Zambia has the fourth highest birth rate in the world and an extremely high HIV/AIDs burden.

These
factors combined with a high level of poverty – 60.5% of the population live below the poverty line –
and a low level of education mean that life expectancy is low at 52 years old.

What are the challenges?

Communities in Zambia’s North Western Providence known as “dark villages” are mostly cut off from
the surrounding area, since they are deeply rural areas with little or no contact with government
services, or the general public. Families there survive on subsistence farming with at most an acre of
land to feed the whole family.

The spread of HIV/AIDS has devastated these communities, resulting in many orphans, widows and the
loss of productive potential. Around two of every five families in this area live on less than $1 per day
and typically survive on just one meal a day.

Many children are out of school because families cannot afford the fees and related costs.

Our work

Global Care, alongside our Zambian partners, New Life Action Foundation Trust, aim to create “a
community which is able to educate, clothe and feed its children.” We are working in Kabompo, the
poorest district in Zambia.

Through a sponsorship scheme, 30 of the most vulnerable children from the “dark villages” are being
enabled to access education and support with feeding and medical care. A local committee selects the
neediest children, such as those who have lost both parents, those with terminally ill parents and
children with disabilities. A further 33 children are on our waiting list for sponsors.

In 2019 Global Care has been able to provide four permanent classrooms, pit latrines, secure storage
and a headteacher’s office for M8 Primary School in Makayi village, replacing temporary thatched
shelters, and providing dedicated teaching space for classes which previously met under trees. The
opening of the new school has had a huge impact on the community, increasing enrolment and
attendance, and the development of adult literacy classes too. However there is still much to be done,
to enable children and their families to break free from poverty.

Global Care is also funding a small women’s microfinance initiative, which has just (late 2019) doubled in
size from supporting 10 women to 21 women, with the aim of supporting very vulnerable families living
in circumstances of extreme poverty.

INCLUSIVE EDUCATION
UNESCO’s (1994) stance that “The fundamental principle of inclusive schooling is that all children should
learn together whenever possible regardless of any difficulties or differences they may have” is valid and
entirely subjective. However, the principle aim of this paper is to discuss this quotation in support for
inclusive education.
Inclusion education is the practice, in which students with special educational needs spend most or all of
their time with non-disabled students. Implementation of this practice varies; schools can use it for
selected students with mild to severe special needs. Description: Inclusive education differs from
previously held notions of ‘integration’ and ‘mainstreaming’, which tended to be concerned principally
with disability and ‘special educational needs’ and implied learners changing or becoming ‘ready for’
accommodation by the mainstream. By contrast, inclusion is about the child’s right to participate and
the school’s duty to accept the child. Inclusion rejects the use of special schools or classrooms to
separate students with disabilities from students without disabilities. A premium is placed upon full
participation by students with disabilities and upon respect for their social, civil, and educational rights.
Inclusive education should be encouraged because it gives opportunity to learners from the different
backgrounds to interact, accept and learn from each other.
Inclusive education is important because Inclusive schools would no longer distinguish between “general
education” and “special education” programs; instead, the school would be restructured so that all
students learn together, pass through similar and the same kind of experience and have the audacity to
focus on developing their nations together in every way.
The other importance of inclusive education is that there would be maximum participation of all
learners in the community schools of their choice, make learning more meaningful and relevant for all,
particularly those learners most vulnerable to exclusionary pressures, and to rethink and restructure
policies, curricula, cultures and practices in schools and learning environments so that diverse learning
needs can be met, whatever the origin or nature of those needs.
Cortiella (2009) indicates that inclusive education is very important as it provides opportunity to all
students learn together. She says all students can learn and benefit from education. Schools can easily
adapt to the needs of students, rather than students adapting to the needs of the school. Individual
differences between students are a source of richness and diversity, and not a problem. The diversity of
needs and pace of development of students are addressed through a wide and flexible range of
responses (so long as those responses do not include removing a student with a disability from a general
education classroom).
Therefore, she defines inclusive education as the process of removing barriers and enabling all students,
including previously excluded groups, to learn and participate effectively within general school systems.
Thomas and Loxley (2007)indicate that Inclusion has just two sub-types: the first is sometimes called
regular inclusion or partial inclusion, and the other is full inclusion. In a “partial inclusion” setting,
students with special needs are educated in regular classes for nearly all of the day, or at least for more
than half of the day. Whenever possible, the students receive any additional help or special instruction
in the general classroom. Most specialized services are provided outside a regular classroom,
particularly if these services require special equipment or might be disruptive to the rest of the class
(such as speech therapy), and students are pulled out for these services. In this case, the student
occasionally leaves the regular classroom to attend smaller, more intensive instructional sessions in a
resource room, or to receive other related services, such as speech and language therapy, occupational
and/or physical therapy, and social work. This approach can be very similar to many mainstreaming
practices.
It is necessary that all children should learn together whenever possible regardless of any difficulties or
differences they may have as a way of providing them with equal access to facilities and diversity in
learning. Inclusion takes disengaged students, as well as some students with special needs, out of class
confinement and put into an alternative cross-age peer group to develop strong relationships and
enable them to better cope with general education classes. All students in Full inclusive education are in
a complete integration with each other and all student with a special need into the general education
classroom. The student receives all special services in the same general education classroom as all other
students. This is very common with students whose needs are easily met in a classroom, such as a
modification that allows the student more time to complete written assignments. Schools that practice
full inclusion for all students have no separate special education classes. However, full inclusion of all
students, regardless of their particular needs, is a controversial practice, and it is not widely applied. It is
more common for local educational agencies to provide a variety of settings, from special classrooms to
mainstreaming to inclusion, and to assign students to the system that seems most likely to help the
student achieve his or her individual educational goals.
Although the argument that all children should learn together whenever possible regardless of any
difficulties or differences they may have sounds fair enough, it is very difficult to successfully address the
needs of all children with disabilities because students with disabilities who are not included are
typically either mainstreamed or segregated based on the extent of the problem under consideration. A
mainstreamed student attends some general education classes, typically for less than half the day, and
often for less rigorous classes. For example, a young student with significant intellectual disabilities
might be mainstreamed for physical education classes, art classes and storybook time, but spend
reading and mathematics classes with other students that have similar disabilities. For such students, it
would be extremely difficult to ascertain that they can learn together with other abled children with full
senses. A segregated student attends no classes with non-disabled students. He or she might attend a
special school that only enrolls other students with disabilities, or might be placed in a dedicated, self-
contained classroom in a school that also enrolls general education students. Some students may be
confined to a hospital due to a medical condition and are thus eligible for tutoring services provided by a
school district. While inclusive education is good for may reasons, it has its own advantages and
disadvantages.
While its important that all children should learn together whenever possible regardless of any
difficulties or differences they may have, this may be determined by many factors. The proportion of
students with disabilities who are included varies by place and by type of disability, but it is relatively
common for students with milder disabilities and less common with certain kinds of severe disabilities.
In most universities in Zambia, students with learning disabilities are placed in general education
classrooms full-time without properly considering other implications that might emanate out of this
inclusion.
Stainback, and Stainback (1995) indicate that although inclusive education is hailed as a way to increase
achievement while decreasing costs, full inclusion does not save money, reduce students’ needs, or
improve academic outcomes; in most cases, it merely moves the special education professionals out of
their own classrooms and into a corner of the general classroom. To avoid harm to the academic
education of students with disabilities, a full panoply of services and resources is required, including:
Adequate supports and services for the students, professional development for all teachers involved,
general and special educators alike, time for teachers to plan, meet, create, and evaluate the students
together, reduced class size based on the severity of the student needs, Professional skill development
in the areas of cooperative learning, peer tutoring, adaptive curriculum, Collaboration between parents,
teachers and administrators and Sufficient funding so that schools will be able to develop programs for
students based on student need instead of the availability of funding (Gillies, 2004).

Jorgensen, Schuh, Nisbet Scheyer et al. (1996) alkso indicates that in principle, several factors can
determine the success of inclusive classrooms and these include: Family-school partnerships,
Collaboration between general and special educators, Well-constructed plans that identify specific
accommodations, modifications, and goals for each student, Coordinated planning and communication
between “general” and “special needs” staff, Integrated service delivery, Ongoing training and staff
development
Critics of inclusive education or full and partial inclusion include both educators, administrators and
parents. Full and partial inclusion approaches neglect to acknowledge the fact most students with
significant special needs require individualized instruction or highly controlled environments. Thus,
general education classroom teachers often are teaching a curriculum while the special education
teacher is remediating instruction at the same time. Similarly, a child with serious inattention problems
may be unable to focus in a classroom that contains twenty or more active children. Although with the
increase of incidence of disabilities in the student population, this is a circumstance all teachers must
contend with, and is not a direct result of inclusion as a concept. Full inclusion may in fact be a way for
schools to placate parents and the general public, using the word as a phrase to garner attention for
what are in fact illusive efforts to education students with special needs in the general education
environment.
It can be concluded that while the concept of having all children learning together whenever possible
regardless of any difficulties or differences they may have is important for many reasons as discussed in
the paper, it has many challenges as well. It is clear that children together can have equal access to the
facilities as provided in the classroom and learn from each other in a certain way. However, it was
pointed out that inclusive education would be more meaningful if the schools provide the needs of the
learners rather than the learners meeting the needs of the schools.
References
Barkley, R.A. (1998). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorders: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment
(2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
Conrad M., & Whitaker T. (1997). Inclusion and the law: A principal’s proactive approach. The Clearing
House
Cortiella, C. (2009). The State of Learning Disabilities. New York, NY: National Center for Learning
Disabilities.
Gillies, R.M. (2004). The effects of cooperative learning on junior high school students during small
group learning. Learning and Instruction, 14(2),197-213.
Jorgensen, C., Schuh, M., & Nisbet Scheyer et al. (1996). The Inclusive Classroom Teacher Created
Materials, Inc. The Inclusive Classroom
Student teachers’ attitudes toward the inclusion of children with special needs. Educational Psychology,
Hastings. R.P., & Oakford, S. (2003), page 23, 87-95
Strully, J., & Strully, C. (1996). Friendships as an educational goal: What we have learned and where we
are headed. In W. Stainback & S. Stainback (Eds.), Inclusion: A guide for educators. Balitmore: Paul H.
Brookes Publishing Co.
Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1995). Controversial Issues Confronting Special Education. Allyn & Bacon.
Thomas, G., & Loxley, A. (2007) Deconstructing Special Education and Constructing Inclusion (2nd
Edition). Maidenhead: Open University Press.