Teachers' perspectives on the transition of students with disabilities from resource classes to general classrooms in Nepal
This qualitative study of 22 teachers in Nepal reveals that the transition of students with disabilities from resource to general classrooms is hindered by intuition-driven practices, inadequate professional preparation, and systemic failures, ultimately threatening the effectiveness of the country's inclusive education model.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
In schools around the world, there is a growing belief that children learn best when they are together, regardless of whether they have a disability. This idea, known as inclusive education, suggests that every student should have a place in the regular classroom, supported by teachers who know how to adapt their lessons. However, moving a child from a special support setting into a regular class is not as simple as opening a door. It requires careful preparation, specific skills, and a system that holds everyone together. In many places, children with disabilities spend time in small, specialized groups to learn essential skills before joining the wider school community. The question remains: does this transition actually work, or does the system break down when the child steps into the larger room?
Researchers in Nepal set out to understand exactly how this process unfolds in their country's schools. They focused on the moment when students with disabilities move from "resource classes"—small, specialized groups within a regular school—into the main general classrooms. The team interviewed twenty-two teachers from five different schools across the country. These teachers included those who ran the small support groups and those who taught the large, mixed classes. By listening closely to their stories, the researchers wanted to see if the schools were following a clear plan or if the teachers were left to figure things out on their own.
What the researchers found was that the transition was rarely guided by a clear, written rulebook. Instead, it depended heavily on the intuition of individual teachers and the specific type of disability the student had. For students with visual impairments, the path was often straightforward. Teachers in the small support groups taught them how to read Braille, a system of raised dots used for reading. Once a student mastered this skill, which usually took one or two years, they were sent to the general classroom. The regular teachers found this manageable; they could simply speak a bit louder, write clearly on the board, or pair the student with a helpful classmate. The transition worked because the necessary tools were within reach.
The story was very different for students with hearing impairments. These students learned sign language in the small support groups, a skill they often picked up quickly. Yet, despite learning to communicate, many of them stayed in the small groups for years, never moving to the general classrooms. The reason was not a lack of skill on the student's part, but a lack of support in the main classroom. The regular teachers did not know sign language, and there were no assistants to help translate. When a student with a hearing impairment entered a regular class, they could not understand the teacher, and the teacher could not understand them. The student would become frustrated, and the teacher, feeling helpless, would send them back to the small group. In this way, the system kept these children separated, not because they were unready, but because the bridge between the two rooms was missing.
The teachers themselves expressed deep uncertainty about their roles. Many had never been trained on how to move a student from a support group to a regular class. They knew how to teach Braille or sign language, but they did not know how to prepare a child for the social and emotional challenges of a big classroom. One teacher described feeling like they were guessing, using their own common sense because no one had given them a map. Another admitted that they felt responsible for the majority of students, while the special needs students were seen as the job of the support teacher. This created a gap where no one felt fully in charge of the transition. The support teachers prepared the students, but the regular teachers were not ready to receive them, and no one was there to make sure the two sides talked to each other.
The study suggests that the current model in Nepal, which places special support groups inside regular schools, risks creating two separate systems that exist side by side rather than one unified system. The resource classes act as a holding pattern for some children, particularly those with hearing impairments, because the general classrooms lack the tools to include them. The researchers found that without specific support staff, like sign language interpreters, and without clear training for all teachers, the promise of inclusive education remains unfulfilled. The transition is not failing because the teachers do not want to help; they are failing because the system has not given them the means to do so. The findings point to a need for a complete overhaul of how schools prepare for these transitions, ensuring that every teacher has the skills and support to welcome every student, rather than leaving the success of inclusion to chance.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.