ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9956
www.rsisinternational.org
2025
The aim of this study is to examine the extent to which stakeholders' attitudes have changed regarding the shift
of the general school structure towards Inclusive Education (IE) practices. This research was conducted using
case study design and a qualitative approach. Five general schools implementing inclusive education practices
in the Batticaloa District were selected using convenience sampling method. The participants comprised five
Assistant Directors of Education for Special Education, five principals, five classroom teachers, and ten subject
teachers. Interview schedules were used to collect data from the Assistant Directors of Education for Special
Education, principals, and classroom teachers. A focus group discussion schedule was used to collect data
from subject teachers in inclusive classrooms. Descriptive analysis was employed to analyze the data through
coding, categorization, and theme generation. The findings indicate that stakeholders in inclusive education
demonstrate positive attitudes and practices towards both key areas: provisions for special needs and student
interactions within inclusive settings. On the other hand, stakeholders demonstrate negative attitudes and face
practical challenges regarding the development of Individualized Education Programmes (IEPs) for students
with special educational needs, as well as in relation to inclusive education policies. Furthermore, mixed
attitudes are evident towards the implementation of physical structures for inclusive education. In this respect,
negative attitudes are observed among higher authorities, while teachers display more positive attitudes. Based
on these findings, it is recommended that awareness be strengthened at both school and zonal levels regarding
the importance of inclusive education policies and Individualized Education Programmes to enhance inclusive
education practices for students with special educational needs in government schools in the Batticaloa
District. In addition, awareness should be raised about the need for appropriate physical infrastructure for
inclusive education and the responsibilities of relevant stakeholders in ensuring its provision.
Inclusive Education; Stakeholders; Special Educational Needs (SEN)
The concept of inclusive education has gained significant prominence in the field of education worldwide. It is
increasingly implemented with the aim of broadening access to education for all children. Inclusive education
is widely regarded as a valuable approach for supporting students with special educational needs. Moreover,
inclusive education is recognized as a fundamental right of the child and should not be viewed as a privilege
(Mag, Sinfield, & Burns, 2017). Moreover, effective inclusive education is essential because every child is
unique. Children with special educational needs have diverse abilities, learn in different ways, and progress at
different paces. Therefore, inclusive, learning-oriented, supportive, and empowering environments should be
created in schools and communities to enable all children to develop their full educational, social, emotional,
and physical potential. It is important to recognize that a child’s educational development cannot be separated
from social, emotional, and physical development, as these aspects are closely connected (Haddad, 2009;
Peters, 2003).
Inclusion should begin within the family and extend to the wider society. Schools play a vital role in educating
students with special educational needs alongside students without special educational needs within the regular
education system. In this context, the attitudes of stakeholders such as parents, community members, peers,
family members, teachers, and principals are essential for the successful implementation of inclusive education
for students with special educational needs.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9957
www.rsisinternational.org
Batticaloa District was affected by 30 years of civil war and natural disasters such as the Tsunami, cyclones,
and floods, resulting in high rates of poverty and high malnutrition. Specifically, a high number of children
with special needs live in the Batticaloa District. According to several research findings and the experiences of
researchers, although general schools in the Batticaloa District implement inclusive education practices,
students with special needs continue to face challenges in accessing appropriate educational provision
(Ketheeswaran, 2019). Based on these challenges, this study was undertaken to examine the extent to which
stakeholders’ attitudes have changed in response to the shift in general school structures towards inclusive
education practices, with the aim of further strengthening inclusive education.
Inclusive education refers to the participation and acceptance of all students in age-appropriate regular
classrooms within their local schools, enabling them to learn, contribute, and take part in all aspects of school
life. It also focuses on how schools, classrooms, programmes, and activities are designed and organized so that
all students can learn and participate together (Nilholm, 2021). Inclusive education involves implementing an
inclusive education system through key functions such as educational provision, physical infrastructure,
inclusive policies, Individualized Education Programmes (IEPs), student interactions, staff and volunteer
competencies, external relations, assessment of achievements, curriculum design, and teaching strategies that
support students with special educational needs to develop their capabilities within the regular education
system. There is substantial evidence highlighting the problems and challenges associated with inclusive
education practices. As a result, these challenges and barriers have been widely recognized, and several major
barriers to inclusive education were identified in the early part of the twenty-first century. In addition, expert
opinions and key documents have contributed to clarifying the current understanding of issues related to
inclusive education (Eleweke & Rodda, 2002; Mittler, 2012; Peters, 2003).
The most common international challenges to successful inclusive education processes and practices include a
lack of policy and legal support, inadequate school resources and facilities, a shortage of appropriately trained
school volunteers, insufficient teacher training in inclusive approaches and techniques, ineffective pedagogical
practices, and rigid curricula. Additional barriers include segregation, limited adaptation or individualization,
unsupportive school environments, weak regional leadership, and negative socio-cultural attitudes towards
disability (Eide & Ingstad, 2011; Eleweke & Rodda, Johnstone & Chapman, 2009; Mittler, 2012; Peters, 2003;
Rose, 2010; Schuelka, 2018; Yasunaga, 2014). These challenges continue to restrict the improvement and
development of inclusive education practices at the international level.
There is evidence that Sri Lanka faces several problems and challenges in the effective implementation of
inclusive education practices for students with special educational needs. These challenges include the lack of
appropriate teaching strategies for diverse learners in inclusive classrooms (Alwis, 2012), limited resources
and opportunities for students with special educational needs, and barriers to equitable educational access and
post-school social participation, particularly in rural schools (Higashida et al., 2016). International and national
research findings have examined these challenges and issues related to inclusive education practices at both
global and national levels.
According to statistical data from the Eastern Provincial Department of Education, 7,248 persons with
disabilities reside in the Batticaloa District of Sri Lanka. In addition, key socio-economic indicators reveal a
poverty rate of 19.4 per cent, malnutrition affecting 10.99 per cent of families, and 27,706 female-headed
households in the district (Guruge et al., 2017). These factors collectively contribute to the increasing number
of persons with disabilities in the Batticaloa District. Currently, 247 students with special educational needs are
receiving education in inclusive classrooms across 174 government schools in the Batticaloa District. It is
against this backdrop that this study was carried forward.
The aim of this study is to examine the extent to which stakeholders’ attitudes have changed in relation to the
shift of the general school structure towards inclusive education practices.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9958
www.rsisinternational.org
The research approach and research design are key aspects of the research methodology. Accordingly, a
comprehensive qualitative approach was adopted to conduct this study.
A multiple case study design was selected for the study. A case study is considered a suitable research design
when researchers aim to gain in-depth, context-specific understanding of a particular real-world phenomenon.
Furthermore, a case study provides a strong basis for exploring the key characteristics, explanations, and
effects associated with the phenomenon.
In Sri Lanka, 4,431 government schools operate under the inclusive education system. This study was
conducted in government schools located in the Batticaloa District. Accordingly, the population of the study
comprised 174 government schools implementing inclusive education in the Batticaloa District.
A closer examination shows that the Batticaloa District consists of five educational zones, namely Batticaloa
Central, Batticaloa West, Batticaloa, Kalkudah, and Paddiruppu. Within the Batticaloa Central educational
zone, there are 76 schools, of which 31 implement inclusive education practices. These schools serve 52
students with special educational needs and are staffed by 50 inclusive classroom teachers and 232 subject
teachers involved in inclusive classes.
Subsequently, the Batticaloa West educational zone consists of 68 schools, of which 25 implement inclusive
education practices. These schools include 34 students with special educational needs, 29 inclusive education
classroom teachers, and 179 subject teachers involved in inclusive classes. The Batticaloa educational zone
comprises 65 schools, of which 41 have inclusive education practices. These schools include 54 students with
special educational needs, 51 inclusive education classroom teachers, and 257 subject teachers for inclusive
classes. Furthermore, the Kalkudah educational zone consists of 83 schools, of which 49 implement inclusive
education practices. These schools include 72 students with special educational needs, 69 inclusive education
classroom teachers, and 302 subject teachers involved in inclusive classes.
Finally, the Paddiruppu educational zone consists of 69 schools, of which 28 implement inclusive education
practices. These schools include 35 students with special educational needs, 32 inclusive education classroom
teachers, and 186 subject teachers involved in inclusive classes.
It is noteworthy that each of the five educational zones has one Assistant Director of Education for Special
Education and one Teacher Advisor for Special Education. Based on this structure, one inclusive school from
each of the five educational zones was selected using the convenience sampling method. Purposive sampling
was used to select the participants for the study. Accordingly, one inclusive classroom was selected from each
of the five selected inclusive schools. From these schools, five principals, five classroom teachers, and ten
subject teachers were selected. In addition, five Assistant Directors of Education for Special Education were
selected from the five educational zones using purposive sampling.
Individual interview schedules were selected and developed to collect data from school principals, Assistant
Directors of Education for Special Education, inclusive classroom teachers, and parents of children with
special educational needs. A focus group discussion schedule was selected and prepared to gather data from
subject teachers in inclusive classrooms. All data collection procedures were carried out by the researcher, and
the data were securely stored.
The developed interview schedule and focus group discussion schedule were validated through expert review
by an Assistant Lecturer and a Professor specializing in research.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9959
www.rsisinternational.org
Qualitative studies must demonstrate reliability. Accordingly, researchers use several indicators, such as
accuracy and trustworthiness, to ensure reliability (Higashida, 2014). In this study, steps were taken to
maintain reliability by ensuring the accuracy of the data, as well as confirmability and credibility.
The collected data were coded, followed by categorization of the codes and generation of themes. The
descriptive analysis method was used to analyze the data.
To maintain research ethics, a letter of permission was obtained from the Provincial Director of Education.
Permission was also obtained from the Zonal Education Authorities and school principals. In addition,
informed consent was obtained from all stakeholders prior to data collection, after which the interviews and
focus group discussions were conducted.
The limitations of the study include the fact that the research was conducted only in the Batticaloa District and
that only five schools were selected from the 174 inclusive schools in the district.
The collected data were analyzed, findings were established, and discussions were conducted. During the
analysis, the five selected schools were identified as A, B, C, D, and E. Similarly, pseudonyms were used in
place of the real names of the participating informants. Details related to these are presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Participants' Pseudonyms and School Codes
School
Types of
Schools
Students/
Pseudonyms
Assistant Director
of Education
Principal's
Name
Classroom
Teacher's Name
Subject Teachers'
Names
A
1AB
Nirojana
Harish
Rajee
Deepa
(1) Suresh, (2) Selvi
B
Type 1
Prakash
Murugan
Yogesh
Ashvini
(1)Theeban(2)Uma
C
1C
Nivetha
Janani
Sangeetha
Bhavani
(1)Bala (2) Mithran
D
1C
Kavitha
Adhil
Ziad
Thiru
(1)Ayesha,(2)Amar
E
Type 1
Aravind
Devi
Arun
Priya
(1)Chithra(2) Dhanu
Furthermore, data analysis was conducted under the following subheadings: Provisions for Inclusive
Education, Physical Aspects for Inclusive Education, Policies for Inclusive Education, Individualized
Education Programmes (IEPs), and Student Interactions in Inclusive Education.
The provisions for inclusive education include two main types:
1. Communication between the school and stakeholders regarding inclusive education practices.
2. Collaboration with stakeholders in implementing inclusive education practices.
In this regard, all five Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs) have undertaken initiatives to strengthen
communication between schools and stakeholders to support inclusive education practices within their
respective educational zones. Accordingly, ADEs from Schools A, C, D, and E conduct meetings to
communicate with stakeholders. For example, ADE Harish from School A stated, “…I conduct a meeting once
a month to share the services available to the students within the zone and to guide the authorities on how to
obtain these services.” Furthermore, all five Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs) collaborated with
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9960
www.rsisinternational.org
stakeholders such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs), police departments, community members,
medical professionals, the education sector, and the school community to support inclusive education practices.
The ADEs continue to work collaboratively with these stakeholders to strengthen such partnerships. Murugan,
from Educational Zone B, stated, “…police departments, community organizations, volunteer organizations,
and the Zonal Education Department are collaborating for the school’s inclusive practices.”
Four school principals from Schools A, B, C, and E communicate with stakeholders and raise awareness to
improve inclusive education practices. In addition, they work collaboratively with stakeholders to strengthen
inclusive education practices in their respective schools. For example, Assistant Director of Education Janani
from School C stated, “…World Vision and community members work with us for the benefit of students with
special educational needs in this school.” This indicates that these principals hold positive perceptions
regarding communication between the school and stakeholders, as well as collaboration with stakeholders in
inclusive education practices. Furthermore, the positive views expressed by the majority of principals reflect
their awareness and proactive approach, which contributes to the improvement of inclusive education practices
in their schools through effective provision. However, one school principal from School D expressed a
negative view regarding both communication between the school and stakeholders and stakeholder
collaboration for inclusive education practices.
For example, Ziad stated, “…this community does not prioritize the education of girls, and therefore, parents
are not interested in working with us.” He further highlighted the community’s flawed perceptions regarding
the education of female students with special educational needs. This may act as a barrier to improving the
provision of inclusive education practices in the school.
All five inclusive classroom teachers demonstrated a favourable attitude towards providing provisions for
inclusive education practices. Two teachers from Schools A and C communicated with parents, two teachers
from Schools B and D communicated with previous teachers, and one teacher from School E communicated
with both parents and previous teachers. Priya, the classroom teacher from School E, stated, “…I spoke with
the previous classroom teachers and Aravind’s mother, Anula, to get ideas for working with Aravind in the
inclusive classroom.”
Inclusive classroom teachers from Schools B, C, and E also collaborated with the parents of students with
special educational needs. In addition, the inclusive classroom teacher from School D revealed, “…I receive
support from the student counsellor teacher; we work together to improve Kavitha.” Based on this analysis, it
is evident that all five inclusive classroom teachers engage in collaboration with stakeholders. The findings
confirm that positive attitudes and commitment among teachers and stakeholders contribute to the
improvement of inclusive education practices within schools.
Eight out of ten subject teachers from Schools A, B, C, and E expressed positive attitudes towards inclusive
education practices in inclusive classrooms. Accordingly, they communicated with parents, classroom teachers,
other subject teachers, principals, community members, and special schools to strengthen inclusive practices.
For example, subject teacher Selvi stated, “…when new teachers arrive, I share my experiences about
Nirojana.”
In addition, these subject teachers collaborated with principals, teachers, parents, peer students, and special
schools. For instance, Dhanu, a subject teacher from School E, noted, “…Aravind’s mother, Anula, is a teacher
and works with me to improve Aravind.” These responses indicate positive attitudes among subject teachers
towards providing provisions for inclusive practices, which contribute to the improvement of inclusive
education for students with special educational needs.
In contrast, two subject teachers from School D expressed negative views regarding the provision of inclusive
practices. For example, subject teacher Ayesha from School D stated, “…it is difficult to communicate with the
parents of students with special educational needs,” after which no effort was made to communicate with
Kavitha’s parents, and the importance of such communication was overlooked. Moreover, subject teacher
Amar from School D stated, “…Kavitha’s mother is emotionally unstable, so we cannot work with her.” This
reflects a tendency to attribute responsibility to the parents by highlighting the mother’s emotional condition.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9961
www.rsisinternational.org
These responses confirm that these subject teachers did not demonstrate positive attitudes towards providing
provisions for inclusive practices.
In summary, all five Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs) demonstrated positive attitudes towards the
provision of services for inclusive practices in schools and educational zones in the Batticaloa District. In
addition, four principals showed positive attitudes towards providing information on inclusive practices in their
schools. All five inclusive classroom teachers expressed positive attitudes towards providing provisions for
inclusive practices within classrooms and schools, and eight subject teachers demonstrated positive attitudes
towards the provision-related roles in inclusive education practices.
This situation indicates that the positive attitudes of teachers, principals, and Assistant Directors of Education
towards providing provisions for inclusive practices reflect their knowledge and professional approach, which
may contribute to the improvement of inclusive practices in schools and educational zones in the Batticaloa
District. A study conducted by Bouillet (2013) reported that communication and collaboration related to
provisions were limited or poorly organized in Croatian schools, a finding that contrasts with the results of the
present study. This difference may be attributed to a lack of positive attitudes within the community towards
communication and collaboration for inclusive practices in Croatian schools. Furthermore, positive attitudes
towards the provision of services for inclusive practices enhance stakeholder awareness and may encourage
more specialized contributions to inclusive education practices for students with special educational needs in
government schools in the Batticaloa District.
However, the negative attitudes of one principal and two subject teachers towards providing provisions for
inclusive practices may have an adverse impact on inclusive education activities within the school.
The physical aspects of inclusive education practices include two main issues:
1. Providing a safe environment for students with special educational needs.
2. Ensuring accessible environments for all students.
In this section, the opinions of the Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs) and school principals involved in
inclusive education practices are examined. Accordingly, all ADEs and principals expressed negative views
regarding the availability of safe and accessible environments for students with special educational needs in
schools and educational zones.
In general, they stated that creating safe and accessible environments is challenging and that responsibility lies
with the authorities responsible for designing school buildings. For example, Murugan from School B stated,
“…since the buildings are designed by engineers, I cannot do anything about the safe environment,” and Rajee
from School A mentioned, “…creating a safe environment is not in our hands.” These statements suggest that
the fulfilment of these responsibilities is expected from the relevant authorities. However, ADEs and principals
also have a role to play in advocating for and supporting the development of safer and more accessible school
environments.
These responses confirm that the Assistant Directors of Education and school principals are not fully aware of
their role in developing safe and accessible environments in inclusive schools. This reflects a negative attitude
towards the physical aspects of inclusive education within schools and educational zones. Furthermore, four
inclusive classroom teachers from Schools A, C, D, and E indicated that students with special educational
needs feel safe within the classroom and school environment. It was also evident that these students do not face
difficulties in accessing spaces and facilities within the classroom and school. For example, Bhavani from
School C stated, “…Nivetha has a partial hearing impairment, but she does not face any difficulty in
movement.” This statement confirms the presence of a safe environment for the student with special
educational needs. Moreover, the majority of classroom teachers perceived both the safety of the environment
and accessibility for students with special educational needs in a positive manner. This further confirms the
availability of safe and accessible physical conditions that support inclusive education practices in these
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9962
www.rsisinternational.org
schools. However, one inclusive classroom teacher from School B expressed a negative perception regarding
the safety and accessibility of the physical environment for students with special educational needs in inclusive
education practices.
For example, Ashvini stated, “…Prakash faces movement challenges in the classroom, which is a barrier to
accessing facilities.” This statement reflects her negative perception of the accessibility of the school
environment and suggests that such conditions may hinder Prakash ’s participation in inclusive practices at
school. Furthermore, the type and severity of a student’s disability may influence inclusive classroom teachers’
attitudes towards the accessibility of the environment in inclusive education practices.
Eight subject teachers from Schools A, C, D, and E reported that students with special educational needs feel
safe within the classroom and school environment and do not face significant challenges in accessing spaces
and facilities. For example, subject teacher Selvi from School A stated, “…Nirojana sometimes needs
assistance to access places in the regular classroom,” while Dhanu from School E noted, “…I think Aravind is
comfortable in this environment, and he is happy in the school environment.” The majority of subject teachers
therefore perceived both the safety of the environment and accessibility for students with special educational
needs in inclusive practices in a positive manner. However, one subject teacher from School B expressed a
negative perception regarding the safety and accessibility of the physical environment for students with special
educational needs in inclusive practices. For example, Uma stated, “…Prakash needs to urinate frequently, but
he has to walk a long distance to the washroom, which is a challenge for him.” This statement confirms a
negative view of the physical aspects of the school environment.
Furthermore, the findings suggest that the nature of special educational needs, as well as the type and severity
of disability, may influence classroom teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education practices. Based on the
analysis, all five Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs) and all five inclusive school principals demonstrated
negative attitudes regarding the physical aspects of inclusive practices within educational zones and schools.
This situation may act as a barrier to the effective implementation of inclusive practices in these schools.
However, four inclusive classroom teachers and eight subject teachers demonstrated positive attitudes towards
the physical aspects of inclusive education practices. In contrast, one inclusive classroom teacher and two
subject teachers expressed negative attitudes regarding the physical aspects of inclusive practices. These
findings indicate that all Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs) and all five principals hold negative attitudes
towards the physical aspects of inclusive education practices, while the majority of teachers hold positive
attitudes. This confirms a clear discrepancy between the attitudes of inclusive education administrators and
classroom teachers with regard to the physical aspects of inclusive practices. A study conducted by Ackah-Jnr
and Danso (2019) highlighted the importance of appropriate architectural design in improving physical and
artificial lighting, adapting classroom and building facilities, redesigning school layouts, and ensuring safety,
accessibility, and usability within school environments.
This finding confirms the importance of providing a safe and accessible environment for all students in
inclusive schools. Therefore, all stakeholders should strengthen their positive attitudes towards the physical
aspects of inclusive education practices in government schools in the Batticaloa District.
Under the framework of policies for inclusive education, two main issues are analyzed:
1. School-level policies
2. National-level policies
All Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs) and all principals expressed negative perceptions regarding
inclusive school policies for inclusive education practices within their respective zones and schools. For
example, Adhil from School D stated, “…we do not have a specific policy for our educational zone that is
suitable for the education of students with special educational needs.” This response reflects a negative attitude
towards inclusive school policies and suggests that the absence of such policies may pose a challenge to the
effective implementation of inclusive education practices in schools.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9963
www.rsisinternational.org
The views of inclusive classroom teachers and subject teachers regarding inclusive school policies were
examined. Accordingly, all inclusive classroom teachers and all subject teachers in inclusive classrooms
expressed negative attitudes towards the implementation of inclusive school policies for inclusive education
practices. For example, Bhavani from School C stated, “…I have no idea about inclusive policy,” and Chithra
from School E mentioned, “…I have not learned about special education policies.” These responses indicate a
lack of adequate awareness and understanding among teachers regarding inclusive school policies. This
situation may pose a challenge to the effective implementation of inclusive education practices in schools.
Overall, Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs), principals of inclusive schools, inclusive classroom
teachers, and subject teachers demonstrated negative attitudes towards policies for inclusive education
practices in schools and educational zones. A recent study by Ireri et al. (2020) highlighted that inclusive
policies are essential for overcoming physical barriers that hinder the effective implementation of inclusive
education. This finding further underscores the necessity of inclusive policies in supporting inclusive education
practices. Therefore, stakeholders should develop more positive attitudes towards inclusive policies to support
the implementation of inclusive education in government schools in the Batticaloa District.
The Individualized Education Programme (IEP) is examined under two aspects:
1. The Individualized Education Programme for students with special educational needs
2. The Individualized Education Programme (IEP) Team for students with special educational needs
In this regard, all Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs) and all school principals demonstrated negative
attitudes towards the implementation of the Individualized Education Programme and the functioning of the
IEP Team for students with special educational needs. They expressed their views on the implementation of
IEPs for students with special educational needs within inclusive education practices in their respective schools
and educational zones. For example, Harish from School A stated, “…Individualized Education Programmes
are not in practice in their educational zone,” and Ziad from School D similarly mentioned, “…Individualized
Education Programmes are not in practice in their educational zone.” This situation reflects the level of
commitment and attitudes of Assistant Directors of Education and school principals towards the
implementation of Individualized Education Programmes and the functioning of IEP Teams for students with
special educational needs within inclusive education practices.
All five inclusive classroom teachers expressed negative perceptions regarding the Individualized Education
Programme (IEP) for students with special educational needs. They commented on the implementation of IEPs
within inclusive education practices in their schools. For example, Thiru from School D stated, “…I do not
know about Kavitha’s Individualized Education Programme in the school,” and “…the Individualized
Education Programme Team is not available in the school.” These responses indicate a lack of appropriate
attitudes and understanding regarding the IEP and the functioning of the IEP Team. Furthermore, all subject
teachers in inclusive classrooms also demonstrated negative perceptions towards the Individualized Education
Programme and the IEP Team for students with special educational needs. They expressed views on the
implementation of IEPs within inclusive practices in their schools. For instance, Chithra from School E stated,
“…the Individualized Education Programme is unnecessary for students like Aravind,” while Theeban from
School B mentioned, “…I have no idea about the Individualized Education Programme for students with
special educational needs.” These responses suggest that teachers lack sufficient knowledge and awareness of
IEPs within inclusive education practices. Overall, all Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs), principals of
inclusive schools, inclusive classroom teachers, and subject teachers demonstrated negative views regarding
the implementation of the Individualized Education Programme (IEP) for students with special educational
needs within inclusive education practices in schools.
However, a study conducted by Timothy and Agbenyega (2018) reported that IEPs are used by school leaders
as effective planning documents that support the identification and communication of students’ learning needs.
Their study further highlighted that the development of IEPs encouraged collaboration and consultation among
school staff, reflecting positive stakeholder attitudes towards inclusive practices. This finding contrasts with
the results of the present study and suggests that stakeholders in the Batticaloa District may lack adequate
awareness and understanding of the implementation of IEPs for students with special educational needs.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9964
www.rsisinternational.org
In contrast, a study by Kovač-Cerović et al. (2016) in North Macedonia found that the introduction of IEPs
created tensions with teachers’ traditional practices, reflecting negative attitudes towards their implementation.
This finding is consistent with the results of the present study. Therefore, stakeholders need to address and
overcome the challenges associated with implementing IEPs for students with special educational needs.
Negative attitudes towards the IEP and the functioning of the IEP Team may pose a significant barrier to
effective inclusive education practices in government schools in the Batticaloa District.
Student interactions in inclusive education practices include two main types:
1. Peer interaction involving students with special educational needs in inclusive education practices.
2. Student–teacher interaction in inclusive education practices.
All Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs) and school principals expressed positive views regarding peer
interaction within schools and educational zones. For example, Devi from School E stated, “…when a student
with a physical disability was accommodated in Grade 1, the student could not walk at first, but gradually
began to walk well due to the support provided by peers.” This illustrates the positive role of peer interaction
in supporting students with special educational needs. Furthermore, Principal Yogesh from School B stated,
“…peer interaction and teacher–student interactions create a friendly environment in this school.” This
highlights the importance of peer interaction in fostering a supportive and inclusive school environment. All
five Assistant Directors of Education and school principals expressed positive perceptions of student–teacher
interactions in inclusive education practices. For example, Adhil from School D stated, “…I explain the
importance of teacher–student interactions during meetings,” and the principal of School E mentioned,
“…student–teacher interaction in inclusive education practices creates a comfortable environment for students
with special educational needs.” These views further confirm the positive stance of the Assistant Directors of
Education regarding student–teacher interactions in inclusive education.
School principals hold positive attitudes towards student–teacher interaction in inclusive education practices.
This analysis indicates an overall positive perception of student interactions within inclusive education
practices. Furthermore, principals can make effective use of student interactions in inclusive education to
enhance the educational and social development of students with special educational needs. All five inclusive
classroom teachers also expressed positive perceptions of student interactions in educational practices. For
example, classroom teacher Ashvini supports teaching and learning through inclusive education practices. In
this regard, the teacher from School E stated, “…I promote peer interactions to support my teaching.” In
addition, student–teacher interaction supports the inclusion of students with special educational needs. For
instance, Deepa, the classroom teacher from School A, mentioned, “…I have a good relationship with
Nirojana, and that helps her to be included in this classroom.” These findings confirm that student interactions
support inclusive education practices in classrooms and reflect positive attitudes towards student interaction in
inclusive education practices.
All ten subject teachers expressed positive views regarding student interaction in inclusive education practices.
Accordingly, subject teachers from Schools D and B emphasized the role of peer interaction in supporting the
educational and social development of students with special educational needs within inclusive settings. For
example, subject teacher Theeban from School D stated, “…peer interaction helps to improve the educational
activities of students with special educational needs.” Furthermore, all subject teachers highlighted the
importance and benefits of teacher–student interaction in inclusive education practices. For instance, subject
teacher Amar stated, “…the teacher should have a good relationship with students who have special
educational needs.” These responses confirm positive perceptions of student interaction in inclusive education
practices and suggest that such interactions contribute to improving the educational and social experiences of
students with special educational needs in inclusive settings.
Overall, all Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs), inclusive school principals, inclusive classroom teachers,
and subject teachers demonstrated positive perceptions of student interactions in inclusive education practices.
This reflects the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of stakeholders towards enhancing student interactions within
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9965
www.rsisinternational.org
inclusive education. Furthermore, it is evident that these stakeholders are committed to strengthening student
interactions in order to promote inclusive education practices in schools in the Batticaloa District. The findings
of a study conducted by Cameron (2014) revealed that teachers are aware of the need to provide greater
individual attention to students with disabilities and described various ways in which they adapt their
instructional approaches in line with effective teaching practices. In addition, Mamas and Avramidis (2013)
found that typically developing children are naturally motivated to interact and play with children with special
educational needs during both free play and structured activities. The consistency of these findings supports
the results of the present study regarding student interaction in inclusive education practices. These positive
interactions are likely to contribute to the improvement of both educational and social experiences of students
with special educational needs within inclusive education practices in government schools in the Batticaloa
District.
The data analysis and discussion of inclusive education practices for students with special educational needs in
the Batticaloa District were presented under the following subheadings: Provisions for Inclusive Education,
Physical Aspects for Inclusive Education, Policies for Inclusive Education, Individualized Education
Programmes (IEPs), and Student Interactions in Inclusive Education.
The attitudes of stakeholders regarding the implementation of inclusive education practices in the five schools
in the Batticaloa District have not undergone a complete transformation.
• Overall, the findings based on the five selected schools indicate that stakeholders hold both positive
and negative attitudes towards the provision of services for inclusive education practices.
• Stakeholders demonstrate positive attitudes and practices in two key areas: Provisions for Inclusive
Education and Student Interactions in Inclusive Education.
• Negative attitudes and implementation challenges are evident among stakeholders in relation to the
development of Individualized Education Programmes (IEPs) for students with special educational
needs and Policies for Inclusive Education.
• With regard to the implementation of Physical Aspects for Inclusive Education, mixed attitudes are
observed. In this respect, negative attitudes are evident among higher-level officials, such as Assistant
Directors of Education and principals, while teachers demonstrate more positive attitudes.
• Awareness should be strengthened at both school and zonal levels regarding the importance of inclusive
education policies and Individualized Education Programmes (IEPs) in order to enhance inclusive
education processes for students with special educational needs in government schools in the Batticaloa
District.
• Awareness should also be raised regarding the importance of physical aspects in inclusive education
and the specific responsibilities of stakeholders in ensuring their effective implementation.
1. Ackah-Jnr, F. R., & Danso, J. B. (2018). Examining the physical environment of Ghanaian inclusive
schools: how accessible, suitable and appropriate is such environment for inclusive education?
International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(2), 188–208.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1427808
2. Bouillet, D. (2013). Some aspects of collaboration in inclusive education – teachers’ experiences.
Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 3(2), 93–117. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.241
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9966
www.rsisinternational.org
3. Cameron, D. L. (2013). An examination of teacher–student interactions in inclusive classrooms:
teacher interviews and classroom observations. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs,
14(4), 264–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12021
4. DSpace. (n.d.). http://hdl.handle.net/11599/3249
5. Eleweke, C. J., & Rodda, M. (2002). The challenge of enhancing inclusive education in developing
countries. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 6(2), 113–126.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110110067190
6. Guruge, S., Ford-Gilboe, M., Varcoe, C., Jayasuriya-Illesinghe, V., Ganesan, M., Sivayogan, S.,
Kanthasamy, P., Shanmugalingam, P., & Vithanarachchi, H. (2017). Intimate partner violence in the
post-war context: Women’s experiences and community leaders’ perceptions in the Eastern Province of
Sri Lanka. PLoS ONE, 12(3), e0174801. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174801
7. Haddad, C. (Ed.). (2009). Teaching children with disabilities in inclusive settings. UNESCO Asia and
Pacific Regional Bureau for Education.
8. Higashida, M. (2014a). Community mobilisation in a CBR programme in a rural area of Sri Lanka.
Disability CBR & Inclusive Development, 25(4), 43. https://doi.org/10.5463/dcid.v25i4.383
9. Higashida, M. (2014b). Community mobilisation in a CBR programme in a rural area of Sri Lanka.
Disability CBR & Inclusive Development, 25(4), 43. https://doi.org/10.5463/dcid.v25i4.383
10. Higashida, M., Kumara, M. R. S., & Nakashima, Y. (2016). Educational Opportunity, Post-School Life
and CBR: a multisectoral approach in rural Sri Lanka. Disability CBR & Inclusive Development,
27(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.5463/dcid.v27i1.482
11. Individual education plan as an agent of inclusiveness of the educational system in Serbia: Different
perspectives, achievements and new dilemmas. (2016). Questa Soft.
https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=688760
12. Ireri, B. R., King'endo, M., Wangila, E., & Thuranira, S. (2020). Policy strategies for effective
implementation of inclusive education in Kenya. International Journal of Educational Administration
and Policy Studies, 12(1), 28-42.
13. Johnstone, C. J., & Chapman, D. W. (2009). Contributions and constraints to the implementation of
inclusive education in Lesotho. International Journal of Disability Development and Education, 56(2),
131–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/10349120902868582
14. Ketheeswaran, K. (2019). Teachers’ Perception about the Inclusive Education (IE) Practices in the
Government Schools in the Batticaloa District of Sri Lanka. Commonwealth of Learning.
http://hdl.handle.net/11599/3249
15. Kovač-Cerović, T., Jovanović, O., & Pavlović-Babić, D. (2016). Individual education plan as an agent
of inclusiveness of the educational system in Serbia: Different perspectives, achievements and new
dilemmas. Psihologija, 49(4), 431-445. https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=688760
16. Mag, A. G., Sinfield, S., & Burns, T. (2017). The benefits of inclusive education: new challenges for
university teachers. MATEC Web of Conferences, 121, 12011.
https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201712112011
17. Mamas, C., & Avramidis, E. (2013). Promoting social interaction in the inclusive classroom: Lessons
from inclusive schools in England and Cyprus. Learning Culture and Social Interaction, 2(4), 217–226.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2013.07.001
18. Matolo, M. F., & Rambuda, A. M. (2021). Factors impacting the application of an Inclusive Education
Policy on screening, identification, assessment, and support of the learners at schools in South Africa.
International Journal of Learning Teaching and Educational Research, 20(9), 207–221.
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.9.12
19. McCombes, S. (2020). How to do a case study: Definition, Examples & Methods.
https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/case-study (accessed on 23 March 2023).
20. Mittler, P. (2012). Working towards inclusive education: Social contexts. David Fulton Publishers.
21. Nilholm, C. (2020). Research about inclusive education in 2020 – How can we improve our theories in
order to change practice? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 36(3), 358–370.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2020.1754547
22. Peters, S. J. (2003). Inclusive education: Achieving education for all by including those with disabilities
and special education needs. World Bank, 1-133.
https://policycommons.net/artifacts/1442872/inclusive-education/2073899/
23. Rose, R. C. (2010). Confronting obstacles to inclusion (pp. 1-7). Routledge.
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI December 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9967
www.rsisinternational.org
24. Schuelka, M. (2018). The cultural production of the “Disabled” person: Constructing difference in
Bhutanese schools. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 49(2), 183–200.
https://doi.org/10.1111/aeq.12244
25. Timothy, S., & Agbenyega, J. S. (n.d.). Inclusive school leaders’ perceptions on the implementation of
individual education plans. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1170727
26. Yoro, A. J., Fourie, J. V., & Van Der Merwe, M. (2020). Learning support strategies for learners with
neurodevelopmental disorders: Perspectives of recently qualified teachers. African Journal of
Disability, 9. https://doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v9i0.561
27. Yasunaga, M. (2014). Non-formal education as a means to meet learning needs of out-of-school
children and adolescents. Montreal: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
https://www.allinschool.org/media/1991/file/Paper-OOSCI-Non-Formal-EducationLearning-Needs-
2014-en.pdf
