Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Anna Hata, Joko Yuwono Ruwiyati Purwana, Shinsaku Nomura Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education This report was prepared by: Anna Hata, Joko Yuwono, Ruwiyati Purwana, and Shinsaku Nomura. This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank, supported by funding from the Australian Government. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions © 2021 The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org Some rights reserved The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for non-commercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. All queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Contact Information The authors can be contacted at snomura@worldbank.org. Photo Credit Cover Photo: Sony Herdiana / Shutterstock.com Photo Page 4: Ade Teguh Wijayanto / Shutterstock.com Photo Page 10-11: Spotters_Studio / Shutterstock.com Photo Page 21: Freepik Photo Page 23: Freepik Photo Page 30: Envato Table of Contents Abbreviations 2 Acknowledgement 3 Executive Summary 4 1 Introduction 10 2 Overview of Inclusive Education in Indonesia 12 2.1 Policy and Regulatory framework 12 2.2 Current situation related to IE 14 3 Challenges for Inclusive Education in Indonesia 17 3.1 IE service provision – infrastructure and learning materials 17 3.2 Issues of service provision - practice 19 3.2.1 Issues with disability identification 19 3.2.2 Issues with teacher training 20 3.2.3 Teachers and teaching practices 22 3.3 Demand-side issues: communities and social perceptions 24 3.4 Issues related to administration and governance 25 3.4.1 Budget allocation 25 3.4.2 Supervision and school support 26 3.2.3 Coordination 27 4 International Good Practices and Models of IE 28 4.1 Models of IE policies and Funding Mechanisms 28 4.2 Designing Enhanced Networks and Coordination Mechanisms in the Multi-Track Approach 31 4.3 Experiences from Other Countries related to IE during the COVID-19 pandemic 32 5 Recommendations 33 5.1 Increasing the access and equity of IE 33 5.2 Enhancing the quality of teaching and learning in inclusive schools 35 5.3 Improving the governance and the ecosystem of service delivery 37 Annex 1: References 40 Annex 2: Summary of Key Indonesian Policies Reviewed 44 Annex 3: Inclusive Education Guides and Evaluation Approaches 45 Annex 4: International Good Practices – UK 46 Annex 5: International Good Practices – Vietnam 47 2 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Abbreviations AT Assistive Technology BOS School Operational Assistance Fund (Bantuan Operasional Sekolah) CFM Child Functioning Module Dapodik Basic Education Data (Data Pokok Pendidikan) DFAT Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade DG Directorate General DSU Disability Service Unit EMIS Educational Management Information System FGD Focus group discussion FPMI Inclusive Madrasah Educator Forum (Forum Pendidik Madrasah Inklusi) GoI Government of Indonesia GTK Dikmen Diksus The Directorate of Teachers and Education Personnel of Secondary Education and Special Education (Direktorat Guru dan Tenaga Kependidikan, Pendidikan Menengah dan Pendidikan Khusus) IE Inclusive Education IM Inclusive Madrasah INOVASI Innovation for Indonesia’s School Children (Inovasi untuk Anak Sekolah Indonesia) KemenkoPMK Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Culture Affairs (Kementerian Koordinator Bidang Pembangunan Manusia dan Kebudayaan) MDT Multidisciplinary Team MoECRT Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology MOET Ministry of Education and Training (Vietnam) MoF Ministry of Finance MoH Ministry of Health MoHA Ministry of Home Affairs MoRA Ministry of Religious Affairs MoSA Ministry of Social Affairs NGO Non-Governmental Organization OPD Organization of Persons with Disabilities PAUD Early childhood education and development (Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini) PBS Student Learning Profile (Profil Belajar Siswa) Permendiknas Regulation of the Ministry of National Education PMPK The Directorate of Community Education and Special Education (Direktorat Pendidikan Masyarakat dan Pendidikan Khusus) PN Policy Note P4TK TKPLB The Center for Empowerment and Training for Teachers and Education Personnel in Kindergarten and Special Needs Education (Pusat Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan, Taman Kanak-Kanak dan Pendidikan Luar Biasa) REB Rwanda Education Board RR Resource Room SD Primary school (Sekolah Dasar) SDG Sustainable Development Goals SMA Senior secondary school (Sekolah Menengah Atas) SMK Vocational school (Sekolah Menengah Kejuruan) SMP Junior secondary school (Sekolah Menengah Pertama) SUSENAS National Social-Economic Household Survey (Survey Sosial Ekonomi Nasional) UDL Universal Design for Learning UNCRPD The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities UNESCO United Nations Education, Scientific and Culture Organization UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 3 Acknowledgement T his report was written by Anna Hata (Consultant), Joko Yuwono (Consultant), Ruwiyati Purwana (Senior Education Specialist), and Shinsaku Nomura (Senior Economist) from the Education Practice, East Asia and Pacific Region (HEAED). The authors are grateful for overall guidance provided by Tobias Linden (Practice Manager, HEAED), and the report also benefited from inputs, contributions, and comments from the wider Indonesia team working on education, social protection, and health, nutrition and population. The team appreciates Sylvia Njotomihardjo for the operational support to the team and Sheila Town for editorial support. The study benefited immensely from a series of discussions and consultations with government officials from the Directorate of Community Education and Special Education (PMPK) of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology (MoECRT). It also benefited from stakeholder workshops and focus group discussions, including participants from schools, district and provincial educational offices, and parents and students. The authors appreciate the discussions and written feedback received consultation workshops of the preliminary findings, received from the Government of Indonesia including MoECRT, the Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA), and provincial and district offices of education; development partners including the Government of Australia, UNICEF, INOVASI, the Tanoto Foundation, and Save The Children and representatives of civil society and academia including Yayasan Wahana Inklusif Indonesia and Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta (UNS). This work received support from the Australia-World Bank Indonesia Partnership (ABIP), which is financed by the Australian Government through the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT). The findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or of the countries they represent. 4 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Executive Summary T he objective of this Policy Note (PN) is to review governance and government programs related Indonesia’s Inclusive Education (IE) policies to IE. It also draws upon an extensive review of and regulations, to assess service delivery, and the regulatory framework and studies on current to discuss potential gaps in policy implementation, progress and challenges of IE implementation with dedicated attention to children with disabilities. and includes a review of international literature to This PN responds to the urgent request of the compare global and Indonesian practices. Government of Indonesia (GoI) for an assessment of service delivery of IE focusing on children with This PN provides policy recommendations based disabilities, including actionable recommendations to on a review of policy frameworks and IE practices support GoI in reaching its goal of strengthening the in Indonesia, international good practices, and implementation of IE by 2024, as envisioned in the beneficiary and stakeholder feedback obtained Master Plan on National Development of Inclusive through a series of FGDs with MoECRT, provincial Education 2020-2024 by the Ministry of Education, and city/district education offices, school principals Culture, Research and Technology (MoECRT). and teachers from inclusive and special schools, school committees, parents and students with and This study used focus group discussions (FGDs) to without disabilities. While the assessment focuses understand stakeholder perspectives in the delivery on the supply-side, demand-side issues, including of IE, with special attention to teacher competency, household and community engagement, are also facilities/school environment, administration/ covered as part of the broader understanding of IE. Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 5 It is noted also that the COVID-19 pandemic is issues, and limited administrative capacity to assumed to have exacerbated learning inequalities, implement the policies. There is a great need for especially for learners with disabilities who may face additional teacher and staff training, improved the additional barrier of inaccessible learning content, administrative capacity, increased budgets and better and recommendations related to this are included. data on children with disabilities. Improved cross sectoral coordination is also critical to address these GoI has set a clear legal framework for IE, issues. however, plans and resources are not in place to implement it. A regulatory framework is necessary to Implementation gaps arise partly from assure the rights of all children to access education, the division of labor, whereby the central however implementation of this is not currently ministry sets the policy and regulations, while sufficient to bring children with disabilities to schools implementation is the responsibility of local and provide quality learning for them. The Indonesian governments. Local governments are responsible for education system is still at an early stage in the developing regional regulations, designating inclusive development and delivery of robust IE programs. schools, organizing training for teachers in inclusive schools and adjusting infrastructure and financing IE Almost 30 percent of children with disabilities do programs. The MoEC Regulation (Permendiknas) No. not have access to education. Among those who 70/2009 stipulates that each sub-district must provide have access to education, the proportion of girls with at least one inclusive school and one teacher, along disabilities is lower than that of boys, accounting for with necessary equipment and tools to accommodate 39 percent of all children with disabilities enrolled in children with disabilities. Law No.8 in 2016 on disability school. The negative correlation between disability also details the obligations of the national and local and attendance in Indonesia is one of the highest governments to assure the right of children with among low- and middle-income countries. Having a 1 disabilities through quality education and reasonable disability reduces school attendance by 61 percent accommodation. for boys and 59 percent for girls. Average years of 2 schooling among children with disabilities is only 4.7 Limited oversight further contributes to years, while the national average is 8.8 years. The 3 the gap between policy and implementation. primary education completion rate is 54 percent for Although Permendiknas No. 70/2009 mandates each children with disabilities, compared to 95 percent sub-district/ city to provide at least one inclusive for children without disabilities.4 This gap is larger school, there is no legal obligation or target for the in secondary education, suggesting children with implementation of inclusive schools in rural areas. disabilities face more barriers as they continue As a result, inclusive schools tend to be concentrated education. 5 in those local governments which have relatively strong implementation capacity and funding – This Policy Note finds that while Indonesia has mostly in Java island. In many local governments, made commendable progress on establishing a there is no guarantee that districts have even one solid policy framework for IE, implementation inclusive school at primary and secondary levels. As of the policies remains a significant challenge discussed in the subsequent sections, this also affects due to a range of issues. IE has not yet been fully teaching and learning quality. Teacher development, mainstreamed into the education system due to curriculum and pedagogy are not yet developed to misaligned responsibility for delivery, budgeting comply with IE policies. The existing curricula do not 1 Mizunoya, Mitra, and Yamasaki (2018) 2 Ibid. 3 UNICEF (2020b). 4 UNICEF and MoEC SDG Monitoring Report 2019, as cited in Afkar, Yarrow, Surbakti, and Cooper (2020). 5 Ibid. 6 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education adequately accommodate different needs of children recommendations in the following three strategic with disabilities. Moreover, lack of understanding of areas: (1) access and equity of IE, (2) quality of what is expected of them and low self-confidence of teaching and learning, and (3) improved governance teachers has led to their unwillingness to teach in and service delivery. See summary table below. inclusive classrooms. This PN contributes to the Master Plan of Inclusive Education by providing specific recommendations that It is recommended that the MoECRT and the elaborate how to deal with multiple challenges in each Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA) develop an strategic area. Note: Short-term actions are intended IE strategy and implementation plan. To feed into for the next 3-5 years and long-term actions are for the strategic plan, this policy note provides policy the next 5-10 years. OVERALL STRATEGIC PLANNING Findings Recommendations • Indonesia has established a solid policy framework • [Short-term] Develop an IE strategy and implementation on IE but implementation of the policies remains a plan which covers the three strategic areas below. challenge. 1 Access and Equity of IE (1) Findings Recommendations Schools and facilities • The number of inclusive schools is insufficient • [Short-term] Promote equitable access to inclusive overall and is highly unequal across different local schools at every level of education in every sub-district/ governments despite the regulations that require city, to ensure each child can fulfil the right to education at least one inclusive school for each level in each in accordance with Permendiknas No. 70/2009 jurisdiction. • [Short-term] Enhance quality of each inclusive school. It • Many inclusive schools do not have facilities to is important to ensure each inclusive school has trained support the implementation of IE. teachers and staff, accessible school infrastructure and adequate resources to provide reasonable accommodation for children with disabilities, in accordance with Regulation No.13 of 2020. Equipment and operating standards • Inclusive schools do not all have adequate • [Short-term] Develop minimum standards for inclusive equipment and materials to accommodate schools, including trained teachers and principals, children with disabilities, and the monitoring and capacity to identify and make reasonable system for them is unclear. accommodation for children with disabilities. • National guidelines on reasonable accommodation • [Long-term] Develop a data system for mapping inclusive for children with disabilities at inclusive schools schools which meet the minimum standards would help and an evaluation system are insufficient, leaving to plan future interventions. many inclusive schools unsupervised. Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 7 Findings Recommendations Disability identification • Proper identification of children with disabilities • [Short-term] Strengthen the identification of children seldom occurs, especially in public inclusive with disabilities and community engagement to schools, and continuous teacher support support it. is required to enable teachers to put their • [Short-term] Train teachers and school principals knowledge into practice. to organize and conduct identification, which is fundamental to providing reasonable accommodation • The identification mechanism requires support for children with disabilities. from special schools and various related professionals, and it is not functioning in many • [Short-term] Introduce a standard tool for the areas due to limited collaboration. assessment of disability. The Profil Belajar Siswa (PBS) or Student Learning Profile, a standardized screening tool for assessment of disability, has been developed and piloted for further rollout. • [Short-term] Develop a collaborative mechanism among schools, clinics, and local governments to provide comprehensive support to children with disabilities. A referral system following screening will be important for children with disabilities. • [Short-term] Explore innovative approaches to identification, such as the use of technology. 2 Quality of Teaching and Learning (1) Findings Recommendations Teachers • Lack of training for teachers in inclusive schools • [Long-term] Compulsory pre-service training on IE for all – both in terms of the quantity and quality - is a teachers will enhance the number and quality of trained major challenge. teachers in schools. • Quality of training also matters, as many teachers • [Short-term] National standards for teacher competency in inclusive schools are not confident about on IE and standardized incentives for inclusive teachers teaching children with disabilities even after are required to make an IE system more sustainable. training. [Good practice - Vietnam: an IE competency framework is used in pre-service training and in-service evaluation of • Principals also have unmet training needs and are professional practice of IE teachers.] often not able to facilitate collaboration between inclusive and special schools. • [Short-term] Strengthen links between in-service teacher training and school-level teacher support, • Lack of a standardized teacher training through mentoring, co-teaching, and peer-to-peer system combined with weak capacity of local networks, harnessing technology governments has led to insufficient training opportunities for inclusive teachers. • [Long-term] Peer support (student-to-student) can enhance academic and social outcomes. 8 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Findings Recommendations Assessments • Regarding assessment of student learning, • [Short-term] Promote the development of an inclusive teachers in inclusive schools face continued assessment mechanism, including strengthening the difficulties due to insufficient teacher support, linkage between initial identification of children with lack of an adequate assessment system for IE, and disabilities and formative (on-going) assessment. lack of a useful guide for inclusive assessments in schools. • Weak or absent school-level assessment mechanisms for children with disabilities impedes teachers from supporting the learning of children with disabilities, and a lack of user-friendly guidelines inhibits them from implementing assessments. Assistive technologies and demand-side issues • Lack of appropriate support such as learning • [Short-term] Introduce assistive technologies to schools materials to meet the learning needs of children to help teachers and children with learning disabilities with disabilities at schools (i.e., specific groups of children with disabilities) for learning support and assessments. • Bullying, discriminatory attitudes and lack of parental knowledge at school and at home. • [Short-term] Following home-based learning in the time of COVID-19 requires different attention for children with • Cost and school accessibility are concerns of disabilities. [Good practice - Rwanda: introducing inclusive parents of children with disabilities. TV and radio programs using the principles of Universal • The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted additional Design for Learning.] issues for children with disabilities, including the difficulty of online learning at home during school closures combined with decreased education and health support. 3 Governance and Service Delivery (1) Findings Recommendations Budgeting for IE • A funding system for IE has not been established • [Short-term] Ensure allocation of adequate budgets and at the national level, and coordination between clarify financial responsibility. different directorates is lacking. • [Short-term] Introduce per capita funding, such as • The absence of a sustainable funding system additional allocations through the School Operational for IE from MoECRT is likely a disincentive for Assistance Fund (BOS: Bantuan Operasional Sekolah) local governments and schools to implement IE. or other resources, for children with disabilities. School principals are not aware of how they can [Good practice - USA: disability identification is linked implement and fund IE. Schools are expected to to adequate funding allocations for each child with a develop IE programs proactively, but there is not disability.] a clear budget allocation system tied to children with disabilities or IE. Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 9 Findings Recommendations Capacity Building for Local Government and School Leadership • [Short-term] Create and strengthen a unit responsible • Many local governments do not have local for management, coordination, disability identification regulations to implement IE although they are and verification, and budget allocation of IE in each required to under current national regulatory local education office to enhance accountability and frameworks. coordination. • Limited accessibility and quality of inclusive • [Short-term] Develop clear guidelines and provide schools is partly attributed to ambiguity of roles training for local governments to support inclusive between provincial and city/district governments. planning, budgeting, and implementation at provincial and district education offices. Capacity building of local • Reliable data on persons with disability is lacking, governments is indispensable to enact the Law No.8 of as is data on educational outcomes and student 2016 for persons with disabilities and the Regulation experiences. No.13 of 2020. • [Short-term] All school principals need to receive awareness training on IE. • [Short-term] Strengthen monitoring and evaluation as well as basic data collection at the national, provincial, district and school levels. Coordination and Partnerships • Weak coordination across the different • [Short-term] Strengthen coordination across (i) different directorates of MoECRT and lack of accountability directorates within MoECRT and (ii) different levels of results in suboptimal implementation of IE. administration, led by the Directorate of PMPK. • Multi-sectoral coordination needs to be • [Short-term] Develop collaboration between MoECRT, developed, especially between education, health MoRA, MoSA, MoH, MoHA, KemenkoPMK, Organizations and social service sectors. of Persons with Disabilities (OPDs), NGOs and development partners. • [Long-term] Foster school-to-school partnerships to improve the quality of IE. [Good practice - UK: exchange knowledge and experience among IE teachers and principals to resolve IE issues.] • [Long-term] Strengthen coordination and communications with communities. • [Short-term] Establish and strengthen Disability Service Units (DSUs) in each district education office, as a key unit to promote stakeholder engagement. [Good practice – Indonesia, Solo city: DSUs play an important role in strengthening coordination for successful implementation of IE]. 10 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 1. Introduction I nclusive Education (IE) plays an important role in addressing the issue of participation of all learners, with a focus on those who may be at risk of exclusion.6 The rights of children with disabilities to access inclusive education are defined by the United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD),7 and supported by target 4.5 of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). International frameworks for IE recommend that schools should accommodate all children, including children with disabilities and disadvantages, and the transformation of the education system to meet the needs of all students.8,9 However, there are gaps between the rhetoric and practice of IE, especially in developing countries where resources are relatively limited. Over the last two decades, Indonesia has been developing regulatory frameworks for IE and ratified the UNCRPD in 2011, with its primary focus on children with disabilities. However, children with disabilities in Indonesia continue to face multiple barriers to education. Almost 30 percent of children with disabilities do not have access to education,10 and 11.6 percent of districts (60 out of 514 districts) do not have special schools able to support nearby inclusive schools.11 Even if children with disabilities have access to school, they attend for an average of only 4.7 years.12 As such, implementation of inclusive education has been a major challenge, meanwhile there has been little detailed investigation into the service delivery of IE. 6 10 Ainscow (2005, p. 119) UNICEF (2020a) https://www.unicef.org/indonesia/ 7 United Nations (2006) documents/children-disabilites-and-education 11 8 UNESCO (1994) Directorate of PMPK, MoECRT (2021) 12 9 UNESCO (2020) UNICEF (2020b) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 11 The objective of this Policy Note (PN) is to review Additional analysis and recommendations related to Indonesia’s IE policies and regulations, to assess this will be of specific relevance at this time. service delivery, and to discuss potential gaps in policy implementation, with dedicated attention This PN particularly focuses on three strategic to children with disabilities. While the term, areas: (1) access and equity of IE, (2) quality Inclusive Education, generally has a broad definition of teaching and learning, and (3) improved (see Box 1), this PN focuses in particular on disability governance and service delivery. This PN provides issues, because children with disabilities remain policy recommendations based on a review of one of the most disadvantaged social groups in policy frameworks and IE practices in Indonesia, Indonesia, and they are not given sufficient attention international good practices, and beneficiary in terms of policy implementation. This PN also and stakeholder feedback obtained through a contributes to the urgent request of the Government series of focus group discussions (FGDs) with of Indonesia (GoI) for an assessment of service national, provincial and city/district governments, delivery of IE focusing on children with disabilities, school principals, teachers, school committees, including actionable recommendations. It is noted parents and students with disabilities.14 While the also that the COVID-19 pandemic is assumed to assessment focuses on the supply-side, demand- have exacerbated learning inequalities, especially side issues, including household and community for learners with disabilities who may face the engagement, are also covered as part of the broader additional barrier of inaccessible learning content.13 understanding of IE. 13 World Bank (2020b) 14 The three focus group discussions with key stakeholders of IE were held online in March 2020 led by MoECRT and the World Bank. In total 73 participants joined, including national and district/city government officers, school principals and teachers from inclusive and special schools, school committees, students with and without disabilities, parents of students with and without disabilities. 12 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 2. Overview of Inclusive Education in Indonesia 2.1 Policy and Regulatory framework T he Government of Indonesia (GoI), under the leadership of Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology (MoECRT), has set a clear legal framework for Inclusive Education. The National Education Ministerial Regulation No. 70 2009 (Permendiknas) regulates implementation of IE, including definitions of IE, objectives, types of children with disabilities, and the role of central and local governments. The Republic of Indonesia Act No. 23/2014 mandates provincial and city/ district governments to establish local regulations on IE, and the Law No. 8 of 2016 on Persons with Disabilities defines types and rights to education for persons with disabilities and obliges local governments to establish a Disability Service Unit (DSU)15 to support the implementation of IE in the primary and secondary levels. The Government Regulation No.13 of 2020 on Reasonable Accommodation stipulates the right of persons with disabilities for reasonable accommodation to meet their needs. However, in practice, implementation of IE falls short of requirements. Article 1 of the Permendiknas defines IE as the implementation of education that provides opportunities for all students who have disabilities and have the potential for intelligence and/or special talents to take part in education or learning in an educational environment together with students in general. Article 3 defines disability as: blind, deaf, unable to speak, intellectual disabilities, physical disabilities, emotional disorders, learning difficulties, slow learning, autism, reduced mobility, victims of drug abuse, other disabilities and multiple disabilities. The legal 15 Disability Service Units (DSUs) are institutions providing services for persons with disabilities, including to: a) improve competency of teachers in schools to support students with disabilities, b) provide support for students with disabilities in schools, c) develop IE programs, d) provide learning materials and assistive devices, e) conduct early identification, f) provide data on disabilities, g) provide consulting services, and h) develop cooperation with other institutions to improve the quality of education for children with disabilities. Article 42, Law No. 8 of 2016 on Persons with Disabilities. Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 13 framework exists but it is perceived as insufficient.16 In practice, when a school accommodates just one child with a disability, it tends to be perceived as an inclusive Box 1: Concepts of inclusive school. This narrow interpretation does not guarantee trained teachers or facilities to meet the different needs of children with disabilities. 17 education and inclusive Implementation gaps arise partly from the division schools - International of labor, whereby the central ministry sets the policy and regulations, while implementation perspectives is the responsibility of local governments. The policies mentioned above state that local governments The precise definition of IE varies by country, are responsible for making regional regulations, but an internationally agreed element is that IE designating inclusive schools, organizing training for is not merely about the placement of students teachers in inclusive schools, adjusting infrastructure with disabilities in mainstream classrooms, and financing IE programs. Permendiknas No. 70 but also about all students being involved 2009 stipulates that each sub-district must provide socially and academically.21 Placement is the at least one inclusive school and one teacher along means for ensuring that people with disabilities with necessary equipment and tools to accommodate are involved academically and socially (e.g., children with disabilities. through peer engagement). In the same vein, participation of children with disabilities Limited oversight further contributes to the gap becomes the basis of achieving inclusion for all. between policy and implementation. Although The concept of the inclusive school necessitates Permendiknas No. 70 2009 mandates each sub-district to the development of a child-centered pedagogy develop at least one inclusive school, there is no legal which can successfully educate all children obligation or target for the implementation of inclusive including children with disabilities and schools in rural areas.18 As a result, inclusive schools disadvantages.22 Thus, trained teachers and tend to be concentrated in local governments with supportive environments are essential to make relatively strong implementation capacity and funding schools truly inclusive. Currently, Indonesia’s – mostly in Java. In many local governments, there is implementation of IE mainly focuses on no guarantee that districts have even one inclusive the placement and inclusion of people with school at primary and secondary levels. As discussed 19 disabilities, and the regulations aim to ensure in subsequent sections, this also affects teaching and that all children with disabilities can learn with learning quality. Teacher development, curriculum learners without disabilities. However, the and pedagogy are not yet developed to comply with limited quantity and quality of inclusive schools IE policies. The existing curricula do not adequately and teachers remains a major challenge. accommodate the different needs of children with disabilities.20 Moreover, lack of understanding of what is expected of them and self-confidence of teachers related to inclusive approaches has led to their unwillingness to teach in inclusive classrooms. 16 19 Amka (2017) Efendi (2018) 17 20 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and Amka (2017) World Bank in March 2021. 21 Göransson and Nilholm (2014) 18 Hasugian, Gaurifa, Warella, Kelelufna, and Waas (2019) 22 UNESCO (1994); UNESCO (2020) 14 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 2.2 Current situation related to IE IE in Indonesia has developed during the past moderate physical disabilities (1.9 and 1.7 percent decade and the number of inclusive schools respectively) amongst others.24 and enrolled children with disabilities has increased. Indonesia takes a twin track approach However, there are still many children with to IE, which refers to combined provision of (i) disabilities who lack access to school, and inclusive schools, which accommodate children even if they come to school, their educational with disabilities in general schools, and (ii) special attainment tends to be lower than other schools for children with disabilities. The number children. Almost 30 percent of children with of children with disabilities enrolled in inclusive disabilities do not have access to education. schools increased from 62,960 in 2015 to 99,467 in Among those who have access to education, the 2020, while the number of children with disabilities proportion of girls with disabilities is lower than that in special schools rose gradually from 114,085 of boys, accounting for 39 percent of all children to 139,014 in the same period. The number of 23 with disabilities enrolled in school. The negative inclusive schools has grown from 3,610 in 2015 to correlation between disability and attendance in 28,778 in 2020, and fluctuations are often related Indonesia is one of the highest among low- and to changing funding policies from the central middle-income countries, and having a disability government (Figure 1). Indonesian data on children reduces school attendance by 61 percent for boys with disabilities enrolled in inclusive schools includes and 59 percent for girls.25 Average years of schooling children with learning disabilities (39.7 percent), among children with disabilities is only 4.7 years, children who are blind (9.6 percent), with attention while the national average is 8.8 years.26 The primary deficit hyperactivity disorder (4.6 percent), with education completion rate is 54 percent for children mild / moderate cognitive disabilities (4.5 and 4.3 with disabilities, compared to 95 percent for children percent respectively), with multiple disabilities (4.1 without disabilities.27 This gap is larger in secondary percent), autism (3.6 percent), speech impairment education, suggesting children with disabilities face (2.7 percent), deafness (2.3 percent), with mild / more barriers as they continue education. '' Almost 30 percent of children with '' disabilities do not have access to education. 23 Dapodik, Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology (2021) 24 Dapodik, Ministry of Education and Culture (2019) 25 Mizunoya et al. (2018) 26 UNICEF (2020b) 27 UNICEF and MoEC SDG Monitoring Report 2019, as cited in Afkar et al. (2020) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 15 Figure 1: Key Statistics related to IE in Indonesia Panel 1: The number of inclusive schools has Panel 2: A large share of inclusive schools are public increased over time schools, but rates of growth were the same for both public and private inclusive schools 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 40K 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 35K 31,7K 31,6K Public 29,3K 20K 21,343 30K 28,8K Number of Schools 25K 20K 10K 15K Private 9,1K 7,435 10K 3.6K 5K 2,239 2,259 2,036 2,188 2,241 2,671 2,190 0K 0K 939 I S I S I S I S I S I S Panel 3: Yet, most children with disabilities are Panel 4: The proportion of girls with disabilities is lower, enrolled in special schools however data quality is questionable 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 180K 180K 40% 39% 39% 39% 39% 39% 39% 159K 160K Enrollment of children with disabilities 160K 35% 139K Female children with disabilities 138K 132K 130K 140K 140K 123K 124K 30% 110.0K 114K 120K 120K %Female (line) 25% 92.9K 95K 99K 100K 100K 20% 69.6K 80K 80K 63K 15% 60K 60K 48K 40K 40K 10% 20K 20K 5% 0K 0K I S I S I S I S I S I S 16 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Panel 5: Despite the increases in numbers, the Panel 6: Enrollment of children with disabilities proportion of inclusive schools remains small decreases with every level of education across all levels of education 2015 2020 2015 2020 80K % of inclusive schools at each 63,086 Enrollment of children with 24,2 70K 25 60K education level 20 17,7 disabilities 39,069 50K 14,8 12,4 15 40K 11,8 23,874 30K 15,835 10 20K 6,614 2,8 5,173 4,450 2,7 3,606 5 1,6 10K 0 0 % HS % Voc % Prim % HS % Voc % Prim Prim HS Voc Prim HS Voc % Sec % Sec Sec Sec Source: MoECRT, 2021 Note: I – Inclusive Schools; S – Special Schools Box 2: Inclusive Education under the Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA) In Indonesia, while MoECRT manages the national education system, MoRA is responsible for religious schools, and has conducted IE interventions. Under MoRA, there are 77 Inclusive Madrasah (IM) with 964 children with disabilities.28 However, IMs are only located in a quarter of the 34 provinces and in only four percent of 514 districts. 88 percent of IMs are private.29 In addition, only 22 of the total 77 IM had been approved by the Directorate General (DG) of Islamic Education by 2016. There are 300 teachers in IMs, and some of them have been trained by various actors including development partners such as UNICEF, Helen Keller International, and the INOVASI program by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT).30 MoRA also provided training for IM principals from 2017 to 2019,31 and provided funds to train inclusive teachers in West Java and South Sulawesi in 2021.32 Nonetheless, teacher training and facilities are still insufficient to support children with disabilities in IMs. During 2021 and 2024, MoRA is planning to develop a Road Map for IE (2020-2024), to establish peer working groups of inclusive teachers and peer groups of inclusive Madrasah Principals, and to ensure all IM are recognized by the Directorate General of Islamic Education.33 28 Education Management Information System (EMIS) 2021 29 EMIS 2021 30 SIMPATIKA (MoRA’s Information System for Educators and Education Personnel); Directorate of GTK-MoRA (Directorate of Teacher and Educational Personnel) and Forum Pendidik Madrasah Inklusi (FPMI). The FPMI is an Inclusive Madrasah Educator Forum, which consists of all teachers in Madrasah who received training on IE. 31 Directorate of GTK-MoRA and FPMI 32 MoRA, 2021 33 Directorate of GTK-MoRA and FPMI Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – 17 Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 3. Challenges for Inclusive Education in Indonesia 3.1 IE service provision – infrastructure and learning materials Infrastructure and Facilities T he number of inclusive schools is insufficient overall and is highly unequal across different local governments despite the regulations that require at least one inclusive school for each level in each jurisdiction.34 Nationwide, only 11.0 percent of general schools, from primary to secondary education, are recognized as inclusive schools, but among primary schools, the percentage is merely 9.5 percent.35 There are many children with disabilities who have not been able to enroll in primary school near their residence,36 and this issue has been raised by parents participating in the FGDs.37 While the national average statistics mask the real distribution, the inequality in availability of inclusive schools across districts and cities is significant. For example, the percentage of inclusive schools among all general schools is as high as 28.9 percent in Jakarta province, about 18 percentage points higher than the national average.38 Gaps in implementation of IE by province are often attributed to the absence of local regulation for IE, resources, and commitment of local governments. 34 National Education Ministerial Regulation No. 70 2009, MoEC 35 MoECRT, 2021 36 Amka (2017) 37 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and World Bank in March 2021. 38 MoECRT, 2021 18 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education '' Nationwide, only Many inclusive schools do not have facilities to support the implementation of IE. Data from the Directorate of Primary School (SD) shows that many inclusive schools do not have adequate facilities. Based on regulations 11.0 percent of general schools, such as the Permendikbud Number 5 of 2021 on operational instructions for regular physical from primary to specific allocation funds, inclusive schools are recommended to have resource rooms (RR). secondary education, RRs are used to provide support for children with disabilities and assist their development are recognized as and learning achievement. The total number of inclusive primary schools with RRs increased from inclusive schools. '' 320 in 2019 to 611 in 2021.39 However, this applies to just 4.3 percent of total inclusive primary schools, and 0.4 percent of total primary schools. Anecdotal evidence reported through FGDs revealed that even if there are RRs in the inclusive 11 schools, the room may not be accessible to % students with physical disabilities if it is located on the second floor. In addition, there is a risk that RRs are used as special classes for children with disabilities who are regarded as ‘troublesome’ in general classrooms, unless teachers understand the effective use of RRs for inclusion with a clear guideline for schools to avoid segregation. Equipment and materials Inclusive schools do not all have adequate and Expenditure Plans, with proper monitoring equipment and materials to accommodate and evaluation. However, national guidelines on children with disabilities, and the monitoring reasonable accommodation for children with system for them is unclear. Inclusive schools are disabilities in inclusive schools and a monitoring required to provide reasonable accommodation system are insufficient, leaving many inclusive to support children with disabilities, such as a schools unsupervised. Lack of materials for children ramp for students who use a wheelchair, an with disabilities demotivates teachers because they accessible restroom, learning media and assistive cannot fully use existing learning media.40 In addition, technologies such as computers for students with research on the effective use of technology in learning learning disabilities. Each inclusive school needs for children with disabilities is scarce, and further to create School Work Plans and School Budget research is required in the Indonesian context. 39 MoECRT 2021 40 Sunardi, Yusuf, Gunarhadi, Priyono, and Yeager (2011) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 19 3.2 Issues of service provision - practice 3.2.1. Issues with disability identification Proper identification of children with disabilities The identification mechanism requires support seldom occurs, especially in public inclusive from special schools and various related schools. Identification is the critical first step professionals, and it is not functioning in many towards providing education to children with areas due to limited collaboration. Doctors, disabilities. It is defined as a process to determine psychologists and special education teachers are the types of special needs of students, and not always available to support general teachers carried out by a teacher, psychologist or doctor due to the distance between schools and hospitals, using standard tools developed by the teacher budget limitations and absence of DSUs to provide or professionals.41 However, not all teachers in schools with psychologists to identify children with inclusive schools have the capacity and resources to disabilities at no or low cost. Additionally, there conduct identification regardless of the existence of may be a lack of cooperation between inclusive children with disabilities in their classrooms. Even if 42 and special schools. In particular, inclusive schools there are identification instruments, some teachers in rural areas are likely to lack access to special use them without any training or mentoring and education resources and support due to the lack of have difficulty in understanding the meaning of the special schools. Permendiknas No. 70/2009 advocates statements in the instrument. The Directorate of 43 the use of special schools as resource centers, Teachers and Education Personnel for Secondary to provide support for inclusive schools, such as Education and Special Education (Directorate GTK sending special education teachers from special Dikmen Diksus) has been piloting an instrument for schools to inclusive schools to assist teachers. identification called the Student Learning Profile However, due to geographical inequality in the (PBS; Profil Belajar Siswa), with support from availability of such schools (i.e., almost 60 percent of INOVASI. In 2020 and 2021, the Universitas Sebelas special schools are concentrated in Java),44 and 11.6 Maret Surakarta (UNS) has provided training using percent (60 districts) do not have special schools,45 digital-based instruments to identify children with inclusive schools in these districts specifically are disabilities targeting teachers in inclusive and at higher risk of failing to evaluate children’s needs, special schools. These new instruments have been without strong coordination mechanisms. Hence, disseminated, however awareness of the tools may it is highly possible that the individual learning be insufficient for teachers to properly understand needs of children with disabilities go undetected how to apply them to children with diverse needs. by teachers in inclusive schools, especially in rural Continuous teacher support is required to enable areas. them to put their knowledge into practice. 41 43 Directorate of PKLK, MoEC (2013) Ibid. 42 44 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and Ediyanto, Kawai, and Atika (2017) World Bank in March 2021. 45 Directorate of PMPK, MoECRT (2021) 20 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 3.2.2. Issues with teacher training Quality of training also matters, as many teachers in inclusive schools are not confident about teaching children with disabilities even 12.6 % after training. The trained GPKs regard the training they have had as insufficient in preparing them to face a complex classroom environment, where children without disabilities are mixed with children with disabilities and all children have different learning needs. Specifically, through the '' FGDs, participating teachers raised issues of: (a) Only 12.6 percent of complete absence of training opportunities, (b) lack of continued training and ongoing support, inclusive schools have (c) insufficiency of skills acquired through training '' for managing a class where both children with and teachers trained on IE. without disabilities are mixed in one classroom, especially when there are varying types of disabilities among the children with disabilities. Lack of training for teachers in inclusive schools – both in terms of the quantity and quality - is a major challenge. The Center for Empowerment “We are facing difficulties in educating children with and Training for Teachers and Education Personnel in Kindergarten and Special Needs Education (P4TK TKPLB)46 is the national institution under MoECRT disabilities such as deaf children. As we don't have responsible for providing training in IE. The trainers are usually representatives of each province. Teachers trained in IE are called Guru Pembimbing special education teachers, there will be obstacles. Khusus (GPK) and are assigned to teach in public schools that serve children with disabilities. The total number of GPK is 3652,47 which is far below I hope that we can train our teachers who work in general the need to cover 28,778 inclusive schools. It suggests that only 12.6 percent of inclusive schools have teachers trained on IE. At present, there is schools. There should be at least one inclusive teacher.” no compulsory pre-service teacher training on IE for general teachers although in-service training is available on IE for selected teachers. In rural areas, many teachers in inclusive schools have never been -School principal of inclusive trained in IE and have no skills or instruments to primary school, Bireun identify children with disabilities and their learning needs.48 46 P4TK TKPLB: Pusat Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan, Taman Kanak-Kanak dan Pendidikan Luar Biasa. 47 GTK Dikmen Diksus, 2021 48 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and World Bank in March 2021. Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 21 Principals also have unmet training needs. opportunities for inclusive teachers. Given the One of the main causes of poor implementation fact that only a small proportion of teachers have of identification and lack of support to teachers is received training in IE by the national institution the lack of training for school principals in inclusive P4TK TKPLB, training by other institutions has schools. Training for school principals has been tended to fill the gap in some areas. In particular, prioritized by the MoECRT, but not been realized. As local governments are expected to provide such, in many cases, they are not able to facilitate continuous teacher training in IE for teachers in collaboration between inclusive and special their regions, based on Permendiknas No. 70/2009. schools. Furthermore, absence of trained principals However, not all local governments are able to decreases the cost effectiveness of teacher training, provide training due to the lack of budget and because teachers cannot practice gained knowledge capacity to invite professional trainers from P4TK and skills in the classroom, without supportive TKPLB, universities or NGOs. Complicating matters school environments. further, universities, NGOs and other institutions provide training based on different standards, Lack of a standardized teacher training therefore the quality of training varies and financial system combined with weak capacity of local incentives for inclusive teachers also vary across governments has led to insufficient training districts/cities. “My child is hyperactive [diagnosed with ADHD], so the principal of primary school immediately told me that my child had to go to special school.” Parents of a child with a disability, Banten province 22 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 3.2.3. Teachers and teaching practices Teachers in inclusive schools face continued FGDs, three teachers and principals from inclusive difficulties due to: 1) insufficient teacher schools indicated that there was ‘No assessment support, 2) lack of an adequate assessment mechanism for children with disabilities’. In two system for IE, and 3) lack of a useful guide to inclusive schools, children with disabilities are implement inclusive assessments in schools. automatically allowed to move to the next class Even after in-service training, teachers in inclusive without adequate assessment, with one school schools often have insufficient knowledge and skills refusing to provide a certificate for grade six which to support children with disabilities, due to the resulted in children with disabilities dropping out lack of support. An empirical study of 165 teachers of school before joining secondary school. Another participating in an in-service training course on school made a child with a disability stay in grade IE in Indonesia asserts that the main problem one for years due to the lack of an assessment is that teachers still lack sufficient knowledge system. Schools without support systems for and techniques to enhance the development of children with disabilities, however, sometimes children with disabilities, due to the lack of support accept children with disabilities due to the demand at school. 49 For example, this particular study from their parents who want their children to have discovered that teachers perceive that the support basic education along with their peers. Teachers received in inclusive schools in Indonesia is low, also feel that they should accept these parents’ including support from peers, special education requests because they do not want to discriminate teachers, teaching assistants, school principals and against children with disabilities.51 As the situation parents.50 It suggests that trained teachers often stands, monitoring of inclusive schooling is lacking have to cope with daily challenges in classrooms and issues of children with disabilities dropping out without support or mentoring. and repeating years are overlooked and thus not resolved. In this way, requiring schools and teachers Weak or absent school-level assessment to accept children with disabilities does not benefit mechanisms for children with disabilities them and rather may negatively affect their learning, severely impedes teachers from supporting the unless adequate teacher training and assessment learning of children with disabilities. Through the systems are provided at school level. '' Monitoring of inclusive schooling is lacking and issues of children with disabilities dropping out and repeating years are overlooked and thus not resolved. '' 49 Kantavong, Sujarwanto, Rerkjaree, and Budiyanto (2017). 50 Ibid. 51 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and World Bank in March 2021. Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 23 A lack of user-friendly guidelines inhibits teachers from being able to implement "The problem is teachers. adequate assessments. Usage of the assessment instruments developed by MoECRT is often Teachers are not given limited due to their length and complexity by teachers who would prefer access to simpler instruments.52 Moreover, teachers in Indonesia tend to prioritize the competences and indicators training, but parents have defined in the national curriculum,53 and this comes at the expense of supporting children registered their children with disabilities. Students who are not assessed properly for special needs are likely to have poor with our school. We can't academic results due to the lack of appropriate teaching.54 Practical guidance on inclusive refuse them, because assessment (e.g., individual education planning) requires inputs from teachers on how to adapt this would discriminate classrooms to provide inclusive education. More importantly, simply providing materials, such between children with and as guidance on assessment, is unlikely to lead without disabilities. The problem is that you can’t to teachers changing their behaviors in school settings. A strategy is needed to motivate teachers refuse." to implement assessments for children with disabilities and teach in a more inclusive way. This might include peer support and mentoring for Teacher in inclusive teachers in each inclusive school as they learn how to make assessments and develop approaches to inclusion in their classrooms. primary school, Bengkayang 52 Mujahid, Yamtinah, and Akhyar (2019) 53 Ibid. 54 Ibid. 24 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 3.3 Demand-side issues: communities and social perceptions Bullying, discriminatory attitudes and lack of education and health support.60 According to an parental knowledge are issues that children online survey on the impact of COVID-19 conducted with disabilities face at school and in the by UNICEF and Wahana Inklusif Indonesia targeting community. Bullying by classmates and peers are 533 parents of children with disabilities61, 73.5 commonly reported after children with disabilities percent reported that their children had difficulties start school.55 Children with disabilities often face in accessing online learning. Major challenges discrimination when teachers do not give them a included difficulty in focusing (46.3 percent), chance to participate in class activities or do not budgets for internet data packages (38.6 percent), give them options like their peers. In addition, 56 and access to internet (27.5 percent). In addition, resistance from parents of children without the level of perceived support for learners with disabilities to accepting children with disabilities in disabilities has decreased since the COVID-19 general schools is commonly acknowledged as a outbreak. This includes access to health and barrier to creating an inclusive learning environment therapeutic services, support from special education by school committees and parents of children with and counseling guidance teachers, provision of disabilities. 57 individual learning programs, and infrastructure support. These findings suggest that the majority Cost and accessibility are concerns of parents of children with disabilities have difficulty accessing of children with disabilities. Adequate IE services, online learning and their access to education such as identification of special educational and health services has reduced since the onset needs by professional medical practitioners and of COVID-19. In another online survey targeting psychologists, are more likely to be available at principals of special schools on the implementation private schools than in public schools, and parents of the learning from home policy during COVID-1962, often need to pay additional costs to receive many schools (65 percent) had not used online special education services for their children with learning applications prior to COVID-19, but only 25 disabilities. Some parents may not send their 58 percent of school principals and teachers received children with disabilities to school because they training on application-based learning methods think their children will not benefit. 59 provided by the local education office. The survey suggests that it is critical to improve teachers’ ICT The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted skills so that they have strategies for engaging additional issues for children with disabilities, students and can provide sufficient learning and including the difficulty of home-schooling teaching materials for children with disabilities during school closures combined with decreased learning at home. 55 59 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and UNICEF (2020b) World Bank in March 2021. 60 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and 56 Poernomo (2016) World Bank in March 2021. 57 61 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and Rohman and Sumarlis (2020) World Bank in March 2021. 62 MoECRT 2020 58 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and World Bank in March 2021. Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 25 3.4 Issues related to administration and governance 3.4.1. Budget allocation A funding system for IE has not been established purposes. Some local actors tend to perceive national at the national level, and coordination between IE programs as something that can run as long as different directorates is lacking. Although IE is a the budget is allocated from the top, instead of using crosscutting issue from early childhood to higher their existing local budgets. Thus, current funding education, there is no law that mandates the practices appear to be insufficient to incentivize local seven technical directorates within MoECRT63 to actors. The government does not have a scheme for allocate funds to support activities related to IE. As per capita funding for children with disabilities in a result, main budgets for IE are derived from only inclusive schools. This means that inclusive schools two directorates; the Directorate of Community need to use the school operational assistance fund Education and Special Education (PMPK) and the (BOS) to support children with disabilities, however Directorate of Teachers and Education Personnel in practice, the needs of a handful of children with of Secondary Education and Special Education (GTK disabilities are often overlooked when it comes to Dikmen Diksus).64 Though the PMPK has supported using BOS funds.65 inclusive schools, provision of funds has fluctuated over time and the number of targeted inclusive School principals are not aware of how they can schools decreased from 1500 in 2018 to 500 in 2020. implement and fund IE. Schools are expected to Based on the FGDs, some principals and teachers develop IE programs proactively, but there is not a raised the concern that there was no specific funding clear budget allocation system tied to children with yet to implement IE. The national monitoring system disabilities or IE programs. Education funds such as of budget allocation for IE is also underdeveloped. the BOS grants are managed by school principals at Informal discussions with senior education staff in school level, and budget allocation for IE is arbitrarily MoECRT revealed that it is currently hard to calculate decided by them. Schools therefore need to squeeze the percentage of the national education budget the money for IE programs out of the BOS or other allocated to IE because activities are carried out general funds. However, since IE is a relatively new independently by each directorate and funds are not concept for many principals and it is not specifically always provided specifically for IE programs. Hence, listed in the BOS manual as a legitimate expense, a regular funding system for IE is lacking and many allocations for IE will continue to be limited unless directorates in MoECRT arguably do not focus on IE school principals understand the importance of IE programs yet. for children with disabilities. Even if principals are aware of the need of additional funds for children The absence of a sustainable funding system for with disabilities, their lack of knowledge on how to IE from the central ministry is likely a disincentive access and utilize BOS limits their capacity to develop for local governments and schools to implement IE programs. GTK Dikmen Diksus, the directorate IE. PMPK has piloted teacher training programs for within MoECRT in charge of training in IE, has no data IE, but not all schools sustain IE programs once the regarding IE training for school principals, though pilot is over. Anecdotal evidence shows there is no it is essential to enable them to develop and fund specific budget allocation for teacher training for IE inclusive programs at a school level. 63 Among all Directorates within MoECRT, key actors of IE implementation include 1) Directorate of Community Education and Special Education (PMPK), 2) Directorate of Teachers and Education Personnel of Secondary Education and Special Education (GTK Dikmen Diksus), 3) Directorate of Early Childhood Education (PAUD), 4) Directorate of Primary School (SD), 5) Directorate of Junior High School (SMP), 6) Directorate of High School (SMA), and 7) Directorate of Vocational High School (SMK). 64 As for other directorates, lack of specific budget for IE is a common issue, and even if there is a fund for IE, the amount is limited. The PAUD provides only IDR 2 million for children with disabilities (targeting about 6000 children with disabilities in PAUD). Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and World Bank in March 2021. 65 Regulation No.6/2021 on technical guidance on the management of regular BOS funds 26 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 3.4.2. Supervision and school support Many local governments do not have local may reduce collaboration between teachers and regulations to implement IE although they are special education teachers to support children with required to under current national regulatory disabilities in inclusive primary schools.67 The lack of frameworks. Since 2009, 20.6 percent of cities and clear roles at a local level can directly affect access districts (106 out of 514) have been designated as to inclusive school for children with disabilities. It is inclusive cities/districts by the central government imperative that this issue be resolved if children with to proactively implement IE based on funds disabilities are to benefit from IE. from MoECRT. However, in reality, even in these designated inclusive city/districts, implementation Reliable data on persons with disabilities is of IE is often perceived as voluntary rather than lacking. For effective implementation of IE, various mandatory. It is possible that even these designated data is required including (a) basic data such local governments have not implemented local as access (e.g. enrollment rate of children with regulations for IE. In fact, anecdotal evidence from disabilities, out-of-school children with disabilities), teachers at inclusive schools in these areas revealed outcomes (e.g. completion, dropout, repetition that no teacher training or facilities had been rate), disaggregated basic data (e.g. by gender, provided by local governments, resulting in children impairment, region), (b) student experiences (e.g. with disabilities dropping out or repeating grades. 66 monitoring whether students feel safe), (c) school- Thus, local regulations are an insufficient framework level data (e.g. quality of facilities to accommodate for the management and monitoring of inclusive children with disabilities), and (d) system-level data schools. (e.g. number of teachers receiving in-service training by region, access to specialists who support teachers Limited accessibility and quality of inclusive and children with disabilities, budget allocation). schools is partly attributed to ambiguity of Currently, data on inclusive schools and children roles between provincial and city/district with disabilities enrolled in schools is available and governments. The division of roles between collected mainly through Dapodik by MoECRT, the provincial and city/district education offices is education management information system (EMIS) defined in the Law of the Republic of Indonesia of the Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA), and No. 23/2014 on Local Government. Provincial SUSENAS. However, regarding basic data on access, governments manage secondary education and different ministerial sources have varying data special education, whereas city/district governments on persons with disabilities, and inter-ministerial manage basic education, early childhood education coordination is needed to collect standardized data and non-formal education. This system can blur the on children with disabilities as a basis for decision- responsibility of district governments. Although the making. Permendiknas No. 70/2009 assumes each city/district government coordinates with special schools, in In addition, data on educational outcomes and practice, special schools are under the authority of student experiences is lacking, thus the causes provincial governments under Law No.23/2014 so of limited schooling of children with disabilities that issues related to children with disabilities are remain unrevealed. It suggests a need for not technically understood as a provincial responsibility. only censuses or surveys to monitor outcomes at In addition, primary schools and special schools population level, but also periodic monitoring at are managed by different local authorities, which school level. Furthermore, longitudinal gender- 66 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and World Bank in March 2021. 67 World Bank (2019a) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 27 disaggregated data on children with disabilities in schools, such as the number of teachers receiving inclusive schools is lacking. More gender-responsive in-service training by region and access to specialists data needs to be integrated into IE framework to who support teachers in inclusive classrooms or identify specific gender-related issues, given cultural who support children with disabilities. Data on the norms which may discriminate against girls or indeed representation of teachers with disabilities would boys. In addition, school and system level data 68 be useful to understand their potential roles in is needed related to the accessibility of inclusive promoting inclusive school environments.69 3.4.3. Coordination Weak coordination across the different Multi-sectoral coordination needs to be directorates of MoECRT and lack of accountability developed, especially between education, results in suboptimal implementation of IE. There health and social service sectors. Currently, IE are units for Inclusive Education within PMPK and in Indonesia is mainly managed by MoECRT and GTK Dikmen Diksus, but individual units are not MoRA. Coordination with the Ministry of Social given the necessary authority to coordinate different Affairs (MoSA) and the Ministry of Health (MoH) is directorates to implement the IE policy effectively, limited. For example, in Indonesia, only four percent and they are not given authority to coordinate of persons with disabilities have access to medical with other ministries. Policies for IE are developed rehabilitation services.71 MoSA has created a disability independently by different directorates within card for people with disabilities which provides MoECRT, sometimes resulting in inconsistent support easy access to services, under the MoSA Regulation in the field, which results in schools receiving support No 21/2017 Concerning Issuance of Persons with facilities for IE without training for teachers or vice Disability Card as a response to the Act No.8/2016 on versa.70 Moreover, the Directorates of SD, SMP, and Persons with Disabilities. However, dissemination is SMA/SMK in particular offer limited IE programs and still limited and not all students with disabilities in interventions. Given the fact that the completion schools possess disability cards. Thus, there is a need rates for children with disabilities decrease at for coordination between MoECRT and MoSA, under every education level, effective school transition is the supervision of Coordinating Ministry for Human also a challenge. Stronger coordination between Development and Cultural Affairs (KemenkoPMK) directorates is required to mitigate this. which oversees MoECRT, MoRA and MoSA. “Recently we have received special materials, tools and equipment to implement inclusive education. But we don’t know how to use them, because there are no trained inclusive teachers yet.” -School principal of inclusive primary school, Bireun 68 Afkar et al. (2020) 69 World Bank (2020a) 70 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and World Bank in March 2021. 71 Cameron and Suarez (2017) 28 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 4. International Good Practices and Models of IE 4.1 Models of IE policies and Funding Mechanisms I ndonesia’s IE is considered to be at an early stage of development and can benefit from considering good examples from other countries. Different countries in the world adopt different models of IE and they are in various stages of IE development. Broadly, there are three types of IE approaches in the following typical sequence: (1) two-track approach (students with special education needs are usually placed in special schools); and (2) multi-track approach (a variety of services between the mainstream and special needs education systems); and (3) one-track approach (inclusion of almost all students within mainstream education).72 As a global trend, more countries are shifting from the (1) two-track approach to (2) the multi-track approach, and then to (3) the one-track approach.73 The IE model that GoI is pursuing can be considered as a multi- track model. When applying a twin-track approach it is important to (a) mainstream children with disabilities and (b) provide specific support to children with disabilities. A twin-track approach includes (a) taking account of the needs and rights of people with disabilities within the mainstream of national and development policies and programs, and (b) supporting specific initiatives aimed at the empowerment of people with disabilities.74 Mainstreaming is not about adding the words “and persons with disabilities” to policy documents. It is about “integration of disability-sensitive measures into the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation with proper budgets” in all policies and programs.76 Thus, the rights and inclusion of people with disabilities is achieved in all aspects of development including education, health, social services and employment. In this context, a twin-track approach to IE includes (i) integration of IE in education system (reducing exclusion) and (ii) specific initiatives to support special and diverse educational needs of children with disabilities (introduction of targeted programs).77 To address 72 75 Meijer (2003). United Nations (2016, p.12) 73 76 Brussino (2020); UNESCO (2020). United Nations (2016, p.9) 74 77 DFID (2000) World Bank (2020a); UNESCO (2020) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 29 exclusion, it is important to prepare disability- (input-based), and (3) output-based funding. responsive budgets that account for the additional Effective implementation of IE policies requires both costs associated with adequate accommodation adequate funding as well as adequate allocation. and support.78 Moreover, it is crucial to ensure These three types of funding schemes have involvement of persons with disabilities at all levels advantages and disadvantages as well as differences including in national and local education plans to in terms of how they can create built-in incentives, ensure that their needs are reflected. depending on the model of IE development in different countries.79,80 The output-based funding Globally, three common funding schemes are can be a hindrance to inclusion without proper used for IE policy implementation, including: (1) monitoring and evaluation systems.81 per-capita funding, (2) resource-based funding Table 1: Three government funding models Description Advantage Disadvantage Countries Per capita The number of • Creates an • Higher cost due to the US, Canada, children identified incentive for need to diagnose and Australia, as having special having needs identify each student New Zealand education needs • More labelling Resource Funding is based • Encourages • Need for evaluation or Norway, (input) on services local actors monitoring mechanism, Denmark, based provided to develop to give incentive to Finland, etc. programs create quality programs Output Funds tied • Accountability • Possibility to result in Part of the based to student for cost- a reluctance to include US and UK outcomes effectiveness students with disabilities systems Source: Peters (2004); Prouty (2021) For Indonesia, decentralization represents an enable local governments to lead implementation additional dimension to consider in developing of IE policies. However, the current issue is that they a workable funding scheme. In the decentralized do not have adequate funding to do so. Shifting the system, the national government transfers budgets responsibility to the local governments or schools to local governments along with decision-making does not automatically lead to effective and quality authority. As discussed in the previous section, IE programs. Indonesia has designed a regulatory framework to 78 80 World Bank (2020a) Meijer, C. J. W., & Watkins, A. (2019) 79 81 Peters (2004) Peters (2004) 30 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Box 3: An example of decentralized IE funding system – the United States The US system of IE fund allocation for children with disabilities is linked to identification strategies conducted by schools to request funds. US federal regulations emphasize that all states have responsibility for establishing policies and procedures to identify all children with disabilities who need special education services, and schools are accountable for making sure they have access to the general classroom and a standard curriculum to the maximum extent possible, to achieve expected outcomes.82 Identification strategies generally apply four steps. Firstly, after a student is referred for evaluation by the parents or school, professional multidisciplinary teams (MDT) from the local school district collect information and conduct a multidisciplinary evaluation to determine whether a student has a disability as set forth in federal regulations. MDT includes the student’s parents, general and special education teachers, a representative of the school administration, medical practitioners according to the type of disability, and students themselves if possible.83 Secondly, MDT determines appropriate placement and services, develop student annual goals, and records the student's choices in an Individualized Education Program (IEP). The IEP informs the instructional delivery and services needed to meet the student's goals in the general education curriculum. Thirdly, IEPs created by schools are then used by the federal and state education authorities and the local districts to determine the number of students who should receive special education support.84 Funds are allocated to students with an IEP. Finally, the school implements the IEP in line with the requirements.85 To ensure the effective use of funds, some state regulations require schools to evaluate implementation strategies and student progress after four to six weeks.86 82 84 The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004 and No Child Hossain (2012) Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 85 Ibid. 83 Salvia, Ysseldyke, and Bolt (2012) 86 Desforges and Lindsay (2010) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 31 4.2 Designing Enhanced Networks and Coordination Mechanisms in the Multi-Track Approach An effective multi-track approach requires needs, leading to real impact using a multi-sensory school-to-school partnerships. A lesson can be approach at secondary school, and providing drawn from the Greater Manchester Challenge87, professional development opportunities for staff a British project which set out to tackle academic at primary school. In this way, schools could performance gaps between the rich and the poor exchange expertise across student age groups and between 2007 and 2011, since the poorest children geographical areas. These arrangements brought often attended the lowest-performing schools. positive impact on student learning in both partner The collaboration project aimed at strengthening schools, suggesting that successful schools should the role of local authorities and school principals support other schools not only to help others but through interventions including, a) keys to success also to help themselves. and b) leadership strategies, outlined below. Creation of hub schools and teaching schools The Keys to Success program aimed at maximizes the effect of the network. The enhancing inter-school partnerships and leadership strategy focused on school principals, resulted in improved student performance and about 170 school principals were designated in about 160 schools facing the biggest as system leaders who took initiatives to drive challenges. Based on the understanding that improvement across the city over the three years. school-to-school partnerships (pairs or trios) can As a key strategy, hub schools, that had provided promote an exchange of expertise and improve specialized support for students with special student achievement, so the program carefully needs, proactively shared good practices through linked and matched schools in different local workshops inviting teachers from across the city. authorities, so that ‘expertise that was previously Similarly, teaching schools were developed to trapped in particular contexts was made widely provide teacher development programs, and over available.’ For example, a primary school which 88 1000 teachers attended from different cities. The had developed expertise in teaching children to modeling of good teaching practices, feedback and read, supported a secondary school in another peer coaching had a positive impact on the quality local authority whose students could not access of pedagogy in classrooms. Thus, principals enabled appropriate learning support. These schools skilled professionals to use the expertise to support developed a teaching strategy together to improve colleagues within and beyond schools. literacy including children with special educational 87 Ainscow (2012) 88 Ainscow (2012, p. 299). 32 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 4.3 Experiences from Other Countries related to IE during the COVID-19 pandemic Vietnam is considered one of the most inclusive their children to use Braille or sign language for countries in the Asia-Pacific region with regard home support.89 While the experience and good to the education of children with disabilities and practices from the year of COVID-19 pandemic is yet offers good lessons about teacher development to be collected for global knowledge, there are some and quality standardization systems. Vietnam’s good anecdotal examples. strength in IE service delivery is built on compulsory preservice training and incentives for teachers, and In Rwanda, inclusive remote learning was development of standards of practice. In Vietnam, implemented using the principles of Universal every prospective preschool teacher must complete Design for Learning (UDL). The Ministry of a 45-hour course on IE principles and practices Education and the Rwanda Education Board (REB), before they acquire teaching certification, and supported by multiple partners, have delivered train-the-trainer for IE teachers is implemented in remote learning programs, focusing on radio and collaboration with university faculty members from television lessons and prioritizing students with all provinces. There are also postgraduate programs disabilities. Distinguishing features of the Rwandan in inclusive and special education. Moreover, experience include the use of sign language teachers receive 20 percent additional salary if they interpretation in lessons broadcast on TV and teach children with disabilities in their inclusive distribution of braille learning resources to blind classrooms. Development of standards of practice children. All learning materials are shared with contributes to assessing and enhancing attendance families through radio, TV, the REB’s eLearning and quality of learning experience of children platform, YouTube and WhatsApp. The REB also with disabilities. There are national standards for disseminated guidance for parents on continued guiding and assessing the quality of IE for children learning for children with disabilities. Then, the REB with intellectual disabilities in preschool, primary mobilized school principals and trained community and secondary schools, and a teacher competency volunteers to support families of children with framework of early intervention education for disabilities to ensure that children with disabilities children with disabilities. More details are found in engaged in learning during school closures.90 Annex 5. However, it should be noted that access and There are important lessons to learn from other uptake have been a key challenge even when countries’ IE initiatives during the COVID-19 remote learning programs are developed for pandemic. Children with disabilities require children with disabilities.91,92 Access and uptake different types of support when remote learning is of remote learning programs is susceptible to required and there are good international examples connectivity and access to technology at home. of using technology to overcome such issues. During Thus, public policy needs to ensure the quantity the COVID-19 pandemic, remote learning options and quality of learning materials at home as well as are often not tailored to blind and deaf students, internet access, while also supporting parental buy- and parents are not always capable of supporting in to new education delivery models. 89 World Bank (2020b) 90 Ibid. UDL respects differences of all learners and uses a multitude of methods in teaching. 91 World Bank (2020d) 92 World Bank (2020c) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – 33 Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 5. Recommendations G oI has set a clear legal framework for IE, however, plans and resources are not in place to implement it. A regulatory framework is necessary to assure the rights of all children to access education, but it is not sufficient to bring children with disabilities to schools and provide quality learning for them. The Indonesian education system is still at an early stage in developing and delivering robust IE programs. In this context, the first and most critical recommendation is to develop an IE strategy and implementation plan. This policy note therefore provides policy recommendations in the following three strategic areas: (1) access and equity of IE, (2) quality of teaching and learning, and (3) improved governance and service delivery. Each recommendation is indicated by either short-term actions for the next 3-5 years and long-term actions for the next 5-10 years. 5.1 Increasing the access and equity of IE Promote equitable access to good- Develop minimum standards for quality inclusive schools at every level of inclusive schools [Short-term], including education in every sub-district/city [Short- trained teachers and principals, and term]. This to ensure each child can fulfil capacity to identify and make reasonable the right to education in accordance with accommodation for children with the Permendiknas No.70/2009. It is important disabilities. Developing a data system for to ensure each inclusive school has trained mapping inclusive schools which meet the teachers and staff and adequate resources minimum standards would help to plan to provide reasonable accommodation for future interventions. Moreover, periodic children with disabilities, in accordance with monitoring of schools should be conducted. Regulation No.13 of 2020. '' Promote equitable access to good-quality inclusive schools at every level of education in every sub-district/city, to ensure each child can fulfil the right to education, in accordance with the Permendiknas No.70/2009. '' 34 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Strengthen the identification of children with and learning, mobility and emotions. This will disabilities and community engagement to enable better data collection and management. support it. To overcome one of the access issues Following screening by teachers, an effective at entry to school and provide adequate support, doctor and specialist referral system will be strengthening identification of disability is necessary. required, in order to better support children with There are four sub-recommendations to strengthen disabilities. identification: 3) Develop the collaborative mechanism among 1) Train teachers and school leadership schools, clinics, and administration to (principals) to organize and conduct provide comprehensive support to children identification [Short-term]. Specific, user- with disabilities [Short-term]. Effective friendly guidelines need to be developed identification should be performed by a team of to enable this at all levels of education. It is education experts including those from special important to include monitoring and evaluation schools, medical experts, and administrators of of these guidelines and involve teachers as key social assistance. The guidelines of identification stakeholders in the process of improving the should specify the skill sets required for guidelines. identification and should support development of collaborative mechanisms for each inclusive 2) Introduce a standard screening tool for school. the assessment of disability and a referral system [Short-term]. Identification should 4) Explore innovative approaches to be better organized and standardized across identification, such as the use of technology the country. Currently, INOVASI is supporting [Short-term]. To overcome the limitations development of a Profil Belajar Siswa (PBS) as associated with remoteness and lack of a standardized screening tool for assessment availability of experts, use of technology of disability. The tool, is developed based on 93 should be actively pursued. Moreover, online the Child Functioning Module (CFM), which was meetings to connect experts or development developed by the Washington Group/UNICEF. of assessment tools for non-expert usage The CFM is an instrument for identifying children could improve identification in remote inclusive with disabilities in different domains such schools. as vision, hearing, communication, behavior '' To overcome one of the access issues at entry to school and provide adequate support, strengthening identification of disability is necessary. '' 93 INOVASI (2019a);INOVASI (2019b); INOVASI (2020) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 35 5.2 Enhancing the quality of teaching and learning in inclusive schools Teachers Compulsory pre-service training on IE for all practices.94 Co-teaching should allow teachers teachers is recommended as a strategy to and multi-professionals work together to promote enhance the number and quality of trained inclusive pedagogical practice (see Annex 4 for an teachers in schools [Long-term]. Initially, such example). Members of co-teaching groups need to training can focus on teachers’ awareness raising be given time to nurture shared goals for students to mitigate or reduce discriminatory attitudes and with disabilities, planning and working together ignorance about children with disabilities. Practical to reach them. Peer-to-Peer networks should be training is suggested as part of pre-service training to developed through innovative technology-based give teachers opportunities to interact with children platforms to support a culture of peer mentoring and with disabilities and gain confidence in practical co-teaching. The introduction of app-based platform teaching situations. for teachers can facilitate peer-to-peer engagement across geographical areas, and this would foster a National standards for teacher competency problem-solving culture among teacher networks. on IE and standardized incentives for inclusive teachers are required to make an IE system Peer-support, that is, student-to-student support, more sustainable [Short-term]. Setting national should be developed as an important pedagogical competency standards with standardized financial approach for teachers to enhance students’ incentives, as seen in the Vietnamese case, would academic and social outcomes [Long-term]. The support systemic improvement of IE service delivery. role of teachers is to establish an inclusive culture for all the children in the classroom. Empirical evidence95 Strengthening the linkage between in-service shows that peer support, in which students without teacher training and school-level teacher disabilities provide social and/or academic support support, through mentoring, co-teaching, and to their classmates with disabilities,96 often result peer-to-peer network harnessing technology in more engagement and more satisfaction for [Short-term]. Mentoring programs should provide students with disabilities than support provided by adequate feedback and reinforce supported adults.97 “It is my hope that all teachers should receive training in inclusive education. Training should be given for all teachers, instead of being given for only some of them, thus providing an opportunity to directly understand what inclusion is.” - School committee of inclusive junior high school, West Nusa Tenggara province 94 96 Mieghem, Verschueren, Petry, and Struyf (2020) Carter, Sisco, Melekoglu, and Kurkowski (2007) 95 97 Lindsay (2007) Copeland and Cosbey (2010) 36 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Assessments '' Promote an inclusive assessment mechanism, Strengthen the linkage including strengthening the linkage between initial identification of children with disabilities between in-service and formative (on-going) assessments [Short- term]. International good practices suggest the teacher training and importance of formative assessments for the quality enhancement of IE. Typically, formative school-level teacher assessments are linked with establishing individual learning plans that include individual target support, through setting for learning, support to be provided, and regular time frames for review. Assessment covers educational experiences, such as learning, behavior, and social and peer relationships. Teachers are encouraged to work in teams to assess and mentoring, co-teaching, share learning outcomes through recording and tracking progress.98 It is also important to and peer-to-peer introduce appropriate adaptations for children network harnessing '' with disabilities in the national competency-based technology. learning assessments. Developing a national level inclusive summative assessment for children with disabilities can be explored in the long term. Assistive technologies Introduce assistive technologies to schools Support to children with disabilities following to help teachers and children with learning home-learning in the time of COVID-19 requires disabilities (i.e., specific groups of children specific attention [Short-term]. Evaluating access with disabilities) for their learning support and to remote learning programs for children with assessments [Short-term]. Assistive technologies disabilities is important to ensure their continued (AT) for children with learning difficulties include, learning. Adopting inclusive TV and radio programs inter alia: individual attention (for children with (as seen in the Rwandan example) is one approach. ADHD [Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder]), Using flexible and hybrid approaches (combinations spell-checker (dyslexia), speech recognition of face-to-face and online learning) may be also technology (dyslexia), electronic visual scheduling necessary for continued learning of children with systems. AT is to be introduced alongside clear disabilities in the time of COVID-19. guidance on how AT can be used to enhance learning opportunities for children with disabilities. 98 Watkins (2007) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 37 5.3 Improving the governance and the ecosystem of service delivery Budgeting for IE Ensure allocation of adequate budgets and easily integrated into the BOS (school grant) clarify financial responsibility [Short-term]. scheme described in MoECRT regulation No.6/2021 Funding responsibilities and formulae need to be on technical guidance for managing regular BOS clear and different levels of administration need to funds, by including IE related activities in the list be accountable for the implementation of IE. of regular BOS usage and showing the percentage of BOS grants that can be allocated for IE. On the Introduce per capita funding, such as additional other hand, other funding options, the resource- allocations through the BOS program or other based or output-based funding models require resources, for children with disabilities [Short- much stronger monitoring and accountability term]. Based on an international review of different mechanisms. The resource-based model carries a funding models, the per-capita funding model is risk of inactivity or use of funds for non-IE purposes. recommended for the current Indonesian context, The output model is unrealistic due to weak teacher as it necessitates data collection of children capacity for teaching children with disabilities. The with disabilities and it is compatible with the per capita funding model needs to be enacted in government’s efforts at improving teachers’ skills to a nondiscriminatory manner, to avoid the risk of identify children with disabilities. It can be relatively exclusion of children with disabilities. ''Funding responsibilities and formulae need to be clear and different levels of administration need to be accountable for the implementation of IE. '' Capacity Building for Local Government and School Leadership Create and support a unit responsible and budget allocations from local government for management, coordination, disability revenue. Examples of good practices from Indonesia identification and verification, and budget are found in municipalities such as Solo city99, where allocation of IE in each local education office to accountability is clear and stakeholder coordination enhance accountability and coordination [Short- is strong. term]. Designating a dedicated unit or position with clear job descriptions in each local education office Develop clear guidelines and provide training for will increase accountability, monitoring, coordination, local governments to support inclusive planning, 99 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussion conducted by MoECRT and World Bank in March 2021. 38 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education budgeting, and implementation in provincial and Strengthening of monitoring and evaluation district education offices [Short-term]. Capacity as well as basic data collection is urgently building of local governments is indispensable required at the national, provincial, district to enact Law No.8 in 2016 on the rights of persons and school levels [Short-term]. The current data with disabilities and Regulation No.13 in 2020 on system should be strengthened for IE, to obtain reasonable accommodation. In a long term, all local data on the number of children with disability by governments should develop and implement gender, types, their expected learning outcomes, local regulations on IE, in collaboration with cross- the number of specialized or trained inclusive sectoral stakeholders. education teachers relevant for different types of disabilities, availability of different facilities in All school principals need to receive training inclusive schools, budget for IE by different level of on IE [Short-term]. School principals need to know administration. Comprehensive data can promote the technical substance of inclusive education and more effective tracking of students’ learning what services different special needs would require. experiences, such as retention and transition of They also need administrative knowledge on how to children with disabilities, analysis of issues by type access BOS and obtain necessary funding for IE. of disability and special needs and availability of Training curriculum should include key topics such as: adequate services, analysis of the intersectionality of the factors related to exclusion such as disability, • Teacher support: Leadership skills to develop gender, and economic status. It is fundamental ‘learning organizations’ where people to monitor budgets and expenditure on IE, to continuously learn to expand their capacity understand how much different directorates within through teamwork and reflective practice. MoECRT, local governments, inclusive schools and other relevant stakeholders spend on what aspect • Administration and school-based management of IE implementation. '' (SBM): School budget allocation for IE (e.g., how to access BOS to develop IE programs) and data collection of children with disabilities as teacher skills for identification develop. School Within the MoECRT, coordination principals need to understand how to register of teacher training, budgeting, the data of children with disabilities gained through identification, update their profiles as and infrastructure development is necessary and this should well as the profiles of teachers profile who have and have not received training on IE. happen across different • Coordination to promote identification of children with disabilities: How to coordinate between directorates and across different levels of administration – inclusive schools, special schools and the health sector. • Evaluation: School self-evaluation using including the central ministry, local governments at provincial '' standard evaluation tools (see Annex 3) to review the inclusiveness of schools for IE, such as the Index of Inclusion.100 and district level, and schools. 100 Booth and Ainscow (2002) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 39 Coordination and Partnerships Strengthen coordination across (i) different Networks for inclusive and special school teachers to directorates within MoECRT and (ii) different exchange knowledge and experience would be also levels of administration, led by the Directorate helpful for solving issues and improving the quality of PMPK [Short-term]. Within MoECRT, coordination of IE in inclusive schools. of teacher training, budgeting, and infrastructure development is necessary and this should happen Strengthen coordination and communications across different directorates and across different with communities and households for levels of administration – including the central comprehensive support to children with ministry, local governments at provincial and district disabilities [Long-term]. It is important for children level, and schools. Clarify the responsibilities of with disabilities to have continuous and consistent each directorate in IE, including the Directorates learning experiences at school and at home. Parental of PAUD, SD, SMP, and SMA/SMK, and encourage education about the knowledge of specific disability each to create well-coordinated IE programs. and special needs is important for them to provide Clear IE guidelines for provincial and district/city appropriate support at home. Communities are governments should be provided by the MoECRT. also important allies for effective IE for children with In addition, coordination between provincial and disabilities. Awareness raising to eliminate social district/city governments should be strengthened. discrimination is critical for bringing children with disabilities into school. School committees, NGOs, Develop collaboration between MoECRT, universities and OPDs can play important roles MoRA, MoSA, MoH, MoHA, KemenkoPMK, in continuous engagement of communities and Organizations of Persons with Disabilities (OPDs), households to support IE. Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and development partners [Short-term]. The role of Establish and strengthen Disability Service MoSA is critical for reaching out-of-school children Units (DSUs) in each district education office to with disabilities. The Ministry of Health (MoH) has an promote stakeholder engagement [Short-term]. important role in supporting disability identification DSUs play an important role in strengthening and learning of children with disabilities though coordination for successful implementation of IE, medical experts’ perspectives. In addition, the as seen in Solo city.102 Ministerial regulations and Ministry of Home Affairs (MoHA) can also promote guidelines should articulate the role of DSUs in effective allocation of local budgets for IE. Other promoting stakeholder involvement for IE to make relevant ministries such as the Ministry of Finance it fully functional and beneficial for children with should also be involved. Where there are gaps in disabilities. DSUs should include cross-sectoral public funds or services, collaboration with OPDs, stakeholders covering education, health and social NGOs and Development Partners can be leveraged. sectors and including district education officers, teachers from inclusive and special schools, Foster school-to-school partnerships to improve psychologists, therapists, doctors, representatives of the quality of IE in inclusive schools [Long-term].101 OPDs, and parents of children with disabilities. 101 Ainscow (2012) 102 Based on findings of Focus Group Discussions conducted by MoECRT and World Bank in March 2021. 40 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Annex 1: References Afkar, R., Yarrow, N., Surbakti, S., & Cooper, R. (2020). Inclusion in Indonesia’s Education Sector: A Subnational Review of Gender Gaps and Children with Disabilities. (Policy Research Working Paper; No. 9282). Washington, DC: World Bank Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/ handle/10986/33943 Ainscow, M. (2005). Developing inclusive education systems: What are the levers for change? Journal of Educational Change, 6, 109-124. doi:10.1007/s10833-005-1298-4 Ainscow, M. (2012). Moving knowledge around: Strategies for fostering equity within educational systems. Journal of Education Change, 13, 289-310. doi:10.1007/s10833-012-9182-5 Amka, A. (2017). Problems and challenges in the implementation of inclusive education in Indonesia. International Journal of Humanities and Soical Science 7(10). Retrieved from http://eprints.ulm.ac.id/id/ eprint/6117 Booth, T., & Ainscow, M. (2002). Index for inclusion: Developing learning and participation in schools. Bristol The Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education Retrieved from https://www.eenet.org.uk/resources/docs/ Index%20English.pdf Brussino, O. (2020). Mapping policy approaches and practices for the inclusion of students with special education needs. OECD Education Working Papers No. 227. doi:10.1787/600fbad5-en Bulat, J., Hayes, A. M., Macon, W., Ticha, R., & Abery, B. H. (2017). School and Classroom Disabilities Inclusion Guide for Low- and Middle-Income Countries. (RTI Press Publication No.OP-0031-1701). Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI Press Retrieved from https://www.rti.org/rti-press-publication/school-classroom- inclusion/fulltext.pdf Cameron, L., & Suarez, D. C. (2017). Disability in Indonesia: What can we learn from the data? Melbourne: Australia Indonesia Partnership for Economic Governance Retrieved from https://fbe.unimelb.edu. au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/2615375/Disability-in-Indonesia-August-2017.pdf Carter, E. W., Sisco, L. G., Melekoglu, M. A., & Kurkowski, C. (2007). Peer Supports as an Alternative to Individually Assigned Paraprofessionals in Inclusive High School Classrrooms. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 32(4), 213-227. doi:10.2511/rpsd.32.4.213 Copeland, S. R., & Cosbey, J. (2010). Making Progress in the General Curriculum: Rethinking Effective Instructional Practices. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 33-4(4-1), 214-227. doi:10.2511/rpsd.33.4.214 Desforges, M., & Lindsay, G. (2010). Procedures used to diagnose a disability and to access special educational needs: An international review. Meath, Ireland: National Council for Special Education Retrieved from https://ncse.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/5_NCSE_Diag_Ass.pdf DFID. (2000). Disability, Poverty and Development. London: DFID Retrieved from https://hpod.law.harvard.edu/ pdf/Disability-poverty-and-development.pdf Ediyanto, E., Kawai, N., & Atika, I. N. (2017). Inclusive education in Indonesia from the perspective of Widyaiswara in centre for development and empowerment of teachers and education personnel of kindergartens and special education. Indonesian Journal of Disability Studies (IJDS), 4(2), 104-116. doi:10.21776/ub.IJDS.2017.004.02.3 Efendi, M. (2018). The Implementation of Inclusive Education in Indonesia for Children with Special Needs: Expectation and Reality. ICSAR, 2(1), 142-147. doi:10.17977/um005v2i22018p142 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 41 Florian, L., & Black-Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring Inclusive Pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 813-828. doi:10.1080/01411926.2010.501096 Forlin, C., & Nguyet, D. T. (2010). A national strategy for supporting teacher educators to prepare teachers for inclusion. In C. Forlin (Ed.), Teacher education for inclusion: Changing paradigms and innovative approaches. Retrieved from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780203850879-14/national-strategy- supporting-teacher-educators-prepare-teachers-inclusion-chris-forlin-dinh-thi-nguyet Göransson, K., & Nilholm, C. (2014). Conceptual diversities and empirical shortcomings - A critical analysis of research on inclusive education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 29(3), 265-280. doi:10.1080/0885 6257.2014.933545 Hai, N. X., Hang, L. T. T., Hang, N. T. T., & Thao, D. T. (2020). Policies on Inclusive Education for Children with Disabilities in Vietnam. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences 72(1), 162- 180. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344399820_Policies_on_Inclusive_Education_ for_Children_with_Disabilities_in_Vietnam Hai, N. X., Villa, R. A., Tac, L. V., Thousand, J. S., & Muc, P. M. (2020). Inclusion in Vietnam: More than a Quarter Century of Implementation. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(3), 257-264. doi:10.26822/iejee.2020358219 Hasugian, J. W., Gaurifa, S., Warella, S. B., Kelelufna, J. H., & Waas, J. (2019). Education for children with special needs in Indonesia. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1-5. Retrieved from https://iopscience.iop.org/ article/10.1088/1742-6596/1175/1/012172/pdf Hossain, M. (2012). An Overview of Inclusive Education in the United States. In J. E. Aitken, J. P. Fairley, & J. K. Carlson (Eds.), Communication Technology for Students in Special Education and Gifted Programs. doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-878-1.ch001 INOVASI. (2019a). Policy Brief: Inclusive Education, October 2019. Jakarta: INOVASI INOVASI. (2019b). Study Report: The Status of Childern with Disabilities and inclusive Education in Central Lombok. Jakarta: INOVASI INOVASI. (2020). Thematic case study: Lessons from INOVASI’s Phase One Work on Disability-Inclusive Education: What has worked and not worked to improve disability-inclusive education? Jakarta: INOVASI Kantavong, P., Sujarwanto, Rerkjaree, S., & Budiyanto. (2017). A comparative study of teacher’s opinions relating to inclusive classrooms in Indonesia and Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 38, 291-296. doi:10.1016/j.kjss.2016.05.005 Lindsay, G. (2007). Educational psychology and the effectiveness of inclusive education/mainstreaming. British Journal of Educational Psychology 77, 1-24. doi:10.1348/000709906X156881 Meijer, C. J. W. (2003). Special Education across Europe in 2003: Trends in provision in 18 European countries. Odense, Denmark: European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education Retrieved from https://www. european-agency.org/sites/default/files/special-education-across-europe-in-2003_special_education_ europe.pdf Mieghem, A. V., Verschueren, K., Petry, K., & Struyf, E. (2020). An analysis of research on inclusive education: Systematic search and meta review. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(6), 675-689. doi:10.1080/13 603116.2018.1482012 Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology. (2021). Dapodik. Ministry of Education and Culture. (2019). Dapodik. Mizunoya, S., Mitra, S., & Yamasaki, I. (2018). Disability and school attendance in 15 low- and middle- income countries. World Development, 104, 388-403. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.12.001 42 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Mujahid, F. N., Yamtinah, S., & Akhyar, M. (2019). The Use of Academic Assessment Instruments for Students with Intellectual Disability in Special Schools Indonesian Journal of Disability Studies (IJDS), 6(1), 47-52. doi:10.21776/ub.IJDS.2019.006.01.7 Nguyen, X. H., & Eda, Y. (2013). Teacher competence: An important factor to ensure the quality of inclusive education for children with intellectual disabilities in Vietnam. Bulletin of Center for Educational Research and Training, Wakayama University, 23, 157-162. Retrieved from http://center.edu.wakayama-u.ac.jp/ centerkiyou/kiyou_no23_pdf/157_162_NGUYEN.pdf Peters, S., Johnstone, C., & Ferguson, P. (2005). A Disability Rights in Education Model for Evaluating Inclusive Education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 9(2), 139-160. doi:10.1080/1360311042000320464 Peters, S. J. (2004). Inclusive Education: An EFA Strategy for All Children. Washington, D.C: World Bank Retrieved from https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/456181468779394512/ pdf/311950PAPER0In1fa1strategy01public1.pdf Poernomo, B. (2016). The Implementation of Inclusive Education in Indonesia: Current Problems and Challenges American International Journal of Social Science 5(3), 144-150. Retrieved from http://www. aijssnet.com/journals/Vol_5_No_3_ June_2016/17.pdf Prouty, R. (2021). Trend in disability-inclusive education financing [PowerPoint slides]: World Bank Inclusive Education Initiative: Share ’n’ Learn Session Series. Rohman, Y. F., & Sumarlis, V. (2020). Laporan Penelitian: Kajian Terhadap Dukungan Bagi Peserta Didik Penyandang Disabilitas di Masa Pandemi COVID-19. West Java: Yayasan Wahana Inklusif Indonesia Salvia, J., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Bolt, S. (2012). Assessment in Special and Inclusive Education(11 ed.). Sunardi, Yusuf, M., Gunarhadi, Priyono, & Yeager, J. L. (2011). The Implementation of Inclusive Education for Students with Special Needs in Indonesia. Excellence in Higher Education 2, 1-10. doi:10.5195/ehe.2011.27 UNESCO. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Salamanca UNESCO Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000098427 UNESCO. (2001). Open File on Inclusive Education: Support Materials for Managers and Administrators. Paris: UNESCO Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000125237 UNESCO. (2017). A Guide for Ensuring Inclusion and Equity in Education. Paris: UNESCO Retrieved from https:// unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000248254_eng UNESCO. (2020). Global Education Monitoring Report 2020: Inclusion and Education: All Means All. Paris: UNESCO Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373718 UNICEF. (2020a). Children with Disabilities and Education. Jakarta: UNICEF Retrieved from https://www.unicef. org/indonesia/documents/children-disabilites-and-education UNICEF. (2020b). The State of Children in Indonesia. Jakarta: UNICEF Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/ indonesia/reports/state-of-children-in-indonesia-2020 United Nations. (2006). United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with- disabilities.html United Nations. (2016). Toolkit on Disability for Africa: Disability-Inclusive Development. New York: United Nations Retrieved from https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/2016/11/toolkit-on-disability-for- africa-2/ Villa, R. A., Tac, L. V., Muc, P. M., Ryan, S., Thuy, N. T. M., Weill, C., & Thousand, J. S. (2003). Inclusion in Viet Nam: More Than a Decade of Implementation. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 28(1), 23-32. doi:10.2511/rpsd.28.1.23 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 43 Watkins, A. (2007). Assessment in Inclusive Settings: Key Issues for Policy and Practice. Odense, Denmark: European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education Retrieved from https://www.european-agency.org/ resources/publications/assessment-inclusive-settings-key-issues-policy-and-practice-report World Bank. (2019a). The Promise of Education in Indonesia: Overview Consultation Edition. Washington DC: World Bank Retrieved from https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/968281574095251918/pdf/Overview.pdf World Bank. (2019b). Teach: Helping Countries Track and Improve Teaching Quality. Washington, DC: World Bank Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/brief/teach-helping-countries-track-and- improve-teaching-quality#ref1 World Bank. (2020a). Inclusive Education Resource Guide: Ensuring Inclusion and Equity in Education. Washington, DC: World Bank Retrieved from https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/798681600707797522/pdf/ Inclusive-Education-Resource-Guide-Ensuring-Inclusion-and-Equity-in-Education.pdf World Bank. (2020b). Pivoting to inclusion: Leveraging lessons from the COVID-19 crisis for learners with disabilities. Washington, DC: World Bank Retrieved from https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/147471595907235497- 0090022020/original/IEIIssuesPaperDisabilityInclusiveEducationFINALACCESSIBLE.pdf World Bank. (2020c). Realizing the Future of Learning: From Learning Poverty to Learning for Everyone, Everywhere. Washington, DC: World Bank Retrieved from https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/764111606876730284- 0090022020/original/TheFutureOfLearningdic12.pdf World Bank. (2020d). TV-Based Learning in Bangladesh: Is It Reaching Students? Washington, DC: World Bank Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/34138 World Bank. (2021). Coach: Helping Countries Accelerate Learning Improving In-Service Teacher Professional Development. Washington, DC: World Bank Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/teachers/ brief/coach-helping-countries-accelerate-learning-by-improving-in-service-teacher-professional- development 44 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Annex 2: Summary of Key Indonesian Policies Reviewed The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (Article 31). Act of the Republic of Indonesia No. 28 Year 2002 on Construction Building. Act of the Republic of Indonesia No. 20 Year 2003 on National Education System. 2004 Bandung Declaration (Indonesia: Towards Inclusive Education) held in Bandung from August 8-14, 2004. Bukittinggi Declaration (International) of 2005. MoEC Regulation No. 70 Year 2009 on Inclusive Education for Students with Special Needs and Potential Intelligence and Talents. Act No. 35 of 2014 on the amendment of law No. 23 of 2003 on Child Protection. Act of the Republic of Indonesia No. 23 Year 2014 concerning Local Government. Act No. 8 Year 2016 on Persons with Disabilities. Ministry of Education and Culture Regulation No 12 Year 2016 on National Education Standards. Regulation of the Ministry of Social Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia No. 21 of 2017 on Issuance of Person with Disabilities Card. The Master Plan on National Development of Inclusive Education 2020-2024. Government Regulation No 13 Year 2020 on Reasonable Accommodation. Regulation of the Minister of Education, Culture, Research and Technology No. 1 Year 2021 on Admission of New Students in Kindergarten, Elementary School, Junior High School, High School, and Vocational High Schools. Regulation No.6/2021 on Technical Guidance on the Management of Regular BOS Funds (School Operational Assistance/ Grant). Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology No. 5 of 2021, Operational Instructions for Specific Physical Allocation Funds for Education for the 2021 Budget. Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 45 Annex 3: Inclusive Education Guides and Evaluation Approaches Guides/Tools Focused Areas Advantages/ Disadvantages Open file103 Managers and administrators Largely based on literature from academics in (UNESCO, 2001) the global north. Little input from people with disabilities The UK Index Schools and communities, Helps schools and communities to develop IE for Inclusion104 development and evaluation programs. Piloted in India, South Africa and (Booth & Ainscow, 2002) of IE programs Brazil. Does not directly address outcome indicators.105 Disability Rights in Inclusion of students with Derived from the inputs of people with Education Model (DREM) disabilities at local/school, disabilities. Cross-cultural framework for (Peters et al., 2005) nation-state, and international evaluating IE programs. Piloted in Lesotho. levels. A guide for ensuring Inclusive values and leadership Provides guidance on inclusion and equity inclusion and equity in policy analysis education106 (UNESCO, 2017) School and Classroom Universal Design for Learning, Provides checklists covering: the modification Disabilities Inclusion Guide Evaluation of physical environment, classroom for Low- and Middle- management strategies, social inclusion, Income Countries107 instructional practice, use of assistive (Bulat, Hayes, Macon, technologies, and school wide practices Ticha, & Abery, 2017) TEACH108 Free classroom Helps identify teachers’ professional (World Bank, 2019b) observation tool development needs. The tool pays attention to diversity COACH109 In-service training Helps countries improve in-service teacher (World Bank, 2021) development, based on four principles including tailored, practical, focused and ongoing. The tool pays attention to diversity. Inclusive Education Project preparation, design, Helps countries make education projects Resource Guide110 results framework, project inclusive, from the project preparation and (World Bank, 2020a) management and risk mitigation design stages 103 https://www.eenet.org.uk/resources/docs/132164e.pdf 104 https://www.eenet.org.uk/resources/docs/Index%20English.pdf 105 Peters (2004); Peters, Johnstone, and Ferguson (2005) 106 https://inclusiveeducation.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2013/07/UNESCO-InclusionEducation.pdf 107 https://www.rti.org/rti-press-publication/school-classroom-inclusion/fulltext.pdf 108 https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/brief/teach-helping-countries-track-and-improve-teaching-quality#ref1 109 https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/teachers/brief/coach-helping-countries-accelerate-learning-by-improving-in-service-teacher-professional-development 110 http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/798681600707797522/pdf/Inclusive-Education-Resource-Guide-Ensuring-Inclusion-and-Equity-in-Education.pdf 46 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Annex 4: International Good Practices – UK There are two types of inclusive pedagogical practices as described below. Table 3: Two approaches to inclusive practice Additional needs approach Inclusive pedagogical approach Focus • Focus on students identified as needing • Focus on everyone in the classroom additional support • Extend what is ordinarily available to all • Make different provision for students children in the class with special educational needs Example • In England, school inspectors examine • Work choice the extent to which teaching is differentiated by a student’s ability level Strengths • Attend to individual differences • Avoid stigma of marking some learners as different Weaknesses • Students with special needs can be • Teachers are better to co-plan and reflect marginalized within the class with their colleagues • Negative effects on teacher expectation, • Teachers are required to continuously student self-perception modify their teaching approaches Source: Florian and Black-Hawkins (2011) Box 4: Case study: Work choice – Inclusive pedagogical approach in Scotland, UK Work choice is an inclusive pedagogical strategy used in a primary school in Scotland. It means that classroom teachers collaborate with their colleagues on how to differentiate learning tasks for students with special needs, while avoiding the stigma of marking them as different in the class. In work choice, all children are given opportunities to choose what, how, where, when and with whom they learn. Teachers need to trust children to make good decisions about their learning through the choice of tasks that are available to all, without stigmatization through teacher-determined differentiation.111 111 Florian and Black-Hawkins (2011) Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education 47 Annex 5: International Good Practices – Vietnam Vietnam is considered one of the most inclusive Moreover, teachers receive 20 percent additional countries in the Asia-Pacific region with regard to salary if they teach children with disabilities in their the education of children with disabilities and inclusive classrooms.116 To provide teachers with offers good lessons about teacher development additional instruction and to extend their career and a quality standardization system. 112 The paths in various educational institutions, MOET Vietnam national survey on people with disabilities decided to initiate a master’s and a doctoral program in 2018 found that 94.2 percent of students with in inclusive special education. The Hanoi National a disability were educated in general education University of Education opened the first Vietnamese classes, and only 0.5 percent were educated in master’s and doctoral degree programs in IE and as special classrooms, and only one percent learned in of 2019, 142 candidates had already completed a special schools. 113 The national education law in 2019 part of the master’s program.117 also identified IE as the preferred mode of education for children with disabilities. Key interventions in Development of standards of practice Vietnam include a) compulsory preservice training contributes to assessing and enhancing and incentives for teachers, and b) development of attendance and quality of learning experiences standards of practice. The Ministry of Education and of children with disabilities. MOET, in collaboration Training (MOET) focused on promoting IE starting with a university, developed national standards for in 2000 and directed all 63 provincial education guiding and assessing the quality of IE for children offices to develop plans for achieving the national with intellectual disabilities in preschool, primary inclusion goals. To support the implementation of and secondary schools. Several schools have used the provincial plans, MOET has provided training the standards to assess and improve the quality of workshops for teachers, school principals and inclusive pedagogy, and as a result, attendance and university leaders since 2000. 114 involvement of students especially children with intellectual disabilities have increased.118 Moreover The quality of compulsory pre-service training in 2012, a teacher competency framework was in IE and incentives for teachers are the developed for early intervention education for foundations for a sustainable IE mechanism. In children with disabilities for universities and colleges Vietnam, every prospective preschool teacher must to follow in preparing prospective teachers.119 The complete a 45-hour course on IE principles and framework includes four standards and 18 criteria practices before they acquire teaching certification, (Figure 2). The framework has been applied in the and many programs preparing primary and evaluation of the professional practice of IE teachers. secondary teachers have adopted the course in An empirical study using the framework for the their curriculum. To enhance the quality of pre- evaluation of practice of 2,138 IE teachers of children service training in IE, the train-the-trainer model with intellectual disabilities found positive results in was implemented in collaboration with university the acquisition of skills of setting goals of education faculties from all provinces, improving knowledge, and making activities of education and care for skills and dispositions of teacher trainers (Table 4). 115 children.120 112 116 Vietnam General Statistics Office (2018), as cited in Hai, Villa, et al. (2020) Hai, Villa, Tac, Thousand, and Muc (2020) 117 Hai, Villa, et al. (2020) 113 Hai, Villa, et al. (2020) 118 Hai, Villa, et al. (2020) 114 Hai, Villa, et al. (2020) 119 Hai, Hang, Hang, and Thao (2020) 115 Forlin and Nguyet (2010) 120 Nguyen and Eda (2013) 48 Embracing Diversity and Inclusion in Indonesian Schools – Challenges and Policy Options for the Future of Inclusive Education Figure 2: Teacher competence framework on early intervention for children with disabilities PROFESSIONAL • Background knowledge: Psychology of child development KNOWLEDGE • Specialized knowledge • Supportive knowlege PROFESSIONAL • • Skills in diagnosis and assessment Skills in making objectives of early intervention for children with disabillity PRACTICE • Skills in making plan of early intervention • Skills in early intervention • Skills in using equipment in early intervention • Skills in evaluating child development PROFESSIONAL • • Belief that children with disabilities can develop Children with disabilities have rights to be supported in their development VALUES • Children with disabilities have their own values • Commitment to the job • Professional morality related to the job PROFESSIONAL • Relationship with children with disabilities RELATIONSHIP • Relationship with families of children with disabilities • Relationship with colleagues • Relationship with communities Source: Hai, Hang, et al. (2020) Quality of teacher trainers matters when building teacher skills. The train-the-teacher model contributed to tackling issues including the lack of knowledge, skills and dispositions of teacher trainers. Table 4: Train the teacher model in Vietnam Target in Vietnam. Disadvantages Advantages/ • All teacher trainers at universities and training college (47 trainers from 10 institutions, who have in average 2.2 years of experience in training institutions) • The majority of them (about 90 percent) did not understand the concept of IE and believed that assessment of children’s needs was not a teacher’s role. Course • To enhance trainers’ skills and pedagogy to infuse the core curriculum framework on IE into objective the pre-service training program Content • A five-day intensive 40-hour course (various pedagogies were employed) Outcome • Enhanced knowledge, skills and attitude and willingness of the participants to train teachers on IE. The course enabled trainers to deeply reflect about their beliefs through in-depth dialogue about the concept of IE, curriculum and practices. Source: Forlin and Nguyet (2010)