Education of Children With Special Needs in Ethiopia: Analysis of The Rhetoric of Education For All and The Reality On The Ground

The Ethiopian Journal of Education Vol. XXXV No.
1 June 2015 45
Education of Children with Special Needs in Ethiopia: Analysis of the

Rhetoric of „Education For All‟ and the Reality on the Ground
Belay Tefera1, Fantahun Admas2 and Missaye Mulatie3
Received: 02 June 2015; Accepted: 28 November 2016
Abstract: The Ethiopian Government appears to show commitment to the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and „Education For All‟ (EFA) by ratifying
different international conventions and enshrining them in its various domestic
laws, policies, strategies, and programs. However, the reality on the ground
indicates that there is limited progress towards implementing these legal
instruments when it comes to the education of children with special needs. This
study compares the rhetoric of „„education for all‟‟ and the ground reality. The
methods employed included, first and foremost, consultation of relevant legal
framework (FDRE Constitution), policy (FDRE Education and Training Policy),
program (ESDPs), national directive (GTP) and strategy documents (SNE
strategy). Then, secondary data were employed from statistical publications of
Ministry of Education mainly from 2008/9-2012/13. More importantly, almost all
accessible local empirical investigations and student dissertations on the
education of children with special needs or inclusive education in Ethiopia from
the inception till 2014/15 were also reviewed. The „Curriculum Relation Model‟ of
inclusive education was used to analyze and synthesize literature and data. The
major observation from the analysis indicates that the education of children with
special needs was alarmingly low. The analysis revealed that the proper
realization of inclusion for children with special needs is less likely even in the
time to come. Hence, it was underscored, on the one hand, that there is a need
to tame ambitions to the principle of „education for some‟ rather than „education
for all‟, through „any available educational modality‟ (may not necessarily be pure
inclusive approach type) and, on the other hand, reverse the top-down inclusive
approach (passed from international and national call, slogan, and approach) to a
bottom-up initiative of a more innovative, culturally sensitive, cost-effective, and
community resource-based inclusive model school, which can successively be
refined, and then gradually scale up lessons.
Key words: children with special needs, education for all, disabilities
in Ethiopia, inclusive education
1
Associate Professor, School of Psychology, Addis Ababa University
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Special Needs Education, Addis Ababa University
3
Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Gondar
46 Belay Tefera, Fantahun Admas and Missaye Mulatie
Introduction
The Ethiopian government has registered a prodigious stride in

improving educational access in the last couple of decades. The gross
enrollment rate (GER) for primary education, for example, has
improved from 51% (6,462,503 children) nearly 15 years ago (EMIS,
2000) to about 95.3% (i.e. 17,430,294 children) in more recent years
(EMIS, 2013). Although these figures are obviously satisfying in
themselves, they can only promise „education for all‟ if all groups of
children are fairly represented irrespective of disability status and other
special needs as the very phrase „education for all‟ genuinely entails.
Usually, national figures such as these ones seem to disregard people
with special needs because these people are not visible in many ways.
Hence, the issue of education of children with special needs requires
closer scrutiny against existing laws, policies and strategies, on the one
hand, and actual provisions for their needs, on the other hand.
Of course, the education of children with special needs has been

influenced by different philosophies, conceptions and paradigms of
“disability” itself. For example, prior to the 1970s, academic interest in
disability discourse was limited almost exclusively to the medical,
individualist view of disability (Barton, 1993) that also came to be
known as the „personal tragedy model‟ (Carson, 2009); as it regards
the difficulties people with impairments experience to result from the
way in which their bodies are shaped and experienced. This model
presupposes that disability is a lack of competence in an individual‟s
body, mind and behavior. It is a factor within the individual and, hence,
solutions consist of changing the individual. Most laws and policies
were then embedded in this biomedical model of disability to correct
flaws within the child (ACPF, 2011). The medical model had been in
some ways reflected in international policy documents pertaining to
disability and services to persons with disabilities as well (e.g.,
Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons in 1975).
The Ethiopian Journal of Education Vol. XXXV No. 1 June 2015 47
In the same way that the disability discourse has shaped policy
provisions, it has also led to the creation of special programs, schools
and services that are believed to serve children with special needs.
Special schools mushroomed in different countries to cater for children
who needed to be put in a separate place for a different kind of care
because children with special needs were believed to contain a
different body. This was the first measure taken to respond to the
needs of the children and, therefore, needs to be appreciated. It was,
however, with a number of limitations and challenges. First and
foremost, it was based on a philosophy that understands the nature,
causes, and effects of disability in a uni-dimensional, deficit-oriented,
and deterministic manner, and, hence had very limited practical utility
(Thomas & Feiler, 1988). Second, many researchers felt that
individuals and disabilities in this approach were isolated from the real
settings they existed, interacted and functioned and were rather put
into a new but artificial context for examination and treatment; on the
one hand, and for special programs in segregated, isolated and yet
very expensive and less accessible special schools to serve their
educational needs, on the other hand. Third, the majority of persons
with disabilities have been sidelined from social, educational and
economic activities. For example, in the World Declaration of Education
For All, the education of persons with disabilities has been put on
condition of availability of resources rather than as a right to education
(UNESCO, 1990). Fourth, the education of children even having
access to special schools was worrisome. In Ethiopia, for example,
special schools are generally overcrowded, urban-based and ill-
equipped with insufficient human and material resources (Tirussew,
2006; World Vision, 2007).
This special educational provision, though inadequate in many ways,

has brought a gradual societal awareness and opened a way for
voicing discontents over its inadequacy. For example, persons with
disabilities challenged the stigmatizing and limiting nature of the
segregated education ensuing from the individual-deficit model, and
gave voice to issues of equality of access and educational opportunity.
This opened a way for integration to gradually take a center stage.

Political pressure from disability and parental advocacy groups also
began to change society‟s values and ultimately brought legislative
changes to reform education. In the same way, educators increasingly
explored ways of supporting previously segregated groups so that they
could find a place in mainstream schools. Researchers still attempted
to highlight the fact that the special school system was selecting
children disproportionately from socially disadvantaged groups (Mercer,
1970; Tomlinson, 1981).
Gathering momentum from these different sources, such critiques

gradually turned into full-blown political debates among human right
activists and organizations in the last decade of the 20th C; thus, the
education of children with disabilities once again witnessing a paradigm
shift from the individualized, medical-oriented special education to a
social disability-based special needs or inclusive education model. The
social approach to disability makes an identification and analysis of the
social, political and economic conditions that restrict the life
opportunities of those suffering from impairment (Butler and Bowlby,
1997).
This newly emerging paradigm is premised on Universal Declaration of

Human Rights (UN, 1948), the World Declaration on “Education for All”
(UNESCO, 1990), the Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons
(1975) to all services, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
(1989) with special needs for social, educational integration, and such
other recent derivatives as the Standard Rules on the Equalization of
Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities (1993), the World Education
Forum (2000), and the Salamanca Framework for Action (1994) which
unequivocally endorsed inclusion as the best mode of educational
delivery for children with disabilities. The principle of inclusive
education was adopted at the Salamanca World Conference on Special
Needs Education held in Spain in 1994, and was reaffirmed at the
World Education Forum in 2002.
At the core of inclusive education is, therefore, the fundamental human

right to „Education for All‟; the need to identifying and solving barriers
within the education system (attitudes, practices, policies and strategies,
environment, curricular contents and methods, and resources), not
barriers within the child (Lewis, 2009), and the overall orientation
towards promoting opportunities for all children to participate and be
treated equally within mainstream settings (UNESCO, 2003). Hence,
unlike special education that focuses on providing services for individual
child, inclusive education focuses on the change of the whole system of
the school environment to the need of the individual child (UNESCO,
2006). More recently, inclusive education is even thought as an
approach that seeks to address „barriers to learning and participation‟,
and provide „resources to support learning and participation‟ for all
kinds of children with special needs (Ainscow et al., 2006; Csie, 2002;
Popping and Maloney, 2005) rather than merely focusing on a single
factor, such as disability in isolation as this isolation has the potential to
lead to faulty assumptions (Csie, 2002) because many of these factors
interact or act in combination and can ultimately result in
marginalization or exclusion. Focusing on a single factor, such as
disability in isolation, has the potential to lead to faulty assumptions
(Popping and Maloney, 2005).
It is described at the same time as the most important and

controversial issue regarding the education of children with
disabilities and special educational needs (SEN) (Hornby, 2012), and
a highly contestable educational system (Armstrong et al., 2011).
This is mainly because the creation of inclusive schools is no simple
process as it implies huge changes that might generate resistance and
fears, which can undermine the process of change (Hornby, 2012).
The fundamental principle of the inclusive school is that all children
should learn together, wherever possible, regardless of any difficulties
or differences they may have. Inclusive schools must recognize and
respond to the diverse needs of their students, accommodating both
different styles and rates of learning and ensuring quality education to
all through appropriate curricula, organizational arrangements, teaching
strategies, resource use and partnerships with their communities.

There should be a continuum of support and services to match the
continuum of special needs education encountered in every school
(Armstrong et al., 2011). Although the Salamanca Statement
(UNESCO, 1990) has vividly indicated that children with special needs
must have access to regular schools, almost two decades have passed
without meaningful inclusion of these children in many parts of the
globe. One would imagine how challenging such practices can be in
contexts such as the Ethiopian context where the social, political and
academic discourses are only beginning to make sense, (human,
material and financial) resources are extremely low, and the culture is
as yet stereotypy (Tirussew, 1999; Abate, 2010) in many ways.
The purpose of this study is, therefore, to examine the rhetoric and
practices of education for children with special needs. It specifically
attempts to analyze the:
 socio-cultural contexts of disability in Ethiopia in general and

children with special needs in particular;
 legal and policy contexts (and intentions) of education of children
with special needs;
 educational provisions, achievements, intentions and concerns for
these children; and
 strategies for improving educational provisions in the time to
come.
Approaches and Methods
Approach: This study is framed based on the changed and broader

understandings of disability called „the social approach to disability‟
(Butler & Bowlby, 1997, p. 412), „the bio-psychosocial model‟ (World
Health Organization, 2002), and “the Curriculum Relation Model”
(Johnsen, 2001, pp: 255-304).
According to the bio-psychosocial model, disability is the result of

interactions between the person‟s health condition (disease, disorders
and injuries), environmental factors (social attitudes, architectural
characteristics, social structures, etc.) and personal factors (gender,
age, coping styles, social background, education, etc. (World Health
Organization, 2002). Systematizing this understanding in more
operational terms, the „Curriculum Relation Model‟ (Johnsen, 2001)
underscores that schools are inclusive to the extent that they are
working towards full participation, commitment and equality through
respect for differences in learning styles, variations in methods, open
and flexible curricula and welcoming each and every child (Johnsen,
2001; Fiji, 2006). First published in 1994, and successively revised
there after (Johnsen, 2001, pp: 255-304), this model specifically
stipulates eight frame factors that continuously interact with one
another eventually giving structure to the status and prospectus of
inclusive education for children with special needs (see Fig. 1): the
pupil‟s background and learning profile, frame factors that dictate the
practice, intentions of education, curricular contents, strategies
employed, methods and organization, assessments model conducted
to secure data to feed back the practice, communication patterns and
care. The model holds that in as much as exclusion of children with
special needs from mainstream educational establishments, provisions,
and practices are systemic, systematic, and interacting, undoing
exclusion and making the education of children meaningful requires
deconstructing status quo (policy and legal provisions, strategies and
approaches, as well as beliefs and practices), and reframing the entire
discourse along the eight interacting components specified in Fig. 1.
This model then presupposes (1) that disabling conditions are more
widely spread, varied, and complex than what was conceived in the
medical model (Ainscow, 1994; 1994),(2), that disability has meaning in
a social context and relationships and functions (Savolainen, 1995), (3)
that difficulties encountered by children in their general development
are likely to arise more from being disadvantaged in opportunities than
bodily impairments per se (Ainscow, 1994), and (4) that children‟s
difficulties at school are, in the same way, largely results of

inappropriate curriculum content, organization, teaching methods etc.
(Johnsen, 2001). Accordingly, the study ventures on unraveling (or
examining theory and practice, intentions and actions, or rhetoric and
reality) the profile of education of children with special needs in
Ethiopia in line with these eight interacting elements of the Model.
Methods: This study is based on review of documents and secondary

data drawn from local sources recorded over the last couple of
decades. It included the consultation of relevant legal documents
(FDRE Constitution), policy (FDRE Education and Training Policy),
program (ESDP documents), national directive (GTP) and strategy
(SNE strategy) documents. Secondary data were collected from
statistical publications (educational abstracts of the last five years -
from 2008/9 - 2012/13). Finally, the study reviewed relevant data
mainly drawn from local empirical investigations conducted by
international (JICA and IDCJ, 2012; Jennings, et al., 2011) and national
organizations (ACPF, 2011), almost all accessible empirical research
and student dissertations on the education of children with special
needs/ inclusive education in Ethiopia from the beginning till 2014/15.
Hence, to the knowledge of the authors of this article, the study
provides a compilation of research conducted in the field in Ethiopia
thus far.
Pupil
Assessment Communication Frame factors
Strategies, Methods, Care

Organizations Intentions
Contents
Figure 1: A Curriculum Relation Mode (Johnsen, 2001, p.260)
Analysis
This section presents analysis of contexts, practices (nature,

provisions, limiting factors and strengths) and prospects of education
of children with special needs/disabilities in Ethiopia. An attempt is
made to highlight what is in place and what is really missing in line
with the basic themes of the Curriculum Relation Model.
Socio-cultural contexts of disabilities in Ethiopia
Persons with disabilities in Ethiopia: disability in hiding
A serious concern in Ethiopia is that the extent and situation of

persons with disability are not well known (Alemayehu, 2004) even
today. Data pertaining to the incidence, prevalence, and situation of
persons with disabilities were once described to be “at best
fragmentary and incomplete and at worst even misleading” (Tirussew,
2001, p.1). The 2007 census estimated that the prevalence of
disability in Ethiopia was slightly higher than 800 thousand showing
that the prevalence was1.09 % (CSA, 2008). This figure was much
lesser than the 1994 census by about 100,000 in the thirteen years‟
interval. On the other hand, a more focused baseline survey of
persons with disabilities, perhaps the first of its kind, reveals that
people with disabilities in Ethiopia constitute a prevalence rate of 2.95
% (Tirussew et al., 1995). No formal census of persons with disabilities
has been done since then.
All the estimates so far are widely believed to significantly

underestimate the correct number of disability in Ethiopia. While, on the
one hand, such estimates are likely to exclude homeless people (an
estimated one-in-three street children have a disability), the social
stigma and ignorance are, on the other hand, to prevent, more often
than not, people with disabilities and their families from self-identifying
(Mont, 2007). This problem of underreporting disability is said to be
common in developing countries where awareness about disability is
generally lower. Mont has made an interesting illustration of this
phenomenon by contrasting the prevalence rate of disability in such
countries as Kenya, Ethiopia, Mali and Botswana (where disability was
reported to be below 4 %) with countries like New Zealand, USA and
Canada (where disability was rather reported to be above 15 % (Mont,
2007). Specific to Ethiopia, evidence from the World Report on
Disability jointly issued by the World Bank and World Health
Organization (World Bank and WHO, 2011), estimated that about 15
million children, adults and elderly persons are likely to be with

disabilities in Ethiopia, representing 17.6 per cent of the population.
The fact that disability estimates are underreported in the African
context in general and in Ethiopia in particular could be justified mainly
in terms of absence or limited documentation, lack of identification and
assessment, differences in definition, lack of understanding and
awareness about disability, attitude and the like.
Unlike other contexts, disabilities in Africa is basically traced a lot more

to poverty (poor nutrition and restricted access to basic services) than
to other disabling factors (ACPF, 2011). Hence, the state of persons
with disabilities in Ethiopia is even more severe due to the presence of
diversified pre-, peri-and post-natal disabling factors (like infectious
diseases, difficulties contingent to delivery, under-nutrition,
malnutrition, harmful cultural practices, lack of proper child care and
management, civil war and periodic drought and famine and the
absence of early primary and secondary preventive actions (JICA,
2002).
In as much as persons with disabilities are not visible statistically, they

appear to face a range of barriers that largely render them to be
excluded from the mainstream society and experience severe
difficulties in accessing community resources as equal members of
society in Ethiopia (ENDAN, 2010), limited employment opportunities,
lack of proper provisions and conducive environment during education
(Tirussew et al., 2013), negative stereotypes which often condition
how people treat and respond to the disabled. Women with disabilities
are victims of physical, sexual, and psychological violence where the
perpetrators are family members, neighbors, and strangers. They
undergo through a number of challenges because of their disabilities,
are at risk of threats, suffer from STD, unwanted pregnancy, social
discrimination and marginalization …Violence against women with
disabilities has deep structural roots whose definitive solution calls for
ongoing effort from society as a whole (Biher, 2009),
Socio-cultural contexts of children with special needs: Vulnerable

groups
The prevalence and situation of children with special needs is even

least understood in Ethiopia. It is, however, believed that there could
possibly be a higher rate of incidence given that the range of disabling
factors is diverse and multidimensional in poor nations. Given WHO‟s
10 % prevalence estimate of disability in a population, it can be said
that out of the estimated 47,146,457 million children aged 6 to 18 years
(CSA, 2008), nearly 4.5 to 5 million children are expected to be with
disabilities of one kind or another in Ethiopia. Along this line, one can
easily imagine how vulnerable these children could be in Ethiopia today
as persons with disabilities, as children growing up in Ethiopia and as
distinct groups of children with disabilities coming from a background
prone to vulnerability.
Vulnerability as a child in Ethiopia: Being a child and with disability in

Ethiopia doubles the challenges. Children with disabilities share
problems of other Ethiopian children by virtue of their age. Evidences
indicate that public awareness about child rights in Ethiopia is low
(Befekadu & Tsegay, 1997), child abuse is not considered as a
problem (Befekadu & Tsegay, 1997), and hence serious child right
violations are widely practiced at home (Balcha, 1998; Belay et al.,
2001; Belay & Dessalegn, 1999), in schools (Ayalew, 1996; Daniel &
Gobena, 1998) and even in police stations in Addis Ababa (Befekadu
and Tsegay, 1997).
Regional disparities: As Ethiopia is a nation with diversity, the different

regions in Ethiopia are not on equal footing in infrastructural
development and educational provisions. Accordingly, children with
disabilities from emerging regions seem to be more vulnerable for ill-
treatment and rejection than those from other regions (e.g. see EMIS,
2013). Looking at the 2013 Education Statistics Abstract, we would
say that children from Afar, Somali, Gambella, and Benishanguel-
Gumuz are with the lowest level of enrollment compared to other
regions (particularly Oromia, Amhara, SNNP, and Tigray). In Gambella

region, for example, no children with hearing or visual impairment were
found attending school.
Urban–rural divide: Urban children are better off in accessing education.

A vast majority of people with disabilities live in rural areas where
access to basic services is limited (World Bank and WHO, 2011). In
terms of access to services and education, children with special needs
in major urban areas have better opportunities of attending special
schools, alternative basic education or ABE centers and primary
schools. Access to education for children with special needs in rural
areas is very difficult. For example, in a research visit to schools in
Amhara region, it was learned that out of 98 primary schools, 6 high
schools, 58 ABEs and 1 preparatory schools visited, no children with
special needs were found and that there were no special classes for
such children (JICA, 2002). According to data obtained from the social
assessment survey (Jennings, et al., 2011), for those students with
visual impairment from rural areas that wish to study in urban centers,
renting accommodation can be difficult as land owners do not want
them as tenants for fear of accidents, sanitation and financial capacity,
to mention some. Because of such discrimination, coupled with high
cost of rent, some do not even have residential quarters (mainly living
on the street or church compounds); let alone to attend school.
Low economic background: Children with disabilities are, in most cases,

from lower SES. The social assessment survey confirmed that the
majority of children with disabilities, failing to have access to education,
are from “economically poor” families (Jennings, et al., 2011).
Gender: Female children are more overburdened than their male

counterparts. Being female coupled with disability might worsen the life
of these children. Female children with disabilities might not be sent to
schools. The education statistics abstracts show that the statistics of
girls‟ enrollment is consistently lower than boys (see Education abstract
up to 2013). Furthermore, in some parts of the country, girls with
disabilities, particularly with hearing and speech impairments, remain in

rural areas and help their families with domestic chores and farming
activities. Men may not marry such girls, though they may be taken as
mistresses in situations where wives fail to conceive (Jennings, et al.,
2011).
Generally, children with special needs who are: females, from

emerging regions, lower SES, and/ or rural families are generally the
most marginalized groups in Ethiopia.
Legal and policy contexts (and intentions): Rhetoric of “schools for all”
The Constitution: Ethiopia has already signed the UN Convention on

the Rights of the Child (1989), its African version, the “African Charter
on the Rights and Welfare of the Child” (1999) and a number of other
international declarations protecting and promoting the survival and
development of children including their education. It has also shown
its commitment to these conventions by enshrining these conventions
in its different laws (including in the Constitution).
Ethiopia‟s Constitution states that all international agreements

(including the Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for
Persons with Disabilities, (1993), and the Salamanca Statement and
Framework for Action on Special Needs Education, 1994), “are an
integral part of the law of the land”. It upholds “those rights of citizens to
equal access to publicly funded services and the support that shall be
given to accommodate the needs of people with disabilities”.
Even if Educational Law or Act has not been in place (JICA Ethiopia
office), the Ethiopian Constitution (1994), supplanting this law,
underscores, in tune with international declarations and conventions,
that education is a human right issue and as such establishes the
universal right to education. The Constitution also establishes the
right to equal access to publicly funded social services, urges all
Ethiopians to have access to public health and education (Article 90),
and emphasizes the need to allocate available resources and provide

rehabilitative assistance to children with disabilities and other
disadvantaged groups (Article 41 (4)); and national standards and
basic policy criteria for education shall be established and
implemented (Article 51 (3)
Policy perspective: As an instrument for effecting the Constitution,

the Ethiopian Education and Training Policy (MoE, 1994)
underscores the implementation and development towards inclusive
education, „education for all‟. It stipulates, as one of its general
objectives, the expansion of basic education and training for all, the
development of physical and mental potential and problem-solving
capacity of individuals including those with special needs, in
accordance with their potential needs (MoE, 1994, p.4). In more
specific terms, one of its objectives is “to enable both the
handicapped and the gifted learn in accordance with their potential
and needs” (p.5). It states that special education and training will be
provided for people with special needs. Teacher training for special
education will be provided in regular teacher training programmers.
Special attention will be given in the preparation and utilization of
support input for special education.
Strategy for inclusive education: To reduce the existing gap and to

actualize „education for all‟, the Ministry of Education designed a
strategy for special needs education in 2006 regarding the provision
of the service within the existing structure and in the framework of
inclusive education. The strategy aimed at ensuring both access and
quality of education for all children, including pupils with special
education needs. According to the Special Needs Education program
strategy document, the responsibility for providing primary education
for all school age children, including pupils with special educational
needs, rested with woreda (the lowest administrative structure in
Ethiopia‟s Federal Government system) education offices (MoE, 2007).
This strategy indicates that inclusive education requires identifying
barriers that hinder learning and/or participation and reducing or
removing these barriers in early education in particular and in

schools, technical and vocational training, higher education, teacher
education, and education management in general.
Education Sector Development Programs (ESDP): Line ministries of

the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia have embarked on
drafting successive sectoral programs through which the policy items
can be implemented. Such programs are to be worked out for five
successive years to be accordingly updated for twenty years. Thus,
the Federal Ministry of Education developed the first five years
Education Sector Development Program (for 1997/98- 2001/02) in
1997 (ESDP I). Three such programs were developed and phased
out and currently ESDP-IV is in place. It was developed in 2010 as a
five-year plan (2010/11-2014/2015) following the ESDP-III. The first
two Education Sector Development Programs did not pay much
attention to the education of children with disabilities. This was
changed with ESDP III which gave due consideration to the
expansion of educational opportunities for children with special needs
in order to achieve the EFA goals. In fact, ESDP IV has given even
wider coverage stipulating basic components of focus, strategies, and
intended targets (see details under strengths and opportunities).
Education Sector Development Program IV (ESDP-IV) generally

stipulates that there is a limited understanding of the concept of
disability, negative attitude towards persons with disabilities and a
hardened resistance to change as the major barriers impeding
special needs and inclusive education. One would generally say that
although there are some attitudinal changes over the last few years,
such changes are so piecemeal, sporadic and inconsistent that they
would hardly deconstruct the bigger disability discourse that has a
strong hold in Ethiopia over the turn of centuries.
National Development Plans: The five year (2010/11 – 2014/15)

National Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP) of Ethiopia (MoFED,
2010) was formulated to accelerate economic growth, and the Plan
for Accelerated and Sustained Development to End Poverty
(PASDEP) (2005/06 – 2009/10). By sustaining the economic growth
and reform, the Government targeted to achieve the MDG targets by
2015 and its longer term vision of building a middle income country
by 2020-2023 (MOFED, 2010). Its goal is to produce democratic,
efficient and effective, knowledgeable, inspired and creative citizens
who contribute to the realization of Ethiopia‟s vision of being a middle
income economy (MOFED, 2010). Regarding the education sector,
expanding and ensuring the qualities of education and achieving
MDGs in the social sector is one of the main objectives of the GTP
which was in fact aligned with the Education Sector Development
Program IV.
As the priority issues of education strategies, the GTP states the

initiative of providing fair and accessible quality formal education is to
be continued and consolidated. The current gender disparity will be
eliminated by the end of the plan period. The education strategy for
children with disabilities will be fully implemented to meet the needs
of this group. Also, an important priority will be given to improve and
ensure the quality and efficiency of education at all levels. To realize
this priority, the General Education Quality Improvement Package 7
(hereinafter, GEQIP) will be fully implemented. The impact of GEQIP
in improving student achievement will be verified through regular
monitoring and evaluation, and through the National Learning
Assessment (hereinafter, NLA) conducted every three years
(MOFED, 2010).
In general, favorable policy and legal environments are in place for

fully adopting inclusive education in Ethiopia (Hiwot, 2011).
Nevertheless, there is a need for the examination of the reality on the
ground from the point of view of its suitability for the execution of the
policy.
Education of children with special needs: Reality of schools
In this section, by way of analyzing how limited progress is made in

making practical use of the existing human rights instruments
including domestic laws and policies discussed (ACPF, 2011), it is
imperative to discuss the nature of education of children with special
needs along with the profile of pupils (enrollment figures, limiting
factors, and psychosocial experiences), and educational provisions
based on a close consultation of documents and research carried out
in the area.
A glimpse at the nature of education of children with special needs
In Ethiopia, the education of children with special needs has a long

history of being rooted into the traditional religious education of the
Orthodox Church. In a situation where children with disabilities have
limited options in life (which was true in Ethiopia mainly in the past),
traditional church education accommodated these children. There
were and are many professors (Liq) with disabilities at the different
levels of church education (Demeke, 2007, p. 174). This provision
was, however, very limited and only accessible for the male blind and
physically disabled residing in places very close to priest schools.
However, formal education for such children started with the
emergence of missionary-supported special schools in the country that
provided education, food and accommodation, educational materials
and related other provisions. However, these schools were very costly
and couldn‟t expand as required. Hence, the number of children with
special needs enrolled in such schools remained almost negligible
compared to the number of children who needed such services. For
example, only 35,000 children received education until 2008 (reported
by Ministry of Education Officials at Inclusive Education workshop April,
2009). With a few small pilot projects, the majority of the children with
disabilities were in separate special education schools often run by
private organizations or NGOs. There are simply not enough resources
to establish enough separate special education school initiatives to

reach out the 1.6 million children who were out of school (II, 2009).
With the realization of the difficulties associated with these schools, on

the one hand, and with a growing understanding of the need for
improving educational access to a greater majority of the children with
special needs, there gradually appeared an approach whereby the
special and regular schools can somehow be combined in a manner to
launch special classes but located within the regular schools. Like the
special schools, this approach puts children with similar needs in the
same group and, alike the integrated approach, these children are to be
included in the regular schools.
A more recent approach to the education of children with disabilities that

increasingly made its appearance in the stock of educational vocabulary
in Ethiopia is inclusive education. This is an approach of addressing the
learning needs of all children in regular school, with a specific focus on
those who are vulnerable to marginalization, exclusion and isolation.
The inclusive education movement initially focused primarily on people
with disabilities and learning difficulties. Gradually, however, the
concept of inclusive education in Ethiopia appears broadened at least
conceptually, legally, and policy-wise to an education system that
attempts to meet the needs of all learners regardless of economic
status, gender, ethnic backgrounds, language, learning difficulties
and impairments (MoE, 2007).
Enrollment of pupils with special needs
A notable area of child rights violation for children with special needs is
the lack of participation in schooling. According to ACPF (2011), the
economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights of such children are
grossly neglected. However, of these areas of neglect, educational
neglect stands out conspicuous. According to Mugawe (cited in ACPF,
2011), perhaps next to war and famine, the failure to provide education
for all children can be considered as an unforgivable scandal of the

current sociopolitical order. This scenario of failure is particularly grave
among persons with special needs.
Available literature and education statistics annual abstracts in Ethiopia

seem to suggest that little attention is given to the education of children
with special needs, and that such children are amongst the most
marginalized in all regions, and are deprived of their rights. According to
the Ministry of Education, fewer than 3% of children with disabilities
have access to primary education, and access to schooling decreases
rapidly as children move up the education ladder (MoE, 2010).
According to UNESCO (2007), of about 30 million school-aged children
in this country, less than 1 per cent of children with special needs have
access to education. UNICEF also estimates that 98% of the children
with disabilities in Ethiopia have no way to get to school or job training.
For example, a survey in one specific community in Addis Ababa,
Kechene community, also revealed that about 80% of children with
disabilities involved in the survey were out of school (Shimelis, 2002).
Out of Addis Ababa, Tefera (2006) assessed the implementation of
policies on special needs education in SNNPR and found that access
and coverage in the region was a negligible 0.2 % between 2001 to
2004 and 0.3 % in 2005. Although, there is paucity of more recent data,
it is possible that these statistical figures might change in later years
(see e.g. Table 1).
In fact, the enrollment of children with disabilities has shown a steady

incline over the last five years as it can be seen in Table 1. The
enrollment size that was 36,782 in 2008 was found almost doubling
itself nearly after five years in 2013. This accounts for almost less than
a percent of the school-aged children getting access to education. The
lower proportion of females as well as the gender gap has also
persisted over these five years period (41.25% in 2008 and 42.56%).
The table still shows that the proportion of children with special needs
reduces as we go up the educational ladder in the five years period;
possibly suggesting, among others, attrition down the road.
Table 1: Enrolment of Children with Special Educational Needs for five years
Academic Primary School Junior Secondary Secondary school Overall
school (Grades 9-10) total
Year (Grades 1-8) (Grades 11-12)
M F T M F T M F T
2008/9 19,561 13,739 33,300 1,915 1,212 3,127 234 121 355 36,782
2009/10 24,142 17,367 41,509 2,091 1,345 3,436 346 128 474 45,419
2010/11 32,072 23,420 55,492 2,817 1,726 4,543 516 238 754 60,789
2011/12 24,825 18,307 43,132 2,410 1,629 4,039 527 250 777 47,948
2012/13 39,293 29,111 68,404 2,954 2,025 4,979 3,889 2,662 6,551 79,934
Source: Ministry of Education, Education Statistics abstracts 2001-2005 E.C. (2008-2013)
Table 2 specifically presents enrollment data for 2013 segregated by

disability type. While physical disability takes the highest figure,
proportional number of children with intellectual and hearing impairment
takes the next highest number followed by visual impairment taking
nearly half of the proportion.
Table 2: Enrollment of children with disabilities in the year 2013

Primary School Junior Secondary Secondary School
Disability (Grades 1-8) School (Grades 11-12) Overall
type (Grades 9-10)
M F T M F T M F T
Blind 5,020 3,678 8,698 387 198 585 572 300 872 10,155
Physical 10,8646 7768 18,632 1490 1,096 2,586 1,870 1,367 3,237 24,455
Deaf 8,686 6,783 15,469 427 273 700 549 358 907 17,706
Intellectually 10,247 7608 17,855 307 164 471 385 277 662 18,988
Other 4,476 3274 7,750 343 294 637 513 360 873 9,260
Total 39,293 2911111 68,404 2,954 2,025 4,979 3,889 2,662 6,551 80,564*
Source: Education statistics annual abstract, 2005 E.C.

Provisions and challenges of special needs/ inclusive education
General concerns of inclusion: Experiences in other countries already

very much into practicing inclusive education indicate a number of
challenges that Ethiopia would face. According to Oswald and Forlin
(2016), the challenges include teacher apathy, curriculum rigidity,
parental prejudices, shortage of staffing and limited resources. Corman
(2014) mentioned challenges like inadequate learning support in the
classroom and ineffective education support teams in schools, low
morale among teachers, lack of effective strategies to address both
learner diversity and disciplinary problems, lack of democratic
leadership, parental involvement and community relationships, bullying
by peers, and communication difficulties. Solia & Keller (2015) also
identified other sources of challenges in inclusive education including
the characteristics of teachers, classroom environment, school climate,
cooperation, and support from people with competence, attitudes and
resources. In fact, Tirussew (1999) was the pioneer to highlight that
these listed problems would definitely encounter the Ethiopian practice
and, hence, there has to be proper preparations to cope with them.
Perhaps as equally important, if not more, as the enrollment of children
is that of changing the whole system of the school environment so that it
can accommodate the needs of those who managed to enroll in
schools. We may need to examine how receptive the school
environment is once it welcomes children with special needs: physical
layouts, classroom conditions, resources, and a number of related other
factors.
Attitudinal problems: Children with disabilities are ridiculed, or they are

perceived to be practicing witchcraft and sorcery (Belay et al., 2004),
and most teachers reject the inclusion of students with disabilities into
their schools (Etenesh, 2000; Gezahegn & Yinebeb, 2010). There are
negative attitudes within society including school managers and
teachers (Tirussew & Alemayehu, 2007), teachers‟ and students‟
negative attitudes towards the inclusion of blind students (Abate, 2010;
Abebe, 2001; Desalegn, 2007; Gezahegn & Yinebebe, 2010). Parents

of children with intellectual disability retained negative attitude towards
inclusion (Mekdes, 2007). Negative attitude towards students with
disabilities were also evident even in the Addis Ababa University
community (Tirussew et al., 2013; Dawit, 2014). Teachers‟ negative
attitudes could be because of resource limitations and inappropriate
classroom conditions (Asrat, 2013), and lack of training that affects self-
esteem (Demisew, 2014). Some studies appear to indicate positive
attitudes among teachers (Asrat, 2013; Dagnachew, 2010), teachers
and visually impaired students (Kassie, 2013), as well as the school
community, partners and other stakeholders (Mohammedhayat, 2013).
It was, however, found out that these teachers lacked knowledge of
inclusion (Dagnachew, 2010), positive attitudes significantly varied by
qualification, training and experience of teaching children with special
needs (Kassie, 2013). It also failed to inform classroom practices of
teaching in inclusive settings by addressing the needs of children with
special needs (Dagnachew, 2010; Kassie, 2013). It didn‟t impact on the
execution of inclusive education because of school facilities and overall
school performance (Mohammedhayat, 2013). A third observation noted
regarding this positive attitude scenario was a kind of „I am okay, you
are not‟ type of understanding. That is, while research participating
teachers and woreda officials believed that they support the notion of
special needs/inclusive education policies and strategy and would like to
implement it, they, however, believed that there is a need for change in
the attitudes of other teachers, peers, leaders, parents/caregivers and
the community to provide sufficient assistance for children with special
needs (Demisew, 2014). This generally means that there still is a need
for a lot of work to bring about a genuine change in attitude that
promotes proper inclusion of children in the educational practice.
Contents, organizations and methods: lack of follow-up and enforcing

bodies on the part of government and lack of coordination between the
different stakeholders have limited the progress of inclusive education
in Ethiopia (Tirussew & Alemayehu, 2007). Teachers‟ limited
knowledge to accommodate and teach children with special needs
(Demisew, 2014), lack of training among teachers, low self-efficacy in

teaching children with special needs, and inability to handle differences
among students ((Demisew, 2014)) were problems noted. Regular
classroom teachers teaching in the inclusive setting found it difficult to
accommodate students with special educational needs, and they
compelled the children to adapt to the classroom instead of modifying
their classroom teaching to the needs of the students (Asrat, 2013).
There were rigid curricula and inappropriate teaching strategies (ACPF,
2011), rigid lesson plans and teaching methods that were less
responsive to children‟s special needs (Belay, 2007), and characterized
by one-way and teacher-dominated classroom methods (Desalegn,
2006). Pupils did not get the proper and meaningful access to subject
matter content (ACPF, 2011).
The classes were large and they were not convenient for individualized
teaching (Asrat, 2013). Data from the statistical abstract may show the
reality in which inclusive classrooms are likely to be offered. As
summarized on Table 3, the average class size for 2013 was about 54
and the pupil-teacher ratio was also very big (i.e. 49:4).
Table 3: Some facts of primary education in Ethiopia for 2012/13 academic year
Year
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Variable
Enrollment 15,549,524 15,792,103 16,718,111 16,989,784 17,430,294
Gross enrollment ratio 94.4% 93.4% 96.4% 95.4% 95.3%
Pupil-section ratio 59.0 57.0 57.0 54.5 53.7
Pupil-teacher ratio 54.0 51.0 51.0 50.0 49.4
Sources: Ministry of Education, Education Statistics Annual Abstract, 2009, 2010, 2011,
2012, 2013.
Care: Studies indicated that there was parental difficulty procuring

information about the nature and prognosis of the disabilities afflicting
their children; besides there was little access to emotional or financial
support networks (Chernet, 2007). Persons with disabilities being
oriented more to believing in what they lack rather than in the assets
they have (Alemayehu, 2004) was the result of negative or
inappropriate care and support. Children with special needs were of
course exposed to all kinds of non-receptive, discouraging,
disapproving and discriminating (familial, community, and school)
experiences affecting their self-views (Alemayehu, 2004) relationship.
These children believe that their disability is posing real problems in
their learning; what they hate about school is “being labeled,”
“discrimination”, “insult”, and bad words”, and many do not have positive
attitudes towards themselves (Belay et al., 2004). Guidance and
counseling services were unavailable (Desalegn, 2007) to support the
children cope with problems ensuing from inappropriate interaction,
care, and support.
Many parents of children with special needs, mainly those with hard of
hearing, do not understand well what their hearing impaired children try
to say to them and this lack of knowledge about hearing impairment
seems to have negative impact on the emotional, social as well as
schooling achievement. Children who are not able to participate in
meaningful interactions with their families are unlikely to experience
educational encouragement from parents and benefit from integrated
placements with large groups of hearing children, (Tilahun 2002). Deaf
students are forced to limited social interaction and communication
because parents, teachers and hearing peers do not know how to use
sign (deaf) language; because of these limitations, children with
impaired hearing feel aggressive, easily disappointed, unloved and
unwanted, perform poorly in their education result in dissatisfaction with
their school work in the inclusive educational settings (Wondwossen,
2014). Hence, educational leaders at all levels, particularly school
management bodies, should strive to create friendly relationship
between and among children with disabilities and their non-disabled
peers, teachers, administrative personnel and supportive staffs by
raising the awareness of the school community (MoE,2012, p.15).
Assessments: Assessments are made before they start class to screen

out children with disabilities, during class to monitor their learning, and
after class to screen them out for therapeutic placement and
rehabilitation. Hence, there is a need for valid and reliable (formal and
informal) assessment tools as well as professionals with expertise to
conduct assessment and diagnosis for these three important purposes
assessment tools (Demisew, 2014; Belay et al., 2004). However, many
teachers indicate that there are no special assessment procedures for
children with disabilities for identification, assessment and intervention
purpose; continuous assessment of a summative type (usually every
month) was the only one conducted in the classrooms (Belay et al.,
2004; Anto, 2004). There are in the Ethiopian education system either
no processes engaged in identification of children with special needs or
inadequate assessment procedures, if any (ESDP IV; UNESCO, 2007).
Physical conditions: Students with disabilities face many barriers in

education because of, among others, physical inaccessibility,
inaccessible library and classroom building, disability-related barriers in
teaching and learning process including examination (64%), getting
information (53.3%), and assignments (Dawit, 2014). Inaccessibility of
buildings and classrooms, lack of elevators, and car parking modes
acting as barriers are common physical constraints (Tirussew et al.,
2013). Hence, many educational settings in Ethiopia are not conducive
and friendly enough to accommodate students with disabilities (MoE,
2012). The school environments in most of the schools with special and
inclusive classes are not convenient and comfortable for children with
intellectual disability (Hiwot, 2011). There are inaccessible physical
environments including school compound, classrooms, buildings,
pathways etc. (Tirussew & Alemayehu, 2007). Physical layout of
schools is poses constraints on the participation of children with
physical disabilities (Jennings, et al., 2011; Asrat, 2013; Belay et al.,
2004). Physical arrangement of the classroom environment is not
conducive (such as seating arrangements, noise level and space and
sense of order of the classroom environment) for an inclusive
education practice (Dessalegn, 2007). Schools compounds fail to suit
to the special needs of blind students like seating positions, classroom

furniture arrangements (Anto, 2004; Desalegn, 2007).
Resources: almost all reviewed research investigations have indicated

the gravity of resource limitations for educating children with special
needs:
 Significant barriers limit full participation of students with

disabilities, such as lack of adaptive educational materials and
facilities, lack of trained trainers, and systematic exclusion of
students with disabilities (Abebe, Pirttimaa & Saloviita, 2015);
 Lack of budget and learning materials allocation, and
commitment (Demisew, 2014);
 Inadequate resources for learning: text books and reference
materials not available in braille, no adequate slate and styles,
lack of hearing aid, inadequate books, reading materials,
tape/voice recorders, scanners (Tirussew et al. 2013);
 Students with disabilities face financial limitation (69.9%),
uncooperative faculty member‟s (49.1%) (Dawit, 2014);
 Facilities such as adapted toilet, adapted seats in library,
adequate space for wheel chairs, ramps, signage, water
supply, play grounds etc. are inaccessible to these children
(MoE, 2012);
 Special and inclusive classes either unavailable or when they do
they are not equipped with relevant learning materials and
teaching aids pertaining to the special needs of children with
intellectual disability (Hiwot, 2011);
 Class size, inadequate resources, lack of adapted curriculum
and lack of adequate training are the factors limiting the
success of inclusion (Gezanhegn & Yinebeb, 2010; Abate,
2010; Tesfaye, 2007);
 The few services currently rendered are mostly sponsored by
NGOs and visibly limited rather to urban areas and places
where there is relatively better accessibility (SADPD, 2010);
 Shortage of resources (trained human power, instructional

materials, facilities, equipment etc. (Anto, 2004; Tirussew &
Alemayehu, 2007);
 Children not going to school because their parents cannot afford
transportation and related costs, they do not have wheelchairs and
crutches; most school going children with disabilities cannot afford a
decent meal, and suck „gelatin‟ (a very cheap candy-like mixture of
frozen ice and sugar prepared under unsanitary conditions) or eat a
slice of sugar cane for lunch. Similarly, in some schools, because of
lack of sufficient money to cover personal expenses, some visually
impaired pupils were reported to have occasionally left campus to
beg for alms (ACPF 2011);
 Public and school infrastructure inaccessible for persons with
disabilities in the majority of the cases (ACPF, 2011);
 Special schools and special classes are understaffed, under-
resourced and also have a shortage of instructional materials
(ESDP IV);
 Schools‟ lack budget to plan and execute programs for children with
disabilities (Jennings, et al., 2011);
 Adequate support system not yet in place (e.g. resource centers,
technology) for students with special education (ESDP IV), existing
special classes are understaffed and have inadequate instructional
materials (ESDP IV);
 Educational settings such as, the buildings, the library collections,
facilities, services, recreational centers, organizational hierarchy,
curriculum the teachers, in fact, everything is built and organized
for normal students to the point of excluding students with
disabilities (Simon, 2003);
 Lack of relevant facilities and materials; the simplest teaching
materials that could have been produced locally (such as maps,
charts, and other illustrative devices) are not available in many
school environments (Etenesh, 2000);
 Serious shortage of educational materials and equipment; no
materials in braille, no special education materials and equipment
like talking books, recorder books or auditory aids; blind students

learn the same contents with sighted students except for the
exempted courses (Desalegn, 2007).
Related others: In the social assessment survey (Jennings, et al.,

2011), a focus group discussion with teachers (SNE) generally raised a
number of challenges that schools face in delivering inclusive
education for children with disabilities:
 Limited technical support from the Special Needs Units in

Regional Education Bureaus;
 Lack of systematic coordination between the state and non-state
actors;
 Low priority given to special needs education (SNE) by school
authorities and reallocation of SNE facilities for other purposes
(e.g. special needs rooms allocated as a kindergarten);
 Lack of clear plan/policy on whether children with intellectual
disabilities should graduate from special classes and/or
integration into mainstream education.
There are no personnel as well as schools or colleges providing

training in special needs education particularly in some emerging
regions of the country like Gambella, Afar and Somali. Moreover,
higher education and teacher training institutes providing courses
and programs in special needs education and psychology offer
theoretical training, not practical in nature. However, teachers in
inclusive schools are not only requiring orientation and awareness
about the learners, but also need specific skills such as braille writing
and reading, mobility, communication, sign language and the like to
work with children with special needs, to facilitate inclusion of all
needs at schools.
Generally, although there are some positive signs for inclusive

education (Tirussew, 2006) and some teachers had positive attitude
towards children with disabilities and believed in the importance of
spending resources in educating them (Belay et al., 2004; Asrat, 2013;
Dagnachew, 2010; Kassie, 2013; Mohammedhayat, 2013), it is hard to
say that inclusion exists in Ethiopia; it is rather an emerging concept
with all the challenges and opportunities (Tirussew, 2006). Schools in
Addis Ababa having special and inclusive classes are not available and
physically accessible for children with disabilities; as a result, a great
majority of children are out of reach of education (Hiwot, 2011).
According to Tirussew (2006), there is, however, every reason to
believe that successful program of inclusive education can of course be
implemented in Ethiopia. Now, nearly a decade after such optimism,
we are asking if inclusion would at all be feasible in the Ethiopian
setting as the practice of inclusive teaching is found to be in its infant
stage (Kassie, 2013). This implies that it is not being properly managed
due to various constraints as compared to the requirements of inclusive
education (Kassie, 2013).
The tomorrow: Opportunities and promises to “Schools for Some”
In a country like Ethiopia, where limited resource and human power are
bottlenecks, it may not come to our surprise if almost all the
investigations converge to articulating the severity of resource
limitations surprisingly for a negligible enrollment level compared to the
greater majority looking for the service. What would have happened to
the resources if, for example, all children with special needs had joined
the schools, as promised in the legal documents upholding „education
for all‟? What is “comforting” is, however, only few children have been
going to school so far. Even the 2015 academic year is almost gone yet
leaving over 90 percent of children with special needs out of schools as
usual. It appears as if that while we are crying over „education for all‟
our schools are in reality „schools for nil‟ when it comes to the
education of children with special needs („nil‟ mainly because of the
negligible level of enrollment as well as provisions of needs for those
enrolled). In contrast to the two extreme positions, „education for nil‟

and „education for all‟, Ethiopia‟s tomorrow of education for children
with special needs/ disabilities can safely be envisaged by striking a
balance for the golden average, “schools for some”. This can be seen
by connecting the past (achievements), with the present (opportunities),
and the future (intentions).
Education for all: achievements and opportunities
Conceptually, there has been a bit of shift in understanding the

education of children with disabilities from the narrow special education
focus to the wider special needs education/ inclusive education so as
to address the needs of all the learners. Legally, the Ethiopian
Government has shown commitment to the Millennium Development
(MDG) and „education for all‟ (EFA) goals as indicated in the legal and
policy framework. It has also expressed its intention to use inclusive
education as a key to sustaining economic development in the five
years‟ growth and transformation plan (GTP), developed a strategy for
special needs education, incorporated it into the ongoing sector
development programs (ESDP III and IV), and extended it to regional
and local action plans to minimize the budget barriers in the
implementation of the strategy. The General Education Quality
Improvement Program (GEQIP) has also given attention to these
issues and incorporated it in its teacher development component. In
addition, special needs education is mainstreamed across all teacher
education institutions in the country. Different universities and colleges
have started new teacher education programs on special needs
education. Currently five teacher education and four higher education
institutions have opened programs to train special needs and inclusive
education professionals at different levels (Diploma, BA, MA and PhD).
In addition, sign language and deaf culture is being given as a subject
at a BA level in Addis Ababa University.
According to basic education sector analysis report prepared by

Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and International
Development Center of Japan (IDCJ, 2012), since the Government
incorporated special needs education in the ESDP III, a strategy for
special needs education was developed; new teacher education
programs on special needs education were started; and curricula was
modified for children with special needs and manuals were prepared
on disability specific curriculum.
UNESCO (2007) has also documents the following important

achievements:
 The new ongoing curriculum framework development is considering

learners‟ diversity;
 Textbooks are transcribed in braille to ensure access to learning for
blind children;
 Sign language is taken as medium of instruction to ensure access to
learning for deaf children;
 All issues of inclusive education are included in both pre- service
and in-service teachers and educational leaders training and
education programs at all levels - undergraduate, graduate and
post graduate levels;
 Programs related to strengthening special needs education Pre-
Service and In-Service Teacher Training and provision of special
needs education materials to TEIs and cluster resource centers
are also being implemented;
 Nowadays, inclusion is one of the teachers‟ big issues of discussion in
their continuous professional development program at cluster centers;
• Issues of inclusion are becoming one of the main factors in

teachers‟ professional competencies;
• Special needs education centers in towns help to promote
awareness of and opportunities for parents/ communities and
children with special needs in rural areas.
Experience so far also shows that the issue of education of children

with special needs/disabilities is more of an NGO involvement; with
very little community backing. NGOs play an important role in service
provision both in terms of technical support and service provision.
They are also active in coordinating services for children with
disabilities. However, the limitation is that their coverage is small and
services are largely urban based.
Education for all: Intentions
Having assessed the implementation of Education Sector

Development Program (ESDP) III, the Ministry of Education has
designed ESDP IV. This program has given, unlike the other three
programs, considerable attention to improving the status of special
needs/ inclusive education in Ethiopia. It envisions performing three
core activities in this regard: improving enrollment, teachers‟
professionalism, and institutional capacity of schools. In the same
way, the key outcome targets are as follows:
 Primary school enrolment of students with special

educational needs will increase from 47,461 in 2009/10 to
1,739,000 in 2014/15;
 Secondary school enrolment of students with special
educational needs will increase from 3,910 in 2009/10 to
8,586 in 2014/15;
 Higher education enrolment of students with special
educational needs will increase from 389 in 2009/10 to 946
in 2014/15;
 All Teacher Education Institutes and Colleges of Teacher
Education will be provided with special needs /inclusive
education training component by 2014/15;
 The proportion of teachers trained for teaching children with
special educational needs will increase by 25% in 2014/15;
 The percentage of schools with appropriate facilities for

special needs/inclusive education will increase by 25% in
2014/15;
 The nine resource centers will be increased to 500 by
2014/15;
 The intention, in order to achieve EFA in 2015, is to enroll all
children with special educational needs in primary school.
Their number in 2007 is estimated at 10% of the total
estimated enrolment in that year;
 Develop an educational assessment and screening tools specific to
children with special educational needs;
 Increase community awareness about special needs education
using various channels of mass media, and to modify the
curriculum.
Schools for some: the golden average
A huge reform agenda which our culture and economy cannot support
is „education for all‟. As discussed above, achievements so far have
been limited, opportunities rather inadequate, and the intentions are
ambitious and require taming compared to what remains to be done in
regard to the education children with special needs. Hence, we need to
revisit the whole set up within the framework of existing realities in
Ethiopia; seeking for a move not from the existing nearly „nil‟ to nearly
„all‟ but rather to „some‟- just to settle for a golden average. This can be
taken as a move towards a golden average whereby a reasonable
number of children with special needs, if not all, could have access to a
reasonable quality of services. If addressing both quality and quantity at
the same time may not be pragmatic again, then focus should be on
quality rather than quantity. If you take care of quality, then quantity will
take care of itself, not vice versa. Start simple, learn from the ground,
and move step by step.
Discussion
“Schools for all”, “schools for nil”, “schools for some”
Some researchers believe that the solution for any school mishaps
today lies on the use of inclusive education of one kind or another. It is
also felt that inclusive education has a number of roles to play in the
Ethiopian setting; though it may not be considered as an antidote to all
problems. On top of improving educational access for children with
disabilities, it obviously provides opportunities for learners to function in
their social setting, get rooted in their collectivist system, cherish the
collectivist life, meet norms and expectations and thereby experience
healthy psychosocial development. Inclusive education is, then, a
method of creating communities, schools, and societies free from
discrimination. Because inclusive education by nature includes the
participation of all children and focuses specifically on the inclusion of
marginalized children, it is the best way to ensure „education for all‟
children (Vietnam Education Team, 2007). In a country like Ethiopia
where child right violations are rampant, inclusive practices can also
set exemplary practice in teaching the society about child rights.
The analysis conducted so far has shown, however, that the frame
factors (contexts) of inclusive education appear to play conflicting roles
in the education of children with disabilities. While the formal context
promises to promote educational access and sets out legal and policy
framework to this end, the informal set up is so much of a deterrent
than a catalyst scaffolding the long way to „„education for all‟‟. The
envisaged „education for all‟ that is enshrined in the legislative and
policy issues in Ethiopia is imposed externally rather than coming up
from within unlike in western countries. A move towards inclusive
education in the western nations has made significant strides. The
objective and subjective realities were in favor of inclusive practices
during it introduction. Communities, practitioners, researchers and
activists appreciated the concerns, sufficiently gave their thoughts on
the way forward, seriously debated on the issue through media, and
joined by political parties that may bid election with these ideas, gave
them legislative and policy framework and finally tabled them for
parliamentary approval. The moment these ideas obtained a legal
backing, they were put into effect in no time.
Although there is no question about the importance of „education for all‟

in Ethiopia, the way it is conceived appears to take a top-down
approach and would definitely require long years from now before it
makes sense informing the educational practice. Measures taken so far
are definitely critical to the inclusive practice. Conspicuous tasks to be
performed regarding the inclusive education system for children with
disabilities in Ethiopia would include, among others, making education
of children with special needs at the center stage in the five years
national growth and transformation plan, committing oneself to MDG
and EFA goals formally instituting „education for all‟ in the legal and
policy frameworks of the country, developing tools for implementation
(strategies and programs), and some efforts at incorporating of the
issue of inclusive education in different concurrent programs,
strategies, and activities at different levels (pre-primary, primary,
secondary, and tertiary) of education.
However, the question is if the talk about „education for all‟ takes nearly
a span of two decades before it gets the right shape on paper, then
how much would it take to restructure the school set up so that it is
characteristically inclusive? After all, inclusive education requires the
educational environment to be adjusted to meet the needs of all
learners regardless of poverty, gender, ethnic background, language,
disabilities and impairment (UNESCO 2000), through inclusive
practices in learning, cultures and communities and reducing exclusion
within and from education (UNESCO 2001), and changing/modifying
the contents, approaches, structures and strategies with a common
vision to cover all children of the appropriate age range and a
conviction that it is the responsibility of the regular system to educate
all children (UNESCO, 2006).
We may need to check what is on the ground before speculating on the

future of inclusion in Ethiopia.
As already presented in the analysis section, the enrollment figure of

children with disabilities is alarmingly small possibly because of the
informal (beliefs and values) contexts (in the families and communities)
that structure the past and present life conditions of the children with
disabilities. There are lots of misconceptions about disability in the
families and communities that keep children away from schools. Some
of these children may manage to escape from dark to light by joining
schools. But, according to a social assessment survey conducted a few
of years ago (Jennings, et al., 2011), the main social blockages to
accessing education for children with disabilities include lack of
readiness and support by schools (finance, teaching, materials and
facilities as well as human support) and services (Jennings, et al.,
2011). The door of the school may be open but the
compound/environment is not receptive in many cases. The physical
layouts do not support mobility of children with visual impairments;
children with physical disabilities face tough time walking through the
usually bumpy way to classrooms, or children with hearing problems
are expected to get into classroom listening to the ringing school bell.
One can imagine why so many children are actually left behind from
the educational system that seems to make an erroneous assumption
that there is only one „typical‟, „normal‟ child in the school working in the
science laboratories, sport fields, art classes etc.
Curriculum materials, books, and classroom set up do not send any

signal that there are children in the classroom who think differently,
read and write in ways other than paper-and-pencil, hear with seeing
than with ears, and speak without tongues… sitting arrangements fail
to allow adequate/ appropriate child-teacher and child-child interactions
and support, teaching strategies dominantly lecture-based,
individualized teaching not in picture at all, rigid lessons plans used
across the board. This is mainly because the required resources are
not in place and the main actors (teachers and administrators) are not
sufficiently trained except for attending some orientation programs or

short-term trainings. Even the teacher training institutions are not well
equipped with resources and experts that help in preparing qualified
special educators with skills to facilitate the education of children with
disabilities.
Teachers had negative attitude towards the inclusion of children with

special needs and they did not welcome them in many cases. Even
worse, regular teachers discriminated not only children with special
needs but also special needs education teachers. In annexed special
units, special needs education teachers were found feeling alienated
because regular teachers considered them as having special
needs/disabilities themselves (cited in Belay et al., 2004). Although
some teachers are with a helping and supporting hand, the attitudes of
peers are not encouraging to an extent that it affects the psychological
make-up of the children with disabilities. Children with disabilities
experience discrimination even by their own siblings (source). There is
a lack of awareness among teachers that so many young children
with special needs enrolled often repeat and dropout, if they do not
receive sufficient support (cited in ESDP-III).
Thus, one wonders whether the schools in Ethiopia are for all.
Undeniably, they are not at least for those with special needs of one
kind or another. In fact, all children are expected to adjust to the school
rather than the school adjusting to the needs of the learners. Schools
and teachers find it difficult to accommodate students with special
needs, and instead compel them to adapt to the school, classroom,
and peers. If schools are not addressing the learners, then it is like
„Schools for Nil‟ because they do not target meeting the needs of any
specific group. The traditional curriculum contents, teaching-learning
process, and schooling that has depended to a large extent on
normative child development and the so-called typical child philosophy
is an abstract, unrealistic, and non-existent in this dynamic, diverse,
and pluralistic world of the postmodern era. The classroom has to be
adaptive rather than prescriptive. If it fails to meet the students, then
students fail to meet it. The results are school dropouts, attrition, and
failure (Lewis 2009); wastage of resources in all the cases. It still sends
a bad message for those looking forward to joining schools; that
“education is not for you!” It is not uncommon to hear children with
special needs complain the unsuitability of the school system for their
unique needs.
In fact, it can be noted from ESDP IV that the Ministry of Education is

aware of the problems above. In fact, the special needs education
section of ESDP IV was designed to address the above problems that
were evident in the ESDP III phase. The special needs education
section of this ESDP IV envisages focusing on improving enrollment
(47,461 to 1,739,000), teachers‟ professionalism (by 25%), and
institutional capacity of schools in addressing the academic and social
needs of children with special needs (by 25%) all from 2009/10 to
2014/15. Looking into accomplishments on the ground so far and the
few months remaining ahead one can easily tell how unrealistic these
targets are as the principle of „education for all‟ itself. This is but an
indication that „education for all‟ is seeking to unfold itself in a context
that is entangled with challenges of different colors. Particularly evident
in present day Ethiopia is the fact that the quality of the regular
education in itself is under siege. The access, equity and relevance of
primary education, which were in a state of infancy barely 20 years
ago, have shown remarkable changes over the last years, reflecting a
genuine commitment to transform a traditionally elitist system to one
that provides for all. Yet schooling indicators are still poor, and below
regional averages (Ethiopia ranked 27th out of 28 countries) in terms of
the African EFA development index (UNESCO, 2010).
What should then be the future of education of children with

disabilities? It is of paramount importance to diversify the modalities for
reaching out these children with the prime need to connect them to
some kind of education. One approach can be the inclusive education
modality that is envisaged to happen in the ESDP IV. Special schools,
special classes in regular schools, special needs education through
alternative basic education programs can be conducted complementing

the inclusive school practices. Other more innovative modalities can be
worked out along these modalities. A case in point is the experience of
Bahir Dar of having division of labor among regular schools in hosting
children with disabilities because it may not be feasible for a single
school to accommodate highly diverse student population (Jennings, et
al., 2011).
Given that there is hardly a single school in Ethiopia today practicing

inclusive education in the real sense of it, there appears to be a need
to set out a model inclusive school as a demonstration site for others to
learn from in very practical terms. Such a school needs to put in place
inclusive practices that are more innovative, culturally sensitive, cost-
effective, and community-resource based. Gradually refining
experiences in from such school, then it can be scaled up to regionally
(at least setting one model in each school).
Last, there has to be a mechanism to attract children to schools,

remain in schools for a meaningful period of time, and make important
progress in the process withstanding the various challenges in the
process. For example, ensuring employment for this group once they
get basic education will reverse all the oddities that are culturally
connected with disabilities to force parents hide their children at home.

An exception could be Dil Betigil Primary school in Addis Ababa. As it was reported in the Ethiopian
Special Needs Education Professionals Association’s Sixth Annual Conference, the school has achieved a
lot and it is a flagship in realizing inclusive education at least in Addis Ababa. It has been reported that
the achievements registered in this specific school has been led by the principal of the school out of his
willingness and passion in making his school accessible to all children with the help of other
stakeholders. For instance, the principal of the school has forged contacts with different donors and
NGOs and made the school compound accessible to wheelchair user students and blind students.
Teacher and hearing students, for example, learned sign language to help children hearing impairment
and included deaf students in the school. It appears that willing school leaders, teachers and students
can create a difference and many children with special needs can be included in the regular schools. Dil
Betgile has been visited by several schools and it is now serving as a center of excellence for experience
sharing and a model for inclusive education practice.
Conclusions
There are legal, policy, and program provisions supporting „education

for all‟ in Ethiopia. However, socio-cultural, economic and practical
problems appear to limit the provision of special needs/ inclusive
education in Ethiopia. Hence, enrollment of children with special needs
is alarmingly low in Ethiopia. The quality of educational services
provided to those enrolled is still worrisome; possibly making them
rather vulnerable to lots of problems. Weighed against this experience,
„education of children for all‟ is only a policy rhetoric in sharp contrast to
the reality on the ground that seems to portray nearly an „education for
nil‟ because of negligible level of enrollment, on the one hand, and the
invisibility of those enrolled, on the other hand. Experience and
research in the field fail to provide evidences about existence of
inclusion in the proper sense. Inclusive education of children with
special needs may not even happen in the time ahead unless inclusive
practices are envisaged within the framework of the Ethiopian reality.
Implications
Improving GER rate alone would hardly ensure “Education for all” in
Ethiopia for 97% of children with disabilities are still out of school.
Inclusive education as it is envisaged today is unlikely to ensure the
needs of children because it is resource intensive in a resource scarce
country. A top-down approach to universal educational inclusion for
children with disabilities is likely to be unrealistic, alien, prescriptive,
instructive, less relevant, and less innovative. In fact, there is a need to
tame ambition from „education for all‟ to „education to some‟, employ all
available modalities of educating children with special needs, start up a
local model school for inclusion that is less resource-intensive,
culturally sensitive, capitalizes more on community resources than
donations, and gradually scale up these practices; and employ a
bottom up approach. This school can also become a center of training
trainers, research, and innovation of local technologies for educating
these children.
References
Abate Lakew (2001). Teachers Attitude towards Inclusion of Children

with Disabilities into Regular Schools: The Case of Some
Selected Schools in Addis Ababa. Unpublished MA Thesis,
Addis Ababa University.
Abebe Gebreselassie (2001). Attitudes of Teachers and Students

Regarding. The Integration of Hearing Impaired Students into
Regular Classes. Unpublished MA Thesis. Addis Ababa
University.
Abebe Yehualawork, Pirttimaa, R. and Saloviita, T. (2015). Inclusion of

students with disabilities in formal vocational education
programs in Ethiopia. International Journal of Special
Education, 30 (2), 1-10.
ACPF (2011). Children with Disabilities in Ethiopia: The Hidden

Reality. Addis Ababa: The African Child Policy Forum.
ACRWC (1999). African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the

Child. OAU Doc.
Ainscow, M. (1994). Towards inclusive schooling. British Journal of

Special Education, 24, (1), 24-54.
Ainscow, M., Booth, T., Dyson, A., Farrell, P., Frankham, J.,
Gallannaugh, F., Howes, A., and Smith.R. (2006). Improving
Schools, Developing Inclusion. London: Routledge.
Alemayehu Tefera (2004). Assessing the Status, Problems, and

Prospectus of Disabled Business Women in Ethiopia. A
welcome speech delivered in the workshop organized. Annexed
in the proceeding of the workshop.
Anto Arkato (2004). The Educational Challenges of Integrated Blind

Students: The Case of Sodo Comprehensive High School.
Unpublished MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University.
Armstrong, D., Armstrong, A. C. and Spandagou, I. (2011). Inclusion:

by choice or by chance? International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 15 (1), 29-39.
Asrat Dagnew (2013). Factors Affecting the Implementation of

Inclusive Education in Primary Schools of Bahir Dar Town
Administration. Education Research Journal, 3, (3), 59- 6.
Ayalew Shibeshi (1996). School Discipline and Corporal Punishment in

Ethiopian Schools. In proceedings of Research Papers on the
Situation of Children and Adolescents in Ethiopia, Addis Ababa
University.
Balcha G. (1998). Children and Corporal Punishment in Jimma: The

Attitude and Practices of Patents. Ethiopian Journal of Health
Sciences, 8. (2), 73-81.
Barton, L. (1993).The struggle for citizenship: the case of disabled

people. Disability, Handicap and Society, 8, (3), 235- 248.
Befekadu Tolera and Tsegaye Dadda (1997). Procedural Manual for

the Police Working in Child Protection Unit. Region 14 Police
Commission, Forum for Street Children and Radda Barnen-
Sweden, Addis Ababa.
Belay Hagos and Dessalegn Chalchisa (1999). Guidance and

Counseling Skills for Field Practitioners. FSCE, Child
Development Center, Addis Ababa.
Belay Hagos et al. (2001). Local Perceptions of Children’s Needs and

Rights in North Wollo of Ethiopia. ANPPCAN- Ethiopian Chapter
in Collaboration with Save the Children-Denmark, Addis Ababa.
Belay Tefera (2007). Research and innovation towards a

demonstration project in inclusive education: Baseline
assessment of the pilot school for practicing inclusive education
in Ethiopia. In Tirussew Tefera and Alemayehu Teklemariam
(eds.), Proceedings of an International Conference on
inclusive Education and competence building in special
needs education, PP. 28-56. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Belay Tefera, Daniel Desta and Teka Zewdie (2004). Inclusive

education for children with special needs: The Ethiopian
experience. A Research report. Department of Psychology,
College of Education, Addis Ababa University.
Biher Yonas (2009). Problems associated with violence against women

with disabilities-analytical study: The case of members of
Ethiopian with disabilities National Association in Addis Ababa.
Unpublished MA Thesis, Department of Special Needs
Education, Addis Ababa University.
Butler, R. and Bowlby, S. (1997). Bodies and spaces: an exploration of

disabled people's experiences of public space, environment and
planning development. Society and Space, 15 (4), 379-504.
Carson, G. (2009). The Social Mode of Disability. Scottish Accessible

Information Forum. Accessed on 23 May 2015.
Chernet Takele (2007). Raising a Child with Intellectual Disabilities in

Ethiopia: What Do Parents Say? Paper Accepted for
Presentation at Refereed Conference of the American
Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Corman, N. (2014). Barriers to inclusive practices, strategic

responses, and individual outcomes. Paper presented in
Disability Discussion Form, Chermalia.
CSA, Central Statistics Authority (2008). Summary and Statistical

Report of the 2007 Population and Housing Census. FDRE
Population Census Commission. Addis Ababa.
Csie, G (2002). Making Special Education Inclusive: from Research

to Practice. London: David Fulton Publishers.
Dagnachew Abebe (2010). Knowledge, attitude and classroom

practices of regular class teachers in including students with
intellectual disability in regular classes of primary schools in
Addis Ababa. Unpublished MA thesis, Special Needs Education,
Daniel Tefera and Gobena Daniel (1998). A Study of Child Abuse and
Neglect in Addis Ababa Elementary Schools. Proceedings of the
national workshop on studies of varies issues concerning
children and families in Ethiopia 4-5 August 1998, Addis Ababa.
Dawit Tessentu (2014). Exploring academic barriers to students with

disabilities at Addis Ababa main campus. Unpublished MA
Thesis, School of Social work, Addis Ababa University.
Demeke Gessesse (2007). History of early childhood education in

Ethiopia. In Belay Tefera and Abebaw Minaye (eds). Child
rights, childhood education and the use of mother tongue in
schools: A voyage to reconstructing the Ethiopian child.
Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference of the
Ethiopian Psychologists‟ Association.
Demisew Abebe (2014). Inclusive Education Practices of Some

Primary Schools in Yeka Sub City. Unpublished MA Thesis,
Department of Special Needs Education, Addis Ababa
University.
Desalegn T/Giorgis (2006). Major Academic Problems of Visually

Impaired Students in Inclusive Classrooms of Two Selected
Preparatory Schools of Addis Ababa. Unpublished MA Thesis,
Desalegn Abebe (2007). Educational Problems of Blind Students: The

Case of Menilik II and Negus Teklehaymanot Regular Primary
Schools. Unpublished MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University.
EMIS, Education Management Information Systems (2000). Education

Statistics Annual Abstract 1992 E.C. (1999-2000). Ministry of
Education, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
EMIS, Education Management Information Systems (2013). Education

Statistics Annual Abstract 2005 E.C. (2012-2013). Ministry of
Education, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
ENDAN, Ethiopian National Disability Action Network (2010). Research

on Standard Disability Survey Tools and Measurement. Addis
Ababa.
ESDP, Education Sector Development Program III (ESDP III),

2005/2006 – 2010/2011, Program Action Plan. Ministry of
Education, Ethiopia.
Etenesh Amanu (2000). The Role of Teachers in the Implementation of

Inclusive Education. Unpublished MA Thesis, Addis Ababa
University.
Fiji, N. (2006). Promoting Inclusive Education to Achieve Quality

Education for All Implementing the Forum Basic Education
Action Plan.
Gezahegne Beyene and Yinebeb Tizazu (2010). Attitudes of Teachers

towards Inclusive Education. The Ethiopia Ethiopian Journal
of Education and Sciences, 6 (1), 89-96.
Hiwot Abebe (2011). The right to education of children with intellectual

disability and its implementation in Addis Ababa. Unpublished
MA Thesis. Faculty of Law, Addis Ababa University.
Hornby, G. (2012). Inclusive education for children with Special

educational needs: a critique of Policy and practice in New
Zealand. Journal of International and Comparative
Education, 1 (1), 52-60.
Jennings, et al. (2011). Social Assessment for Education Sector.

Ethiopia department for social development. (ed.)
JICA and IDCJ, Japan International Cooperation Agency Planning and

Evaluation Department and International Development Center of
Japan. (2012). Basic Education Sector Analysis Report,
Ethiopia. Education for children with disabilities and Inclusive
Education.
JICA, Japan International Cooperation Agency Planning and

Evaluation Department (2002). Country Profile on Disability:
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia.
Johnsen, B. (2001). Curricula for the Plurality of Individual Learning

Needs. In Berit H. Johnsen and Miriam D. Skjorten (Edrs.),
Special Needs Education: An Introduction, PP.255-304.
Kassie Shifere Bishaw (2013). Inclusive Teaching Involving Visually

Impaired Students In English Language Teaching (ELT)
Settings. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Department of English,
Andhra University, Viskhapatnam, India.
Lewis, I. (2009). Reaching the marginalized: Education for Disabled

People in Ethiopia and Rwanda. Paper commissioned for the
EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010, UNESCO.
Mekdes Gebretensay (2007). Attitude of Parents on the Inclusion of

Children with Mental Retardation: The Case of Two Centers in
Addis Ababa. Unpublished MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University,
School of Graduate Studies.
Mercer K. (1970). Developing Inclusive Schools. University of

Cambridge, Institute of Education, Monograph, 31, 3.
Ministry of Education (1994). The new Education and Training Policy of

Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Ministry of Education (2007). Directory of Special needs education

Services, equipment and materials. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Ministry of Education (2012). Special Needs Education program

strategy: Emphasizing inclusive education to meet the UPE and
EFA goals. Federal Ministry of Education, Addis Ababa.
Ministry of Education (2001/2). Educational Statistics Annual Abstract.

Addis Ababa.
Ministry of Education (2006). Special Needs Education Program

Strategy Emphasizing Inclusive Education to Meet the UPEC
and EFA Goals. Ministry of Education, Addis Ababa.
Ministry of Education (2010). Education Sector Development Plan

(ESDP) – IV Monitoring Report.
Minsistry of Finance and Economic Development (2010). National

Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP) of Ethiopia (2010/11 -
2014-15): Ministry of Finance and Economic Development
(MoFED), Addis Ababa.
Mohammedhayat Ibrahim (2013). Status of Inclusive Education of

Hearing Impaired Students in Primary Schools: The case of
Yekatit 23 Special Primary School and Mekanissa School for the
Deaf in Addis Ababa. Unpublished MA Thesis. Institute of
Educational Research, Addis Ababa University.
Mont, D. (2007). Measuring Disability Prevalence. Social Policy

Discussion Paper No 0706. World Bank.
Oswald, L. and Forlin, L. (2016). Supporting the support system of

inclusive education. Colloquium of Inclusion for justice, Atbara,
Unison.
Popping K, Maloney, S. (2005). The Rout Ledge/ Flamer Reader in

Inclusive Education. London: Routledge.
SADPD, Secretariat of the African Decade of Persons with Disabilities

(2010). Baseline Study On the Status of Persons with
Disabilities and the Influence of the African Decade
Pronouncement in Ethiopia. Final REPORT.
Savollainen, H. (1995). Special Education and Rehabilitation. IER

Flambeau, 3, 2.
Shimelis Tefera (2002). The Local School for All: The Case of Kechene
Debreselam Elementary and Junior High School In Its Context
In Addis Ababa. Unpublished MA thesis. Department of Special
Needs Education, University of Oslo.
Simon, T. (2003). Libraries and Information Services For Visually

Impaired Students In Ethiopian Higher Education Institutions: A
Case Of Addis Ababa University. Addis Ababa University
Library, Reference Department.
Solia, E. and Keller, F. (2015). Inclusion beyond social justice:

Knowing what works well. Colloquim of Inclusion for justice,
Atbara, Unison.
Tefera Tirago (2006). Prospects and Problems of the Implementation

of Policies on Special Needs in Ethiopia: The Case of SNNPR.
Unpublished MA Thesis. Addis Ababa University, School of
Graduate Studies.
Tesfaye Alemu (2005). The Attitude of Special and Regular Class

Teachers Towards the Inclusion of Individuals with Mental
Retardation. Unpublished MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University,
School of Graduate Studies.
Thomas, G. and Feiler, A. (1988). Planning for Special Needs: A Whole

School Approach. T.J. Press Ltd: Padstow, Cornwall.
Tilahun Achaw Messaria (2002). The schooling situation of hearing

impaired pupils in four regular schools of Bahirdar and
Debretabor, Addis Ababa University.
Tirusew Teferra (2005). Disability in Ethiopia: Issues, Insights and

Implications. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University Printing
Press.
Tirusew Teferra and Alemayehu Teklemariam (2007). Including the

excluded: Integrating disability into the EFA Fast Track Initiative
processes and National Education Plans in Ethiopia. London:
World Vision.
Tirusew Teferra (1999). Inclusion of Children with Disability in Regular

Schools Challenge and Opportunities. The Ethiopian Journal
Education, 11 (1), 6-9.
Tirusew Teferra (2006). Overview Of The Development Of Inclusive

Education In The Last Fifteen Years In Ethiopia‟.In Savolainen,
H, Matero, M and Kokkala, H (eds), When All Means All:
Experiences in Three African Countries with EFA and Children
with Disabilities, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, Helsinki.
Tirusew Teferra et al. (1995). Baseline Survey on Disabilities in

Ethiopia. Commercial Printing Press: Addis Ababa.
Tirusew Teferra (2001). Gender and Disability in Ethiopia. The

Ethiopian Journal of Development Research, 23, 1: 79-109.
Tirussew Teferra, Alemayehu Teklemariam, Belay Hagos , Fantahun A

dmas., Moges Abey, Sewalem Tsega, Tilahun Achaw, and
Yirgashewa Bekele (2013). Manual for Employability of Persons
with Disabilities in Ethiopia. Department of Special needs
education: AAU.
Tomlinson, S. (1982). A Sociology of Special Education. London:

Routledge and Kegan Paul.
UN (1975). Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons, UN.
UN (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UN.

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), UN Convention on

the Rights of the Child. New Zealand.
UNESCO (1990). World Declaration on Education for All: Meeting

Basic Learning Needs. Adopted by the World conference on
education for All. Jomtien, Thailand, 5-9 march 1990. Accessed
http://www.unescobkk.org/
UNESCO (1994). Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on

Special Needs Education, Salamanca.
UNESCO (2000). The Open File on Inclusive Education Support

Materials for Managers and Administrators.
(www.unesdoc.unesco.org).
UNESCO (2001). Including the Excluded: Meeting diversity in

Education – Example from Uganda. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO (2003). Overcoming Exclusion through Inclusive Approaches

in Education: A Challenge and a Vision. Conceptual paper.
UNESCO (2006). Education for All Monitoring Report 2007. Strong

Foundations: Early Childhood Care and Education. Paris:
UNESCO.
UNESCO (2007). Education and Inclusive Education: Priority Issues for

Inclusive Quality Education in Eastern and Western Sub-
Saharan Africa. Nairobi, Kenya, 23 – 27.
UNESCO (2010). Reaching the Marginalized. Oxford University Press.

UNESCO.
Vietnam Education Team (2007). Inclusive Education for Children with

Disabilities: Catholic Relief Services.
Wondwossen Kebede (2014). Exploring the problems of Inclusive

Education on the Psycho-Social Development and Academic
Achievement of Deaf Students. The Case of Mekanisa School
for the Deaf. Unpublished MA Thesis. School of Social Work,
World Bank and World Health Organization (2011). World Report on

Disability. Washington, D. C.
World Health Organization (2002). Towards a Common Language for

Functioning, Disability and Health the International Classification
of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).
WHO/EIP/GPE/CAS/01.3 Geneva.
World Vision (2007). Education‟s Missing Millions. Including Disabled

Children in Education through Efa/Fti Processes and National
Sector Plans. Main Report of Study Findings. World Vision
International.

Education of Children With Special Needs in Ethiopia: Analysis of The Rhetoric of Education For All and The Reality On The Ground

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Education of Children With Special Needs in Ethiopia: Analysis of The Rhetoric of Education For All and The Reality On The Ground

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Education of Children With Special Needs in Ethiopia: Analysis of The Rhetoric of Education For All and The Reality On The Ground

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Ethiopian Journal of Education Vol. XXXV No.

Education of Children with Special Needs in Ethiopia: Analysis of the

The Ethiopian government has registered a prodigious stride in

Of course, the education of children with special needs has been

This special educational provision, though inadequate in many ways,

This opened a way for integration to gradually take a center stage.

Gathering momentum from these different sources, such critiques

This newly emerging paradigm is premised on Universal Declaration of

At the core of inclusive education is, therefore, the fundamental human

It is described at the same time as the most important and

strategies, resource use and partnerships with their communities.

 socio-cultural contexts of disability in Ethiopia in general and

Approaches and Methods

Approach: This study is framed based on the changed and broader

According to the bio-psychosocial model, disability is the result of

difficulties at school are, in the same way, largely results of

Methods: This study is based on review of documents and secondary

Assessment Communication Frame factors

Strategies, Methods, Care

Figure 1: A Curriculum Relation Mode (Johnsen, 2001, p.260)

This section presents analysis of contexts, practices (nature,

Socio-cultural contexts of disabilities in Ethiopia

Persons with disabilities in Ethiopia: disability in hiding

A serious concern in Ethiopia is that the extent and situation of

All the estimates so far are widely believed to significantly

million children, adults and elderly persons are likely to be with

Unlike other contexts, disabilities in Africa is basically traced a lot more

In as much as persons with disabilities are not visible statistically, they

Socio-cultural contexts of children with special needs: Vulnerable

The prevalence and situation of children with special needs is even

Vulnerability as a child in Ethiopia: Being a child and with disability in

Regional disparities: As Ethiopia is a nation with diversity, the different

regions (particularly Oromia, Amhara, SNNP, and Tigray). In Gambella

Urban–rural divide: Urban children are better off in accessing education.

Low economic background: Children with disabilities are, in most cases,

Gender: Female children are more overburdened than their male

disabilities, particularly with hearing and speech impairments, remain in

Generally, children with special needs who are: females, from

The Constitution: Ethiopia has already signed the UN Convention on

Ethiopia‟s Constitution states that all international agreements

and emphasizes the need to allocate available resources and provide

Policy perspective: As an instrument for effecting the Constitution,

Strategy for inclusive education: To reduce the existing gap and to

removing these barriers in early education in particular and in

Education Sector Development Programs (ESDP): Line ministries of

Education Sector Development Program IV (ESDP-IV) generally

National Development Plans: The five year (2010/11 – 2014/15)

As the priority issues of education strategies, the GTP states the

In general, favorable policy and legal environments are in place for

Education of children with special needs: Reality of schools

In this section, by way of analyzing how limited progress is made in

A glimpse at the nature of education of children with special needs

In Ethiopia, the education of children with special needs has a long

to establish enough separate special education school initiatives to

With the realization of the difficulties associated with these schools, on

A more recent approach to the education of children with disabilities that

Enrollment of pupils with special needs

for all children can be considered as an unforgivable scandal of the

Available literature and education statistics annual abstracts in Ethiopia