Investigating the Child Development of Learners with Special Educational Needs in Inclusive Education

Abstract

This study examined the development of 22 learners with special educational needs (LSENs) in inclusive education at Balamban SPED Center Elementary School in the Philippines. Surveys were used for data collection, and the analysis included descriptive statistics and comparative analysis. Most participants were 5-12-year-old females with three or four siblings. Their families had a monthly income of Php 10,000 or below. Autism was the most common particular need among successful learners, followed by hearing impairment and intellectual disability. According to parents, LSENs exhibited well-developed knowledge, attitude, skills, and behavior. Teachers, however, perceived that only knowledge and behavior were well-developed, while attitudes and skills showed moderate development. Perceptions of parents and teachers regarding child development did not differ significantly. The study concluded that inclusive education plays a crucial role in the success and development of LSENs. Successful learners demonstrated high levels of knowledge and behavior, as assessed by both parents and teachers. Teachers rated attitudes and skills as moderately developed. LSENs achieved functional literacy and adaptive behaviors necessary for daily life and prospects. Collaboration between parents and teachers was emphasized for enhancing child development and fostering holistic learners at home, school, and community. The study recommends that administrators use the findings to develop appropriate programs for LSENs, while teachers and parents utilize the results as an action plan to address educational gaps. The study can serve as a baseline for future research on the benefits of inclusive education for LSENs.

Introduction

I. THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

A. Introduction

1. Rationale of the Study

With a comprehensive understanding of individual differences, educational ;Learner diversity has led to education practices towards developing, promoting, and sustaining inclusive society. Through these inclusive practices, all learners receive a superior education in inclusive systems, which also help to challenge prejudice. The framework that schools give for learners' initial interactions with the world outside their families facilitates the growth of social connections and interactions.

These inclusive practices aim to provide for all learners, regardless of differences in perception, disability, or even social, cultural, and linguistic aspects. In other words, learners with or without special needs are educated in the same classroom or inclusive classroom. In inclusion, all learners are given opportunities to reach their full potentials and create a culture of acceptance and understanding. Due to this harmonious relationship with classmates and teachers, all learners are prepared for life after school, increasing not only self-esteem and confidence, but also their knowledge and skills essential for life.

 However, inclusion may not be advantageous at times. Schools may have insufficient human and non-human resources for inclusive education and learners and teachers may have insufficient psychological readiness to study together with learners with special educational needs. Although there are disadvantages, but the advantages are far more numerous. Due to this numerous advantage, many countries, including the Philippines, advocate for inclusiveness in education.

In the Philippines, inclusive education has always been stipulated in the constitution, making education accessible to all. Through the Magna Carta for disabled persons, learners with special needs are given opportunity for rehabilitation, self-development, and self-reliance. With this, special education (SPED) programs are established. Each division in the country is mandated to have at least one SPED center to cater to learners with special needs. Therefore, each learner with special needs is given the opportunity to study in inclusive settings.

Teachers themselves have stated that teaching the learner in inclusive setting is challenging yet fulfilling. Hence, the interaction of the learning environment, teachers, and parents play an important aspect in making a successful learner in an inclusive school. 

Success has been observed among learners with special needs in schools in different parts of the country, including the SPED center in Balamban, Cebu. In this inclusive school, certain learners have achieved similar to what regular learners do. In other words, the accomplishments are at part with the regular class, leading to the researcher to delve deeper on what can these learners do as they showcase their abilities and potentials in class. They have their own knowledge and skills that their parents and teachers are proud of. Therefore, the study intended to determine whether the learner with special educational needs really developed these knowledge and skills as expected from them. With this mind, the study characterized the development of learners with special needs.

In this study, the child development of learners with special educational needs in inclusive education was investigated. The output was an action plan that can assist teachers and parents in developing a successful learner in inclusive education. The results of this study were significant as these results could provide crucial data to the administrators on what to mold and develop to produce a successful learner in an inclusive school.

2. Theoretical Background

This study is anchored these theories; (1) Inclusion Theory (Hemdan, 2022) and (2) Engaging, Affirming, Nurturing Inclusive Environment Theory (Raguindin et al., 2021). Moreover, the study is anchored on two legal bases as well as two theoretical foundations. The two legal bases are Republic Act No. 7277 also known as Magna Carta for Disabled Persons and (2) DepEd Order No. 11, s. 2000. The Magna Carta for Disabled Persons was executed in 1992 and provided a comprehensive framework for empowering and integrating persons with disabilities into society. It covers various aspects of their lives, including education, employment, social services, accessibility, and rehabilitation.

Two theories govern the study. These theories are (1) Inclusion Theory (Hemdan, 2022) and (2) Engaging, Affirming, Nurturing Inclusive Environment Theory (Raguindin et al., 2021). This also supported with the legal bases. The first theory is based on the principles of scientific and medical pedagogy. It states

That there should be no learner left out in the classroom; all learners should be included. In this theory, the level of inclusion a learner receives should depend on how much benefit and how much time the learner can benefit from while still receiving the services they require. Therefore, the level of inclusion impacts the success that the learner experience in their respective schools (Hemdan, 2022).

Engaging, Affirming, Nurturing Inclusive Environment Theory (Raguindin et al., 2021) is a grounded theory about inclusive education environment in the Philippines. It states that the learner can be successful in inclusive settings if their environment is engaging, affirming, and nurturing. An engaging environment promotes active participation and involvement of learners. Engagement is crucial for children with special educational needs as it enhances their motivation, attention, and learning outcomes. An engaging environment can provide multisensory learning opportunities, hands-on activities, interactive materials, and technology integration to cater to different learning styles and preferences. By producing a stimulating and interactive learning environment, children with special educational needs are more likely to stay motivated, focused, and actively participate in learning, leading to enhanced development.

Likewise, in an affirming environment, the learner can express and receive appropriate language and celebrate diversity in the classroom. Also, affirmation in an inclusive environment involves recognizing and valuing the unique abilities and strengths of learners with special educational needs. Affirmation promotes a positive self-concept and self-esteem, essential for a child's development. By acknowledging and appreciating the accomplishments and progress of children with special educational needs, an affirming environment fosters a sense of belonging, self-confidence, and a positive attitude towards learning. It, in turn, creates a supportive atmosphere where children feel valued and empowered to reach their full potential.

A nurturing environment addresses the social-emotional well-being of learners with special educational needs. it includes creating a supportive and caring atmosphere that promotes positive relationships, empathy, and understanding among students. In such an environment, children feel safe to express themselves, share their thoughts, and develop social skills. Nurturing also involves providing emotional support and addressing the specific needs of learners through individualized attention, personalized learning plans, and targeted interventions. By nurturing the social-emotional development of children with special educational needs, an inclusive environment contributes to their overall growth and well-being.

Ultimately, in a nurturing environment, there is interdependence and care for the needs of everybody. When the environment is made engaging, affirming, and nurturing, success among learners could be attained within the inclusive classroom setup. These elements support creating a supportive, inclusive, and enriching learning environment that promotes the holistic development of children with special educational needs in inclusive education settings.

Regarding education, the law recognizes the right of persons with disabilities to access quality education equally with others. It promotes inclusive education, which means that children with disabilities have the right to study in regular schools and classrooms alongside their non-disabled peers whenever possible. This principle of inclusive education aligns with providing appropriate support and accommodations to learners with special educational needs.

Republic Act 7277 mandates the Department of Education (DepEd) and other concerned government agencies to emerge and implement programs and policies that support inclusive education. These measures ensure that students with disabilities receive appropriate support, reasonable accommodations, and a conducive learning environment. The law encourages the participation of parents, guardians, and organizations of persons with disabilities in the planning and implementation of inclusive education programs.

The other legal basis is Republic Act No. 11650 or the “Instituting a Policy of Inclusion and Services for Learners with Disabilities in Support for Inclusive Education Act”. This act mandates that all public schools are required to identify learners with special needs and provide these learners with free basic and quality education. It also mandates that all cities and municipalities have at least one Inclusive Learning Resource Center (ILRC).With this, these learners are given the chance to develop their knowledge, skills, attitude, and behavior in the inclusive classroom. Republic Act No. 11650 was signed into law on December 20, 2021, and aims to promote inclusive education by providing learners with disabilities access to free primary and quality education. Some key points and provisions of the law were the Identification and Assessment, which mandates that all elementary and secondary public schools are required to identify learners with disabilities. Schools must conduct regular assessments to determine the specific needs and appropriate support for these learners. Next was the Inclusive Learning Resource Center (ILRC), wherein the law also mandates that each city and municipality establishes at least one Inclusive Learning Resource Center (ILRC). These centers serve as a hub of resources, expertise, and support for inclusive education. They provide training, materials, and assistance to teachers, parents, and learners with disabilities.

Another is the Individualized Education Program (IEP); the law emphasizes the development of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for learners with disabilities. An IEP is a personalized plan that outlines the specific goals, strategies, and accommodations necessary for a student with special needs to succeed academically and socially. The IEP ensures that the educational needs of each learner with a disability are addressed effectively.

Lastly, the accessibility and Universal Design: The law emphasizes the importance of providing accessible facilities, materials, and technologies in schools to support the learning needs of learners with disabilities. It promotes universal design principles to create inclusive environments that all students can access.By instituting a policy of inclusion and services for learners with special needs, Republic Act No. 11650 aims to ensure equal education opportunities, enabling them to develop their knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behavior within an inclusive classroom setting. The law reflects the commitment of the Philippines towards inclusive education and providing support services for learners with disabilities. The legal and theoretical bases become the foundation of the present study, as these bases anchor on the notion that learners with special needs in an inclusive setting can derive success in their education. This means that they can accomplishment feats similar to what regular learners can get. With this, the characteristics of the successful learners may be characterized based on the impressions of the teachers and parents. Both teachers and parents are crucial personalities in the development of a successful inclusive practice.  As an output of the study, an action plan that can assist parents and teachers could be useful in guiding them how to deal with learners in inclusive setups. This form of assistance offers strategies on how to deal with these learners to provide the best teaching-learning experience, yielding positive impacts.

With an inclusive education strategy, students with a variety of disabilities and learning needs attend classes alongside typically developing and non-disabled students. In an inclusive setting, reports financial support was provided by Austrian Science Fund (Kirschner, 2022). Every learner has the right to obtain a quality education at their neighborhood school, regardless of disability or difference. Inclusive education is a human right. Each student is treated fairly, with respect, and without discrimination in an inclusive school (Clark-Howard, 2019). The idea of equity is the foundation of inclusive education, which rejects the practice of separation. The needs and rights of children, including their right to education, are highlighted. It accepts all kids for who they are while giving them the resources and support they require. The integration of a person into a setting where they had not previously been accepted is what is meant when the term "integration" is used. The term "inclusive education" The principle of inclusive education was adopted at the “World Conference on Special Needs Education: Access and Quality” (Pingle&Garg, 2023).

Advantages are explored by Mag et al. (2023) in their study on benefits of inclusive education. They concluded that children must be respected, re-evaluated, and listened to. Regardless of how adult lives are impacted by economic difficulties, their rights must be protected. Parents, caregivers, and professionals must respect children, but this respect is molded by their views about children as well as their own teaching, learning, and evaluation experiences. Numerous youngsters are negatively impacted by certain attitudes and behaviors that can harm or limit them. The ways in which research, thought, and practice around inclusive education are reconstructing education and children in new ways have been investigated. These acts and language of authority and regulation held by adults in designing and supervising children's lives. A study by Bendová and Fialová (2023) this research aims to develop an instrument to measure the implementation of inclusive education in universities. The research was developed using mixed-methods approach which combines Theoretical Framework and Needs Assessment.  It also demonstrates that primary school teachers fail to realistically define the difference between integration and inclusion of students. According to a thorough analysis of the respondents' responses, those who have prior experience integrating students with special needs say, among other things, that they have far fewer obstacles in the way of doing so and are generally more inclined to integration. According to a report by Hehir et al. (2019), there is ample evidence to support the proposition that inclusive learning environments can offer both short- and long-term advantages to students with and without impairments. Numerous studies show that students who have been included grow more proficient in reading and mathematics, attend class more frequently, are less likely to experience behavioral issues, and are more likely to finish secondary school than students who have not been involved. When they are adults, students with disabilities who were included are more likely to be employed or live independently, as well as to be enrolled in postsecondary education.

Another study by Imanian and Fitria (2018) come to the conclusion that individuals with autism who have good intellectual, communicative, and emotional skills can attend an integrated school with a guidance teacher. However, in reality, the goal of inclusive education itself is supported by a wide range of stakeholders, including the government and institutions like schools, teachers, the school environment, the community, and parents. For inclusive education to be understood and practiced by pupils effectively and efficiently, a school organizing it must also be provided with an adequate infrastructure. In summary, all children have equal educational opportunities, with the exception of special education, which is designed for students with unique educational requirements.

Navarro-Mateu et al. (2020) analyzed the attitudes, sentiments, and concerns about inclusive education of teachers and teaching students. The measure displayed psychometric qualities that were appropriate for the general population, students, and teachers. The female pupils also demonstrated a more favorable attitude toward inclusion, and these sentiments were linked to social dominance and empathy. The Sentiments, Attitudes, and Concerns about Inclusive Education Revised is a good instrument for gauging undergraduate education students' and in-service teachers' attitudes on inclusive education.

Lastly, a very recent study by Arnaiz-Sanchez et al. (2022) did a mixed study to evaluate the inclusion of students with special needs enrolled in mainstream schools based on their presence, attitudes, and planning processes. The findings of the study suggested that the primary factor influencing inclusion was the attitudes of the educational community. Since the participation of students with SEN in the academic and social life of educational centers, as well as in mainstream classrooms, is not guaranteed, there is a need to consider and take action to remove existing barriers to the operation of SOCs.

In the Philippines, studies were also conducted to explore inclusive education. Muega (2020) cited that teachers support the concept and practice of inclusion but feel they are not being provided enough training or support in its implementation. However, they acknowledge that they are unsure if their concept of IE complies with recognized definitions. Participants are unsure of whether their purported methods are effective enough to meet the demands of high-quality inclusive education. In the survey of the participants' involvement in and knowledge of IE, there was no discernible difference in their mean scores.

Rosales and Rosales (2019) documented the insights and lived experiences of stakeholders on the inclusive education program. The study's findings showed that individuals with disabilities were welcomed and treated fairly at the university. Persons with disabilities enrolling in the inclusive setting were given the opportunity to receive quality education through scholarship grants and other financing options. Additionally, people with disabilities adopted a holistic perspective that takes into account development in the areas of recreation, religion, social interaction, and culture. Similar to how the regular classmates, parents, and administrators shared common themes of experiences and insights, these stakeholders also helped to provide learning opportunities and clear appropriate strategies for independent learning. These themes included collaboration, sense of belonging, communication, and feedbacking.

Dela Fuente (2021) investigated inclusive education through the experiences of college teachers with deaf students. Colaizzi's descriptive phenomenological approach to coding and categorizing the participant replies, which were acquired from in-depth, one-on-one face-to-face and online interviews, reveals four themes that shed light on the participant experiences. These themes are shown as being demanding in terms of utilizing their innovative and creative brains to build teaching resources for high-quality instruction, as well as an opportunity to influence the future of deaf children and engage in inspiring teaching. The qualities emphasized in the themes can help create inclusive education programs in Philippine tertiary institutions that are more successful.

In conclusion, the theories recognize the significance of active participation, affirmation of individual abilities, and addressing students' social-emotional well-being. Supported by legal bases such as the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons and the Inclusive Learning Resource Center Act, the Philippines is committed to promoting inclusive education and providing support services for learners with disabilities. The success of inclusive education relies on the collaboration and support of teachers, parents, and the entire educational community. By embracing the principles of inclusive education and implementing effective strategies, we can create inclusive classrooms that empower all learners to reach their full potential, fostering a more inclusive and enriching learning environment.

B. The Problem

1. Statement of the Problem

This research assessed the child development of the learners with special educational needs enrolled in inclusive education at Balamban SPED Center Elementary School in Cebu Province Division for school year 2022-2023 as basis for an action plan.

Specifically, it sought answer answers to the following questions:

a. What is the profile of the learners with special educational needs in terms of:

• Age and gender,
• number of siblings,
• combined family monthly income, and
• type of disability?

b. As perceived by the respondent-groups, what is the level of child development of the learners with special educational needs in terms of:

• knowledge,
• attitude,
• skills, and
• behavior?

c. Is there a significant difference between the parents and teachers’ perceptions on the child development of the learners with special educational needs?

d. Based on the findings of the study, what action plan can be formulated?

2. Statement of the Null Hypothesis

Based on the objectives of the study, the following null hypothesis was tested at 0.05 level of significance:

Ho: There is no significant difference between the parents and teachers’ perception on the child development of the learners with special educational needs

3. Significance of the Study

The study is significant to the following:

a. School Administrators. The principals and school heads could use the results of the study in developing programs and plans for inclusive learning environments that are engaging, affirming, and nurturing towards the success of their learners.

b. Teachers. The teachers could utilize the crafted program that can assist them in honing successful learners in inclusive settings, giving maximum advantage to the latter as they discover and live in the real world.

c. Parents. The parents could employ the crafted program that can help them in raising their child with special needs and introducing them in the inclusive environment, paving a way for their children to be successful as the latter become functionally literate and responsible at home and in the community. Learners. The learners could maximize their learning advantage as they are exposed with appropriate strategies in honing them to become successful in themselves in the classroom, family, and community.

d. Researcher. The researcher herself could use the findings in making her own plans for her learners, making sure that all things go well in her inclusive classroom.

e. Future Researchers. The future researchers could use the study results as baseline data in future investigations about inclusive education in Region VII or the whole country.

C. Research Methodology

This section is all about the design. The study employed a descriptive-comparative research design to characterize the successful learner in inclusive education. and the flow of the study followed the input-process-output (IOP) paradigm in Figure 2 

1. Design

The study employed descriptive-comparative research design in characterizing the successful learner in inclusive education. In this design, the researcher described the successful learner in terms of the disability profile and the impressions people have toward the learner. Then, the researcher compared the impressions of these people namely, the teachers and parents, revealing whether a significant difference occurs between their perceptions. Descriptive-comparative consider two variables without manipulation to test, following a formal procedure to conclude which one is better than the other (Formplus, 2022).

Universal sampling was used for this study as this includes the learners with special needs in the class. This sampling was appropriate for the study as it selects all learners who have the characteristics needed in the study. In this, learners with special educational needs were the specific characteristics to study child development in inclusive education.

2. Flow of the Study

The flow of the study followed the Input-Process-Output (IOP) paradigm in Figure 2 in the next page. In this study, the inputs of the study included the variables of interest in the study. The first input was the profiles of the learner, as well as the level of child development of learners with special needs and the difference between the teachers’ and parents’ perceptions toward child development in inclusive education.

The process of the study involved the sending of transmittal letters to the Division Superintendent’s and Principal’s Office and asking of informed consent from the teacher and parent participants. Once permitted, the participants answered a survey questionnaire that determines their impressions towards the successful learner in inclusive education. The survey results were stored and organized in Microsoft Excel. Data analysis was done through the use of descriptive statistics and comparative analyses in Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). The results of the study yielded a proposal of an action plan for the child development of learners with special educational needs.

3. Environment

The study was conducted in Balamban SPED Center Elementary School. The school is located in Barangay Baliwagan in Balamban, Cebu, is a recognized SPED center by DepEd and listed under the National Council on Disability Affairs of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). The center is known to cater to learners with special needs in the 28 barangays of Balamban and other areas in the third district of Cebu. Learners in this center are known to have excelled in their own craft, resulting to successful learners in inclusive education.

The founding of Balamban Central Elementary School most likely occurred during this wave of educational growth. In order to meet the educational requirements of the local children, local schools were established as the need for education grew, particularly in rural regions like Balamban. BCES has undergone a number of developments throughout the years that have been indicative of community needs, curriculum upgrades, and changes in Philippine education regulations. These could include modifications to the leadership, upgrades to the infrastructure, and adjustments to the teaching strategies.

Balamban Central Elementary School is probably still a major center of education and community involvement today, educating a new generation of children and advancing the social and economic advancement of Balamban. Its past bears witness to the continuing significance of education in enabling people and societies to move toward better futures.

4. Respondents

The study included a total of twenty-two learners in inclusive education, who were selected as respondents based on specific inclusion criteria. These learners were chosen by the school principal and class adviser, ensuring that they met three critical criteria: (1) they were learners with special needs, (2) were enrolled in inclusive educational settings, and (3) they were recognized for their achievements in the classroom. This selection process aimed to gather insights from learners who had experienced success in inclusive eucation. In addition to the learners, the study also involved teachers and parents from Balamban SPED Center Elementary School. These individuals were chosen as respondents to provide their impressions on the identified successful learners in inclusive education. To be qualified for the study, teachers needed to be directly involved in the education of the selected learners, while parents needed to have a child in the same class as the successful learner.  This purposive sampling approach ensured that the perspectives of those closely connected to the successful learners were included in the study.

In total, the study included five teachers and twenty-two parents as respondents. By incorporating the viewpoints of these key stakeholders, the researchers aimed to gain a comprehensive understanding of the experiences and perceptions surrounding successful learners in inclusive education at Balamban SPED Center Elementary School.

The different respondents to the study are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 Distribution of the Respondents
Name of School	Teachers		Parents		Total
	n	%	n	%	n	%
Balamban SPED Center Elementary School	5	18.52	22	81.48	27	100.00
Total	5	18.52	22	81.48	27	100.00

5. Instruments

The study used two instruments: (1) a Demographic profile sheet and (2) a Child development level questionnaire.

The demographic profile sheet was used to gather the successful learner's-demographic profile. The information in this profile included the age and gender, number of siblings, parents' highest educational attainment, combined family monthly income, and type of disability of Balamban SPED Center Elementary School learners.

The child development level questionnaire was a researcher-made tool that incorporates the level of child development of the learners with special educational needs as perceived by teachers and parents towards the learner's development in inclusive education. This tool was divided into four parts, namely the knowledge (K), attitudes (A), skills (S), and behavior (B) perceptions that teachers and parents had as they observed and dealt with the learners with special educational needs in inclusive education. The tool was measured using a five-point Linkrt scale, from 1 (strong disagreement) to 5 (strong agreement).

This tool was pilot-tested on 15 teachers and 15 parents in Balamban Central School, where the SPED Center is located. With a total of 30 participants for the pilot testing, a reliability analysis was conducted. The Cronbach's alpha was 0.91, indicating that the tool is reliable.

6. Data Gathering Procedure

The data-gathering procedure for the study consisted of three stages: pre-data gathering, actual data gathering, and post-data gathering. In the pre-data gathering stage, the researcher sought approval from the Office of the School Principal at Balamban SPED Elementary School to conduct the study, explicitly targeting successful learners in inclusive education. Post data, once the approval was obtained; the researcher approached the teacher and parent participants, seeking their informed consent for voluntary participation in the study. Moving on to the actual data gathering stage, the researcher began by administering a demographic profile sheet to collect information about the learners with special educational needs—the sheet aimed to establish a comprehensive profile of the participants. Subsequently, the researcher provided the teachers and parents with a child development level.

The  post data gathering stage involves tallying of data, statistical treatment of data and presentation, analysis and interpretation of results.

 

7. Statistical Treatment of Data

The collected and managed data from the respondents were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). The demographic profile was treated through descriptive statistics, specifically frequency and percentage. The teachers’ and parents’ perceptions of the level of child development of the learners with special educational needs were analyzed using weighted using a set of qualitative descriptors. The difference between the teachers’ and parents’ perceptions was compared using the t-test of independent samples. All tests were conducted at 95% confidence levels; any p-value equal to or less than .05 was considered significant.

8. Scoring Procedure

The impressions of the teachers and parents towards the successful learner were scored using the five-point scale, with 4 as the strongest agreement  while 1 as the strongest disagreement in K, A, S, and B aspects. The overall impressions in all the aspects were scored based on the weighted mean as this procedure has been the practice in tool development studies. The scoring procedure is presented below.

Scale	Numerical Rating	Descriptive Rating	Verbal Interpretation
4	3.25-4.00	Well Developed	The respondents strongly agree on the statements describing the child development of the LSENs.
3	2.50-3.24	Developed	The respondents agree on the statements describing the child development of the LSENs.
2	1.75-2.49	Less Developed	The respondents disagree on the statements describing the child development of the LSENs.
1	1.00-1.74	Not Developed	The respondents strongly disagree on the statements describing the child development of the LSENs.

D. Definition Of Terms

The following are the different definition operatively

1. Action Plan. It is the output of the study that can be used to develop the learners with special educational needs.
2. Attitude. It is the disposition of the learners in the inclusive education.
3. Behaviour. It refers to the way learners behave in class.
4. Child development. It refers to the level of knowledge, skills, attitude, and behaviour of the learners with special educational needs.
5. Disability profile. This describes the disability or the special needs of the successful learner in inclusive education.
6. Impression. It is the idea or feeling of the teachers and parents about the successful child based on their interactions and dealings with the child.
7. Inclusive Education. It is the setting of the successful learner, wherein the learner with special needs is mainstreamed in the regular class in an inclusive learning environment.
8. Knowledge. It refers to the ideas and concepts learned by the learners in the inclusive setting.
9. Learners with special educational needs. are learners that have special needs in the inclusive classroom.
10. Program. It is the proposed output of the study, which can help teachers and parents in assisting learners with special needs in successful inclusive education settings.

II. PRESENTATION, ANALSIS AND INTERPREATATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the analyses and interpretations of the data gathered from the study which aimed to determine the profile of the learners with special needs in terms of age and gender, number of siblings, combined family monthly income, and type of disability. This chapter also assesses the level of child development of these LSENs according to knowledge, attitude, skills, and behavior as perceived by their teachers and parents. Furthermore, the difference in the perceptions between teachers and parents was also explored in this study.

With the help of the respondents’ answers to the survey questionnaire, the following results and findings are hereby presented and discussed in the sections as follows.

A. Profile Of The Learners With Special Educational Needs

This section presents the profile of the learners with special educational needs (LSENs) in terms of their age and gender, number of siblings, combined family monthly income, and type of disability.

1. Age and Gender of the LSENs

Age and gender are considered important profiles that need to be determined in this study, which could help in explaining the findings of the study. Data gathered are presented in Table 2 .

Table 2 Age and Gender of the LSENs
Age (in years)	Female		Male		Total
	f	%	f	%	f	%
21 and above	4	18.18	4	18.18	8	36.36
13 – 20	4	18.18	1	4.55	5	22.73
5 – 12	4	18.18	5	22.73	9	40.91
Total	12	54.55	10	45.45	22	100.00

As shown in Table 2, there were 12 out of 22 respondents who are females which comprised 54.55 percent of the respondents while there were 10 or 45.45 percent of them were males. Among the females, four or 18.18 percent of the respondents constituted each of the age brackets of 5-12 years, 13-20 years, and 21 years old and above. On the other hand, five or 22.73 percent of the male respondents were aged 5-12 years old while four or 18.18 percent of them were aged 21 years old and above. Only one or 4.55 percent of them had an age between 13 and 20 years.

The distribution indicates that there are more female respondents than male ones; however, this gap is not significant as observed in the difference of two respondents. This suggests that gender is an important variable in inclusive educational settings, that its significance is seen regardless of gender. In fact, a study by Oraker et al. (2020) found no significant effect of gender on stakeholders’ attitudes toward inclusive education. The same perspective has been observed by Possi and Milinga (2020) as interactions between boys and girls inside the inclusive classroom and school environment are positive, signifying the importance of learner diversity in inclusive education. Furthermore, Flores (2020) revealed that gender diversity contributes to the success of the implementation of inclusive education in the country.

In terms of age, the distribution shows that there are more respondents in the age brackets of 5-12 years as well as 21 years old and above than in ages 13-20 years old. This means that learners with special needs are distributed across different age brackets, signifying that most learners are not in their appropriate schooling age. This could be explained by the fact that these learners may have been home-schooled or late-schoolers due to their disabilities that require special needs. Studies outside the country such as that of Gül and Vuran (2020) mentioned that this late schooling could be due to the lack of necessary differentiation and adaptation towards mental deficiency and learning disability across learning dimensions. In Tanzania, Mapunda et al. (2021) cited that this problem can be attributed to the absence of policy implementation frameworks that can enforce the provision of special educational needs to students so that they can start schooling at an appropriate age. In the Philippines, Allam and Martin (2021) attributed this to the limited necessary support and services so that these learners can access education in their locality.

Due to this, the Department of Education issued Department Order No. 44, s. 2021, to strengthen the provision of the necessary support and services to learners with special needs under the present K to 12 basic education program. These special educational programs integrate gender diversity and age inclusivity to properly promote inclusive education in special educational setups.

2. Number of Siblings of the LSENs

Another important profile of the learners with special education needs is the number of their siblings at home. Table 3 shows the distribution of the number of siblings these learners have.

Table 3 Number of Siblings of the LSENs
Number of Siblings	f	%
More than 4	4	18.18
3-4	10	45.45
1-2	8	36.36
Total	22	100.00

As shown in Table 3, there were 10 or 45.45 percent of the respondents with three or four siblings in their family. Eight of 36.36 percent of them had one or two siblings while only four or 18.18 percent had more than four siblings at home. In other words, most learners had at most four siblings and only few had more siblings than this number.

The number of siblings of the learners is quite higher than the Filipino average as observed in the average household size. The Philippine Statistics Authority (2022) released their documents regarding household statistics, wherein the average household size in the country is 4.1 while this size is also 4.1 in Central Visayas where the research environment is located. With this, the average sibling number is around two or three, depending on the nature of parenting if solo or co-parenting.

The family size and sibling number is an important factor in inclusive education because sending learners with special needs to school is a collaboration between the home and the school. In fact, more siblings can lead to limited parental involvement that can negatively influence their children’s education (Azumah et al., 2017). This limited parent involvement can also lead to learners to dropout in school (Ali et al., 2019). Hence, there should be proactive parental involvement and management on each of their children’s education because this home-guidance and assistance is crucial to attaining better outcomes in inclusive education (Afolabi, 2019).

3. Combined Family Monthly Income of the LSENs

Aside from the number of siblings, the combined family income of the learners with special education needs is also important to look into. Table 4 presents the combined family monthly income of the LSENs.

Table 4 Combined Family Monthly Income of the LSENs
Monthly Income (in pesos)	f	%
10,000 and below	22	100.00
Total	22	100.00

Based on Table 4, there were 22 or 100 percent of the learners have a monthly income of Php 10,000 and below. This means that the learners belong to poor-income families and that their parents earn lower salaries than the minimum wage earners. According to Albert et al. (2020), the aforementioned income profile of the learners’ family is evident in Cebu where there are more than half a million poor people and that 29.4% of the lower income families are found in the rural areas. Interestingly, poor families have an average of 4-6 members that also corroborate with the results of the previous table.

The socioeconomic status of the learners’ families as indicated in their combined monthly income can impact the education of LSENs.

According to Suárez-Orozco et al. (2020), socioeconomic inequities can yield negative impact of the abilities of these learners to learn that could widen education gap between them and the advantaged children. When learners have socioeconomic advantage, they could have better learning and educational outcomes (Lenkeit et al., 2022).So-Oabeb (2021)calls for inclusive practices such as teachers’ acceptance of loco parentis, classroom accommodation, and school social club so that no learner will be left behind, especially those who are coming from poor and economically challenged backgrounds. Skills development, formation of social networks, and greater acceptance of disability are crucial to implement effective and efficient inclusive education in basic education contexts (Mezzanotte, 2022).

4. Type of Disability of the LSENs

The types of disability of the learners with special educational needs are shown in Table 5.

Table 5 Type of Disability of the LSENs
Type of Disability	f	%
Autism	14	63.64
Hearing Impairment	4	18.18
Intellectual Disability	4	18.18
Total	22	100.00

In Table 5, there were 14 or 63.64 percent of the learners with autism. Four or 18.18 percent of the learners had hearing impairment while another four or 18.18 percent had intellectual disability. Hence, there are more learners with autism in the class than hearing impairment nor intellectual disability. These three disabilities are among the common disabilities reported in the literature, by Agbon and Mina (2020) and Largo et al. (2021).

Most of the respondents were learners with autism. This disability has been increasingly prevalent in the country, prompting parents to provide interventions to their children. These interventions include therapy, education, medications, and developmental monitoring, which have burdened parents especially the below-minimum wage workers (Quilendrino et al., 2022). This could be the reason why these learners with autism were enrolled late to school because of the intervention costs and parents’ preparedness.

Unlike autism, intellectual disability has always been prevalent in the country. With intellectual disability, learners are challenged in terms of their intellectual functioning and adaptive behaviors. Due to this, both parents and schools formulate programs that optimize these learners’ learning process to attain functional literacy and adaptive behaviors (Cabbeh et al., 2024). To do this, parents must have ample attention to their children and teachers must have appropriate training on this and innovative methods to implement appropriate instruction to them (Djk& Balakrishnan, 2020). Because of this, parents are eager to enroll them earlier in school so that they have a collaborator in rearing and educating their children at school.

Along with visual impairment, hearing impairment has been the prevalent disability of learners in special and inclusive schools. Due to hearing impairment, learners encounter hindrances in their communication, socialization, and even education. With this, The Department of Education ensures that learners with exceptionalities will have access to quality education by providing programs that focus on holistic development such as cognitive (Undalok, 2019). At school, teachers offer appropriate strategies to deal with these learners such as customized communication, unconditional love and care, and coping mechanisms to teach them properly (Dela Rosa et al., 2021). Due to this collaboration, learners are enrolled in special and inclusive schools so that they can develop functional skills and have a normal life in the society.

Because of the aforementioned disabilities and all other disabilities that lead to some learners to require special education needs, the Inclusive Education Act was enacted. With the passing of this law, the learners with disabilities are provided with services and inclusion policy that strengthens their need for equitable and inclusive education to attain functional literacy and adaptive behaviors so that they can be good participative citizens of the country.

B. Level Of Child Development Of Lsens As Perceived By Parents And Teachers

The learners with special education needs undergo child development as they are educated in school to attain functional literacy and adaptive behaviors. This level of child development was determined based on the perception of parents and teachers on four aspects of knowledge, attitudes, skills, and behavior.

1. Level of Knowledge of Parent the LSENs

Knowledge is important in child development because it helps the learners learn easier and hone their thinking skills. The level of knowledge of the learners with special education needs as perceived by the parents is reflected in Table 6.

Table 6 Perception of the Parents on the Level of the Child Development of the LSENs in terms of Knowledge
S/N	Indicators	WM	Verbal Description
1	The child knows his own name.	3.68	Well Developed
2	The child knows his own gender.	3.68	Well Developed
3	The child knows the alphabet.	2.64	Developed
4	The child knows the counting numbers.	3.50	Well Developed
5	The child knows the parts of the body.	3.45	Well Developed
6	The child knows common animals in the community.	3.59	Well Developed
7	The child knows common plants in the community.	3.55	Well Developed
8	The child knows common games and sports in the community.	3.41	Well Developed
9	The child knows the name and flag of the country.	2.68	Developed
10	The child knows the food that he/she eats at school or home.	3.55	Well Developed
Aggregate Weighted Mean		3.37	Well Developed
Legend: 3.25-4.00-Well Developed; 2.50– 3.24-  Developed   ;1.75 – 2.49-Less  Developed ; 1.00 – 1.74– Not  Developed

As reflected in Table 6, parents perceived the learners with special educational needs to be well developed in most items in the knowledge aspect. The LSENs are well developed because they know their name and gender (m=3.68), identify common animals in the community (m=3.59), recognize the food they eat and the common plants they see in the community (m=3.55), and ascertain the counting numbers (m=3.50), the parts of the body (m=3.45), and the names of common games and sports in the community (m=3.41). This means that the LSENs have higher level of knowledge development when the knowledge is directly related to their experience or the place where they live. When students have prior knowledge or previous experience, they can learn better and manage their learning effectively (Dong et al., 2020).

Moreover, there were two items which the LSENs only had developed level as they know the name and flag of the country (m=2.68) and the alphabet (m=2.64). This suggests that the LSENs have slight difficulty in these knowledge items because of the complexity of the cognitive load that they have to take it. The word “Philippines” and the many letters of the alphabet are examples of complex items that learners may have difficulty particularly in language skills (Hofmann & Müller, 2021).

Nevertheless, the overall level of child development in terms of the knowledge aspect as perceived by parents was well developed (m=3.37). This signifies that the LSENs have well-developed their knowledge in the inclusive settings in the locality. Parents’ perceptions on knowledge development is essential so that they can provide guidance and assistance to the teachers with regards to their children’s learning at home (Erdener & Knoeppel, 2018). Knowledge should be developed well because it is the foundation of learning in the basic years. Aside from this, knowledge acquisition is crucial for learners with special education needs because they can use this knowledge for their further learning.

2. Level of Knowledge of Teacher the LSENs

Teachers were able to evaluate the knowledge level of the LSENs and the results are presented in Table 7.

Table 7 Perception of the Teachers on the Level of the Child Development of the LSENs in terms of Knowledge
S/N	Indicators	WM	Verbal Description
1	The child knows his own name.	3.60	Well Developed
2	The child knows his own gender.	3.60	Well Developed
3	The child knows the alphabet.	3.40	Well Developed
4	The child knows the counting numbers.	3.40	Well Developed
5	The child knows the parts of the body.	3.40	Well Developed
6	The child knows common animals in the community.	3.20	Developed
7	The child knows common plants in the community.	3.00	Developed
8	The child knows common games and sports in the community.	3.00	Developed
9	The child knows the name and flag of the country.	2.60	Developed
10	The child knows the food that he/she eats at school or home.	3.40	Well Developed
Aggregate Weighted Mean		3.26	Well Developed

Based on Table 7, the teachers perceived the learners with special education needs to have well-developed levels in the majority of the knowledge items. The LSENs have developed well in terms of knowing their name and gender,,and ascertaining the alphabet, the counting numbers, the parts of the body, and the food they eat at school or home (WM=3.40). These results indicate that the LSENs have acquired knowledge as taught to them at school such as concepts of the alphabet, numbers, parts of the body, and food. When ideas, concepts, and even principles are effectively taught in inclusive settings, the students can acquire them and elevating their child development (Walsh, 2018).

There were four knowledge items which the LSENs have developed levels. The teachers perceived that LSENs developed knowledge on common animals in the community, common plants and games and sports in the community (m=3.00), and name and flag of the country (m=2.60). These results suggest that the LSENs had quite lower development that those items in the preceding paragraph because teachers expect that LSENs to know the animals, plants, or games by their technical or formal name instead of the layman’s terms. For example, ducks and geese have many similarities that LSENs may consider the two animals to be the same; however, teachers are keen with accuracy that ducks and geese are different from one another. Knowledge accuracy and its mastery are important ingredients so that the learners can apply their knowledge in correct settings and appropriate ways (Hill and Chin, 2018).

Overall, the teachers rated the LSENs to be well developed in their knowledge component. This signifies that the LSENs have well-developed their knowledge in the inclusive settings as provided by the school in their area. Teachers’ perceptions on knowledge development including accuracy and mastery are important to consider in inclusive education because teachers know their learners in the parlance of teaching and learning processes. When these perceptions are considered, they consider their learners’ learning styles and can implement well the inclusive practices and special programs in their respective schools (Mary et al., 2022). Through inclusive education, LSENs can be able to apply their learning to new learning contexts may this be in face-to-face contexts or distance learning (Bedaiwy et al., 2021).

3. Level of Attitudes of Parents the LSENs

Another essential aspect of child development is attitudes. The level of attitudes of LSENs as perceived by parents is shown in Table 8.

Table 8 Perception of the Parents on the Level of the Child Development of the LSENs in terms of Attitude
S/N	Indicators	WM	Verbal Description
1	The child loves his name.	3.59	Well Developed
2	The child shows interest in his class.	3.45	Well Developed
3	The child has positive outlook in life.	3.50	Well Developed
4	The child is friendly to his classmates.	3.64	Well Developed
5	The child obeys his parents and teachers.	3.64	Well Developed
6	The child loves talking with his classmates.	3.36	Well Developed
7	The child appreciates the food that he/she eats.	3.41	Well Developed
8	The child displays enthusiasm in class.	3.36	Well Developed
9	The child is responsible in class.	3.50	Well Developed
10	The child is punctual in class.	3.36	Well Developed
Aggregate Weighted Mean		3.48	Well Developed

According to Table 8, the parents perceived that their children had well developed attitudes across all items. This means that the LSENs have well developed attitudes as observed in their friendliness with their classmates and obedience to their parents and teachers (m=3.64), love for their name (m=3.59), positive outlook in life and responsibility in class (m=3.50), interest in class (m=3.45), appreciation of the food they eat (m=3.41), and love for talking to their classmates, enthusiasm in class, and punctuality (m=3.36).These findings signify that the learners manifested positive attitudes towards themselves, their classmates, their parents and teachers, and in the class in general.

This manifestation could be due to the fact that inclusive education has made them more appreciative of the things they have and do in school. Parents’ perceptions towards attitudes of their children are significant to the implementation of inclusive education because this can help them accept the special needs of the children, lessen their stress, and find ways to support them (Galaterou, 2017; Dharma &Trory, 2019). The inclusive school becomes an avenue where they appreciate their life, including their aspirations, interactions with their classmates, and even adults as their inspirations (Paseka& Schwab, 2019). Through inclusion, the LSENs have developed positive attitudes that they can manifest in their own dealings in the future (Moutsinas, 2022).

4. Level of Attitude of Teacher the LSENs

The teachers’ perceptions were also gathered. The level of attitudes based on these teachers’ perceptions is showcased in Table 9.

Table 9 Perception of the Teachers on the Level of the Child Development of the LSENs in terms of Attitude
S/N	Indicators	WM	Verbal Description
1	The child loves his name.	3.20	Developed
2	The child shows interest in his class.	3.00	Developed
3	The child has positive outlook in life.	3.20	Developed
4	The child is friendly to his classmates.	3.00	Developed
5	The child obeys his parents and teachers.	2.80	Developed
6	The child loves talking with his classmates.	3.40	Well Developed
7	The child appreciates the food that he/she eats.	3.40	Well Developed
8	The child displays enthusiasm in class.	2.60	Developed
9	The child is responsible in class.	3.40	Well Developed
10	The child is punctual in class.	2.80	Developed
Aggregate Weighted Mean		3.08	Developed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unlike the parents’ perceptions, the teachers’ perceptions on the LSEN’s attitudes are mostly at developed level instead of well-developed extent. The LSENs had developed levels in seven items, including loving their name and having positive outlook in life (m=3.20), showing interest in class and friendly nature with their classmates (m=3.00), obeying their parents and teachers and being punctual in class (m=2.80), and displaying enthusiasm in class (m=2.60). This means that the LSENs had a lesser manifestation of the aforementioned attitudes than the well-developed ones. This manifestation could be attributed to the fact that teachers have a very keen eye in observing their students’ attitudes following the proper protocol of affective assessments. When teachers are in front, the LSENs may experience rigid teaching-learning process wherein they tend to be more formal and less ecstatic (Ojo, 2018). However, this is true to all classroom setups because the presence of the teacher commands respect and obedience, hence, some aspects of enthusiasm and interest may be diminished. Learners can be manifest more positive attitudes when involved in inclusion style of teaching (Sanchez et al., 2021).

Despite the majority of the items at developed levels only, the teachers highlighted three items with well-developed levels. The LSENs were perceived to be highly developed in terms of loving to talk with their classmates, appreciating the food that they eat, and being responsible in class (m=3.40). This means that the students manifest more positively on what they love to do in class like talking and eating.

These things may not be done at home; therefore, they do these things at school because they are other people who can appreciate them. These attitudes are observed by teachers as these manifestations are evident among LSENs who prefer to be in class than at home. Through inclusion, the LSENs are given the chance to socialize, (Barnes et al., 2021).

In totality, the teachers observed that the LSENs had developed levels in the attitude aspect (m=3.08). However, these findings do not mean that learners were not developing well their attitudes. This just means that teachers need to be flexible when they deal with LSENs to invite more positive vibes in the class. When flexibility and inclusion are integrated, the LSENs can enjoy more in their class and manifest more positive attitudes than the non-positive ones (Lübke et al., 2021).

5. Level of Skills of Parents the LSENs

One of the goals of inclusive education is for LSENs to be functional in their life and in the society. This functionality can be observed through their skills. The level of skills of the LSENs as perceived by parents are seen in Table 10.

Table 10 Perception of the Parents on the Level of the Child Development of the LSENs in terms of Skills
S/N	Indicators	WM	Verbal Description
1	The child can eat on his own.	3.73	Well Developed
2	The child can read well.	3.59	Well Developed
3	The child can write well.	3.59	Well Developed
4	The child can listen well.	3.41	Well Developed
5	The child can communicate with others.	3.55	Well Developed
6	The child can count.	3.68	Well Developed
7	The child can draw.	3.68	Well Developed
8	The child can assemble a simple toy.	3.36	Well Developed
9	The child can play with others.	3.36	Well Developed
10	The child can help himself/herself in the comfort room.	3.00	Developed
Aggregate Weighted Mean		3.50	Well Developed

As seen in Table 10, the parents perceived that the learners had well-developed skills across nine items out of 10. They observed that the LSENs can be able to each on their own (m=3.73), count and draw (m=3.68), read and write well (m=3.59), communicate with others (m=3.55), listen well (m=3.41), assemble a simple toy and play with others (m=3.36). This means that the LSENs have well-developed skills, which could be attributed to the inclusive education they have. Inclusive education made them learn these skills, as inclusion considers their special educational needs and strategies were in place to optimize the development of these skills (Djk& Balakrishnan, 2019). These skills are foundation capabilities that LSENs should have to function well in their respective lives and in the society in general (Cabbeh et al., 2019).  Yet, there is one skill that the LSENs had that is developed less than the nine skills stated above. This skill is the capability of the learners to help themselves in the comfort room ((m=3.00). This level of skills development could be attributed to the fact that LSENs still need assistance when they pee, poop, or even fix themselves in the comfort room.  To ensure that this skill be developed well, schools must have inclusive facilities for the LSENs. Rosato-Scott et al. (2021) recommend that inclusive school setups should include contextually appropriate facilities and child-friendly toilets for LSENs to be able to develop and master their skills concerning water, sanitation, and hygiene. Slater et al. (2019) suggest appropriate toilet training and practice to optimize this very important skill in life.

Overall, the parents have observed well-developed level of skills among LSENs. This result cohered with the study of Padillo et al. (2021), which revealed that LSENs had moderate-to-high skills in terms of life skills and community-based skills. Parents’ perceptions toward these skills are crucial to inclusive education because they are collaborators of the teachers, especially that parents can enrich the skills at school. With this, parental intervention plan for the LSENs is recommended by Padillo et al. (2021). When LSENs practice the skills at home with the participatory involvement of their parents and family, then they can demonstrate these skills in their community and be enriched to other contexts they can encounter in the future (Afolabi, 2019).

6. Level of Skills of Teacher the LSENs

Teachers also did an assessment on their learners based on their perceptions. These perceived levels of child development in terms of skills aspect are gleaned in Table 11.

Table 11 Perception of the Teachers on the Level of the Child Development of the LSENs in terms of Skills
S/N	Indicators	WM	Verbal Description
1	The child can eat on his own.	3.20	Developed
2	The child can read well.	3.00	Developed
3	The child can write well.	3.00	Developed
4	The child can listen well.	2.40	Less Developed
5	The child can communicate with others.	2.60	Developed
6	The child can count.	3.00	Developed
7	The child can draw.	3.00	Developed
8	The child can assemble a simple toy.	3.60	Well Developed
9	The child can play with others.	3.80	Well Developed
10	The child can help himself/herself in the comfort room.	4.00	Well Developed
Aggregate Weighted Mean		3.16	Developed

As gleaned in Table 11, the teachers perceived that the learners have “developed” levels in six items out of 10. They perceived that LSNs have developed skills on eating on their own (m=3.20), reading, writing, counting, and drawing well (m=3.00), and communicating with others (m=2.60). These results indicate that the LSENs have development levels lower than the three well-developed skills. This development level could cohere with the results of knowledge and attitudes that teachers assess the LSENs based on objective tools and methods, leading to accuracy and mastery in skills development. The LSENs should be able to accurately demonstrate and master these skills because these constitute the foundation of their future learning (Hill & Chin, 2018).

In contrast with the six items above, there were three items which the teachers perceived to be well-developed by the LSENs. The learners have well-developed helping themselves in the comfort room (m=4.00), playing with others (m=3.80), and assembling a simple toy (m=3.60). Teachers perceived these well-developed skills because the LSENs have given the chance to independently use their skills even without the guidance or presence of the teacher. The manipulative, playful and creative nature of learners push them to independently apply their skills to play with others and even assemble a simple toy (Smith, 2021). With this, teachers should be able to embed strategies that could exercise learners’ independent learning as well as their creative thinking so that they can demonstrate their developed skills well (Obradovic et al., 2019).

One skills was observed by the teachers to be less developed by the learners. This skill is the ability of the LSENs to listen well (m=2.40). In read literature, this skill is one of the most crucial skills to be developed by the LSENs and it is also one of the most difficult skill to teach among learners with disabilities. This could be due to the disconnection of meaning of what has been said to the real thing, highlighting the need to start at the concrete level before procedure to abstract thinking (Zudeta & Mumpuniarti, 2019). When listening skills are not well-developed, there can be barriers between the LSENs and the people they talk to; hence, the two-way communication process is hindered (Coskun &Uzunyol-Köpru, 2021). Therefore, teachers should integrate active listening strategies in inclusive settings to improve this skill and the LSENs to effectively use of this skill in the future (Canpolat et al., 2015).

In a capsule, the teachers perceived the level of child development in terms of skills aspect to be at developed level (m=3.16). This level could be due to the teachers’ endeavor to teach the LSENs and immerse them in experience-based learning. To enrich these skills, more active strategies should be embedded in the instruction (Canpolat et al., 2015). Differentiated instruction may be integrated to equitably teach LSENs in inclusive settings. When these learners have well-developed the aforementioned skills, then they will become successful learners inside the classroom and eventually successful people in the future (Strogilos, 2018).

7. Level of Behavior Parents of the LSENs

The fourth aspect crucial to the child development of LSENs is the behavior. The level of the behavior development of LSENs based on parents’ perceptions is presented in Table 12.

Table 12 Perception of the Parents on the Level of the Child Development of the LSENs in terms of Behavior
S/N	Indicators	WM	Verbal Description
1	The child is alert and attentive in class.	3.50	Well Developed
2	The child raises his/her hand when answering.	3.41	Well Developed
3	The child plays enthusiastically with others.	3.05	Developed
4	The child keeps his/her things after using.	3.45	Well Developed
5	The child finishes his/her food.	3.64	Well Developed
6	The child does not annoy or fight his/her classmates.	3.18	Developed
7	The child respects his/her parents and teachers	3.45	Well Developed
8	The child is behaving during class.	3.41	Well Developed
9	The child is competitive in class.	3.05	Developed
10	The child follows instructions.	3.14	Developed
Aggregate Weighted Mean		3.33	Well Developed

Based on Table 12, parents perceived that the learners were well-developed in six behavior items out of 10. The LSENs were observed to finish their food (m=3.64), be alert and attentive in class (m=3.50), keep their things after using and respect their parents and teachers (m=3.45), and raise their hands when answering and behave during class (m=3.41).

This means that the LSENs were able to act well after eating and playing and do well in class-related behaviors such as attentiveness, respect, and raising hands. These behaviors could be due to the inclusive education the LSENs had. In inclusive settings, the diversity of learners is considered. Therefore, the different aspects including behavior are dealt with appropriately so that the learners can also properly act in class and the community (Walsh, 2018).

However, there were four items wherein behavior development has less extent than the abovementioned six items. The LSENs were seen to develop behaviors such as they do not annoy others (m=3.18), follow instructions (m=3.14), and play enthusiastically with others and competitive in class (m=3.05). These behaviors could be due to the fact that the LSENs are still adjusting on how they deal with others, especially their classmates. Through time, these learners will be able to adjust with their new environment and eventually have adaptive behaviors essential for their development as functioning persons in the society (Cabbeh et al., 2015). Parents’ perceptions on this are crucial so that they can reinforce these behaviors at home and form positive behaviors as LSENs grow up (Kizilkaya & Sari, 2021).

Overall, the parents perceived the behavior development of the learners as well-developed (m=3.33). This means that LSENs have well-developed behaviors that could be attributed to the inclusive environments where they are in. Inclusion is very beneficial to the LSENs because they are given the chance to be immersed with other people in the school and eventually improve their behaviors (Cabbeh et al., 2015). Parents’ awareness of these behaviors can be helpful to them so that they can reinforce their children to act properly and behave appropriately.

8. Level of Behavior of Teacher the LSENs

The teachers also rated the child development level of the learners according to their behaviors. The level of behavior development is shown in Table 13.

Table 13 Perception of the Teachers on the Level of the Child Development of the LSENs in terms of Behavior
S/N	Indicators	WM	Verbal Description
1	The child is alert and attentive in class.	3.80	Well Developed
2	The child raises his/her hand when answering.	3.40	Well Developed
3	The child plays enthusiastically with others.	3.80	Well Developed
4	The child keeps his/her things after using.	3.80	Well Developed
5	The child finishes his/her food.	3.80	Well Developed
6	The child does not annoy or fight his/her classmates.	3.20	Developed
7	The child respects his/her parents and teachers	2.80	Developed
8	The child is behave during class.	3.40	Well Developed
9	The child is competitive in class.	2.80	Developed
10	The child follows instructions.	3.00	Developed
Aggregate Weighted Mean		3.38	Well Developed

Similar to the results as perceived by the parents, the teachers assessed the learners to be well-developed in six items out of 10. This indicates that the LSENs were well-developed in being alert and attentive in class, playing enthusiastically with others, keeping things after using them, and finishing their food (m=3.80), and raising their hands when answering and behaving during the class (m=3.40).

These well-developed behaviors could be caused by the LSENs expectation that they need to act properly and behave appropriate in school. These learners pay attention to their teachers; therefore they show social skills towards the teachers and class in general (Padillo et al., 2021). Through inclusion, LSENs are given the chance to experience how to behave as this behavior could mirror the learners’ future with other people such as the employer and the company in general.

Teachers’ perceptions on this matter is crucial in developing well-mannered and well-behaved learners that can-do positive things in their respective communities (Walsh, 2018).

Teachers also noted four items that have development levels less than those six mentioned above. These behaviors are at good levels of development because the learners can amply able to avoid annoying or fighting their classmates (m=3.20), follow instructions (m=3.00), and respecting parents and teachers and being competitive in class (m=2.80). These behaviors may be due to the fact that these learners are challenged by their own behaviors and they are still adjusting in an environment aside their respective homes (Abu-Hamour, 2018). With this, appropriate strategies should be offered so that these learners will feel welcome in their class and eventually develop positive behaviors in school (Kizilkaya& Sari, 2021).

Generally, the teachers perceived the behavior development of the learners to be well-developed (m=3.38). This means that the LSENs have well-developed behaviors that are both positive and beneficial in the classroom, school, and even the community. Despite the difficulties and challenging behaviors of the LSENs, the teachers still perceive them to have moderate-to-good behaviors because teachers have considered their special educational needs in their planning, implementation, and assessments. To consider the learners’ special needs, teachers and schools need to create a friendly and motivational environment wherein LSENs are encouraged to manifest positive attitudes and have better behaviors (Derzhavina et al., 2021). When they have these attitudes and behaviors, LSENs can reveal their genuine love and happiness for the learning process. When they love this process, they can develop well in the inclusive educational settings (Abuzaid, 2023).

9. Overall Level of Child Development of LSENs

The general levels of child development of learners with special educational needs are highlighted in Table 14.

Table 14 Summary on the Level of Child Development of the LSENs
Components	Parents		Teachers
	WM	Verbal Description	WM	Verbal Description
Knowledge	3.37	Well Developed	3.26	Well Developed
Attitude	3.48	Well Developed	3.08	Developed
Skills	3.50	Well Developed	3.16	Developed
Behavior	3.33	Well Developed	3.38	Well Developed
Grand Mean	3.42	Well Developed	3.22	Developed

According to Table 14, the parents perceived the LSENs to be well-developed across the four components of knowledge (m=3.37), attitude (m=3.48), skills (m=3.50), and behavior (m=3.33) with a grand mean of 3.42, still denoting a well-developed level. This means that the LSENs have developed well the aforementioned aspects because parents believed that sending them to school, a holistic development happens. In the school, the LSENs are immersed in a learning environment that is diverse and inclusive, leading learners to have high levels of child development (Cabbeh et al., 2023). Aside from this, the high development levels could also be attributed to the parents’ involvement in the education of their children (Galaterou, 2017; Erdener&Knoeppel, 2018; Dharma &Trory, 2019). Parental involvement coupled with the teachers and school’s inclusive educational settings leads to better educational outcomes and ultimately the child development levels of the LSENs (Afolabi, 2014; Padillo et al., 2021).

However, the teachers had quite different perceptions toward the learners’ development. They observed that LSENs were well-developed in knowledge (m=3.26) and behavior (m=3.38) but only developed in attitudes (m=3.08) and skills (m=3.16). The grand mean is 3.22, denoting a “developed” level of child development. This suggests that LSENs have been observed to excel in knowledge and behavior due to the outcomes-based approach to education that learners should be knowledgeable and behaving well.

In inclusive settings, teachers understand their learners and consider their needs in planning lessons, implementing instruction, and assessing learning outcomes (Bedaiwy et al., 2021; Mary et al., 2022). Experience-based, active, and flexible teaching strategies are implemented to the LSENs, targeting holistic development (Canpolat et al., 2019; Lübke et al., 2021). To develop holistically, the LSENs must be exposed to a friendly and motivational environment to be able to optimize their learning and manifest positive attitudes and good behaviors (Derzhavina et al., 2021). Hence, inclusive settings have developed not only knowledge and behaviors but also their attitudes and skills positively. This leads to the good-to-high levels of child development among the LSENs (Abuzaid, 2015; Strogilos, 2018).

C. Significant Difference Between The Parents And Teachers’ Perceptions On The Child Development Of The Lsens

This section presents and discusses the results of the test of significance of the perceptions towards the child development of learners with special educational needs between the parents and teachers. The test of significance was conducted for the four variables of knowledge, attitudes, skills, and behaviors,with the use oft-test of independent samples, tested at 95% confidence levels. The results of the test of significance, including the computed t-value, p-value, decision, and interpretation are highlighted in Table 15

Table 15 Test of significant difference between the parents and teachers’ perception on the child development of the LSENs
Variables	Source of Difference	Mean	sd	Mean Diff.	Comp. t- value	p-value	Decision	Result
Knowledge	Parents	33.73	3.15	1.13	0.723	0.476	Accept Ho	NS
	Teachers	32.60	3.13
Attitude	Parents	34.82	3.94	4.02	0.918	0.407	Accept Ho	NS
	Teachers	30.80	9.60
Skills	Parents	34.95	3.43	3.35	1.820	0.081	Accept Ho	NS
	Teachers	31.60	4.98
Behavior	Parents	33.27	4.59	-0.53	-0.228	0.822	Accept Ho	NS
	Teachers	33.80	5.07
*significant at p<0.05; NS = Not Significant; S = Significant

Based on Table 15, the perceptions of the parents and teachers towards the knowledge variable resulted to a mean difference of 1.13. This difference yielded a t-value of 0.723 and p-value of 0.4776. Since the p-value is greater than 0.05, then the Ho is accepted. Hence, there is no significant difference between the knowledge of LSENs as perceived by parents and teachers. There is comparability in the knowledge of the learners because these learners have been exposed to the same recommended curriculum that is learner-centered, developmentally relevant and appropriate, and inclusive (Department of Education, 2019). As the learners are exposed to an inclusive curriculum, they are given opportunities to optimize their learning through meaningful learning experiences and differentiated instruction (Vaughn et al., 2015; Marlina et al., 2019). Since learning has been optimized, both parents and teachers found the learners to be developed to well-developed as evident in the items of the knowledge aspect (Afolabi, 2014; Galaterou, 2017; Erdener&Knoeppel, 2018; Dharma &Trory, 2019; Padillo et al., 2021).

The attitudes of the LSENs were also subjected to the same test of significance. As a result, there was a mean difference of 4.02; however, the t-value and p-values were 0.918 and 0.407, respectively. As p-value is greater than 0.05, Ho was accepted. This means that there is no significant difference between the attitudes of LSENs as perceived by parents and teachers. Similar to the results of the knowledge aspect, there is also a comparability between the perceptions of parents and teachers towards attitudes development. This could be due to the fact that the learners were exposed to the same educational system that LSENs should not only develop their cognitive and psychomotor aspects but also their affective side (Derzhavina et al., 2021). More than this reasoning, the LSENs have acquired the same developmental perceptions because they are taught in an inclusive classroom. In this inclusive classroom, the learners are taught be good to themselves, classmates, teachers, and other school stakeholders (Crouse et al., 2018; Lübke et al., 2021). When there is good teaching, the LSENs manifest good and positive attitudes that they can carry throughout their life. Since they manifest positive attitudes, the holistic development of these LSENs have been observed to be comparable by parents and teachers (Jury et al., 2021).

The skills perception by parents and teachers were analyzed as well. The difference between the two perceptions was 3.35 with a t-value of 1.820 and p-value of 0.081. With this p-value, Ho was accepted, indicating that there is no significant difference between the skills of LSENs as observed by parents and teachers. This means that there is similar perception between parents and teachers towards the skills development of the learners. This is because the learners were exposed to inclusive education. In inclusive education, the preliminary skills and talents of the learners were considered so that teachers can delivery appropriate learning tasks and teaching strategies (Canpolat et al., 2019). Both parents and teachers have similar observations because the skills are both life skills and community-based abilities. When there are life skills and community-based abilities in a subject or program, the learners can develop well their skills. When skills are more developed, they can be functional in the society (Strogilos, 2018).

Lastly, the behavior rating by parents and teachers were subjected to the same analysis. The results showed a mean difference of -0.53, a t-value of -0.228, and a p-value of 0.822; this numerical result suggests that Ho was accepted. Therefore, there is no significant difference in the behaviors as perceived by parents and teachers. There is still similarities in the perceptions of parents and teachers, which could be attributed to the fact that the learners were exposed to the same environment. This environment is inclusive, hence, the LSENs are immersed to a friendly and motivation learning setups (Derzhavina et al., 2021). When the environment is friendly and motivational, the LSENs will do their best to behave properly. Due to this, both parents and teachers similarly observe the behaviors. When they have the same perceptions, parents and teacher could collaborate to mold the learners not only to be well-mannered but also well-behaved (Abuzaid, 2015; Strogilos, 2018).

III. SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter entails the study’s overview, research results, and conclusions. This part of the chapter also comprises recommendations based on the findings.

A. Summary

The study assessed the child development of the twenty-two (22) learners with special educational needs enrolled in inclusive education who were selected as respondents based on specific inclusion criteria. These learners were chosen by the school principal and class adviser, ensuring that they met three critical criteria. This selection process aimed to gather insights from learners who had experienced success in inclusive education at Balamban SPED Center Elementary School in Cebu Province Division for school year 2022-2023 as basis for an action plan. It employed descriptive-comparative research design, and there were two instruments were used namely the demographic profile sheet and child development level questionnaire, which were administered through a face-to-face survey. The data obtained from the survey were analyzed using descriptive statistics such as frequency, percentage, and mean, as well as comparative analysis using t-test for independent samples.

B. Findings

Based on the findings, most of the respondents were females (54.55 percent), aged 5-12 years old (40.91 percent), and had three or four siblings (45.45%). All of them had combined family monthly income of Php 10,000 and below. Majority of the successful learners had autism (63.64 percent)

The perception of the parents develops successful learners with special education needs had well-developed knowledge, attitude, skills, and behavior. However, as perceived by teachers, only knowledge and behavior were well-developed by the LSENs while attitudes and skills were only developed by them. Comparing the perceptions between parents and teachers, none of the aspects of child development were significantly different from one another.

C. Conclusion

With the advent of inclusion and diversity in the Philippine educational settings, the learners with special educational needs (LSENs) become successful in their education. With this, the level of child development in terms of knowledge, attitudes, skills, and behavior was investigated.

Knowledge and behavior development was high among LSENs as perceived both by parents and teachers while attitudes and skills development was assessed good by teachers. Therefore, the LSENs have become successful and developed functional literacy and adaptive behaviors they need in their daily life and the future. Inclusive education is vital in such development, where parents and teachers collaborate to improve and enrich the different aspects of development to produce a holistic learner at home, school, and community.

D. Recommendations

Based on the study's conclusion, the researcher recommends that the administrators use the study findings in developing appropriate programs for the LSENs where the teachers and parents utilize the study output as an action plan to address gaps in the education of the LSENs. Moreover, the learners to accomplish the learning experience provided by inclusive education, and Future researchers to use study results as baseline data for future investigations about inclusive education and its benefits to the LSENs. Hence, an action plan was proposed based on the study's findings.

IV. ACTION PLAN

A. Output Of The Study

1. Rationale

Schools have employed inclusive practices that form part of the crucial step towards inclusive education. In inclusion, all learners are given opportunities to reach their full potentials and create a culture of acceptance and understanding. In the Philippines, inclusive education has always been stipulated in the constitution, making education accessible to all. The Department of Education shifted the current system of SPED to inclusive education system, mainstreaming these learners in the regular classroom. Therefore, each learner with special needs is given the opportunity to study in inclusive settings. Success has been observed among learners with special needs in schools in different parts of the country, including the SPED center in Balamban, Cebu.The output is an action plan that can assist teachers and parents in developing a successful learner in inclusive education.

2. Objectives

The researcher, parents, and teachers are expected to achieve the following objectives through a seminar:

1. To guide parents how to reinforce knowledge, attitudes, skills, and behaviors at home;
2. To assist teachers how to integrated developmentally appropriate learning experiences to the LSENs;
3. To help the school administrators to link home and school through the collaboration between parents and teachers; and
4. To provide parents and teachers how to help LSENs to optimize their learning so that these learners become successful learners in the school and community.

3. Schemes of Implementation

The proposed action plan can be utilized by administrators, teachers, and parents from Balamban SPED Center Elementary School and other schools in Cebu Province to promote collaboration in addressing gaps concerning the child development of learners with special education needs.  The proposed action plan could be held at the start of the school year to address these gaps that can benefit the child developments of these LSENs. The researcher is expected to follow these schemes to implement the action plan, which is first the submission of the action plan to the office for feedback, and next will be the presentation of the plan to the stakeholders. Third is the preparation of the seminar, including its flow and participants, and lastly, the plan implementation and documentation of the different activities.

 

References

[1] Abu-Hamour, B. (2014). Students with learning disabilities and challenging behaviors in Jordan. International Education Studies, 7(4), 98-109. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1069313.pdf [2] Abuzaid, S. M. (2015). Handling negative attitudes and behaviors of special education students in the classroom. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.2556.7444 [3] Afolabi, O. E. (2014). Parents’ involvement in inclusive education: an empirical test for the psycho-educational development of learners with special educational needs (SENs). International Journal of Educational Administration and Policy Studies, 6(10), 196-208. https://doi.org/10.5897/IJEAPS2014.0364 [4] Agbon, A. D., & Mina, C. D. (2017). School participation of children with disability: the case of San Remegio and Mandaue City, Cebu, Philippines. https://pidswebs.pids.gov.ph/CDN/PUBLICATIONS/pidsdps1759_rev.pdf [5] Albert, J. R. G., Abrigo, M. R. M., Quimba, F. M. A., &Vizmanos, J. F. V. (2020). Poverty, the middle class, and income distribution amid COVID-19. https://pidswebs.pids.gov.ph/CDN/PUBLICATIONS/pidsdps2022.pdf [6] Ali, A., Ali, H., & Ali, S. R. (2019). The effects of family size and learning achievement on dropout rate of students at primary level. Global Social Sciences Review, 4(11), 254-260. http://dx.doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2019(IV-II).33 [7] Allam, F. C., & Martin, M. M. (2021). Issues and challenges in special education: a qualitative analysis from teacher’s perspective. Southeast Asia Early Childhood Journal, 10(1), 37-49. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1296259.pdf [8] Azumah, F. D., Adjei, E. K., &Nachinaab, J. O. (2017). The effects of family size on the investment of child education, case study at Atonsu-Buokro, Kumasi. Journal of Sociology, 5(4), 1-16. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325972109_The_Effects_Of_Family_Size_On_The_Investment_Of_Child_Education_Case_Study_At_Atonsu-Buokro_Kumasi [9] Barnes, R., Kelly, A. F., &Mulrooney, H. M. (2021). Student belonging: the impact of disability status within and between academic institutions. New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.29311/ndtps.v0i16.3607 [10] Bedaiwy, A. A., Elsharkasy, A. S., Elsayad, W. A., Busaad, Y. A., Alnaim, M. F., &Helali, M. M. (2021). Teachers’ perceptions about inclusion of students with learning disabilities in distance learning. North American Journal of Psychology, 23(4), 709-722. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356781834_Teachers%27_Perceptions_about_Inclusion_of_Students_with_Learning_Disabilities_in_Distance_Learning [11] Cabbeh, K. D., Villafuerte, B. J. A., Ruiz, J. K. O., &Adanza, J. R. (2015). Lived experiences of parents of children with intellectual disability undergoing pre-vocational education. Proceedings of the DLSU Research Congress, 3, 9-15. https://www.dlsu.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/pdf/conferences/research-congress-proceedings/2015/LLI/009LLI_Cabbeh_KD.pdf [12] Canpolat, M., Kuzu, S., Yildirim, B., &Canpolat, S. (2015). Active listening strategies of academically successful university students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 60, 163-180. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1076695.pdf [13] Clark-Howard, K. (2019). Inclusive education: how do New Zealand secondary teachers understand inclusion and how does this understanding influence their practice? Kairaranga, 20(1), 46-57. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1240185.pdf [14] Coskun, H., &Uzunyol-Köprü, M. (2021). An overview of listening skills of secondary school students: barriers and suggestions. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(4), 49-72. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1328770.pdf [15] Crouse, T., Rice, M., &Mellard, D. (2018). Learning to serve students with disabilities online: teachers’ perspectives. Journal of Online Learning Research, 4(2), 123-145. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1184994.pdf [16] Dela Fuente, J. A. (2021). Implementing inclusive education in the Philippines: college teacher experiences with deaf learners. Issues in Educational Research, 31(1), 94-110. http://www.iier.org.au/iier31/dela-fuente.pdf [17] Dela Rosa, R. M., Somido, F. C., Bermudo, P. J. V., Salinas, E. A., Yango, A. R., &Galicia, L. S. (2017). Never deaf of learning with heart: understanding the essence of handling pupils with hearing impairment. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(4), 726-733. https://doi.org/10.25255/jss.2017.6.4.726.733. [18] Department of Education (2000). DepEd Order No. 11, s. 2000: Recognized special education (SPED) centers in the Philippines. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2000/07/DO_s2000_11.pdf [19] Department of Education (2019). DepEd Order No. 21, s. 2019: Policy guidelines on the K to 12 basic education program. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/DO_s2019_021.pdf [20] Department of Education (2021). DepEd Order No. 44, s. 2021: Policy guidelines on the provision of education programs and services for learners with disabilities in the K to 12 basic education program. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/DO_s2021_044.pdf [21] Derzhavina, V. V., Nikitina, A. A., Makarov, A. L., Piralova, O. F., Korzhanoca, A. A., Gruver, N. V., &Mashkin, N. A. (2021). Inclusive education importance and problems for students social integration. Current Context of Education and Psychology in Europe and Asia, 9(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.20511/pyr2021.v9nSPE3.1130 [22] Djk, C., & Balakrishnan, J. (2012). Inclusive education for students with intellectual disability. Disability, CBR & Inclusive Development, 2(23), 81-93. https://doi.org/10.5463/DCID.v23i2.111 [23] Dong, A., Jong, M. S., &King, R. B. (2020). How does prior knowledge influence learning engagement? The mediating roles of cognitive load and help-seeking. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.591203 [24] Erdener, M. A., &Knoeppel, R. C. (2018). Parents’ perceptions of their involvement inschooling. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 4(1), 1-13.https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.369197 [25] Flores, G. A. Y. (2018). Gender diversity and inclusive education among women school stakeholders in selected schools of Cavite: a grounded theory. http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i6.2399 [26] Formplus (2022). Descriptive research designs: types, examples & methods. https://www.formpl.us/blog/descriptive-research [27] Galaterou, J. (2017). Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education: the role of job stressors and demographic parameters. International Journal of Special Education, 32(4), 643-658. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1184123.pdf [28] Gül, S. O., &Vuran, S. (2015). Children wih special needs’ opinions and problems about inclusive practices. Education and Science, 40(180), 169-195. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.4205 [29] Hehir, T., Grindal, T., Freeman, B., Lamoreau, R., Borquaye, Y., & Burke, S. (2016). A Summary of the Evidence on Inclusive Education. Abt Associates. https://alana.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/A_Summary_of_the_evidence_on_inclusive_education.pdf [30] Hemdan, A. (2022). Assessment of learners with disabilities in the UAE toward thriving in inclusive classrooms: Reality and vision. Rethinking Inclusion and Transformation in Special Education, https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-4680-5 [31] Hill, H. C., & Chin, M. (2018). Connections between teachers’ knowledge of students, instruction, and achievement outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 55(5), 1076-1112. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218769614 [32] Hofmann, V., &Müller, C. M. (2021). Language skills and social contact among students with intellectual disabilities in special needs schools. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2021.100534 [33] Imaniah, I., &Fitria, N. (2018). Inclusive education for students with disability. SHS Web of Conferences, 42. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184200039 [34] Jury, M., Perrin, A., Rohmer, O., &Desombre, C. (2021). Attitudes toward inclusive education: an exploration of the interaction between teachers’ status and students’ type of disability within the French context. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.655356 [35] Kirschner, S. R. (2015). Inclusive Education. In Scarlett (Ed.) Sage Encyclopedia of Classroom Management. Sage [36] Kizilkaya, A. E., & Sari, H. (2021). Effectiveness of the reinforcement parent education program designed for parents of children with autism spectrum disorder on supporting positive behaviors. Asian Journal of Education and Training, 7(2), 103-114. https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.522.2021.72.103.114 [37] Largo, F.M., Bacungan, C.C., Alegado, J.L.G., Borja, J.B., Mayol, N.L., Bechayda, S.A., Bautista, C.A.P.,&Herrin, A.N. (2019). Mitigating the effect of children’s disabilities on elementary education outcomes.Longitudinal Cohort Study on the Filipino Child. UNFPA-OPS Policy Notes Series_No. 3. USC-Office ofPopulation Studies Foundation, Inc. https://www.opsusc.org/paper_series.php [38] Lenkeit, J., Hartmann, A., Ehlert, A., Knigge, M., &Spörer, N. (2022). Effects of special educational needs and socioeconomic status on academic achievement. Separate or confounded? International Journal of Educational Research, 113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.101957 [39] Lübke, L., Pinquart, M., & Schwinger, M. (2021). The role of flexibility in the realization of inclusive education. Sustainability, 13(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084452 [40] Mag, A. G., Sinfield, S., & Burns, T. (2017). The benefits of inclusive education: new challenges for university teachers. MATEC Web of Conferences, 121. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319012324_The_benefits_of_inclusive_education_new_challenges_for_university_teachers [41] Mapunda, P. H., Omollo, A. D., & Bali, T. A. L. (2017). Challenges in identifying and serving students with special needs in Dodoma, Tanzania. International Journal of Child Care and Educational Policy, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40723-017-0036-8 [42] Marlina, Efrina, E., &Kusumastuti, G. (2019). Differentiated learning for students with special needs in inclusive schools. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 382. https://dx.doi.org/10.2991/icet-19.2019.164 [43] Mary, L., Manickam, J. P., &Nagalakshmi, P. (2022). School teachers’ perception of learning disability. Turkish Journal of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, 32(3), 29943-29949. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360726452_SCHOOL_TEACHERS%27_PERCEPTION_OF_LEARNING_DISABILITY [44] Mezzanotte, C. (2022). The social and economic rationale of inclusive education: an overview of the outcomes in education for diverse groups of students. https://one.oecd.org/document/EDU/WKP(2022)1/en/pdf [45] Moutsinas, G. (2016). Including students with disabilities: attitudes of typically developing children and of children with and without special educational needs. The IAFOR International Conference on Education 2016 Official Conference Proceedings.https://papers.iafor.org/wp-content/uploads/papers/iicehawaii2016/IICEHawaii2016_19732.pdf [46] Muega, M. A. G. (2016). Inclusive education in the Philippines: through the eyes of teachers, administrators, and parents of children with special needs. Social Science Diliman, 12(1), 5-28. https://journals.upd.edu.ph/index.php/socialsciencediliman/article/view/5230/4700 [47] Navarro-Mateu, D., Franco-Ochoa, J., Valero-Moreno, S., & Prado-Gascó, V. (2020). Attitudes, sentiments, and concerns about inclusive education of teachers and teaching students in Spain. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00521 [48] Obradovi?, S., Bjeki?, D., &Zlati?, L. (2015). Creative teaching with ICT support for students with specific learning disabilities. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 203, 291-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.297 [49] Ojo, O. J. (2018). Teachers’ professional attitudes and students’ academic performance insecondary schools in Ilorin Metropolis of Kwara State. eJournal of Education Policy. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1203831.pdf [50] Open Society Foundations (2022). The value of inclusive education. Open Society Foundations. https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/explainers/value-inclusive-edution#:~:text=Inclusive%20systems%20provide%20a%20better,of%20social%20relationships%20and%20interactions. [51] Oraker, S., Aktan, O., Toraman, Ç., &Çevik, H. (2016). The influence of gender and special education training on attitudes towards inclusion. International Journal of Instruction, 9(2), 107-122. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2016.928a [52] Padillo, G. G., Espina, R. C., Capuno, R. G., Manguilimotan, R. P., Calasang, V. O., &Bellete, J. B. (2021). Functional skills for learners with special educational needs amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 16(4), 1893-1916. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v16i4.6057 [53] Paseka, A., &Schwab, S. (2019). Parents’ attitudes towards inclusive education and their perceptions of inclusive teaching practices and resources. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 35(2), 254-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2019.1665232 [54] Philippine Statistics Authority (2022). Household population, number of households and average household size of the Philippines (2020 census of population and housing). https://psa.gov.ph/content/household-population-number-households-and-average-household-size-philippines-2020-census [55] Pingle, S., & Garg, I. (2015). Effect of inclusive education awareness programme on preservice teachers. The European Conference on Education 2015. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED560796.pdf [56] Possi, M. K., &Milinga, J. R. (2017). Learner diversity in inclusive classrooms: the interplay of language of instruction, gender and disability. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(3), 28-45. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1150435.pdf [57] Quilendrino, M. I. O., Castor, M. A. R., Mendoza, N. R. N., Vea, J. R., & Castillo-Carandang, N. T. (2022). The direct cost of autism and its economic impact on the Filipino family. Acta MedicaPhilippina, 56(9), 24-30. https://doi.org/10.47895/amp.v56i9.5005 [58] Rosales, S. S., &Rosales, E. H. (2019). Inclusive education program for persons with disabilities: insights and lived-experiences of stakeholders. Science International (Lahore), 31(4), 631-636. http://www.sci-int.com/pdf/637018892140832174.pdf [59] Raguindin, P. Z. J., Custodio, Z. U., &Bulusan, F. (2021). Engaging, affirming, nurturing inclusive environment: a grounded theory study in the Philippine context. IAFOR Journal of Education: Inclusion Education, 9(1), 114-131. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1291741.pdf [60] Rosato-Scott, C., Evans, B. E., & Barrington, D. J. (2021). CHILD-SAN: a new disability-inclusiveframework for emergency sanitationfor children aged fve to 11, basedon a systematic review of existing guidance.Journal of International Humanitarian Action, 6(18), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41018-021-00107-6 [61] Sanchez, B., Byra, M., &Wallhead, T. L. (2012). Students’ perceptions of the command, practive, and inclusion styles of teaching. Book of Proceedings, AIESEP 2011 International Conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2012.690864 [62] Sharma, J., &Trory, H. (2019). Parents’ attitudes to inclusive education: a study conducted in early years settings in inclusive mainstream schools in Bangkok, Thailand. International Journal of Special Education, 33(4), 877-893. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1219309.pdf [63] Slater, J., Jones, C., & Procter, L. (2019). Troubling school toilets: resisting discourses of ‘development’ through a critical disability studies and critical psychology lens. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics in Education, 40(3), 412-423. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2017.1316237 [64] Smith, J. E. (2021). Creative self-efficacy: an essential transition skill for students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 57(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512211024938 [65] So-Oabeb, J. (2021). Inclusive schooling practices for learners with poor socioeconomic backgrounds and challenges faced. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348234696_Inclusive_schooling_practices_for_learners_with_poor_socioeconomic_backgrounds_and_challenges_faced [66] Strogilos, V. (2018). The value of differentiated instruction in the inclusion of students with special needs/ disabilities in mainstream schools. SHS Web of Conferences, 42, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184200003 [67] Suarez-Orozco, C., Yoshikawa, H. & Tseng, V. (2015). Intersecting Inequalities: Research to Reduce Inequality for Immigrant Origin Children and Youth. William T. Grant Foundation. New York: NY [68] Undalok, J. M. B. (2015). Hearing impaired education of the Department of Education in Region X, Philippines: its approaches and implication. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 3(4), 6-11. http://www.apjmr.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/APJMR-2015-3.4.2.02.pdf [69] United Nations (2008). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. UN-Department of Economic and Social Affairs. https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-2.html [70] Vaughn, S., Danielson, L., Zumeta, R., &Holdheide, L. (2015). Deeper learning for students with disabilities. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED560790.pdf [71] Walsh, M. (2018).The inclusion of students with special needs in the general educationclassroom. Senior Theses, 69.https://doi.org/10.33015/dominican.edu/2018.EDU.ST.01 [72] Zudeta, E., &Mumpuniarti (2019). Listening skill of mild intellectual disability. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 296, 104-108. https://dx.doi.org/10.2991/icsie-18.2019.20

Copyright

Copyright © 2024 Mary Therese A. Vistar, Lilibeth Pinili, Reylan Capuno. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.