In-Service Teachers’ Knowledge and Preparedness in Supporting Students with Mild Disabilities in an Inclusive, Class in Secondary Schools, Kenya

In-Service Teachers’ Knowledge and Preparedness in Supporting Students with Mild Disabilities in an Inclusive, Class in Secondary Schools, Kenya

Dr. Fedha Flora

Department of Curriculum, Instruction and Educational Management,Egerton University

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0469

Received: 29 July 2025; Accepted: 07 August 2025; Published: 09 September 2025

ABSTRACT

Providing a meaningful education to all learners, including those with mild disabilities, is a critical responsibility for educators and all must be involved for a truly inclusive Special education for students with mild/moderate disability to be realized. This study investigates in-service teachers’ knowledge and preparedness to support students with mild disabilities in inclusive classrooms across secondary schools in Kenya. The study sought to assess whether different institutions of higher learning has equipped teachers to support students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms. This is a crucial area that wills ensure equitable education for all students. The primary objectives were to assess current knowledge levels, identify training gaps, faced by teachers.The participants were 125 teachers selected from 3 counties in Kenya. A questionnaire tool was used for data collection. Data was analyzed descriptively and using inferential statistics. Special education teachers generally rated themselves as more prepared than their general education counterparts, both after completing their undergraduate programs and after gaining teaching experience. Key experiences contributing to this preparedness included clinical placements and interactions with students with disabilities during their training. However, the nature and frequency of these experiences varied significantly between programs. Post- undergraduate professional learning opportunities, such as graduate school and professional development workshops, were identified as limited across both groups. Findings revealed limited preparedness, inconsistent training, minimal exposure to inclusive best practices, and a lack of sustained professional development. The paper recommends embedding inclusive pedagogy within teacher education curricula, increasing experiential exposure, and establishing continuous learning pathways to advance equity in Kenyan classrooms.

Keywords: Inclusive Education, Teacher Preparedness, Mild Disabilities, Secondary Schools, Special needs

Objectives of the Study

• To identify existing gaps in both pre-service and in-service teacher education in relation to inclusive practices.
• To examine challenges faced by teachers when supporting students with mild disabilities.
• To recommend improvements for Teacher Education and Professional Development programs.

INTRODUCTION

Inclusive education mandates the accommodation of all learners, regardless of ability. For Kenya, the successful implementation of inclusive education aligns with national education goals and international commitments such as SDG 4.

A wealth of research emphasizes the vital role of comprehensive teacher training in equipping educators to effectively meet the diverse needs of students with disabilities (Florian & Linklater, 2010; Forlin, 2010). Effective inclusive education necessitates teachers possessing adequate knowledge and skills related to disability awareness, differentiated instruction, and inclusive pedagogical practices (Sharma & Desai, 2014). Without adequate preparation, teachers may feel ill-equipped to support students with disabilities, potentially leading to negative outcomes for these students (Avramidis & Norwich, 2002).

Studies emphasize that teacher training has a direct impact on inclusive classroom success. Teachers trained in inclusive pedagogies are more likely to adopt positive attitudes and effective strategies (Florian & Linklater, 2010). Effective training includes exposure to disability awareness, differentiated instruction, and inclusive methodologies (Sharma & Desai, 2014).Special education teachers often report higher self-efficacy in inclusive settings due to targeted training and practical experiences such as clinical placements (Kaczorowski & Kline, 2020; Reeves et al., 2020). However, general education teachers frequently lack such preparation and feel under-equipped to support students with special needs (Brownell et al., 2010).

Kenya’s commitment to inclusive education is framed by the Persons with Disabilities Act (2003) and the Special Needs Education Policy Framework (2009). Despite these frameworks, teacher training institutions in Kenya often provide limited disability-specific training (Mugo & Maithya, 2013).Research indicates that training is often theoretical with insufficient emphasis on practical experiences, such as field placements or classroom simulations (Odeny, 2015). Furthermore, there are inconsistencies in curriculum content across teacher training institutions.

While teacher training programs are expected to prepare graduates for inclusive classrooms, the quality and depth of disability-related coursework can vary significantly across institutions (Brownell et al., 2010). Studies have shown a positive correlation between the extent of disability-focused training received during university and teachers’ self-efficacy in working with students with disabilities (de Boer, Pijl, & Minnaert, 2011). Furthermore, exposure to practical experiences, such as fieldwork in inclusive settings, has been found to enhance teachers’ preparedness and positive attitudes towards inclusion (Loreman, Deppeler, & Harvey, 2010).

Postgraduate development opportunities such as workshops are crucial for maintaining and enhancing inclusive practices. However, in Kenya, many teachers, especially in rural areas,have limited access to such opportunities (Kosgei, Mise, & Odera, 2013). Workshops that are available often lack depth and continuity, reducing their effectiveness.Recognizing the ongoing need for professional development, many teachers engage in workshops and courses on inclusion and special education after receiving their degrees. These opportunities can provide valuable updates on current research, best practices, and specific strategies for supporting students with diverse needs (Friend & Cook, 2010).

Kenya has made significant strides in promoting inclusive education, with a commitment to ensuring access and participation for all learners, including those with disabilities. The Persons with Disabilities Act (2003) and the Special Needs Education Policy Framework (2009) provide a legal and policy framework for inclusive education, emphasizing the need for trained teachers and supportive learning environments. However, translating these policies into practice remains a challenge, and significant gaps persist in teacher preparedness for inclusive education (Republic of Kenya, 2009).

The Inclusive Education Policy in Kenya, particularly as it relates to teachers, is outlined in the Sector Policy for Learners and Trainees with Disabilities (2018) developed by the Ministry of Education. This policy promotes the right of every learner, regardless of ability, to access quality education in an inclusive environment and em[phasis is on teachers to ensure that classrooms are physically and socially inclusive, to involve parents and caregivers in the learning process, especially for learners with disabilities and Schools must foster a culture of collaboration and inclusion

While teacher training institutions in Kenya are increasingly incorporating disability-related coursework into their programs, concerns remain about the adequacy and effectiveness of this training. Studies have highlighted the need for more practical, hands-on experiences and a stronger focus on evidence-based strategies for supporting students with diverse needs (Mugo & Maithya, 2013). Furthermore, challenges related to limited resources, large class sizes, and a lack of specialized personnel in teacher training colleges hinder the effective preparation of teachers for inclusive classrooms (Odeny, 2015). The findings of this study, which suggest that the number of disability-related courses taken during teacher training may not directly correlate with teacher preparedness, further emphasize the need for a critical evaluation of the content and pedagogical approaches used in these courses.

Continuing professional development (CPD) opportunities for teachers in Kenya often lack sufficient focus on inclusive education. Existing programs may not adequately address the specific needs of teachers working with students with disabilities, and access to these programs can be limited, particularly in rural areas (Kosgei, Mise, & Odera, 2013). The findings of this study, which indicate that participation in workshops and courses on inclusion and special education does not necessarily guarantee improved teacher preparedness, underscore the need for more targeted and effective CPD programs.

Despite the progress made in recent years, several challenges continue to hinder the successful implementation of inclusive education in Kenya. These include: Negative attitudes and stigma surrounding disability, societal attitudes towards disability can impact teachers’ beliefs and practices, leading to exclusion and marginalization.Limited resources and infrastructure: However, alongside these challenges, there are also significant opportunities for improvement. Strengthening pre-service teacher training, teacher training institutions should prioritize the development of comprehensive and practical disability-related coursework, incorporating evidence-based strategies and opportunities for fieldwork ininclusive settings. By addressing the challenges and capitalizing on the opportunities for improvement, Kenya can move closer to realizing its goal of providing quality education for all learners, regardless of their abilities.

METHODOLOGY

This study adopted a multi-method survey design using both descriptive and inferential statistics to analyze responses. It included both qualitative and quantitative measures to capture a comprehensive picture of teacher preparedness.125 in-service secondary school teachers were sampled purposively from three counties in Kenya: Nairobi, Kisumu, and Uasin Gishu. The selection aimed to represent both urban and rural educational settings.A structured questionnaire was administered, consisting of sections on:Demographic information,University training experiences,Post-degree professional development,Perceived preparedness,Challenges in inclusive education.

Findings of the study   

Teachers were sampled from 3 counties. Figure 1 shows that majority of teachers were from Nakuru region (88.0%) followed by Baringo region (6.4%) and lastly Kisii region (5.6%).

Figure 1: Summary of Teachers’ Regions

Gender of Respondent

The statistics in figure 2 revealed that there were more male teachers (53.4%) than female teachers (46.6%) who responded to the questionnaire. However, seven teachers did not disclose their gender.

Figure 2: Distribution of gender among teachers

Age of teachers

Age statistics indicate that on average, teachers were approximately 33 years old. The most teachers who took part in the survey were aged 30 years. The youngest teacher was aged 20 years while the oldest teacher was aged 59 years. Further analysis on age of teachers in Figure 3 show that majority of teachers were aged 35 years and below. Ten teachers did not provide their age.

Figure 3: Percentage distribution of age among teachers (n=115)

Majority of 122 teachers were teaching in day schools (68.0%) followed by boarding schools (29.5.0%). Additionally, 2.5% of teachers were teaching in school type that was both day and boarding. Three teachers did not indicate the type of school they teach in.

Figure 4: Statistics on school type

On the university where teachers received their training, the interpretation of data in Table 3 depicts that majority of the teachers in the survey were trained by Egerton University (26.2%), Moi university (19.7%) and Kenyatta University (12.3) respectively. On teac experience, the number of years teaching was approximately 8 years (Table 4). Most teachers had a teaching experience of 2 years (mode). The lowest number of teaching experience was 1 year. The highest number of years teaching stood at 36 years.

On the number of courses on students with disabilities and/or special needs taken by teachers in their  training program. Fot the 51 teachers who responded to the question, many teachers took 2 (37.3%) and 1 course (33.3%) during their teacher training program courses on students with disabilities and/or special needs (Figure 6). Cumulatively, 29.4% of teachers had taken 3, 4 and 6 courses. Majority of teachers 74 (59.2%) did not respond to this question may be attributed to inability to remember the course units they were taught  or inability to understand the course on students with disabilities and/or special needs at the time of training

Figure 5: Statistics courses taken by teachers on students with disabilities and/or special needs

The insights in Figure 5 shows that many of teachers had taken 1 (40.0%) and 2(22.0%) courses and workshops respectively about inclusion and special education since the time they had received their degree. It is worth noting that the highest number of courses and workshops was 8 (2.00%). However, the statistics show that only 50 out of 125 teachers (Table 6) took the courses and workshops.

Figure 6: Statistics on courses and workshops taken by teachers on inclusion and special education (n=50)

Summary distribution on courses and workshops taken by teachers

Figure 7:Distribution on courses and workshops taken by teachers Per Region

The crosstabulation of region and number of courses and workshops taken by teachers in Figure 7 reveal that majority of 50 teachers who took courses/workshops were in Nakuru region 43(86%) followed Kisii and Baringo 4(8%) and Kisii 3(6%).

Inferential Analysis

The Chi-square test of independence is commonly used in social science research to analyze survey data and test hypotheses about the relationship between categorical variables (Field, 2013). Composite scores of ratings on how well teachers are acquainted with various disabilities/special needs.

Figure 10 reveal that on average majority of teachers 64(52.0%) who rated how well they were acquainted with various disabilities/special needs indicated that they had neither training nor experience but were familiar with the disability. 25.2% of teachers said that they did not have specialized training but had extensive experience in the disability.

Figure 8: Composite scores of ratings on how well teachers are acquainted with various disabilities/special needs

Further, 15.4% of teachers had neither training nor experience and were not familiar with the disability and another 2.4% had other opinions. On the other hand, only 4.9% of teachers had specialized training and experience with disability. Two teachers did not rate their acquaintance with various disabilities needs. Association Between Teacher Training University and How Well Their Teachers Are Acquainted With Disabilities/Special Needs.

Chi-square test of independence was done to determine the relationship between teacher training university and how well their teachers are acquainted with disabilities/special needs. The test was performed among 120 teachers.

Table 1 Association Between Teacher Training University and How Well Their Teachers Are Acquainted With Disabilities/Special Needs.

The crosstabulation table showed largest group of teachers (51.7%) who indicated that their training universities neither had training nor experience but were familiar with the disability. 15.0% of teacher neither had training nor experience and were not familiar with the disability. Additionally, 25.8% had no specialized training but had extensive experience in the disability. On the other hand, only 5.0% of teachers had specialized training and experience in disability.

The results of Chi-square test of independence (Likelihood Ratio (χ²(84)=68.248, p=0.894)) revealed an insignificant association between the two variables. These results revealed that there was no enough evidence to conclude that training university had an influence on how well their respective teachers were acquainted with disabilities/special needs. This imply that any apparent association observed in the data is likely due to chance rather than a true relationship between the two variables. Therefore, it is important to look at other factors that may contribute to how well teachers are acquainted with disabilities/special needs.

Association Between Teacher Training University and How Their Respective Teachers Rate (how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted)

Chi-square test of independence was conducted to determine whether there was significant relationship between Teacher Training University and how their respective teachers rate how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted. The test was performed among 116 teachers.

Table 2 Association Between Teacher Training University and How Their Respective Teachers Rate section 4 (how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted

The crosstabulation Table showed majority of teachers (44.0%) gave a rating of 4 regarding various aspects on how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted. Some 30.2% teachers rated the aspects at 3, followed by 12.9% at 2 and 10.3% of teachers at 5 (Highest level of agreement). A rating of 1 (Lowest level of agreement) had 2.6% of teachers trained by all universities.

The results of Chi-square test of independence (Likelihood Ratio (χ²(76) = 69.594, p=0.685)) showed an insignificant relation between the two variables. These results revealed that there was no enough evidence to conclude that teacher training university had influence on how their respective teachers rate how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted.

Association between number of courses on students with disabilities/special needs taken by teachers in teacher training program and how well the trained teachers in theses course are acquainted with disabilities/special needs.

Chi-square test of independence was conducted among 51 teachers to find out the association between the number of courses on students with disabilities/special needs taken by teachers in teacher training program and how well the trained teachers in these courses are acquainted with disabilities/special needs

Table 3. Association Between Number of Courses on Students with Disabilities/Special Needs Taken by Teachers in Teacher Training Program and How Well the Trained Teachers are acquuainted

The statistics in crosstabulation table showed that majority of teachers (51.0%) who had undergone at least one training still said that they neither had training nor experience but were familiar with the disability. Another large portion of teacher (29.4%) did not have specialized training but had extensive experience in the disability. Further, 9.8% of teachers did not have training nor experience and were not familiar with the disability. Only 9.8% of teachers had specialized training and experience.

The results of Chi-square test of independence (Likelihood Ratio (χ²(12) =8.627, p=0.734)) revealed an insignificant association between the two variables. These results revealed that there was no sufficient evidence to conclude that number of courses on students with disabilities/special needs taken by teachers in teacher training program was an influencing factor on how well the trained teachers in these courses are acquainted with disabilities/special needs.

Number of courses on students with disabilities and/or special needs did you take in your teacher training program * How Teaching Students with Disabilities/Special Needs Should Be Conducted

Chi-square test of independence was carried among 49 teachers who had undergone at least one training on students with disabilities/special needs to find out the association between the number of courses on students with disabilities/special needs taken by teachers in teacher training program and how the trained teachers rate how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted).

Table 4. Association Between Number of Courses on Students with Disabilities/Special Needs Taken by Teachers in Teacher Training Program and How the Trained Teachers Rate Section 4 (How Teaching Students with Disabilities/Special Needs Should Be Conducted

The crosstabulation table showed majority of teachers (46.9%) rated various aspects on how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted at 4. Some 26.5% and 8.2% of teachers rated the aspects at 3 and 2 respectively. 14.3% of teachers had the highest level of agreement as compared to 4.1% who had the lowest level of agreement in all teacher training universities.

The results of Chi-square test of independence (Likelihood Ratio (χ²(16) =15.466, p=0.491)) showed an insignificant relation between the two variables. These findings indicated that there was no enough evidence to conclude that the number of courses on students with disabilities/special needs taken by teachers in teacher training program determine how the trained teachers in these courses rate how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted.

Figure 9: Statistics courses taken by teachers on students with disabilities and/or special needs

Association between number of courses and workshops about inclusion and special education taken by teachers since receiving their degree and how well the trained teachers in theses course are acquainted with disabilities/special Needs.

Chi-square test of independence was conducted among 50 teachers to establish the association between number of courses and workshops about inclusion and special education taken by teachers since receiving their degree and how well the trained teachers in these courses are acquainted with disabilities/special needs.

Table 5. Association Between Number of Courses and Workshops About Inclusion and Special Education

The analysis in the crosstabulation table showed that majority of teachers (36.0%) who had undergone at least one course or workshop about inclusion and special education did not have specialized training but had extensive experience in the disability. Similarly, 48.0% of teachers neither had training nor experience but they were familiar with the disability. In addition, 8.0% of teachers had neither training nor experience and were not familiar with the disability. Furthermore, 8.0% of teachers had specialized training and experience with disability.

The results of Chi-square test of independence (Likelihood Ratio (χ²(18) =17.435, p=0.493)) showed an insignificant association between the two variables. These results revealed that there was no enough evidence to conclude that number of courses and workshops about inclusion and special education taken by teachers since receiving their degree influenced how well the trained teachers in theses course are acquainted with disabilities/special needs.

Figure 10: Number of Courses and Workshops About Inclusion and Special Education Taken by Teachers Since Receiving Their Degree

Chi-square test of independence was conducted among 47 teachers to establish the association between number of courses and workshops about inclusion and special education taken by teachers since receiving their degree and how well the trained teachers rate how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted).

Table 6. Association Between Number Of Courses And Workshops About Inclusion And Special Education Taken By Teachers Since Receiving Their Degree And How The Trained Teachers Rate and how Teaching Students With Disabilities/Special Needs Should Be Conducted.

The crosstabulation table revealed half of teachers (48.90%) who had undergone at least one course or workshop since their graduation rated various aspects on how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted at 4. 21.3% and 12.8% of teachers rated the aspects at 3 and 2 respectively. 12.8% of teachers had the highest level of agreement as compared to 4.3% who had the lowest level of agreement in all teacher training universities.

 The results of Chi-square test of independence (Likelihood Ratio (χ²(24) = 17.053, p=0.846)) showed an insignificant relation between the two variables. These results revealed that there was no enough evidence to conclude that the number of courses and workshops about inclusion and special education taken by teachers since receiving their degree influence how well the trained teachers rate how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted.

Qualitative Analysis

Strengths Of Teachers in Teaching Students with Disabilities/Special Needs

The major three strengths of highlighted by 95 teachers who were teachings students with disabilities/special needs at the time of the survey were; the ability to be patient (15.8%), willingness to support (13.7%), understand students and their needs (12.6%) and encourage (8.4%) students.

On the Support Needed by The Teachers Teaching Students with Disabilities/Special Needs, more than half of the 113 teachers indicated that they needed  support in special training on how to handle students (51.3%). Other 14.2% of teachers needed to be provided with adequate learning resources. Provision of necessary training equipment (7.1%) and facilities  (7.1%) required by students were other major areas that teachers needed support.

On the challenges experienced by the teachers teaching students with disabilities/special needs,Lack of adequate time to give attention students due to congested timetable (19.1%) was cited as major challenge by teachers teaching students with disabilities/special needs. Lack of specialized training on how to handle students (16.4%), inadequate teaching and learning materials/resources (10.9%) and lack of enough professional skills on handling students (8.2%) were also cited as other major challenges.

SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS

Preparing teachers for inclusive education is a complex and ongoing process. While university training programs and continuing professional development play a crucial role, further research is needed to identify the most effective strategies for equipping educators with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to create truly inclusive learning environments for all students.

In thei study, 64(52.0%) who rated how well they were acquainted with various disabilities/special needs indicated that they had neither training nor experience but were familiar with the disability On the other hand, only 4.9% of teachers had specialized training and experience with disability

On the association between teacher training university and how well their teachers are acquainted with disabilities/special needs,results revealed that there was no enough evidence to conclude that teacher training university had influence on how their respective teachers rate how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted. These results revealed that number of courses on students with disabilities/special needs taken by teachers in teacher training program was not an  influencing factor on how well the trained teachers in these courses are acquainted with disabilities/special needs.

These findings indicated that there was no enough evidence to conclude that the number of courses on students with disabilities/special needs taken by teachers in teacher training program determine how the trained teachers in these courses rate how teaching students with disabilities/special needs should be conducted. majority of teachers (36.0%) who had undergone at least one course or workshop about inclusion and special education did not have specialized training but had extensive experience in the disability. Similarly, 48.0% of teachers neither had training nor experience but they were familiar with the disability. Implies need for workshops which paly crucial role hence some notable influence.

Among the challenges Experienced by The Teachers Teaching Students with Disabilities/Special Needs, Lack of adequate time to give attention students due to congested timetable (19.1%) was cited as major challenge by teachers teaching students with disabilities/special needs. Lack of specialized training on how to handle students (16.4%), inadequate teaching and learning materials/resources (10.9%) and lack of enough professional skills on handling students (8.2%) were also cited as other major challenges

The data presented in this study suggests that simply attending a specific university or taking a certain number of disability-related courses during teacher training may not be sufficient to guarantee adequate acquaintance with disabilities/special needs. This finding aligns with research indicating that the content and pedagogical approaches employed in these courses are crucial factors influencing teacher learning and subsequent practice (Darling-Hammond, 2000).

The findings of this study suggest that participation in workshops does not necessarily translate to a significant difference in teachers’ reported level of acquaintance with disabilities/special needs or their perspectives on teaching these students. This finding underscores the importance of examining the quality, relevance, and effectiveness of continuing professional development programs (Avalos, 2011).

RECOMMENDATIONS

• Revise teacher training curricula to incorporate mandatory, hands-on coursework in inclusive pedagogy.
• Institutionalize CPD programs focused on inclusion, accessible to rural teachers, and monitored for impact.
• Promote school-level support systems including mentorship programs and collaborative teaching models.
• Encourage government and NGO partnerships to provide infrastructure, materials, and technical support.

This study highlights the need for further research exploring the specific elements of teacher training programs and professional development opportunities that contribute most significantly to teacher preparedness for inclusive education.

Furthermore, research should examine the role of ongoing support and mentorship in fostering teachers’ continued growth and development in this area.

REFERENCES

1. Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10-20.
2. Avramidis, E., & Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers’ attitudes towards integration/inclusion: A review. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17(2), 129-147.
3. Brownell, M. T., Sindelar, P. T., Kiely, M. T., & Danielson, L. C. (2010). Special education teacher quality and preparation. Exceptional Children, 76(3), 357-377.
4. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1).
5. de Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2011). Regular primary schoolteachers’ attitudes. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(3), 331-353.
6. Florian, L., & Linklater, H. (2010). Preparing teachers for inclusive education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(4), 369-386.
7. Forlin, C. (2010). Teacher education for inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(5), 505-517.
8. Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2010). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (6th ed.). Pearson.
9. Kaczorowski, T., & Kline, J. (2020). Preparedness of secondary teachers for inclusion. Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(2), 112-128.
10. Kosgei, A., Mise, J., & Odera, F. (2013). Challenges facing inclusive education in Kenya. Educational Review, 12(2), 33-41.
11. Loreman, T., Deppeler, J., & Harvey, D. (2010). Inclusive education: Supporting diversity in the classroom. Allen & Unwin.
12. Mugo, J. K., & Maithya, R. (2013). Teacher preparedness for inclusive education in Kenya. Kenya Institute of Special Education Journal, 5(1), 23-30.
13. Odeny, M. (2015). Capacity building in inclusive education in Kenya. International Journal of Educational Research, 3(4), 85-92.
14. Reeves, M., Jones, D., & Mungai, A. (2020). Teacher self-efficacy in inclusive education. Journal of Special Education Research, 18(3), 205-221.
15. Republic of Kenya. (2009). The National Special Needs Education Policy Framework. Nairobi: Ministry of Education.
16. Sharma, U., & Desai, I. (2014). Inclusive education: Teacher preparation and challenges. International Journal of Education and Psychological Research (IJEPR), 3(4), 14-17.
17. https://repository.kippra.or.ke/items/8047891d-b412-4cb2-88bb-4d80175c4440