Fwd: URGENT: DEADLINE TODAY: NATIONAL EDUCATION POLICY RESPONSE FOR REVISION AND SUPPORT
36 views
Skip to first unread message
Vaishnavi Jayakumar
Aug 16, 2016, 12:59:58 AM8/16/16
to We the Pwd Egroup
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Amba Salelkar <am...@equalscpsj.org>
Date: Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:31 AM
Subject: URGENT: DEADLINE TODAY: NATIONAL EDUCATION POLICY RESPONSE FOR REVISION AND SUPPORT
I hope to send the document in by end of day today at 6PM or thereabouts. I realize that this is very stressful and last minute for all of you and that you are extremely busy otherwise. I request you to read the document and please let me know if there are any serious discrepancies to be addressed (I am simultaneously checking it for grammar and spelling and consistency errors). You can do so in the following ways:
1. Email me on this address [am...@equalscpsj.org]
2. Call me or whatsapp me on +919884045265.
I am available all day today (16th August) for your inputs.
I have not marked any organization as supporters of this document as yet as it was not out in a final form. If you have sent me responses I have credited the same as a contributor (and not as a supporter) but please do let me know if I have missed your name or not given your correct details.
If you or your organization wishes to support the document kindly let me know as well. If you would like to remove your name from the list of contributors do let me know that as well.
If any of you have reports that you would like me to link to in this submission please provide a copy or a URL and I will do so.
Thanks again for all your inputs and many apologies for this inordinate delay.
Best regards,
Amba
----
To,
The Hon’ble Minister for Human Resource Development,
Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi.
Re: Draft National Education Policy
Subject: Response on behalf of individuals with disabilities and organizations working in the disability sector
16th August, 2016
Sir,
The attempts toward drafting a National Education Policy, with a comprehensive approach towards the inclusion of all persons throughout the lifelong education system, is an extremely valuable guidance document, particularly in light of the various international obligations that India has undertaken in the recent past, including but not limited to the Sustainable Development Goals which is in turn committed to “leaving no one behind”. Indeed, leaving no one behind requires changes – structural, legislative and budgetary – to the way in which our education system functions.
Persons with disabilities – including children – have been excluded from some parts of the education system, if not all, on the grounds of inaccessibility, or being deemed ‘ineducable’. The practice of segregating education systems for persons with disabilities, through the establishment of ‘special’ educational and vocational training systems is based on the presumption that persons and children with disabilities cannot cope with ‘normal’ systems. In reality, establishments are not willing to accommodate children and adults with disabilities for many reasons including a lack of awareness on how to accommodate their needs, and an inability and unwillingness to bear the additional costs of inclusion. Inclusion of persons with disabilities within the education system requires the evaluation of all services and policies, and for that matter, overall approaches relating to education and mainstreaming the needs of persons with disabilities within them. The disability sector has made several efforts to monitor the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in the field of primary education particularly and use the same to bridge the gaps in inclusion to the attention of policy makers. In 2013 during the evaluation of the efficacy of the Right to Education Act which was undertaken by your Ministry, a collective response including ground reports and experiences were forwarded to your office. Though this is only in the context of primary education under the RTE, the collation of experiences is indicative of the gaps in the system. We are attaching the same as Annexure A to this submission.
It is hoped that with the collective experience contained in this constructive submission, the policy can be made more meaningful for persons with disabilities and ensure their inclusion throughout the education system, and comply with the obligations under Article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This submission has been compiled with the contributions of several individuals and organizations working in the field of persons with disabilities, and representing the experience of a variety of intersectionalities, including:
1. Meenakshi B., Equals Centre for Promotion of Social Justice
[meen...@equalscpsj.org]
2. Bhargavi Davar, Bapu Trust for Mind and Body Discourse
[bapu.crp...@gmail.com]
3. K. Raghu Ram
[raghur...@gmail.com]
4. Nirmita Narasimhan, Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore
[nir...@cis-india.org]
5. Praveena Bhaskar Mehta, National Association for the Blind, Sakarkantha Branch, Gujarat
[nabsaba...@gmail.com]
6. Neeta Panchal and Mr Parag Panchal, Disability Advocacy Group, Gujarat
[neeta....@gmail.com, paragrpa...@gmail.com]
7. Deepa Sonpal, Programme Coordinator, UNNATI, Ahmedabad
[deepa...@gmail.com]
8. Mahesh Chandrasekar, Bangalore
[mahesh.ch...@gmail.com]
9. Ramya Miryala, DeafEnabled, Hyderabad
[deafe...@gmail.com]
10. Beena Prithveeraj, WeCan, Chennai
[beena_prithiveeraj@hotmail.com]
11. Dipendra Manocha, Saksham, New Delhi
[d...@saksham.org]
12. Bishakha Datta, Point of View, Mumbai
[bish...@pointofview.org]
13. Merry Barua, Action for Autism, New Delhi
[afa....@autism-india.org]
14. Gautam Chaudhury, SANCHAR, Kolkata
[gautamc...@hotmail.com]
15. Rajiv Rajan, Human Rights Law Network, Chennai
[rajiv....@gmail.com]
16. Reshma Valliappan, The Red Door, Pune
[val...@gmail.com]
17. Shruthi Venkat, Tamil Nadu
[shruthi...@gmail.com]
18. Sudha Ramamoorthy, Equals Centre for Promotion of Social Justice, Chennai
[su...@equalscpsj.org]
19. Radhika Alkazi, Aarth Astha, New Delhi
[aarth...@gmail.com]
The submission is supported by a number of organizations who have been mentioned as follows:
Best regards,
Compiled by Amba Salelkar
Equals Centre for Promotion of Social Justice
am...@equalscpsj.org
www.equalscpsj.org
Suggestions and additions to the Draft National Educational Policy, 2016
I. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
A. Dangers of an overemphasis on employability
1. While the policy seeks to be holistic with respect to all stages of education, it may not be desirable to continuously link education with employability as has been done in the policy e.g. “The overall goal is to foster quality and relevance of education and raise the credibility of India’s education system, improve employability of the products of school and higher education system, ensure equitable access to education, from early childhood education to tertiary education, including technical and vocational education and training (TVET) as well as lifelong learning opportunities, and ensure that educational opportunities are available to all segments of the society.”
2. Linking education to employability even at the earliest stages of education tends to exclude those persons who are perceived to be ‘unemployable’ and ‘uneducable’ such as those persons with disabilities who face high restrictions in participation. This can be seen from the ongoing litigation around the residential institution Asha Kiran in New Delhi, where only a small number of children with disabilities resident there were given access to schooling .
3. Paradoxically, linking education to employability for children with disabilities has also lead to them only having the option of ‘skill development’ and not academic education, particularly with syllabus that may not be perceived to be accessible for them. Focus group discussions around the Right of Persons with Disabilities Bill 2013 in Tamil Nadu revealed, for instance, that graduate students with visual impairment in several colleges were only given admission to language courses and not to any other stream of their choice .
4. The focus of the policy should include reimagining the role of the teacher in the classroom, who should focus on planning their lessons with the developmental needs of their children in mind in a diverse classroom setting. This includes changing pedagogy towards activity-based learning and a multi-sensory approach. As the student grows within the system, there may be an evolution in the goals of education, including looking at employability but also looking at holistic development. To improve quality of education teacher trainings courses, in service teacher trainings and education curriculums should focus on value based education system to invoke a lifestyle of conscious living – sincerity, commitment, compassion, mutual respect, tolerance, wisdom, integrity and humility,
5. A good example of a best practice are the Ashoka Changemaker Schools, a global movement towards changing approaches to school and higher education. The schools “….prioritize empathy, teamwork, leadership, problem-solving and changemaking as student outcomes. These schools are leading a transformation in education that supports children as changemakers – individuals with the skill set and connection to purpose that enable them to generate ideas and take initiative to effectively solve problems and drive positive change.”
II. PRE-SCHOOL EDUCATION
A. Context for children with disabilities
1. Though the ICDS policy mentions inclusion and intervention for children with disabilities, the curricula for the ICDS personnel (and the training programme) remains unchanged. Within a maximum two hour detection session, children with disabilities are to be detected and referred by the Anganwadi Workers (AWW). Earlier, the AWW training programme was of 3 months duration - and at present it is of less than one month.
2. There is no clarity as to what role in being played by which agency in relation to early childhood services. At present the role of AWW appears to be limited to supplementary nutrition, growth monitoring , immunisation (including for pregnant women). There is also a question of convergence of the roles of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the WCD.
3. The Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram is run in different ways in different states. In tribal areas, many children are referred (even from primary schools by the mobile team) to the district hospital or in some places District headquarters based early intervention centres – for poor people from remote areas this does not work out very well.
4. Experts working in the field of education for persons with disabilities have observed that while the ‘Right to Education’ begins from age 6, children with disabilities have no inclusive services available to them between the crucial ages of 0 to 6, after early intervention services are exhausted and transition needs to be made from rehabilitation towards inclusion. In the 295th Law Commission Report on Early Childhood Services and entitlements, it was keenly observed that children had a right to Early Childhood Development as they required all round developmental services from the ‘window of opportunity’ ages of 0 to 6.
5. Poor quality of education resulting in unsatisfactory learning outcomes is a matter of great concern. Quality-related deficiencies such as inappropriate curriculum, the lack of trained educators and ineffective pedagogy remain a major challenge relating to pre-school education. A significant proportion of children who complete pre-school education do not have school readiness competencies in cognitive and language domains when they join primary school. The majority of pre-school educators are inadequately trained/prepared. The curricula for pre-school education in many cases continue to be a downward extension of the primary education curriculum.
6. The availability of inclusive preschooling services – which are developmentally appropriate play based in design - from ages 3 to 6 can make a huge difference for children with disabilities and their future development, as well as mutual socializing with other children, as has been laid down in the Early Childhood Care and Education Policy of 2013 .
B. Delivery Mechanism
1. The role of Anganwadis should not be conflated with that of preschooling services. Anganwadi centres are meant to provide for basic health care and nutrition under the Integrated Child Development Scheme. However, they play important roles in enabling the overall participation of children in society. It is crucial that their training and role is strengthened to provide for a boost in the development of children with disabilities in the 0 to 4 age group with inclusive early intervention services where Anganwadi workers and ASHA workers can be adequately trained to identify children with disabilities for the purpose of early intervention.
2. The role of grassroot workers like the ICDS and ASHAs on follow up / implementation along with that of the family / community must be clarified and stregthened. These are essential services and issues for preparing a child for school education. The poor do not have a ‘choice’ – the only choice is these two services which is very crucial and not dealt with in this document.
3. Any delivery of Early Childhood Developmental Services must be inclusive. Children learn from their peers even at such tender ages, and segregating them or imparting them services only in the company of other similarly impaired children runs the risk of stunting their development through peer learning.
4. The role of pre-school services should be inclusive for children with disabilities. The participation of Disabled People’s Organizations, as well as the documented best practices of Community Based Rehabilitation, is crucial in enabling this transition – both to ensure proper identification of children with disabilities for their early intervention and to ensure their inclusion in the preschool as well as in the development of curriculum and infrastructural standards.
5. To address the therapeutic needs of children with disabilities a mobile van equipped with therapists need to be made available at the block level. This van to schedule visits to one panchayat every day in the block and in tribal areas visit the various hamlets. Children with disabilities in need to support could be identified through the ASHAs, anganwadi workers and FHW.
6. The Constitutional amendments proposed by the 295th Law Commission Report should be implemented to extend the right of children to early childhood developmental services as well as preschool services.
III. PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF THE CHILD AND ADOLESCENT EDUCATION
A. Context of protection of rights for children with disabilities
1. The policy speaks of preventing breaches of child rights and protecting them from corporeal punishment. The experience of children with disabilities, whether actual or perceived, must be considered when developing an understanding as to what is violence and abuse. There are several instances of children with disabilities being denied their rights in the guise of ‘corrective treatment’ - particularly those with developmental, learning, and psychosocial disabilities, who are sometimes subjected to abusive treatment and punishments for not being able to keep up with the rest of the class. Students identified as a ‘threat’ to others on the basis of their impairments – for example, autistic students who have ‘violent uncontrollable outbursts’ when not reasonably accommodated, or those who are ‘psychologically profiled’ to be prone to violence – are being removed from inclusive education settings on this basis in the guise of disciplinary action or for the ‘protection’ of other students.
2. All students with disabilities have a right to accessible infrastructure and teaching methods, aids and appliances as well as a right to be reasonably accommodated within the classroom setting. The denial of both these rights exposes these students to actual and possible harm – both mental and physical. This extends to the provision of clean and accessible sanitation facilities, particularly in the context of women and girls with disabilities.
3. As has been elaborated under the CRPD, denial of reasonable accommodation is also a form of discrimination on the basis of disability, and should be treated as such. Here it is important to note that students with invisible impairments – including autism, are often denied from accessing many services in schools as faculty have absolutely no idea about the nature of the impairment.
4. In cities, particularly in private school settings, children especially in primary education must be safe guarded from needless medical interventions and medication in the name of remedial methods. In the west, the overuse of such medication has been clearly linked to the onset of serious mental illnesses and violent tendencies.
5. There is rampant sexual abuse of girls with disabilities, especially in special schools, and several instances of such abuse coming to light only after the victims have graduated from the institution.
6. Remedial classes for students with disabilities, and in particular, autism, are entirely unregulated at present. Parents groups, such as TogetherWeCan in Cochin, Kerala, have raised concerns at the methods being adopted in such classes, with the ‘therapy’ administered without the consultation or supervision of the parents, and such methods are often administered by underqualified staff, an issue which was recently taken cognizance of by the Kerala State Commission for Protection of Child Rights.
B. Redressal Mechanisms
1. At present, the RTE (Section 17) only provides for ‘mental and physical harassment’ to students to be addressed as a disciplinary offence at the school level under the applicable service rules. There has been no method developed for overall monitoring of complaints made and compliance with Section 17. A School Committee, on lines of the Committees mandated under the Sexual Harassment at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013 mechanism should be set up in all schools, with the participation of parents, to look into complaints of mental and physical harassment of students.
2. Such instances of remedial classes for students with disabilities must be mainstreamed within the education system and subject to appropriate norms of monitoring and qualifications, with active involvement of parents.
3. The provision of aids and appliances for students with disabilities to further their participation in the classroom and in extra and co curricular activities must be mandated.
4. Every student, principal, teachers, members of school management committees etc. should be oriented to child rights and related laws – including the Juvenile Justice Act, Child Labour Act and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The materials developed for these trainings must be accessible and available in simple language formats.
5. Concerns of adolescents, including sex education, shall be made available for girls and boys with disabilities with appropriate accessibility considerations to ensure that the same is accessible for them.
IV. LEARNING OUTCOMES IN SCHOOL EDUCATION
A. Context of students with disabilities
1. With regard to prescription of norms for learning outcomes, students, particularly those with developmental and learning disabilities, must have the benefit of individualized learning plans which focus on their developmental needs and not catering to a ‘one size fits all’ template of education goals. These learning plans must not fall into the trap of limiting the students to what teachers believe they can study, but developed with the participation of the child and the parents. Any system which prescribes norms for learning outcomes runs the risk of harming the overall development of students with disabilities.
2. Any relaxation of the parameters prescribed by the RTE Act with regard to infrastructure runs the risk of being exclusionary for students with disabilities. Students who are deprived and facing difficult circumstances should be given access to education, however it must not be forgotten that a significant percentage of such students may have disabilities and they are as much entitled to inclusion as others. While bureaucratic impediments to setting up schools in areas of strife may be relaxed to adapt to circumstances, the minimum quality of education cannot be compromised on and this includes the provision of accessible environment and reasonable accommodation and non discrimination against students with disabilities.
3. The identification of ‘academically weak students’ for remedials and detention must not be conflated with the failure of the school to provide the accommodation required for the full and effective participation of these students, who may be restricted on the grounds of actual or perceived impairments, poverty, gender, etc.
4. At present, many children with disabilities are reduced to superficial inclusion. They often sit in classes without being given any support and even after 12 years of education their learning outcomes are negligible.
B. Mechanisms
1. The development of individualized learning plans must be participatory and involve the teacher, the student and the students parents. Having an individualized learning plan shall never necessitate the denial of learning in an inclusive atmosphere.
2. The policy does not explain how assessment of students for the purpose of remedial trainings shall be undertaken. The assessment of a student to require detention must be approved before a committee comprising of teachers and parents, and such committee must be satisfied that the detention is required despite the provision of adequate accessible infrastructure and reasonable accommodation for the student.
V. SCHOOL EDUCATION
A. Context for students with disabilities
1. The Right to Education Act in the context of students with disabilities between the ages of 6 and 14 needs strict monitoring and data collection. There have been serious concerns raised by groups monitoring the implementation of the Act on the rates of dropouts of students with disabilities and the loophole created by the clause that allows for ‘home based education’ in Section 3 (3) of the Act. In many States, students who are classified to be receiving home-based education are not receiving any such facilities, yet their data is being used to show high rates of enrollment under the RTE. The Gross Enrollment Ratio data that is referred to in the Draft Policy does not include disaggregated data for students with disabilities at all levels of education.
2. The provisions with regard to inclusive education within the Right to Education Act must be extended to minority unaided institutions.
B. Development of an Action Plan for meaningful implementation of the RTE with respect to children with disabilities
The Government must begin the collection of disaggregated data on the inclusion of students with disabilities, on parameters that are developed in consultation with the Disabled Peoples Organizations that have been working towards monitoring of the Act.
VI. CURRICULUM RENEWAL AND EXAMINATION REFORMS
A. Context for students with disabilities
1. The move to revamp curriculum is a welcome one. From all perspectives, curriculum requires to evolve over time.
2. The curriculum should include a review of all current material to enable sensitivity to diversity – including caste, disability, gender, religion etc. Difference should be taught as diversity, and with respect to disability, which is dealt with under science (biology) classes, there must be an emphasis on the social model being introduced. India’s obligations under various human rights treaties must also be made part of the discourse.
3. Examinations are a useful feedback mechanism to understand what students have gained from education. There must be a move to make all written examinations online, and students with disabilities should be allowed all reasonable accommodations in order to ensure that they can take their examinations on an equal basis with others.
4. Many Boards provide a facility to exempt students with disabilities from certain subjects, allegedly in their best interests. This is discriminatory. If a student wishes to pursue a certain subject, they should be accommodated to do so.
5. Flexibility within the system to allow for individualized curriculum development in the context of individualized learning plans must be encouraged, provided that the same is according to the choice of the student and their family, and not on account of the incapacity of the school to make a syllabus accessible.
B. Mechanisms for implementation
1. While the examination system should be made accessible by developing modes for it to be taken electronically, efforts like the UGC guidelines on examinations for persons with disabilities should be incorporated at all levels.
2. A simple language version of the CRPD should be taught as part of the social studies curriculum.
3. While flexibility in curriculum is necessary, mandatory exemptions from subjects on the basis of impairments (e.g. mathematics exemption for blind students in 9th and 10th standard, language exemptions for deaf students etc.) should be done away with and all syllabus of all subjects should be made accessible.
4. The UGC Guidelines for conducting written examinations for persons with disabilities must be followed and adapted for the school education system and be made available across all school education boards recognized in India . All boards must allow and encourage students with blindness to write their own examinations on computer instead of taking writers.
5. Evaluations should be designed to test the compliance with learning outcomes hat are age appropriate in the context of overall life skills, with weightage reducing as the evaluation moves to wider areas which may not be of such crucial importance. For instance, greater weightage can be given to demonstration of ‘problem solving’ skills and analytical /critical thinking.
6. Teacher training should also include methodology to implement ‘continuous assessment’ of students which seems to be missing in execution.
VII. INCLUSIVE EDUCATION AND STUDENT SUPPORT
A. Context for students with disabilities
1. Teacher training at present is not equipping professionals to teach in a diverse classroom setting with children with different impairments. Special Education is governed by the Rehabilitation Council of India and Special Schools remain under the domain of the Ministry for Social Justice and Empowerment (Department of Disabilities). As a result, the current system of inclusive education expects that special educators attached to every school will ensure that the needs of students with disabilities are met. In reality, this is far from the case. The number of special educators in India is not enough to bridge the inclusive education gap. This, along with a lack of accessible infrastructure, school transport and teaching materials, discourages students with disabilities and their families from exercising their rights under the RTE. Accommodating students with disabilities is perceived to be more expensive for schools and so under the 25% of seats for disadvantaged groups, children with disabilities tend to get left behind.
2. The suggestion in the draft policy of “Special interventions will be undertaken to meet the educational needs of differently abled children and children with learning disabilities ...” should not be misconstrued to mean setting up of segregated institutions to teach these students.
3. Language contained in the draft policy including “devising a long term plan for addressing the problem of learning disabilities”; mandatory referrals of children with perceived or actual disabilities to a “sub-committee of experts comprising of child and clinical psychologists” seems to take precedence over the core principles of ensuring accessibility and reasonable accommodation. There must be less of an emphasis on diagnosis and labeling, and more of an emphasis on building inclusion. The system must move away from a ‘one size fits all’ approach to an individualized approach. This includes supporting parents of children with disabilities and the local community to provide after school support for these children and ensuring social cohesion.
4. The identity of being a person with disability includes the methods of communication and languages that are a part of this identity. Students with disabilities must be given access to learn these communication methods with an equal emphasis on reading, writing and communication.
5. It is crucial for a peer network to develop between students with disabilities currently in the higher education system with other students with disabilities who have graduated. This helps build confidence, and helps in identifying gaps in the system based on prior experience.
6. The policy has observed that inclusive education is especially problematic in rural areas. The feedback from those working in the field of inclusive education is that both rural and urban areas are equally found to have failed in creating a heterogeneous environment for inclusive education.
7. The granting of scholarships to ‘meritorious students’ often privileges those who can afford extra assistance, be it through external classes or familial support – and further marginalizes those who would benefit through some economic assistance.
B. Implementation
1. Each school need to be connected to central repository of accessible books and other teaching learning materials (TLMSs) that is accessible to all so that every teacher is not reinventing the wheel. Such a repository exists, having been built in India jointly by NIVH and the DAISY Forum of India.
2. Digital copy in EPUB format with accessibility guidelines and Unicode based font of every text book published or approved by text book board of the country needs to be deposited to this central repository of accessible books so that accessible format book reaches every student without any delay.
3. The State must provide one computer per child for students with impairments for whom computers would be a primary reading and writing tool e.g. vision impairment, developmental impairments etc. This also includes autistic children who actually do have difficulty writing but are denied computers because teachers do not believe or understand the nature of the impairment with regard to communication. Adequate training must be imparted to operate the same.
4. Communication and language methods require to be taught to students with disabilities, including Braille, Sign Language and Augmentative and Alternative Communication.
5. Provide mentorship programmes to children with disabilities and student support cells to enable them to interact with successful adults with disabilities who have gone on to pursue higher education and employment. Expose them to various career and educational options and technology solutions to pursue these career choices.
6. Non-disabled children of disabled parents need support to educate their children with benefits like scholarships, admission in neighbourhood school located close to their home (this is specifically true for large cities where commuting is an issue).
7. The evaluation of students eligible for scholarships etc. must be relooked at in order to benefit those who really require the same.
8. There is too much emphasis on the role of child psychologists in devising strategies around children with disabilities and their inclusion. There must be more involvement of teachers themselves and experiential experts in disability and inclusion.
VIII. LITERACY AND LIFELONG LEARNING
A. Context for persons with disabilities
1. Many adults with disabilities, particularly women with disabilities have not had access to adequate education, particularly in the rural areas. This is especially true for persons with disabilities who have been in long-term residential care. With some efforts, some children with disabilities in these institutions are given access to the right to education as long as they are deemed educable. There has been no disaggregated data collected to establish whether the reach of Saakshar Bharat has been extended to persons with disabilities, neither have specific accessibility measures been taken in the context of persons with disabilities. The policy layout of Saakshar Bharat does not address inclusion and accessibility at all .
2. There is a large percentage of the adult population among persons with disabilities who are illiterate. This is not just illiteracy in the conventional sense of being able to read, but also a deprivation of exposure to information and skills that can help them communicate – whether it is braille, assistive software, sign language etc.
B. Implementation
1. Linkages must be built with existing efforts at inclusion for persons with disabilities (e.g. Community Based Rehabilitation Projects, DPOs and State Federations for Persons with Disabilities) and situations where persons with disabilities are prone to isolation from the community (e.g. residential institutions) and to make current curriculum for education accessible to them.
2. Audio visual materials for remote education must be made accessible and in simple language with a universal design which can be used for everyone.
3. Learning aids need to be made available along with skilled teachers in adult education centres with knowledge of Braille, sign language etc.
IX. SKILLS IN EDUCATION AND EMPLOYABILITY
A. Context for persons with disabilities
1. Persons with disabilities who have received formal education are often excluded from courses that equip them with soft skills, life skills and entrepreneurial skills etc. to equip them not only for the formal employment market but also for living independently and within the community in general.
2. Skill development programmes for persons with disabilities have not seen any innovation and creativity and focus more on what the project designer thinks that persons with disabilities ‘can’ do. Often, these skill trainings are outdated by the time they are adapted for persons with disabilities.
B. Making skill development meaningful for persons with disabilities
1. Instead of segregation ensure that all efforts at skill development within the education system are made accessible for persons with disabilities.
2. Create a needs assessment among persons with disabilities, organizations working on employability of persons with disabilities etc. on a syllabus which meets the needs of persons with disabilities for the workplace and is designed to be accessible.
X. USE OF ICT IN EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
Information and Communication Technologies are well known to be absolutely essential in inclusive education, not only for making materials accessible, but also for ensuring maximum possible outreach to persons with disabilities, particularly those who may find themselves in situations of conflict or natural disasters for extended periods of time. For teachers with disabilities themselves, ICT is an important tool to facilitate their teaching methodology. The procurement of accessible assistive devices is essential towards ensuring the best and most universal use of ICT. At present, schemes such as e-basta are not entirely accessible though the website does host e-books which could be a valuable resource.
B. Implementation
1. All procurement and development of devices and technologies to facilitate the use of ICT in education must be in compliance with accessibility norms through a comprehensive procurement policy.
2. The State must provide one computer per child for students with impairments for whom computers would be a primary reading and writing tool e.g. vision impairment, developmental impairments etc. Adequate training must be imparted to operate the same.
3. Teachers need to learn to use ICT and infrastructure such as digital online library of accessible books and braille presses etc. to be able to deliver books in accessible formats to students. Any educational ICT infrastructure deployed in the country need to be usable with assistive technology such as the screen reading software.
4. All repositories maintained by the Government as well as all technology in assistive devices should, as far as possible, be free and open source software.
X. TEACHER DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. At present, no teacher training accounts for the possibility of having to engage with students with disabilities. Special education training is segregated. This poses a huge problem in the implementation of inclusive education. The present system is entirely dependent on the engagement of special educators, who themselves are in short supply and in fact inadequately trained in the rights based approach to inclusion of persons with disabilities. In such a situation, students with disabilities are often dependent on the involvement of their own family members, particularly mothers, and the kindness of their fellow students. It is of utmost importance that special education is mainstreamed and that a strong component is included in teacher training on inclusion of persons with disabilities.
2. The focus should not be on the ‘features’ of an impairment, but rather on what is required for their inclusion. Teacher training should therefore include a holistic approach to communication through various means, an understanding of reasonable accommodation, and other necessary skills like developing meaningful individualized learning plans where necessary.
3. Some students with disabilities require the assistance and support of caregivers to ensure their full participation at school. At present, school domestic and cleaning staff often play the role of assisting a student with disability who faces high restrictions in participation. These persons are not trained. This service must be professionalized and the staff must be trained in ensuring that all assistance rendered reinforces the dignity and self respect of persons with disabilities.
4. Persons with disabilities themselves are often refused to be taken on as teachers under the misconception that they will not be able to control the classroom on par with their able bodied colleagues. Persons with disabilities have been active in academia all over the world and lend a diversity to the education sector that is much needed.
B. Implementation
1. All levels of teacher training must include a primer on developing an inclusive teaching pedagogy. At the local level pre-service and in-service teacher training curriculum must comprehensively include the various aspects of inclusive education.
2. Training of special educators must be in line with a rights based approach to persons with disabilities and the CRPD, in ensuring their right to learn appropriate languages, scripts, and communication methods. These resource persons should be mandated to assist the class and subject teacher, and impart some extra support in learning Braille or Sign Language or AAC, but cannot take the child in isolation for segregated learning within an inclusive atmosphere.
3. A cadre of professional caregivers must be created from new recruits and existing personnel employed as ayahs etc. in schools and they must be given specific training in supporting persons with disabilities and ensuring their full and effective participation in schools.
4. Salaries of Special Educators must be on par with that of the ordinary teachers.
5. All teacher and staff trainings – special educators and otherwise – must be brought under the Ministry of Human Resource Development.
6. Refresher courses can include specific teaching/ learning challlanges the teacher is facing for peer learning. Many general teachers have come out with simple and brilliant doable ideas in the field. Such innovations can be rewarded and highlighted to create incentives.
XI. LANGUAGE AND CULTURE IN EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. Language is an extremely part of the culture of persons with disabilities – be it the learning of Braille for blind persons, the learning of sign language for the deaf community, or alternative and augmentative communication for persons with developmental and learning disabilities. Inclusive education cannot mean forcing students to sacrifice their right to learning these important tools.
2. Ethics education must also include exposure to diversity in the community, which includes the entire range of impairments that persons may experience, and means to accommodate and enable their participation. This will foster a more accepting society for persons with disabilities. Inclusive education is one of the most important means towards achieving this.
B. Implementation
1. Inclusive education of deaf children must include Indian Sign Language from the pre-primary levels of education, on par with the right of students to receive education in their regional language/’mother tongue’. The training of teachers must be in conjunction with efforts on the development of sign language that are currently underway with the Department of Persons of Disabilities.
2. Curriculum which includes a rights based introduction to the inclusion of persons with disabilities, along with exposure to their histories and culture, should be incorporated at the school education level.
XII. SELF DEVELOPMENT THROUGH COMPREHENSIVE EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. The policy speaks of physical education, yoga, games and sports, NCC, NSS, art education, Bal Sansad, covering local art, craft, literature and skills, and other co- scholastic activities. Co-curricular activities and extra-curricular activities are largely inaccessible for persons with disabilities. Though there have been many successful endeavours in the private sector with the use of art, theatre and dance as therapy for youth with psychosocial, developmental and learning disabilities, these are hardly incorporated in mainstream schooling setups. Playgrounds are not made accessible, and children with disabilities are exempted from physical education classes instead of finding suitable and much needed physical activity for them.
2. Children with disabilities have additional nutritional requirements which need to be taken into account in order to prevent the onset of secondary disabilities. Many of them may require interventions so that they may be able to eat and drink independently or with varying degrees of support.
B. Implementation
1. The design of all co and extra curricular programmes must be inclusive and instructors in art, physical education and other courses must be trained in inclusive pedagogies for persons with disabilities.
2. Nutritional planning for children must be comprehensive with an additional facility to incorporate additional nutritional needs for students with disabilities or health concerns and to also guide parents on optimal nutritional provisions for their children.
3. A cadre of caregivers must be created and engaged in order to provide support and training to children with disabilities to eat independently or with support.
XIII. SCHOOL ASSESSMENT AND GOVERNANCE
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. At present, there is no monitoring mechanism for the provision of inclusive education, either under the Right to Education Act or in higher education.
2. The system of School Management Committees under the RTE Act, where implemented, is not inclusive. Without persons experienced and committed towards ensuring inclusion in education in positions of power within the system, there will be very little catalyst for change.
3. Methodology with regard to assessment criteria must also include the views of children and their parents, and not be limited to paper assessment of schools.
B. Implementation
1. The RTE Rules should be amended to include a person with disability/person with experience working in the field of disability/parent or caregiver within the School Management Committee. Among the parents as part of the Committee, one seat must be given for the parent of a child with a disability or a parent with a disability.
2. Any School Quality Assessment and Accreditation System requires to take into account the experience of children with disability within the school system.
XIV. GOVERNANCE REFORMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. Time and again, students with disabilities have been in for rude shocks at entrance examination halls or at college interviews where they have been informed, directly or indirectly, that the institution had no intention of accommodating them . Even with the existence of UGC guidelines with regard to accommodation in examinations, which were prepared by the Commissioner of Disabilities, there are gross discrepancies in actual compliance.
B. Implementation
1. The Education Commission that is proposed under the Policy must include the concerns of persons with disabilities by including experts in the field of inclusive education, who are also following the innovations taking place across the world with regard to accommodation and inclusion.
2. Multistakeholder governance in Higher Education institutions must also include persons with disabilities.
3. All grievance redressal mechanisms envisaged by the policy must have mandatory accessibility considerations with all necessary accommodations extended to students who wish to seek grievance redressal.
XV. REGULATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. Persons with disabilities are often restricted in their choices for specialization within the higher education system. In Tamil Nadu, persons with visual impairments are often restricted to the Bachelor of Arts programme, and that too only language courses.
2. Residential accommodation for students is not accessible in most cases, and additional supports that may be required in a particular context are not available for students like mental health counseling, personal assistance etc. This severely restricts their choices for higher education.
3. Despite having a 3% reservation in higher education for persons with disabilities, there is no data to show how much of these seats are being filled disaggregated across impairments and what the rate of retention is in these cases.
B. Implementation
1. Data on the number of students availing of the disability reservation and their retention must be made available on a regular basis and part of mandatory disclosures under the Right to Information Act.
2. The National Higher Education Fellowship Programme must be made relevant for persons with disabilities and factor in the additional costs that a person with disability may encounter in the higher education system.
3. Residential arrangements for students with disabilities must subscribe to the National Building Code and other accessibility norms.
4. Higher Education institutions must provide for facilities like mental health counseling, personal assistance, peer counseling and student support groups for students with disabilities.
XVI. QUALITY ASSURANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION
A. Context for Students with Disabilities
1. It is of significance that the National Institutional Ranking Framework for engineering includes a component on ‘Outreach and Inclusivity’ that includes 10 marks for ‘facilities for the physically challenged students’ in the event that the Institute provides full facilities for physically challenged students. It is not clear as to how this access audit is to be conducted and by whom, but ‘the NAAC and NBA may be requested to provide their assessment, as possible’. There are also parameters for inclusion of the percentage of students with physical disabilities in management .
2. The National Assessment and Accreditation Council does not include accessibility or inclusion in its assessment criteria at present . There is no monitoring for quality of services provided for students with disabilities and students are often limited to the experience of their peers with similar impairments to judge the standard of accessibility and reasonable accommodation available to them.
B. Implementation
1. Parameters for assessment of accessibility and inclusion must be considered and included in all assessment and accreditation programmes. These parameters must look beyond just physical disabilities and include the concerns of persons with other impairments, and must also be developed in consultation with persons with disabilities.
XVII. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING AND MOOCS
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. Like for all persons, there is a great scope of impact for Massive Open Online Courses on the lives of persons with disabilities. Many persons with disabilities have been excluded from opportunities in higher education and can use these opportunities as a cost effective way to better their own knowledge base. Around the world, persons with disabilities have benefitted from MOOCS like Coursera, which have specific accessibility policies and a non-exhaustive list of accommodations offered for a whole range of impairments .
2. While vocational training is important, MOOCS provide scope of learning beyond the goals of employability. Internationally, MOOCS have a wide range of courses which help people learn more about disability theory and rights .
B. Implementation
1. Mandatory minimum standards for accessibility of MOOCS, including compliance with the latest version of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines published by World Wide Web Consortium, must be set in place.
2. Available courses must include rights based approaches to disability rights.
XVIII. INTERNATIONALISATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION
A. Context for Students with disabilities
1. Students with disabilities have greatly benefitted from the accessibility and inclusion and acceptance that foreign universities have offered them. It is crucial that these lessons and experiences in inclusion are incorporated when higher education is being ‘internationalized’. The double-speak of accessibility and inclusion is common in relation to Multi-National companies incorporated in countries with mandatory accessibility legislation – Indian branches or subsidiaries continue to discriminate against persons with disabilities in hiring and in employment accommodations whereas such conduct would be actionable in the country where the headquarters were located.
B. Implementation
1. Mandatory minimum standards for accessibility, inclusion and reasonable accommodations, in line with the CRPD, must be developed and all Universities which open in India must conform to the same along with the disability policy of the main seat of the University.
2. Indian Universities which open abroad must comply with the Indian standards on disability inclusion in the absence of State or University mandates on the same.
XIX. FACULTY DEVELOPMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION
A. Context for Students with disabilities
1. Currently, special educators, when available, are limited to school education or equivalent for persons with disabilities. Academia teaching in higher education has little experience or training in the needs of students with disabilities and often they have to go by instinct or goodwill in making their students experience meaningful.
2. Persons with disabilities who have achieved MPhil and PhD degrees and are qualified to teach in higher education are often denied teaching posts outright instead of being given accommodations to enable them to teach.
B. Implementation
1. The Certificate in Teaching for those being recruited in the higher education as well as leadership programmes for senior posts must include primers on inclusion and accessibility for students with disabilities, and concepts like reasonable accommodation. There must also be continuing refreshers on these concepts and evolving technologies.
2. Constant interactions between faculty and students with disabilities are key in communicating suggestions for improving inclusion in the institution.
3. Recruitment policies for faculty must be non-discriminatory and qualified faculty who are persons with disabilities must be given the opportunity to teach and given all necessary accommodations to do so.
XX. RESEARCH, INNOVATION AND NEW KNOWLEDGE
A. Context for Students with disabilities
1. The academic ‘brain drain’ that is being alluded to in the policy is not only on account of research opportunities. Persons from various marginalized communities in India have found studying abroad extremely empowering as well as often the community and the family, as well as the surrounding environment, have added to the experience of oppression that they have felt. In the case of disability, foreign universities have been empowering experiences in terms of granting accessibility and acceptance to the diversity that such scholars bring to the table.
2. Centres of excellence at present have not met standards of acceptability in terms of access and inclusion. Many students with psychosocial disabilities, for instance, have found the environment of such centres toxic and difficult to cope with. Centres of excellence must not only be so in outcomes of research but must also excel in creating inclusive environments for a diversity of students, including those with disabilities, to be able to exchange ideas.
3. While many existing Centres of Excellence are producing great products and innovations for persons with disabilities, persons with disabilities themselves find it difficult to gain access to incubation opportunities offered by higher education institutions.
B. Implementation
1. Mandatory minimum standards with regard to infrastructural accessibility, reasonable accommodation and inclusion, must be developed in consultation with persons with disabilities, for all institutions accredited as ‘centres of excellence’, with monitoring mechanisms and grievance redressals in case of violations.
2. All publications and projects produced by the centres of excellence must be made accessible and available to all persons, including by hosting them in an accessible format for persons with disabilities.
3. Incubation centres must be made accessible for persons with disabilities, and specific concerns and challenges faced by entrepreneurs with disabilities must be addressed by incubators e.g. linkages to markets, access to information and communication etc.
XXI. FINANCING EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. As per the Persons with Disabilities Act of 1995, a minimum of 3% of the allocations towards any education scheme must be earmarked for persons with disabilities. This percentage is set to increase with the passage of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill.
2. An analysis of the allocations made under the various schemes for school and higher education for students with disabilities shows that there are four schemes that have specifically mentioned persons with disabilities as a target group – the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, the Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan, the University Grants Commission, and the scheme promoting higher education among persons with disabilities which has been launched recently. In a report compiled by Meenakshi B. of the Equals Centre for Promotion of Social Justice, these were the findings:
Year Department of School Education Department of Higher Education
SSA RMSA UGC Scheme promoting higher edu. Among persons with disabilities
2013-14 24801.96
2014-15 24039.08 3386 8906.41 NA
2015-16 21891 3534.71 9315.45 NA
2016-17 22500 3700 4286.94 2.0
Source: http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2016-17/eb/sbe52.pdf &http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2016-17/eb/sbe51.pdf
It could be observed a declining trend in allocation for SSA which is supposed to be the flagship programme and a vehicle for the implementation of the RTE. A marginal increase in allocation could be seen under RMSA. The UGC under the department of higher education has undergone a 50% slash. It is to be noted that these are the few programmes under the Ministry has specific mention / component for persons with disabilities. The overall reduction in allocation will mean a reduction in allocation for persons with disabilities.
In spite of mentioning persons with disabilities as a target group in a number of programmes, disaggregated data is maintained only on the union share of financial allocation under SSA and RMSA.
3. There is no social audit systems inbuilt as a part of the programme. This shows that there is no mechanism for the government to understand the efficiency of the programme particularly with respect to marginalized groups.
4. The criteria for judging the effectiveness of any programme depends on the:
a. Adequacy of allocation
b. Efficiency in spending
c. Optimal utilization of available resources
d. Adherence to the articles of CRPD and the national legislations and the
e. Accountability in terms of financial and physical data disaggregation
However with the SSA it was found that
i. There is a considerable reduction in the quantum of increment for the component compared to the previous year.
ii. 28 out of the 29 states underutilize the allocated resources across State even out of the Union’s share and there is an evidence of decreasing trend in the utilization.
iii. Most of the spending has been in the last quarter of the year. During the first quarter it has been very limited. This will have an impact on the quality of services as there are evidences that children do not get appropriate furniture, assistive devices, support services etc, once they are enrolled in schools.
iv. There is a lack of gender and constituency wise disaggregation of data at the Union level. However, it was observed that some states disaggregate data based on Gender and constituencies (ex: Tamil Nadu)
v. It is also a supply driven programme i.e. the physical and financial targets are decided by the Government and are not mandated to reach out all the demands from the community.
The Draft Report can be found at Annexure – B to this submission.
5. The SSA Framework states that per child component of Rs. 3000/ year could be incurred in a year to meet the special learning needs of children with disabilities . However on analysis of what activities are planned under special learning needs in Tamil Nadu (Tiruvallur district), it was found that the activities under the component include allocation to residential bridge course, day care centres, resource centres, salary of physiotherapists and special educators, Braille books, assistive devices, modification of teaching and learning materials, surgeries, training and sensitization of teachers, ramps and barrier free environment . Most of the components mentioned above should not be allowed under the specific learning needs of children with disabilities example barrier free environment, sensitization and awareness, sports, salary of teachers etc,. Instead all this should be part of the general heads such as building fund, salaries for teachers, general training and sensitization etc. Some of the other components such as day care centres, AIE, home based education should be withdrawn since they are not in lines with Article 24 of CRPD . Nearly 27% of the allocation to the districts goes in running these centres.
B. Implementation
1. Close monitoring of expenditure – with a minimum of 3% of the budgetary allocation of every education scheme on inclusive education - must be undertaken.
2. Release of funds should be restructured to ensure its timely delivery to schools, especially considering that the bulk of expenses towards ensuring inclusion of children across the board would be at the beginning if not before the school term begins.
3. The activities for which the Rs. 3000 per student as ‘special learning needs’ are utilized must be closely monitored and should ideally be limited to costs incurred towards reasonable accommodation of the particular child. Other heads should cover creation of accessible and universally designed teaching materials, provision of aids and appliances, salaries of special educators, and infrastructure.
4. Overall assessment of services provided for children with disabilities must be examined vis-à-vis the CRPD and whether it encourages an inclusive and rights based approach.
XXII. IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. At present the data with regard to inclusive education, be it overall rates of enrollment, rates of retention, and spending, are all extremely difficult to track. The efforts of a few Civil Society Organizations to obtain this data have been of great use to the sector to demand accountability in this front. Some important observations which were collected by Civil Society Organizations in their individual reports, as well as by activists working at the field level in response to this present effort to respond to the Draft NEP have highlighted the following:
i. That the classification of students as receiving home based education under the exception to the RTE for certain students with disabilities is leading to these students being stranded at home and never having received any home based support that is due to them .
ii. That the Rs. 3000 per student with disability for ‘special learning needs’ is directly handed to the student’s family in cash in certain schools in West Bengal and Orissa
iii. That students who wear glasses are counted as ‘Visually Impaired’ during data collection in Pune City
iv. There are high rates of dropouts from amongst students with Hearing Impairment
v. That students with disabilities in Tamil Nadu are often asked to produce their caste certificates along with their disability certificates for the purpose of availing of reservations in higher education .
vi. Despite the RTE Act provision for 25% enrolment of children from backward classes, most out of school children happen to be children with disabilities .
It is absolutely essential that this data is collected at source and made available in an accessible and open manner for effective civil society participation.
2. Persons with disabilities and organizations working on the inclusion of persons with disabilities can be valuable assets to the Ministry for the monitoring of the policy, as well as for inputs as the policy goes on to become more concrete – in terms of standards of infrastructure and services, and illustrations of best practices.
3. At present, even after 4 years of the recognition of the right to inclusive education and numerous Court rulings mandating the same, there is much to be desired in terms of infrastructure of schools and their practices towards promoting inclusion.
B. Implementation
1. Data with regard to enrollment and retention of students with disabilities must be collected on a regular basis and hosted in a manner that is accessible for all persons with disabilities and available in the various official languages in India as well as in an easy read format.
2. Gender and disability disaggregated data to be collected not only on enrolment by on attendance at all levels of education. This data to be mandatorily displayed by schools and other educational institutions under pro-active disclosures as mentioned under section 4 (b) of the Right to Information Act along with other 17 points mentioned under it.
3. Persons with Disabilities and/or their organizations must be part of all Committees entasked with development of standards for implementation, monitoring etc.
4. All aspects relating to Early Childhood Care and Education must be made inclusive and the concerns of persons with disabilities must be mainstreamed under the implementing agency, be it the Ministry of Women and Child Development, or the Ministry of Human Resource Development. The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment should only play the role of an advisory agency.
5. Social audits and access audits must be conducted of all schools to help modify infrastructure and instill mechanisms to ensure greater accountability for enhancing learning levels. The social audit must also look into the implementation of various schemes, performance of teachers, learning levels of students etc.
Date: Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:31 AM
Subject: URGENT: DEADLINE TODAY: NATIONAL EDUCATION POLICY RESPONSE FOR REVISION AND SUPPORT
Hi everyone,
I took full advantage of the deadline as you can see and finally, this is the response to the National Education Policy with (hopefully) all responses incorporated. It is copy pasted below this email and also attached. Attached along with this is an earlier response to the RTE Act which I have referred to in the submission. If you or your organization wishes to support the document kindly let me know as well. If you would like to remove your name from the list of contributors do let me know that as well.
----
To,
The Hon’ble Minister for Human Resource Development,
Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi.
Re: Draft National Education Policy
Subject: Response on behalf of individuals with disabilities and organizations working in the disability sector
16th August, 2016
Sir,
The attempts toward drafting a National Education Policy, with a comprehensive approach towards the inclusion of all persons throughout the lifelong education system, is an extremely valuable guidance document, particularly in light of the various international obligations that India has undertaken in the recent past, including but not limited to the Sustainable Development Goals which is in turn committed to “leaving no one behind”. Indeed, leaving no one behind requires changes – structural, legislative and budgetary – to the way in which our education system functions.
Persons with disabilities – including children – have been excluded from some parts of the education system, if not all, on the grounds of inaccessibility, or being deemed ‘ineducable’. The practice of segregating education systems for persons with disabilities, through the establishment of ‘special’ educational and vocational training systems is based on the presumption that persons and children with disabilities cannot cope with ‘normal’ systems. In reality, establishments are not willing to accommodate children and adults with disabilities for many reasons including a lack of awareness on how to accommodate their needs, and an inability and unwillingness to bear the additional costs of inclusion. Inclusion of persons with disabilities within the education system requires the evaluation of all services and policies, and for that matter, overall approaches relating to education and mainstreaming the needs of persons with disabilities within them. The disability sector has made several efforts to monitor the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in the field of primary education particularly and use the same to bridge the gaps in inclusion to the attention of policy makers. In 2013 during the evaluation of the efficacy of the Right to Education Act which was undertaken by your Ministry, a collective response including ground reports and experiences were forwarded to your office. Though this is only in the context of primary education under the RTE, the collation of experiences is indicative of the gaps in the system. We are attaching the same as Annexure A to this submission.
It is hoped that with the collective experience contained in this constructive submission, the policy can be made more meaningful for persons with disabilities and ensure their inclusion throughout the education system, and comply with the obligations under Article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
This submission has been compiled with the contributions of several individuals and organizations working in the field of persons with disabilities, and representing the experience of a variety of intersectionalities, including:
1. Meenakshi B., Equals Centre for Promotion of Social Justice
[meen...@equalscpsj.org]
2. Bhargavi Davar, Bapu Trust for Mind and Body Discourse
[bapu.crp...@gmail.com]
3. K. Raghu Ram
[raghur...@gmail.com]
4. Nirmita Narasimhan, Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore
[nir...@cis-india.org]
5. Praveena Bhaskar Mehta, National Association for the Blind, Sakarkantha Branch, Gujarat
[nabsaba...@gmail.com]
6. Neeta Panchal and Mr Parag Panchal, Disability Advocacy Group, Gujarat
[neeta....@gmail.com, paragrpa...@gmail.com]
7. Deepa Sonpal, Programme Coordinator, UNNATI, Ahmedabad
[deepa...@gmail.com]
8. Mahesh Chandrasekar, Bangalore
[mahesh.ch...@gmail.com]
9. Ramya Miryala, DeafEnabled, Hyderabad
[deafe...@gmail.com]
10. Beena Prithveeraj, WeCan, Chennai
[beena_prithiveeraj@hotmail.com]
11. Dipendra Manocha, Saksham, New Delhi
[d...@saksham.org]
12. Bishakha Datta, Point of View, Mumbai
[bish...@pointofview.org]
13. Merry Barua, Action for Autism, New Delhi
[afa....@autism-india.org]
14. Gautam Chaudhury, SANCHAR, Kolkata
[gautamc...@hotmail.com]
15. Rajiv Rajan, Human Rights Law Network, Chennai
[rajiv....@gmail.com]
16. Reshma Valliappan, The Red Door, Pune
[val...@gmail.com]
17. Shruthi Venkat, Tamil Nadu
[shruthi...@gmail.com]
18. Sudha Ramamoorthy, Equals Centre for Promotion of Social Justice, Chennai
[su...@equalscpsj.org]
19. Radhika Alkazi, Aarth Astha, New Delhi
[aarth...@gmail.com]
The submission is supported by a number of organizations who have been mentioned as follows:
Best regards,
Compiled by Amba Salelkar
Equals Centre for Promotion of Social Justice
am...@equalscpsj.org
www.equalscpsj.org
Suggestions and additions to the Draft National Educational Policy, 2016
I. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
A. Dangers of an overemphasis on employability
1. While the policy seeks to be holistic with respect to all stages of education, it may not be desirable to continuously link education with employability as has been done in the policy e.g. “The overall goal is to foster quality and relevance of education and raise the credibility of India’s education system, improve employability of the products of school and higher education system, ensure equitable access to education, from early childhood education to tertiary education, including technical and vocational education and training (TVET) as well as lifelong learning opportunities, and ensure that educational opportunities are available to all segments of the society.”
2. Linking education to employability even at the earliest stages of education tends to exclude those persons who are perceived to be ‘unemployable’ and ‘uneducable’ such as those persons with disabilities who face high restrictions in participation. This can be seen from the ongoing litigation around the residential institution Asha Kiran in New Delhi, where only a small number of children with disabilities resident there were given access to schooling .
3. Paradoxically, linking education to employability for children with disabilities has also lead to them only having the option of ‘skill development’ and not academic education, particularly with syllabus that may not be perceived to be accessible for them. Focus group discussions around the Right of Persons with Disabilities Bill 2013 in Tamil Nadu revealed, for instance, that graduate students with visual impairment in several colleges were only given admission to language courses and not to any other stream of their choice .
4. The focus of the policy should include reimagining the role of the teacher in the classroom, who should focus on planning their lessons with the developmental needs of their children in mind in a diverse classroom setting. This includes changing pedagogy towards activity-based learning and a multi-sensory approach. As the student grows within the system, there may be an evolution in the goals of education, including looking at employability but also looking at holistic development. To improve quality of education teacher trainings courses, in service teacher trainings and education curriculums should focus on value based education system to invoke a lifestyle of conscious living – sincerity, commitment, compassion, mutual respect, tolerance, wisdom, integrity and humility,
5. A good example of a best practice are the Ashoka Changemaker Schools, a global movement towards changing approaches to school and higher education. The schools “….prioritize empathy, teamwork, leadership, problem-solving and changemaking as student outcomes. These schools are leading a transformation in education that supports children as changemakers – individuals with the skill set and connection to purpose that enable them to generate ideas and take initiative to effectively solve problems and drive positive change.”
II. PRE-SCHOOL EDUCATION
A. Context for children with disabilities
1. Though the ICDS policy mentions inclusion and intervention for children with disabilities, the curricula for the ICDS personnel (and the training programme) remains unchanged. Within a maximum two hour detection session, children with disabilities are to be detected and referred by the Anganwadi Workers (AWW). Earlier, the AWW training programme was of 3 months duration - and at present it is of less than one month.
2. There is no clarity as to what role in being played by which agency in relation to early childhood services. At present the role of AWW appears to be limited to supplementary nutrition, growth monitoring , immunisation (including for pregnant women). There is also a question of convergence of the roles of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the WCD.
3. The Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram is run in different ways in different states. In tribal areas, many children are referred (even from primary schools by the mobile team) to the district hospital or in some places District headquarters based early intervention centres – for poor people from remote areas this does not work out very well.
4. Experts working in the field of education for persons with disabilities have observed that while the ‘Right to Education’ begins from age 6, children with disabilities have no inclusive services available to them between the crucial ages of 0 to 6, after early intervention services are exhausted and transition needs to be made from rehabilitation towards inclusion. In the 295th Law Commission Report on Early Childhood Services and entitlements, it was keenly observed that children had a right to Early Childhood Development as they required all round developmental services from the ‘window of opportunity’ ages of 0 to 6.
5. Poor quality of education resulting in unsatisfactory learning outcomes is a matter of great concern. Quality-related deficiencies such as inappropriate curriculum, the lack of trained educators and ineffective pedagogy remain a major challenge relating to pre-school education. A significant proportion of children who complete pre-school education do not have school readiness competencies in cognitive and language domains when they join primary school. The majority of pre-school educators are inadequately trained/prepared. The curricula for pre-school education in many cases continue to be a downward extension of the primary education curriculum.
6. The availability of inclusive preschooling services – which are developmentally appropriate play based in design - from ages 3 to 6 can make a huge difference for children with disabilities and their future development, as well as mutual socializing with other children, as has been laid down in the Early Childhood Care and Education Policy of 2013 .
B. Delivery Mechanism
1. The role of Anganwadis should not be conflated with that of preschooling services. Anganwadi centres are meant to provide for basic health care and nutrition under the Integrated Child Development Scheme. However, they play important roles in enabling the overall participation of children in society. It is crucial that their training and role is strengthened to provide for a boost in the development of children with disabilities in the 0 to 4 age group with inclusive early intervention services where Anganwadi workers and ASHA workers can be adequately trained to identify children with disabilities for the purpose of early intervention.
2. The role of grassroot workers like the ICDS and ASHAs on follow up / implementation along with that of the family / community must be clarified and stregthened. These are essential services and issues for preparing a child for school education. The poor do not have a ‘choice’ – the only choice is these two services which is very crucial and not dealt with in this document.
3. Any delivery of Early Childhood Developmental Services must be inclusive. Children learn from their peers even at such tender ages, and segregating them or imparting them services only in the company of other similarly impaired children runs the risk of stunting their development through peer learning.
4. The role of pre-school services should be inclusive for children with disabilities. The participation of Disabled People’s Organizations, as well as the documented best practices of Community Based Rehabilitation, is crucial in enabling this transition – both to ensure proper identification of children with disabilities for their early intervention and to ensure their inclusion in the preschool as well as in the development of curriculum and infrastructural standards.
5. To address the therapeutic needs of children with disabilities a mobile van equipped with therapists need to be made available at the block level. This van to schedule visits to one panchayat every day in the block and in tribal areas visit the various hamlets. Children with disabilities in need to support could be identified through the ASHAs, anganwadi workers and FHW.
6. The Constitutional amendments proposed by the 295th Law Commission Report should be implemented to extend the right of children to early childhood developmental services as well as preschool services.
III. PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF THE CHILD AND ADOLESCENT EDUCATION
A. Context of protection of rights for children with disabilities
1. The policy speaks of preventing breaches of child rights and protecting them from corporeal punishment. The experience of children with disabilities, whether actual or perceived, must be considered when developing an understanding as to what is violence and abuse. There are several instances of children with disabilities being denied their rights in the guise of ‘corrective treatment’ - particularly those with developmental, learning, and psychosocial disabilities, who are sometimes subjected to abusive treatment and punishments for not being able to keep up with the rest of the class. Students identified as a ‘threat’ to others on the basis of their impairments – for example, autistic students who have ‘violent uncontrollable outbursts’ when not reasonably accommodated, or those who are ‘psychologically profiled’ to be prone to violence – are being removed from inclusive education settings on this basis in the guise of disciplinary action or for the ‘protection’ of other students.
2. All students with disabilities have a right to accessible infrastructure and teaching methods, aids and appliances as well as a right to be reasonably accommodated within the classroom setting. The denial of both these rights exposes these students to actual and possible harm – both mental and physical. This extends to the provision of clean and accessible sanitation facilities, particularly in the context of women and girls with disabilities.
3. As has been elaborated under the CRPD, denial of reasonable accommodation is also a form of discrimination on the basis of disability, and should be treated as such. Here it is important to note that students with invisible impairments – including autism, are often denied from accessing many services in schools as faculty have absolutely no idea about the nature of the impairment.
4. In cities, particularly in private school settings, children especially in primary education must be safe guarded from needless medical interventions and medication in the name of remedial methods. In the west, the overuse of such medication has been clearly linked to the onset of serious mental illnesses and violent tendencies.
5. There is rampant sexual abuse of girls with disabilities, especially in special schools, and several instances of such abuse coming to light only after the victims have graduated from the institution.
6. Remedial classes for students with disabilities, and in particular, autism, are entirely unregulated at present. Parents groups, such as TogetherWeCan in Cochin, Kerala, have raised concerns at the methods being adopted in such classes, with the ‘therapy’ administered without the consultation or supervision of the parents, and such methods are often administered by underqualified staff, an issue which was recently taken cognizance of by the Kerala State Commission for Protection of Child Rights.
B. Redressal Mechanisms
1. At present, the RTE (Section 17) only provides for ‘mental and physical harassment’ to students to be addressed as a disciplinary offence at the school level under the applicable service rules. There has been no method developed for overall monitoring of complaints made and compliance with Section 17. A School Committee, on lines of the Committees mandated under the Sexual Harassment at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013 mechanism should be set up in all schools, with the participation of parents, to look into complaints of mental and physical harassment of students.
2. Such instances of remedial classes for students with disabilities must be mainstreamed within the education system and subject to appropriate norms of monitoring and qualifications, with active involvement of parents.
3. The provision of aids and appliances for students with disabilities to further their participation in the classroom and in extra and co curricular activities must be mandated.
4. Every student, principal, teachers, members of school management committees etc. should be oriented to child rights and related laws – including the Juvenile Justice Act, Child Labour Act and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The materials developed for these trainings must be accessible and available in simple language formats.
5. Concerns of adolescents, including sex education, shall be made available for girls and boys with disabilities with appropriate accessibility considerations to ensure that the same is accessible for them.
IV. LEARNING OUTCOMES IN SCHOOL EDUCATION
A. Context of students with disabilities
1. With regard to prescription of norms for learning outcomes, students, particularly those with developmental and learning disabilities, must have the benefit of individualized learning plans which focus on their developmental needs and not catering to a ‘one size fits all’ template of education goals. These learning plans must not fall into the trap of limiting the students to what teachers believe they can study, but developed with the participation of the child and the parents. Any system which prescribes norms for learning outcomes runs the risk of harming the overall development of students with disabilities.
2. Any relaxation of the parameters prescribed by the RTE Act with regard to infrastructure runs the risk of being exclusionary for students with disabilities. Students who are deprived and facing difficult circumstances should be given access to education, however it must not be forgotten that a significant percentage of such students may have disabilities and they are as much entitled to inclusion as others. While bureaucratic impediments to setting up schools in areas of strife may be relaxed to adapt to circumstances, the minimum quality of education cannot be compromised on and this includes the provision of accessible environment and reasonable accommodation and non discrimination against students with disabilities.
3. The identification of ‘academically weak students’ for remedials and detention must not be conflated with the failure of the school to provide the accommodation required for the full and effective participation of these students, who may be restricted on the grounds of actual or perceived impairments, poverty, gender, etc.
4. At present, many children with disabilities are reduced to superficial inclusion. They often sit in classes without being given any support and even after 12 years of education their learning outcomes are negligible.
B. Mechanisms
1. The development of individualized learning plans must be participatory and involve the teacher, the student and the students parents. Having an individualized learning plan shall never necessitate the denial of learning in an inclusive atmosphere.
2. The policy does not explain how assessment of students for the purpose of remedial trainings shall be undertaken. The assessment of a student to require detention must be approved before a committee comprising of teachers and parents, and such committee must be satisfied that the detention is required despite the provision of adequate accessible infrastructure and reasonable accommodation for the student.
V. SCHOOL EDUCATION
A. Context for students with disabilities
1. The Right to Education Act in the context of students with disabilities between the ages of 6 and 14 needs strict monitoring and data collection. There have been serious concerns raised by groups monitoring the implementation of the Act on the rates of dropouts of students with disabilities and the loophole created by the clause that allows for ‘home based education’ in Section 3 (3) of the Act. In many States, students who are classified to be receiving home-based education are not receiving any such facilities, yet their data is being used to show high rates of enrollment under the RTE. The Gross Enrollment Ratio data that is referred to in the Draft Policy does not include disaggregated data for students with disabilities at all levels of education.
2. The provisions with regard to inclusive education within the Right to Education Act must be extended to minority unaided institutions.
B. Development of an Action Plan for meaningful implementation of the RTE with respect to children with disabilities
The Government must begin the collection of disaggregated data on the inclusion of students with disabilities, on parameters that are developed in consultation with the Disabled Peoples Organizations that have been working towards monitoring of the Act.
VI. CURRICULUM RENEWAL AND EXAMINATION REFORMS
A. Context for students with disabilities
1. The move to revamp curriculum is a welcome one. From all perspectives, curriculum requires to evolve over time.
2. The curriculum should include a review of all current material to enable sensitivity to diversity – including caste, disability, gender, religion etc. Difference should be taught as diversity, and with respect to disability, which is dealt with under science (biology) classes, there must be an emphasis on the social model being introduced. India’s obligations under various human rights treaties must also be made part of the discourse.
3. Examinations are a useful feedback mechanism to understand what students have gained from education. There must be a move to make all written examinations online, and students with disabilities should be allowed all reasonable accommodations in order to ensure that they can take their examinations on an equal basis with others.
4. Many Boards provide a facility to exempt students with disabilities from certain subjects, allegedly in their best interests. This is discriminatory. If a student wishes to pursue a certain subject, they should be accommodated to do so.
5. Flexibility within the system to allow for individualized curriculum development in the context of individualized learning plans must be encouraged, provided that the same is according to the choice of the student and their family, and not on account of the incapacity of the school to make a syllabus accessible.
B. Mechanisms for implementation
1. While the examination system should be made accessible by developing modes for it to be taken electronically, efforts like the UGC guidelines on examinations for persons with disabilities should be incorporated at all levels.
2. A simple language version of the CRPD should be taught as part of the social studies curriculum.
3. While flexibility in curriculum is necessary, mandatory exemptions from subjects on the basis of impairments (e.g. mathematics exemption for blind students in 9th and 10th standard, language exemptions for deaf students etc.) should be done away with and all syllabus of all subjects should be made accessible.
4. The UGC Guidelines for conducting written examinations for persons with disabilities must be followed and adapted for the school education system and be made available across all school education boards recognized in India . All boards must allow and encourage students with blindness to write their own examinations on computer instead of taking writers.
5. Evaluations should be designed to test the compliance with learning outcomes hat are age appropriate in the context of overall life skills, with weightage reducing as the evaluation moves to wider areas which may not be of such crucial importance. For instance, greater weightage can be given to demonstration of ‘problem solving’ skills and analytical /critical thinking.
6. Teacher training should also include methodology to implement ‘continuous assessment’ of students which seems to be missing in execution.
VII. INCLUSIVE EDUCATION AND STUDENT SUPPORT
A. Context for students with disabilities
1. Teacher training at present is not equipping professionals to teach in a diverse classroom setting with children with different impairments. Special Education is governed by the Rehabilitation Council of India and Special Schools remain under the domain of the Ministry for Social Justice and Empowerment (Department of Disabilities). As a result, the current system of inclusive education expects that special educators attached to every school will ensure that the needs of students with disabilities are met. In reality, this is far from the case. The number of special educators in India is not enough to bridge the inclusive education gap. This, along with a lack of accessible infrastructure, school transport and teaching materials, discourages students with disabilities and their families from exercising their rights under the RTE. Accommodating students with disabilities is perceived to be more expensive for schools and so under the 25% of seats for disadvantaged groups, children with disabilities tend to get left behind.
2. The suggestion in the draft policy of “Special interventions will be undertaken to meet the educational needs of differently abled children and children with learning disabilities ...” should not be misconstrued to mean setting up of segregated institutions to teach these students.
3. Language contained in the draft policy including “devising a long term plan for addressing the problem of learning disabilities”; mandatory referrals of children with perceived or actual disabilities to a “sub-committee of experts comprising of child and clinical psychologists” seems to take precedence over the core principles of ensuring accessibility and reasonable accommodation. There must be less of an emphasis on diagnosis and labeling, and more of an emphasis on building inclusion. The system must move away from a ‘one size fits all’ approach to an individualized approach. This includes supporting parents of children with disabilities and the local community to provide after school support for these children and ensuring social cohesion.
4. The identity of being a person with disability includes the methods of communication and languages that are a part of this identity. Students with disabilities must be given access to learn these communication methods with an equal emphasis on reading, writing and communication.
5. It is crucial for a peer network to develop between students with disabilities currently in the higher education system with other students with disabilities who have graduated. This helps build confidence, and helps in identifying gaps in the system based on prior experience.
6. The policy has observed that inclusive education is especially problematic in rural areas. The feedback from those working in the field of inclusive education is that both rural and urban areas are equally found to have failed in creating a heterogeneous environment for inclusive education.
7. The granting of scholarships to ‘meritorious students’ often privileges those who can afford extra assistance, be it through external classes or familial support – and further marginalizes those who would benefit through some economic assistance.
B. Implementation
1. Each school need to be connected to central repository of accessible books and other teaching learning materials (TLMSs) that is accessible to all so that every teacher is not reinventing the wheel. Such a repository exists, having been built in India jointly by NIVH and the DAISY Forum of India.
2. Digital copy in EPUB format with accessibility guidelines and Unicode based font of every text book published or approved by text book board of the country needs to be deposited to this central repository of accessible books so that accessible format book reaches every student without any delay.
3. The State must provide one computer per child for students with impairments for whom computers would be a primary reading and writing tool e.g. vision impairment, developmental impairments etc. This also includes autistic children who actually do have difficulty writing but are denied computers because teachers do not believe or understand the nature of the impairment with regard to communication. Adequate training must be imparted to operate the same.
4. Communication and language methods require to be taught to students with disabilities, including Braille, Sign Language and Augmentative and Alternative Communication.
5. Provide mentorship programmes to children with disabilities and student support cells to enable them to interact with successful adults with disabilities who have gone on to pursue higher education and employment. Expose them to various career and educational options and technology solutions to pursue these career choices.
6. Non-disabled children of disabled parents need support to educate their children with benefits like scholarships, admission in neighbourhood school located close to their home (this is specifically true for large cities where commuting is an issue).
7. The evaluation of students eligible for scholarships etc. must be relooked at in order to benefit those who really require the same.
8. There is too much emphasis on the role of child psychologists in devising strategies around children with disabilities and their inclusion. There must be more involvement of teachers themselves and experiential experts in disability and inclusion.
VIII. LITERACY AND LIFELONG LEARNING
A. Context for persons with disabilities
1. Many adults with disabilities, particularly women with disabilities have not had access to adequate education, particularly in the rural areas. This is especially true for persons with disabilities who have been in long-term residential care. With some efforts, some children with disabilities in these institutions are given access to the right to education as long as they are deemed educable. There has been no disaggregated data collected to establish whether the reach of Saakshar Bharat has been extended to persons with disabilities, neither have specific accessibility measures been taken in the context of persons with disabilities. The policy layout of Saakshar Bharat does not address inclusion and accessibility at all .
2. There is a large percentage of the adult population among persons with disabilities who are illiterate. This is not just illiteracy in the conventional sense of being able to read, but also a deprivation of exposure to information and skills that can help them communicate – whether it is braille, assistive software, sign language etc.
B. Implementation
1. Linkages must be built with existing efforts at inclusion for persons with disabilities (e.g. Community Based Rehabilitation Projects, DPOs and State Federations for Persons with Disabilities) and situations where persons with disabilities are prone to isolation from the community (e.g. residential institutions) and to make current curriculum for education accessible to them.
2. Audio visual materials for remote education must be made accessible and in simple language with a universal design which can be used for everyone.
3. Learning aids need to be made available along with skilled teachers in adult education centres with knowledge of Braille, sign language etc.
IX. SKILLS IN EDUCATION AND EMPLOYABILITY
A. Context for persons with disabilities
1. Persons with disabilities who have received formal education are often excluded from courses that equip them with soft skills, life skills and entrepreneurial skills etc. to equip them not only for the formal employment market but also for living independently and within the community in general.
2. Skill development programmes for persons with disabilities have not seen any innovation and creativity and focus more on what the project designer thinks that persons with disabilities ‘can’ do. Often, these skill trainings are outdated by the time they are adapted for persons with disabilities.
B. Making skill development meaningful for persons with disabilities
1. Instead of segregation ensure that all efforts at skill development within the education system are made accessible for persons with disabilities.
2. Create a needs assessment among persons with disabilities, organizations working on employability of persons with disabilities etc. on a syllabus which meets the needs of persons with disabilities for the workplace and is designed to be accessible.
X. USE OF ICT IN EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
Information and Communication Technologies are well known to be absolutely essential in inclusive education, not only for making materials accessible, but also for ensuring maximum possible outreach to persons with disabilities, particularly those who may find themselves in situations of conflict or natural disasters for extended periods of time. For teachers with disabilities themselves, ICT is an important tool to facilitate their teaching methodology. The procurement of accessible assistive devices is essential towards ensuring the best and most universal use of ICT. At present, schemes such as e-basta are not entirely accessible though the website does host e-books which could be a valuable resource.
B. Implementation
1. All procurement and development of devices and technologies to facilitate the use of ICT in education must be in compliance with accessibility norms through a comprehensive procurement policy.
2. The State must provide one computer per child for students with impairments for whom computers would be a primary reading and writing tool e.g. vision impairment, developmental impairments etc. Adequate training must be imparted to operate the same.
3. Teachers need to learn to use ICT and infrastructure such as digital online library of accessible books and braille presses etc. to be able to deliver books in accessible formats to students. Any educational ICT infrastructure deployed in the country need to be usable with assistive technology such as the screen reading software.
4. All repositories maintained by the Government as well as all technology in assistive devices should, as far as possible, be free and open source software.
X. TEACHER DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. At present, no teacher training accounts for the possibility of having to engage with students with disabilities. Special education training is segregated. This poses a huge problem in the implementation of inclusive education. The present system is entirely dependent on the engagement of special educators, who themselves are in short supply and in fact inadequately trained in the rights based approach to inclusion of persons with disabilities. In such a situation, students with disabilities are often dependent on the involvement of their own family members, particularly mothers, and the kindness of their fellow students. It is of utmost importance that special education is mainstreamed and that a strong component is included in teacher training on inclusion of persons with disabilities.
2. The focus should not be on the ‘features’ of an impairment, but rather on what is required for their inclusion. Teacher training should therefore include a holistic approach to communication through various means, an understanding of reasonable accommodation, and other necessary skills like developing meaningful individualized learning plans where necessary.
3. Some students with disabilities require the assistance and support of caregivers to ensure their full participation at school. At present, school domestic and cleaning staff often play the role of assisting a student with disability who faces high restrictions in participation. These persons are not trained. This service must be professionalized and the staff must be trained in ensuring that all assistance rendered reinforces the dignity and self respect of persons with disabilities.
4. Persons with disabilities themselves are often refused to be taken on as teachers under the misconception that they will not be able to control the classroom on par with their able bodied colleagues. Persons with disabilities have been active in academia all over the world and lend a diversity to the education sector that is much needed.
B. Implementation
1. All levels of teacher training must include a primer on developing an inclusive teaching pedagogy. At the local level pre-service and in-service teacher training curriculum must comprehensively include the various aspects of inclusive education.
2. Training of special educators must be in line with a rights based approach to persons with disabilities and the CRPD, in ensuring their right to learn appropriate languages, scripts, and communication methods. These resource persons should be mandated to assist the class and subject teacher, and impart some extra support in learning Braille or Sign Language or AAC, but cannot take the child in isolation for segregated learning within an inclusive atmosphere.
3. A cadre of professional caregivers must be created from new recruits and existing personnel employed as ayahs etc. in schools and they must be given specific training in supporting persons with disabilities and ensuring their full and effective participation in schools.
4. Salaries of Special Educators must be on par with that of the ordinary teachers.
5. All teacher and staff trainings – special educators and otherwise – must be brought under the Ministry of Human Resource Development.
6. Refresher courses can include specific teaching/ learning challlanges the teacher is facing for peer learning. Many general teachers have come out with simple and brilliant doable ideas in the field. Such innovations can be rewarded and highlighted to create incentives.
XI. LANGUAGE AND CULTURE IN EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. Language is an extremely part of the culture of persons with disabilities – be it the learning of Braille for blind persons, the learning of sign language for the deaf community, or alternative and augmentative communication for persons with developmental and learning disabilities. Inclusive education cannot mean forcing students to sacrifice their right to learning these important tools.
2. Ethics education must also include exposure to diversity in the community, which includes the entire range of impairments that persons may experience, and means to accommodate and enable their participation. This will foster a more accepting society for persons with disabilities. Inclusive education is one of the most important means towards achieving this.
B. Implementation
1. Inclusive education of deaf children must include Indian Sign Language from the pre-primary levels of education, on par with the right of students to receive education in their regional language/’mother tongue’. The training of teachers must be in conjunction with efforts on the development of sign language that are currently underway with the Department of Persons of Disabilities.
2. Curriculum which includes a rights based introduction to the inclusion of persons with disabilities, along with exposure to their histories and culture, should be incorporated at the school education level.
XII. SELF DEVELOPMENT THROUGH COMPREHENSIVE EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. The policy speaks of physical education, yoga, games and sports, NCC, NSS, art education, Bal Sansad, covering local art, craft, literature and skills, and other co- scholastic activities. Co-curricular activities and extra-curricular activities are largely inaccessible for persons with disabilities. Though there have been many successful endeavours in the private sector with the use of art, theatre and dance as therapy for youth with psychosocial, developmental and learning disabilities, these are hardly incorporated in mainstream schooling setups. Playgrounds are not made accessible, and children with disabilities are exempted from physical education classes instead of finding suitable and much needed physical activity for them.
2. Children with disabilities have additional nutritional requirements which need to be taken into account in order to prevent the onset of secondary disabilities. Many of them may require interventions so that they may be able to eat and drink independently or with varying degrees of support.
B. Implementation
1. The design of all co and extra curricular programmes must be inclusive and instructors in art, physical education and other courses must be trained in inclusive pedagogies for persons with disabilities.
2. Nutritional planning for children must be comprehensive with an additional facility to incorporate additional nutritional needs for students with disabilities or health concerns and to also guide parents on optimal nutritional provisions for their children.
3. A cadre of caregivers must be created and engaged in order to provide support and training to children with disabilities to eat independently or with support.
XIII. SCHOOL ASSESSMENT AND GOVERNANCE
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. At present, there is no monitoring mechanism for the provision of inclusive education, either under the Right to Education Act or in higher education.
2. The system of School Management Committees under the RTE Act, where implemented, is not inclusive. Without persons experienced and committed towards ensuring inclusion in education in positions of power within the system, there will be very little catalyst for change.
3. Methodology with regard to assessment criteria must also include the views of children and their parents, and not be limited to paper assessment of schools.
B. Implementation
1. The RTE Rules should be amended to include a person with disability/person with experience working in the field of disability/parent or caregiver within the School Management Committee. Among the parents as part of the Committee, one seat must be given for the parent of a child with a disability or a parent with a disability.
2. Any School Quality Assessment and Accreditation System requires to take into account the experience of children with disability within the school system.
XIV. GOVERNANCE REFORMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. Time and again, students with disabilities have been in for rude shocks at entrance examination halls or at college interviews where they have been informed, directly or indirectly, that the institution had no intention of accommodating them . Even with the existence of UGC guidelines with regard to accommodation in examinations, which were prepared by the Commissioner of Disabilities, there are gross discrepancies in actual compliance.
B. Implementation
1. The Education Commission that is proposed under the Policy must include the concerns of persons with disabilities by including experts in the field of inclusive education, who are also following the innovations taking place across the world with regard to accommodation and inclusion.
2. Multistakeholder governance in Higher Education institutions must also include persons with disabilities.
3. All grievance redressal mechanisms envisaged by the policy must have mandatory accessibility considerations with all necessary accommodations extended to students who wish to seek grievance redressal.
XV. REGULATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. Persons with disabilities are often restricted in their choices for specialization within the higher education system. In Tamil Nadu, persons with visual impairments are often restricted to the Bachelor of Arts programme, and that too only language courses.
2. Residential accommodation for students is not accessible in most cases, and additional supports that may be required in a particular context are not available for students like mental health counseling, personal assistance etc. This severely restricts their choices for higher education.
3. Despite having a 3% reservation in higher education for persons with disabilities, there is no data to show how much of these seats are being filled disaggregated across impairments and what the rate of retention is in these cases.
B. Implementation
1. Data on the number of students availing of the disability reservation and their retention must be made available on a regular basis and part of mandatory disclosures under the Right to Information Act.
2. The National Higher Education Fellowship Programme must be made relevant for persons with disabilities and factor in the additional costs that a person with disability may encounter in the higher education system.
3. Residential arrangements for students with disabilities must subscribe to the National Building Code and other accessibility norms.
4. Higher Education institutions must provide for facilities like mental health counseling, personal assistance, peer counseling and student support groups for students with disabilities.
XVI. QUALITY ASSURANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION
A. Context for Students with Disabilities
1. It is of significance that the National Institutional Ranking Framework for engineering includes a component on ‘Outreach and Inclusivity’ that includes 10 marks for ‘facilities for the physically challenged students’ in the event that the Institute provides full facilities for physically challenged students. It is not clear as to how this access audit is to be conducted and by whom, but ‘the NAAC and NBA may be requested to provide their assessment, as possible’. There are also parameters for inclusion of the percentage of students with physical disabilities in management .
2. The National Assessment and Accreditation Council does not include accessibility or inclusion in its assessment criteria at present . There is no monitoring for quality of services provided for students with disabilities and students are often limited to the experience of their peers with similar impairments to judge the standard of accessibility and reasonable accommodation available to them.
B. Implementation
1. Parameters for assessment of accessibility and inclusion must be considered and included in all assessment and accreditation programmes. These parameters must look beyond just physical disabilities and include the concerns of persons with other impairments, and must also be developed in consultation with persons with disabilities.
XVII. OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING AND MOOCS
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. Like for all persons, there is a great scope of impact for Massive Open Online Courses on the lives of persons with disabilities. Many persons with disabilities have been excluded from opportunities in higher education and can use these opportunities as a cost effective way to better their own knowledge base. Around the world, persons with disabilities have benefitted from MOOCS like Coursera, which have specific accessibility policies and a non-exhaustive list of accommodations offered for a whole range of impairments .
2. While vocational training is important, MOOCS provide scope of learning beyond the goals of employability. Internationally, MOOCS have a wide range of courses which help people learn more about disability theory and rights .
B. Implementation
1. Mandatory minimum standards for accessibility of MOOCS, including compliance with the latest version of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines published by World Wide Web Consortium, must be set in place.
2. Available courses must include rights based approaches to disability rights.
XVIII. INTERNATIONALISATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION
A. Context for Students with disabilities
1. Students with disabilities have greatly benefitted from the accessibility and inclusion and acceptance that foreign universities have offered them. It is crucial that these lessons and experiences in inclusion are incorporated when higher education is being ‘internationalized’. The double-speak of accessibility and inclusion is common in relation to Multi-National companies incorporated in countries with mandatory accessibility legislation – Indian branches or subsidiaries continue to discriminate against persons with disabilities in hiring and in employment accommodations whereas such conduct would be actionable in the country where the headquarters were located.
B. Implementation
1. Mandatory minimum standards for accessibility, inclusion and reasonable accommodations, in line with the CRPD, must be developed and all Universities which open in India must conform to the same along with the disability policy of the main seat of the University.
2. Indian Universities which open abroad must comply with the Indian standards on disability inclusion in the absence of State or University mandates on the same.
XIX. FACULTY DEVELOPMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION
A. Context for Students with disabilities
1. Currently, special educators, when available, are limited to school education or equivalent for persons with disabilities. Academia teaching in higher education has little experience or training in the needs of students with disabilities and often they have to go by instinct or goodwill in making their students experience meaningful.
2. Persons with disabilities who have achieved MPhil and PhD degrees and are qualified to teach in higher education are often denied teaching posts outright instead of being given accommodations to enable them to teach.
B. Implementation
1. The Certificate in Teaching for those being recruited in the higher education as well as leadership programmes for senior posts must include primers on inclusion and accessibility for students with disabilities, and concepts like reasonable accommodation. There must also be continuing refreshers on these concepts and evolving technologies.
2. Constant interactions between faculty and students with disabilities are key in communicating suggestions for improving inclusion in the institution.
3. Recruitment policies for faculty must be non-discriminatory and qualified faculty who are persons with disabilities must be given the opportunity to teach and given all necessary accommodations to do so.
XX. RESEARCH, INNOVATION AND NEW KNOWLEDGE
A. Context for Students with disabilities
1. The academic ‘brain drain’ that is being alluded to in the policy is not only on account of research opportunities. Persons from various marginalized communities in India have found studying abroad extremely empowering as well as often the community and the family, as well as the surrounding environment, have added to the experience of oppression that they have felt. In the case of disability, foreign universities have been empowering experiences in terms of granting accessibility and acceptance to the diversity that such scholars bring to the table.
2. Centres of excellence at present have not met standards of acceptability in terms of access and inclusion. Many students with psychosocial disabilities, for instance, have found the environment of such centres toxic and difficult to cope with. Centres of excellence must not only be so in outcomes of research but must also excel in creating inclusive environments for a diversity of students, including those with disabilities, to be able to exchange ideas.
3. While many existing Centres of Excellence are producing great products and innovations for persons with disabilities, persons with disabilities themselves find it difficult to gain access to incubation opportunities offered by higher education institutions.
B. Implementation
1. Mandatory minimum standards with regard to infrastructural accessibility, reasonable accommodation and inclusion, must be developed in consultation with persons with disabilities, for all institutions accredited as ‘centres of excellence’, with monitoring mechanisms and grievance redressals in case of violations.
2. All publications and projects produced by the centres of excellence must be made accessible and available to all persons, including by hosting them in an accessible format for persons with disabilities.
3. Incubation centres must be made accessible for persons with disabilities, and specific concerns and challenges faced by entrepreneurs with disabilities must be addressed by incubators e.g. linkages to markets, access to information and communication etc.
XXI. FINANCING EDUCATION
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. As per the Persons with Disabilities Act of 1995, a minimum of 3% of the allocations towards any education scheme must be earmarked for persons with disabilities. This percentage is set to increase with the passage of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill.
2. An analysis of the allocations made under the various schemes for school and higher education for students with disabilities shows that there are four schemes that have specifically mentioned persons with disabilities as a target group – the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, the Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan, the University Grants Commission, and the scheme promoting higher education among persons with disabilities which has been launched recently. In a report compiled by Meenakshi B. of the Equals Centre for Promotion of Social Justice, these were the findings:
Year Department of School Education Department of Higher Education
SSA RMSA UGC Scheme promoting higher edu. Among persons with disabilities
2013-14 24801.96
2014-15 24039.08 3386 8906.41 NA
2015-16 21891 3534.71 9315.45 NA
2016-17 22500 3700 4286.94 2.0
Source: http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2016-17/eb/sbe52.pdf &http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2016-17/eb/sbe51.pdf
It could be observed a declining trend in allocation for SSA which is supposed to be the flagship programme and a vehicle for the implementation of the RTE. A marginal increase in allocation could be seen under RMSA. The UGC under the department of higher education has undergone a 50% slash. It is to be noted that these are the few programmes under the Ministry has specific mention / component for persons with disabilities. The overall reduction in allocation will mean a reduction in allocation for persons with disabilities.
In spite of mentioning persons with disabilities as a target group in a number of programmes, disaggregated data is maintained only on the union share of financial allocation under SSA and RMSA.
3. There is no social audit systems inbuilt as a part of the programme. This shows that there is no mechanism for the government to understand the efficiency of the programme particularly with respect to marginalized groups.
4. The criteria for judging the effectiveness of any programme depends on the:
a. Adequacy of allocation
b. Efficiency in spending
c. Optimal utilization of available resources
d. Adherence to the articles of CRPD and the national legislations and the
e. Accountability in terms of financial and physical data disaggregation
However with the SSA it was found that
i. There is a considerable reduction in the quantum of increment for the component compared to the previous year.
ii. 28 out of the 29 states underutilize the allocated resources across State even out of the Union’s share and there is an evidence of decreasing trend in the utilization.
iii. Most of the spending has been in the last quarter of the year. During the first quarter it has been very limited. This will have an impact on the quality of services as there are evidences that children do not get appropriate furniture, assistive devices, support services etc, once they are enrolled in schools.
iv. There is a lack of gender and constituency wise disaggregation of data at the Union level. However, it was observed that some states disaggregate data based on Gender and constituencies (ex: Tamil Nadu)
v. It is also a supply driven programme i.e. the physical and financial targets are decided by the Government and are not mandated to reach out all the demands from the community.
The Draft Report can be found at Annexure – B to this submission.
5. The SSA Framework states that per child component of Rs. 3000/ year could be incurred in a year to meet the special learning needs of children with disabilities . However on analysis of what activities are planned under special learning needs in Tamil Nadu (Tiruvallur district), it was found that the activities under the component include allocation to residential bridge course, day care centres, resource centres, salary of physiotherapists and special educators, Braille books, assistive devices, modification of teaching and learning materials, surgeries, training and sensitization of teachers, ramps and barrier free environment . Most of the components mentioned above should not be allowed under the specific learning needs of children with disabilities example barrier free environment, sensitization and awareness, sports, salary of teachers etc,. Instead all this should be part of the general heads such as building fund, salaries for teachers, general training and sensitization etc. Some of the other components such as day care centres, AIE, home based education should be withdrawn since they are not in lines with Article 24 of CRPD . Nearly 27% of the allocation to the districts goes in running these centres.
B. Implementation
1. Close monitoring of expenditure – with a minimum of 3% of the budgetary allocation of every education scheme on inclusive education - must be undertaken.
2. Release of funds should be restructured to ensure its timely delivery to schools, especially considering that the bulk of expenses towards ensuring inclusion of children across the board would be at the beginning if not before the school term begins.
3. The activities for which the Rs. 3000 per student as ‘special learning needs’ are utilized must be closely monitored and should ideally be limited to costs incurred towards reasonable accommodation of the particular child. Other heads should cover creation of accessible and universally designed teaching materials, provision of aids and appliances, salaries of special educators, and infrastructure.
4. Overall assessment of services provided for children with disabilities must be examined vis-à-vis the CRPD and whether it encourages an inclusive and rights based approach.
XXII. IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING
A. Context for Persons with Disabilities
1. At present the data with regard to inclusive education, be it overall rates of enrollment, rates of retention, and spending, are all extremely difficult to track. The efforts of a few Civil Society Organizations to obtain this data have been of great use to the sector to demand accountability in this front. Some important observations which were collected by Civil Society Organizations in their individual reports, as well as by activists working at the field level in response to this present effort to respond to the Draft NEP have highlighted the following:
i. That the classification of students as receiving home based education under the exception to the RTE for certain students with disabilities is leading to these students being stranded at home and never having received any home based support that is due to them .
ii. That the Rs. 3000 per student with disability for ‘special learning needs’ is directly handed to the student’s family in cash in certain schools in West Bengal and Orissa
iii. That students who wear glasses are counted as ‘Visually Impaired’ during data collection in Pune City
iv. There are high rates of dropouts from amongst students with Hearing Impairment
v. That students with disabilities in Tamil Nadu are often asked to produce their caste certificates along with their disability certificates for the purpose of availing of reservations in higher education .
vi. Despite the RTE Act provision for 25% enrolment of children from backward classes, most out of school children happen to be children with disabilities .
It is absolutely essential that this data is collected at source and made available in an accessible and open manner for effective civil society participation.
2. Persons with disabilities and organizations working on the inclusion of persons with disabilities can be valuable assets to the Ministry for the monitoring of the policy, as well as for inputs as the policy goes on to become more concrete – in terms of standards of infrastructure and services, and illustrations of best practices.
3. At present, even after 4 years of the recognition of the right to inclusive education and numerous Court rulings mandating the same, there is much to be desired in terms of infrastructure of schools and their practices towards promoting inclusion.
B. Implementation
1. Data with regard to enrollment and retention of students with disabilities must be collected on a regular basis and hosted in a manner that is accessible for all persons with disabilities and available in the various official languages in India as well as in an easy read format.
2. Gender and disability disaggregated data to be collected not only on enrolment by on attendance at all levels of education. This data to be mandatorily displayed by schools and other educational institutions under pro-active disclosures as mentioned under section 4 (b) of the Right to Information Act along with other 17 points mentioned under it.
3. Persons with Disabilities and/or their organizations must be part of all Committees entasked with development of standards for implementation, monitoring etc.
4. All aspects relating to Early Childhood Care and Education must be made inclusive and the concerns of persons with disabilities must be mainstreamed under the implementing agency, be it the Ministry of Women and Child Development, or the Ministry of Human Resource Development. The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment should only play the role of an advisory agency.
5. Social audits and access audits must be conducted of all schools to help modify infrastructure and instill mechanisms to ensure greater accountability for enhancing learning levels. The social audit must also look into the implementation of various schemes, performance of teachers, learning levels of students etc.
Anita
Aug 16, 2016, 1:10:06 AM8/16/16
to weth...@googlegroups.com
Looks great! Thanks for sharing
Best regards,
Best regards,
Anita
Access Consultant
Founder and Managing Trustee : www.ekansh.org
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EMAIL OVERLOAD? Choose digest email in your deliver settings instead.
--- For archives visit : https://groups.google.com/group/wethepwd/topics
You received this message because you are subscribed to "We the People with Disabilities of India" Google group.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "We the People (with Disabilities) of India" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wethepwd+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to weth...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/wethepwd.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wethepwd/CAN7%2Bzvo%3D2q6L_oQK5XhnSbi3cxv_pZctry%2BqZ3uvMnKxmKy7vQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
<Response to NEP Final Draft.docx>
<Feedback on the Right to Education Act 2010 on behalf of PWDs.docx>
captainjohann samuhanand
Aug 16, 2016, 3:09:29 AM8/16/16
to weth...@googlegroups.com
Dear Amba,
Is education only the read and write variety.? I recently saw a child without two hands helping her parents in making a living by helping in making jadus which they sell
.Then there are children who are helping their parents doing hazardous job like filling caps of bottles which contain hazardous chemicals..
With kind regards.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EMAIL OVERLOAD? Choose digest email in your deliver settings instead.
--- For archives visit : https://groups.google.com/group/wethepwd/topics
You received this message because you are subscribed to "We the People with Disabilities of India" Google group.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "We the People (with Disabilities) of India" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wethepwd+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to weth...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/wethepwd.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wethepwd/CAN7%2Bzvo%3D2q6L_oQK5XhnSbi3cxv_pZctry%2BqZ3uvMnKxmKy7vQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Greatness lies NOT in never falling but in Rising every time we fall.
Captain Johann Samuhanand,Bangalore.
Vaishnavi Jayakumar (Inclusive India)
Aug 16, 2016, 3:55:38 AM8/16/16
to We the Pwd Egroup, Amba Salelkar
Technically, the hazardous bit is illegal Capt Johann. Even if 'home-based' work. Recent child labour legislation is shilly-shallying on intent.
On vocational education, hope there are no restrictions or forced interventions Amba? Either on socio-economic profile or ability? Sorry, I know - not doing my homework :-(
Children allowed to work with family under Child Labour Bill amendment
7/20/2016
indianexpress.comThe Rajya Sabha on Tuesday passed a Bill that allows children below 14 to engage in “home-based work” with their families after school hours, or help their families in fields or forest gathering. It amended a 1986 law that prohibits child labour.
The amendment also allows children between 14 and 18, newly defined as ‘adolescents’, to work or be employed in other professions as well, except in “any of the hazardous occupations or processes” that have been listed in the law.
The amendment continues to prohibit the employment of children below 14 years of age in any “profession” and has increased the penalties for violators. Employers of children can be jailed for six months to two years or be fined Rs 20,000 to Rs 50,000 or both. The original 1986 law provided for imprisonment between three months and one year and a fine of Rs 10,000 to Rs 20,000.
Labour Minister Bandaru Dattatreya said the new law would help curb child labour. He said children were allowed to work with the family because there was no employer-employee equation in such situations.
However, many Opposition members were not very convinced and opposed the Bill, which was later passed by a voice vote. Ravi Prakash Verma of the Samajwadi Party said India had an “organised system of exploitation of children” and the amendment would only worsen the situation.
Vivek Gupta of Trinamool Congress was of the view that while agriculture had not been listed in the hazardous category, the use of chemicals and pesticides made it hazardous. He said family enterprises such as carpet weaving and beedi making were also hazardous for children.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wethepwd/CALHKEjtYar5_U6hM3VcJmDKMOrG4Xwn-Pbkpw1zSdnrJz0fMiA%40mail.gmail.com.
Dlu South
Aug 16, 2016, 8:16:55 AM8/16/16
to We the Pwd Egroup, Amba Salelkar
Hi Amba,
I support the representation and submissions for National Education Policy.
Pl add my name as Smitha Sadasivan, Vidya Sagar, Chennai. email: dlu....@gmail.com.
Thanks & Regards
Smitha
On 16 Aug 2016 13:25, "Vaishnavi Jayakumar (Inclusive India)" <vaishnavi...@inclusiveindia.info> wrote:
>
> Technically, the hazardous bit is illegal Capt Johann. Even if 'home-based' work. Recent child labour legislation is shilly-shallying on intent.
>
> On vocational education, hope there are no restrictions or forced interventions Amba? Either on socio-economic profile or ability? Sorry, I know - not doing my homework :-(
> Children allowed to work with family under Child Labour Bill amendment
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wethepwd+u...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To post to this group, send email to weth...@googlegroups.com.
>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/wethepwd.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wethepwd/CAN7%2Bzvo%3D2q6L_oQK5XhnSbi3cxv_pZctry%2BqZ3uvMnKxmKy7vQ%40mail.gmail.com.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Greatness lies NOT in never falling but in Rising every time we fall.
>>
>> http://www.captainjohann.blogspot.com
>> Captain Johann Samuhanand,Bangalore.
>>
>> --
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> EMAIL OVERLOAD? Choose digest email in your deliver settings instead.
>>
>> --- For archives visit : https://groups.google.com/group/wethepwd/topics
>>
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to "We the People with Disabilities of India" Google group.
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "We the People (with Disabilities) of India" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wethepwd+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to weth...@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/wethepwd.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wethepwd/CALHKEjtYar5_U6hM3VcJmDKMOrG4Xwn-Pbkpw1zSdnrJz0fMiA%40mail.gmail.com.
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> EMAIL OVERLOAD? Choose digest email in your deliver settings instead.
>
> --- For archives visit : https://groups.google.com/group/wethepwd/topics
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to "We the People with Disabilities of India" Google group.
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "We the People (with Disabilities) of India" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wethepwd+u...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to weth...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/wethepwd.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wethepwd/CAN7%2BzvrKr3a8wYdqS15XP8SQt5%3DvZmrNHX7khNQrghydUyATyw%40mail.gmail.com.
Rajiv Rajan
Aug 16, 2016, 8:19:02 AM8/16/16
to We the Pwd Egroup
Hi Amba
Please mention Ektha as a supporter of this document.
Rajiv Rajan
executive director
Ektha
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wethepwd/CAN7%2BzvrKr3a8wYdqS15XP8SQt5%3DvZmrNHX7khNQrghydUyATyw%40mail.gmail.com.
Anita
Aug 16, 2016, 9:35:36 AM8/16/16
to weth...@googlegroups.com
EKansh Trust, Pune too please. Thanks!
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wethepwd+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to weth...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/wethepwd.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wethepwd/CAGTKFZpu9NJwHOJq%3DMtAOukfM4%3D%3DhxAF4P1ge-EfCuwyFgWGeA%40mail.gmail.com.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages