Chapter 4: Presentation and analysis of data
4.3 Analysis and findings
4.3.1 Educators‟ understandings of learning disabilities
The educators‟ understanding of learning disabilities varied in their responses to the interview questions and that revealed what the educators knew and understood about learning disabilities. Similarly, the classroom practices of the educators were also argued to be based on their understandings of learning disabilities. To begin with, the educators showed how they viewed learning disabilities to be different as learners behave differently. Participants showed that they identify learners with learning disabilities by their bad pronunciation, spelling mistakes, bending of head aside
indicating that one ear does not hear properly, squeezing of eyes when reading and reversing letters when writing. All these signs indicate that learners with learning disabilities are different. As a result, educators‟ attitudes towards learners with disability were influenced by their understanding. For instance, they showed to be sympathetic towards the learners with disabilities. The responses below are testimony to this finding:
“I felt pity for them and I thought the work will be hard for me.”(Participant 1 school B)
“I felt like I will not be able to work with them.”(Participant 2 school C)
These responses show that the Ministry of Education imposed an inclusion policy on educators without giving them guidelines or training for helping learners with learning disabilities. This confirms the study undertaken by Mariga and Phachaka (1993) that reveals that when the special education programme was introduced, the focus was only on learners with hearing and sight impairment and physical disability, while learning disabilities were excluded. This view, in relation to methods of teaching learners wit h learning disabilities is also held by Armstrong et al. (2000) in that schools are selling millions of learners short by writing them off as underachievers, when in reality they are disabled largely by poor teaching methods. This also explains why educators were not able to assist learners with learning disabilities due to lack of appropriate teaching techniques. Educators did not understand how learners with learning disabilities could be taught.
Based on their understanding, the educators therefore put into practice various classroom methods. These methods ranged from proactive to reactive practices and they reveal the way the educators view learning disabilities. Participant A and Participant B showed almost a similar view. Concerning methods of encouragement, the two had this to say:
“I give them incentives of erasers, pencils and pencil sharpeners when they have got questions correct. (Participant 2 school B).
“I praise them and pat them.” (Participant 1 school A).
The above statements show that it is the educators‟ understanding that with more incentives and positive reinforcement, the learners with disabilities will do more.
However, the same participants also admitted to administering punitive measures as reactive classroom practices. With reference to the issue of homework, the two participants responded thus:
“I give them a punishment of doing the homework before they can be in the class.”
(Participants 1 School A)
“I give them a punishment to sit on the imaginary chair.” (Participant 2 school B).
The quotations above show that not all educators believe in the use of incentives. This lack of consistency regarding useful teaching methods reveals that the workshops that educators attended for inclusive education were inadequate and too short - they were only for two weeks. Learners with learning disabilities have individual differences and difficulties which educators should bear in mind. According to IDEA (2005), some children lack preschool experiences. Some have few opportunities to learn outside school due to limited family resources, some do not attend school regularly and miss a lot of information. This shows that learners come to school with individual differences and difficulties. Educators punish learners without finding out the reason for not doing the homework. Learning disorder has a potential to cause destruction in child‟s life on a daily basis (Learning Disability, 2001).
Furthermore, the punishment given to the learners with learning disabilities who do not submit their homework can lead to dropouts or truants. This is revealed in the daily attendance register which shows that learners with learning disabilities have poor attendance records. The reason is that, they are not well cared for or they are threatened.
This is supported by Henchey (2007) who asserts that children deserve a safe, nurturing learning environment where they can learn, in an atmosphere of patience, respect, gentleness and trust - not threat and force. In the same vein, Kauffman 2005 explains that the consequences of difficulty in academic work also include the possibility of emotional stress and contribute to the fact that adolescents with learning disabilities are often considered at risk for juvenile delinquency. According to Barkley (2005), punishment can lead to resentment and hostility in learners and they can find ways to
retaliate. However, some teachers still rely on punishment as a tool of positive reinforcement (Wheldall, 2005).
In support of documents review, daily attendance register reveals that many learners with learning disabilities have bad attendances. The reason is that learners are not cared for and treated well. Still, some participants take the initiative to help learners with learning disabilities to do their homework and encourage them to ask for help from their siblings or neighbours.
One participant said:
“I encourage them to ask for help from their parents or siblings, or do the homework in groups.” (Participant 2 school A)
Evidently such responses reveal an understanding that with sufficient help, learners with disabilities can overcome their problems and do well in class.
In order to explain the issue of sufficient or insufficient help from parents and siblings, Bronfenbrenner‟s theory (1979), shows how the microsystem consists of the child‟s immediate family. The immediate family includes parents, grandparents and siblings who assist in developing the child. At school, the child‟s immediate environment includes peers and educators. Learners with learning disabilities need their peers to help them. At this microsystem level, the development of the child is closely involved in continuous face-to-face interactions with familiar people (Donald et al, 2002).
While the foregoing responses expose a negative understanding of learning disabilities, one participant, when responding to a question on whether or not they enjoyed working with learners with disabilities, seemed to contradict herself. She explained why she enjoyed it thus:
“Very much because they are always happy, they are nice people.” (Participant 2 school B).
While this statement portrays the learners with disabilities in a positive light, it still reveals that the educator has the understanding that learners with disabilities have a peculiar behaviour. Another of the educators‟ experiences is that learners come to
school with different types of learning disabilities. At the same time, the participants revealed an understating that learners need extra help. This extra help can be in the form of group work. As one participant stated:
“Learners with learning disability learn better when they are grouped with normal peers from their village. (Participant 1 school A).
Another participant understands that with extra responsibility the learners with disabilities can deal with the problems they face as it gives them confidence. This is called self-esteem enhancement.
“Let them be group leaders and lead the discussions.” (Participant 2 school A)
Evidently, as discussed above, educators‟ understanding of inclusive education impact on its implementation. The more they know, the more ready they would be; the less they know the more reluctant they would be to try it out.