Inclusion of Children with Special Needs in Schools

Research Paper

Inclusion of Children with Special Needs in Schools The Cases of India, Latvia and Poland

Group 05 Jose Sibi Kinga Natalia Kolaczko Laine Nameda Lazda Magdalena Agata Kroh Urban Sociology MSc in Architecture and Urban Design 2020-2021 Prof. Marta Margherita Cordini Asst. Martina Atanasovska

ABSTRACT In 1994, The UNESCO World Conference on Special Needs Education issued a consensus report on the education of students with disabilities. The resulting Salamanca Statement, signed by representatives of 92 countries and 25 organizations, states that “those with special educational needs must have access to regular schools.” The statement affirms that inclusive regular schools “are the most effective means of combating discriminatory attitudes, creating welcoming communities, building an inclusive society and achieving education for all.” The Salamanca Statement was part of a global movement toward inclusive education and offered guidelines for action at the national, regional, and international levels. The Statement called for governments to promote, plan, finance, and monitor inclusive education programs within their education systems (UNESCO, 2009). But even though these steps have been initiated (albeit poorly) in most of the countries that signed the Salamanca Statement, segregation still exists.

Children with Special Needs face significant difficulties to attain education not because of their disability but rather due to various factors ranging from lack of resources, parental/guardian disagreements to inadequate teacher training. In this paper, we start with the introduction of the different types of existing educational systems that deal with disability and continue with a comparitive analysis between the countries of India, Latvia and Poland to further understand the existing situations in these countries. A specific case study of Latvia is taken into consideration to comprehend the territorial distribution of the schools that cater to CWSN. The paper is then concluded by critically analysing the positive as well as negative aspects of inclusion and comprehending the way ahead for the betterment of CWSN. Keywords: Disability, Children with Special Needs(CWSN), School Segregation, Integration, Inclusion, Threshold of Disability

Image: A CWSN along with his classmates in an inclusive classroom environment Source: https://tiescenter.org/inclusive-instruction/overview

2

1.

EXCLUSION vs SEGREGATION vs INTEGRATION vs INCLUSION Educational opportunities for Children With Special Needs (CWSN hereafter) range from a complete denial of formal educational services to equal participation in all aspects of the education system. According to Hehir et. al. (2016), these systems can be broadly classified as: i) Exclusion: which occurs when students are directly or indirectly prevented from or denied access to education in any form. ii) Segregation: when students with disabilities learn separately from their peers in special schools or separate classrooms. iii) Integration: which is similar to combined education but without any commitment to equity.

Students are expected to fit in with pre-existing structures, attitudes and unaltered environment. iv) Inclusion: which is a process of strengthening the capacity of the education system to reach out to all learners. It involves restructuring the culture, policies and practices in schools so that they can respond to the diverse needs of their students.

Image: Graphical explanation of how exclusion, segregation, integration and inclusion work Source: Hehir, T., Pascucci, S. & Pascucci C. (2016) A summary of the evidence on inclusive education

2.

DISABILITY AND SCHOOL SEGREGATION School segregation regards the uneven distribution across schools of pupils on the basis of inequalities in terms of socioeconomic, ethnic or other characteristics (Ball, 2003). In addition to these characteristics, disability (both physical and/or mental) of the child also leads to segregation due to the lack of incentives and misguided policies. [This] segregation occurs when the education of students with disabilities is provided in separate environments, such as special schools, in isolation from students without disabilities (HRW, 20201). The report concurrently states that “segregation can also take the form of placing children with disabilities in separate classrooms within mainstream schools.”

It can be clearly understood from these statements that it is not the occurence of disability but rather the policies that are in place which lead to school segregation for CWSN. As mentioned in the previous chapter, segregation and/or integration are still widely practised among numerous schools as they are either not willing to accept the CWSN as who they are and provide a more tailored education that revolves around a child-centered pedagogy or do not have the required resouces. The role of the parent/guardian is also important as it is their decision as to whether the child will eventually enroll in a school that provides for inclusive education or not. These parents rightly point out that too often, inclusive education means the mere physical presence of children with disabilities in the regular classroom (Wilson, 2017).

While school segregation can be caused by various factors ranging from social, economic, ethnic and ‘choice’ factors (Boterman et.al, 2019), the policies that surround disability are the major reason as to why a majority of CWSN remain segregated or even excluded. For example, CWSN form the largest out of school section of children in India. The Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children (UNESCO, 2015) found that out of 2.9 million CWSN countrywide, 990,000 aged 6-14 years (34%) are out of school. Of the number of CWSN in primary education, only a mere 8.52% reach the ninth grade - a dropout rate of 91.48% (DISE, 20162).

2

1 HRW: Human Rights Watch, see References DISE - District Information System of Education, India

3

3.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Over the years, there has been an evolution of understanding as to how to settling upon inclusion, the following table shows a brief, general and com

INDIA FREE EDUCATION

Under the Constitution of India, free and compulsory education General education in Latvia i is provided as a fundamental right to children between the ages and compulsory 9 years of ba education. of 6 and 14.

FREE EDUCATION CWSN

Under India’s Disability Act (1995), children with disabilities Provisions regarding the inte have the right to free education up to the age of 18. Other rights institutions in general were o include provisions such as transportation, scholarships, and free operate in the same period. uniforms, books and teaching materials.

I SPECIAL SCHOOLS

II INTEGRATION

III INCLUSION

For those pupils that due to d mainstream schools, special these schools are specialized school for weak-eyed and sig for pupils with other kind of

Integrated Education for Disabled Children (IEDC) scheme was launched in December 1974. 100% financial assistance for setting up... surveys and assessment of CWSN,... training and orientation of teachers. IEDC met with limited success - only a little more than 100,000 CWSN have been covered.a

No schemes for integration a inclusion.

In 1997, with the objective of ‘Education for All’, the philosophy of inclusive education was added in the District Primary Education Programme. It’s child-centered pedagogy addressed core issues related to what modifications were necessary to ensure fuller curriculum access for CWSN.b

Provisions regarding inclusiv only introduced after 2004 an Legal basis was created for t the mainstream general educ

In 1996, the Persons with Disabilities Act stated the criterion for children to be registered as disabled would be the presence of THRESHOLD 40% or more of disability(s). This has to be certified by any of OF DISABILITY the government (public) hospitals.

The National and Municipa are the authorities competent education provision and to pr implementing appropriate ed

Seven categories of disability were covered in the legislation, namely 1) Blindness, 2) Low Vision, 3) Leprosy Cured, CATEGORIES 4) Hearing Impairment, 5) Locomotor Disability, 6) Mental OF DISABILITY Retardation and 7) Mental Illness c

They correspond to eight targ Impairment, 3) Mental disabi Disorders, 6) Language Disa 8) Learning Disabilities

RATES OF DROPOUT CWSN

4

Children with special needs have access to special schools providing non-formal education and vocational training. There are more than 2,500 schools for children with special needs in India. However, these special schools segregate CWSN from the mainstream, thus developing a specific disability culture.

According to UNICEF, of 2.9 million children with disabilities in India, 990,000 children aged 6-14 years (34%) are out of school. The DISE 2015-16 data indicates that of the number of CWSN in primary education, a mere 8.52% reach the ninth grade - a dropout rate of 91.48%.d

No specific information avail The general trend of Latvia’s

o accommodate CWSN. Beginning with special schools and going through the motions of integration and finally mparative analysis of the situation in the countries of India, Latvia and Poland.

LATVIA

POLAND

in total lasts 12 years consisting of free asic education and 3 years of secondary

The free and compulsory education in Poland starts when the child is 7 years old (can start from 6 after special tests and parental agreement), and ends at the age of 18.

egration processes and inclusive educational only introduced after 2004 and began to

For children with various types of disabilities, there is a possibility to extend compulsory schooling. Children are provided with required neccesities during the schooling time.

different reasons may not be integrated into l education schools are established. Usually d (school for hearing-impaired and deaf; ghtless, etc.) but may also organize classes development problems.

A new type of school called “School of Life” was begun for kids with deep intellectual disabilities. Now special educational facilities or classes inside a school are divided according to intensity of the disability. These kinds of centers are usually better prepared then integration classes in the comprehensive school, to provide care and teaching to children with special needs.

as new schemes were developed directly for

No schemes for integration as new schemes were developed directly for inclusion.

ve educational institutions in general were nd began to operate in the same period. the inclusion of students with disabilities in cational institutions.

Started in the 90’s. At the beginning there were only kindergartens and primary schools, later also lyceums were available. In this system, each division has two teachers, one is the main subject teacher, the other is a supportive educator responsible for customizing the educational program for children with special needs.

al Pedagogical and Medical Commissions t to diagnose children’s need for special rovide information about schools ducation programme.

Qualification for special and inclusive education is carried out by psychological-educational counselling centres, which, as a result of appropriate specialist examinations, issue a certificate on the type and degree of disability, specifying an appropriate form of education.

get groups, 1)Visual Impairment, 2) Hearing 3 main categories: motor, mental and other disabilities. Children with ilities, 4) Physical Disabilities, 5) Health only motor disability don’t require special schools. Children with slight abilities, 7) Mental Health Disorders, mental disability can attend inclusive classes, but not recommended by specialists. Children with other disabilities (deaf-mute, blind) can attend inclusive classes, but not recommended by specialists.

lable on drop-out rates of CWSN. s early school leaving rate is relatively low.

No specific information available on drop-out rates of CWSN.

a; b; c; d

See References 5

4.

CASE STUDY OF LATVIA - Urban Rural Gap of Inclusive Education Location of institutions providing inclusive education in context of ‘Centre vs Periphery’’

Image 1: Distribution of primary and secondary education institutions that provide education for children with special needs in Latvia Source: Map created by author based on data from https://www.csb.gov.lv/lv/statistika/statistikas-temas/socialie-procesi/ izglitiba/tabulas

Special Education Institutions (Segregation) No. of Institutions

No. of CWSN

Riga (Capital)

25

2230

Major Regional Cities

30

Counties and towns TOTAL

General Education Institutions (Inclusion) No. of Institutions

No. of CWSN

Riga (Capital)

29

1078

1167

Major Regional Cities

69

1267

88

2229

Counties and towns

478

4287

143

5626

TOTAL

576

6632

Table 1: General and special education institutions providing education for children with special needs (CWSN); Source: Based on data from https://www.csb.gov.lv/lv/statistika/statistikas-temas/socialie-procesi/izglitiba/tabulas

The metropolitan area population of Riga 634,000 (2019) 68.6% of population is urban (1,293,197) people (2020) The current population of Latvia is 1,875,844 (2020) There is a monocentric urban system in Latvia with the capital Riga as the dominant centre. The city is surrounded by a large metropolitan area with a population of about 1.1 million which means that almost 50% of the country’s population is concentrated in about 15% of its territory.

The Law on General Education defines the types of education implemented in Latvia (for information about education in Latvia, see 3. Comparative Analysis). It states that special education is a specific type of general education. Chapter 8 of this law defines the implementation of special education programmes that can be carried out in general education institutions (inclusive education). Best schools for acquiring mandatory general education with highest performance in the state exams are located in the capital (Riga) or some of the other 9 major

6

regional centres (http://www.skolureitings.lv/). Very few of these schools have inclusive classes that educate children who follow special education programme. As seen in the data acquired from Central Statistics Bureau, most special education schools and schools who promote inclusive education (Image 1; Table 1) are located in regions or in the periphery of Riga. Upper middle class families who can afford transportation to and from school often have settled in residential areas closer to centre and with the best social and transport infrastructure, while families with less funding are not able to choose and settle where they can afford which in the case of Latvia are either in the country side or microrayono of Riga.

4.1 PROBLEMS Even though there are regulations and laws promoting inclusive education and accentuating that CWSN should be able to receive equal education, reality shows otherwise. Best performing schools rarely have inclusive classes and resources (teaching, healthcare staff, funding, special amenities, technical resources) to provide for CWSN. Those schools who promote inclusive or at least integrated education are located in peripheries and cause problems of access for both CWSN and non-disabled students, thus promoting segregation between peripheries and the centre. Peripheries often suffer from lack of public transport, social infrastructure, management and technical infrastructure. This creates mobility problems such as accessing schools as well as increased distances from the place of residence. In the rural territories and towns it is very common that most students live further than 15 minutes by foot from school. Another downside for periphery schools is the hardship of attracting highly qualified teachers and specialists due to lack of funding and lack of mobility. This causes lower quality education and thus making school less attractive to parents that are not constricted by mobility and monetary issues.

5.

MAIN CHALLENGES Educational systems in the countries mentioned above face many challenges concerning schooling of CWSN. Some of them are fairly similar, apart from the different contexts they represent. The Latvian study shows that the special educational system is still struggling with providing optimal solutions. Starting with the historical narrative (until 1991, Latvia was a Soviet Republic nation) which had drawn clear division between special and general education, going further into new challenges like providing better school policy which supports and pays enough attention to the needs of CWSN, for instance: implementation of special educational institutions in reachable areas together with proper transportation or better organization of the clsses and teaching programme. In India on the other hand a large number of children with disabilities live in families with income significantly below the poverty level. According to Rao (1990), while disability causes poverty, it is also possible that poverty causes disability.

The combination of poverty and disability results in a condition of ‘simultaneous deprivation’.

Alur (2001), in her study found that disability in India is not seen as something ‘normal’ or ‘natural’... she further concludes that “the contradiction was that Indian society ... has a social role construct of disability which is negative, discriminatory and exclusionary.” In Poland, after many years of improving special education, it seems that still a lot more has to be done in terms of organization and proper equipment.

Every country has its own challenges to deal with, however during this research we have noticed many, which are common for all the three cases: • Policy of the school not supporting or paying enough attention to the needs of CSWN • Large number of students in the same class • Lack of dissemination and public education (of existing rights and benefits for CWSN) • Lack of cooperation from parents/guardians of CSWN • Lack of adequate levels of training to key stakeholders o

microrayon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microdistrict 7

• Inadequate resources, amenities • Low wages for teachers, time consuming job • Lack of education opportunities close to home and family Moreover, there is a lot to be done in the attitude towards CWSN. Unfortunately, the negative and discriminatory view on CWSN and special education is still prominent and causes further division and segregation.

6.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS - The Good, Bad and Ugly of Inclusion We can raise important questions: if or how countries can improve their educational systems to prevent segregation among CWSN? Is there any chance that the process of inclusion of CWSN will proceed without any obstacles? And does inclusion in itself lead to further segregation?

During our research we discovered that even though educational systems have been improved significantly in terms of providing CWSN a fair chance to obtain basic education, there are still many challenges. School segregation is present and inclusive education doesn’t work as well in reality as on official legal documents. For a few decades, the governments of India, Latvia and Poland have been working on providing CWSN better schooling with fairly similar outcome. Looking at the case study of Latvia, which indicates an urban rural gap of inclusive education, it becomes clear that there is inequality of inclusive or special education institutions between peripheries and more urbanized areas, which then leads to spatial segregation.

Generally speaking “there is a strong relationship between residential choice and school choice, certainly for middle-class parents who can afford the higher house prices that result from the desirability of being in the catchment of a ‘good’ school; prices that, in turn, are an outcome of those preferences” (Wilson, Bridge, 2019). If families with disabled children, who can’t afford schools located far from their homes, are not provided with special funding, their children will not receive special care which is their basic human right.

Even though inclusion seems to be be the best solution providable by the system, it is not often the best option for the stakeholders who are involved in the process. The following shows the ‘good, bad and ugly’ sides of inclusion.

6.1 THE GOOD2 The positive aspects of inclusion affect CWSN and surprisingly non-disabled children too, as explained below: • Multiple systematic reviews of the scholarly research literature indicate that students with disabilities who were educated in general education classes academically outperformed their peers who had been educated in segregated settings (Baker, Wang, & Walberg, 1995; Katz & Mirenda, 2002).

• In a study of students with learning disabilities in Canada, researchers found that students who were educated primarily in a mainstream setting (in an inclusive classroom) were more accepted by their peers, had better social relationships, were less lonely, and exhibited fewer behavioural problems than similar children who were educated in … special education classroom settings (Wiener & Tardif, 2004).

• Another study used advanced statistical methods to examine the graduation patterns of students with disabilities in Massachusetts (USA) and found that students with disabilities in fully inclusive placements were almost five times more likely to graduate on time than students in segregated settings (Schifter, 2015).

• Drawing on research from 26 studies conducted in the United States, Australia, Canada, and Ireland, researchers found that the vast majority (81%) of findings indicated that nondisabled students either experienced no effects (58%) or experienced positive effects (23 2

8

information obtained from Hehir et. al. (2016). See References

• %) on their academic development as a result of being educated alongside students with disabilities (Kalambouka, Farrell, Dyson, & Kaplan, 2007).

• Attending class alongside a student with a disability can yield positive impacts on the social attitudes and beliefs of non-disabled students. These changes in attitude are predicted by the Contact Hypothesis, a term referring to the reduction of hostility, prejudice, and discrimination between groups through increased inter-group contact (Allport, 1979).

Low income CWSN Non-low income CWSN

Image:[left] CWSN scoring more grades in inclusive classrooms; [right] CWSN performing ‘better in life’ post inclusive education Source: Hehir et. al. (2016) A summary of the evidence on inclusive education

6.2 THE BAD The negative aspects of inclusion affect non-disabled children and surprisingly CWSN and the teaching staff too, as explained below: • [CWSN] are often an easy target for being teased and bullied by their non-disabled peers (Nabuzoka and Smith 1993). Recent research findings suggest that vulnerability to bullying cuts across all types of disability (Mishna 2003; Smith and Tippett 2006).3 • [CWSN] aspiring to study in inclusive school have [a] greater challenge in their attempt to secure admission. The eligibility criteria of these schools are stringent; the nature and severity of disability is the foremost concern of the school authorities. It was observed that most inclusive schools only enrol children with mild disabilities (Mumbai, India) (Kattumuri, 2010).

• There are some students, even if their only issue is a specific learning disability like a processing disorder, who could be severely affected by an inclusion classroom to the point where they are unable to stay caught up despite the presence of accommodations. Then the only outcome which works is a specialized spot where their current educational needs can receive the attention it deserves (Gaille, 2019).

• Regular teachers considered [CWSN] as the responsibility of the resource teachers.

Secondly, they felt [CWSN] to be a ‘disturbance’ to the class and as causing distractions which delayed course completion. Therefore, they choose to ignore their presence and concentrate on execution of their lesson plans (Kattumuri, 2010).

• For kindergartners and 1st grader non-disabled children - especially for African-American and Hispanic students (minorities) - having a classmate with an identified emotional disability is associated with lower test scores in reading and in math. This is known as the spillover effect (Fletcher, 2010).

6.3 THE UGLY “If inclusion requires a child to be excluded from the same experiences and boundaries as everyone else just to remain on the premises, then it’s not inclusion. What about the other children whose education is hindered and – in some cases – personal safety jeopardised? I am 3

information obtained from Kattumuri (2010). See References 9

responsible for those children too” (Secret Teacher, 2015). There seems to be an inadvertent after effect of inclusion wherein the process in itself leads to the very thing it was meant to oppose. Meaning that in some cases, inclusion of CWSN in mainstream schools leads to parents withdrawing their non-disabled children citing issues that associated behavioural difficulties (of CSWN) along with modifications or accommodations that CWSN require in inclusive classrooms will impede the learning of non-disabled students. This is segregation.

“In year 2 we have a little girl with autism. She... sometimes lies down and refuses to move – it’s her way of coping. Her classmates have learned not to react to this... This is, in some ways, a positive thing: they accept her and don’t bat an eyelid when her behaviour is unusual. However, I can’t help but feel we’ve brought up a cohort of children who, when they see someone with special needs in distress, would assume they should just walk by without offering help” (Secret Teacher, 2015).

7. CONCLUSION Summing up all the collected information we can say that there is no equality of access in education for children. Even if in all three countries, many tools were implemented to make education for kids with disabilities as good, comfortable and accessible as for other children there is still a lot to do. Inclusion doesn’t work properly and naturally due to many previous problems that haven’t been solved yet. As an example we can take the fact that children, teachers and facilities are not fully prepared for the special rules and needs of inclusive education. All the gathered references show that inclusion seems to be the most optimal system available.

However our research indicates that there are ‘good, bad and ugly’ sides of this process. We can say that it indeed brings benefits to CWSN as well as non-disabled children. Although often the INTEGRATION

INCLUSION

?

Image: Explaining how integration and inclusion work along with what a positive future could look like Source: https://directcourseonline.com/equity-equality-inclusion/

organizational issues cause problems, which slow down or cease the progress of inclusion, and eventually involuntarily lead to segregation. Another fact worth mentioning is a general attitude and deeply rooted belief that non-disabled pupils shouldn’t study together with CWSN because it might bring disadvantage to both groups. Relevant studies show otherwise, nonetheless parents still hesitate and refuse to send their children to the inclusive classes.

Generally speaking, the three brief but comprehensive parallel studies on the countries and the specific case study represent the whole spectrum of potential of inclusion and subsequent problems. On one hand we have interesting policies promoting inclusion of CWSN, while on the other questionable organization, lack of qualified teaching staff and equipment, inadequate fundings, poorly distributed institutions and limited access to them along with still prominent prejudices among children, parents and teachers. There is a thin line between inclusion and segregation, and keeping a fine balance requires equal attention from every relevant stakeholder.

10

REFERENCES Human Rights Watch (2020) Amicus Curiae regarding school segregation for children with disabilities, Brazil Supreme Court

1

Hehir, T., Pascucci, S. & Pascucci C. (2016) A summary of the evidence on inclusive education. (and other references mentioned in this article)

2

Kattumuri, R. (2010) Children with disabilities in private inclusive schools in Mumbai: Experiences and challenges, Asia Research Center Working Paper

3

Ball, S.J. (2003) Class strategies and the education market: The middle classes and social advantage. New York: Routledge Wilson, J.D. (2017) Reimagining disability and inclusive education through universal design for learning, Disability Studies Quarterly, 37 (2) Wilson, D. & Bridge, G. (2019) School choice and the city: Geographies of allocation and segregation. Urban Studies Journal, 56 (15) Boterman, W., Musterd, S., Pacchi, C. & Ranci, C., (2019) School segregation in contemporary cities: Socio-spatial dynamics, institutional context and urban outcomes. Urban Studies Journal, 56 (15) a,c

Sharma, U. & Deppeler, J. (2005) Integrated education in India: Challenges and prospects, Disability Studies Quarterly, 25 (1)

b

Sanjeev, K. & Khagendra, K. (2007) Inclusive education in India, Journal for Inclusive Education, 2 (2)

d

UNESCO (2014) Global Initiative on Out-of-School Children, UNESCO Institute for Statistics

Alur, M. (2001). Inclusion in the Indian Context. Humanscape, 8(6), 1-8 Singhal, N. (2009) Education of children with disabilities in India, Background paper prepared for the Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2010 Chatterjee, G. (2003) The global movement for inclusive education Retrieved 11th January, 2016, from http://www.indiatogether.org/2003/apr/edu-inclusive.htm Daniela, Linda. (2015). Children with special needs in Latvia. Legislative Frame. Society, Integration, Education. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference. 3. 10.17770/ sie2015vol3.372.

Nīmante, D. (2008, May). Bērnu ar speciālām un īpašām vajadzībām iekļaujošās izglītības vēsturiskā attīstība. Thesis. Riga: Latvian University, 296. p. Retrieved September 11, 2009, from http://luis.lanet.lv/pls/pub/luj.fprnt?l=1&fn=F35159/Dita%20Nimante% 202008.pdf Tihomirova I., (2011). Disabled children in general education school, Journal of Sport Science, 2 (89-97) Retrieved 20th December from https://lspa.lv/files/research/Journal_of_Sport_Science/ zurnals_2011_2.89-97.pdf Skadiņš, Toms. (2018). Changes of Commuting Range in Riga Agglomeration. Architecture and Urban Planning. 14. 10.2478/aup-2018-0007.

WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data (2011) World report on disability

11

Sękowska Z. (1985) Wprowadzenie do pedagogiki specjalnej. Warszawa ​ISBN 83-87079-55-3 Smyczek A., Dońska-Olszko M. (2016). Edukacja uczniów z niepełnosprawnością intelektualną i sprzężoną. Warszawa, ISBN 978-83-65450-79-1 Secret Teacher (2015, May 23). Secret teacher: I am all for inclusion in principle, but it doesn’t always work. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/teachernetwork/2015/may/23/secret-teacher-support-inclusion-but-not-at-any-cost Gaille, L., (2019) 15 pros and cons of an inclusion classroom. Retrieved from https://vittana. org/15-pros-and-cons-of-an-inclusion-classroom Fletcher, J. (2010) Spillover effects of inclusion of classmates with emotional problems on test scores in early elementary school. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management Sitography https://www.izm.gov.lv/en/general-education https://www.european-agency.org/country-information/latvia https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/separate-special-educationneeds-provision-early-childhood-and-school-education-34_en http://www.niepelnosprawni.pl/ledge/x/163751 https://www.dzieciwpolsce.pl/analiza/7/szkolnictwo-specjalne https://www.gov.pl/web/edukacja-i-nauka https://www.poradnia.pl/edukacja-dzieci-niepelnosprawnych.html

12