of the schools in teaching them together with those termed as normal. ROK (2009) further underscores this as a challenge to the education sector and reports that the national education system of education has been characterized by inadequate systems and facilities that respond to the challenges faced by learners with special needs.

2.3 School factors influencing integration

A school is a place where children usually go to receive formal education. School factors are all those aspects in a school that influence education. These factors may be physical, emotional, intellectual, administrative, and environmental, among others. Stainback and Stainback (1996) argue that observation and questioning are necessary to determine the philosophy of the educational staff and the primary purpose for placement of pupils in any given school. What, how, where and with whom is the student with disabilities able to learn? Must the student with disabilities earn the right to the general education classroom, or do educators believe that all students can be educated together with appropriate support? How will all the needs of the students be met? How are all the educators (teachers), prepared to meet their responsibilities? The school is the setting of implementation of most educational innovations and so its readiness is crucial. The section that follows is a discussion of some factors that were investigated in this study and the extent to which they influenced integration of pupils with special needs in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality.

2.3.1 Teachers’ familiarity with the process of integration

Teachers’ familiarity with the process of integration is their knowledge of or experience with learners with special needs. The Koech Report (ROK, 1998/9) postulates that special education is a programme of instruction designed to meet the unique needs of a child with special educational needs. It includes classroom integration, instruction in physical education, home instruction in hospitals and other designated institutions. The learners’ challenges interfere with regular education unless modifications and related services, equipment and specially trained teachers are provided.

According to Hodge and Jansma (2000), special education is a term most commonly used to describe the methodology and practice of education for students with special needs, such as learning difficulties, mental health issues and specific disabilities (physical or developmental). Ideologies and application of special education can differ from region to region, nation to nation, but most developed countries recognize the importance of the field. Special education exists so that students with special needs can achieve the same educational goals as the rest of the students. Since such students have different needs, learn in different ways, and interact socially in different fashions than other students, the techniques used may be very different from the general population, and differ greatly within the special student population itself.

The struggle to balance the needs of the individual students against the needs of the larger school population has been the subject of continuing debate. While the ultimate goal of any educational system is that all students achieve educational goals, and students with special needs should be no exception, the needs of all students cannot be sacrificed for these particular students. The field of special education, thus, addresses not only the challenge of educating students with special needs but also how such programs can be included in the total educational system to best serve society as a whole ( Osgood, 2007)and thus generating the whole idea of integration.

Formal education where learning and teaching activities are formalized into classroom situation was introduced in Kenya by European missionaries in 19th century (Eshiwani, 1993). As schools continued to be established regular public schools started to house special classes (Randiki, 2002). These special units formed the basis for Integration. The learning environment “is the setting or physical surrounding in which learning is expected to take place” (Newby, Stepich, Lehman, and Rusell, 1996). Learning takes place in formal and non-formal environments. Normal, formal learning occurs in school environments and “what is taught in these is carefully structured by means of syllabuses and timetables and the teaching provided is usually carefully supervised” While non-formal education is any organized learning activity outside the structure of formal education system that is consciously aimed at meeting specific learning needs of particular groups of learners “with more flexibility to places and methods of learning,” (Farrant, 2002). Conductive school learning environment is an important consideration for effective instructional implementation as children learn quite a lot through interactions and experiences.

The learning environment comprises several things and a variety of settings like the number of types of classrooms or lecture halls/theatres, laboratories, resource centers, gymnasium, playing ground, field trips and libraries among others. According to Pollard (2002), the nature of things within the learning environment will often influence class sizes and forms of curriculum and teaching organization. Thus reflective teachers are likely to be concerned about the quality of learning environment within their school and will aim to maximize the learning potential. This implies that the teacher needs to have the knowledge and professional qualities to be able to anticipate and restructure the learning environment so as to plan for instruction appropriately. The learning environment should facilitate the teaching-learning process through “the acquisition of knowledge, skills and attitudes which enable us to adjust ourselves in an effective manner to the environment” (Farrant, 2002). Teachers may not always have a say on the kind of school they wish to work in. However, they have the ability, knowledge and skills to be able to manipulate the environment in which they find themselves to suit their own and specific learner characteristics they are familiar with.

James, Jenks and Prout (1998) observe that learner characteristics are of central focus for teachers in any instructional process. It is important to note that the teacher knows that learners are thinking rational individuals who require special attention from the teacher. Learners may not be necessarily the same by virtue of being in the same class, but the teacher needs to appreciate them from two main perspectives. Homogeneous learners in class tend to have similar characteristics by virtue of their age, developmental levels and cognitive abilities while heterogeneous learners tend to have virtually different characteristics in most aspects because each has unique biological characteristics, developmental stages, cognitive abilities and habitual natures. A teacher learns about all these levels and categories from experiences with the learner in and outside the classroom.

It is the aspect of heterogeneity that brings about learner diversity and differences. The teacher needs to be conscious of this fact when planning and preparing for instruction to cater for the individual and group needs, interests, motivation and learning styles for effectiveness. Once these learning experiences and opportunities have been selected, they have to be organized so that the desired learning can take place. Such factors determine how the learners actually respond to their circumstances provided for them by their teachers. This knowledge enables the teacher to relate and respond appropriately to each learner. The teacher is enabled to appropriately use instructional tools, restructure and manipulate the various elements of instructional process, and innovate and balance various aspects of instructions (Otunga, Odero and Barasa, 2011) in order to suit the classroom situation which is being handled.

There are various teaching approaches that a teacher can employ when dealing with learners with special needs in education. An approach is a particular way of thinking about or dealing with something. Integrated teaching approaches are ways by which a child with special needs in education is taught in a regular classroom where they are exposed to the same curriculum. And curriculum refers to the subject matter that is planned to be taught by the teachers and learnt by the learners at each level of education. It provides guidelines on the content, sequence of activities, teaching methods, educational resources, time schedules and evaluation procedures. The curriculum framework aims at reaching the average learner. This is why integrative education calls for the recognition that all pupils may not do the same work in the same way at the same speed. This requires flexibility in terms of the content and teaching approaches to meet each learner’s needs (Ndurumo, 1993).

According to KISE (2000), a differentiated curriculum is an attempt to modify the regular curriculum to meet the individual needs of the learner. It involves: manipulating the environmental factors; adapting the teaching approach and time schedules; modifying the content presentation; adapting the examination question and assessment procedures; providing appropriate learning materials to meet the learners needs; including other relevant vital subjects for lifelong education required for some learners with special needs in education such as: independent living skills, sign language, Braille, orientation and mobility among others. These need to be examinable alternatives to other subjects, which need not be compulsory. The education policy should, however, clearly allow the modification by empowering the schools to make decisions concerning learners.

For the teacher to effectively assist the learner with special needs, she/he must use a variety of teaching approaches. These should be appropriate to the learners’ ability and the learning process (Omolo, 2002). Some of these approaches include:

Peer Tutoring-which involves using other children to assist those experiencing difficulties in a learning activity.

Group work- where the task is planned in such a way that each member does a bit of the task so that all can contribute to the finished product.

Individual Education Programmes which are recognized systems of assessing, teaching and doing remedial services to children with special needs.

Co-teaching- involves two teachers who work as partners in the same class, time and lesson. They plan their programme together, fill in on each other’s knowledge and share responsibility for the benefit of all learners in the class.

Child to child approach- is giving opportunity to children who know something different about a task to share their experience with others who have acquired a different skill or knowledge.

Team teaching- a group of teachers plan a program for a group of learners in a class. They divide among themselves responsibilities of implementation.

Task analysis- is a system of breaking a task into its component and then a learner completes the first part before he proceeds to the other until the parts are managed at last.

Thematic approach- teaching the main skill within other skills. The teacher can teach the concept of ordering of numbers through music.

Ability grouping- is dividing children into homogeneous groups based upon student’s performance in meeting set criteria necessary for participation in a particular group.

Acceleration- emphasizes advanced content of subject matter. Priority is given to the mastery of the subject matter among others (Corbett and Anderson, 1997).

In the classroom situation the teacher should: adjust sitting arrangement according to individual needs; cater for individual differences; use additional or special learners resources; adapt the curriculum or lesson to meet the needs of individual differences; adapt the classroom environment; modify methods of approach; adjust communication mode; emphasize on more motivation; allow more time to complete assignments; provide curative measures like, visual trainings, auditory crowning, orthopedic and physiotherapy exercise, speech therapy and behavior modification (Volfendel, 1992).

However, Barkley (1998) asserts that critics of integration include educators, administrators and parents. They argue that this approach neglects 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 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 integration as a concept. Teachers should aim at achieving the overall goal of education for all by 2015 in line with the national and global commitment. The government’s vision is to have globally competitive quality education, training and training and research for sustainable development. Towards this end, the MOE is mandated to work with other education stakeholders to provide, promote and coordinate quality life-long education, training and research for Kenya’s sustainable development and responsible citizenry for ALL. The National SNE policy framework in this respect is hinged on and aims to achieve the following overarching objectives at all times (ROK, 2009: 25);

To enhance early identification, assessment, intervention, placement, habilitation and rehabilitation of learners with special needs and disabilities.

To promote awareness of the educational needs and capabilities of persons with special learning needs and disabilities.

To promote and facilitate inclusion of children with special needs in formal and non-formal education and training.

To put in place measures to promote barrier free environment for learners with special needs in ALL learning institutions.

To provide and promote the use of specialized facilities, services, assistive devices and technology, equipment and teaching/learning materials.

To promote quality, relevant and holistic education in ALL learning institutions for learners with special needs and disabilities.

To develop capacity of SNE professionals, specialists and essential service providers to deliver quality services to learners with special needs and disabilities.

To enhance collaboration and networking, strategic partnerships and participation of stakeholders including learners with special needs and disabilities in provision of SNE services.

To support research and development on SNE, documentation and dissemination of relevant information.

To promote effective management and coordination of SNE and other related services.

To provide education that promotes spiritual growth and value development.

These objectives highlight a total process by which learners with special needs are developed and achieve individual growth and social competence in institutional settings. A fundamental characteristic of any education system is its curriculum; that is, the courses or subjects specified to be taught to learners in schools. Such courses ideally reflect what society deems to be important and central to societal values to be transmitted to individuals pursuing the education through schooling. As Skilbeck (1990, p.45) notes:

In all periods of history, efforts have been made to analyze for the purposes of schooling, the fundamental elements of knowledge and understanding: the kinds of knowledge that seems to provide foundations for further learning, the intellectual and practical skills that serve as tools, values and attitudes that seem to be of most worth to individuals and society.

Curriculum is described as a written plan for action and serves as a guide to teachers who interpret and put it into use in the classroom. Shiundu and Omulando (1992) define curriculum design as the way in which the component parts or elements of the curriculum have been arranged in order to facilitate instruction. It involves structure and pattern or organization of the component parts. Print (1993) defines curriculum development as the process of planning learning opportunities intended to bring about certain desired changes in pupils and the assessment of the extent to which these changes have taken place. The purpose of an instructional programme is to bring about some desirable change in terms of knowledge, skills and values in the learners. Curriculum development is dynamic, systematic and an unending process which can be re-arranged or altered to suit the needs of learners giving rise to a differentiated curriculum which suits the needs of individual learners, and in this study, a curriculum that would be useful to nation in achieving its overall objectives.

In the United States of America, the United Kingdom and some other European countries, schools are able to design and follow a school-based curriculum. Individual schools or schools within an administrative district are permitted to draw up a school curriculum or decentralized curriculum for schools within the district. The examination system reflects the decentralized system. The most valuable examinations are those set by universities’ admissions board. On the contrary, in many African countries, there is insistence on the standardization and, therefore, the curriculum is centralized. Kenyan schools on the other hand, follow a centralized curriculum designed and monitored by education officials in the Ministry of Education specifically, the Kenya Institute of Education (KIE) and the Quality of Assurance and Standards Officers (QASOs). The Kenya schools’ curriculum consists of a published syllabus document distributed to schools. For each class level, the syllabus document consists of topics and specific learning objectives. The objectives indicate what learners should be able to do by the end of a particular unit. The examination system reflects the centralized system. The official curriculum is sometimes currently published by the Kenya National Examination Council (KNEC) as an examination syllabus. Due the centralization, the curriculum does not cater for specific needs of learners and those learners with challenges in education are always disadvantaged.

However, the syllabus is only one of the instruments which express the official curriculum. Other sources of the curriculum include: national public statement of goals and intent, the legal and administrative framework of the school system, official calendars and time allocations, style of the final and intermediate examinations (Malusu, 1997). The prescribed curriculum is not the one which is often attained. What teachers are able to teach and what learners are able to acquire represent the actual curriculum. The single valid measure of a curriculum is the learning which takes place. Teachers of learners with special needs in public schools need to familiarize themselves with the entire process of integration of special needs which is more learner-centered, for effective integration. The learner-centered designs emphasize the development of the individual. Their organizational patterns grow out of the needs, interests and purposes of the students. The learner is the centre of the curriculum process and his/her active participation in the learning process is the main focus of these designs. These designs draw on the knowledge about human growth and development, and on the theories of learning. The traditional domination by the teacher is greatly minimized by allowing for freedom, active involvement, and creativity which are all important for human growth. The prototypes of the learner-centered designs are child-centered design or activity design. The appropriateness of the name ‘activity/experience’ for this pattern of curriculum organization is found in the design of Daniel (1980, p.41) puts it,

People learn what they experience. Only that learning which is related to active purposes and is rooted in experience translates itself into behaviour changes. Children learn best those things that are attached to solving actual problems that help them in meeting real needs or that connect with some active interest. Learning in its true sense is an active transaction.

Curriculum encompasses all learning opportunities provided by the school. It has component parts which have been arranged to facilitate instruction as discussed by Shiundu and Omulando (1992), who address three main elements. These are aims, goal and objectives, learning experiences, and evaluation. Knowing the destination of a plan facilitates good planning. Objectives are usually the destination towards which planning is directed. They strongly control the process of planning and all curricular activities including implementation and evaluation. Learning experiences on the other hand refer to the interaction between the learner and the external conditions in the environment as cited by Otunga, Odero and Barasa (2011). They include the content, the teacher, fellow learners, resource materials, teaching methods and aids, learning activities, learning environment, resource persons, and so forth. Lastly, evaluation is the process of determining the extent to which curricula objectives are being or have been achieved. It helps in making decisions to building, changing and improving the curriculum, of which integration is one of them. Since curriculum is a means of achieving the aims of education, integration of learners with special needs in education is an innovation in the system of education which needs to be addressed corporately by all stakeholders so that teachers in public primary schools can familiarize themselves with SNE curriculum for effective implementation. This will help to enhance teacher-preparedness and readiness for integration of children with special needs.

One of the major roles of KIE is to promote equity and access to quality curricula and curriculum support materials. According to the People with Disabilities Act (2004), every child has a constitutional right to free primary education, including those with special needs. Among the objectives of special needs objectives, therefore, are that children be educated in an inclusive setting unless this would be in the best interest of the child or effective provision of education for other children in the mainstream education. It advocates for an inclusive environment as much as possible so that the learner with disability can benefit from education in the same setting with some adjustments here and there to suit individual needs of learners. Children with disability in regular schools can get support from ‘normal’ children, rehabilitation through social interactions and all the experiences of the curriculum both formally and informally.

2.3.2 Educational facilities and resources for integration

Educational resources is a broad term that focuses on all factors outside and within the classroom that make teaching and learning experiences more effective. Educational resource simply refers to human and material resources and any other environmental factors that are necessary to facilitate learning. Integration as an innovation places certain reasonable demands on school conditions, pupils, teachers, parents and facilities. These demands are within cultural, political, social and economic contexts. In this study they are resources which will enable a learner with special needs to be integrated in a regular school. In Distant Learning SNE module 1 ( KISE, 2002) such resources include magnifying glasses to reinforce reduced vision, hearing aids for learners who are hard of hearing, walkers, crutches made from local materials to help learners with mobility difficulties and providing guiding and counseling to learners with special needs.

There are several categories of physical challenges that are defined under special education law and each involves certain accommodations that can be made into public school setting. Depending on the severity, these children are eligible for an extensive range of provisions as indicated by Individualized Education Programmes (IEPs) (Zachry, 2012). Physical therapy focuses on gross motor skills (large muscles) while occupational therapy focuses on daily living activities.

School therapy treatment assists a student in travelling throughout the school environment, participating in classroom activities, maintaining and altering positions in the classroom, as well as managing stairs, restrooms and cafeteria. It is also recommended for improved wheel chair mobility. In the school setting activities of daily setting include academic and non- academic activities such as social skills and self-help skills like washing of hands, toileting, among others (Zachry, 2012).

There are many other accommodations that can be made for physically disabled children who attend public schools. For example, children who use a wheelchair or walk with assistance of crutches, braces or a walker can be given access to a school elevator, those with hearing problems can be made to sit near the source of sound or use hearing aids, those vision problems can be made to sit near blackboard, use bold print, eye glasses, among others. Those with emotional disorders can undergo counseling sessions with the service providers. Appropriate accommodations should also ensure that these children have necessary amount of physical space to manoeuvre about in the classroom setting. Students who struggle with communication, as a result of a disorder such as cerebral palsy may benefit from speech therapy or other assistive technology. These impairments involve communication disorders such as shuttering, articulation problems, language impairment or a voice issue that adversely affects a child’s education. Teachers of epileptic students should be trained in preparation for administering first aid in the event of seizure (Tony and Will, 1988).

On the political aspect, the development of integrative schools as the most effective means for achieving education for all must be recognized as a key government policy and accorded a privileged place on the nation’s development agenda. It is only in this way that adequate resources can be obtained. Changes in policies and priorities cannot be effective unless adequate resource requirements are met. Political commitment, at both the national and community level, is needed both to obtain additional resources and to redeploy existing ones. These are both human and material resources that are necessary for the learner to learn effectively (KISE, 2002).

As far as physical factors are concerned, Oluoch (2002) notes that schools embarking on the new curriculum should be those which can obtain the necessary facilities and equipment. For example, one would expect to find acceptable classrooms, desks, blackboards, playing fields, textbooks for teachers and pupils in the schools which are ready for curriculum improvement. Schools should for example have magnifying glasses and other optical devices to reinforce the reduced vision; hearing aids for learners who are hard of hearing; walkers and crutches made of local materials to help learners with mobility difficulties. The success or failure of curriculum implementation may well depend on the availability of these facilities and equipment.

Economically, resources must also be allocated to support services for the training of mainstream teachers, for the provision of resource centres and for special education teachers or resource teachers. Appropriate technical aids to ensure the successful operation of an integrated education system must also be provided. Integrated approaches should, therefore, be linked to the development of support services at central and intermediate levels. Pooling the human, institutional, logistic, material and financial resources of various ministerial departments (Education, Health, Social Welfare, Labour and Youth, among others), territorial and local authorities, and other specialized institutions is an effective way to maximize their impact. Combining both an educational and a social approach to special needs education will require effective management structures enabling the various services to co-operate at both national and local levels, and allowing the public authorities and associative bodies to join forces (Robertson and Nilson, 2008).

Technology does not pose serious consequences for implementing curriculum. This is because it results in major changes in the kind of knowledge society wants their youth to be given. It leads to changes in values, raises moral problems and puts pressure on existing curriculum use of computers and calculators. The curriculum has to cater for use of these machines as well as their place in the school (Shiundu and Omulando, 1992). People, however, react differently to change, but usually the reactions are negative. In education, resistance which is part of natural human behaviour over shadows acceptance. Most people will resist change if it threatens the cherished traditions and institutions, due to personal reasons or because they do not approve of them and integration of learners with challenges in education into public schools is one of such changes.

KISE (2007), states that among the many uses of educational resources is that they provide significant gains in formal learning by improving the learner’s abilities like retention, remembering, thinking, reasoning, imagination, better understanding and personal growth development. When resources are used there is a great opportunity for learners to move about, talk, laugh and interact freely. Under such condition the learners work independently and collaboratively and learning becomes interesting. Resource also promote learning as clear images are formed when learners see, hear, touch, taste and smell as their experiences are direct and concrete. Resources reduce barriers to learning and development by meeting learners’ individual special need as learners are able to learn and function independently.

The specific needs and disabilities include sensory impairments, cognitive differences, motor and multiple disabilities among others. Sensory impairment includes visual, hearing and deaf-blindness. The special educational resources for the learners with visual impairments are devices for mobility, communication, low vision, classrooms devices and reproduction devices. Devices for mobility are the white cane and the guide dog. A sighted guide is also very useful to learners with visual impairments. Communication devices for learners with visual impairment include braille, slate and stylus, tape-recorders, typewriters and computers. Low-vision devices are those devices that help a learner with low vision to use a residual (remaining) vision effectively. They include both optical and non-optical devices. Optical devices include different types of magnifiers. Non-optical devices include large print, felt-tip pens and paper with bold lines, CCTV and reading stand among others. Reproduction devices for transforming original work to other form such as photocopying, enlarging or thermoforming are also useful in supporting the education of learners with visual impairments.

Educational resources for learners with hearing impairments include visual aids and various types of hearing aids such as in the ear hearing aids, pocket or body-worn hearing aid with spectacle hearing aids among others. Communication strategies such as body language, gestures, graphic symbols, mimicry, sign language, eye contact and finger spelling are also important for learners with hearing impairments. Learners who are deaf-blind require communication devices that are likely to stimulate their residual vision or hearing ability. Communication strategies such as body contact prompt and cues are necessary for their survival. They also require adaptive equipment for normalizing muscles and voluntary movement such as bolsters and mobility devices among others.

Cognitive differences include learners with mental disabilities, specific learning difficulties, the gifted and talented and those with autism. This group of learners may not have any notable disabilities. The educational resources required by these learners depend on the individual learning needs and may range from pre-school materials to the modern advanced high technology equipment. Resources for learners with mental disabilities include simple abacus, jigsaw puzzles, pegboards, pictures, patterns, puppets, toys and lacing/buttoning frame among others. The gifted and talented learners require exploratory resources such as encyclopedias, advanced textbooks, computers and journals. They also need enrichment resources such as challenging games like chess or scrabble, novels, magazines and professionals (human resources) who have excelled in various fields. Learners with specific learning difficulties require resources that may assist them to improve skills in either, reading, spelling or writing or mathematical skills. The learners with autism may require materials similar to those used by learners with specific learning difficulties or mental disabilities depending on the specific special needs an individual learner has.

Learners with physical and multiple disabilities experience problems such as poor balance and body posture that may result to awkward gross motor movement, stiffness or floppiness of the body parts among others. These learners require compensatory devices for mobility, positioning, communication and then classroom devices adapted according to individual needs or conditions. The learners with multiple disabilities have more than one disability which makes them experience a number of limitations in life. These learners need resources that are carefully selected to promote skills of independent living and learning in classroom. Resources for such learners are selected according to the combined type of disabilities and specific needs of the learner.

Communication difficulties also interfere with the learner’s academic achievement, personality and social adjustment. Learners with such difficulties require communication resources and strategies that will assist or enhance the means of communication. Such resources may include writing boards with pictures, typewriters, gestures and sign language among others.

Learners with emotional and behavioral problems may portray unusual behavior in class such as aggression, acting inappropriately, being destructive or refusing to comply with given instructions among others. To minimize such behaviors, reinforcement should be the major approach through the use of social activities, token reinforcers, establishment of rules and routines in the class and facilitating appropriate placement among others.

There are also alternative modes of communication for learners whose speech and language are severely impaired. The resources that are required to meet these needs include communication boards, sign supported speech, talking books and bliss symbols.

The list of resources is endless. A classroom teacher may manipulate those which are available suit the individual learner. Nevertheless, resources cannot be ignored in implementing any innovation. They may be human or non-human. Pollard (2002) identifies essential categories as people, buildings, equipment and materials. He further says these resources have an impact on what is possible to do in a classroom. The main objective of using educational resources is to provide learners with meaningful and productive knowledge, experiences, skills and attitudes. For this to be achieved there must be effective stimulation of the learner’s senses through use of appropriate educational resources. This study investigates how availability of resources influences integration of learners with special needs in regular classrooms.

2.3.3 Teacher preparedness

Shifts in educational thinking lead to new theories regarding educational practices. Such thinking eventually influences approaches to educational practice hence integration in education. The teachers are usually in the forefront in curriculum implementation and they can effectively implement only what they know, understand and are capable of doing. Teachers as professionals need to be equipped with relevant skills and knowledge.

KISE (2002:43) observes

The classroom teacher is the most important person...Teachers may make it possible for the learner to be accepted by other learners by demonstrating positive and supportive attitude to the learner. Conversely being negative towards the learner with special needs may block chances for the learner to learn in the regular class.

Teachers are the key to the success of integratory programs, as they are viewed as linchpins in the process of including students with special needs into regular classes. Other studies acknowledge that integrative education can only be successful if teachers are part of the team driving this process. It is important to ascertain the factors shaping the perceptions of mainstream teachers as they attempt to include pupils with special needs in education. He asserts that perceptions of mainstream teachers toward the integration of pupils with special needs influence the learner’s experiences. And since teachers and pupils exist in an environment in which they interact, theory is deemed right to explain the influence of teachers experience on their learners.

Integration being an innovation in education requires that teachers be equipped in order to integrate special needs learners. Quist (2000) acknowledges that for one to be a good teacher, ones needs to have a variety of personal and professional skills to help him or her teach successfully. These, he notes, include: organization, planning, management, communication, monitoring and evaluation skills. He furthers states that the teacher requires knowledge in several areas in which include: subject knowledge, theories of child development, theories of learning, teaching methods, classroom management and self-knowledge.

A more knowledgeable and experienced teacher is likely to have a better ability in utilizing learner capability to enhance the learning process, through careful professional planning. The quality and range of expertise of class teachers are a major factor in determining what is done and what is possible to do in school (Pollard, 2002). Teachers themselves are the most important resource in the teaching-learning process because they have the ability to manipulate various tools within the instructional situation to suit the specific learning environments. Thus, their attitudes towards teaching should help develop appropriate attitudes among learners and towards the learning process (Horne, 1983).

Appropriate preparation of all educational personnel stands out as a key factor in promoting progress towards integration of special needs learners. Pre-service training programmes should provide to all student teachers, primary and secondary alike, positive orientation toward disability, thereby developing an understanding of what can be achieved in schools with locally available support services. In teacher-training, specific attention should be given to preparing all teachers to exercise their autonomy and apply their skills in adapting curricula and instruction to meet pupils’ needs as well as to collaborate with specialists and co-operate with parents. Shiundu and Omulando (1992) noted that the teacher is the one who translates the curriculum plan into reality through instructional learning experiences in order to achieve the prescribed objectives of education. There is need therefore, for quality and relevant training for teachers. The International Labour Organizations (ILO) in conjunction with UNESCO has recommended that all teachers be trained in post-secondary institutions at a level equivalent to that of higher education for acquisition of skills, knowledge and attitudes. Teacher ability, skills and knowledge is the variation of the teachers’ conceptualization of the process of teaching and learning which impacts on the manner in which content is presented to the learners. This depends on the teacher’s knowledge and skills in the teaching and learning interactions with diverse learner groups and learning environments, which are the public primary schools.

Teaching is a complex activity, which cannot just be learnt by imitation. An effective teacher acquires pedagogical skills through a long process of gaining an understanding of the principles of human learning. Teaching involves thinking and reflection. The teacher thinks about the lesson long before, during, and even after the teaching encounter. In planning for instruction, the teacher’s thoughts are laid down in a lesson plan. The written plan is a projection of what has preoccupied the teacher’s mind in the preceding period. Effective teaching is also systematic, stimulating and caring (Marsh, 1982). The emphasis on these factors varies between teachers and subjects. Each of these factors is complex and challenging. A good teacher presents material clearly and stimulates the children to think deeply by drawing their attention to specific issues particularly, in order to meet the needs of each learner.

There are variations of abilities and differences found among any group of learners in any given setting. These variations and differences give rise to different learner characteristics called special needs. These special needs are conditions or factors that hinder normal learning for individuals. They may be temporary or life-long. Galloway (1995, p.36) states,

The most effective way to help children with special needs is to review aspects of school organizations, teaching methods and resource management…seeing the child as a teaching problem implies that teachers see it as their responsibility to teach him/her. In contrast, when he/she is seen as a learning or behaviour problem, the implication is that the problem resides in the child, and is therefore not the teacher’s responsibility.

The process of learning in children takes place through interaction with the environment. Robert (2011) describes learning experiences as the interaction between the learner and the external conditions in the environment which the learner can react to. A teacher is expected to be manipulative to enable learners to become actively involved in the process of learning. A pupil must be given experiences which provide him with time to practice his skills of problem solving and give satisfaction answers while carrying out expected activities. The teacher must also start from known to unknown and the activities should not be beyond physical or mental ability of learners. Learning experiences are selected basing on aims, goals objectives, content and evaluation of the curriculum. Once learning experiences and opportunities have been selected, they have to be organized so that the desired learning can take place. The curriculum is usually organized according to subjects but there have evolved new approaches in an attempt to modify the traditional subject, centered curriculum so as to reduce shortcomings and respond to new understanding regarding the nature of the child and new learning theories (Shiundu and Omulando, 1992). Subjects taught in schools form the medium through which the objectives may be achieved. The individual subjects are curriculum areas which must be organized into a school programme. This involves consideration for a new sequence of presentations, time allocation and approaches to instructions. The learning experience within a subject (such as mathematics) can be organized at three levels which are the lesson, topic and unit.

Another consideration in organizing learning experiences is the individual learner’s needs. This can be done by organizing the classroom to address the learner’s difficulty. For example, moving the learner to sit near the teacher or away from too much light, modifying the teaching style to involve more group activities where each learner participates or encouraging learners to help each other rather than competing with each other (Shiundu and Omulando, 1992) as this is in line with the objective of integration of challenged to public schools.

Teachers of children with special needs need to be very innovative in improving the learning environment of their learners. An example from teachers in Britain shows how teachers can initiate inclusion. Some 250 special needs teachers invited their colleagues from mainstream schools in a meeting to discuss how their learners with special needs could access the national curriculum in the early 90’s. This led to monthly meetings, which recommended the need for a whole curriculum that includes personal and social education. They also pointed out the need for reducing the curriculum to make it fit for the developing learner including those with special needs. Their government took up these recommendations and they were included in the curriculum review of the year 2000 (KISE, 2002).

All the above can be achieved through proper training of teachers. According to the MOEST (2004, p.45) teachers train in special needs education so as to:

provide skills and attitudes aimed at habitation and adjustment to environment

identify, assess and provide early intervention for correction and rehabilitation

promote awareness of the needs of the disabilities

promote the provision and use of specialized facilities and equipment and

promote measures to prevent impairment in order to limit the incidences of disabilities.

In practice, whatever the teacher’s qualification, quality and attitudes, there are some constraints to teachers’ participation in curriculum decision making. As Ryle (1990) notes, teachers tend to restrict their domain of operations to the classroom. Programmes that involve teachers in activities outside the classroom are frowned upon. They build defenses around themselves and their classroom activities. Attempts to penetrate the classroom, even with the noble intention of evaluating the performance of curriculum materials are regarded as interference thus hampering integration special needs learners as teachers want to cover the examination oriented curriculum.

KISE (2000) suggests that skills required to respond to special educational needs should be taken into account during assessment of studies and teacher certification. Specialized training in special needs education leading to additional qualifications should normally be integrated with or preceded by training and experience as a regular education teacher in order to ensure complementarity and mobility. The government is conscious of the fact that capacities and skills of staff at all levels within SNE should be commensurate with the tasks they perform. The success of SNE services and education depends on provision of specialized human and institutional capacity. SNE teachers in the country are trained at Kenya Institute of Special Education (KISE) in certificate and diploma levels, and also at higher levels in local universities. It is estimated that in 2003, there were 4255 SNE teachers trained in Kenya against an estimated 1.8 million learners with SNE requirements. Currently, in most cases there are gaps between competencies and the responsibilities of staff who undertake provision of Special needs education. Some specific skills required by special needs education teacher are: patience- special needs children may need more time than one is accustomed to allowing for a task and impartiality- these children are sometimes sensitive to seeing differences in responses to some behavior. The teacher should be ready to explain in terms they can understand, listening- some learners may not be able to express themselves clearly. The teacher should also patiently listen, classroom management-teacher should be knowledgeable of techniques to curtail inappropriate surface behavior and readiness- which is the ability to accept challenges each unique child faces and what to do to meet those challenges (Richard, 2011).

Kowalski and Rizzo (1996) confirm that challenges of catering for the needs of the children are many and varied. These include, among others the challenge of large classes. This is characteristic of public schools where the population far exceeds the number allowed by law. Inability to identify special children early enough, if possible before they enter school and lack of trained specialists to handle special children in the classroom are also a challenge. Right now there is a dearth of teachers especially those trained to attend to the needs of special children. Appropriate preparation of all educational personnel stands out as a key factor in promoting progress towards integration. Pre-service training programmes should provide to all student teachers positive orientation toward disability, thereby developing an understanding of what can be achieved in schools with locally available support services. The knowledge and skills required are mainly those of good teaching and include assessing special needs, adapting curriculum content, utilizing assistive technology, individualizing teaching procedures to suit a larger range of abilities, among others.

In teacher-training practice schools, specific attention should be given to preparing all teachers to exercise their autonomy and apply their skills in adapting curricula and instruction to meet pupils’ needs as well as to collaborate with specialists and co-operate with parents. The skills required to respond to special educational needs should be taken into account during assessment and teacher certification. As a matter of priority, written materials should be prepared and seminars organized for local administrators, supervisors, head teachers and senior teachers to develop their capacity to provide leadership in this area and support. The other major challenge lies in providing in-service training to all teachers, taking into account the varied and often difficult conditions under which they serve. In-service training should, wherever possible, be developed at school level by means of interaction with trainers and supported by distance education and other self-instruction techniques (Wiles and Bondi, 2008). Universities also have a major advisory role to play in the process of developing special needs education, especially as regards research, evaluation, preparation of teacher trainers, and designing training programmes and materials. Networking among universities and institutions of higher learning in developed and developing countries should be promoted. Linking research and training in this way is of great significance. Non-availability of instructional materials to assist the teachers in managing the special child is a challenge too.

The other challenges include lack of cooperation from other staff in dealing with special needs children. They see the child as a problem with all kinds of needs, which are difficult or impossible to meet. Lack of proper funding to procure equipment and train specialists in special needs education is the other challenge. Similarly, negative attitude of members of the public towards special needs children poses a big problem. Lack of equipment and writing materials such as Braille, and typewriter to mention just a few, is a challenge. Last but not least is lack of a recurrent problem with education systems, even those that provide excellent educational services for students with special needs is lack of role models and public awareness (KISE,2002).

The Ministry of Education (MOE), however, faces various challenges in respect to capacity building and human resource development, especially in SNE. There is lack of systems to provide adequate information and skills inventory to guide those who perform deployment functions in the ministry (Eshiwani, 1990). Through government sponsorship, the MOE continues to train primary school teachers in special needs education. The government is also sponsoring training in SNE at university level in order to improve capacity. The government is committed to achieving social equality especially provision of equal opportunity and access to education for learners with special needs. A co-operative, supportive partnership between school administrators, teachers and parents should be developed and parents regarded as active partners in decision-making. Governments should take a lead in promoting parental partnerships through both statements of policy and legislation concerning integration of special needs learners as an innovation in curriculum implementation.

Specialized training in special needs education leading to additional qualifications should normally be integrated with or preceded by training and experience as a regular education teacher in order to ensure complementarity and mobility. The training of special teachers needs to be reconsidered with a view to enabling them to work in different settings and to play a key role in special educational needs programmes. According to UNESCO (2001), an understanding and responding to children's needs in integrative classrooms require specialized training of teachers in order to meet the demand of their learners. This study examines extent to which teacher training influences integration of special needs learners.

2.3.4 School administrative support

Okech and Asiachi (1992) agree that once a syllabus has been produced at the national level, individual areas and schools are left with the responsibility of interpreting curriculum objectives to be able to select suitable learning experiences. School authorities make further decisions which may even result in modifications of the national objectives. The changes decided upon are based on various factors. For instance a school may be interested in teaching agriculture due to the location, resources and needs of the society while another one may be inclined to teaching vocational education. However, everybody in society should ideally accept and promote change although there are special people who play a leading role in implementing an innovation such as integration of learners with special needs. People react differently to change but usually the reactions are negative and sometimes resistance may overshadow acceptance. School administrators need to remember that resistance to new ideas is part of the natural human behaviour and attempt to understand the reasons for such resistance as observed by Shiundu and Omulando (1992) in order for implementation of the innovation to succeed.

Public primary schools are among educational institutions which hold on top-bottom approach of management. Integration is an innovation which requires also bottom-up approach for full participation of all learners. It applies to the relationship of learners to teachers, teachers to head teacher, head teachers to field officers, officers in the Ministry of Education and so on. School administrative support of this innovation is therefore very important.

Management and organization of integrated education programmes in USA is based on the principle of equality (Laserson and Block, 1985), which recognizes different capabilities and different interests. Thus overcoming the obstacles to learning is an appropriate and valid responsibility of schooling. Further, according to Kinsler and Gamble (2001), proper governance must be in place in order to facilitate learning, and the greater ownership of schooling process must be shifted from state to local authority policy makers or school councils, and in this study, the school administrators.

British primary school is founded on a set of prescriptive assumptions about children’s learning referred to as ‘good practice’. This good practice, according to Alexander (1992), refers to organizational arrangements and teaching methods which include group work, curriculum integration, a learning environment story or visual impact and exploratory pedagogy and thematic enquiry. Children’s entitlement to participate in every area of curriculum implies that assessment of children with special needs dose not only relate to detailed individual programmes but also address the kinds of arrangements needed to ensure that the child has opportunities to participate in all activities (Volfendale, 1992). Hegarty (1993) reports that Local Education Authorities (LEAs) run schools at local levels in Britain. The LEAs employ staff in an advisory capacity, monitor the authorities and develop new initiatives within it.

In Kenya, despite the governments’ policy to provide equal education opportunities and the recent introduction of free primary education, still more than 95% of children with disabilities do not go to school (Ramani, 2004). This high percentage can be attributed to the ministry of education’s continued support and development for regular schools at the expense of special schools and integrated programmes. The schools are characterized by poor management leading to poor methods, poor attitudes on the side of the teachers towards students with special needs and above all lack of proper teaching facilities (Kirimi, 1997). The above literature implies proper management of special education integrated institutions is crucial for the challenged learners.

Teachers in a school need a lot of support from school inspectors, educational administrators and other educational authorities during the stage of curriculum implementation. It is this stage that the main thrust for the curriculum development passes from the project staff to the field officers who are concerned with the maintenance of standards in schools. This cadre of curriculum workers should be strengthened in number and made more effective by providing them with better facilities in order to enable them give efficient support to the school as new curricula are implemented (Oluoch, 2002). Learners with special needs require basic support services if their learning will be effective in an inclusive setting (KISE, 2002). The following are some of the support services that should be made available to teachers and learners with SNE in the regular class; resource room, peripatetic or itinerant teacher, guidance and counseling, medical practitioners, feeding programmes and charitable organizations and interest groups like churches Red Cross, Rotary clubs which provide moral and financial help, among others. Some of these support services if not all, should be made available to the learners with special needs in the regular classroom. Learners entering into less supported environments, experience negative self-concepts, poor socialization skills, stress and anxiety. Greene and Kochhar-Bryant (2003) indicate that most transitions affect a person’s self-concept, their motivation, as well as personal development. They assert that how a child copes with change can very much depend on the kind of support he/she receives and that resilience may also contribute to a child’s ability to cope with change. A learner with special needs may require occupational therapy, counseling, learning support, home and classroom interventions.

Children with disabilities benefit from learning in a regular classroom, while their peers without disabilities gain from being exposed to children with diverse characteristics, talents and temperaments. According to Ajuwon (2008), supporters of inclusion use the term to refer to the commitment to educate each child, to the maximum extent appropriate, in the school and classroom he/she would otherwise attend. It involves bringing the ancillary services to the child, and requires only that the child will benefit from being in the class (rather than having to keep up with the other students). This is a salient aspect of integration, and requires a commitment to move essential resources to the child with a disability rather than placing the child in an isolated setting where services are located. For the child with a disability to benefit optimally from integration, it is imperative for general education teachers to be able to teach a wider array of children, including those with varying disabilities, and to collaborate and plan effectively with special educators. Administrative support is hence crucial in the implementation of any innovation, like integration of special needs education. School administration is charged with the responsibility of ensuring that all stakeholders like the ministry of education, local leaders, parents and the entire community work together for the innovation to succeed. Although at national level the KIE is charged with the responsibility of disseminating the program, there must be proper coordination of events and activities on the ground. Donor agencies for example can come in with donations to assist in the realization of the innovation. Parents’ awareness and involvement cannot also be ignored because they interact with them before schooling begins and when the learner is not at school. Last, but not least is the teachers who are the ones who translate the curriculum into reality according to the objectives and so, this study investigates whether the provision of administrative support influences integration of learners with special needs.

2.4 Related studies

A study done by Visser shows that change in human behaviour may be possible when patterns of social and organisational relationships change or the physical environment changes (Duncan, Bowman, Naidoo, Pillay and Roos, 2007). Billington and Pomerantz (2004) also agree that the transition is one of “temporary boundary crossing”, where learners take with them their loyalties, cultural and organizational meanings from the existing system into the new system, where they are visitors until they can internalize this information into the new system. These transitions have academic, vocational and social consequences and the educational environment of the school plays a major role in the efficacy of the transition. The aim of integration agrees with the findings of Visser that children learn from each other as they socialize in a given environment. Some factors in a school play a key role in these relationships and they should therefore find school more rewarding due the formal setting of the school environment where they likely to encounter more challenging tasks.

Another study by Snyder and Dillow (2011) on Critical pedagogy, Education, Education policy, Educational psychology, Inclusive school, Learning disability, Mainstreaming, Social Issues, Special education, Special education in the United States and the Teacher reveals that special needs students are often the most challenging to teach yet also the most neglected by politicians and government educational policymakers. The number of students in special education has skyrocketed since the 1980s and only stabilized in the last few years. During the 2008–2009 academic school year, about 6.5 million students aged 3 through 21 were enrolled in special education programs for students with disabilities. This figure represents 13.2 percent of total US public school enrollment. Because of the increased level of special education enrollment, schools must pay more attention to the effectiveness of their current special education curriculums, including whether special needs students learn better with structure or freedom in the classroom. Schools must determine whether special needs students respond to a rigid teaching style with strict disciplinary measures or a flexible curriculum in a lenient classroom setting. This study on school factors influencing integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools is similar to Snyder and Dillow’s in the sense that they both found integration of special needs children quite challenging although this study found out that there was political good will. The government of Kenya supports integration of special needs children right from policy formulation to implementation despite the shortcomings. A reasonable number of teachers is trained in special needs education but this study is concerned with the competency of teachers in public primary schools to integrate learners with special needs in regular classrooms.

He further indicates that special needs students need a balance between structure and outlets for creativity. Policymakers consider a broad spectrum of special-needs student disabilities, ranging from mild learning disabilities to severe mental handicaps. Analyzing different types of special education programs by assessing their results is important given the severe problems special needs students may encounter later in life. For instance, many people with special needs have limited higher education and job opportunities. The use of ordinary curriculum puts emphasis on academic performance and is examination oriented. This study aimed at investigating whether the schools balance between structure and creativity, between integration into the structured curriculum and a curriculum individualized to the needs of a student in special education. Sharron (2011), a teacher who mentors students with behavioral issues at Dumas Elementary School in Chicago’s south side, believes that school should be a combination of many learning styles. She asserts that students should be integrated into regular classrooms during social studies and science lessons, because these subjects account for a wide variety of learners such as kinesthetic and visual. If structured, these subjects provide special-needs students direction and an opportunity for creativity. For math and reading, traditionally more difficult subjects, Sharon believes students should work in a separate classroom with more flexibility says some students need some time to adjust to regulations and structure in increments, so students should have an opportunity to play in between. Sharon’s study stresses creativity just like in this study. Creativity requires relevant resources which was one of the objectives of this study.

A study by UNESCO (1996) shows that special needs provision in 52 member nations indicate clearly that legislation is needed to ensure rights of people with special needs to equal rights and opportunities. This can further help in securing the resources needed to translate abstract rights into practical entitlements. Research indicates that in developed countries the importance and positive impacts of mandatory laws and policies on the implementation of inclusive programs are recognized. A study by Kristensen, Kristensen and Bragger (1997) in Uganda and another by Kisanji (1995) in Tanzania, both indicate that in most regular schools where children with special needs were integrated, the required materials were not provided or were inadequate. Legislation also affects structure and governance of any system. This study similarly sought to investigate school administrative support to integration of learners with special needs in regular classrooms.

Another study carried out in Zambia by (Katwishi, 1988) indicates that there were no specialist teachers in most mainstream schools to provide important advisory services that would assist regular teachers with managing learners with special needs who were being integrated. In his research study in Zimbabwe, Katwishi indicates that in some of the mainstream schools where children with hearing impairments were integrated, hearing aids had no batteries, and or cords, some of the ear moulds were chipped, some speech trainers were not working and there were no spare parts. Successful integrative education programs require the services of different professionals who assist in identification, referral, diagnosis, treatment and training (Fisher, 1995). The study on some factors in schools influencing integration of learners with special needs also investigated teacher training as a factor for effective integration just like Katwishi, Kisanjiand Hegarty did. Competency of teachers is a critical factor in implementing integration as an innovation.

While research indicates that most developing countries south of the Sahara have training programs for teachers of special needs (Kisanji, 1995), developing countries lack training programs for other specialist professionals needed to support integration. Hegarty (1993) asserts that integrative education demands relevant training and support for all teachers. There are very few training programs for specialist personnel such as educational audiologists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech and language pathologists and communication support workers such as interpreters and this study sought to investigate capacity building programmes for teachers in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality.

According to Zindi (1997), in theory many developing countries show interest in the education of children with special educational needs but realistically some of them are not able to carry out their well intentions due to lack of financial support. Some developing countries develop splendid policy plans to stimulate programs that educate children with special educational needs in order to tempt donors to donate funds but fail to implement the programs. Kenya could have similar challenges and this contributed to carrying out this study to investigate the role of head teachers, as administrators who are in charge of the implementation process.

Omurwa (2011) carried out a study on factors hindering integration of students with special needs in primary and secondary schools of Borabu schools in Nyamira district and cited major factors to be lack of training in special education by most teachers, lack of adequate physical and learning facilities, lack of adequate plans and preparedness for integration, absence of proper policies on integration and lack of awareness by parents about special education and integration. It is possible that Eldoret municipality, shares the same government policies and educational settings for integration of learners with special needs and there was need to carry out a similar study in a different locality.

Musumba (2008) in her study on factors shaping teachers attitudes towards the mentally handicapped pupils in special education units in Uasin Gishu district indicates that if professional teacher training will be emphasized for teachers handling pupils with special educational needs, teachers will be facilitated and equipped with knowledge and skills of imparting social and survival skills effectively, which can only be viable when they hold the right attitudes towards them. She further says that teachers require moral support from parents, school administration, their employer and the society at large. Musumba recommends that all teachers should be inducted regularly on the needs of learners to enhance specific skills and varied approaches. This is paramount with the emphasis of inclusive and integrative programmes by educators. Learners who show positive improvement in the special units are expected to join the regular programme in the mainstream class. Teachers in the mainstream classes have no option but to equip themselves with relevant skills, knowledge and attitudes to meet the new demands. This study also investigates integration of learners with special needs as an innovation being implemented in public primary schools and school factors that may influence it.

Consistent with the changes in policy, changes in ideology will always emerge. The learner is seen as an individual with assets (Landsberg, Kruger and Nel, 2005), as opposed to the view that the problem is within the learner. Lindsay (2003) cites the findings of a national UK-based study on the principles of integrative education including the following: all children can learn; support is important for all learners who should be guided according to their own pace of learning. While this study may have been conducted overseas, the applicability to the Kenyan context in terms of integration should be considered in line with the vision 2030 and Education for All.

Kenya, being a developing country has similar characteristics. According to literature review above, these factors may influence integration of pupils with special needs hence the undertaking of this study.

2.5 Chapter summary

This chapter has reviewed literature in relation to the study. The literature review was on integration as an innovation, teachers’ familiarity with the integration process, education facilities and resources for special needs education, the administrative support and related literature. The next chapter will discuss the research design and methodological procedures that the study adopted.

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter describes the research design and research methodology to be employed in the study. It is divided in sections which include: research design, area of study, population sample, sampling procedures, research instruments, and data collection procedures.

3.2 Research design

A research design is a specific plan for studying a research problem (Mutai, 2000). In this study, descriptive survey research design was employed. Kothari (2005) defines descriptive survey research as concerned with describing, recording, analyzing and interpreting conditions that either exist or existed for the purpose of employing data to justify current conditions, practice or make more informed plans for improvement. In this case information which described the existing phenomena such as school factors that might contribute to influencing integrative education in public primary schools were sought. This was done by asking the respondents about their education, attitudes or values.

The survey design assisted in exploring the existing status of variables. Oso and Onen (2005) say surveys are justifiable by considering issues of cost implication, rapid data collection and ability to understand population from part of it. Both primary and secondary information were sought. Secondary information was collected from libraries, resource centres and internet among others. Primary data were collected by use of the questionnaire and interview schedules and analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively respectively.

3.3 Research methodology

The study adopted a mixed method type of research as both qualitative and quantitative methods were used. Qualitative method was used to analyze items from the interview guide while the questionnaires were analyzed quantitatively. Quantitative method deals with quantity or amount while the qualitative phenomenon on the other hand relates to or involves quality or kind Kothari (2005).

3.4 Area of study

The study was carried out in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality. Eldoret is a town in Kenya and the administrative centre of Uasin Gishu county of Rift Valley Province. Eldoret experiences favourable climatic conditions and is good for agricultural activities. The population was about 289,830 in 2009 (census), and it is currently the 5th and fast growing cosmopolitan town because of the increased number of universities, a teaching and referral hospital, businesses, agricultural activities (GOK, 1999). Consequently, more schools have sprung up and pupils’ enrolment has increased tremendously.

Public schools have embraced integration of learners with special needs and going by trends; the increase in population likely translates into increase in the number of learners with specific learning difficulties. Eldoret municipality had 39 public primary schools. Thus about a half (1/2) of the schools were studied, which was a good representation of the schools within the municipality. Learner characteristics here can also be representative of other learners with special educational needs in similar educational institutions. This motivated the researcher to carry out the study since it is important to come up with remedial strategies in order to contribute towards integration of special needs education, by looking at some factors. Factors in schools are paramount because it is in a school that implementation of the innovation takes place.

3.5 Target population

According to Borg and Gall (1989), target population is all numbers or set of people, events or objects to which the researcher wishes to generalize the results of the research. The study targeted public primary schools’ head teachers (39) and teachers (800), in Eldoret municipality. Head teachers were asked to give general information about the integration process. The teachers were chosen because they are directly involved in the process of implementation of educational innovations.

3.6 Sample size and sampling techniques

A sample is a finite part of a statistical population whose properties are studied to gain information about the whole (Kombo and Tromp, 2006). Sampling is the procedure of selecting a number of individuals from the population such that the selected group contains elements representative of the characteristics found in the entire group (Orodho and Kombo, 2002).

Table 3.1: Sampling frame as per the record in MEO's office

Stratified sampling was used to select 19 schools and the head teachers of the selected schools were automatically included in the study. Simple random sampling was used to select at least 50% of teachers (12 or more) per school using Krejcie and Morgan (1970) method as cited by Amin (2005) to give each of them equal and independent chance of participating in the study and it was also representative of the entire population. In total there were 19 schools, 19 head teachers and 259 teachers who participated in the study. Table 3.1 shows the sampling frame.

3.7 Research instruments

The data collection instruments of the study were questionnaire for teachers of the selected schools and an interview schedule for head teachers. The items sought to find out the influence of the following variables: teachers’ familiarity with the integration process, teaching/learning resources and facilities, teachers’ preparedness, and provision of administrative support.

3.7.1 Questionnaires

A questionnaire is a collection of items or questions to which a research subject is expected to respond as defined by Kathuri and Pals, (1993). It is preferred because of its confidentiality, it saves time and information can be collected from a large sample. It contained two sections, A and B. Section A sought general information about the teacher while section B sought information on the process of integration. It contained both closed and open ended items. The Closed-ended items limited the respondents to specific answers thus making it easier to analyze the findings. Such items also made it easy for the respondent to answer and thus gave more accurate responses. The open-ended responses provided opportunities for self-expression. According to Mugenda and Mugenda (1999), closed ended questions are easier to analyze since they are in immediate usable form and economical in terms of money and time. Since it is a standard research instrument it allowed for uniformity in the manner in which questions were asked and made comparison possible across the respondents (Cohen and Manion, 2003). The questions were developed based on the outlined objectives. The self- administered questionnaires were hand delivered to teachers who filled and returned them to enable the process of analysis to commence. The questionnaire is found in Appendix 1.

3.7.2 Interview guide

An interview guide is an oral exchange between the interviewer and the interviewee who may be an individual or groups of individuals, according to Kathuri and Pals, (1993). In this study these were, the head teachers of the selected schools. The use of interview schedule was preferred because it facilitated in-depth information which otherwise could not be acquired from questionnaires, therefore making the interviewing process efficient. The face to face interview session sought to investigate details while clarifying issues and directing the process. It contained one section for the interviewees to respond to the general process of integration. The interview schedule is found in Appendix II of this thesis.

3.8 Validity and Reliability of the research instruments

3.8.1 Validity

Mugenda and Mugenda (1999) state that validity of research instruments is the degree to which results obtained from the analysis of the data actually represent the phenomenon under study. Validity therefore, is concerned with how the study represents the variables of the study. If such data is a true reflection of the variables, then inferences based on such data will be accurate and meaningful. The instrument was rated in terms of how efficient they sampled significant aspects of the purpose of the study. The researcher discussed the instrument with the supervisors and colleagues to determine validity then carried out a pilot study. Cohen and Manion (2003), agree that the purpose of a pilot study is to get the ‘bugs’ out of the research instruments. Piloting helps in that participants in the study do not experience any difficulties in their responses, and the researcher carried out preliminary analysis to see whether the wording and format of questions presented any difficulties and made necessary changes or modification.

A pilot study was carried out in one school (selected randomly), in Wareng district with all teachers filling in the questionnaire. This school was not included in the study. Wareng district schools have similar characteristics with Eldoret municipality since they are in the same neighbourhood. The responses of the subjects were checked against the research objectives. For the research instrument to be considered valid, the content selected and included in the questionnaire must be relevant to the variable being investigated (Creswell, 2007). The initial feedback obtained from the pilot study indicated some ambiguity which was discussed with the supervisors and used to improve on the instruments to clarify items.

3.8.2 Reliability

According to Mugenda and Mugenda (1999), the reliability of an instrument is the measure of the degree to which a research instrument yields consistent results or data after trials. Piloting was done to establish reliability using Test-Retest method. The questionnaires were administered and re-administered after two weeks to the same respondents. Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation (r) was used to determine the coefficient of stability of the data collection instruments which was 0.7. The correlation coefficient of 0.7 and above falls within McDonald (1999) category that is considered reliable to be used in the study. The instruments were also discussed with the supervisors.

3.9 Data collection procedures

Data were collected by use of a questionnaire, and an interview guide (see appendix I and II). Permission was sought from relevant authorities to conduct research, thus from The National Council for Science and Technology through Moi University, School of Education, Municipal Education Office, District Commissioners for Eldoret East and West also gave research authorization since the schools are under their area of administration. Consent was sought from head teachers of the selected schools in order to fix dates for the administration of the questionnaires and interview schedules. Appointments with the respective schools were booked and the researcher personally administered the instruments.

3.10 Data analysis and presentation of data

Data from the questionnaire were coded and the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to analyze them into descriptive statistics in the form of frequency tables, percentage and pie charts. Where Strongly Agree (SA) and Agree (A), Disagree (D) and Strongly Disagree (SD) were used, Strongly Agree and Agree were merged into Agree while Disagree was merged with Strongly Disagree into Disagree and there was also the Undecided group who stood on their own. Data from interview schedule were analyzed qualitatively showing either majority or a few of the head teachers. Results obtained formed the basis for the interpretation, conclusions and recommendations from findings and a comprehensive data analysis is presented in chapter four.

3.11 Ethical considerations

The major ethical considerations in this study were privacy, confidentiality and informed consent of the respondents. The participants were informed of their right to anonymity and autonomy in the questionnaire through the instructions to the respondent. No respondent was required to write his/ her name on the questionnaire for confidentiality purposes. The information gathered from the respondents was kept private and confidential, and were used for study purposes only as recommended by Oso and Onen (2005).

3.12 Chapter summary

This chapter has discussed the research design and methodological aspects of the study. The next chapter is a discussion of data presentation, analysis, interpretation and discussion of findings.

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION

AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the results following the undertaking of the research design and methodological aspects of the study. That is, after administration of the research instruments, data obtained were presented in pie charts, bars graphs and tables followed by analysis to give the results which were then interpreted. The purpose of this study was to find out some factors in the school influencing integration of pupils with special needs in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality. The objectives of the study were:

To find out the extent to which teachers’ familiarity with the integration process influences integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

To investigate the extent to which availability of physical facilities and resources influences integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

To examine the extent to which teachers’ preparedness influences integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

To investigate whether provision of the school administrative support influences integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

This chapter presents the findings that were obtained from this study from each of these objectives.

Response rates

Out of the 259 questionnaires given out 215 (82.6%) were returned.

4.3 Respondents’ biographical information

Respondents’ biographical information and results is provided below:

4.3.1 Gender of respondents

Figure 4.1 shows the results of the teachers’ responses on item of gender

Figure 4.1: Respondents’ gender

Results showed that out of the 215 teachers, who were involved in the study, 36% were males and 64% were females (Figure 4.1).Teachers are key players in a school and we cannot discuss school factors without discussing the input of teachers. Study findings showed that there were more female teachers in Eldoret municipality than there were male. A study conducted by Hastings and Oakford (2003) showed that gender disparities had a significant influence on mainstreaming attitudes. Females, however, were more likely to accept it and have positive attitudes than males. Gender, therefore, influences a type of response to a particular item in a research instrument. Based on the information contained in figure 4.1, majority of teachers in public primary schools within Eldoret municipality were of female gender. This mirrors a true reflection of teachers’ gender disparity in Kenyan urban areas. The study revealed that there is a significant agreement with Hasting and Oakford’s study since a majority of teachers were of a positive attitude towards integration of learners with special needs to regular classrooms, which also agrees with the views of Hammoand and Iggalls (2003) that gender influenced mainstreaming attitudes.

4.3.2 Respondents’ experience in terms of years in teaching profession

From table 4.1, ninety percent (90%) of the teachers in the municipality had worked for over five (5) years with forty percent (40%) of them having worked for over twenty (20) years. This is an indication that majority of the teachers had had ample time to interact with pupils of various kinds, including learners with various special needs. Results from the interview guide indicated majority of the teachers had worked for more than five years. The study showed there were variations in abilities and differences among any group of learners in any given setting. The responses obtained from the teachers, therefore, are reckoned to have been made out of many years of experience as most of them said experience and interactions had significantly enriched their contribution towards integration. A more knowledgeable and experienced teacher is likely to have ability in utilizing learner capability to enhance the learning process, through careful professional planning. Through interaction, experience gained by teachers may be useful in handling certain special needs since the needs of learners are diverse and this was in agreement with KISE (2002).

4.4 Responses on teachers’ familiarity with integration process

Influence of teachers’ familiarity with integration process was considered and the results were as follows:

4.4.1 The highest professional qualification of respondents

Figure 4.2 shows the highest professional qualifications of the respondents.

Figure 4.2: Respondents’ highest qualification

Basically, most teachers if not all, in primary schools in Kenya were trained as P1 but due to further studies a good number have undertaken various courses. Forty nine percent (42.9%) of the teachers in public primary schools within Eldoret municipality had P1 professional qualification only (Figure 4.2). Teachers with P1 and special needs education qualification at different levels, that is, certificate, diploma and degree were, however, few. For instance, only 3.4% of the teachers had certificate in SNE, 16.8% had diploma in SNE, 2.5 % of the teachers had degree in SNE and 12.5 were either employed by management or voluntary basis. This means more than 50% of the teachers in schools are not trained in special needs education although they teach or interact with these children in the school environment. Specialized training in special needs education should normally be integrated with or preceded by training and experience as a regular education teacher in order to ensure effectiveness (Bishop, 1985). Results of interview schedules indicated that most schools had few trained teachers in special needs education. A few of the head teachers said that most teachers who were trained in SNE were under- utilized due to various factors like lack of resources hearing aids or teacher-pupil ratio. Although some of them could have trained in SNE, class experience with pupils with SN may influence integration of such learners in public primary schools due to other school factors. Integration being an innovation in education requires that teachers be equipped adequately in order to integrate special needs learners in regular classrooms. Quist (2000) acknowledges that for one to be a good teacher, one needs to have a variety of personal and professional skills to help one to teach successfully.

4.4.2 Number of learners with special needs

Influences of teachers’ familiarity with curriculum for special needs were considered and the results showing the numbers of learners are given in table 4.2.

Table 4.2: Number of learners with special needs in schools

Although the number of learners with special needs varied from school to school, this study showed that almost half of the respondents (48.7%) were of the view that the number was over twenty (20) in a school (Table 4.2) and eighty seven percent (87.4%) of the respondents being in agreement that such learners in a school were over five (5) in number for every school.

The information in Table 4.2 indicates and emphasizes the importance of taking into account measures to assist learners with special needs in a ‘normal’ school setting as results indicated that such learners are found in every public school. ROK (1988) strategy of free primary education and education for all is a clear indication that challenged learners exist in public schools. Such pupils have different needs, learn in different ways, and interact socially in different fashions than other children. The techniques used when teaching them may be very different from the general school population, and differ greatly within the special learner population itself according to ROK (2003).

4.4.3 Category of learners with special needs

Various categories of learners with special needs found in different schools were considered and the results presented in figure 4.3.

Figure 4.3: Category of learners with special needs

From figure 4.3, the main categories of learners with special needs in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality were those with special learning difficulties (38%), mental challenge (19%) and short of hearing (10%). Although not many, visually and physically challenged learners (4% and 1%, respectively) were some of those with special needs. Others included those with behavioural disorders, hyper active, slow learners, just to mention a few. From the figure 4.3, severe challenges like total blindness, deafness or dumbness and mental retardation are catered for in special schools or elsewhere. Those in public schools are mild or partial and can cope with or benefit from ‘normal’ children through interaction.

Interview guide results also indicated that all head teachers were aware of special needs learners in their schools. They seemed to be able to recognize pupils with special needs because they were able to give the number of pupils with special needs in their schools. All head teachers said SNE challenges were not limited to physical, mental, deaf or dumb. The responses indicated that all schools in the study area had pupils with special needs with a variation in numbers from school to school. Available literature indicated that several conferences and commissions have advocated for education for all and integration of children with special needs to public institutions (UNESCO, 1997). Findings of this study showed that integration was on-going as there were special need learners, which is normal in any given society due to individual differences. Public schools in Eldoret municipality did not have at all or did not have enough facilities, therefore, should be equipped with basic facilities like ramps and toilets for special needs children which can be of great assistance during integration. Zachry (2012) says different challenges involve certain accommodations depending on the severity.

4.4.4 Whether teachers were familiar with integration curriculum or not

The results of whether teachers are familiar with the curriculum for integration of learners with special needs or not are presented in figure 4.4.

Figure 4.4: Teachers’ familiarity with curriculum for integration

Figure 4.4 presents information on familiarity of teachers with the curriculum for integration of learners with special needs. Most of the teachers (81%) in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality were either very familiar (17%) or familiar (64%) with the process of integration of learners with special needs. The study showed that they were aware of the government policy on integration but the main challenge was how to implement it. This indicated that their responses in this study regarding the integration of learners with special needs were made from an informed position. Interview guide results also revealed that teachers were familiar with the curriculum either through training or experience. Majority of the head teachers confessed that creating awareness to all teachers was quite a challenge to them as managers.

Cawley et al (2002) agree that integration in education is an opportunity for enriching learning and for education systems to embrace change. It is a dynamic, continuing process of facilitating the participation of all students including those with special needs. According to FPE setting in Kenya all children in Kenya have a right to an education and studies on educational gains of children with special needs indicate that they do better academically in regular classrooms. They should, therefore, be encouraged to join ‘normal’ children in class or social areas. Daniel (1980) notes that through interaction with the environment people learn and only that learning which is related to active purposes and is rooted in experience translates itself into changes in behaviour. It is also found that children learn best those things that are attached to solving actual problems which help them meet real needs or those that connect them with some active interest. Learning in its true sense is an active transaction. Therefore, teachers of learners with special needs should be familiar with the curriculum that meets the needs of their learners as postulated in the Koech Report, (1998/9).

Learners’ challenges interfere with regular education programmes unless modifications and other related services are provided and when teachers are familiar with the process, they can be able to handle the learners effectively. The head teachers interviewed also indicated that they were familiar with the requirements for integration of learners with special needs.

4.4.5 Level to which integration was a success

The results showing the level to which integrating learners with special needs is a success is given in table 4.3.

Table 4.3: Level of success in integrating learners with special needs

As shown in Table 4.3, the integration of learners with special needs in schools in Eldoret municipality is regarded successful as indicated by the percentage of teachers that were of the view that the level was either very successful (8.4%) or successful (61.3%). The success of integration as an innovation, however, is relatively dependent on school factors which are crucial in this study. These factors included teachers’ familiarity with the integration process of learners with special needs, availability of resources and facilities, teachers’ preparedness and provision of administrative support. Such factors interact within the learners’ school environment that determines how they actually respond to their circumstances and, indeed how teachers provide for them.

Despite the fact that teacher training on special needs education and availability of resources were not adequate, teachers were positive about the process of integration of special needs children and said it was a success, looking at the degree of how it was embraced. Malusu (1997) says the growth, maturation and learning that the child acquires could be best utilized by the individual in the changing society. It is, therefore, not enough to say integration of special needs education was a success basing on attitude but how implementation of the innovation was being done and how it would benefit the learner in his or her adult roles.

4.5 Responses on availability and adequacy of facilities and resources

Teachers’ responses on availability and adequacy of educational resources for learners with special needs are shown in table 4.4.

Table 4.4: Availability and adequacy of resources and facilities

Fifty two percent (52%) of the respondents were of the view that physical facilities and resources required for the integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools were available but not adequate. However, thirty four percent (34%) of the respondents were of the opinion that the facilities were not available (Table 4.4). Thus, according to eighty six percent (86%) of the respondents, the facilities were either inadequate or unavailable. These included desks, ramps and toilets.

Physical factors cannot be ignored in implementing an innovation such as integration of special needs education. Oluoch (2002) notes that schools that are prepared to embark on the new curriculum should be those ones which can procure the necessary facilities and equipment. This study, however, found out that schools in the municipality were not sufficiently equipped and so ill prepared for integration.

Inadequate facilities and lack of relevant materials is one of the major obstacles to the implementation of inclusive education in developing countries as shown by Kristensen et al (1997) and Kisanji (1995). Katwishi (1988) further showed that there were no specialist teachers in most mainstream schools that would provide important advisory services to assist regular teachers with managing learners with special needs who were being integrated. The fact that the head teachers were aware was an indication that they would possibly support the implementation of the innovation, given their position as the link person. They, however, just like teachers expressed lack of effectiveness due to limited resources though they appreciated the effort of the government of Kenya for funding free primary education.

The distribution of resources to schools should take realistic account of the differences in expenditure required to provide appropriate education for all children, bearing in mind their needs and circumstances. It may be realistic to begin by launching pilot projects in some areas in order to gain the necessary expertise for expansion and progressive generalization. In the generalization of integrative education, the level of support and expertise will have to be matched to the nature of the demand.

4.5.1 Sufficiency of time allocated for lessons

Teachers’ responses to sufficiency of time allocation for lessons catering for learners with special are recorded in table 4.5.

Table 4.5: Sufficiency of time allocation for lessons

The respondents were almost equally divided on their view regarding sufficiency of time allocated for lessons in catering for the learners with special needs in primary schools. While fifty one percent (51%) of them were of the view that the time allocated was either very sufficient or sufficient, forty nine percent (49%) of the respondents thought the time was not sufficient (Table 4.5).Whether or not the time allocated was sufficient was not easy to determine given the very close proportion of respondents with contrasting views on the question, although the differences in proportion of respondents with various views were significant. Time allocated for lessons was sufficient for ‘normal’ learners but for special needs learners it depended on the specific need of the learner. Since most learners fell in the category of special learning difficulty, it followed that such learners required extra attention hence more time. Interview guide also revealed that time uniform timing of lessons did not work in favor of learners with special needs.

James, et al (1998) observes that learner characteristics are of central focus for teachers in any instructional process. The teacher knows that learners are thinking rational individuals who require special attention from the teacher. Learners may not be necessarily the same by virtue of being in the same class, but the teacher needs to appreciate them from two main perspectives. Homogeneous learners in class tend to have similar characteristics by virtue of their age, developmental levels and cognitive abilities while heterogeneous learners tend to have virtually different characteristics in most aspects because each has unique biological characteristics, developmental stages, cognitive abilities and habitual natures. Findings of the study agree with James and others that, different learner characteristics may require different time allocation. Head teachers interviewed were also of the view that time was an element of learner specific needs.

4.5.2 How often schools sought specialized support services

School administrators’ seeking external and specialized support services is presented in Table 4.6.

Table 4.6: Seeking specialized support services

Public primary schools in the municipality rarely or never sought for specialized support services from agencies like churches, hospitals, and so forth for learners with special needs. Therefore, as indicated in table 4.6, seventy seven percent (77%) of the respondents were of the view that the schools either rarely (68.9%) or never (8.4%) bothered to seek specialized support. Only three percent (3%) of them thought that the schools very often sought for such support.

Agencies like religious organizations and Non- Governmental Organizations (NGOs) have proved to be very useful in supporting educational innovations and can be handy if their services are sought for integration of learners with special needs in education. Collaboration with other specialists and professionals to support learners with special needs can be very useful. It is, however, unfortunate that their services were rarely sought as per the findings of this study and this reflects negatively on provision of administrative support. Turnbull (2002) argues that special needs pupils might be disruptive to the rest of the class and might require privacy such as counseling sessions. The study findings showed that such services were hardly offered due to various reasons like lack of personnel and assistive devices. Most head teachers tied the lack of support for SNE programmes to insufficiency of funds and as KISE (2002) puts it; there should be a political commitment both at national and community level as a development agenda and allocate adequate funding to integration of learners with special needs to public primary schools.

Also, most municipal schools use ordinary curriculum and few schools use differentiated curriculum. As shown in Table 4.7, sixty nine percent (69%) of the respondents concurred that the schools use ordinary curriculum; fourteen percent (14%) of them were of the view that both ordinary and differentiated curriculum are used in the schools; eight percent (8%) differentiated curriculum while another eight percent (8%) of the respondents did not know the kind of curriculum used in the schools. Learners have diverse needs and some of the needs require specialized attention which can only be offered by an expert, in this case a trained teacher in special needs education. The ordinary curriculum is examination oriented and tends to ignore the needs of challenged learners. This requires flexibility in terms of the content and teaching approaches to meet each learner’s needs (Ndurumo, 1993).

According to KISE (2000), a differentiated curriculum is an attempt to modify the regular curriculum to meet the individual needs of the learner. It involves: manipulating the environmental factors; adapting the teaching approach and time schedules; modifying the content presentation; adapting the examination question and assessment procedures; providing appropriate learning materials to meet the learners needs; including other relevant vital subjects for lifelong education required for some learners with special needs in education. The study showed that although teachers were positive about integration of special needs learners, the use of ordinary curriculum indicates learners with special needs were not adequately catered for. Some teachers were not even keen on adjusting the curriculum by varying teaching methods to suit the individual learners. Sharon (2011) shows that it is important for schools to find a balance between structure and creativity and/or between integration into the structured curriculum and a curriculum individualized to the needs of the student. Most head teachers that responded said that the schools did not adjust the curriculum to suit learners with special needs the one they used was examination oriented. This could be an indication that most head teachers were familiar with special needs education requirements but used the ordinary curriculum which was for ‘normal’ learners, possibly, for convenience or due to lack of personnel.

4.5.4 Availability of facilities and assistive devices

Figure 4.5 presents the proportion of respondents with various views on availability of facilities in schools that could be used to assist learners with special needs.

Figure 4.5: Facilities and assistive devices

From figure 4.5, most of the facilities required for learners with special needs were not available in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality. Although some schools had resource teachers (78%) and resource rooms (34%), over eighty percent (over 80%) of the respondents were of the view that facilities like Braille, speech trainers, itinerants, hearing aids, magnifying glasses, crutches, walking frames and wheel chairs were not available in the schools. This means that even the resource teachers in the schools could be ill-equipped to assist the learners with special needs.

Head teachers said that they could only make those adaptations which could not require extra finances to general constructions. They accepted that some schools had made adaptations when planning for programmes to integrate learners with special needs and these include the following: ramps (16%), desks (50%), seating arrangements (16%) and classroom (16%). Half of the interviewed teachers did not respond to the question on adaptability of schools which was an indication of not taking responsibility as the personnel in-charge. The results, however, indicated that desks that were adapted for use by learners with special needs seemed to be the main form of adaptability by schools. They also attributed lack of resources to large enrolments due to free primary education.

Just as in a study conducted by Agbenyega and others (2005) in Ghana showed, that apart from some teachers’ negative beliefs about integration and concern for their professional competency to practice integration, resource issues also generated a lot of concern. Resource issues addressed physical aspects such as inaccessible classrooms to students in a wheel chair, overcrowded classrooms; materials such as Braille and large prints. Further, teachers were concerned about the lack of support from professionals with expertise such as peripatetic teachers or those with expertise in sign language and Braille as well as general special education experts and overwhelmingly believe that integration is impossible without addressing their needs for specialist resources. This is in agreement with this study, that lack of facilities is a major hindrance to implementing the innovation. The head teachers who responded to the items held similar views.

4.6 Responses on teachers’ preparedness for integration

Teachers’ responses on preparedness of teachers for integration of learners with special in regular classrooms were shown as follows:

4.6.1 Training, seminars or workshops on special needs

Figure 4.6 shows the frequency of primary teachers’ attendance of training, seminars or workshops on special needs education.

Figure 4.6 Training, seminars and workshops on SNE

High proportions (85%) of teachers in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality rarely or never attended training, seminars or workshops on special needs education (Figure 4.6). Only about three percent (3%) of the teachers very often attended such training, seminars or workshops while twelve percent (12%) often attended. This implies that the professional capacity of majority of the teachers to handle learners with special needs could be inadequate.

Experienced teachers are expected to facilitate the implementation of integrated education in learning institutions in the area of study. As noted by Hastings and Oakford (2003), special education teachers were reported to be using more diversity and adaptations when teaching those learners with special needs than general education teachers. Teachers with more training in SNE used more strategies in the classroom than those who did not have any training. Those already in the field should be exposed to current innovations, new approaches in teaching through seminars, workshops and short courses. This showed that most teachers in public primary schools were not competent enough due to lack of relevant skills and knowledge as the percentage of those who attended workshops, seminars and short courses on SNE was very low. Responses from interview guide also indicated that majority of the schools in the study area rarely or never organized capacity building programmes tailored towards the implementation of integrative learning programmes. The head teachers said the programmes were expensive and emphasis was on academic performance, not development of individual learners.

4.6.2 Methods of teaching

Since there are many different methods of teaching at the disposal of the teaching, it was prudent to find out how often teachers use them and the results are shown in figure 4.7.

Figure 4.7: Teaching methods used

As shown in figure 4.7, the three most used methods of teaching in public primary schools in the Municipality were ability grouping, individual education and team teaching. Integration of learners with special needs to public primary schools is an innovation and it requires that all teachers are familiar with the needs of those learners they teach in order for them to serve those learners properly. These can be done through seminars and workshops since curriculum is ever changing. Omolo (2002) examines a variety of teaching approaches which can be adopted for effective teaching to assist the learner with special needs. This study revealed that not many of the teachers in Eldoret municipality have embraced these methods, which is disadvantageous to the special needs child.

Findings from figure 4.7 indicate that teachers in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality used varied methods when teaching learners with special needs depending on the specific needs of the learners. Ability grouping was the most commonly used method with a score of 73.1% as there have evolved new approaches and methods of teaching in an attempt to modify the traditional subject centered curriculum so as to reduce shortcomings and respond to new understanding regarding the nature of the child. As the specialist in the classroom, a teacher has to vary his approach and method of teaching to suit individual needs of learners.

4.6.3 Other services to learners with special needs

Figure 4.8 shows services rendered to learners with special needs in Eldoret municipality.

Figure 4.8: Other services offered to learners with special needs

From figure 4.8 the three most offered services to learners with special needs in public primary schools in the municipality were guidance and counseling, remedial work and individual teaching. The percentage of respondents in support of this view (that is, that the services were very frequently or frequently offered) were 85%, 84% and 72%, respectively. Awareness programmes are offered but not frequently as the results show having a value of 58%.As children learn, they need guidance and remedial work for corrective measures. Due to individual differences, they may also require individual teaching and counseling. All these experiences contribute to learning and according to Ismael, (2012) in Vision 2030, provide globally competitive quality education and training. Children learn best those things which are attached to problem solving or that connect with some active interest. These services affect the emotions of the learner and lead to the learner feeling accepted and that his/her problem is addressed. Findings of the study, therefore, showed that integration of special needs learners to public schools is not limited to the classroom content but tries to address other needs as well.

4.6.4 Methods used to motivate learners with special needs

Methods used for motivation and how often they are used are presented in figure 4.9.

Figure 4.9: Methods used for motivation

The two most used methods to motivate learners in public primary schools in the Municipality were provision of instructional materials and rewards and can be seen from figure 4.9. The corresponding percentage of respondents in support of this view (that is, that the methods were used very often or often) were 83% and 72%. A teacher is expected to be manipulative to enable learners to become actively involved in the process of learning. A pupil must be given experiences which provide him with time to practice his skills of problem solving and give satisfactory answers while carrying out expected activities.

Professional knowledge (initial and further training), material and human resources are found to enhance teachers’ positive attitudes and their willingness to embrace and make inclusion work (Avramidis, Bayliss and Burden, 2000); (Loreman, Deppeler and Harvey, 2005). It is when teachers’ are sufficiently equipped in knowledge and expertise and supported by other professionals that their confident levels to work with all learners in inclusive classrooms will improve. Researchers have noted that integrative education is a dynamic process without any quick fix and which requires the endorsement of regular classroom teachers to be successful (Corbett, 2001; Lindsay, 2003).

4.6.5 Teachers' liking for integration

Figure 4.10 presents the proportion (%) of respondents with different liking for integration of learners with special needs (that is, whether they were highly positive, positive, negative or highly negative about the integration).

Figure 4.10: Rating teachers' liking for integration

From figure 4.10, thirty one percent (31%) of the respondents were highly positive about the integration while sixty six percent (66%) of them were positive, meaning that the total percentage of teachers that had liking for integration of learners with special needs was ninety seven percent (97%). The general liking for integration may be in agreement with a study by Hastings and Oakford (2003) that gender had a significant influence on mainstreaming attitudes, while 3% who don’t like integration could be attributed to other school factors that influence integration. Results of interview schedules indicated that most teachers like integration of learners with special needs very much or averagely. Also, when asked about the extent to which they would recommend integrative approach as a method of improving quality of learning, all of the teachers would either recommend or highly recommend integrative approach. These results indicate that even though not many teachers have enough knowledge and skills in special needs education (based on few numbers that have trained in special needs education), they have a positive attitude to integrative approach as reviewed studies reveal about the female gender.

4.7 Responses on provision of school administrative support

Table 4.8 presents the proportion (%) of respondents with various views regarding the provision of administrative support on integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality.

Table 4.8: School administrative support

The table shows that seventy two percent (72%) of the respondents strongly agreed or agreed that learners with special needs received equal attention with ‘normal learners’. Also, seventy six percent (76%) of them disagreed or strongly disagreed that the learners were discriminated against.

Learners with special needs were allowed to interact with "normal" ones (98%), they were motivated in their academic performance (77%). Seventy percent (70%) of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that there were guidelines of assisting learners with special needs in schools. Sixty percent (60%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the view that schools had put in place environmental modifications such as toilets, ramps, and so forth for adaptation to take care of learners with special needs. Nearly all respondents (94%) agreed or strongly agreed that there was need for administrative support for staff development opportunities like in-service courses and capacity building programmes on SNE.

Also, in the opinion of head teachers, concerning the use, there was an average level of use of required resource materials in schools during lesson presentations according to majority of respondents. The interviews also revealed that the schools carry out the following strategies to cater for learners with special needs: in-service teachers, donations from well-wishers and proper staffing of teachers. Parents were the main sources of support, according to more than half of respondents, followed by teachers and resource people in special needs. Additionally, attitude towards learners with special needs and training opportunities are not serious challenges according to all respondents but availability of facilities for integration was the most serious challenge. Again, according to the respondents, challenges regarding policy on learners with special needs are negligible. Administrative support has been cited as a significant factor in determining the success of integration if the school principal fosters a positive learning environment for both teachers and students (Idol and Gameros, 1994). The support of the principal and other school leaders are critical in order to implement integrative practices as it was found out in this study, at 94.1%. They refer to a "visionary" principal as one who will accept the challenge to create an inclusive environment for all students. Principals need to accept ownership of all students and support integrative placement, in order to inspire these feelings among other school personnel (Gameros, 1995). The study found the role of school administration being central and, therefore, a unifying factor for successful implementation of the innovation. It was also evident from findings that although there were policy guidelines on integration of learners with special needs to public primary schools, majority of the schools had done very little or no environmental modifications to cater for learners with special needs.

Clayton (1996) noted that administrative staff lacks sufficient understanding and expertise regarding the delivery of services to students with disabilities as it is also noted by Daane et al (2000). The role of administrators cannot be ignored. They make the school to be more responsive to learners with special needs. They are central and the coordinating factor of all stake holders of the entire process of integration of learners with special needs. In this study they were linking learners, parents, teachers and other support service providers. A child who is supported by parents feels loved and appreciated as a valuable member of the family, worthy of being educated and they can also offer very vital information about the children because they have been with them during the whole period of growth and development.

4.8 Chapter summary

This chapter presented and analyzed data. The organization of data was in such a way that related information was analyzed and reported together. Characteristics of the sample were presented first to facilitate analysis and reporting. To adequately address the research problem, data were analyzed under the following headings: respondents’ general information, teachers’ familiarity with special needs education curriculum, availability of physical facilities and resources, teachers’ preparedness and provision of school administrative support.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusions and recommendations that the study aimed at. The main objective was to investigate some factors influencing integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools in Eldoret Municipality. The study was guided by the following specific objectives:

To find out to what extent teachers’ familiarity with the integration process influences integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

To investigate to what extent availability of physical facilities and resources influences integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

To examine to what extent teachers’ preparedness influences integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

To investigate whether the provision of school administrative support influences integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools.

5.2 Summary of findings

The following were the findings of the study:

5.2.1 Influence of familiarity of teachers on the integration process

The first research objective was to find out the extent to which teachers’ familiarity with the integration process influenced integration of learners with special needs in regular classrooms. From findings it was clearly evident that there were different categories (Figure 4.3) of learners with special needs in public primary schools. Through interaction and experience most teachers were familiar with the process of integrating children with special needs into regular classrooms. There were, however, a good number of teachers who were trained at different levels in special needs education and were conversant with the requirements of or curriculum for learners with special needs (differentiated curriculum) in regular classrooms. Without familiarity the teacher may not be able to employ the varied teaching approaches of when dealing with learners with special needs in education. Their interaction and experience with the special needs learner was very important.

5.2.2 Influence of resources and facilities on integration

The second objective was an investigation of the extent to which availability of resources and facilities influenced integration of special needs learners in public schools. Based on this objective it was found out that although resource teachers were available in most of the schools, there was general lack of facilities required for learners with special needs (Table 4.4). These items included facilities like resource rooms, speech trainers, itinerants, hearing aids, magnifying glasses, among others. Schools embarking on changes in the curriculum should be those that can obtain the necessary facilities and equipment because the success or failure of curriculum implementation may well depend on the availability of these facilities and equipment.

5.2.3 Influence of teachers’ preparedness on integration

The third research objective was investigating to what extent teacher preparedness influenced integration of pupils with special needs to regular classrooms. The findings revealed that regular attendances of seminars or workshops on special needs education could help teachers improve a lot on their capacity to assist and integrate learners with special needs in their schools (Figure 4.6). Even teachers with professional qualification in special needs education require regular training on the same. Since most of the teachers in the municipality did not attend seminars or workshops on special needs education the process of integration of the learners could be negatively affected because of lack of relevant knowledge and skills to facilitate positive outcomes.

5.2.4 Influence of school administrative support on integration

The fourth and last objective in this study investigated influence of provision of school administrative support on integration of learners with special needs to regular schools. The findings revealed that most of the schools provided administrative support except that they did not put in place environmental modifications such as toilets, ramps, among others for adaptation to take care of learners with special needs. It seemed the support provided within the schools was inadequate as there were indications that seeking of specialized or professional external support was rarely or never done by schools in the municipality. This negatively affected the process of integration of learners with special needs because primary schools are among educational institutions which hold on top-bottom approach of management and so, administrative support is critical. Special needs learners, however, were given equal against (Table 4.8). They interacted freely with ‘normal’ learners and the teachers were aware of the ministry of education guidelines on teaching special needs children and also said that there was need for staff development opportunities to enhance capacity building.

5.3 Conclusions

From the findings gathered in the study the following conclusions were made:

Teachers in the municipality were familiar with the process of integration through experience and interaction with different categories of learners. They could identify challenged learners and were aware that they were supposed to teach them alongside ‘normal’ children. They could at times use varied approaches to suit learners’ needs.

Other than availability of resource teachers, physical facilities and resources in schools were either unavailable or inadequate thus hindering integration.

Most of the teachers were inadequately prepared for integration of learners with special needs in regular classrooms. They hardly attended in-service courses on special needs education and this incapacitated them in terms of knowledge and skills thus affecting integration of learners with special needs public primary schools.

In theory school administrators have embraced integration of learners with special needs but not much has been done in terms of seeking external expert support and that they also did not put in place environmental modifications such as toilets, ramps, among others for adaptation to take care of learners with special needs.

5.4 Recommendations

The following recommendations are made for improved integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools in Eldoret municipality:

Varied approaches when teaching should be used for integration of learners with special needs in all public schools as an attempt to address individual needs of learners. Use of ordinary curriculum may disadvantage learners with special needs as it examination oriented.

All teachers should be equipped with relevant skills and knowledge. There is need for pre-service training of all teachers in special needs education for successful integration. In-service training through seminars and workshops can also be useful to teachers who are already in service.

Capacity of the teachers to integrate learners with special needs in regular classrooms should be enhanced by providing adequate facilities for special needs learners to schools. The provision can be done by the government, NGOs or parents among others. These facilities may include special desks, writing boards, magnifying glasses, resource rooms, and so on. The distribution of resources to schools should take realistic account of the differences in expenditure required to provide appropriate education for all children, bearing in mind their needs and circumstances. It may be realistic to begin by launching pilot projects in some areas in order to gain the necessary expertise for expansion and progressive generalization. In the generalization of integrative education, the level of support and expertise will have to be matched to the nature of the demand.

School administrators should fully support integration of learners with special needs in regular classrooms. They should be more practical in their role as service providers for integration of special needs education. They should be able solicit to for support from other agencies and well-wishers as well.

5.5 Suggestions for further research

The following suggestions have been made for further research:

There is need for KICD to investigate and evaluate the academic performance of learners with special needs integrated in regular classrooms up to and beyond KCPE level of education.

There is need to investigate the effect of integration of learners with special needs on “normal” learners.

Whether varied approaches in curriculum implementation has an impact on examination results.

REFERENCES

Adriana, K. (2001). Understanding and Facilitating Organizational Change in the 21 Centaury.Washington D. C.: ERIC Publications.

Agbenyega, J. S., Deppeler, J. and Harvey, D. (2005). Attitudes Towards Inclusive

Education in Africa Scale (ATIAS): An Instrument to measure teachers'

attitudes towards inclusive education for students with disabilities. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 5, pp. 1-15.

Ajuwon, P. (2008). Making Inclusive Education Work In Nigeria: Evaluation of Special Education Attitudes. USA: Ohio State University Library.

Alexander, R. (1992). Approaches To Planning: Introducing Current Planning Theories, 2ndedition. London: Routedge.

Amin, G. (2005). Key Words and Cultural Change. Urbana: University of Ilinois.

Avramidis, E., Buylis, P. and Burden, R. (2000). A survey into mainstream teachers'

attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the ordinary school in one local education authority. ’Educational Psychology. 20(2), pp. 191-212.

Barkley, R.A. (1998). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorders: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.

Bennis, W. G. and Schein, E.(2002). Personal and Organizational Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Billington, T. and Pomerantz, M. (eds) (2004). Children at the Margins: Supporting children, supporting schools. Stoke-on-Trent, UK: Trentham Books.

Bishop, G. (1985) Curriculum Development. A textbook for Students. London Basingstoke: Macmillan Education Ltd.

Borg , W. R. and Gall, M.D. (1989). Educational Research: An Introduction. New York: David California Press.

Bosch, N. (2008). Effective Practices for Gifted Education. Kansas: The Broken Arrow Enhanced Learning Center.

Bussiness Dictionary, (2012).en.wikipedia.org/wiki.com

Cawley, J., Hayden, S., Cade, E. and Baker-Kroczynski, S. (2002). Including Students with Disabilities into the General Education Science Classroom, 68(4),423-435.

Clayton, M. (1996). Clearing the way for inclusion: A Response to Thorley, Hotchkis and Martin. Special Education Perspectives, 5(2), 39-44.

Cohen, L. and Manion, C. (2003). Research Methods in Education, Croom Helm Ltd. London.

Cope, C. and Anderson, E. (1997). Special Units in ordinary Schools. University of London Institute of Education. The NFER Publishing Co. Ltd, Windsor, Berks SL4 IQS.U.K

Corbett, J. (2001). Teaching approaches, which support inclusive education: a

connective pedagogy. British Journal of Special Education, 28(2), 55-59.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Daane, C. J., Beirne-Smith, M., and Latham, D. (2000). Administrators' and Teachers' Perceptions of the Collaborative Efforts of Inclusion in the Elementary Grades. Education, 121(2), 331-338.

Daniel, T. (1980). Curriculum Development Theory into Practice. UK: Upper Saddle River.

Duncan, N., Bowman, B., Naidoo, A., Pillay, J.and Roos, V. (2007). Community Psychology: Analysis, context and action. Cape Town: UCT Press.

Dunn, L. M. (ed) (1993). Exceptional Children in the School: Special Education in transition, New York: Holt Rinehart and Winstone.

ECLAC, (1990). World Conference on Education For All. Jomtein: Thailand.

Eshiwani, S. G. (1993). Education in Keya Since Independence. Nairobi: East African Publishers.

Eshiwani, G.S. (1990). Implementing Educational policies in Kenya. Africa Technical Department Series Discussion Paper. World Bank.

Farrant, J. S. (2002). Principles and Practice of Education (New ed.). UK: Longman.

Fisher, R. (1995). Teaching Children to Learn. London: STP.

Fullan, M. (2013). The New Meaning of Educational Change. Routledge: Research Collations.

Galloway, J. (1995). Climate Variability & Change. High Reliability Schools. New York: Mc Cutchan Publishing.

Gameros, P. (1995). The Visionary Principal and Inclusion of Students with Disabilities. NASSP Bulletin, 79(568), 15-17.

Gary, T. and Andrew, L. (2001).Deconstructing Special Education and Constructing Inclusion. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Government of Kenya (GoK) (2010). Constitution of the Republic of Kenya, Published August 2010. Nairobi: Government Printer.

GOK (2007). Kenya Vision 2030. First Edition. Nairobi: Government Publishers.

GOK (2003). People with Disabilities Act. Act of parliament section 2. Nairobi: Nairobi Council of Law.

GOK (2001). Act of Parliament no. 2. Children’s Act. Nairobi: National Council of Law.

GOK (1999). Population of Local Authorities" (with towns) webpage

Greene, G.and Kochhar-Bryant, C.A. ( 2003). Pathways to Successful Transitions for Youth with Disabilities. New Jersey: Pearson-Education.

Gross, N., Giaquinta, J., and Bernstein, M. (1971) Implementing Organizational Innovations: A Sociological Analysis of Planned Educational Change. New York: Basic Book.

Hallahan, D. P. and Kauffman, J (2003).Exceptional Learners. Introduction to Special Education. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon

Hammoand, H., and Iggalls, L. (2003). Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Inclusion: Survey Results From Elementary School Teachers in Three Southern Rural School Districts. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 22(2),24-30.

Hastings, R. P. and Oakford, S. (2003). The Attitude of Teachers on Inclusion. New York: Routedge Springer Company.

Hegarty, F. (1993). Meeting Special Needs in Ordinary Schools. London: Cassell.

Heward, E. and Olansky, M. (1984). Exceptional Children. Ohio: Charles E. Merril Publ. Co.

Hodge, S. R. andJansma, P. (2000). Physical Education Majors' Attitudes Toward Teaching Students With Disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 23(3), 211-224.

Holland, H. (2000). You’ve got to Know Them to Show Them. Middle Ground p. 10-13. Columbia: Wright Middle School.

Horne, M. D. (1983). Attitudes of Elementary Classroom Teachers Toward Mainstreaming. The Exceptional Child, 30, 93-97.

Huber, M. T., Hutchings, P. and Galer, R. (2005). Integrative Learning for Liberal Education. Washington D.C: Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Idol, R. and Gameros, T. (1994).Don't Forget the Teachers. Journal of Emotional and Behavioural Problems., 3(3), 28-33.

Ismael, L. (2012).Vision 2030: National Development Plan. Unpublished.

James, A., Jenks, C. and Prout, P. (1998). Theorizing Childhood. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Kathuri, N. J. and Pals, A.D. (1993). Introduction to Educational Research. Egerton University: Educational Media Centre (EMC)

Katwishi, C. (1988). Untitled Document www.isec 2005 org.uk/charema.ishtml

Kinsler, K. and Gamble, M. (2001). Reforming schools. Continuum. London.

Kirimi, S.K. (1997, May 28). Schools for deaf neglected. East African Standard P.14 col. 6. Government printers.

Kisanji, J. (1995). Enhancing Inclusive Education in Developing Countries www.isec 2000.org.uk/,/eleweke-.htm

KISE (2007).Introduction to Educational Resources-1.Nairobi: KISE.

KISE (2002).Module 1. Introduction to Special Needs Education. Nairobi: KISE.

KISE (2000). Modulu11. Introduction to Special Needs Education: Nairobi: KISE.

Kombo, D. K. and Tromp, L. D. (2006). Proposal and Thesis Writing : An Introduction Nairobi: Paulines Publications Africa

Kothari, C. R. (2005). Research Methodology, Methods and Techniques. Mumbai: New Age Publishers Mackay Company Inc.

Kowalski, E. M. and Rizzo, T. L. (1996). Factors influencing preservice student attitudes toward individuals with disabilities. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 13, 180-196.

Krejcie, R. V. and Morgan, W. D. (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Retrieved August 19th2012 from http://www.edu/-mbaro/edaf810/krejcie.pdf.

Kristensen, V., Kristensen, I. and Bragger, L.(1997). British Journal of Special Educationwww.danidadevforum.um.dk/NR/rdolyr.

Landsberg, E., Kruger, D. and Nel, N.(2005).Addressing Barriers to Learning: A South African Perspective. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

Laserson, M. and Block, J. (1985). .An Education of Value – purpose and Practices of schools. Cambridge University Press. London.

Lindsay, G. (2003). Inclusive Education: A Critical Perspective. British Journal of Special Education, 30:3-12.

Loreman, T., Deppeler, J. and Harvey, D. (2005). Inclusive Education: a practical guide to supporting diversity in the classroom. NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Macmillan, (2002). Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. United Kingdom:Bloomsbury.

Malusu, J. (1997). Curriculum Theory and Practice. Nairobi: Kenyatta University publishers.

Marsh, H. W. (1982). Factors affecting student evaluations of the same course taught by the same instructor on different occasions: American Educational Research journal, p.485-497.

McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test Theory: A Unified Treatment. London: Psychology Press.

MOEST (2004). National Consultative Forum on Policy for open Learning and Distance Education. Education Manual. Nairobi: Government Printers.

MOEST (2001). Education for All (EFA) in Kenya. A National Handbook for 2002 and beyond. Nairobi : Unpublished

Mugenda, M.O. and Mugenda, G.A.(1999). Research Methods. Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches, Nairobi: Acts press.

Musumba, N. (2008). Factors Shaping Teachers' Attitudes Toards the Mentally Handicapped Pupils. Eldoret: Moi University.

Mutai, K. B. (2000). How to Write Quality Research Proposal A complete and Simplified Recipe. George Square Edinburg Scotland: Thelley Publications.

Ndirangu, L. K., Omiti, J. M. and Waiyaki, N. N.(2004).Kenya’s Vision 2030 Ministry of Planning and national Development: Kenya Institute for Public Policy. Nairobi: High Flyer.

Ndurumo, M.W. (1993). Exceptional Children. Nairobi: Longman.

Newby, T.J., Stepich, D. A., Lehman, J. D., and Rusell, J. D. (1996). Instructional Technology in Teaching and Learning: Designing Instructional, Integrating Computers and Using Media. Englewood Cliff, NJ. : Prentice- Hall Inc.

Okech, J. G. and Asiachi, A. (1992). Curriculum Development for Schools. Nairobi: Educational Research and Publications (ERAP).

Oluoch, G.P.(2002). Essentials of Curriculum Development. Nairobi: Birds Printers.

Omolo, M.P. (2002). Implementation and Supervision of Curriculum. Paper presentation at

Omurwa, J. B. (2011). Masters’ Thesis. Nairobi: Kenyatta University.

Orodho, A. J. and Kombo, D. K. (2002). Research Methods Nairobi: Kenyatta University, Institute of Open Learning.

Osgood, R. L. (2007). The History of Special Education: A Struggle for Equality in American Public Schools (Growing Up: History of Children and Youth). Praeger Publishers.

Oso, W. Y. and Onen, D. (2005). A General Guide to Writing Research Proposal and Writing, Kisumu: Options Press and Publishers.

Otunga, R, Odero, I.I. and Barasa, P. L. (eds.) (2011). A Handbook for Curriculum and Instruction. Moi University Press.

Patterson, D. (2000). Let's get Real about Merging Special Education and Regular Education in: The JNL of The International Association of Special Education..Vol. 4 No. 1 p.1-13.

Peters, S. J. (2001). Disability and Special Needs Education in an African Context. Harare: College press.

Persons with Disabilities Act, (2003). The Government Printers.

Pollard, A., (2002). Reflective Teaching: Effective and Evidence-informed Professional Practice. London: Harvard University Press.

Print, M. (1993). Curriculum Development and Design: New South Whales: Allen Unwin Pty Ltd

Quist, D. (2000). Primary Teaching Methods. London: Macmillan Educational Ltd.

Ramani, K. (2004, August 5). Special education woes persist. East African Standard. P14 (2003).

Randiki, F. O. (2002). Historical Development of Special Needs. Nairobi: KISE.

Richard, F. (2011). Paraeducator-qualifications. http://www,autism.community.com

Robert, T. (2011). Integrating Needs Assessment into Career and Technical. Virginia: University Libraries.

Robertson, D. R., and Nilson, B. L., (Eds.) (2008). To Improve the Academy: Resources for Faculty, Instructional and Organizational Development. Vol. 26. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Crown Publishing Group.

ROK (2012). A Policy Framework for Education and Planning in Kenya. Nairobi: Government Printers.

ROK (2009). The National Special Education Policy Framework. Nairobi: Government Printers.

ROK (2005, July). Kenya Education Sector Support Programme 2005-2010. Delivering Quality Education and Training to all Kenyans. Nairobi: Office of the President Ministry of Home Affairs.

ROK, (2003). Report of the Task Force on SNE Appraisal Exercise. Nairobi: Government printers

ROK (1998/9). Totally Integrated Quality Education and Training (TIQET) Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Education System of Kenya. Nairobi: Government Printers.

ROK (1998). Totally Integrated Quality Education and Training (TIQET), (Koech Report).Nairobi: Government Printers.

ROK (1988). Education and Manpower Development for this Decade and Beyond (Kamunge Report). Nairobi: Government Printers.

ROK, (1976). National Education Commission on Education Objectives and Policies. (Gachathi Report). Nairobi: Government Printers.

ROK, (1964). Committee on Care and Rehabilitation of the Disabled. Nairobi: Government Printers.

ROK. (1964). (Ominde Report) Kenya Education Commission. Nairobi: Government Printers.

Ryle, G. (1990). Knowing how/ knowing that Distinction. London: Claridge Press L.S.

Schonwetter, D. J. (2008). The Teaching Resource Portfolio, in Robertson, D. R. and Nilson, B. L. (Eds.).To Improve the Academy: Resources for Faculty, Instructional, and Organizational Development. Vol.26. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Schulman, D.E. (1980). Focus on the Retarded Adult. London: The C.V. Mosby Company

Sharron, C. (2011). Interview. Dumas Elementary School, Chicago.

Shiundu, J.S. and Omulando, S.J. (1992). Curriculum Theory and Practice in Kenya, Nairobi: Oxford University Press.

Skilbeck, M. (1990). Curriculum Reform: An Overview of Trends. Paris: OECD

Snyder, T.D. and Dillow, S.A. (2011).Digest of Education Statistics 2010 (NCES 2011-015) [Internet] National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, D.C.

Stainback, W. andStainback, S. (1996). Support Networks for Inclusive Schooling. Interdependent Integrated Education. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes publishing Co.

Susan, W. and Eames, C. (2013). Developing an “Ecology of Learning” within a school Sustainability. Routledge: Part of the Taylor and Francis group.

The Session Paper No. 1 (2005). A Policy Framework for Education, Training and Research.

Tony, B. and Will, S. (1988). Including Students with Disabilities. Philadelphia: Open.

Turnbull, R. (2002). "Exceptional Lives: Special Education in Today's Schools” (3rd ed.) Merrill Prentice Hall. New Jersey.

Turnbull, H.R. (1997). ‘‘Legal implications’’ in Managing Emotionally Disturbed Children, edited by Pappanikou, A.J and Paul, J.L. Syracuse University Press.

UNESCO (2009) Policy Guidelines on Inclusion in Education. Paris: UNESCO.

UNESCO (2008). Directions in Educational Planning.Paris: UNESCO.

UNESCO (2001). Understanding and Responding to Children's Needs in Inclusive Classrooms. A guide for Teachers. Paris: UNESCO.

UNESCO (2000) Dakar Framework for Action. Senegal: UNESCO.

UNESCO (1997). Inclusive Schools and Community Support Programmes. Paris: UNESCO

UNESCO (1996).Convention on the Rights of persons with disabilities. University Press.

UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Education, Spain: Ministry of Education.

UNESCO (1990). The Jomtien Declaration on Education for All. Thailand: UNESCO.

UNISE (2000). Module 1. Introduction to Special Needs Education. Kampala: UNISE.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948-2008).

Volfendel, S. (1992). Primary School and Special Needs London: Casell Education Ltd.

Watkins, J. S. Amanda (ed) (2010). SNE Country Data. European Agency for Development in SNE

Wilcox, B. (1992). Time-Constrained Evaluation A practical Approach for LEAS and Schools. London and New York: Routedge.

Wiles, W. and Bondi, J. (2008). Curriculum Development: A guide to Practice. Virginia: Virginia Beach City Schools Publications.

Wiles, J. W. and Bondi, J. C. (1984). Curriculum Development: A guide to Practice. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Publications.

Winzer, M. A. (2004). The History of Special Education: From Isolation to Integration. Toronto: Prentice hall.

Zachry, A. (2012). SE services for physically Disabled students in public schools.

http:www.google.com

Zindi, F. (1997). A Baseline Study on Inclusive Educationwww.eenet.org.uk/resources/docs/Mal

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS

The aim of this study is to establish some factors that influence integration of learners with special needs (SNE) in public primary schools. Kindly answer the questions contained here by ticking in the appropriate space or as directed by the question. Note that all information will be kept confidential. Do not write your name on this paper.

Section A: General Information

What is your gender? Male ( ) Female ( )

What is your teaching experience? Below 5 years; ( ) 16-20 years ( ) 6-10 years; ( ) More than 20 years ( ) 11-15 years; ( )

Section B: Teachers’ familiarization with special needs education curriculum.

What is your highest professional qualification?

P 1 ( ) Certificate in SNE ( )

Diploma in SNE ( ) Degree in SNE ( )

B ED ( ) M ED ( )

How many learners in your school have special needs?

Less than 5 ( ) 16-20 ( )

6-10 ( ) More than 20 ( )

11-15 ( )

What category of these special needs learners are found in your school?

Special learning difficulties ( )

Short of hearing ( )

Physically challenged ( )

Mentally challenged ( )

Visually challenged ( )

Epileptic ( )

Others ( )

To what extent are you familiar with the curriculum for integration of learners with special needs?

Very familiar ( ) Familiar ( ) Not familiar ( )

To what extent do you think integration of learners with special needs is a success in your school?

Very successful ( ) Successful ( ) Not successful ( )

Section C: Facilities and Resources

What is your view on availability and adequacy of educational resources for learners with special needs in your school?

Available and adequate ( ) Available but not adequate ( ) Not available ( )

What is your response to the sufficiency of time allocated for the lessons in catering for the learners with special needs?

Very sufficient ( ) sufficient ( ) Not sufficient ( )

How often does your school seek other specialized support services from agencies like churches, hospitals, etc, for the learners with special needs? Very often ( ) Often ( ) Rarely ( ) Never ( )

Which curriculum does your school use? Differentiated curriculum ( ) Ordinary curriculum ( )

Both differentiated and ordinary curriculum ( ) Don’t know ( )

Which of these facilities and assistive devices are available in your school?

Section D: Teachers’ training

13. How often do you attend training, seminars or workshops on SNE?

Very often ( ) Often ( ) Rarely ( ) Never ( )

14. How often do you use these methods when teaching?

15. How frequent do you offer these services to your learners with special needs?

How often do you use these methods to motivate your learners?

How would you rate your liking for integration of learners with special needs?

Highly positive ( ) Positive ( )

Negative ( ) Highly negative ( )

Section E: Administrative Support

APPENDIX II: INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR HEADTEACHERS

Thank you very much Mr / Madam … for the warm welcome. This interview is to collect data purely for academic purposes. The study seeks to investigate sl factors influencing integration of learners with special needs in public primary schools. All information will be treated with strict confidentiality. As we continue with the interview I will be taking notes for record purposes. Please feel free to participate.

For how long have you been a head teacher?

How many teachers are there in your school?

How many teachers are trained in special needs education in your school?

How many learners with special needs are there in your school?

How many of these learners went through the assessment centre for placement?

Which methods other than observation are used in identifying learners with special needs in your school?

In your view, is time allocation per sufficient for an integration lesson? If no, how would you prefer it to be?

Which adaptations has the school made when planning for teaching programmes to integrate learners with special needs? e.g Toilets, Ramps, Desks, Seating arrangement, others.

How often does your school organize capacity building programmes tailored towards the implementation of integrative learning?

Which curriculum is used in your school? e,g Ordinary, Differentiated

What is your opinion on the teachers’ use of the required resource materials in your school during lesson presentation?

To what extent do you think teachers in your school like integration of learners with special needs?

What challenges apart from enrolment are encountered in your school in relation to integration of learners with special needs to primary schools?

Which intervention strategies do you carry out to cater for learners with special needs in education in your school?

In- servicing teachers

Seeking donations from well-wishers

Sponsoring learners to special schools

Proper staffing of teachers

Nothing has been done

Others

What kind of support services does your school get from the stakeholders?

Teachers, teaching materials, special facilities for needy learners, resource people in SNE, parents’ support, etc

To what extent do you recommend integrative approach as a method of improving quality of learning?

APPENDIX III

A table for determining sample size for a given population (Krejcie and Morgan, 1970).

N-Population

S-Sample size

APPENDIX IV

PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN ELDORET MUNICIPALITY

1. Moi Marula

2. Moi Chepkoilel

3. UasinGishu

4. Union

5. Central

6. Kidiwa

7. Emkoin

8. St. Mary’s

9. Kimalel

10. Township

11. Tuiyobei

12. G. K. Prison

13. Kapchumba

14. Racecourse

15. Boarder Farm

16. Kimumu

17. Sosiani

18. Kipkaren

19. Chebarus

20. Kamukunji

Illula

Kapyemit

Kiptanui

Kapsaos

St. Patricks

Kipkeino

AtnasKandie

Ainabtich

Saroyiot

Munyaka

Oasis

Kapkenduiyuo

Gitwe

Kapkeben

Kapkoros

Kapsoya

Langas

Huruma

Mwiruti

Teachers’ familiarity with the integration process special needs

Availability of physical facilities and resources for special needs learners

Provision of school administrative support

Teachers’ preparedness

Integration of learners with special needs

schools

Method of teaching�

Very often�

Often�

Rarely�

Never�

�

Co- teaching �

�

�

�

�

�

Peer Teaching �

�

�

�

�

�

Individual education �

�

�

�

�

�

Team teaching �

�

�

�

�

�

Task analysis �

�

�

�

�

�

Ability Grouping�

�

�

�

�

�