Barriers to Inclusive Education: A Sociological Evaluation of Special Needs Education Service Delivery in Primary Schools in South West Ethiopia

Barriers to Inclusive Education: A Sociological Evaluation of Special Needs Education Service Delivery in Primary Schools in South West Ethiopia | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Barriers to Inclusive Education: A Sociological Evaluation of Special Needs Education Service Delivery in Primary Schools in South West Ethiopia Demelash Belay This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8292329/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The study aimed to evaluate the state of service delivery for students with special needs in public primary schools within Bench-Sheko Zone, Southwest Ethiopia, through the lens of Inclusion Theory. The research utilized a concurrent mixed-methods design, combining quantitative and qualitative data to provide a holistic view of the issue. The findings revealed that while the placement of students with special needs in schools is relatively adequate, significant challenges remain in other critical areas that underpin inclusive education. These challenges, which threaten the fundamental right of students to an inclusive education, span across the dimensions of access, acceptance, adapted curriculum, adapted teaching and assessment, as well as leadership and support structures. Issues such as physical inaccessibility within school facilities, the lack of individualized lesson plans and assessments tailored to the diverse abilities of students, ongoing budgetary constraints, and the inefficient use of available resources emerged as key barriers. Furthermore, the study revealed a limited commitment from local educational authorities to fully embrace and implement inclusive practices. The study underscores the urgent need for systemic reforms that align with inclusive educational principles to ensure equitable access for all learners, regardless of their abilities and in line with the ideals of Inclusion Theory. Special Education Inclusive Education Special Needs Education (SNE) Access Acceptance Curriculum Adaptation Educational Leadership Educational Support 1. Introduction Education is pivotal to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, particularly Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4), which emphasizes not only equitable quality education but also inclusion and lifelong learning for all (United Nations, 2015 ). Inclusion Theory contends that education systems should adapt to diverse learners rather than expecting learners to conform to a fixed system (Ryan, 2011 ). In Ethiopia, constitutional recognition of education as a human right, together with policies like the 1994 Education and Training Policy, Education Sector Development Programs (ESDP IV and V), the 2006 Special Needs Education Strategy, and the 2012 Inclusive Education Strategy, reflect this alignment with inclusive principles (Kebede & Phasha, 2024 ). The Growth and Transformation Plan II (2015/16–2020/21) further reinforces targeted support for children with special educational needs (MoE, 2016). Nevertheless, prevailing practices remain at odds with Inclusion Theory. Children with disabilities often face exclusion, segregation, and discrimination in mainstream education (Temesgen, 2018 ; Dy & Ninomiya, 2003 ). Deficiencies in teacher training, curriculum adaptation, and learning materials exacerbate marginalization (Woodhead et al., 2017 ). Despite policy pledges by the Ministry of Education to counteract exclusionary trends, access to education remains uneven—some children with disabilities continue to be placed in separate classes or denied schooling entirely (MoE, 2015; Kebede & Phasha, 2024 ). Recent research underscores that teacher competency and preparedness are critical for realizing inclusive education. For example, Kebede and Phasha ( 2024 ) highlight substantial gaps in pre-service and in-service teacher education, including inadequate understanding of inclusion, limited experiential learning, and poor self-efficacy among educators in Ethiopia. Inclusion Theory emphasizes that teachers’ attitudes and self-efficacy significantly influence student well-being in inclusive settings (Cologon, 2024 ). Moreover, multistakeholder collaboration—including policy implementers, communities, and school leadership—has been identified as indispensable for dismantling systemic barriers to inclusion in Ethiopian education (Kebede & Phasha, 2024 ). Against this theoretical and empirical backdrop, the present study sought to examine how service delivery to students with special needs in the public primary schools of Bench-Sheko Zone aligned with Inclusion Theory’s principles—particularly in terms of equitable access, infrastructure, pedagogical flexibility, and school leadership. 2. Statement of the Problem According to the Ministry of Education (2016), approximately 71,007 students with special educational needs attended primary school in 2014/15 (2007 E.C.), falling substantially short of the targeted 1,739,000. Factors include misclassification, regional data gaps (notably in Afar and Somali regions), and limited recognition of special needs (MoE, 2016). Additionally, only 7,322 students with special needs were enrolled in secondary education in 2016 (Grades 9–12), with a gender imbalance favoring males (MoE, 2016). Literature since 2022 emphasizes the gap between policy intentions and practice in Ethiopia’s inclusive education journey. Achaw et al. ( 2024 ) found that Ethiopia’s policy framework lacks a cohesive comprehensive inclusive education policy, suffers from weak organizational structures, resource scarcity, unreliable data systems, and insufficient financing. This systemic weakness impedes meaningful inclusion. Kebede and Phasha’s ( 2024 ) study further reveals that teacher education programs inadequately build competencies for inclusive education. Educators often lack practical training, theoretical grounding, and self-efficacy—all essential for inclusive practices, in line with Inclusion Theory which stresses structural adaptation and teacher readiness. Kebede & Phasha ( 2024 ) point to the absence of effective multisectoral collaborations. Although Ethiopia has operational policies—like the Inclusive Education Resource Centers and differentiated curriculum guidelines—their implementation is hampered by poor coordination among stakeholders, including educators, parents, policymakers, and communities. Moreover, Genovesi et al. ( 2024 ) demonstrate that inclusive education can support children with developmental disabilities by facilitating peer relationships and learning; however, insufficient teacher training and lack of safeguarding mechanisms can exacerbate risks such as social exclusion or bullying. This highlights the importance of prioritizing teacher preparation and safety measures within inclusion frameworks. These findings suggested that whereas Ethiopian primary schools might have policy intent toward inclusion, actual implementation likely fell short of Inclusion Theory’s ideals: infrastructure and materials remained inaccessible; teacher capacity to differentiate or employ assistive tools was limited; and opportunities to harness inclusive technologies were unexplored. Moreover, as previous research in Ethiopia tended to focus on discrete disability categories and often omitted parental perspectives or context-specific inclusive strategies, there was a clear knowledge gap regarding the integrated delivery of inclusive services in Bench-Sheko primary schools. Thus, this study addresses a critical gap by exploring the current state of service delivery to students with special needs in Bench-Sheko Zone’s public primary schools—focusing on enrollment, teacher preparedness, access to inclusive curricula and resources, facility accessibility, and the role of school leadership. In doing so, it contributes to the empirical and theoretical understanding of inclusive education implementation in under-researched rural Ethiopian regions. 3. Research Gaps The literature review conducted for this study revealed several gaps in the existing body of research on special needs education (SNE) in Ethiopia. These gaps are essential for guiding the direction of the study and highlighting areas that have not been thoroughly explored in previous investigations. 3.1. Focus on Specific Disabilities Most of the studies reviewed were primarily focused on a singular type of disability, limiting the broader understanding of how various types of disabilities are addressed within the same educational setting. This narrow focus presents an incomplete picture of the needs and experiences of learners with diverse disabilities, thus neglecting the intersectionality of different impairments in the classroom (Florian & Hawkin., 2011). Recent research emphasizes the need to examine the inclusive practices for various disabilities simultaneously, as learners with different needs often share common educational barriers and require comprehensive, individualized approaches (Florian & Hawkin., 2011). This gap is critical because inclusive education policies should support all learners, irrespective of their specific disabilities. 3.2. Special Schools vs. Regular Schools Another significant gap identified in the literature is the overwhelming concentration of studies on special schools designed for specific disabilities. While special schools have contributed to the development of SNE, they often operate in isolation from regular schools, reinforcing segregation rather than promoting inclusion (Geleta, 2019 ). Inclusion Theory, as conceptualized by scholars like Inclusion Spectrum ( 2022 ), posits that inclusive education should not be seen as an isolated provision but as a holistic approach that integrates all learners into mainstream educational settings. In line with this, there is a pressing need for more studies focusing on inclusive education practices within regular public primary schools. 3.3. Limited Parental Involvement Although previous studies considered the views of students with special educational needs (SEN) and their teachers, the voices of parents/guardians were often underrepresented. Parental involvement is a crucial factor in the success of inclusive education (Wurf, 2022 ). Parental perspectives on the barriers to inclusion and their role in educational outcomes can provide a deeper understanding of the socio-cultural factors affecting the quality of education for children with SEN. The inclusion of parental input is vital for developing a more inclusive educational system that responds effectively to the needs of all students. 3.4. Geographical Focus Despite the growing body of research on SNE in Ethiopia, there was no study focusing specifically on public primary schools in Bench-Sheko Zone in Southwest Ethiopia. This geographical gap is significant because the challenges of delivering inclusive education may differ across regions due to cultural, socio-economic, and infrastructural factors (Genovesi et al., 2024 ). This study sought to fill this gap by examining the specific state of SNE in this under-researched zone, offering insights into local conditions and practices. Therefore, the general objective of this study was to assess the special needs education service delivery practices in selected public primary schools in Bench-Sheko Zone. The study also aimed to achieve the following specific objectives: Investigating the existing conditions regarding the acceptance, registration, and attendance of students with special needs. Evaluating the availability of trained special education teachers, an inclusive curriculum, and professional support teams. Assessing the accessibility of school facilities, infrastructure, teaching aids, and instructional materials. Examining the role of school management bodies in overseeing service delivery for students with special needs. 4. Research Questions This study sought to answer the following research questions: What are the existing conditions for the acceptance, registration, and attendance of students with special needs in public primary schools in Bench-Sheko Zone? Are there sufficiently trained special education teachers, an inclusive curriculum, and a team of professionals for students with special needs in public primary schools in the zone? Are the school facilities, infrastructure, teaching aids, and instructional materials accessible to students with special needs in public primary schools in the zone? What role do school management bodies play in managing service delivery to students with special needs in the study area? 5. Conceptual Framework The study adopts a modified version of Mitchell's (2014) inclusive education conceptual framework to assess the current state of special needs education in Bench-Sheko Zone's public primary schools. Inclusive education (IE) is fundamentally defined as educating learners with special educational needs within regular education settings, promoting equal opportunities for all students regardless of their abilities (Side, 2018 ). Mitchell’s (2004) original framework conceptualizes inclusive education as a multi-dimensional process, where various factors interact to ensure the full inclusion of students with special needs. The original framework can be summarized as follows: IE = V + P + AC + AA + AT + AC + AS + S + R + L Where: V = Vision P = Placement AC = Adapted Curriculum AA = Adapted Assessment AT = Adapted Teaching AC = Acceptance A = Access S = Support R = Resources L = Leadership This study adapted the framework as it is with the exception of the vision dimension which was found to be less significant for a study focused on delivery practices as opposed to policy or design. With that slight modification, the framework was found to be suitable for addressing the local context and provide a more inclusive view of the current SNE practices in the study area. The key components of the adopted framework are discussed below: Placement Inclusive education calls for learners with special needs to be placed in age-appropriate, local schools, and integrated into mainstream classes, irrespective of their abilities (Mitchell, 2014 ). This is in line with recent findings by Hendrickson and Lee (2023), which highlight the importance of placing learners with special needs within their neighborhood schools to foster a sense of belonging and community. Adapted Curriculum In inclusive classrooms, the standard curriculum should be adapted to accommodate the abilities and interests of all learners. For students with special needs, this may involve modifying content to ensure it is age-appropriate yet pitched at a developmentally suitable level (Mitchell, 2014 ). A study by Genovesi et al., ( 2024 ) support this view, emphasizing that curriculum differentiation is key to meeting diverse learning needs in inclusive settings. Adapted Teaching and Assessment The adaptation of teaching methods and assessment tools is crucial to ensure that all students, including those with special needs, can participate fully in the educational process. Assessment practices should reflect any curricular adaptations and provide individualized feedback to guide student progress (Mitchell, 2014 ). Recent evidence from inclusive classrooms suggests that data-driven instruction can significantly improve outcomes for students with special needs (Zhang, & Zhang, 2022 ). Acceptance The concept of acceptance refers to the recognition of the rights of students with special educational needs to be educated alongside their peers in general education settings. This includes social and emotional acceptance, not only educational (Mitchell, 2014 ). A study by Worku ( 2025 ) emphasizes that emotional acceptance is as crucial as academic inclusion in fostering a supportive learning environment. Access Physical access to educational facilities is another fundamental element of inclusive education. This includes the availability of ramps, adapted toilets, and sufficient space for wheelchairs. Additionally, the physical environment must consider other factors, such as lighting, ventilation, and classroom arrangement, to ensure students’ needs are met (Mitchell, 2014 ). Accessibility remains a significant challenge in many Ethiopian schools, particularly in rural areas (Zhang, & Zhang, 2022 ). Support and Resources Inclusive education requires the collaboration of multiple professionals, including general educators, special education experts, therapists, and assistants. Schools must ensure adequate resources, such as specialized teaching aids, equipment, and staffing, to support the inclusion of students with special needs (Mitchell, 2014 ). Recent studies highlight that a well-equipped support team is essential for overcoming the barriers to inclusion (King-Sears et al., 2023 ). Leadership Effective leadership plays a pivotal role in the successful implementation of inclusive education. Leaders must demonstrate a strong commitment to diversity, set realistic expectations, and work collaboratively with teachers, parents, and communities to achieve positive educational outcomes (Ainscow & Sandill, 2010 ). According to a study by Ainscow & Sandill ( 2010 ), leadership in inclusive education requires a commitment to fostering an inclusive culture within schools, particularly in low-resource settings. 6. Research Methodology 6.1. Description of the Study Area The study was conducted in the Bench-Sheko zone, located in the newly formed South West Ethiopia Peoples’ Region. This zone is bordered by the Kaffa zone to the northeast, Sheka zone to the southeast, and West Omo zone to the northwest. Situated approximately 561 km from Addis Ababa, the Bench-Sheko zone encompasses a total area of 4042.7 square kilometers (BSZPC, 2024). The region is composed of six rural Woredas—namely Shay-Bench, Gidy-Bench, North-Bench, South-Bench, Sheko, and Guraferda—as well as the Mizan-Aman and Seiz town administrations. Given the diversity and remoteness of the area, the study aimed to capture an in-depth picture of the state of special needs education services in Bench-Sheko’s primary schools. These schools serve a population that includes students from diverse socio-economic and cultural backgrounds, which is vital in understanding the barriers and enablers to inclusive education (Genovesi et al., 2024 ). 6.2. Research Design In line with the principles of Inclusion Theory, which stresses the importance of both quantitative and qualitative approaches for a holistic understanding of inclusion practices (Mitchell, 2014 ), the study adopted a concurrent mixed methods research design. This design was chosen because it enables the combination of numerical data with qualitative insights to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the issues surrounding special needs education in Bench-Sheko Zone. As noted by Burchett ( 2014 ), a mixed-methods approach is valuable in contexts where the complexity of the research questions requires both the breadth of quantitative data and the depth of qualitative insights. This approach enabled the researcher to address the study's objectives by concurrently collecting quantitative data on the prevalence and types of disabilities in primary schools, as well as qualitative data from teachers, parents, and school administrators regarding the experiences and challenges of inclusive education. The quantitative component of the study involved a survey administered to 259 parents/guardians of students with special needs, and the qualitative component consisted of semi-structured interviews with school administrators, special needs teachers, and local government officials. This design provided a nuanced view of the barriers to inclusive education, including physical, social, and instructional challenges that directly relate to the concepts of acceptance and access within Inclusive Education frameworks (Side, 2018 ). 6.3. Study Population and Sampling Design 6.3.1. Study Population According to the Bench-Sheko Zone Education Office (BSZA, 2023), the zone has 237 schools, with a total student enrollment of 201,584 students in the 2023/24 academic year. Of these, 7,496 primary school students were classified as having disabilities, a figure that represents 4.97% of the primary student population. Additionally, the study revealed that 733 students were identified as requiring specialized assistance for their special needs, making them the focus of this research. The data on the distribution of students with disabilities by type revealed that these learners faced a range of challenges, including physical, sensory, emotional, and cognitive disabilities, each of which may require different educational supports (Ainscow & Sandill, 2010 ). The focus of the study was on the parents/guardians of the 733 students who were in primary schools, along with the 26 special needs teachers serving in the schools. These participants were considered central to understanding the practical implications of inclusive education in the region, particularly regarding the availability of trained staff, curriculum adaptations, and the support systems available (Florian & Hawkin., 2011). 6.3.2. Sampling Design A combination of probability and non-probability sampling techniques was employed. For the parents/guardians, a simple random sampling technique was used, ensuring each parent had an equal chance of being selected for the survey. The researcher drew the sample using a random number table to maintain randomness and minimize selection bias (Joskow & Yamane, 1965 ). According to the formula for sample size determination, the final sample consisted of 259 parents/guardians (see the calculation below). The use of random sampling enabled the study to draw conclusions that were generalizable to the broader population of parents of students with special needs in the region. The sample size was determined using Joskow & Yamane’s ( 1965 ) formula: n = N/ \(\:(1+\varvec{N}{\left(\varvec{e}\right)}^{2}\) ) Where, n = Sample Size; N = Total Number of Parents/Guardians; e = Margin of Error at 5% (0.05). Therefore n = N / \(\:(1+\mathbf{N}{\left(\varvec{e}\right)}^{2}\) ) = 733 / \(\:(1+733\:{\left(0.05\right)}^{2}\) ) = 258.78 n = 259 For the special needs teachers, given their small number (26), a census was conducted, meaning all teachers participated in the study. In addition, purposive sampling was employed to select school administrators and local government officials, as these individuals possess specialized knowledge regarding the implementation of inclusive education policies and practices. The purposive sample included three school principals, two heads of Woreda-level education offices, and the head of a special needs resource center. These participants were interviewed to provide in-depth insights into the broader policy and organizational challenges that affect service delivery to students with special needs (Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011 ). 6.4. Methods of Data Collection 6.4.1. Primary Data Primary data were directly gathered from the sampled respondents and the study area. The researcher employed questionnaires, interviews, and observations to collect the primary data necessary to explore the inclusion and exclusion practices in special needs education (SNE) within the context of Bench-Sheko Zone. This multi-method approach aligns with Inclusion Theory, which advocates for integrating multiple perspectives and experiences in educational research to capture the complexity of inclusive practices (Ainscow et al., 2006 ). Questionnaires : Structured questionnaires were the primary tool used to collect data from parents/guardians of students with special needs and teachers in the study area. Two separate versions of the questionnaire were created: one for parents/guardians and another for teachers. The questions in the questionnaires were grounded in indicators identified within the Special Needs and Inclusive Education Measurement Scale developed by Mitchell ( 2014 ), which is widely used in the field of inclusive education for assessing various dimensions such as placement, adapted curriculum, teaching and assessment adaptations, acceptance, access, and support and resources. These dimensions are central to understanding the ways in which educational institutions either foster or hinder inclusive practices (Florian & Spratt, 2013 ). The inclusion of these key elements helped align the study with the broader goals of Inclusion Theory, which focuses on both structural and attitudinal barriers to inclusion (Ainscow et al., 2006 ). To ensure the reliability of the data, both questionnaires were translated into Amharic and validated for cultural and linguistic appropriateness. Moreover, the study ensured the quality of the data collection by providing orientation and training to enumerators on how to present the questions in ways that respondents could easily understand and relate to. This approach was designed to mitigate any potential barriers stemming from language, literacy, or cultural differences (Zhang, & Zhang, 2022 ). Interviews : Interviews were conducted with six key informants: three principals of public primary schools, two heads of Woreda-level education offices, and the head of a special needs resource center. These interviews allowed the researcher to probe deeply into the perspectives of educational leaders and policymakers, gathering insights into the challenges and opportunities they perceive for advancing inclusive education in the region. The interviews were structured around themes such as the state of special needs education, challenges to inclusion, and strategies for enhancing accessibility (Mitchell, 2023). The inclusion of these qualitative perspectives was crucial for understanding the institutional dynamics that contribute to the inclusion or exclusion of students with special needs in the region (Kozleski et al., 2014 ). Observation In addition to surveys and interviews, the researcher utilized observational methods to collect data on the actual conditions in schools, such as the accessibility of school facilities, the quality of classroom environments, and the teaching practices employed in inclusive settings. The researcher used a detailed observation checklist, specifically designed for this study, to guide observations and ensure that key areas—such as physical accessibility, instructional methods, and learning materials—were systematically assessed. The observational data complemented the self-reported data, providing a more comprehensive picture of the practices and barriers that contribute to or hinder inclusion (Genovesi et al., 2024 ). 6.4.2. Secondary Data The study also incorporated secondary data, which provided valuable contextual information about the state of special needs education in Bench-Sheko Zone. Secondary data sources included published and unpublished research reports, statistical records, and other educational documents retrieved from digital libraries and relevant government databases. Additionally, lesson plans, student records, meeting minutes, and other administrative documents from the selected schools and education offices were examined. The inclusion of secondary data allowed the researcher to triangulate findings, comparing them with existing reports and statistics on SNE provision in the region (Hashimov, 2014 ). This helped to ensure a richer, more nuanced analysis of the educational context, consistent with Inclusive Education Theory, which emphasizes the importance of understanding local educational systems in their entirety (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). 6.5. Methods of Data Analysis The analysis of the data was conducted using both quantitative and qualitative methods, in line with the mixed-methods approach, which aligns with Inclusion Theory’s call for the integration of diverse data sources to achieve a fuller understanding of educational practices (Phillips et al., 2023 ). Quantitative Data Analysis The quantitative data collected through surveys were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22. The analysis included both descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. Descriptive statistics, such as mean, mode, median, variance, and standard deviation, were used to summarize the responses from the questionnaire items. Additionally, t-tests and ANOVA were employed to assess differences in perceptions between different groups (parents/guardians and teachers) and between schools in relation to the dimensions of special needs education (Strunk & Mwavita, 2024 ). These statistical methods provided insights into the extent of agreement or disagreement on key issues related to special needs education and helped identify significant patterns in the data. Qualitative Data Analysis The qualitative data collected from interviews and observations were analyzed using content analysis, a systematic technique for organizing and interpreting textual data. The analysis involved identifying recurring themes, patterns, and connections related to the challenges and opportunities for inclusive education. The researcher focused on data relevant to the research questions, organizing it in terms of its contribution to understanding the practice of inclusion or exclusion in the study area. This analysis was triangulated with data from the quantitative survey and personal observations, allowing the researcher to cross-verify findings and ensure the robustness of the conclusions drawn (Bell et al., 2022 ). 6.6. Reliability and Validity The reliability of the study refers to the consistency and trustworthiness of the data and findings. As noted by Chakrabartty (2013), reliability in educational research is essential for ensuring that the study's conclusions are dependable and replicable. To increase the reliability of the study, the researcher employed the Special Needs and Inclusive Education Measurement Scale developed by Mitchell ( 2014 ), an established scale that has been rigorously tested for validity and reliability in various contexts (Mitchell, 2014 ). A Cronbach’s alpha test was conducted on the collected data to assess the internal consistency of the measurement scale. The result, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.902, indicates a high level of reliability for the instruments used in the study, ensuring that the questions in the survey and the data they generated were consistent and accurate (Tavakol & Dennick, 2011 ). Validity refers to the extent to which the study measures what it intended to measure and the credibility of the findings (Mohajan, 2018 ). To ensure internal validity, the researcher used peer review and reflexivity throughout the research process. The researcher also ensured heterogeneity within the sample by including parents/guardians of students with different types of disabilities and by selecting respondents from diverse schools across various locations within the study area. Additionally, the sampling methods, data collection procedures, and analysis techniques were thoroughly described to enable future researchers to replicate the study, a process critical for ensuring the external validity of the findings (Burchett, 2014 ). 7. Results 7.1. Participant Demographics A total of 26 special needs education (SNE) teachers and 259 parents/guardians of students with special needs participated in this study. Among the teachers, 19 (73.1%) were male and 7 (26.9%) female, while the parent/guardian sample included 180 (69.5%) males and 79 (30.5%) females. The teachers’ ages ranged from 23 to 50 years (M = 33.08, SD = 7.29), while the ages of the students, as reported by their parents/guardians, ranged from 6 to 18 years (M = 11.50, SD = 2.86). Regarding familial relationships to the child, the majority were fathers (94; 36.3%), followed by mothers (93; 35.9%), and the rest were brothers, sisters, or other guardians. The types of disabilities reported by parents/guardians were diverse, with the most common being multiple impairments (78; 30.1%), followed by hearing impairment (46; 17.8%), speech/language impairment (35; 13.5%), visual impairment (34; 13.1%), and general learning disabilities (23; 8.9%). Grade-level distribution showed that most students were in Grade 1 (93; 35.9%), followed by Grade 2 (69; 26.6%) and Grade 3 (37; 14.3%). These demographic distributions demonstrate an inclusive sampling range that captures a broad spectrum of age, disability type, and familial context, in line with Inclusion Theory’s emphasis on intersectionality and diversity (Genovesi et al., 2024 ). 7.2. Special Needs Education Placement, Acceptance, and Access The study aimed to assess the placement, acceptance, and access surrounding special needs education (SNE) in the study area. The results indicated that the majority of respondents had positive views on the placement of students in neighborhood schools. Specifically, 10 (38.5%) of the teachers strongly agreed, and 133 (51.4%) of the parents/guardians agreed that students with special educational needs attended nearby schools. Regarding the age-appropriateness of classes, while 7 (26.9%) of the teachers disagreed, 149 (57.5%) of the parents/guardians agreed that students were placed in age-appropriate classes. These findings align with principles of inclusive education (IE), which argue that students with disabilities should learn in integrated, age-appropriate environments (Collins, 2012 ). The acceptance dimension, a key tenet of Inclusion Theory, was also measured through respondents’ views on the commitment of school governing bodies, local governments, and staff to inclusive education. The data revealed widespread agreement on the recognition of the rights of learners with special needs to receive inclusive education. Most teachers (21; 80.8%) and a significant portion of parents/guardians (103; 39.8%) strongly agreed that school governing bodies and local educational authorities respected these rights. Furthermore, 80.8% of teachers and 56% of parents/guardians agreed that principals and staff recognized and supported the rights of students with special needs to inclusive education. These results highlight the role of institutional attitudes and structures in fostering inclusivity (Zhang, & Zhang, 2022 ). Schools also demonstrated strong social and emotional acceptance of students with special needs, with 18 teachers (69.2%) and 110 parents/guardians (42.5%) agreeing that the schools met the emotional and social needs of these learners. In terms of physical access, a crucial aspect of inclusive education, the study found mixed results. While 9 (34.6%) teachers and 61 (23.6%) parents/guardians agreed that schools had adequate physical access for learners with disabilities, a significant proportion of parents (41; 15.8%) and teachers (6; 23.1%) disagreed. This discrepancy indicates ongoing challenges in ensuring physical accessibility, a key barrier to inclusion (Clough & Corbett, 2000 ). Additionally, while teachers were generally satisfied with the interior design of the classrooms and school facilities, with 34.6% agreeing that the design catered to learners with physical disabilities, a substantial number of parents (52; 20.1%) expressed concerns. Finally, on the environmental conditions of the classrooms, such as lighting and acoustics, 50.2% of parents and 26.9% of teachers reported positive perceptions, suggesting a need for further improvements to create fully accessible and inclusive learning environments (Mitcham et al., 2009 ). 7.2.1. Statistical Analysis of Data on Special Needs Education Placement, Acceptance, and Access To further examine the variations in perspectives between teachers and parents/guardians regarding the placement, acceptance, and access dimensions of Special Needs Education (SNE), an independent samples t-test (Table 1 ) was conducted. The results indicated that while both groups held differing views on all three dimensions, only the difference in the acceptance dimension was statistically significant. Specifically, the mean score for teachers' views on the acceptance of students with special needs in their respective schools (M = 4.77) was significantly higher than that of parents/guardians (M = 3.86), with a p-value of 0.000. This difference in mean scores (0.91 on a 5-point scale) suggests that teachers generally held more favorable views regarding the school's acceptance of students with special needs. These findings align with previous research, which has shown that educators are often more supportive of inclusive practices when they have been trained and have direct experience with inclusive education (Obiakor et al., 2012 ). Teachers' more positive views could be attributed to their professional role and greater exposure to inclusive education policies, while parents' views may be influenced by the reality of limited resources and support systems that hinder effective inclusion (Collins, 2012 ). Table 1 Comparison of Responses from Teachers and Parents/Guardians on the Placement, Acceptance and Access Dimensions of SNE (n = 26 teachers and 259 parents/guardians) Variable M SD t df p Placement − .877 26.437 .388 Teachers 3.46 1.272 Parents/Guardians 3.68 .676 Acceptance 7.958 41.311 .000 Teachers 4.77 .514 Parents/Guardians 3.86 .875 Access − .471 283 .638 Teachers 3.04 .916 Parents/Guardians 3.14 1.092 t and df were adjusted because variances were not equal, Source: Survey (2024) Moreover, the significant difference in the acceptance dimension highlights a crucial area for intervention, as it reflects not only the recognition of the rights of students with special needs but also the schools' readiness to embrace inclusive practices both socially and pedagogically (Zhang, & Zhang, 2022 ). Inclusion Theory underscores the need for a collective effort from all stakeholders—teachers, parents, and the broader community—to foster an inclusive environment. The contrasting perspectives between teachers and parents/guardians may be indicative of a gap in communication or a mismatch between institutional policies and community experiences of inclusion (Zaorska, 2024 ). Thus, addressing these disparities is essential to create an inclusive educational ecosystem that extends beyond policy to actual practice. To further understand the differences within the teachers' responses across different schools, ANOVA tests (Table 2 ) were conducted on the data collected from the teachers regarding the placement, acceptance, and access dimensions of SNE. The results revealed that while no significant differences were observed in the placement and access dimensions (F = 1.594, p = 0.199 and F = 0.734, p = 0.673, respectively), a statistically significant difference was found in the acceptance dimension (F = 4.103, p = 0.007). This indicates that teachers in different schools had varied perceptions of how inclusive and accepting their respective schools were towards students with special needs. The findings reflect that institutional factors, such as school leadership, resources, and local policies, could influence teachers' perceptions of inclusion (Genovesi et al., 2024 ). As Inclusion Theory suggests, true inclusivity depends on systemic changes that address these localized discrepancies, ensuring that all schools provide equitable educational experiences for students with special needs (Obiakor et al., 2012 ). Table 2 ANOVA Tests on Responses from Teachers in Different Schools on the Placement, Acceptance and Access Dimensions of SNE Variable Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Placement Between Groups 19.128 9 2.125 1.594 .199 Within Groups 21.333 16 1.333 Total 40.462 25 Acceptance Between Groups 4.615 9 .513 4.103 .007 Within Groups 2.000 16 .125 Total 6.615 25 Access Between Groups 6.128 9 .681 .734 .673 Within Groups 14.833 16 .927 Total 20.962 25 Source: Survey (2024) 7.3. Special Needs Education Curriculum, Teaching, and Assessment The study also sought to evaluate the curriculum, teaching strategies, and assessment practices in Special Needs Education (SNE) in the Bench-Sheko Zone. Drawing on the principles of Inclusion Theory, which emphasizes equal access, participation, and learning opportunities for all students, the study focused on three key areas: the generality and adaptability of the SNE curriculum, the use of diverse teaching strategies, and the extent to which assessment practices consider the needs and abilities of students with disabilities. Inclusion Theory advocates for curricula that are not only accessible but also responsive to the varied needs of all learners, particularly those with disabilities (Kueker, 2000 ). The research aimed to explore how the curriculum, teaching, and assessment practices in the study area either facilitated or hindered inclusive educational experiences. The findings revealed a significant divide between teachers and parents/guardians regarding the SNE curriculum. While a majority of teachers (57.7%) strongly agreed that the curriculum was broadly similar for all learners, most parents/guardians (46.3%) disagreed with this statement. This disparity points to a potential gap between the theoretical design of the curriculum and its practical implementation in the classroom (Ainscow et al., 2006 ). Teachers’ views may be influenced by their professional training and familiarity with inclusive policies, whereas parents may experience a mismatch between policy and actual practice. Furthermore, the study found that teachers (57.7%) largely disagreed that the curriculum was adapted to meet the diverse abilities and interests of learners, while parents (51.4%) shared similar concerns. This gap suggests that while the curriculum may be designed with a broad view of inclusion, it may lack the specificity needed to accommodate the diverse needs of learners, especially those with more complex disabilities (Kozleski et al., 2014 ). However, both teachers (30.8%) and parents (34.7%) agreed that universal design principles were employed in the development of curricula, indicating an alignment with inclusive education frameworks, albeit with room for improvement in their application. This discrepancy is consistent with research indicating that while inclusive education policies may be in place, the actual delivery of adapted and accessible curricula is often inconsistent (Graham, 2023 ). Regarding teaching strategies, both groups reported that a variety of classroom-focused strategies were utilized, with 38.5% of teachers and 70.7% of parents/guardians affirming this. This reflects a commitment to differentiation, which is a cornerstone of inclusive teaching practices. In line with Inclusion Theory, such practices aim to meet the individual learning needs of all students (Moon et al., 2020 ). Additionally, the study found that both teachers (38.5%) and parents/guardians (67.2%) acknowledged that data from learner outcomes were used to shape teaching strategies, suggesting a data-driven approach to teaching and learning, which is crucial for adjusting educational methods to suit diverse learning needs (Giangreco, 2010 ). The presence of individual educational plans (IEPs) for learners with special educational needs, affirmed by 42.3% of teachers and 42.9% of parents, further supports the idea that personalized and flexible teaching is central to inclusive practices. The study also explored the degree to which assessment tasks in schools were adapted to the needs of learners with special needs. Most teachers (30.8%) were divided in their views on whether assessment tasks reflected these adaptations, whereas the majority of parents (56%) believed that assessments considered the abilities of all learners. This disparity may be indicative of challenges teachers face in aligning assessments with diverse student needs in real-time, which is a well-documented issue in inclusive education (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). 7.3.1. Statistical Analysis of Data on Special Needs Education Curriculum, Teaching, and Assessment The findings from the independent samples t-test (Table 3 ) revealed a statistically significant difference in the mean scores between teachers (M = 3.46) and parents/guardians (M = 4.05) on the dimension of adapted teaching and assessment (p = 0.031). This suggests that parents/guardians were more positive about the adaptability of teaching and assessment practices in the schools than teachers, potentially reflecting a disconnect between teachers' perceptions of the adequacy of adaptations and the lived experiences of students with special needs (Muhati-Nyakundi, 2023 ). These results underscore the need for better alignment between policy intentions and classroom practices, particularly in terms of creating more adaptive, inclusive, and responsive assessment strategies that accommodate the diverse needs of all students. Table 3 Comparison of Responses from Teachers and Parents/Guardians on the Curriculum, Teaching and Assessment Dimensions of SNE (n = 26 teachers and 259 parents/guardians) Variable M SD t df p Adapted Curriculum 1.390 27.537 .176 Teachers 3.69 1.594 Parents/Guardians 3.25 1.121 Adapted Teaching and Assessment -2.275 26.278 .031 Teachers 3.46 1.303 Parents/Guardians 4.05 .654 Source: Survey (2024) The study further employed an ANOVA test to examine whether there were differences in the responses of teachers from different schools regarding the curriculum, teaching strategies, and assessment practices in Special Needs Education (SNE). This analysis aimed to assess the extent to which the schools varied in their approaches to inclusive education, specifically looking at how the curriculum and teaching practices were perceived by teachers. In alignment with Inclusion Theory, which emphasizes the need for educational environments that are flexible and responsive to the diverse needs of students, the study sought to identify whether the schools in the Bench-Sheko Zone were consistently applying inclusive practices or if there were discrepancies across schools. The results from the ANOVA test (Table 4 ) revealed that there were statistically significant differences between schools in terms of how adaptive the SNE curriculum was perceived to be (F = 8.189, p = 0.000). This finding indicates that the extent to which the curriculum was seen as adaptable to the needs of students varied significantly across schools. Such a discrepancy is consistent with studies suggesting that inclusive education, although embedded in policy, is often implemented in ways that are context-dependent and influenced by the resources, training, and attitudes of educators (Ainscow et al., 2004 ; Rix et al., 2009 ). For instance, some schools may have more robust mechanisms for adapting the curriculum to meet the needs of students with disabilities, while others may face challenges related to resource constraints or lack of specialized teacher training (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). This variability underscores the need for consistent professional development and policy alignment to ensure that the principles of inclusive education are effectively operationalized across all schools (Moon et al., 2020 ). In contrast, no significant difference was found in how teachers perceived the teaching strategies and assessment practices in their schools, with a non-significant F value (F = 1.528, p = 0.220). This suggests that, despite differences in curriculum adaptation, the strategies and assessments used across schools were more uniform. This finding could point to a more standardized approach to teaching and assessment, which, while beneficial for ensuring some level of consistency, may not fully align with the individualized and differentiated practices that are core to the inclusive education model (Giangreco, 2010 ; Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). The relative consistency in teaching and assessment practices might reflect a broader challenge in achieving true inclusion, where educational environments are not just uniform but also personalized to cater to the unique needs and abilities of each student (McLeskey et al., 2012 ). These findings also reflect the ongoing debate in inclusive education, particularly in resource-constrained contexts like Southwest Ethiopia, where schools may struggle to balance the demands of inclusivity with the practicalities of curriculum design and implementation (Kozleski et al., 2014 ). The lack of variability in teaching strategies and assessments across schools suggests that while teachers might share a common approach to these practices, there may still be significant room for improvement in adapting these strategies to be more inclusive and responsive to the needs of students with disabilities. Future efforts should aim at providing more targeted professional development to educators, fostering an environment where both the curriculum and teaching methods can be more effectively customized to support all learners, regardless of their abilities. Table 4 ANOVA Tests on Responses from Teachers in Different Schools on the Curriculum, Teaching and Assessment Dimensions of SNE Variable Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Adapted Curriculum Between Groups 52.205 9 5.801 8.189 .000 Within Groups 11.333 16 .708 Total 63.538 25 Adapted Teaching and Assessment Between Groups 19.628 9 2.181 1.528 .220 Within Groups 22.833 16 1.427 Total 42.462 25 Source: Survey (2024) 7.4. Special Needs Education Leadership, Support, and Resources In alignment with the principles of Inclusion Theory, which advocates for equitable access to quality education and emphasizes the importance of systemic support, leadership, and the adequate allocation of resources, this section of the study examines the roles of leadership and the availability of support and resources for Special Needs Education (SNE) in the Bench-Sheko Zone, Southwest Ethiopia. The theory posits that inclusive education requires a whole-school approach, involving not just the teaching staff but also leadership, administrative bodies, and policymakers who must demonstrate a firm commitment to inclusion (Florian & Spratt, 2013 ; Ainscow et al., 2004 ). Therefore, assessing the consistency of leadership commitment and the availability of resources is crucial to understanding the barriers and enablers of inclusive education in the region. 7.4.1. Leadership Commitment to Inclusive Education The leadership dimension of SNE in this study was assessed by evaluating the degree to which principals, school leadership, school governing bodies, and local education authorities consistently expressed a commitment to inclusive education. Results indicated a positive perception of leadership commitment from the teachers, with the majority (19, 73.1%) agreeing that their school principals consistently demonstrated commitment to inclusive education. This is in line with recent literature highlighting the essential role of school leadership in driving the implementation of inclusive practices Ainscow & Sandill 2010 ). However, parental perceptions were more varied, with fewer parents (123, 47.5%) expressing agreement with the same statement, indicating possible differences in how leadership commitment is perceived by different stakeholders. Similarly, senior members of school leadership, such as vice principals and department heads, were viewed as committed to inclusive education by half of the teachers (13, 50%) and 45.9% of the parents. The alignment between teachers' and parents' views on leadership commitment could reflect a shared recognition of the importance of inclusive practices, but also suggests that there may be gaps in the actualization of these commitments (Moon et al., 2020 ). While a majority of teachers and parents agreed that the school boards/governing bodies showed commitment to inclusive education (teachers: 12, 46.2%; parents: 124, 47.9%), the perception of commitment by local education authorities was more polarized. Teachers (10, 38.5%) strongly disagreed with the claim that local education authorities were committed to inclusive education, whereas a significant proportion of parents (102, 39.4%) disagreed with this assertion. This discrepancy underscores a critical gap between policy-level support and its actual implementation at the local level, a challenge that has been highlighted in other studies on inclusive education in developing countries (Tremblay & Lapointe, 2023). 7.4.2. Support and Resources for Special Needs Education The support and resources dimension of SNE was assessed by examining access to specialist advisers, training opportunities for teachers, resource availability, and the efficient utilization of available resources. The findings revealed a stark discrepancy between teachers' and parents' perceptions of resource availability. A significant number of teachers (17, 65.4%) and parents (139, 53.7%) strongly disagreed with the assertion that teachers had access to specialist advisers, therapists, and other professionals. This gap in perceptions points to a potential lack of external support structures that are essential for the effective implementation of inclusive education practices (Giangreco, 2010 ). Without specialized support, teachers may struggle to provide individualized instruction or accommodations for students with disabilities, undermining the principles of inclusive education. Additionally, when it came to training opportunities for teachers to engage in collaborative arrangements, a majority of both teachers (14, 53.8%) and parents (124, 47.9%) strongly disagreed, signaling a lack of professional development in this area. Collaborative teaching is an integral part of inclusive practices, as it ensures that teachers work together to create an inclusive learning environment that accommodates diverse student needs (Rix et al., 2009 ). The absence of such training not only limits teachers’ ability to engage in collaborative practices but also highlights the need for systemic support in building teacher capacity for inclusive education (McLeskey et al., 2012 ). The findings also revealed a marked difference in the perceptions of teachers and parents regarding the sufficiency of resources for inclusive education. While a majority of teachers (17, 65.4%) strongly disagreed with the claim that local education systems provided sufficient resources to schools to meet their inclusive education obligations, a significant portion of parents (100, 38.6%) disagreed with this assessment. This difference suggests that while parents may perceive resource allocation as somewhat adequate, teachers on the ground feel the strain of resource shortages that hinder their ability to implement inclusive education effectively (Kozleski et al., 2014 ). Furthermore, the study revealed differing perceptions between teachers and parents regarding the role of school governing bodies in ensuring resources are delivered and used appropriately. A majority of teachers (10, 38.5%) strongly disagreed that school governing bodies ensured effective utilization of resources, whereas most parents (115, 44.4%) agreed. This divergence points to potential communication issues or a disconnect between what is promised by school leadership and what is actually delivered, which is a common challenge in the implementation of inclusive education in low-resource settings (Moon et al., 2020 ). Regarding the availability of sufficient resources at the classroom level, both teachers (12, 46.2%) and parents (80, 30.9%) expressed relatively more positive views, with the majority agreeing that school managers ensured adequate materials and personnel were available. This finding suggests that, at least at the classroom level, there may be more effective allocation and utilization of resources, but it also highlights that systemic issues at the school and local education authority levels continue to present challenges. In line with Inclusion Theory, which emphasizes the importance of leadership, systemic support, and the effective allocation of resources for the success of inclusive education, the findings from this study suggest that there are significant gaps in leadership commitment, access to specialized support, teacher training, and resource allocation in the study area. These challenges, particularly in low-resource contexts, must be addressed to create a truly inclusive education system where all learners, regardless of their disabilities, can thrive. Future efforts should focus on strengthening the capacity of leadership at all levels, providing adequate professional development for teachers, and ensuring that resources are not only available but effectively utilized to support inclusive practices. 7.4.3. Statistical Analysis of Data on Special Needs Education Leadership, Support and Resources The study also utilized statistical tests to examine differences in responses related to leadership, support, and resources. The t-test results (Table 5 ) revealed a statistically significant difference between teachers and parents/guardians regarding their perceptions of support and resources (t = -3.507, df = 27.375, p = .000), with parents expressing more positive views than teachers. This significant difference in perceptions highlights the need for a deeper understanding of the resource constraints and support mechanisms from the perspective of educators, who often bear the direct responsibility for implementing inclusive practices in the classroom. Table 5 Comparison of Responses from Teachers and Parents/Guardians on the Leadership, Support and Resources Dimensions of SNE (n = 26 teachers and 259 parents/guardians) Variable M SD t df p Leadership .046 26.496 .964 Teachers 3.96 1.280 Parents/Guardians 3.95 .694 Support and Resources -3.507 27.375 .000 Teachers 2.15 1.120 Parents/Guardians 2.94 .763 Source: Survey (2024) Further, the ANOVA tests (Table 6 ) showed statistically significant differences between schools regarding leadership commitment to inclusive education (F = 6.313, p = .001), indicating variability in how leadership is perceived and enacted across different schools. This variability suggests that some schools may be more successful than others in implementing inclusive education practices, highlighting the need for more consistent and systemic approaches to leadership and resource allocation across schools in the region. Table 6 ANOVA Tests on Responses from Teachers in Different Schools on the Leadership, Support and Resources Dimensions of SNE Variable Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Leadership Between Groups 31.962 9 3.551 6.313 .001 Within Groups 9.000 16 .563 Total 40.962 25 Support and Resources Between Groups 14.718 9 1.635 1.570 .207 Within Groups 16.667 16 1.042 Total 31.385 25 Source: Survey (2024) The findings of this study align with the core principles of Inclusion Theory, which stresses the importance of leadership commitment, adequate resources, and support for the successful implementation of inclusive education. However, significant gaps in leadership consistency, teacher training, and resource availability were identified, which hinder the effective integration of inclusive practices in the primary schools of Bench-Sheko Zone. Addressing these challenges will require a comprehensive approach that involves strengthening leadership, enhancing teacher training, and ensuring that sufficient resources are allocated to meet the diverse needs of students with disabilities. 7.5. Results from the Qualitative Analysis of Data Inclusion Theory, which advocates for an education system that is responsive to the diverse needs of all students, emphasizes the importance of systemic support, individualized instruction, and the active participation of all stakeholders—including teachers, parents, and local authorities—in fostering a truly inclusive learning environment (Florian & Spratt, 2013 ; Ainscow, 2002 ). The qualitative findings of the current study, derived from interviews with school principals, teachers, local education officials, and direct classroom observations, provide an in-depth view of the challenges and opportunities related to Special Needs Education (SNE) in the primary schools of Bench-Sheko Zone, Southwest Ethiopia. These results are discussed through the lens of Inclusion Theory, focusing on aspects such as the accessibility, leadership, and infrastructure required to support the effective inclusion of students with special needs (SNE) in mainstream educational settings. 7.5.1. Access and Placement of Special Needs Education According to the principal of Mizan No.1 Elementary School, a significant proportion of students with special needs are located within or near Mizan-Aman town. This observation reflects a somewhat localized approach to SNE provision, where placement is more concentrated in urban centers. While this might offer certain advantages in terms of proximity and access to resources, it also reinforces the notion that students from rural or peripheral areas face additional barriers to accessing quality education (Deroncele-Acosta & Ellis, 2024 ). As Inclusion Theory emphasizes the need for equitable access, the concentration of resources and services in urban areas represents a key obstacle in achieving inclusive education on a broader scale. This urban-rural disparity aligns with findings by Hegarty et al., ( 2002 ) who highlighted that access to inclusive education services often varies significantly based on geographic location, socioeconomic status, and availability of local resources. 7.5.2. Challenges in Classroom Practices and Curriculum Delivery The principal of Ketea Elementary School expressed that teachers often struggle to deliver the prescribed curriculum due to the wide range of disabilities present in the same classroom. This challenge of accommodating diverse needs within a single lesson plan is a central concern in inclusive education (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ; Deroncele-Acosta & Ellis, 2024 ). The difficulty in creating a flexible, student-centered curriculum that addresses the needs of all learners, especially in mixed-ability classrooms, is frequently noted in the literature as a barrier to effective inclusion (McLeskey et al., 2012 ). The rigid adherence to a one-size-fits-all curriculum exacerbates the challenges faced by teachers in providing individualized support and engaging all students in meaningful learning experiences (Ainscow, 2002 ). In this context, the teacher’s role in adapting and differentiating the curriculum becomes pivotal. However, the current system seems to reinforce traditional, one-way pedagogical methods that are less conducive to the individualized, participatory learning approaches advocated by Inclusion Theory (McLeskey et al., 2012 ). As observed, classrooms are typically dominated by teacher-centered instruction, which neglects the diverse learning needs of students with disabilities (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). The lack of flexibility in lesson planning and teaching methods, coupled with overcrowded classrooms (ranging from 40 to 55 students), hinders the possibility of providing individualized attention to students with special needs, a key principle of inclusive education (Giangreco, 2010 ). This finding underscores the need for a pedagogical shift towards differentiated instruction that is responsive to the diverse needs of all students (Deroncele-Acosta & Ellis, 2024 ). 7.5.3. Insufficient Resources and Infrastructure A recurring theme in the interviews and observations was the chronic shortage of resources and inadequate infrastructure in schools. The principal of Aman No.1 Elementary School emphasized that the success of inclusive education in their school relied heavily on the dedication and sacrifices of the staff, rather than on systemic support or resource availability. This sentiment resonates with findings from recent studies, which suggest that even in contexts where there is significant leadership commitment to inclusion, the lack of resources—both human and material—limits the ability of schools to fully realize the goals of inclusive education (Kozleski et al., 2014 ; Rix et al., 2009 ). The observations made by the researcher—such as the presence of inaccessible infrastructure (e.g., ditches without wheelchair paths) and poorly designed classrooms—further underline the physical and structural barriers that impede the implementation of inclusive education. These challenges are particularly pressing for students with mobility impairments or other physical disabilities, as they limit their ability to engage fully in the educational environment (Giangreco, 2010 ). Moreover, inadequate ventilation and lighting, as observed in some schools, create an uncomfortable learning environment that can exacerbate the difficulties faced by students with sensory processing disorders or other learning challenges (Deroncele-Acosta & Ellis, 2024 ). Inclusion Theory stresses the importance of an inclusive physical environment that is accessible to all students, including those with disabilities. The lack of such accommodations in many schools in the study area highlights a significant gap in achieving inclusive education (Ainscow, 2002 ). The absence of accessible infrastructure undermines efforts to create a welcoming and supportive environment for students with special needs, making it clear that inclusive education requires not only curricular and pedagogical reform but also a commitment to improving physical and organizational infrastructure (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). 7.5.4. Teacher Motivation and Parent-Teacher Communication The principal of Aman No.1 Elementary School also discussed the challenges faced by teachers in accommodating students with special needs, particularly the expectation that students should adapt to the existing classroom setup, rather than having the classroom modified to meet the students' needs. This tension is consistent with Inclusion Theory, which calls for schools to be adaptive to the needs of students rather than expecting students to conform to existing structures (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). This issue is compounded by the insufficient resources available to support such adaptations, leaving teachers to navigate these challenges with limited support, as noted by the principal. Moreover, the irregular communication between teachers and parents, coupled with the lack of emotional and financial support networks, creates further barriers to effective collaboration in the education of students with special needs. The difficulty for parents to access information about their children’s educational progress and the absence of support systems at the local level reflect broader systemic issues that hinder the involvement of families in the educational process. This lack of collaboration between home and school has been identified as a significant factor in the successful implementation of inclusive education, as strong partnerships between parents and teachers are crucial for the holistic development of students (McLeskey et al., 2012 ; Kozleski et al., 2014 ). The findings from the qualitative analysis highlight several key challenges in the implementation of inclusive education in the primary schools of Bench-Sheko Zone, particularly in the areas of resource availability, teacher training, infrastructure, and communication. These challenges underscore the importance of systemic support and the active involvement of all stakeholders in creating an inclusive educational environment. Adopting the principles of Inclusion Theory requires a multi-faceted approach that involves not only curricular reform and pedagogical flexibility but also significant improvements in infrastructure, resource allocation, and stakeholder engagement. 8. Discussion The provision of Special Needs Education (SNE) in Ethiopia, particularly in the Bench-Sheko Zone, has been a topic of increasing academic attention. While specific studies on SNE in this particular zone remain scarce, a substantial body of research has focused on SNE in Ethiopia at large, including studies in Addis Ababa, the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples' Region (SNNPR), and other areas (Pather et al., 2021 ; Abraraw, 2017 ; Kassie, 2013 ). Although these studies did not adopt the same conceptual framework as the current research, their findings provide valuable context and allow for comparative discussions. This section reviews the main findings of the study, with particular attention to their alignment with Inclusion Theory, which emphasizes the active participation of all students, particularly those with disabilities, in the general education system. 8.1. Assessment and Placement of Students with Special Needs In line with Inclusion Theory, the individualized assessment of students is a cornerstone of inclusive education. The theory stresses the importance of diagnostic assessments that are both scientifically valid and tailored to the specific needs of students (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). However, the findings of this study highlighted a critical gap in this regard: primary schools in the Bench-Sheko Zone rarely conducted standardized evaluations of students before their placement in classrooms. When evaluations were administered, there was little evidence of scientific rigor in their design or implementation, further questioning the validity of such assessments. This issue resonates with the findings of other studies in Ethiopia, which have pointed out the absence of standardized screening, assessment, and identification tools for students with special needs (Abraraw, 2017 ). The absence of scientifically informed evaluation processes not only undermines the goals of inclusive education but also perpetuates the marginalization of students with disabilities, as they are placed in classrooms that may not meet their specific learning needs (Muslim, 2023 ; Sabates et al., 2021 ). The lack of standardized tools for assessment underscores the need for national or regional guidelines for evaluating students with special needs (Rahmato & Ayenew, 2018 ; Muslim, 2023 ). Inclusion Theory advocates for systemic changes that provide both the tools and the frameworks necessary to effectively identify and support students' diverse needs. Without these tools, educational institutions are left without the means to implement the tailored educational plans required for true inclusion (Deroncele-Acosta & Ellis, 2024 ). 8.2. Infrastructure and Accessibility Challenges In terms of physical accessibility, the study found that many of the schools in the Bench-Sheko Zone lacked the essential infrastructure to accommodate students with special needs. These findings align with previous research that has identified similar challenges throughout Ethiopia. For instance, the national inclusive education strategy outlined the need for accessible facilities, such as adapted toilets, ramps, and appropriate seating arrangements (MoE, 2015). However, these guidelines have not been consistently implemented, as confirmed by studies indicating the inaccessibility of school facilities for students with disabilities (Pather et al., 2021 ; Tefera et al., 2015 ). In particular, the study revealed that some schools had physical environments that were completely inaccessible to students with mobility impairments. The presence of doorways, classrooms, and pathways that did not accommodate wheelchair users, along with areas that required students to be carried by peers, starkly highlights the systemic failures in implementing inclusive physical environments (Tirussew et al., 2013 ). The absence of accessible infrastructure violates the principles of Inclusion Theory, which emphasizes the importance of adapting the physical environment to meet the needs of all learners (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). Creating accessible school environments is a fundamental requirement for enabling full participation in education for all students, regardless of their physical abilities (Ainscow, 2002 ). 8.3. Lack of Trained Professionals and Specialized Support Another significant finding of the study concerns the lack of specialized professionals in schools. The absence of specialists such as speech pathologists, occupational therapists, and special education experts is a well-documented issue in Ethiopia (Aldersey et al., 2024 ; Zhang, & Zhang, 2022 ). In line with previous studies, this research highlights the critical gap in trained professionals that is necessary for supporting students with a wide range of disabilities in inclusive classrooms (Amanu, 2000 ; Aldersey et al., 2024 ). The lack of such expertise further inhibits the ability of schools to provide the individualized support that students with special needs require, thereby undermining the goals of inclusive education (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). In this context, Inclusion Theory emphasizes the importance of professional development and the role of well-trained educators in ensuring that all students, regardless of their disabilities, are provided with appropriate educational opportunities. The lack of specialists further exacerbates the challenges faced by educators who are expected to meet the diverse needs of students without adequate support (Giangreco, 2010 ). 8.4. Teacher Attitudes Toward Inclusion The study also found that, in contrast to some earlier studies which reported negative attitudes among teachers toward the inclusion of students with disabilities (Amanu, 2000 ; Beyene & Tizazu, 2010 ), teachers in the Bench-Sheko Zone expressed relatively positive attitudes toward including students with special needs. This finding is consistent with more recent studies that have noted a shift towards more inclusive attitudes among teachers, particularly when provided with proper support and training (Dagnew, 2013 ; Dagnachew et al., 2023 ). This positive trend reflects the growing awareness of the importance of inclusion and the role of teachers in facilitating it. However, while these attitudes are encouraging, the absence of adequate resources, training, and specialized support undermines their effectiveness in practice. Inclusion Theory posits that positive attitudes alone are insufficient to create an inclusive education system. It is essential that these attitudes are supported by structural changes, including professional development opportunities, adequate resources, and inclusive pedagogical practices (Ainscow, 2002 ). Teachers’ positive attitudes must therefore be coupled with systemic changes that make inclusion possible on a practical level. 8.5. Lack of Educational Materials and Adapted Curriculum The study identified the lack of adaptive educational materials, specialized facilities, and trained trainers as key obstacles to the effective provision of primary level SNE. These findings are consistent with previous research on the inadequate supply of adapted educational resources for students with disabilities in Ethiopia (Aldersey et al., 2024 ; Tirussew et al., 2013 ). In particular, the study found that many schools lacked an adapted curriculum and basic learning materials, such as textbooks and reference materials, which are crucial for supporting students with special needs (Beyene & Tizazu, 2010 ; Zhang, & Zhang, 2022 ). This lack of resources is a significant barrier to achieving the goals of inclusive education, as students with disabilities often require specialized materials and methods of instruction that are not provided in standard classrooms (Florian & Linklater, 2010 ). As Inclusion Theory suggests, inclusive education requires the creation of curricula that are flexible, adaptive, and capable of meeting the needs of all learners, regardless of their abilities. The absence of an adapted curriculum and appropriate resources in the study area highlights the systemic barriers to inclusion that exist at multiple levels, from policy to practice (Deroncele-Acosta & Ellis, 2024 ). The findings of this study underline several critical issues that hinder the successful implementation of inclusive education in the Bench-Sheko Zone. While some positive developments, such as improved teacher attitudes toward inclusion, were observed, the lack of standardized assessments, inadequate infrastructure, insufficient professional support, and limited resources present significant challenges. These barriers are consistent with previous studies conducted in Ethiopia and elsewhere, highlighting the need for systemic change in the country’s approach to SNE. By aligning the findings of this study with the principles of Inclusion Theory, it is clear that inclusive education in Ethiopia requires not only changes in attitudes but also comprehensive reforms in policy, infrastructure, resources, and professional development to ensure that all students, regardless of their abilities, have access to meaningful educational opportunities. 9. Limitations of the Study Despite its potential contributions to the field of special needs education in Ethiopia, the study is also subject to certain limitations. The reliance on self-reported data may have introduced bias, while the focus on primary schools in a single zone restricts the generalizability of the findings. The absence of localized assessment tools limited the precision of identifying special educational needs. In addition, the analysis emphasizes institutional and pedagogical factors and does not go deep into systemic issues such as national financing, intersectoral collaboration, and long-term outcomes. 10. Conclusion This study sought to assess the state of Special Needs Education (SNE) in public primary schools within the Bench-Sheko Zone of Southwest Ethiopia, focusing specifically on key dimensions of service delivery: placement, acceptance, access, adapted teaching and assessment, leadership, and support and resources. By employing these dimensions, the study aimed to provide a comprehensive view of how SNE practices are being implemented in this region, aligning its findings with the principles outlined in Inclusion Theory. This theory emphasizes that every learner, regardless of their abilities, should have equal opportunities to access and participate in education. One of the key findings of this study was that students with special needs were placed in schools that were relatively close to their homes, which aligns with the principles of inclusion that prioritize accessibility and convenience for all students. However, while placement was geographically convenient, the study found that students were not always placed in age-appropriate classes, which could hinder their social inclusion and peer interactions. According to Inclusion Theory, proper placement in an age-appropriate and supportive learning environment is critical to fostering not only academic development but also social and emotional growth for students with special needs. The study also noted that students with special needs were not withdrawn for additional assistance more frequently than other students. This finding challenges the traditional segregated models of SNE, which often involve separating students from their peers for additional support. Inclusion Theory posits that removing students from the general classroom setting may perpetuate their exclusion from broader social and educational experiences. Therefore, the practice of integrating students with disabilities into regular classroom settings aligns with the core ideals of inclusion, allowing for more equitable learning experiences. While schools in the study were generally aware of the rights of students with special educational needs to inclusive education, significant infrastructural barriers were observed. The lack of ramps, adapted toilets, accessible playgrounds, and appropriate footpaths hindered the physical accessibility of schools for students with physical disabilities. These findings are in line with those of previous studies, which emphasized the importance of creating accessible physical environments that are conducive to the learning and participation of all students. Inclusion Theory stresses that a truly inclusive education system must be designed with universal access in mind, ensuring that physical environments are as accessible to students with disabilities as they are to their peers. The absence of these basic features is a direct violation of the principles of inclusive education, as it limits students' participation in school activities and their ability to engage in meaningful learning experiences. For inclusion to be fully realized, schools must be equipped with the necessary infrastructure to meet the diverse needs of their students. The study also highlighted the inadequacies in the SNE curriculum, which was found not to consider the varying abilities and needs of different student groups. The implementation of an adapted curriculum is central to the success of inclusive education. Inclusion Theory emphasizes that education should be flexible and responsive to the diverse needs of all students, allowing them to engage with content in ways that are meaningful to them. However, the study found that while certain schools had adopted diverse teaching strategies and individualized education plans (IEPs) to address these challenges, the lack of resources severely hindered the proper implementation of the curriculum. This aligns with recent research that underscores the importance of resource availability in implementing an inclusive curriculum. In many contexts, including Ethiopia, a lack of training, materials, and resources for teachers has been identified as one of the most significant barriers to effective inclusion. Therefore, schools must not only adapt their curricula but also ensure that they have the appropriate resources to support these adaptations. Teachers in the study were found to be committed to delivering inclusive education, making efforts to accommodate the diverse needs of their students. However, the absence of access to specialist advisors and other professional support posed a significant challenge. As Inclusion Theory advocates, effective inclusion requires not only the commitment of teachers but also professional development, collaboration with specialists, and ongoing support for teachers in their roles as facilitators of diverse learning needs. In the absence of such support, even the most dedicated teachers struggle to effectively implement inclusive education practices. The study’s findings are consistent with those of other studies, which highlight that teacher professional development and access to specialized support services are essential for the successful inclusion of students with disabilities in the general education system. Without these, the gap between theory and practice in inclusive education is likely to remain unbridgeable. The study found statistically significant differences between teachers’ and parents’ views on various dimensions of SNE. Teachers generally had more positive views on the acceptance dimension of SNE, while parents/guardians expressed more favorable views regarding the adapted curriculum, adapted teaching, and assessment practices, as well as support and resources. These differences highlight the diverse perspectives that exist between educators and families regarding the effectiveness of inclusive education practices. The alignment of Inclusion Theory with the perspectives of parents and teachers is critical, as inclusive education is a shared responsibility that involves collaboration between school staff, parents, and local authorities. It is essential for these two groups to communicate effectively and work together to ensure that the needs of students with special needs are met both in and outside the classroom. The study also revealed statistically significant differences between schools in terms of the acceptance, adapted curriculum, and leadership dimensions of SNE. However, no significant differences were found in the areas of placement, access, adapted teaching and assessment, and support and resources. This variability across schools suggests that while some schools are making progress toward inclusive education, others continue to face significant challenges in implementing key components of the SNE framework. This inter-school disparity further underscores the need for a more systematic approach to the development and implementation of inclusive education policies at the regional and national levels. 11. Implications for Future Research Future research should extend to multiple regions and employ longitudinal designs to assess long-term outcomes for learners with special needs. The development of localized assessment and monitoring tools would strengthen the evidence base for inclusive education. Greater emphasis on parental engagement, community participation, and cultural attitudes could provide deeper insights into local dynamics. Applying interdisciplinary and alternative theoretical approaches, such as rights-based or disability studies perspectives, may also enrich understanding and practice in inclusive education. Declarations Ethical Approval All research procedures, including data collection, analysis, and reporting, were conducted in accordance with established ethical standards. The research proposal was reviewed and approved by the Graduate Research and Publication Ethics Committee of Mizan-Tepi University. Furthermore, the research was carried out in accordance with the ethical principles set forth in the Declaration of Helsinki (1964) and its subsequent amendments, as well as the National Research Ethics Review Guideline issued by the Ethiopian Ministry of Science and Technology (http://www.most.gov.et/Ethics%20Guideline.pdf) Consent to Participate Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their enrollment in the study. Participants were provided with a comprehensive explanation of the study’s aims and procedures and were required to give informed consent before data collection commenced. To maintain confidentiality and protect participant privacy, all data were anonymized, and no personally identifiable information (e.g., names or unique identifiers) was included in the final dataset or report. These measures were undertaken in compliance with internationally accepted ethical standards for research involving human subjects. Consent for Publication Not applicable. This manuscript does not contain any identifiable individual person’s data in any form (including individual details, images, or videos), and therefore, consent for publication is not required. Competing Interests The author declares no conflicts of interest. Funding The author has received no financial support for the research. Availability of Data Sources of all information supporting the manuscript are duly cited within the manuscript. In accordance with the ethical guidelines applied during the research approval process datasets for the study are confidential and not publicly available. Acknowledgements Not applicable Author’s Information Demelash Belay has received a B.A. Degree in Sociology and Social Anthropology as well as an M.A. Degree in Sociology from Addis Ababa University. He specializes in areas of sociological theories, social welfare, economic sociology, organizations, and development. He currently holds a senior lecturer position at Mizan-Tepi University, South West Ethiopia Peoples’ Region, Ethiopia. Email: [email protected] Author’s Contribution The author made full contribution in the writing, editing and finalizing of the article. References Abraraw, S. (2017). Good Practices and Challenges of Special Needs Education Itinerant Teachers in Addis Ababa Special and Mainstream Primary Schools. Addis Ababa University, Department of Special Needs Education. Addis Ababa. (Unpublished) Achaw, T., Mebratu, T., & Teklemariam, A. (2024). Policy intentions on inclusive education for students with disabilities in Ethiopia. Indonesian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 3(2), 86–101. https://doi.org/10.33650/ijess.v3i2.9948 Ainscow, M. (2002). Understanding the Development of Inclusive Schools. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203016619 Ainscow, M., & Sandill, A. (2010). Developing inclusive education systems: The role of school leadership. School Leadership & Management, 30(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110802504903 Ainscow, M., Booth, T., & Dyson, A. (2004). Understanding and developing inclusive practices in schools: a collaborative action research network. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 8(2), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360311032000158015 Ainscow, M., Booth, T., & Dyson, A. (2006). Improving schools, developing inclusion. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203967157 Aldersey, H. M., Lartey, J., Gabriels, S., Xu, X., Abrahams, D., Batorowicz, B., Abebe, S. M., Mamo, T., Nyoka, N., & Lorenzo, T. (2024). “I Really Wanted to Further My Education but That Wasn’t Possible”: Out of School Experiences of Youth with Disabilities in Ethiopia, Ghana, and South Africa. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 72(2), 195–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912x.2024.2317476 Amanu, E. (2000). The Role of Teachers in the Implementation of Inclusive Education. Unpublished MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University. Bell, E., Bryman, A., & Harley, B. (2022). Research Designs. Business Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.1093/hebz/9780198869443.003.0013 Bench Sheko Zone Planning Commission (BSZPC). (2024). Bench Sheko Zone Plan Commission Annual Statistical Abstract. Location, area and administrative divisions of the zone,. Mizan-Aman: Bench Sheko Zone Planning Commission Office. (Unpublished) Bench-Sheko Zone Administration (BSZA). (2023). Bench-Sheko zone annual performance report for 2023. Miza-Aman. (Unpublished) Beyene, G., & Tizazu, Y. (2010). Attitudes of teachers towards inclusive education in Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Education and Sciences, 6(1). Burchett, N. (2014). Book Review: Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 77(8), 435–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/030802261407700807 Clough, P., & Corbett, J. (2000). Theories of Inclusive Education: A Students’ Guide. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446220436 Collins, M. (2012). Index for inclusion: developing learning and participation in schools. Educational Psychology in Practice, 28(4), 445–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2012.728810 Cologon, K. (2024). How can inclusion succeed for all? Children’s well-being in inclusive schools and the role of teachers’ inclusion-related attitudes and self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104411 Dagnachew, T. K., Woldegerima Berhe, Y., Yalew Mustofa, S., & Birlie Chekol, W. (2023). Clinicians’ knowledge and attitude towards early mobilization in intensive care units in Ethiopian tertiary hospitals: A multi-centre study. SAGE Open Medicine, 11, 20503121231172348. Dagnew, A. (2013). Factors affecting the implementation of inclusive education in primary schools of Bahir Dar Town Administration. Education Research Journal, 3(3), 59-67. Deroncele-Acosta, A., & Ellis, A. (2024). Overcoming Challenges and Promoting Positive Education in Inclusive Schools: A Multi-Country Study. Education Sciences, 14(11), 1169. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111169 Dy, S. S., & Ninomiya, A. (2003). Basic Education in Cambodia: The Impact of UNESCO on Policies in the 1990s. Education Policy Analysis Archives. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v11n48.2003 Florian, L., & Black-Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 813–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2010.501096 Florian, L., & Linklater, H. (2010). Preparing teachers for inclusive education: using inclusive pedagogy to enhance teaching and learning for all. Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(4), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764x.2010.526588 Florian, L., & Spratt, J. (2013). Enacting inclusion: A framework for responding to diversity in the classroom. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778111 Geleta, A. D. (2019). School Principals and Teachers’ Perceptions of Inclusive Education in Sebeta Town Primary Government Schools, Sebeta, Ethiopia. International Journal of Technology and Inclusive Education, 8(1), 1364–1372. https://doi.org/10.20533/ijtie.2047.0533.2019.0166 Genovesi, E., Gaches, A., McKenzie, J., Hanlon, C., & Hoekstra, R. A. (2024). Exploring context for implementation of inclusive education for children with developmental disabilities in mainstream primary schools in Ethiopia. PLOS ONE, 19(8), e0307576. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/mpz7b Giangreco, M. F. (2010). One-to-One Paraprofessionals for Students With Disabilities in Inclusive Classrooms: Is Conventional Wisdom Wrong? Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 48(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-48.1.1 Graham, L. J. (2023). Inclusive education. Inclusive Education for the 21st Century, 3–17. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003350897-2 Hashimov, E. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook and The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Technical Communication Quarterly, 24(1), 109–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2015.975966 Hegarty, S., Meijer, C. and, & Pijl, S. J. (2002). Inclusive Education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203015728 Inclusion Spectrum. (2022). Encyclopedia of Teacher Education, 816–816. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8679-5_300097 Joskow, J., & Yamane, T. (1965). Statistics, an Introductory Analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 60(310), 678. https://doi.org/10.2307/2282703 Kassie, S. (2013). Inclusive teaching involving visually impaired students in English language teaching (ELT) setting. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Andhra University, India. Kebede, A. T., & Phasha, T. N. (2024). Developing teachers’ competency for inclusive education in Ethiopia: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods study. African Journal of Disability, 13, a1383. https://doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v13i0.1383 King-Sears, M. E., Stefanidis, A., Evmenova, A. S., Rao, K., & Mergen, R. L. (2023). Achievement of learners receiving UDL instruction: A meta-analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, 103956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103956 Kozleski, E. B., Artiles, A. J., & Waitoller, F. R. (2014). Equity in inclusive education: Using research to inform policy. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18(9), 901–918. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446282236.n16 Kueker, J. (2000). Book Review: From Them to Us: An International Study of Inclusion in Education Edited by Tony Booth and Mel Ainscow New York: Routledge, 1998 271 pages. Remedial and Special Education, 21(1), 63–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193250002100109 McLeskey, J., Waldron, N. L., & Redd, L. (2012). A Case Study of a Highly Effective, Inclusive Elementary School. The Journal of Special Education, 48(1), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466912440455 Ministry of Education (MoE). (2015). Guidelines for Establishing and Managing Inclusive Education Resource Centers. (MoE internal document) Ministry of Education (MoE). (2016). Education Sector Development Program V. Resource Centers. (MoE internal document) Mitcham, M., Agahe Portman, T. A., & Afi Dean, A. (2009). Role of School Counselors in Creating Equitable— Educational Opportunities for Students With Disabilities in Urban Settings. Urban Education, 44(4), 465–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085909341042 Mitchell, D. (2014). What really works in special and inclusive education: Using evidence-based teaching strategies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429401923 Mohajan, H. K. (2018). Qualitative Research Methodology in Social Sciences and Related Subjects. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 7(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.26458/jedep.v7i1.571 Moon, T. R., Brighton, C. M., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2020). Using Differentiated Classroom Assessment to Enhance Student Learning. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429452994 Muhati-Nyakundi, L. I. (2023). Teachers’ Agency and Wellbeing in Inclusive Education: Challenges and Opportunities. Journal of Educational Studies, 2023(si1), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.59915/jes.2023.special.1.19 Muslim, A. K. (2023). Practices And Challenges in Implementing Inclusive Education in Some Selected Pre-Primary Schools in Dire Dawa City Administration (Doctoral dissertation, Haramaya University). Obiakor, F. E., Harris, M., Mutua, K., Rotatori, A., & Algozzine, B. (2012). Making Inclusion Work in General Education Classrooms. Education and Treatment of Children, 35(3), 477–490. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2012.0020 Pather, S., Tadesse, A., & Gizachew, S. (2021). Moving Toward Inclusive Education in Ethiopia Through Itinerant Teachers at Resource Centers. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.438 Phillips, D., Stewart-Fox, T., Phillips, S., Griffith, M., & Bhojedat, J. (2023). Distributed Leadership in Education: A Systematic Review of its Role in Fostering Innovative Practices and Enhancing School Performance. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 12(11), 2083–2089. https://doi.org/10.21275/sr231128014118 Rahmato, D., & Ayenew, M. (Eds.). (2018). Challenges and Opportunities for Inclusive Development in Ethiopia. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.8085385 Rix, J., Hall, K., Nind, M., Sheehy, K., & Wearmouth, J. (2009). What pedagogical approaches can effectively include children with special educational needs in mainstream classrooms? Support for Learning, 24(2), 86–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2009.01404.x Ryan, D. (2011). The Irregular School: Exclusion, Schooling and Inclusive Education – By Roger Slee. Support for Learning, 26(4), 189–189. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2011.01502_2.x Sabates, R., Zhao, Y. V., Mitchell, R., & Ilie, S. (2021). Understanding the External Social Benefits of Education in Ethiopia. journal of education finance, 47(1), 45-70. Side, A. S. (2018). Challenges of Implementing Inclusive Education and Supporting Marginalized Groups in Ethiopia. Challenging Inclusive Education Policy and Practice in Africa, 148–156. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391505_009 Strunk, K. K., & Mwavita, M. (2024). Basic issues in quantitative educational research. Design and Analysis in Quantitative Educational Research, 3–20. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003442011-2 Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd Tefera, B., Admas, F., & Mulatie, M. (2015). Education of children with special needs in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian Journal of Education, 35(1), 45-97. Temesgen, Z. (2018). Exploring Governmental Commitment to Execute Inclusive Education in Ethiopia. Research in Pedagogy, 8(2), 226–239. Internet Archive. https://doi.org/10.17810/2015.86 Tirussew, T. (2005). Disability in Ethiopia: Issues, insights, and implications. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University Print Press. https://doi.org/10.69475/ratei.2024.1.4 Tirussew, T., Alemayehu, T., Belay, H., Fantahun, A. d., Moges, A., Sewalem, T., et al. (2013). Manual for Employability of Persons with Disabilities in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa University, Department of Special Needs Education. (Unpublished) United Nations (2015). Transforming governance for the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. https://doi.org/10.18356/e5a72957-en Woodhead, M., Rossiter, J., Dawes, A., & Pankhurst, A. (2017). Scaling-up early learning in Ethiopia: Exploring the potential of O-class. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526402004.n14 Worku, M. Y. (2025). Teacher professional competence in Ethiopia: Educators’ perspectives on current status and key influential factors. Teaching Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2025.2544573 Wurf, G. (2022). Working with Families of Students with Disabilities in Primary Schools. Research for Inclusive Quality Education, 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5908-9_15 Zaorska, M. (2024). Inclusive education or education for All: Balancing individualisation and community (opportunities and challenges). Special School, LXXXV(4), 258–269. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0054.9137 Zhang, H., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Educational outcomes for primary school children in Ethiopia: A scoping review. International Journal of Inclusive Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2022.2030295 Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8292329","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":556111937,"identity":"a1c640ec-0b65-427b-b4cb-bbc2045e2195","order_by":0,"name":"Demelash Belay","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4356-9865","institution":"Mizan-Tepi University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Demelash","middleName":"","lastName":"Belay","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-12-06 06:17:02","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8292329/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8292329/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":97776400,"identity":"98cc9287-a29a-4b28-99a0-7772b4da1614","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-09 09:00:16","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":137508,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"WithAuthorDetailsSpecialNeedsEducation.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8292329/v1/d8c6589a5ecbb38d688bfacc.docx"},{"id":97776401,"identity":"7a7135ad-b380-4a55-884d-e87dc04e8098","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-09 09:00:17","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":342,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"rs8292329.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8292329/v1/92a8942b3face7ec9474a73a.json"},{"id":97776397,"identity":"d4a1410b-e00f-4d81-8933-d4ba2de24125","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-09 09:00:15","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":201442,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"rs82923290enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8292329/v1/68fe409d9acdbeabf5866ca3.xml"},{"id":97898130,"identity":"da4bbdf5-6a81-4c11-955a-8435e0b11e93","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 15:38:42","extension":"xml","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":197937,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"rs82923290structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8292329/v1/728812d1b755cbf9235ca0ef.xml"},{"id":97776399,"identity":"a28fd6fd-cb05-4e97-915d-ddf115ab8a29","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-09 09:00:16","extension":"html","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":210069,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8292329/v1/47ea30a6f0d98cd85eff1e96.html"},{"id":98421226,"identity":"cebd7e6b-68d0-4f47-84d9-a967fb4187fd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 16:25:44","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1765839,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8292329/v1/49212ac4-bf52-4201-961b-cf969426fe59.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003eBarriers to Inclusive Education: A Sociological Evaluation of Special Needs Education Service Delivery in Primary Schools in South West Ethiopia\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eEducation is pivotal to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, particularly Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4), which emphasizes not only equitable quality education but also inclusion and lifelong learning for all (United Nations, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Inclusion Theory contends that education systems should adapt to diverse learners rather than expecting learners to conform to a fixed system (Ryan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). In Ethiopia, constitutional recognition of education as a human right, together with policies like the 1994 Education and Training Policy, Education Sector Development Programs (ESDP IV and V), the 2006 Special Needs Education Strategy, and the 2012 Inclusive Education Strategy, reflect this alignment with inclusive principles (Kebede \u0026amp; Phasha, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The Growth and Transformation Plan II (2015/16\u0026ndash;2020/21) further reinforces targeted support for children with special educational needs (MoE, 2016).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNevertheless, prevailing practices remain at odds with Inclusion Theory. Children with disabilities often face exclusion, segregation, and discrimination in mainstream education (Temesgen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Dy \u0026amp; Ninomiya, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). Deficiencies in teacher training, curriculum adaptation, and learning materials exacerbate marginalization (Woodhead et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Despite policy pledges by the Ministry of Education to counteract exclusionary trends, access to education remains uneven\u0026mdash;some children with disabilities continue to be placed in separate classes or denied schooling entirely (MoE, 2015; Kebede \u0026amp; Phasha, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRecent research underscores that teacher competency and preparedness are critical for realizing inclusive education. For example, Kebede and Phasha (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) highlight substantial gaps in pre-service and in-service teacher education, including inadequate understanding of inclusion, limited experiential learning, and poor self-efficacy among educators in Ethiopia. Inclusion Theory emphasizes that teachers\u0026rsquo; attitudes and self-efficacy significantly influence student well-being in inclusive settings (Cologon, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, multistakeholder collaboration\u0026mdash;including policy implementers, communities, and school leadership\u0026mdash;has been identified as indispensable for dismantling systemic barriers to inclusion in Ethiopian education (Kebede \u0026amp; Phasha, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAgainst this theoretical and empirical backdrop, the present study sought to examine how service delivery to students with special needs in the public primary schools of Bench-Sheko Zone aligned with Inclusion Theory\u0026rsquo;s principles\u0026mdash;particularly in terms of equitable access, infrastructure, pedagogical flexibility, and school leadership.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Statement of the Problem","content":"\u003cp\u003eAccording to the Ministry of Education (2016), approximately 71,007 students with special educational needs attended primary school in 2014/15 (2007 E.C.), falling substantially short of the targeted 1,739,000. Factors include misclassification, regional data gaps (notably in Afar and Somali regions), and limited recognition of special needs (MoE, 2016). Additionally, only 7,322 students with special needs were enrolled in secondary education in 2016 (Grades 9\u0026ndash;12), with a gender imbalance favoring males (MoE, 2016).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLiterature since 2022 emphasizes the gap between policy intentions and practice in Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s inclusive education journey. Achaw et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) found that Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s policy framework lacks a cohesive comprehensive inclusive education policy, suffers from weak organizational structures, resource scarcity, unreliable data systems, and insufficient financing. This systemic weakness impedes meaningful inclusion. Kebede and Phasha\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) study further reveals that teacher education programs inadequately build competencies for inclusive education. Educators often lack practical training, theoretical grounding, and self-efficacy\u0026mdash;all essential for inclusive practices, in line with Inclusion Theory which stresses structural adaptation and teacher readiness.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eKebede \u0026amp; Phasha (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) point to the absence of effective multisectoral collaborations. Although Ethiopia has operational policies\u0026mdash;like the Inclusive Education Resource Centers and differentiated curriculum guidelines\u0026mdash;their implementation is hampered by poor coordination among stakeholders, including educators, parents, policymakers, and communities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMoreover, Genovesi et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrate that inclusive education can support children with developmental disabilities by facilitating peer relationships and learning; however, insufficient teacher training and lack of safeguarding mechanisms can exacerbate risks such as social exclusion or bullying. This highlights the importance of prioritizing teacher preparation and safety measures within inclusion frameworks.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese findings suggested that whereas Ethiopian primary schools might have policy intent toward inclusion, actual implementation likely fell short of Inclusion Theory\u0026rsquo;s ideals: infrastructure and materials remained inaccessible; teacher capacity to differentiate or employ assistive tools was limited; and opportunities to harness inclusive technologies were unexplored. Moreover, as previous research in Ethiopia tended to focus on discrete disability categories and often omitted parental perspectives or context-specific inclusive strategies, there was a clear knowledge gap regarding the integrated delivery of inclusive services in Bench-Sheko primary schools.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThus, this study addresses a critical gap by exploring the current state of service delivery to students with special needs in Bench-Sheko Zone\u0026rsquo;s public primary schools\u0026mdash;focusing on enrollment, teacher preparedness, access to inclusive curricula and resources, facility accessibility, and the role of school leadership. In doing so, it contributes to the empirical and theoretical understanding of inclusive education implementation in under-researched rural Ethiopian regions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Research Gaps","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe literature review conducted for this study revealed several gaps in the existing body of research on special needs education (SNE) in Ethiopia. These gaps are essential for guiding the direction of the study and highlighting areas that have not been thoroughly explored in previous investigations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.1. Focus on Specific Disabilities\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eMost of the studies reviewed were primarily focused on a singular type of disability, limiting the broader understanding of how various types of disabilities are addressed within the same educational setting. This narrow focus presents an incomplete picture of the needs and experiences of learners with diverse disabilities, thus neglecting the intersectionality of different impairments in the classroom (Florian \u0026amp; Hawkin., 2011). Recent research emphasizes the need to examine the inclusive practices for various disabilities simultaneously, as learners with different needs often share common educational barriers and require comprehensive, individualized approaches (Florian \u0026amp; Hawkin., 2011). This gap is critical because inclusive education policies should support all learners, irrespective of their specific disabilities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2. Special Schools vs. Regular Schools\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnother significant gap identified in the literature is the overwhelming concentration of studies on special schools designed for specific disabilities. While special schools have contributed to the development of SNE, they often operate in isolation from regular schools, reinforcing segregation rather than promoting inclusion (Geleta, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Inclusion Theory, as conceptualized by scholars like Inclusion Spectrum (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), posits that inclusive education should not be seen as an isolated provision but as a holistic approach that integrates all learners into mainstream educational settings. In line with this, there is a pressing need for more studies focusing on inclusive education practices within regular public primary schools.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.3. Limited Parental Involvement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlthough previous studies considered the views of students with special educational needs (SEN) and their teachers, the voices of parents/guardians were often underrepresented. Parental involvement is a crucial factor in the success of inclusive education (Wurf, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Parental perspectives on the barriers to inclusion and their role in educational outcomes can provide a deeper understanding of the socio-cultural factors affecting the quality of education for children with SEN. The inclusion of parental input is vital for developing a more inclusive educational system that responds effectively to the needs of all students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.4. Geographical Focus\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite the growing body of research on SNE in Ethiopia, there was no study focusing specifically on public primary schools in Bench-Sheko Zone in Southwest Ethiopia. This geographical gap is significant because the challenges of delivering inclusive education may differ across regions due to cultural, socio-economic, and infrastructural factors (Genovesi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This study sought to fill this gap by examining the specific state of SNE in this under-researched zone, offering insights into local conditions and practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTherefore, the general objective of this study was to assess the special needs education service delivery practices in selected public primary schools in Bench-Sheko Zone. The study also aimed to achieve the following specific objectives:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eInvestigating the existing conditions regarding the acceptance, registration, and attendance of students with special needs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eEvaluating the availability of trained special education teachers, an inclusive curriculum, and professional support teams.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eAssessing the accessibility of school facilities, infrastructure, teaching aids, and instructional materials.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eExamining the role of school management bodies in overseeing service delivery for students with special needs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Research Questions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study sought to answer the following research questions:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhat are the existing conditions for the acceptance, registration, and attendance of students with special needs in public primary schools in Bench-Sheko Zone?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eAre there sufficiently trained special education teachers, an inclusive curriculum, and a team of professionals for students with special needs in public primary schools in the zone?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eAre the school facilities, infrastructure, teaching aids, and instructional materials accessible to students with special needs in public primary schools in the zone?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhat role do school management bodies play in managing service delivery to students with special needs in the study area?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conceptual Framework","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe study adopts a modified version of Mitchell's (2014) inclusive education conceptual framework to assess the current state of special needs education in Bench-Sheko Zone's public primary schools. Inclusive education (IE) is fundamentally defined as educating learners with special educational needs within regular education settings, promoting equal opportunities for all students regardless of their abilities (Side, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMitchell\u0026rsquo;s (2004) original framework conceptualizes inclusive education as a multi-dimensional process, where various factors interact to ensure the full inclusion of students with special needs. The original framework can be summarized as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;V\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;P\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;AC\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;AA\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;AT\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;AC\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;AS\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;S\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;R\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;L\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhere:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eV\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Vision\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eP\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Placement\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAC\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Adapted Curriculum\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Adapted Assessment\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAT\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Adapted Teaching\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAC\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Acceptance\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Access\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Support\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Resources\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eL\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Leadership\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study adapted the framework as it is with the exception of the vision dimension which was found to be less significant for a study focused on delivery practices as opposed to policy or design. With that slight modification, the framework was found to be suitable for addressing the local context and provide a more inclusive view of the current SNE practices in the study area. The key components of the adopted framework are discussed below:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePlacement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eInclusive education calls for learners with special needs to be placed in age-appropriate, local schools, and integrated into mainstream classes, irrespective of their abilities (Mitchell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). This is in line with recent findings by Hendrickson and Lee (2023), which highlight the importance of placing learners with special needs within their neighborhood schools to foster a sense of belonging and community.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdapted Curriculum\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn inclusive classrooms, the standard curriculum should be adapted to accommodate the abilities and interests of all learners. For students with special needs, this may involve modifying content to ensure it is age-appropriate yet pitched at a developmentally suitable level (Mitchell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). A study by Genovesi et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) support this view, emphasizing that curriculum differentiation is key to meeting diverse learning needs in inclusive settings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdapted Teaching and Assessment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe adaptation of teaching methods and assessment tools is crucial to ensure that all students, including those with special needs, can participate fully in the educational process. Assessment practices should reflect any curricular adaptations and provide individualized feedback to guide student progress (Mitchell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Recent evidence from inclusive classrooms suggests that data-driven instruction can significantly improve outcomes for students with special needs (Zhang, \u0026amp; Zhang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcceptance\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe concept of acceptance refers to the recognition of the rights of students with special educational needs to be educated alongside their peers in general education settings. This includes social and emotional acceptance, not only educational (Mitchell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). A study by Worku (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) emphasizes that emotional acceptance is as crucial as academic inclusion in fostering a supportive learning environment.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAccess\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003ePhysical access to educational facilities is another fundamental element of inclusive education. This includes the availability of ramps, adapted toilets, and sufficient space for wheelchairs. Additionally, the physical environment must consider other factors, such as lighting, ventilation, and classroom arrangement, to ensure students\u0026rsquo; needs are met (Mitchell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Accessibility remains a significant challenge in many Ethiopian schools, particularly in rural areas (Zhang, \u0026amp; Zhang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSupport and Resources\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eInclusive education requires the collaboration of multiple professionals, including general educators, special education experts, therapists, and assistants. Schools must ensure adequate resources, such as specialized teaching aids, equipment, and staffing, to support the inclusion of students with special needs (Mitchell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Recent studies highlight that a well-equipped support team is essential for overcoming the barriers to inclusion (King-Sears et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLeadership\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eEffective leadership plays a pivotal role in the successful implementation of inclusive education. Leaders must demonstrate a strong commitment to diversity, set realistic expectations, and work collaboratively with teachers, parents, and communities to achieve positive educational outcomes (Ainscow \u0026amp; Sandill, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). According to a study by Ainscow \u0026amp; Sandill (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), leadership in inclusive education requires a commitment to fostering an inclusive culture within schools, particularly in low-resource settings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6. Research Methodology","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.1. Description of the Study Area\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted in the Bench-Sheko zone, located in the newly formed South West Ethiopia Peoples\u0026rsquo; Region. This zone is bordered by the Kaffa zone to the northeast, Sheka zone to the southeast, and West Omo zone to the northwest. Situated approximately 561 km from Addis Ababa, the Bench-Sheko zone encompasses a total area of 4042.7 square kilometers (BSZPC, 2024). The region is composed of six rural Woredas\u0026mdash;namely Shay-Bench, Gidy-Bench, North-Bench, South-Bench, Sheko, and Guraferda\u0026mdash;as well as the Mizan-Aman and Seiz town administrations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGiven the diversity and remoteness of the area, the study aimed to capture an in-depth picture of the state of special needs education services in Bench-Sheko\u0026rsquo;s primary schools. These schools serve a population that includes students from diverse socio-economic and cultural backgrounds, which is vital in understanding the barriers and enablers to inclusive education (Genovesi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.2. Research Design\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn line with the principles of Inclusion Theory, which stresses the importance of both quantitative and qualitative approaches for a holistic understanding of inclusion practices (Mitchell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), the study adopted a concurrent mixed methods research design. This design was chosen because it enables the combination of numerical data with qualitative insights to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the issues surrounding special needs education in Bench-Sheko Zone.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs noted by Burchett (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), a mixed-methods approach is valuable in contexts where the complexity of the research questions requires both the breadth of quantitative data and the depth of qualitative insights. This approach enabled the researcher to address the study's objectives by concurrently collecting quantitative data on the prevalence and types of disabilities in primary schools, as well as qualitative data from teachers, parents, and school administrators regarding the experiences and challenges of inclusive education.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe quantitative component of the study involved a survey administered to 259 parents/guardians of students with special needs, and the qualitative component consisted of semi-structured interviews with school administrators, special needs teachers, and local government officials. This design provided a nuanced view of the barriers to inclusive education, including physical, social, and instructional challenges that directly relate to the concepts of acceptance and access within Inclusive Education frameworks (Side, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.3. Study Population and Sampling Design\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.3.1. Study Population\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAccording to the Bench-Sheko Zone Education Office (BSZA, 2023), the zone has 237 schools, with a total student enrollment of 201,584 students in the 2023/24 academic year. Of these, 7,496 primary school students were classified as having disabilities, a figure that represents 4.97% of the primary student population. Additionally, the study revealed that 733 students were identified as requiring specialized assistance for their special needs, making them the focus of this research. The data on the distribution of students with disabilities by type revealed that these learners faced a range of challenges, including physical, sensory, emotional, and cognitive disabilities, each of which may require different educational supports (Ainscow \u0026amp; Sandill, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe focus of the study was on the parents/guardians of the 733 students who were in primary schools, along with the 26 special needs teachers serving in the schools. These participants were considered central to understanding the practical implications of inclusive education in the region, particularly regarding the availability of trained staff, curriculum adaptations, and the support systems available (Florian \u0026amp; Hawkin., 2011).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.3.2. Sampling Design\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA combination of probability and non-probability sampling techniques was employed. For the parents/guardians, a simple random sampling technique was used, ensuring each parent had an equal chance of being selected for the survey. The researcher drew the sample using a random number table to maintain randomness and minimize selection bias (Joskow \u0026amp; Yamane, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1965\u003c/span\u003e). According to the formula for sample size determination, the final sample consisted of 259 parents/guardians (see the calculation below). The use of random sampling enabled the study to draw conclusions that were generalizable to the broader population of parents of students with special needs in the region.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe sample size was determined using Joskow \u0026amp; Yamane\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1965\u003c/span\u003e) formula:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003en\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;N/\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:(1+\\varvec{N}{\\left(\\varvec{e}\\right)}^{2}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhere, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Sample Size;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eN\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Total Number of Parents/Guardians;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ee\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Margin of Error at 5% (0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTherefore n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;N /\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:(1+\\mathbf{N}{\\left(\\varvec{e}\\right)}^{2}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e)\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e=\u0026thinsp;733 /\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\:(1+733\\:{\\left(0.05\\right)}^{2}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e )\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e=\u0026thinsp;258.78\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003en\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u003cspan type=\"DoubleUnderline\" class=\"DoubleUnderline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003e259\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor the special needs teachers, given their small number (26), a census was conducted, meaning all teachers participated in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn addition, purposive sampling was employed to select school administrators and local government officials, as these individuals possess specialized knowledge regarding the implementation of inclusive education policies and practices. The purposive sample included three school principals, two heads of Woreda-level education offices, and the head of a special needs resource center. These participants were interviewed to provide in-depth insights into the broader policy and organizational challenges that affect service delivery to students with special needs (Florian \u0026amp; Black-Hawkins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.4. Methods of Data Collection\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.4.1. Primary Data\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003ePrimary data were directly gathered from the sampled respondents and the study area. The researcher employed questionnaires, interviews, and observations to collect the primary data necessary to explore the inclusion and exclusion practices in special needs education (SNE) within the context of Bench-Sheko Zone. This multi-method approach aligns with Inclusion Theory, which advocates for integrating multiple perspectives and experiences in educational research to capture the complexity of inclusive practices (Ainscow et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eQuestionnaires\u003c/em\u003e: Structured questionnaires were the primary tool used to collect data from parents/guardians of students with special needs and teachers in the study area. Two separate versions of the questionnaire were created: one for parents/guardians and another for teachers. The questions in the questionnaires were grounded in indicators identified within the Special Needs and Inclusive Education Measurement Scale developed by Mitchell (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), which is widely used in the field of inclusive education for assessing various dimensions such as placement, adapted curriculum, teaching and assessment adaptations, acceptance, access, and support and resources. These dimensions are central to understanding the ways in which educational institutions either foster or hinder inclusive practices (Florian \u0026amp; Spratt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The inclusion of these key elements helped align the study with the broader goals of Inclusion Theory, which focuses on both structural and attitudinal barriers to inclusion (Ainscow et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo ensure the reliability of the data, both questionnaires were translated into Amharic and validated for cultural and linguistic appropriateness. Moreover, the study ensured the quality of the data collection by providing orientation and training to enumerators on how to present the questions in ways that respondents could easily understand and relate to. This approach was designed to mitigate any potential barriers stemming from language, literacy, or cultural differences (Zhang, \u0026amp; Zhang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eInterviews\u003c/em\u003e: Interviews were conducted with six key informants: three principals of public primary schools, two heads of Woreda-level education offices, and the head of a special needs resource center. These interviews allowed the researcher to probe deeply into the perspectives of educational leaders and policymakers, gathering insights into the challenges and opportunities they perceive for advancing inclusive education in the region. The interviews were structured around themes such as the state of special needs education, challenges to inclusion, and strategies for enhancing accessibility (Mitchell, 2023). The inclusion of these qualitative perspectives was crucial for understanding the institutional dynamics that contribute to the inclusion or exclusion of students with special needs in the region (Kozleski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eObservation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn addition to surveys and interviews, the researcher utilized observational methods to collect data on the actual conditions in schools, such as the accessibility of school facilities, the quality of classroom environments, and the teaching practices employed in inclusive settings. The researcher used a detailed observation checklist, specifically designed for this study, to guide observations and ensure that key areas\u0026mdash;such as physical accessibility, instructional methods, and learning materials\u0026mdash;were systematically assessed. The observational data complemented the self-reported data, providing a more comprehensive picture of the practices and barriers that contribute to or hinder inclusion (Genovesi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.4.2. Secondary Data\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study also incorporated secondary data, which provided valuable contextual information about the state of special needs education in Bench-Sheko Zone. Secondary data sources included published and unpublished research reports, statistical records, and other educational documents retrieved from digital libraries and relevant government databases. Additionally, lesson plans, student records, meeting minutes, and other administrative documents from the selected schools and education offices were examined. The inclusion of secondary data allowed the researcher to triangulate findings, comparing them with existing reports and statistics on SNE provision in the region (Hashimov, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). This helped to ensure a richer, more nuanced analysis of the educational context, consistent with Inclusive Education Theory, which emphasizes the importance of understanding local educational systems in their entirety (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.5. Methods of Data Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe analysis of the data was conducted using both quantitative and qualitative methods, in line with the mixed-methods approach, which aligns with Inclusion Theory\u0026rsquo;s call for the integration of diverse data sources to achieve a fuller understanding of educational practices (Phillips et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQuantitative Data Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe quantitative data collected through surveys were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22. The analysis included both descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. Descriptive statistics, such as mean, mode, median, variance, and standard deviation, were used to summarize the responses from the questionnaire items. Additionally, t-tests and ANOVA were employed to assess differences in perceptions between different groups (parents/guardians and teachers) and between schools in relation to the dimensions of special needs education (Strunk \u0026amp; Mwavita, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These statistical methods provided insights into the extent of agreement or disagreement on key issues related to special needs education and helped identify significant patterns in the data.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQualitative Data Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe qualitative data collected from interviews and observations were analyzed using content analysis, a systematic technique for organizing and interpreting textual data. The analysis involved identifying recurring themes, patterns, and connections related to the challenges and opportunities for inclusive education. The researcher focused on data relevant to the research questions, organizing it in terms of its contribution to understanding the practice of inclusion or exclusion in the study area. This analysis was triangulated with data from the quantitative survey and personal observations, allowing the researcher to cross-verify findings and ensure the robustness of the conclusions drawn (Bell et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e6.6. Reliability and Validity\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe reliability of the study refers to the consistency and trustworthiness of the data and findings. As noted by Chakrabartty (2013), reliability in educational research is essential for ensuring that the study's conclusions are dependable and replicable. To increase the reliability of the study, the researcher employed the Special Needs and Inclusive Education Measurement Scale developed by Mitchell (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), an established scale that has been rigorously tested for validity and reliability in various contexts (Mitchell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha test was conducted on the collected data to assess the internal consistency of the measurement scale. The result, with a Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha of 0.902, indicates a high level of reliability for the instruments used in the study, ensuring that the questions in the survey and the data they generated were consistent and accurate (Tavakol \u0026amp; Dennick, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eValidity refers to the extent to which the study measures what it intended to measure and the credibility of the findings (Mohajan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). To ensure internal validity, the researcher used peer review and reflexivity throughout the research process. The researcher also ensured heterogeneity within the sample by including parents/guardians of students with different types of disabilities and by selecting respondents from diverse schools across various locations within the study area. Additionally, the sampling methods, data collection procedures, and analysis techniques were thoroughly described to enable future researchers to replicate the study, a process critical for ensuring the external validity of the findings (Burchett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"7. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.1. Participant Demographics\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA total of 26 special needs education (SNE) teachers and 259 parents/guardians of students with special needs participated in this study. Among the teachers, 19 (73.1%) were male and 7 (26.9%) female, while the parent/guardian sample included 180 (69.5%) males and 79 (30.5%) females. The teachers\u0026rsquo; ages ranged from 23 to 50 years (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;33.08, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.29), while the ages of the students, as reported by their parents/guardians, ranged from 6 to 18 years (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11.50, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.86). Regarding familial relationships to the child, the majority were fathers (94; 36.3%), followed by mothers (93; 35.9%), and the rest were brothers, sisters, or other guardians. The types of disabilities reported by parents/guardians were diverse, with the most common being multiple impairments (78; 30.1%), followed by hearing impairment (46; 17.8%), speech/language impairment (35; 13.5%), visual impairment (34; 13.1%), and general learning disabilities (23; 8.9%). Grade-level distribution showed that most students were in Grade 1 (93; 35.9%), followed by Grade 2 (69; 26.6%) and Grade 3 (37; 14.3%). These demographic distributions demonstrate an inclusive sampling range that captures a broad spectrum of age, disability type, and familial context, in line with Inclusion Theory\u0026rsquo;s emphasis on intersectionality and diversity (Genovesi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.2. Special Needs Education Placement, Acceptance, and Access\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study aimed to assess the placement, acceptance, and access surrounding special needs education (SNE) in the study area. The results indicated that the majority of respondents had positive views on the placement of students in neighborhood schools. Specifically, 10 (38.5%) of the teachers strongly agreed, and 133 (51.4%) of the parents/guardians agreed that students with special educational needs attended nearby schools. Regarding the age-appropriateness of classes, while 7 (26.9%) of the teachers disagreed, 149 (57.5%) of the parents/guardians agreed that students were placed in age-appropriate classes. These findings align with principles of inclusive education (IE), which argue that students with disabilities should learn in integrated, age-appropriate environments (Collins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe acceptance dimension, a key tenet of Inclusion Theory, was also measured through respondents\u0026rsquo; views on the commitment of school governing bodies, local governments, and staff to inclusive education. The data revealed widespread agreement on the recognition of the rights of learners with special needs to receive inclusive education. Most teachers (21; 80.8%) and a significant portion of parents/guardians (103; 39.8%) strongly agreed that school governing bodies and local educational authorities respected these rights. Furthermore, 80.8% of teachers and 56% of parents/guardians agreed that principals and staff recognized and supported the rights of students with special needs to inclusive education. These results highlight the role of institutional attitudes and structures in fostering inclusivity (Zhang, \u0026amp; Zhang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Schools also demonstrated strong social and emotional acceptance of students with special needs, with 18 teachers (69.2%) and 110 parents/guardians (42.5%) agreeing that the schools met the emotional and social needs of these learners.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn terms of physical access, a crucial aspect of inclusive education, the study found mixed results. While 9 (34.6%) teachers and 61 (23.6%) parents/guardians agreed that schools had adequate physical access for learners with disabilities, a significant proportion of parents (41; 15.8%) and teachers (6; 23.1%) disagreed. This discrepancy indicates ongoing challenges in ensuring physical accessibility, a key barrier to inclusion (Clough \u0026amp; Corbett, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, while teachers were generally satisfied with the interior design of the classrooms and school facilities, with 34.6% agreeing that the design catered to learners with physical disabilities, a substantial number of parents (52; 20.1%) expressed concerns. Finally, on the environmental conditions of the classrooms, such as lighting and acoustics, 50.2% of parents and 26.9% of teachers reported positive perceptions, suggesting a need for further improvements to create fully accessible and inclusive learning environments (Mitcham et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec24\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.2.1. Statistical Analysis of Data on Special Needs Education Placement, Acceptance, and Access\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo further examine the variations in perspectives between teachers and parents/guardians regarding the placement, acceptance, and access dimensions of Special Needs Education (SNE), an independent samples t-test (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) was conducted. The results indicated that while both groups held differing views on all three dimensions, only the difference in the acceptance dimension was statistically significant. Specifically, the mean score for teachers' views on the acceptance of students with special needs in their respective schools (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.77) was significantly higher than that of parents/guardians (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.86), with a p-value of 0.000. This difference in mean scores (0.91 on a 5-point scale) suggests that teachers generally held more favorable views regarding the school's acceptance of students with special needs. These findings align with previous research, which has shown that educators are often more supportive of inclusive practices when they have been trained and have direct experience with inclusive education (Obiakor et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Teachers' more positive views could be attributed to their professional role and greater exposure to inclusive education policies, while parents' views may be influenced by the reality of limited resources and support systems that hinder effective inclusion (Collins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eComparison of Responses from Teachers and Parents/Guardians on the Placement, Acceptance and Access Dimensions of SNE (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;26 teachers and 259 parents/guardians)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePlacement\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.877\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e26.437\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.388\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.46\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.272\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eParents/Guardians\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.68\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.676\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcceptance\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e7.958\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e41.311\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.77\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.514\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eParents/Guardians\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.86\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.875\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAccess\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.471\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e283\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.638\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.04\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.916\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eParents/Guardians\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.14\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.092\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003et and df were adjusted because variances were not equal, Source: Survey (2024)\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMoreover, the significant difference in the acceptance dimension highlights a crucial area for intervention, as it reflects not only the recognition of the rights of students with special needs but also the schools' readiness to embrace inclusive practices both socially and pedagogically (Zhang, \u0026amp; Zhang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Inclusion Theory underscores the need for a collective effort from all stakeholders\u0026mdash;teachers, parents, and the broader community\u0026mdash;to foster an inclusive environment. The contrasting perspectives between teachers and parents/guardians may be indicative of a gap in communication or a mismatch between institutional policies and community experiences of inclusion (Zaorska, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, addressing these disparities is essential to create an inclusive educational ecosystem that extends beyond policy to actual practice.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo further understand the differences within the teachers' responses across different schools, ANOVA tests (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) were conducted on the data collected from the teachers regarding the placement, acceptance, and access dimensions of SNE. The results revealed that while no significant differences were observed in the placement and access dimensions (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.594, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.199 and F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.734, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.673, respectively), a statistically significant difference was found in the acceptance dimension (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.103, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.007). This indicates that teachers in different schools had varied perceptions of how inclusive and accepting their respective schools were towards students with special needs. The findings reflect that institutional factors, such as school leadership, resources, and local policies, could influence teachers' perceptions of inclusion (Genovesi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). As Inclusion Theory suggests, true inclusivity depends on systemic changes that address these localized discrepancies, ensuring that all schools provide equitable educational experiences for students with special needs (Obiakor et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eANOVA Tests on Responses from Teachers in Different Schools on the Placement, Acceptance and Access Dimensions of SNE\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSum of Squares\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePlacement\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBetween Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e19.128\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.125\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.594\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.199\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e21.333\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.333\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e40.462\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAcceptance\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBetween Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.615\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.513\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.103\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.007\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.000\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.125\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6.615\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAccess\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBetween Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6.128\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.681\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.734\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.673\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14.833\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.927\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e20.962\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003eSource: Survey (2024)\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec25\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.3. Special Needs Education Curriculum, Teaching, and Assessment\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study also sought to evaluate the curriculum, teaching strategies, and assessment practices in Special Needs Education (SNE) in the Bench-Sheko Zone. Drawing on the principles of Inclusion Theory, which emphasizes equal access, participation, and learning opportunities for all students, the study focused on three key areas: the generality and adaptability of the SNE curriculum, the use of diverse teaching strategies, and the extent to which assessment practices consider the needs and abilities of students with disabilities. Inclusion Theory advocates for curricula that are not only accessible but also responsive to the varied needs of all learners, particularly those with disabilities (Kueker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). The research aimed to explore how the curriculum, teaching, and assessment practices in the study area either facilitated or hindered inclusive educational experiences.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings revealed a significant divide between teachers and parents/guardians regarding the SNE curriculum. While a majority of teachers (57.7%) strongly agreed that the curriculum was broadly similar for all learners, most parents/guardians (46.3%) disagreed with this statement. This disparity points to a potential gap between the theoretical design of the curriculum and its practical implementation in the classroom (Ainscow et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Teachers\u0026rsquo; views may be influenced by their professional training and familiarity with inclusive policies, whereas parents may experience a mismatch between policy and actual practice. Furthermore, the study found that teachers (57.7%) largely disagreed that the curriculum was adapted to meet the diverse abilities and interests of learners, while parents (51.4%) shared similar concerns. This gap suggests that while the curriculum may be designed with a broad view of inclusion, it may lack the specificity needed to accommodate the diverse needs of learners, especially those with more complex disabilities (Kozleski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). However, both teachers (30.8%) and parents (34.7%) agreed that universal design principles were employed in the development of curricula, indicating an alignment with inclusive education frameworks, albeit with room for improvement in their application. This discrepancy is consistent with research indicating that while inclusive education policies may be in place, the actual delivery of adapted and accessible curricula is often inconsistent (Graham, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRegarding teaching strategies, both groups reported that a variety of classroom-focused strategies were utilized, with 38.5% of teachers and 70.7% of parents/guardians affirming this. This reflects a commitment to differentiation, which is a cornerstone of inclusive teaching practices. In line with Inclusion Theory, such practices aim to meet the individual learning needs of all students (Moon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, the study found that both teachers (38.5%) and parents/guardians (67.2%) acknowledged that data from learner outcomes were used to shape teaching strategies, suggesting a data-driven approach to teaching and learning, which is crucial for adjusting educational methods to suit diverse learning needs (Giangreco, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). The presence of individual educational plans (IEPs) for learners with special educational needs, affirmed by 42.3% of teachers and 42.9% of parents, further supports the idea that personalized and flexible teaching is central to inclusive practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study also explored the degree to which assessment tasks in schools were adapted to the needs of learners with special needs. Most teachers (30.8%) were divided in their views on whether assessment tasks reflected these adaptations, whereas the majority of parents (56%) believed that assessments considered the abilities of all learners. This disparity may be indicative of challenges teachers face in aligning assessments with diverse student needs in real-time, which is a well-documented issue in inclusive education (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec26\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.3.1. Statistical Analysis of Data on Special Needs Education Curriculum, Teaching, and Assessment\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings from the independent samples t-test (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) revealed a statistically significant difference in the mean scores between teachers (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.46) and parents/guardians (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.05) on the dimension of adapted teaching and assessment (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.031). This suggests that parents/guardians were more positive about the adaptability of teaching and assessment practices in the schools than teachers, potentially reflecting a disconnect between teachers' perceptions of the adequacy of adaptations and the lived experiences of students with special needs (Muhati-Nyakundi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). These results underscore the need for better alignment between policy intentions and classroom practices, particularly in terms of creating more adaptive, inclusive, and responsive assessment strategies that accommodate the diverse needs of all students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eComparison of Responses from Teachers and Parents/Guardians on the Curriculum, Teaching and Assessment Dimensions of SNE (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;26 teachers and 259 parents/guardians)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdapted Curriculum\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.390\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e27.537\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.176\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.69\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.594\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eParents/Guardians\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.121\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdapted Teaching and Assessment\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-2.275\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e26.278\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.031\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.46\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.303\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eParents/Guardians\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e4.05\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.654\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003eSource: Survey (2024)\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study further employed an ANOVA test to examine whether there were differences in the responses of teachers from different schools regarding the curriculum, teaching strategies, and assessment practices in Special Needs Education (SNE). This analysis aimed to assess the extent to which the schools varied in their approaches to inclusive education, specifically looking at how the curriculum and teaching practices were perceived by teachers. In alignment with Inclusion Theory, which emphasizes the need for educational environments that are flexible and responsive to the diverse needs of students, the study sought to identify whether the schools in the Bench-Sheko Zone were consistently applying inclusive practices or if there were discrepancies across schools.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results from the ANOVA test (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) revealed that there were statistically significant differences between schools in terms of how adaptive the SNE curriculum was perceived to be (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.189, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.000). This finding indicates that the extent to which the curriculum was seen as adaptable to the needs of students varied significantly across schools. Such a discrepancy is consistent with studies suggesting that inclusive education, although embedded in policy, is often implemented in ways that are context-dependent and influenced by the resources, training, and attitudes of educators (Ainscow et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; Rix et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, some schools may have more robust mechanisms for adapting the curriculum to meet the needs of students with disabilities, while others may face challenges related to resource constraints or lack of specialized teacher training (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). This variability underscores the need for consistent professional development and policy alignment to ensure that the principles of inclusive education are effectively operationalized across all schools (Moon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, no significant difference was found in how teachers perceived the teaching strategies and assessment practices in their schools, with a non-significant F value (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.528, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.220). This suggests that, despite differences in curriculum adaptation, the strategies and assessments used across schools were more uniform. This finding could point to a more standardized approach to teaching and assessment, which, while beneficial for ensuring some level of consistency, may not fully align with the individualized and differentiated practices that are core to the inclusive education model (Giangreco, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). The relative consistency in teaching and assessment practices might reflect a broader challenge in achieving true inclusion, where educational environments are not just uniform but also personalized to cater to the unique needs and abilities of each student (McLeskey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese findings also reflect the ongoing debate in inclusive education, particularly in resource-constrained contexts like Southwest Ethiopia, where schools may struggle to balance the demands of inclusivity with the practicalities of curriculum design and implementation (Kozleski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). The lack of variability in teaching strategies and assessments across schools suggests that while teachers might share a common approach to these practices, there may still be significant room for improvement in adapting these strategies to be more inclusive and responsive to the needs of students with disabilities. Future efforts should aim at providing more targeted professional development to educators, fostering an environment where both the curriculum and teaching methods can be more effectively customized to support all learners, regardless of their abilities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eANOVA Tests on Responses from Teachers in Different Schools on the Curriculum, Teaching and Assessment Dimensions of SNE\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSum of Squares\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAdapted Curriculum\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBetween Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e52.205\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5.801\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8.189\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11.333\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.708\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e63.538\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eAdapted Teaching and Assessment\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBetween Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e19.628\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.181\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.528\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.220\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e22.833\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.427\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e42.462\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003eSource: Survey (2024)\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec27\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.4. Special Needs Education Leadership, Support, and Resources\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn alignment with the principles of Inclusion Theory, which advocates for equitable access to quality education and emphasizes the importance of systemic support, leadership, and the adequate allocation of resources, this section of the study examines the roles of leadership and the availability of support and resources for Special Needs Education (SNE) in the Bench-Sheko Zone, Southwest Ethiopia. The theory posits that inclusive education requires a whole-school approach, involving not just the teaching staff but also leadership, administrative bodies, and policymakers who must demonstrate a firm commitment to inclusion (Florian \u0026amp; Spratt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Ainscow et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, assessing the consistency of leadership commitment and the availability of resources is crucial to understanding the barriers and enablers of inclusive education in the region.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec28\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.4.1. Leadership Commitment to Inclusive Education\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe leadership dimension of SNE in this study was assessed by evaluating the degree to which principals, school leadership, school governing bodies, and local education authorities consistently expressed a commitment to inclusive education. Results indicated a positive perception of leadership commitment from the teachers, with the majority (19, 73.1%) agreeing that their school principals consistently demonstrated commitment to inclusive education. This is in line with recent literature highlighting the essential role of school leadership in driving the implementation of inclusive practices Ainscow \u0026amp; Sandill \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). However, parental perceptions were more varied, with fewer parents (123, 47.5%) expressing agreement with the same statement, indicating possible differences in how leadership commitment is perceived by different stakeholders.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSimilarly, senior members of school leadership, such as vice principals and department heads, were viewed as committed to inclusive education by half of the teachers (13, 50%) and 45.9% of the parents. The alignment between teachers' and parents' views on leadership commitment could reflect a shared recognition of the importance of inclusive practices, but also suggests that there may be gaps in the actualization of these commitments (Moon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile a majority of teachers and parents agreed that the school boards/governing bodies showed commitment to inclusive education (teachers: 12, 46.2%; parents: 124, 47.9%), the perception of commitment by local education authorities was more polarized. Teachers (10, 38.5%) strongly disagreed with the claim that local education authorities were committed to inclusive education, whereas a significant proportion of parents (102, 39.4%) disagreed with this assertion. This discrepancy underscores a critical gap between policy-level support and its actual implementation at the local level, a challenge that has been highlighted in other studies on inclusive education in developing countries (Tremblay \u0026amp; Lapointe, 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec29\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.4.2. Support and Resources for Special Needs Education\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe support and resources dimension of SNE was assessed by examining access to specialist advisers, training opportunities for teachers, resource availability, and the efficient utilization of available resources. The findings revealed a stark discrepancy between teachers' and parents' perceptions of resource availability. A significant number of teachers (17, 65.4%) and parents (139, 53.7%) strongly disagreed with the assertion that teachers had access to specialist advisers, therapists, and other professionals. This gap in perceptions points to a potential lack of external support structures that are essential for the effective implementation of inclusive education practices (Giangreco, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Without specialized support, teachers may struggle to provide individualized instruction or accommodations for students with disabilities, undermining the principles of inclusive education.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, when it came to training opportunities for teachers to engage in collaborative arrangements, a majority of both teachers (14, 53.8%) and parents (124, 47.9%) strongly disagreed, signaling a lack of professional development in this area. Collaborative teaching is an integral part of inclusive practices, as it ensures that teachers work together to create an inclusive learning environment that accommodates diverse student needs (Rix et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). The absence of such training not only limits teachers\u0026rsquo; ability to engage in collaborative practices but also highlights the need for systemic support in building teacher capacity for inclusive education (McLeskey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings also revealed a marked difference in the perceptions of teachers and parents regarding the sufficiency of resources for inclusive education. While a majority of teachers (17, 65.4%) strongly disagreed with the claim that local education systems provided sufficient resources to schools to meet their inclusive education obligations, a significant portion of parents (100, 38.6%) disagreed with this assessment. This difference suggests that while parents may perceive resource allocation as somewhat adequate, teachers on the ground feel the strain of resource shortages that hinder their ability to implement inclusive education effectively (Kozleski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, the study revealed differing perceptions between teachers and parents regarding the role of school governing bodies in ensuring resources are delivered and used appropriately. A majority of teachers (10, 38.5%) strongly disagreed that school governing bodies ensured effective utilization of resources, whereas most parents (115, 44.4%) agreed. This divergence points to potential communication issues or a disconnect between what is promised by school leadership and what is actually delivered, which is a common challenge in the implementation of inclusive education in low-resource settings (Moon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRegarding the availability of sufficient resources at the classroom level, both teachers (12, 46.2%) and parents (80, 30.9%) expressed relatively more positive views, with the majority agreeing that school managers ensured adequate materials and personnel were available. This finding suggests that, at least at the classroom level, there may be more effective allocation and utilization of resources, but it also highlights that systemic issues at the school and local education authority levels continue to present challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn line with Inclusion Theory, which emphasizes the importance of leadership, systemic support, and the effective allocation of resources for the success of inclusive education, the findings from this study suggest that there are significant gaps in leadership commitment, access to specialized support, teacher training, and resource allocation in the study area. These challenges, particularly in low-resource contexts, must be addressed to create a truly inclusive education system where all learners, regardless of their disabilities, can thrive. Future efforts should focus on strengthening the capacity of leadership at all levels, providing adequate professional development for teachers, and ensuring that resources are not only available but effectively utilized to support inclusive practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec30\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.4.3. Statistical Analysis of Data on Special Needs Education Leadership, Support and Resources\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study also utilized statistical tests to examine differences in responses related to leadership, support, and resources. The t-test results (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e) revealed a statistically significant difference between teachers and parents/guardians regarding their perceptions of support and resources (t = -3.507, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;27.375, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.000), with parents expressing more positive views than teachers. This significant difference in perceptions highlights the need for a deeper understanding of the resource constraints and support mechanisms from the perspective of educators, who often bear the direct responsibility for implementing inclusive practices in the classroom.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eComparison of Responses from Teachers and Parents/Guardians on the Leadership, Support and Resources Dimensions of SNE (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;26 teachers and 259 parents/guardians)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003et\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003edf\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLeadership\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.046\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e26.496\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.964\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.96\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.280\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eParents/Guardians\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.95\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.694\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSupport and Resources\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e-3.507\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e27.375\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.15\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.120\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eParents/Guardians\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2.94\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.763\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003eSource: Survey (2024)\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurther, the ANOVA tests (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e) showed statistically significant differences between schools regarding leadership commitment to inclusive education (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6.313, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.001), indicating variability in how leadership is perceived and enacted across different schools. This variability suggests that some schools may be more successful than others in implementing inclusive education practices, highlighting the need for more consistent and systemic approaches to leadership and resource allocation across schools in the region.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eANOVA Tests on Responses from Teachers in Different Schools on the Leadership, Support and Resources Dimensions of SNE\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSum of Squares\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLeadership\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBetween Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e31.962\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3.551\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6.313\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.001\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9.000\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.563\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e40.962\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSupport and Resources\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBetween Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14.718\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.635\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.570\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e.207\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWithin Groups\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16.667\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1.042\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e31.385\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003eSource: Survey (2024)\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study align with the core principles of Inclusion Theory, which stresses the importance of leadership commitment, adequate resources, and support for the successful implementation of inclusive education. However, significant gaps in leadership consistency, teacher training, and resource availability were identified, which hinder the effective integration of inclusive practices in the primary schools of Bench-Sheko Zone. Addressing these challenges will require a comprehensive approach that involves strengthening leadership, enhancing teacher training, and ensuring that sufficient resources are allocated to meet the diverse needs of students with disabilities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec31\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.5. Results from the Qualitative Analysis of Data\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eInclusion Theory, which advocates for an education system that is responsive to the diverse needs of all students, emphasizes the importance of systemic support, individualized instruction, and the active participation of all stakeholders\u0026mdash;including teachers, parents, and local authorities\u0026mdash;in fostering a truly inclusive learning environment (Florian \u0026amp; Spratt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Ainscow, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). The qualitative findings of the current study, derived from interviews with school principals, teachers, local education officials, and direct classroom observations, provide an in-depth view of the challenges and opportunities related to Special Needs Education (SNE) in the primary schools of Bench-Sheko Zone, Southwest Ethiopia. These results are discussed through the lens of Inclusion Theory, focusing on aspects such as the accessibility, leadership, and infrastructure required to support the effective inclusion of students with special needs (SNE) in mainstream educational settings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec32\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.5.1. Access and Placement of Special Needs Education\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAccording to the principal of Mizan No.1 Elementary School, a significant proportion of students with special needs are located within or near Mizan-Aman town. This observation reflects a somewhat localized approach to SNE provision, where placement is more concentrated in urban centers. While this might offer certain advantages in terms of proximity and access to resources, it also reinforces the notion that students from rural or peripheral areas face additional barriers to accessing quality education (Deroncele-Acosta \u0026amp; Ellis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). As Inclusion Theory emphasizes the need for equitable access, the concentration of resources and services in urban areas represents a key obstacle in achieving inclusive education on a broader scale. This urban-rural disparity aligns with findings by Hegarty et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e) who highlighted that access to inclusive education services often varies significantly based on geographic location, socioeconomic status, and availability of local resources.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec33\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.5.2. Challenges in Classroom Practices and Curriculum Delivery\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe principal of Ketea Elementary School expressed that teachers often struggle to deliver the prescribed curriculum due to the wide range of disabilities present in the same classroom. This challenge of accommodating diverse needs within a single lesson plan is a central concern in inclusive education (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Deroncele-Acosta \u0026amp; Ellis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The difficulty in creating a flexible, student-centered curriculum that addresses the needs of all learners, especially in mixed-ability classrooms, is frequently noted in the literature as a barrier to effective inclusion (McLeskey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). The rigid adherence to a one-size-fits-all curriculum exacerbates the challenges faced by teachers in providing individualized support and engaging all students in meaningful learning experiences (Ainscow, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this context, the teacher\u0026rsquo;s role in adapting and differentiating the curriculum becomes pivotal. However, the current system seems to reinforce traditional, one-way pedagogical methods that are less conducive to the individualized, participatory learning approaches advocated by Inclusion Theory (McLeskey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). As observed, classrooms are typically dominated by teacher-centered instruction, which neglects the diverse learning needs of students with disabilities (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). The lack of flexibility in lesson planning and teaching methods, coupled with overcrowded classrooms (ranging from 40 to 55 students), hinders the possibility of providing individualized attention to students with special needs, a key principle of inclusive education (Giangreco, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). This finding underscores the need for a pedagogical shift towards differentiated instruction that is responsive to the diverse needs of all students (Deroncele-Acosta \u0026amp; Ellis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec34\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.5.3. Insufficient Resources and Infrastructure\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA recurring theme in the interviews and observations was the chronic shortage of resources and inadequate infrastructure in schools. The principal of Aman No.1 Elementary School emphasized that the success of inclusive education in their school relied heavily on the dedication and sacrifices of the staff, rather than on systemic support or resource availability. This sentiment resonates with findings from recent studies, which suggest that even in contexts where there is significant leadership commitment to inclusion, the lack of resources\u0026mdash;both human and material\u0026mdash;limits the ability of schools to fully realize the goals of inclusive education (Kozleski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Rix et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe observations made by the researcher\u0026mdash;such as the presence of inaccessible infrastructure (e.g., ditches without wheelchair paths) and poorly designed classrooms\u0026mdash;further underline the physical and structural barriers that impede the implementation of inclusive education. These challenges are particularly pressing for students with mobility impairments or other physical disabilities, as they limit their ability to engage fully in the educational environment (Giangreco, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, inadequate ventilation and lighting, as observed in some schools, create an uncomfortable learning environment that can exacerbate the difficulties faced by students with sensory processing disorders or other learning challenges (Deroncele-Acosta \u0026amp; Ellis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInclusion Theory stresses the importance of an inclusive physical environment that is accessible to all students, including those with disabilities. The lack of such accommodations in many schools in the study area highlights a significant gap in achieving inclusive education (Ainscow, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). The absence of accessible infrastructure undermines efforts to create a welcoming and supportive environment for students with special needs, making it clear that inclusive education requires not only curricular and pedagogical reform but also a commitment to improving physical and organizational infrastructure (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec35\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e7.5.4. Teacher Motivation and Parent-Teacher Communication\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe principal of Aman No.1 Elementary School also discussed the challenges faced by teachers in accommodating students with special needs, particularly the expectation that students should adapt to the existing classroom setup, rather than having the classroom modified to meet the students' needs. This tension is consistent with Inclusion Theory, which calls for schools to be adaptive to the needs of students rather than expecting students to conform to existing structures (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). This issue is compounded by the insufficient resources available to support such adaptations, leaving teachers to navigate these challenges with limited support, as noted by the principal.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMoreover, the irregular communication between teachers and parents, coupled with the lack of emotional and financial support networks, creates further barriers to effective collaboration in the education of students with special needs. The difficulty for parents to access information about their children\u0026rsquo;s educational progress and the absence of support systems at the local level reflect broader systemic issues that hinder the involvement of families in the educational process. This lack of collaboration between home and school has been identified as a significant factor in the successful implementation of inclusive education, as strong partnerships between parents and teachers are crucial for the holistic development of students (McLeskey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Kozleski et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings from the qualitative analysis highlight several key challenges in the implementation of inclusive education in the primary schools of Bench-Sheko Zone, particularly in the areas of resource availability, teacher training, infrastructure, and communication. These challenges underscore the importance of systemic support and the active involvement of all stakeholders in creating an inclusive educational environment. Adopting the principles of Inclusion Theory requires a multi-faceted approach that involves not only curricular reform and pedagogical flexibility but also significant improvements in infrastructure, resource allocation, and stakeholder engagement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"8. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe provision of Special Needs Education (SNE) in Ethiopia, particularly in the Bench-Sheko Zone, has been a topic of increasing academic attention. While specific studies on SNE in this particular zone remain scarce, a substantial body of research has focused on SNE in Ethiopia at large, including studies in Addis Ababa, the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples' Region (SNNPR), and other areas (Pather et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Abraraw, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Kassie, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Although these studies did not adopt the same conceptual framework as the current research, their findings provide valuable context and allow for comparative discussions. This section reviews the main findings of the study, with particular attention to their alignment with Inclusion Theory, which emphasizes the active participation of all students, particularly those with disabilities, in the general education system.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec37\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e8.1. Assessment and Placement of Students with Special Needs\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn line with Inclusion Theory, the individualized assessment of students is a cornerstone of inclusive education. The theory stresses the importance of diagnostic assessments that are both scientifically valid and tailored to the specific needs of students (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). However, the findings of this study highlighted a critical gap in this regard: primary schools in the Bench-Sheko Zone rarely conducted standardized evaluations of students before their placement in classrooms. When evaluations were administered, there was little evidence of scientific rigor in their design or implementation, further questioning the validity of such assessments. This issue resonates with the findings of other studies in Ethiopia, which have pointed out the absence of standardized screening, assessment, and identification tools for students with special needs (Abraraw, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The absence of scientifically informed evaluation processes not only undermines the goals of inclusive education but also perpetuates the marginalization of students with disabilities, as they are placed in classrooms that may not meet their specific learning needs (Muslim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Sabates et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe lack of standardized tools for assessment underscores the need for national or regional guidelines for evaluating students with special needs (Rahmato \u0026amp; Ayenew, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Muslim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Inclusion Theory advocates for systemic changes that provide both the tools and the frameworks necessary to effectively identify and support students' diverse needs. Without these tools, educational institutions are left without the means to implement the tailored educational plans required for true inclusion (Deroncele-Acosta \u0026amp; Ellis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec38\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e8.2. Infrastructure and Accessibility Challenges\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn terms of physical accessibility, the study found that many of the schools in the Bench-Sheko Zone lacked the essential infrastructure to accommodate students with special needs. These findings align with previous research that has identified similar challenges throughout Ethiopia. For instance, the national inclusive education strategy outlined the need for accessible facilities, such as adapted toilets, ramps, and appropriate seating arrangements (MoE, 2015). However, these guidelines have not been consistently implemented, as confirmed by studies indicating the inaccessibility of school facilities for students with disabilities (Pather et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Tefera et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn particular, the study revealed that some schools had physical environments that were completely inaccessible to students with mobility impairments. The presence of doorways, classrooms, and pathways that did not accommodate wheelchair users, along with areas that required students to be carried by peers, starkly highlights the systemic failures in implementing inclusive physical environments (Tirussew et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The absence of accessible infrastructure violates the principles of Inclusion Theory, which emphasizes the importance of adapting the physical environment to meet the needs of all learners (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Creating accessible school environments is a fundamental requirement for enabling full participation in education for all students, regardless of their physical abilities (Ainscow, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec39\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e8.3. Lack of Trained Professionals and Specialized Support\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnother significant finding of the study concerns the lack of specialized professionals in schools. The absence of specialists such as speech pathologists, occupational therapists, and special education experts is a well-documented issue in Ethiopia (Aldersey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang, \u0026amp; Zhang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). In line with previous studies, this research highlights the critical gap in trained professionals that is necessary for supporting students with a wide range of disabilities in inclusive classrooms (Amanu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e; Aldersey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The lack of such expertise further inhibits the ability of schools to provide the individualized support that students with special needs require, thereby undermining the goals of inclusive education (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this context, Inclusion Theory emphasizes the importance of professional development and the role of well-trained educators in ensuring that all students, regardless of their disabilities, are provided with appropriate educational opportunities. The lack of specialists further exacerbates the challenges faced by educators who are expected to meet the diverse needs of students without adequate support (Giangreco, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec40\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e8.4. Teacher Attitudes Toward Inclusion\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study also found that, in contrast to some earlier studies which reported negative attitudes among teachers toward the inclusion of students with disabilities (Amanu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e; Beyene \u0026amp; Tizazu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e), teachers in the Bench-Sheko Zone expressed relatively positive attitudes toward including students with special needs. This finding is consistent with more recent studies that have noted a shift towards more inclusive attitudes among teachers, particularly when provided with proper support and training (Dagnew, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Dagnachew et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This positive trend reflects the growing awareness of the importance of inclusion and the role of teachers in facilitating it. However, while these attitudes are encouraging, the absence of adequate resources, training, and specialized support undermines their effectiveness in practice.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInclusion Theory posits that positive attitudes alone are insufficient to create an inclusive education system. It is essential that these attitudes are supported by structural changes, including professional development opportunities, adequate resources, and inclusive pedagogical practices (Ainscow, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Teachers\u0026rsquo; positive attitudes must therefore be coupled with systemic changes that make inclusion possible on a practical level.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec41\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e8.5. Lack of Educational Materials and Adapted Curriculum\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study identified the lack of adaptive educational materials, specialized facilities, and trained trainers as key obstacles to the effective provision of primary level SNE. These findings are consistent with previous research on the inadequate supply of adapted educational resources for students with disabilities in Ethiopia (Aldersey et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Tirussew et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). In particular, the study found that many schools lacked an adapted curriculum and basic learning materials, such as textbooks and reference materials, which are crucial for supporting students with special needs (Beyene \u0026amp; Tizazu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang, \u0026amp; Zhang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). This lack of resources is a significant barrier to achieving the goals of inclusive education, as students with disabilities often require specialized materials and methods of instruction that are not provided in standard classrooms (Florian \u0026amp; Linklater, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs Inclusion Theory suggests, inclusive education requires the creation of curricula that are flexible, adaptive, and capable of meeting the needs of all learners, regardless of their abilities. The absence of an adapted curriculum and appropriate resources in the study area highlights the systemic barriers to inclusion that exist at multiple levels, from policy to practice (Deroncele-Acosta \u0026amp; Ellis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study underline several critical issues that hinder the successful implementation of inclusive education in the Bench-Sheko Zone. While some positive developments, such as improved teacher attitudes toward inclusion, were observed, the lack of standardized assessments, inadequate infrastructure, insufficient professional support, and limited resources present significant challenges. These barriers are consistent with previous studies conducted in Ethiopia and elsewhere, highlighting the need for systemic change in the country\u0026rsquo;s approach to SNE. By aligning the findings of this study with the principles of Inclusion Theory, it is clear that inclusive education in Ethiopia requires not only changes in attitudes but also comprehensive reforms in policy, infrastructure, resources, and professional development to ensure that all students, regardless of their abilities, have access to meaningful educational opportunities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"9. Limitations of the Study","content":"\u003cp\u003eDespite its potential contributions to the field of special needs education in Ethiopia, the study is also subject to certain limitations. The reliance on self-reported data may have introduced bias, while the focus on primary schools in a single zone restricts the generalizability of the findings. The absence of localized assessment tools limited the precision of identifying special educational needs. In addition, the analysis emphasizes institutional and pedagogical factors and does not go deep into systemic issues such as national financing, intersectoral collaboration, and long-term outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"10. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study sought to assess the state of Special Needs Education (SNE) in public primary schools within the Bench-Sheko Zone of Southwest Ethiopia, focusing specifically on key dimensions of service delivery: placement, acceptance, access, adapted teaching and assessment, leadership, and support and resources. By employing these dimensions, the study aimed to provide a comprehensive view of how SNE practices are being implemented in this region, aligning its findings with the principles outlined in Inclusion Theory. This theory emphasizes that every learner, regardless of their abilities, should have equal opportunities to access and participate in education.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne of the key findings of this study was that students with special needs were placed in schools that were relatively close to their homes, which aligns with the principles of inclusion that prioritize accessibility and convenience for all students. However, while placement was geographically convenient, the study found that students were not always placed in age-appropriate classes, which could hinder their social inclusion and peer interactions. According to Inclusion Theory, proper placement in an age-appropriate and supportive learning environment is critical to fostering not only academic development but also social and emotional growth for students with special needs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study also noted that students with special needs were not withdrawn for additional assistance more frequently than other students. This finding challenges the traditional segregated models of SNE, which often involve separating students from their peers for additional support. Inclusion Theory posits that removing students from the general classroom setting may perpetuate their exclusion from broader social and educational experiences. Therefore, the practice of integrating students with disabilities into regular classroom settings aligns with the core ideals of inclusion, allowing for more equitable learning experiences.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile schools in the study were generally aware of the rights of students with special educational needs to inclusive education, significant infrastructural barriers were observed. The lack of ramps, adapted toilets, accessible playgrounds, and appropriate footpaths hindered the physical accessibility of schools for students with physical disabilities. These findings are in line with those of previous studies, which emphasized the importance of creating accessible physical environments that are conducive to the learning and participation of all students. Inclusion Theory stresses that a truly inclusive education system must be designed with universal access in mind, ensuring that physical environments are as accessible to students with disabilities as they are to their peers.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe absence of these basic features is a direct violation of the principles of inclusive education, as it limits students' participation in school activities and their ability to engage in meaningful learning experiences. For inclusion to be fully realized, schools must be equipped with the necessary infrastructure to meet the diverse needs of their students.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study also highlighted the inadequacies in the SNE curriculum, which was found not to consider the varying abilities and needs of different student groups. The implementation of an adapted curriculum is central to the success of inclusive education. Inclusion Theory emphasizes that education should be flexible and responsive to the diverse needs of all students, allowing them to engage with content in ways that are meaningful to them. However, the study found that while certain schools had adopted diverse teaching strategies and individualized education plans (IEPs) to address these challenges, the lack of resources severely hindered the proper implementation of the curriculum.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis aligns with recent research that underscores the importance of resource availability in implementing an inclusive curriculum. In many contexts, including Ethiopia, a lack of training, materials, and resources for teachers has been identified as one of the most significant barriers to effective inclusion. Therefore, schools must not only adapt their curricula but also ensure that they have the appropriate resources to support these adaptations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTeachers in the study were found to be committed to delivering inclusive education, making efforts to accommodate the diverse needs of their students. However, the absence of access to specialist advisors and other professional support posed a significant challenge. As Inclusion Theory advocates, effective inclusion requires not only the commitment of teachers but also professional development, collaboration with specialists, and ongoing support for teachers in their roles as facilitators of diverse learning needs. In the absence of such support, even the most dedicated teachers struggle to effectively implement inclusive education practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study\u0026rsquo;s findings are consistent with those of other studies, which highlight that teacher professional development and access to specialized support services are essential for the successful inclusion of students with disabilities in the general education system. Without these, the gap between theory and practice in inclusive education is likely to remain unbridgeable.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study found statistically significant differences between teachers\u0026rsquo; and parents\u0026rsquo; views on various dimensions of SNE. Teachers generally had more positive views on the acceptance dimension of SNE, while parents/guardians expressed more favorable views regarding the adapted curriculum, adapted teaching, and assessment practices, as well as support and resources. These differences highlight the diverse perspectives that exist between educators and families regarding the effectiveness of inclusive education practices. The alignment of Inclusion Theory with the perspectives of parents and teachers is critical, as inclusive education is a shared responsibility that involves collaboration between school staff, parents, and local authorities. It is essential for these two groups to communicate effectively and work together to ensure that the needs of students with special needs are met both in and outside the classroom.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study also revealed statistically significant differences between schools in terms of the acceptance, adapted curriculum, and leadership dimensions of SNE. However, no significant differences were found in the areas of placement, access, adapted teaching and assessment, and support and resources. This variability across schools suggests that while some schools are making progress toward inclusive education, others continue to face significant challenges in implementing key components of the SNE framework. This inter-school disparity further underscores the need for a more systematic approach to the development and implementation of inclusive education policies at the regional and national levels.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"11. Implications for Future Research","content":"\u003cp\u003eFuture research should extend to multiple regions and employ longitudinal designs to assess long-term outcomes for learners with special needs. The development of localized assessment and monitoring tools would strengthen the evidence base for inclusive education. Greater emphasis on parental engagement, community participation, and cultural attitudes could provide deeper insights into local dynamics. Applying interdisciplinary and alternative theoretical approaches, such as rights-based or disability studies perspectives, may also enrich understanding and practice in inclusive education.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical Approval\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll research procedures, including data collection, analysis, and reporting, were conducted in accordance with established ethical standards. The research proposal was reviewed and approved by the Graduate Research and Publication Ethics Committee of Mizan-Tepi University. Furthermore, the research was carried out in accordance with the ethical principles set forth in the Declaration of Helsinki (1964) and its subsequent amendments, as well as the National Research Ethics Review Guideline issued by the Ethiopian Ministry of Science and Technology (http://www.most.gov.et/Ethics%20Guideline.pdf)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their enrollment in the study. Participants were provided with a comprehensive explanation of the study\u0026rsquo;s aims and procedures and were required to give informed consent before data collection commenced. To maintain confidentiality and protect participant privacy, all data were anonymized, and no personally identifiable information (e.g., names or unique identifiers) was included in the final dataset or report. These measures were undertaken in compliance with internationally accepted ethical standards for research involving human subjects.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for Publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis manuscript does not contain any identifiable individual person\u0026rsquo;s data in any form (including individual details, images, or videos), and therefore, consent for publication is not required.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting Interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author declares no conflicts of interest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author has received no financial support for the research.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of Data\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSources of all information supporting the manuscript are duly cited within the manuscript. In accordance with the ethical guidelines applied during the research approval process datasets for the study are confidential and not publicly available.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor\u0026rsquo;s Information\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDemelash Belay has received a B.A. Degree in Sociology and Social Anthropology as well as an M.A. Degree in Sociology from Addis Ababa University. He specializes in areas of sociological theories, social welfare, economic sociology, organizations, and development. He currently holds a senior lecturer position at Mizan-Tepi University, South West Ethiopia Peoples\u0026rsquo; Region, Ethiopia. Email: [email protected]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor\u0026rsquo;s Contribution\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author made full contribution in the writing, editing and finalizing of the article.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbraraw, S. (2017). Good Practices and Challenges of Special Needs Education Itinerant Teachers in Addis Ababa Special and Mainstream Primary Schools. Addis Ababa University, Department of Special Needs Education. Addis Ababa. (Unpublished)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAchaw, T., Mebratu, T., \u0026amp; Teklemariam, A. (2024). Policy intentions on inclusive education for students with disabilities in Ethiopia. Indonesian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 3(2), 86\u0026ndash;101. https://doi.org/10.33650/ijess.v3i2.9948\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAinscow, M. (2002). Understanding the Development of Inclusive Schools. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203016619\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAinscow, M., \u0026amp; Sandill, A. (2010). Developing inclusive education systems: The role of school leadership. School Leadership \u0026amp; Management, 30(2), 123\u0026ndash;138. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110802504903\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAinscow, M., Booth, T., \u0026amp; Dyson, A. (2004). Understanding and developing inclusive practices in schools: a collaborative action research network. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 8(2), 125\u0026ndash;139. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360311032000158015\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAinscow, M., Booth, T., \u0026amp; Dyson, A. (2006). Improving schools, developing inclusion. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203967157\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAldersey, H. M., Lartey, J., Gabriels, S., Xu, X., Abrahams, D., Batorowicz, B., Abebe, S. M., Mamo, T., Nyoka, N., \u0026amp; Lorenzo, T. (2024). \u0026ldquo;I Really Wanted to Further My Education but That Wasn\u0026rsquo;t Possible\u0026rdquo;: Out of School Experiences of Youth with Disabilities in Ethiopia, Ghana, and South Africa. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 72(2), 195\u0026ndash;212. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912x.2024.2317476\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAmanu, E. (2000). The Role of Teachers in the Implementation of Inclusive Education. Unpublished MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBell, E., Bryman, A., \u0026amp; Harley, B. (2022). Research Designs. Business Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.1093/hebz/9780198869443.003.0013\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBench Sheko Zone Planning Commission (BSZPC). (2024). Bench Sheko Zone Plan Commission Annual Statistical Abstract. Location, area and administrative divisions of the zone,. Mizan-Aman: Bench Sheko Zone Planning Commission Office. (Unpublished)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBench-Sheko Zone Administration (BSZA). (2023). Bench-Sheko zone annual performance report for 2023. Miza-Aman. (Unpublished)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBeyene, G., \u0026amp; Tizazu, Y. (2010). Attitudes of teachers towards inclusive education in Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Education and Sciences, 6(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBurchett, N. (2014). Book Review: Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 77(8), 435\u0026ndash;435. https://doi.org/10.1177/030802261407700807\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eClough, P., \u0026amp; Corbett, J. (2000). Theories of Inclusive Education: A Students\u0026rsquo; Guide. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446220436\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCollins, M. (2012). Index for inclusion: developing learning and participation in schools. Educational Psychology in Practice, 28(4), 445\u0026ndash;445. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2012.728810\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCologon, K. (2024). How can inclusion succeed for all? Children\u0026rsquo;s well-being in inclusive schools and the role of teachers\u0026rsquo; inclusion-related attitudes and self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104411\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDagnachew, T. K., Woldegerima Berhe, Y., Yalew Mustofa, S., \u0026amp; Birlie Chekol, W. (2023). Clinicians\u0026rsquo; knowledge and attitude towards early mobilization in intensive care units in Ethiopian tertiary hospitals: A multi-centre study. SAGE Open Medicine, 11, 20503121231172348.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDagnew, A. (2013). Factors affecting the implementation of inclusive education in primary schools of Bahir Dar Town Administration. Education Research Journal, 3(3), 59-67.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeroncele-Acosta, A., \u0026amp; Ellis, A. (2024). Overcoming Challenges and Promoting Positive Education in Inclusive Schools: A Multi-Country Study. Education Sciences, 14(11), 1169. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111169\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDy, S. S., \u0026amp; Ninomiya, A. (2003). Basic Education in Cambodia: The Impact of UNESCO on Policies in the 1990s. Education Policy Analysis Archives. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v11n48.2003\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFlorian, L., \u0026amp; Black-Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 813\u0026ndash;828. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2010.501096\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFlorian, L., \u0026amp; Linklater, H. (2010). Preparing teachers for inclusive education: using inclusive pedagogy to enhance teaching and learning for all. Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(4), 369\u0026ndash;386. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764x.2010.526588\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFlorian, L., \u0026amp; Spratt, J. (2013). Enacting inclusion: A framework for responding to diversity in the classroom. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(2), 119\u0026ndash;135. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778111\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGeleta, A. D. (2019). School Principals and Teachers\u0026rsquo; Perceptions of Inclusive Education in Sebeta Town Primary Government Schools, Sebeta, Ethiopia. International Journal of Technology and Inclusive Education, 8(1), 1364\u0026ndash;1372. https://doi.org/10.20533/ijtie.2047.0533.2019.0166\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGenovesi, E., Gaches, A., McKenzie, J., Hanlon, C., \u0026amp; Hoekstra, R. A. (2024). Exploring context for implementation of inclusive education for children with developmental disabilities in mainstream primary schools in Ethiopia. PLOS ONE, 19(8), e0307576. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/mpz7b\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGiangreco, M. F. (2010). One-to-One Paraprofessionals for Students With Disabilities in Inclusive Classrooms: Is Conventional Wisdom Wrong? Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 48(1), 1\u0026ndash;13. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-48.1.1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGraham, L. J. (2023). Inclusive education. Inclusive Education for the 21st Century, 3\u0026ndash;17. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003350897-2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHashimov, E. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook and The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Technical Communication Quarterly, 24(1), 109\u0026ndash;112. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2015.975966\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHegarty, S., Meijer, C. and, \u0026amp; Pijl, S. J. (2002). Inclusive Education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203015728\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eInclusion Spectrum. (2022). Encyclopedia of Teacher Education, 816\u0026ndash;816. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-8679-5_300097\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJoskow, J., \u0026amp; Yamane, T. (1965). Statistics, an Introductory Analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 60(310), 678. https://doi.org/10.2307/2282703\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKassie, S. (2013). Inclusive teaching involving visually impaired students in English language teaching (ELT) setting. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Andhra University, India.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKebede, A. T., \u0026amp; Phasha, T. N. (2024). Developing teachers\u0026rsquo; competency for inclusive education in Ethiopia: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods study. African Journal of Disability, 13, a1383. https://doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v13i0.1383\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKing-Sears, M. E., Stefanidis, A., Evmenova, A. S., Rao, K., \u0026amp; Mergen, R. L. (2023). Achievement of learners receiving UDL instruction: A meta-analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, 103956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103956\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKozleski, E. B., Artiles, A. J., \u0026amp; Waitoller, F. R. (2014). Equity in inclusive education: Using research to inform policy. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18(9), 901\u0026ndash;918. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446282236.n16\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKueker, J. (2000). Book Review: From Them to Us: An International Study of Inclusion in Education Edited by Tony Booth and Mel Ainscow New York: Routledge, 1998 271 pages. Remedial and Special Education, 21(1), 63\u0026ndash;63. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193250002100109\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcLeskey, J., Waldron, N. L., \u0026amp; Redd, L. (2012). A Case Study of a Highly Effective, Inclusive Elementary School. The Journal of Special Education, 48(1), 59\u0026ndash;70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466912440455\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMinistry of Education (MoE). (2015). Guidelines for Establishing and Managing Inclusive Education Resource Centers. (MoE internal document)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMinistry of Education (MoE). (2016). Education Sector Development Program V. Resource Centers. (MoE internal document)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMitcham, M., Agahe Portman, T. A., \u0026amp; Afi Dean, A. (2009). Role of School Counselors in Creating Equitable\u0026mdash; Educational Opportunities for Students With Disabilities in Urban Settings. Urban Education, 44(4), 465\u0026ndash;482. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085909341042\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMitchell, D. (2014). What really works in special and inclusive education: Using evidence-based teaching strategies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429401923\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMohajan, H. K. (2018). Qualitative Research Methodology in Social Sciences and Related Subjects. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 7(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.26458/jedep.v7i1.571\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoon, T. R., Brighton, C. M., \u0026amp; Tomlinson, C. A. (2020). Using Differentiated Classroom Assessment to Enhance Student Learning. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429452994\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMuhati-Nyakundi, L. I. (2023). Teachers\u0026rsquo; Agency and Wellbeing in Inclusive Education: Challenges and Opportunities. Journal of Educational Studies, 2023(si1), 365\u0026ndash;379. https://doi.org/10.59915/jes.2023.special.1.19\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMuslim, A. K. (2023). Practices And Challenges in Implementing Inclusive Education in Some Selected Pre-Primary Schools in Dire Dawa City Administration (Doctoral dissertation, Haramaya University).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eObiakor, F. E., Harris, M., Mutua, K., Rotatori, A., \u0026amp; Algozzine, B. (2012). Making Inclusion Work in General Education Classrooms. Education and Treatment of Children, 35(3), 477\u0026ndash;490. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2012.0020\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePather, S., Tadesse, A., \u0026amp; Gizachew, S. (2021). Moving Toward Inclusive Education in Ethiopia Through Itinerant Teachers at Resource Centers. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.438\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePhillips, D., Stewart-Fox, T., Phillips, S., Griffith, M., \u0026amp; Bhojedat, J. (2023). Distributed Leadership in Education: A Systematic Review of its Role in Fostering Innovative Practices and Enhancing School Performance. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 12(11), 2083\u0026ndash;2089. https://doi.org/10.21275/sr231128014118\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRahmato, D., \u0026amp; Ayenew, M. (Eds.). (2018). Challenges and Opportunities for Inclusive Development in Ethiopia. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.8085385\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRix, J., Hall, K., Nind, M., Sheehy, K., \u0026amp; Wearmouth, J. (2009). What pedagogical approaches can effectively include children with special educational needs in mainstream classrooms? Support for Learning, 24(2), 86\u0026ndash;94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2009.01404.x\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRyan, D. (2011). The Irregular School: Exclusion, Schooling and Inclusive Education \u0026ndash; By Roger Slee. Support for Learning, 26(4), 189\u0026ndash;189. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2011.01502_2.x\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSabates, R., Zhao, Y. V., Mitchell, R., \u0026amp; Ilie, S. (2021). Understanding the External Social Benefits of Education in Ethiopia. journal of education finance, 47(1), 45-70.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSide, A. S. (2018). Challenges of Implementing Inclusive Education and Supporting Marginalized Groups in Ethiopia. Challenging Inclusive Education Policy and Practice in Africa, 148\u0026ndash;156. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004391505_009\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStrunk, K. K., \u0026amp; Mwavita, M. (2024). Basic issues in quantitative educational research. Design and Analysis in Quantitative Educational Research, 3\u0026ndash;20. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003442011-2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTavakol, M., \u0026amp; Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53\u0026ndash;55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTefera, B., Admas, F., \u0026amp; Mulatie, M. (2015). Education of children with special needs in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian Journal of Education, 35(1), 45-97.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTemesgen, Z. (2018). Exploring Governmental Commitment to Execute Inclusive Education in Ethiopia. Research in Pedagogy, 8(2), 226\u0026ndash;239. Internet Archive. https://doi.org/10.17810/2015.86\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTirussew, T. (2005). Disability in Ethiopia: Issues, insights, and implications. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University Print Press. https://doi.org/10.69475/ratei.2024.1.4\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTirussew, T., Alemayehu, T., Belay, H., Fantahun, A. d., Moges, A., Sewalem, T., et al. (2013). Manual for Employability of Persons with Disabilities in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa University, Department of Special Needs Education. (Unpublished)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUnited Nations (2015). Transforming governance for the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. https://doi.org/10.18356/e5a72957-en\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWoodhead, M., Rossiter, J., Dawes, A., \u0026amp; Pankhurst, A. (2017). Scaling-up early learning in Ethiopia: Exploring the potential of O-class. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526402004.n14\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWorku, M. Y. (2025). Teacher professional competence in Ethiopia: Educators\u0026rsquo; perspectives on current status and key influential factors. Teaching Education, 1\u0026ndash;17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2025.2544573\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWurf, G. (2022). Working with Families of Students with Disabilities in Primary Schools. Research for Inclusive Quality Education, 193\u0026ndash;203. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5908-9_15\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZaorska, M. (2024). Inclusive education or education for All: Balancing individualisation and community (opportunities and challenges). Special School, LXXXV(4), 258\u0026ndash;269. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0054.9137\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, H., \u0026amp; Zhang, Y. (2022). Educational outcomes for primary school children in Ethiopia: A scoping review. International Journal of Inclusive Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2022.2030295\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Inclusive Education, Special Needs Education (SNE), Access, Acceptance, Curriculum Adaptation, Educational Leadership, Educational Support","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8292329/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8292329/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe study aimed to evaluate the state of service delivery for students with special needs in public primary schools within Bench-Sheko Zone, Southwest Ethiopia, through the lens of Inclusion Theory. The research utilized a concurrent mixed-methods design, combining quantitative and qualitative data to provide a holistic view of the issue. The findings revealed that while the placement of students with special needs in schools is relatively adequate, significant challenges remain in other critical areas that underpin inclusive education. These challenges, which threaten the fundamental right of students to an inclusive education, span across the dimensions of access, acceptance, adapted curriculum, adapted teaching and assessment, as well as leadership and support structures. Issues such as physical inaccessibility within school facilities, the lack of individualized lesson plans and assessments tailored to the diverse abilities of students, ongoing budgetary constraints, and the inefficient use of available resources emerged as key barriers. Furthermore, the study revealed a limited commitment from local educational authorities to fully embrace and implement inclusive practices. The study underscores the urgent need for systemic reforms that align with inclusive educational principles to ensure equitable access for all learners, regardless of their abilities and in line with the ideals of Inclusion Theory.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Barriers to Inclusive Education: A Sociological Evaluation of Special Needs Education Service Delivery in Primary Schools in South West Ethiopia","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-12-09 09:00:08","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8292329/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"d0135c3c-4e31-44f3-8375-634d97c9e140","owner":[],"postedDate":"December 9th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":59191893,"name":"Special Education"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-12-09T09:00:08+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-12-09 09:00:08","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8292329","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8292329","identity":"rs-8292329","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}