Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The data was collected for two main objectives; to get the status of special SNC in the
mainstream schools with the help of direct observation of the children and the screening instruments
and to get awareness level the participants about SNC. The researcher categorized collected data for
analysis as follows.
The analysis of awareness of teachers about the disabilities of the SNC learning in
mainstream public schools.
The analysis for the identification of different types of SNC leaning in mainstream public
schools.
4.1 Analysis of Awareness of Teachers about Disabilities of Children with Disabilities
The awareness of teachers about different types of SNC learning in class is basic element of
study to get reliable result (Kazimi, 2007). The educational levels, job experience, period of teaching of
present class, were main domains of awareness level. The participants (male/ female) of small sample
belong to different areas of the population, in which 37 teachers (74%) were male and 13 (26%) female
as shown in the Figure 4.1 & Table 4.1.
Table 4.1
Distribution of male female participants
Gender frequency %age
Male 37 74.0
Female 13 26.0
Total 50 100.00
Figure 4.1
The Pie graph showing male /female distribution of the participants
Male37
74%
Female13
26%
MaleFemale
4.1.1 Job experience of the participants
The Experience plays a vital role for personal skill and level of proficiency of teachers. (G.
Lokanadha, 2006)
Table 4.2
Distribution of teaching experience of participants in mainstream schools
Job experience in years Frequency Percentage %
Below-5 6 12.0
5-10 13 26.0
10-15 5 10.0
15-20 5 10.0
Above -20 21 42.0
Total 50 100.0%
The Table 4.2 & Figure 4.2 illustrate that there were 21(42%) participants had experience of
above 20 years. The 5(10%) participants had experience of between 15-20 years, 5 (10%) participants
had experience of 10-15 years. The percentage of participants who had experience 5-10 years were
13(26%). Only 6(12%) out of 50 participants had experience of below 6 years .This configuration of the
%age of experience of participants showed that high number of participants had experience above 10
years.
Figure 4.2
Bar graph showing Experience of teachers in years
below-5 5_10 10_15 15_20 above_200.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
45.00%
12.00
26.00
10.00 10.00
42.00
the experience of teachers in years
exp
eri
an
cein
%
4.1.2 Distribution of the academic qualification of participants
The Distribution of qualification of participants shows academic level of participant. A good
teacher with better qualification has better position to indentify the leaning activities and disabilities of
children.
Table 4.3
Academic qualification of participants
Academic Qualification Frequency Percentage %
Metric 7 14.0F.A 8 16.0
B.A 14 28.0
M.A 21 42.0
Total 50 100.0
The above Table 4.3 illustrates that the maximum range of frequency for academic qualification
of participants was 21(42.0%) of M.A level, which was a positive sign for the mainstream schools for the
better educational deliverance. This %age shows a trend in teachers to increase their level of education.
There were 14 (28.0%) of participants B.A, 8(16.0%) F.A and 14.0% were metric. This percentage shows a
good educational background of teachers of public schools for a better inclusive education. Figure 4.3
below shows a trend of increasing the academic among participants.
Figure4.3
Bar graph showing & trend line Academic qualification of participants
MATRIC F.A B.A M.A0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
7% 8%
14%
21%
1416
28
42
frequency
Linear (frequency)
percentage
Exponential (percentage)
acedamic qualification
4.1.3 The professional qualification of participants
Professional qualification has great impact on teaching methods of teachers. A skilled teacher
has better position to plan, to guide the children, to accommodate individual abilities or disabilities of
the children. If we see the previous table4.3, the %age of metric was 14%, here in Table 4.4 participants
who had professional qualification PTC were 16 (32.0%), there was a difference of 18(%) that revealed
that 18% teachers had increased their academic level from metric after their appointment as metric PTC
teacher. That showed a positive trend. There were 10 (20%) participants had CT, 9(18%) B.ED and 15
(30.0%) participants were M.ED. As shown in the Table.4.4 and Figure 4.4 below.
Table 4.4
The distribution of the professional qualification of participants
Professional qualification frequency Percent %
P.T.C 16 32.0
C.T 10 20.0
B.ED 9 18.0
M.ED 15 30.0
Total 50 100.0
Figure 4.4
Bar graph showing Distribution of the professional qualification
P.T.C C.T B.ED M.ED0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%32.00
20.0018.00
30.00
Professional Qualification Of The Participants
4.1.4 The participant experience’s distributions in the present class.
Teaching experience plays a vital role in the teaching process in class and being an in charge of
class, it is a necessary element to observe activities of children continuously.
Table 4.5
Bar graph showing Period of teaching of participant in present class
0_1 2_3 4_5 Above five0
510
1520
25
3035
4045
21 21
62
42% 42%
12%
4%
The period of the teachers teaching in the present class in years
frequancy precentage
Table 4.5
Distribution of the period of teaching of the participants in present class
Period of teaching present class in years frequency Percentage %
0-1 21 42.0
2-3 21 42.0
4-5 6 12.0
Above 5 2 4.0
Total 50 100.0
Entire participants had been teaching in present class since last six months as it shown in above
Table 4. 5 and figure 4.5, no participant had the period ≤ six month because it was necessary that
participants must have teaching their classes teaching in mainstream school since last six months for a
reliable data collection. There were 42% of participants teaching for 1 year in present class, 42% of
participants were teaching classes for 2-3 years, 12% participants were teaching their class for 3 years,
and 4 % had the period of teaching in present class for above 4 years. As entire participants were PST
teachers, and they were teaching in primary schools therefore it was obvious that they had a teaching
span for present class between one to 5 years.
4.2 The Analysis of Awareness Level of the Participant about the SNC
Participants of study were teachers of primary schools and have been teaching mainstream school
of inclusive class since at least six months; to get degree of awareness of participants, there were five
question asked, the domains for analyses were; %age of feedback of the statements from participants,
Mean score of responses of statements yes=1, to some extent=2, no=3, and the SD (standard deviation)
of each question. The statement S1 was; “do you have information about different types of disabilities of
children like dyslexic, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD),
Slow Learner (SL), Learning Disabilities, (LD) Emotional Disturbed Children, (EDC) Mental Retarded
Children, and (MRC)?”
There were 0.00% (50) of the participants who did not response “yes”, 72.0% (36) of the
participants reposed that they had “to some extant” information about SNC and 28. % response “No”,
the Mean score was (2.28,) SD (.445), revealed that there was no single participant who knew about all
types of the SNC as illustrated in the Table 4.6. The statement S2 was; “do you recognize the children
with physical handicap like, visual impairment children (VIC), hearing impairment children (HIC) or
physical handicap children (PHC)?” There were 50% (25), participants responded “yes”, 25 %( 50) knew
“to some extent” of the PHC, and there were no participant who responded “no” to the statement.
Result of table 4.6 indicates that no participants had of complete information about different types of
SNC.
Table 4.6
Distribution of responses of questions of participants
Awareness Questions
Yes%
To Some Extent%
No% Mean SD
S1 0.00
(0)*
72.0
(36)
28.0
(14)2.28 0.454
S250.0
(25)
50.0
(25)
0.00
(0)1.50 0.505
S30.00
(0)
0.00
(0)
50.00
(50)3.00 0.000
S40.00
(0)
60.00
(30)
40.00
(20)2.40 0.495
S50.00
(0)
12.00
(6)
88.00
(44)2.88 0.328
*the frequency
Statement S3 was; “did you get any training before or during service to get awareness about
children with disabilities?” The entire participants, (0.00%) zero percent, did not have any training
before service or during service. It was a negative element and the previous table 4.2 showed that
minimum range of job experience was 1-6 years and maximum range was above 21 years, but it was
analyzed that during entire service all participants did not got any training to teach in inclusive class, this
was a most insignificant point and showed lowest awareness level of participants about different
disabilities of SNC. The statement S4 was; “did parent of children tell about disabilities of their child on
time of admission?” .There were 60% (30) of participants responded that parent told “to some extant”
of about disabilities of their child at the time of admission and 40% (20) did not tell about the disabilities
of the children; Mean score (2.40), SD (0.495) of responses reveals that parent did not tell about
disabilities of their child completely. Statement 5 was; “does your school take information about
disabilities of children at time of admission?” .There were 0.00 %( 50) of the participants did not respond
“yes” that their school kept the record of children at the time of admission and 12.0 %( 6) responded “to
some extent” that school got information about disabilities of at time of admission where as 88 %( 44)
responded “No”. Mean= 2.88, and SD= 0.328, values gave a degree of awareness that school had not
positive response for SNC and 88% schools and the teachers did not get any information about
disabilities of child in written at the time of admission .The responses of Statements S1, S2, S3, S4, S5,
revealed that very low %age of participants had awareness about disabilities of SNC.
Table 4.7
The comparison of awareness between the male to female participants
Gender N Mean SD df t-value sig-2 p
S1. Male Female 3713
2.35.2
.484
.277 48 1.928 .000*
S2. Male Female
3713
1.57 1.31 .502 480 48 1.622 .072
S3. Male Female
3713
3.00 3.00
.000a
.000a 48 0.00 .000*
S4. Male Female
3713
2.49 2.15
.507 .376 48 2.162 .000*
S5. MaleFemale
3713
2.86 2.92
.347 .277 48 .546 .258
P<0.05, a= the stander deviation can’t be calculated.
The above table 4.7 illustrates compression of male vs. female awareness level about differences
types of disabilities of the SNC. The responses of statement1 (S1),“Do you have information about the
different types of the disabilities of the children like dyslexic, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
(ADHD), Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Slow Learner (SL), Learning Disabilities, (LD) Emotional
Disturbed Children, (EDC) Mental Retarded Children, (MRC)?” .The obtained mean=2.3, SD=.487,
SD=.277 for male, mean=5.2, SD= .277 for female, and t-value (df =48) =1.928 (p<0.05) that was
insignificant to differences.
The responses for statement 2, “Do you recognize children with physical handicap like, visual
impairment children (VIC), hearing impairment children (HIC) or physical handicap children (PHC)?”
mean =1.57, SD=.502, t-value (48) =1.622, reveals that awareness level of both male and female
participants was same.
Responses of statement no 3, “Did you get any training before or during the service to get
awareness about the children with disabilities?” mean= 3, SD=zero for the both male and female
participants, t-value (48) =0.00, (P<0.05), insignificants, it indicates that the both awareness level of both
male and female participants about was same. Score of statement S4, “Did the parent of the children tell
about disabilities of their child on the time of admission?” showed Mean=2.49, with SD=.507, for male
participant, and mean=2.15, SD=.376, with t-value=2.162, indicates that there was no significant
difference, so response level of male and female participant was same.
The mean =2.86, SD=.347, for male, and mean=2.92, SD= .277, and t-value=.546, for the female
for statement 5, “Does your school take information about disabilities of children at time of admission?”
indicated that there was no significant difference between responses of male and female participants
and that both male and female participants had at same level to get information about SNC at time of
admission.
4.3 Analysis and Status of the SNC Learning In the Mainstream Public School
For the identification of SNC, the demographic configuration was distributed into domains; gender,
father occupation, class, and age, on OBT (observation tag) and on student screening checklist (SSC).
Figure 4.6
Pie graph illustrating the percentage distribution of SNC
SNC23%
NORMAL77%
Percentage of SNC
SNCNORMAL
Out of 2120 children of sample schools (SS) 495 SNC were indentified and the percentage
distribution of SNC in sample SS of in the sample schools (SS) shows that were 23% children had the
different types of disabilities. As shown in the figure 4.6
The number of boys who were selected for the screening was 1535, and 585 were girls. Out of
total number of boys 380 are identified as SNC, and 115 girls were screened as the SNC.
Figure 4.7
The distribution of the male vs. female SNC
Male77%
Female23% Male
Female
4.3.1 Distribution of the age group of SNC leaning in the public school
Second domain was age of Child, maximum range of age was 13 years, there were 83(16.8)
children who had age below 6 years, 121(24.4%) had age group 6-8 years, 168(33.9%) SNC had age
group 8-10 years, 77(15.6%) children had age group 10-12 years, 46(9.3%) had age form 12-14 years .
The maximum range of age of SNC was 168 that 33.9% children were suffering from disabilities
who had age from 8-10 years, and the minimum range of age was 46 that % 9.3 of children who were
suffering from disabilities had age group12-14 years. The different age groups reveals the children who
had the age from 8-10 years were more suffering from the disabilities as shown in the Table 4.8 and
illustrated in Figure4.8.
Table 4.8
Distribution of the age groups of SNC in the SSs
Age group in years frequency Percentage%
Below 6 83 16.8
6-8 121 24.4
8-10 168 33.9
10-12 77 15.6
12-14 46 9.3
Total 495 100.0
Figure4.8
Distribution of the SNC age wise in the SS
Below_6 6_8 8_10 10_12 12_140
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
83
121
168
77
46
16.8%24.4%
33.9%
15.6%9.3%
frequancypercent
4.3.2 Distribution of the Occupation of the father of SNC
Social differences have impacts on learning of children, and occupation of father has
importance in the life of the children in the developing country like Pakistan where the social
discrimination does effect on the lives of the children (Bullough, 1995). Father occupation was the
variable in the sample schools (SS) which had impact on the status of the Special Needs Children (SNC).
Table 4.9
Distribution of the occupation of the father’s of SNC in SS
Occupation group frequency percentage
Furniture worker 245 49.5
Farmer 43 8.7
labors 179 36.2
service 15 3.0
Unemployed 13 2.6
Total 495 100.0
There were five groups in the classification of occupation of father; 1=furniture worker, 2=
farmer, 3=labor, 4= service, 5=unemployed. Analysis showed, there were 245(49, 9%) of fathers of SNC
had occupation as a furniture worker, 43(8.7%) were farmer, 179 (36.2%) were labor, 15(3.0%) were
government employers and 13 (2.6%) were unemployed. As illustrated in Table 4.9 and Figure 4.9.
Figure 4.9
Percentage distribution of the father’s occupation of SNC
Furniture worker
Farmer labors service Unemployed0
10
20
30
40
50
60
49.5%
8.7
36.2%
3% 2.6%
percentageLinear (percentage)Linear (percentage)Linear (percentage)
There were 245 (49.5%), fathers of SNC whose occupation was as furniture worker. The 179
(36.6%) had occupation of laborer, and unemployed were 13. The analysis of data about the occupation
of the fathers of the children SNC reveals that children whose fathers were working in the Furniture
factories had AHDH ratio more than that of the other disabilities.
4.4 Identification of SNC: according to the disability group
Table 4.10 illustrates distribution of different levels of the SNC.The distribution of SNC in SS
reveals that maximum range was 310 (62.6%) who had moderate disability level, 173 (34.5%) had severe
disability level.
Table 4.10
Distribution of disability level of the SNC
The disability level Frequency Percent%
Mild 10 2.0
Moderate 310 62.6
Severe 173 34.9
Profound 2 0.4
Total 495 100.0
The minimum range of profound level was 2(0.4%), maximum range of moderate level was
310(62.6%), children who were suffering from severe level of disability were 173(34.9%), and children
who had disability of level of profound were 2 (0.4%).
Figure 4.10
The distributing of the disabilities level
Mild Moderate Severe Profound0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
10
310
173
22.0%
62.6%34.9%
0.4%
the disabliitiy level of SNC
FrequencyPercent
4.5 Screening of the SNC: The Status SNC of Different Types in SS.
The individual evaluation of class room performance, social behavior, and after monitoring
activities of children, different types of SNC were classified into different groups. Main categories of SNC
were; dyslexic. ADHD, LDs, autistics (ASD), EDC, SL, MRC, VIC, HIC, PHC. The frequency distribution and
%age of the SNC in inclusive classroom is shown in Table 4.11. There were ten categories of SNC
described in instrument SSC, and symptoms of every type were stated on each statement. Participants
were asked to check most relevant option that match with the characteristics of child. There were four
options for each statement, not at all= 1, often=2, usually=3, and always=4, the mean score, stander
deviation (SD). Table 4.11 shows different types of disabilities SNC suffering in main stream school.
Table 4.11
Overall distribution of the different types SNC SS
Disability type Frequency Percent%
Dyslexic 76 15.4
LD 74 14.9
ADHD 94 20.0
ASD 33 6.7
EDC 21 4.2
MRC 89 18.0
SL 71 14.3
VIC 27 5.5
HIC 8 1.6
PHC 2 0.4
Total 495 100.0
The maximum range 94(20%) revealed that ADHD children were high in number in mainstream schools.
There were 18 %( 89) children had disabilities of MRC.
Figure 4.11
The graphical distribution of the SNC
Dyslexic LD ADHD ASD EDC MRC SL VIC HIC PHC0
102030405060708090
100
76 74
94
3321
89
71
27
82
15.4 14.9 20
6.7 4.2
18 14.35.5 1.6 0.4
Distrubition of the differnt types of disablities among SNC.
Frequancypercent
Dyslexic were 76(15.4%), children having disability of Autism Spectrum disorder (ASD) were
33(6.7%), EDC (4.2%), SL 71(14.3%), VIC 27(5.5%), HIC 8(1.6%), and PHC 2(.4%). The Graphical illustration
of different types of disabilities of SNC shown in Figure 4.11
4.5.1 School wise distributing of SNC from Kacchi (nursery) to 5 Grade
Identification of special needs was a sensitive study, as all parents when they send their child to
school have the thinking that their child is normal. Overall class vise distribution of SNC from kacchi
(Nursery) to class 5 is presented in the Table 4.12& in Figure 11
Table 4.12
Overall class vise distribution of SNC from kacchi to 5th
Class name Frequency Percent%
Kacchi (nursery) 81 16.4
One (Grade-1) 70 14.1
Two(Grade-2) 94 19.0
Three(Grade-3) 88 17.8
Four(Grade-4) 91 18.4
Five(Grade-5) 71 14.3
Total 495 100.0
Figure 4.12
The class vise distribution of the SNC
16%
14%19%
18%
18% 14%
Class vise distrubition of SNC in SSs
Kacchi (nursery)
One (Grade-1)
Two(Grade-2)
Three(Grade-3)
Four(Grade-4)
Five(Grade-5)
The Table 4.12 & figure4.12 illustrate the entire number of SNC learning in classes of SS. There
were 81(16.4%) SNC studying in nursery (kacchi) class number of SNC in class two was 94(19.0%). There
were 88(17.8%) SNC in class three, 91(18.4%) in four class and 71(14.3%) were in five class.
Maximum range of distribution was 91(19%). It meat that in class two children with disabilities
were more than others classes of SSs. The minimum range of distribution was 70(14.1%) that was lower
number of children in class one. The figure 4.12 shows that, in class two more children had disabilities.
4.5.2 The male vs. female distribution of SNC in the SSs
The status of male and female SNC shows that the number of male SNC was more than female children.
Table 4.13 shows distribution of male SNC with different types of disabilities. The Illustration revealed
that maximum range of male children with disabilities was 76 (19.89%) that was of ADHD, that showed
that boys were more pray to attention deficits than that of girls. MRC were second children that were
65(17.05 %); it meant that male children had more mental disabilities.
Boys having impairment of dyslexia were 60 (15.18%), learning disabilities were 58(15.18%). There were
23(6.05%) ASD impaired, EDC =16 (4.18%), SL =56 (14.65%), VI =18 (4.71%), HIC = 8(2.094%), PHC
=1(0.26%), reading in mainstream schools.
Table 4.13
The distribution of male SNC with different types of disabilities in SS
Disability type Frequency Percent%
Dyslexic 60 15.70
LD 58 15.18
ADHD 76 19.89
ASD 23 6.05
EDC 16 4.18
MRC 65 17.05
SL 56 14.65
VIC 18 4.71
HIC 8 2.094
PHC 1 0.26
Total 382 100.0
Graphical representation of distribution of different types of impairments among male (boys) is
shown in bar graph Figure 4.13.
Figure 4.13
Distribution of the different types of disabilities in male SNC
Dyslexic LD ADHD ASD EDC MRC SL VIC HIC PHC0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
60 58
76
2316
65
56
18
81
percentage distrubition of the disabilities amomg male SNC
Table 4.14 and figure 4.14 below gives different types of female SNC in SSs. The sufferers of ADHD were
18(15.92%). Dyslexic girls were 16(14.15%), LD Impairment 16 (14.15%), Autistics 10(8.84%), slow
learner (SL) female sufferers 15(13.27%), Visual Impairment 9(7.96%), hearing impairment were 0(0%),
and physical handicap sufferers were 1(.20%). Analysis revealed that male sufferers had more disabilities
than the female. Male had more attention deficit disorder and heaving problems in reading. Mental
retarder MRC sufferers of male side were more than female
Table 4.14
The distribution of female SNC with different types of disabilities in SS
Disability type Frequency Percent%
Dyslexic 16 14.15
LD 16 14.15
ADHD 18 15.92
ASD 10 8.84
EDC 5 4.42
MRC 23 20.35
SL 15 13.27
VIC 9 7.96
HIC 0 0.00
PHC 1 0.88
Total 113 100.0
The configuration of table reveals that the maximum range was 23(20.35%) of mental retarded
(MRC), which shows that girls were more sufferers of mantel retarded, minimum range 0(%) was of HIC
that no girl had hearing impairment. The proportion of SNC of male sufferers was greater than female.
Figure 4.14
The graphical presentation of the different types of female SNC in SSs
Dyslexic LD ADHD ASD EDC MRC SL VIC HIC PHC0
5
10
15
20
25
14.1515.92
8.84
4.42
20.35
13.27
7.96
00.88
Percentage distrubition of the differnt female SNC in the SSs
percentage
4.6 Identification of the Main Types of SNC with SSC
The SSC was administrated to participants to check most relevant option. On a consolidated screen
checklist characteristics of different disabilities were grouped in ten main categories; Dyslexic, LD, ADHD,
ASD, EDM, MRC, SL, VIC, HIC, PHC.
4.6.1 Identification of characteristic of the dyslexic
Table 4.15
Analysis of the characteristic of Dyslexia (Group A)
Statements Not%
Often%
Usually%
Always% Mean SD
1-She/he has difficulties in reading and hesitates to read 84.6 1.4 7.9 6.1 .35 .867
2-He has puzzlement to differ visually similar looking letters and words for example b, p, a, d, Urdu ب ت ت ث ٹ
84.6 5.1 9.3 1.0 .27 .666
3-She/he has difficulties in pronunciation sounds of words. 84.8 2.6 12.1 0.4 .28 .685
4-She/he has difficulties in reading rhyming words. 84.8 4.0 9.9 1.2 .27 .686
5-She/he has difficulties to follow the words problems of Math 85.1 3.6 9.7 1.6 .28 .702
6-She/he reverses the left right order of English and Urdu alphabets as above.
84.6 1.6 12.3 1.4 .31 .738
7-She/he has illegible and labored writing 85.1 1.9 9.1 2.0 .28 .711
8-She/he has left-right hand confusion. 86.7 4.8 7.3 1.2 .23 .629
9-She/he as difficulties to decode the words in Urdu "Jore Tore". 85.1 3.4 9.9 1.6 .28 .706
10-The English spelling & Urdu dictation is very poor. 85.3 2.0 7.1 5.7 .33 .839
The Table 4.15 and figure 4.15 illustrates the configuration of the responses of participants about the
characteristics of Dyslexics.
Figure 4.15
Graphical illustration of responses of participants about characteristics of Dyslexic
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S100
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1.4
5.12.6
4 3.61.6
1.9
4.83.4
2
7.99.3
12.1
9.9 9.7
12.3
9.1
7.3
9.9
7.16.1
10.4
1.2 1.6 1.42
1.2 1.6
5.7
the pecentage of the responces about the charactirectices of Dsylexic
Often
usually
Always
Main symptoms of each group were placed in serial vise statements which explained
characteristics of the child. Statements 1 to 10 were belonged to the characteristics of dyslexia. The
responses of statement 1 (S1) “She/he has difficulties in reading and hesitates to read”, showed that 1.4
%often, 7.9% usually, and 6.1 %, always, had problems in reading. The responses of statement 2 “He has
puzzlement to differ visually similar looking letters and words for example b, p, a, d, Urdu”ب ت ت ث reveled that, 5.1%=often, and 9.3%=usually, 1.0%=always, had puzzlement problem of same looking ٹ
words. The responses of statement 3 “She/he has difficulties in pronunciation sounds of words”
indicated that 2.6% =often, 12.1%=usually, .4% =always, children had problems of pronunciation sound
of words. Responses of t S4 showed, 4.0%= often, 9.9% =usually, 1.2%=always had problems of the
reading the rhyming words. Response of the S5 reveals that 3.6% =often, 9.7%=usually, 1.6 always faced
difficulties of basic computation. Reverse problems of similar looking, response of S6 described that 1.6
% percent of group had deficit in reversing similar looking words. Responses of the S7, showed that 3.8%
=often, 9.1% =usually, 2.0% =always of SNC had illegible writings. Response of statement S8 showed
4.8% =often, 7.3%=usually, 1.2% =always had difficulty in right hand and left hand 0.4% =often, 9.9%
=usually, and 1.6% =always, had the problems in Urdu “Jore” and” Tore”. Responses of statement 10,
showed that 2. %= often, 7.1% =usually, 5.7% =always, had poor spellings.
4.6.2 Identification of the Learning Disabilities
The statements from 11 to 19 were administrated to the children of learning disabilities. The
Table 4.15 illustrates the responses of statement. The responses reveals that 1.8%= often, 9.9% =usually,
2.6%=always, children did not grip pencil well, that was why they had difficulties in writing. The
responses of the statement 12, “She/he has difficulties to recognize pictures of objects”, shows that
4.8%= often, 7.9%=usually, 1.2%=always, had deficits in the recognizing pictures of objects. The
response of statement 13 reveals that 3.4% =often, 9.5% =usually, 1.2% =always, had not control on
their concentration on lesson. The response of the statement 14 reveals that 2.6%=often, 9.9%=usually,
1.6%=always had problems in memorizing that just has been taught and 5.9%=often, 5.7%=usually, 0.8%
=always, children reversed the similar looking letters.
Table 4.16
Analysis of Characteristics of LD children
Statements Not%
Often % Usually% Always
% Mean SD
11. She/he grips the pencil unusually and has poor writing.
85.7 1.8 9.9 2.6 .29 .75
12. She/he has difficulties to recognize the pictures of objects.
85.1 4.08 7.9 1.2 .24 .64
13. She/he does not concentrate on lesson.
85.9 3.4 9.5 1.2 .25 .67
14. She/he cannot memorize the lesson that has been just taught.
85.9 2.6 9.9 1.6 .27 .70
15. She/he can’t understand the new instructions easily.
87.7 5.9 5.7 0.8 .20 .56
16. She/he reverses the similar looking words e.g. saw/was.
88.5 5.1 5.9 0.6 .19 .55
17. She/he has difficulties to focus attention on school work and activities.
86.7 1.6 9.1 2.6 .28 .73
18. She/he loses pen, pencils etc. during class room activities.
85.1 3.6 8.9 1.4 . 25 .67
19. She/he can't do Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication etc.
85.1 1.2 7.5 4.8 .31 .80
Figure 4.16
Graphical presentation of characteristics of the LD
S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S190
2
4
6
8
10
12
1.8
4.083.4
2.6
5.95.1
1.6
3.6
1.2
9.9
7.9
9.5 9.9
5.7 5.9
9.1 8.9
7.5
2.6
1.2 1.2 1.60.80.60000000000000
1
2.6
1.4
4.8 OftenUsaullyAlways
Response of statement 17, “She/he has difficulties to focus attention on school work and
activities.” reveals that 5.1%=often, 5.9%=usually, 0.6%=always had the impairment of the inattention,
and hyperactivity. Response of statement 18, “She/he loses pen, pencils etc. during class room
activities.” 3.6%=often, 8.9%=usually, 1.4%=always, during the class room activity, had lost their learning
utilities. The response of statement 18, “She/he can't do Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication etc”
shows that 1.2%= often, 4.8%=usually, 7.5% =always, had deficits to learn the basic computation of
mathematics. The results showed that 10% of the SNC had problems in gripping the pencils. The 9.9% of
SNC, had difficulties in remembering lesson that just has been taught.
4.6.3 The identification of the ADHD in the SNC with SSC
The Table 4.17 below shows the results of responses of the participants about ADHD. The
statements from 20 to 30 in the SSC had main characteristics of the children with ADHD. The response of
statement 20, “She/he has careless behavior during the class room activities”, illustrated that
1.0%=often, 12.5%=usually, 5.7%=always, had care less behavior in class. The response of statement21,
“She/he is a day dreamer, wandering mind has", that 3.0%=often, 14.7%=usually, .5%=always, moved on
in the class. The responses of the statement 22, “She/he frustrates of an activity after a few minutes.”
shows that 5.5%=often, 11.9%=usually, 1.2%=always, frustrated by the class room activity after
sometime. The response of the Statement 23, “She/he can't follow new instructions easily”, shows the
impulsivity level of children of the SNC, 8.3%=often, 9.3%= usually, 0.6%=always, could not fellow new
instructions in class.
Table 4.17
The analysis of the Characteristics of the ADHD
Statements Not%
Often %
Usually%
Always% Mean SD
20.She/he has careless behavior during the class room activities
80.8 1.0 12.5 5.7 .43 .915
21.She/he is a day dreamer, "a wandering mind has"
81.6 3.0 14.7 .6 .34 .747
22. She/he frustrates of an activity after a few minutes.
81.4 5.5 11.9 1.2 .33 .730
23. She/he can't follow new instructions easily.
81.8 8.3 9.3 .6 .29 .654
24. She/he is shriek of work. 81.6 4.6 12.5 1.2 .33 .739
25. She/he is a forgetful person in daily activities.
81.8 4.4 12.5 .8 .33 .727
26. His/her attention is diverted by external agents easily?
81.6 2.6 10.7 5.3 .40 .878
27. She/he has less confidence to begin a new work.
82.6 7.7 7.9 1.8 .29 .688
28.She/he often move seat to seat and not a calm person
82.0 2.6 7.7 7.7 .41 .925
29. She/he is very talkative? 83.4 7.5 8.1 1.0 .27 .647
30.She/he has difficulties to wait for turn in games
83.4 11.1 5.3 .2 .22 .539
The Response of statement 24, “She/he is shriek of work”, shows that 0.6%=often, 2.5%=usually,
1.2%=always had shriek of work in class room activity. The response of statement 25, “She/he is a
forgetful person in daily activities”, describes the level of the memory of the SNC, and reveals that
4.4%=often, 12.9.usually, 0.8%=always had problems in memorizing the class room activity.
The response of statement 26, “She/he has less confidence to begin a new work”, shows the
lack of initiative, and reveals that 7.7%=often, 7.9%=usually, 1.8=always, had problems in starting a new
point. The response of statement 27, “His/her attention is diverted by external agents easily”, shows the
level of the inattention, that 2.60%=often, 10.7%=usually, 5.3%=always, were disturbed by the external
agents. The response of statement 28, “He/ She often move seat to seat and not a calm person”,
describes the hyper active behavior level of SNC, and reveals that 2.6%=often, 7.7%=usually,
2.6%=always, had not seated on their seats and always move on. The response of statement 29, “She/he
is very talkative”, reveals that, 11.1%= often, 8.1%=usually, 1.0%= always, had a talkative behavior. The
response of statement 30, “She/he has difficulties to wait for turn in games”, reveals the level of
impatience in games, that 11.1%=often, 5.3%=usually, 0.2% =always, had behavior of impatient in games
and could not wait for their turn.
Figure 4.17
The graphical illustration of the responses about the ADHD among SNC
S20 S21 S22 S23 S24 S25 S26 S27 S28 S29 S300
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1
3
5.5
8.3
4.6 4.4
2.6
7.7
2.6
7.5
11.112.5
14.7
11.9
9.3
12.5 12.5
10.7
7.9 7.7 8.1
5.3
OftenUsuallyAlways
4.6.4 Identification of ASD in SNC of SS with SSC
The Table 4.17 below illustrates characteristic of children with impairment of Autism Spectrum
Disorder (ASD). The response of statement 31, “She/he likes to do things repeatedly”, shows that
4.4%=often, 2.3%=usually, 20%=always, liked to play repeatedly. The response of the statement 32,
“She/he felt difficulties to play with class fellows”, shows that 2.8%=often, 3.8%=usually, 3.8%=always,
had problems to play with peers.
Table 4.18
The analysis of the characteristic of the ASD
Statements Not%
Often%
Usually%
Always% Mean SD
31. She/he likes to do things repeatedly. 92.9 4.4 2.3 .20 .09 .365
32.She/he feels difficulties to play with class fellows 93.1 2.8 3.8 .2 .11 .434
33. Dose She/he enjoy sports? 93.1 2.0 4.8 .0 .12 .448
34. She/he speaks like machine and talking unclearly?
93.1 .4 1.0 5.5 .19 .708
35. Dose student like to interact with other class fellows?
93.1 2.2 4.6 0.0 .12 .442
36. She/he has the one sided social behavior. 92.9 2.2 4.6 .2 .12 .460
The response of statement 33, “Dose she/he enjoys sports?” reveals that 2.0%=often, 4.8%
=usually, 0.0% =always, enjoyed sports with the peers. The response of statement 34, “She/he speaks
like machine and talking unclearly?” reveals that 0.4%=often, 1.0=usually, 5.5%=always, spoke like the
machine. The Statement 35, “Dose student like to interact with other class fellows?” gave the degree of
the social behavior of children that 2.2%=often, 4.6%=usually, 0.0%= always, liked to interact with their
class fellows. The result of statement 36“She/he has the one sided social behavior” shows that 2.2%=
often, 4.5%=usually, 2%= always, had one sided behavior.
4.6.5 Identification of the EDC among the SNC with SSC
The Table 4.19 illustrates the characteristics of children with symptoms of emotional disturbance.
The response of statement 37 “She/he interfere the class room activities repeatedly” reveals that
2.2%=often, 2.0%=usually, 0.0%=always, interfered in class room activity. The result of statement 38,
“She/he does not sit quietly”, shows that 1.8 %=often, 2.2%=usually, 4%=always, did not sit in their class
room. The response of statement 39, “He/she has low concentration on learning activity”, shows that
2.6%=often, 1.8%=usually, 0%=always, showed the level of low concentration in the learning.
Table 4.19
Analysis of the main characteristics of the EDC
Statements Not%
Often%
Usually%
Always% Mean SD
37. She/he interfere the class room activities repeatedly. 95.8 2.2 2.0 0.0 .06 .315
38.He/She does not sit quietly 95.6 1.8 2.2 .4 .07 .372
39. He/she has low concentration on learning activity.
95.6 2.6 1.8 0.0 .05 .309
40. He/she does not accept new rules and change. 96.0 2.8 1.2 0.0 .05 .272
41.He/she speaks purposeless 95.8 2.2 2.0 0.0 .05 .315
42. He/she has an aggressive behavior. 95.6 1.2 3.0 0.2 .08 .382
43. He/she jars at and makes fun of other class fellows. 96.6 .4 3.0 0.0 .05 .348
44. He/she often absent from school. 95.6 1.6 1.8 1.0 .08 . 416
45. He/she blames others every time. 95.6 1.4 3.0 0.0 .07 .361
46. He/she has difficulties in working with groups. 95.8 1.4 2.5 .2 .07 .364
The response of the statement of the 40“He/she does not accept new rules and change” shows
that, 2.8%=often, 1.2%=usually, of the SNC did not accept new rules in the class room. The response of
statement 41“He/she speaks purposeless” shows that, 2.2%=often, 2.0%=usually, 0.0%=always, talked
purposely. The statement 42 “He/she has an aggressive behavior”, shows that 1.2%=often, 3.0%=
usually, 0.2%=always, had aggressive behaviors. The response of statement 43 shows that 0.4%=often,
3.0% =usually, adopted attitudes of jar at in class.
Figure 4.18
Bar graph illustration of responses about characteristics of the EDC
S37 S38 S39 S40 S41 S42 S43 S44 S45 S460
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
2.2
1.8
2.62.8
2.2
1.2
0.4
1.61.4 1.4
2
2.2
1.8
1.2
2
3 3
1.8
3
2.5
Oftenusuallyalways
The response of statement 44, that “He/she often absent from school” revealed that
1.6%=often, 1.8%=usually, 1.0%=always, were absent from school. The response of statements 45
“He/she blames others every time” shows that 1.4%=often, 3.0%=usually, blamed others students. The
response of the statement 46, “He/she has difficulties in working with groups” shows that, 1.4%=often,
2.5%=usually, .2%=always had difficulty to work in the groups.
4.6.6 Identification the MRC among the SNC in SSC
The Table 4.20, statements from 47 to 55, shows the characteristics of mental retarded children.
The response of statement “He/she has very poor memory as compare with other peers” shows that,
2.2%=often, 12.1%=usually, 4. %=always, had poor memory. Results of statements 48 “He/she can't read
& decode English & Urdu Book” indicates that, 2.2%=often, 13.3%=usually, and 2.5%= always, had
impairments of decoding of words. Results of statement 49, “He/she has problem to comprehend the
lesson” indicates that, 5.5%=often, 11.3 % = usually, 1.2%=always, had difficulties of the in
comprehending text. The statement 50, “She/he cannot coordinate motor organs and skills” responses
of participants were indication of that 5.5%=often, 3.0%=usualy, 3.0%=always, had problems in
controlling motor organs for movement. The statement S51 were for the naturals requirement of the
MRC indicates that 2.0%= often, 2.2%=usually, .2%= always, had not care for natural requirements. The
statement 52 “He/she loses control of his attention on the lesson” response indicated that 4.2%=often,
10.1%=usually, 1.8%=always, cannot their attention on lesson. The statement 53, “He/she has very poor
abilities to solve basic computations” response of participants about the SNC indicated, 3.4%=often,
12.7%=usually, 1.2%= always had deficits to understand basic computation of mathematics. The
response of statement 54, “He/she is unsocial and had no interest to make friends”, shows that
4.8%=often, 11.1%=usually, 1.0%=always had unsocial behavior with peers.
Table 4.20
Identification of characteristics of the MRC among SNC of SSs
Statements Not%
Often%
Usually%
Always% Mean SD
47. He/she has very poor memory as compare with other peers.
81.6 2.2 12.1 4.0 .39 .850
48. He/she can't read & decode English & Urdu Book. 81.8 2.2 13.3 2.5 .37 .811
49. He/she has problem to comprehend the lesson. 82.0 5.5 11.3 1.2 .32 .719
50. She/he cannot coordinate motor organs and skills. 91.5 5.5 3.0 0.0 .12 .404
51. He/she has not care of natural requirements. 95.5 2.0 2.2 .2 .07 .305
52.He/she loses control of his attention on the lesson 83.8 4.2 10.1 1.8 .30 .722
53. He/she has very poor abilities to solve the basic computations. 82.5 3.4 12.7 1.2 .33 .740
54. He/she is unsocial and has no interest to make friends. 83.0 4.8 11.1 1.0 .30 .703
55. His/her writing is not understandable. 82.4 3.0 10.3 4.2 .35 .833
Figure 4.19
Graphical representation in percentage about the characteristics of the MRC.
S47 S48 S49 S50 S51 S52 S53 S54 S550
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
2.2 2.2
5.5 5.5
2
4.23.4
4.8
3
12.113.3
11.3
32.2
10.1
12.7
11.110.3
OftenusuallyAlways
4.6.7 Screening of the Slow Learners (SL) among the SNC with SSC
Statements 56 to 62 were grouped G, and characteristics of SL were administrated in table 20
and figure. Statements 56, “He/she has low intelligence and is poor performance”, responses of
0.6%=often, 8.5%= usually, 6.3%=always has low intelligence and poor performance in the learning
activity. The responses of the statement 57, “He/she understands the basic computation slowly vs.
peers”, shows that 0.4%=often, 13.1=usually, 1.0=always had the problem in the understanding of the
basic computation. The response of statement 58, “He/she takes concepts of a topic after a lot of
mental efforts” illustrates that 1.2%=often, 11.9%=usually, 1.6%= always had the impairment to
understand the new concepts with great difficulties.
Analysis of statement 59, “He/she lacks of confidence to initiate a work”, shows that
3.0%=often, 9.5%=usually, 1.8%=always had the problems in the starting the new work. The statement
60,“He/she works very hard to get the same level of peers”, shows the levels of efforts that the SNC
require to take to get the higher position in the class , 2.6%=often, 9.7%=usually, 2.4%=always did more
efforts to the same grade as of the peers. Analysis of statement 61, “She/he wants to quit school due to
poor learning outcomes”, shows the level of disappointment of SNC due to low performance, that
0.0%=often of SNC, 7.7%= usually, 1.4%=always wanted to leave the school.
Table 4.21
Analysis the characteristics of the slow learners SL
Statements Not%
Often%
Usually%
Always% Mean SD
56. He/she has low intelligence and is poor performance. 84.5 .6 8.5 6.3 .36 .882
57. He/she understands the basic computation slowly vs. peers. 85.5 .4 13.1 1.0 .30 .730
58. He/she takes concepts of a topic after a lot of mental efforts. 85.3 1.2 11.9 1.6 .30 .739
59. He/she lacks of confidence to initiate a work. 85.5 3.0 9.5 1.8 .27 .707
60. He/she works very hard to get the same level of peers. 85.5 2.6 9.7 2.4 .29 .740
61. She/he wants to quit the school due to poor learning outcomes.
86.9 4.0 7.7 1.4 .24 .648
62. She/he often fails in the final exams. 85.3 5.1 7.7 1.0 .23 .623
Figure 4.20
Graphical representation of the responses about the characteristics of the SL
S56 S57 S58 S59 S60 S61 S620
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0.600000000000001 0.4
1.2
32.6
4
5.1
8.5
13.1
11.9
9.5 9.7
7.7 7.7
6.3
11.6 1.8
2.41.4
1
oftenusuallyalways
The statement 62, “She/he often failed in the final exams”, shows the evaluation and final
assessment of SNC, that 5.1 %=often, 7.7%=usually, and 1.0%=always failed in final examination.
4.6.8 Identification of visual impairments children VIC
Table 4.22
Analysis of the characteristics of the VIC
Statements Not%
Often%
Usually%
Always% Mean SD
63. He/she uses pair of visual
glasses. 98.8 0.2 0.8 0.2 0.02 0.228
64. He/she reads books close to
eyes. 94.3 1.6 2.8 1.0 0.10 0.485
65. He/she often collides with desks
and benches. 94.3 3.8 1.6 0.2 0.08 0.340
66. He/she has difficulties to see
bright objects. 95.8 3.2 .6 0.4 0.05 0.300
67. He/she uses gesture to find
his/her way. 95.4 2.6 1.6 0.4 0.07 0.350
68. He/she rubs eyeballs to see the
objects clearly. 94.5 3.0 1.6 0.6 0.08 0.738
69. He/she cannot read small letters
but read big letters easily. 95.2 3.0 1.4 0.4 0.07 0.344
70. He/she distinguishes between
bright and dark only. 99.0 0.6 0.4 0.0 0.01 0.149
The Group H from statement no 63 to 70 described symptoms of visual impairments children.
Table 4.22 shows responses about VIC. The response of statement 63, “He/she uses pair of visual
glasses” indicates that 0.2%=often, 0.8%=usually, 0.2%= always, used the pair of glasses. The response of
statement 64,”He/she reads books close to eyes”, reveals that 1.6%=often, 2.8%=usually, 1.0%=always,
read books near to their eyes. The response of statement 65, “He/she often collides with desks and
benches”, that 3.8%=often, 1.5%=usually, 0.2%=always collided with benches due to visual impairment.
The analysis of statement 66, “He/she has difficulties to see bright objects”, reveals that 3.2%=often,
0.5%=usually, and 0.4%=always had problem in seeing bright objects.
Figure 4.21
Graphical illustration of characteristics of VIC
S63 S64 S65 S66 S67 S68 S69 S700
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0.2
1.6
3.8
3.2
2.6
3 3
0.600000000000001
0.8
2.8
1.6
0.600000000000001
1.6 1.61.4
0.40.2
1
0.2 0.4 0.40.60000000000000
1 0.4
0
OftenUsuallyalways
The analysis of statement 67, “He/she uses gesture to find his/her way”, shows using of gesture
to locates the ways, that 2.6%=often, 1.6%=usually, 0.4%=always, used their gestures to locate
directions. The analysis of statement 68, “He/she rubs eyeballs to see the objects clearly”, indicates that
3.0%=often, 1.6=usually, 0.6%=always rubbed their eyes to read books and white board clearly. The
response of statement 69, “He/she cannot read small letters but read big letters easily”, reveals that
3.0%=often, 1.4%=usually, 0.4%=always, could not read small letters clearly. The response of statement
70, “He/she distinguishes between bright and dark only”, indicates that 0.6%=often, 0.4%=usually,
distinguished between bright and dark.
4.6.9 Identification of characteristics of hearing impairments (HIC) with SSC
Statements of group I have characteristics of hearing impairment children. Table 4.23 illustrates
the analysis of the characteristics of the HIC. The response of statement 71 “He/she lifts ups ears, when
teacher talks”, indicates that, 0.6%=often, 0.6%=usually and 0.2%=always lift their ears to listen. The
response of statement 72, “She/he often demands to teachers to speak loud”, describes that
0.8%=often, 0.8%=usually, and 0.0%= always demanded teacher to speck loud. The analysis of
statement 73, “She/he demands to speak loud as himself speak loud”, responses indicates that
1.0%=often, 0.6%=usually, demanded to speech loud as they also speak loud. The analysis of statements
74, “He/she locates the source of sound with difficulty”, reveals that 0.6%=often, 0.6%=usually,
0.2%=always located the sources of the sound.
Table 4.23
Analysis of the characteristics of the HIC with SSC
Statements Not%
Often%
Usually%
Always% Mean SD
71. He/she lifts ups ears, when teacher talks. 98.6 .6 .6 .2 .02 .219
72. She/he often demands to teachers to speak loud. 98.4 0.8 0.8 0.0 .02 .200
73. She/he demands to speak loud as he speaks loud. 98.4 1.0 .6 0.0 .02 .184
74. He/she locates the source of sound with difficulty. 98.4 0.6 0.6 0.2 .02 .219
75. He/she requests to repeat the reading again & again loudly. 98.6 0.8 0.8 0.0 .02 .200
76.He/She has difficulties to understand speech in noisy environment
98.4 0.4 1.2 0.0 .03 .228
77. He/she often gestures to talk with class fellows. 98.4 0.8 0.4 0.0 .02 .155
78. He/she sits quietly due to lack of hearing. 98.8 1.2 0.2 0.0 .02 0.141
79.He/She does not response when the school bell rings 98.6 0.0 0.4 0.0 .01 .127
The responses of the statement 75,”He/she requests to repeat reading again & again loudly”
that 0.8%=often, 0.8%=usually, and 0%=always requested to repeat reading again. The response of the
statement 76, “She/he has difficulties to understand speech in noisy environment”, shows that
0.4%=often, 1.2%=usually, and 0%=always had difficulties to understand the speech in noisy
environment. The response of the statement 77, “He/she often gestures to talk with class fellows”,
reveals that 0.8%=often, 0.4%=usually, used their gestures of hands to talk with their class fellows. The
response of statement 78, “He/she sits quietly due to lack of hearing” indicate that 1.2 %= often, 0.2 =
usually, and 0.0%=always, set quietly due to not listening voice of the speaker. The response of
statement 79, “She/he does not response when the school bell rings”, shows that only, 0.4% =usually,
0%=always, did not response to ringing of school bell, it was an indication that hearing level of SNC
leaning in mainstream school had not down level.
Figure 4.22
The graphical illustration of the characteristics of the HIC
S71 S72 S73 S74 S75 S76 S77 S78 S790
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0.600000000000001
0.8
1
0.600000000000001
0.8
0.4
0.8
1.2
0
0.600000000000001
0.8
0.6000000000000010.60000000000000
1
0.8
1.2
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.2
0 0
0.2
0 0 0 0 0
OftenUsuallyalways
4.6.10 Identification the PHC among the SNC
The table 4.24 shows statements from 80 to 83 to reveal the characteristics of PHC. The response of
statement 80, “He/ She have difficulties to move”, shows that 0.2%=often, 0%=usually, 0%=always had
difficulty to move.
Table 4.24
Analysis of the characteristics of PHC
Statements Not%
Often%
Usually%
Always% Mean SD
80. He/ She has difficulties to move. 99.8 0.2 0.0 0.0 .00 .090
81. She/he needs “Bysakhy” stick, wheel chair, etc to move.
99.5 0.2 0.2 0.0 .01 .100
82. She/he has to depend on other for movement.
99.8 0.2 0.2 0.0 .00 .045
83. She/he has difficulties to eat meal.
99.8 0.2 0.0 0.0 .00 .045
The analysis of the statement 81, “She/he needs “Bysakhy” stick, wheel chair, etc to move”, shows that
0.2%=often 0.2%=usually, that used “Bysakhy” to move. The response of the statement 82, “She/he has
to depend on other for movement”, shows that 0.2%=often, and 0.2%=usually depended on others to
move. The response of statement 83, “She/he has to difficulties to eat meal”, reveals that 0.2%=often,
had difficulties to eat meal. The analysis of characteristics of PHC shows that there were low numbers of
SNC who had physical disability learning in mainstream schools.
Figure 4.23
The graphical representation the responses of statements about PHC
S80 S81 S82 S830
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%
0%
0.2% 0.2%
0%
Oftenusuallyalways
4.7 Educational Status of the SNC
The evaluation of learning outcomes gave the degree of performance of SNC. Five main
subjects; English reading, Urdu reading, Dictation of Urdu and English, writing of English and Urdu, and
basic computation (addition, subtraction, and multiplication) were assessed for educational status of
SNC. The stander scale, fair, poor, very poor and nothing, was administrated to assess the level of
learning. Notebooks and reading of text books were taken to evaluate the educational status. Table
4.25& figure 4.24 illustrates the performance of the English reading. It was indicated that a large
number 283(57.2%) of the SNC, had impairment of English reading that they could not read the English
book of their class. The 191(38.6%) read of SNC had very poor reading. The 20(4%) of the SNC had poor
English reading. Only one SNC had fair grade in the English reading
Table 4.25
The status in the English reading of the SNC
Level of the performance frequency Percent %
Fair 1 0.2Poor 20 4.0
Very poor 191 38.6
Nothing 283 57.2
Total 495 100.0
Figure 4.24
Bar graph of showing status of in English reading of SNC
Fair Poor Very poor Nothing0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0.2%4%
38.6%%
57.2%
The status of SNC in english reading
4.7.1 Status of the Urdu reading of the SNC in mainstream schools
Table 4.26
The Status of Urdu reading of SNC in mainstream SS
Level of the performance frequency Percent %
Fair 16 3.2
Poor 49 9.9
Very poor 402 81.2
Nothing 28 5.7
Total 495 100.0
The Condition of Urdu reading of SNC was also very disappointed. As shown in Table 4.26 & Figure 4.25
Figure 4.25
The bar graph showing the status of Urdu reading of SNC
Fair Poor Very poor Nothing0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
3.2 9.9
81.2
5.71649
402
28
The status of SNC in Urdu reading
percentfrequancy
There were 402(81.2%) SNC who had very poor Urdu reading, it indicated that SNC learning in
the mainstream school had poor level of educational performance. 49(9.9%) had poor Urdu reading, and
16(3.2%) fair condition in Urdu reading. percentage of SNC who could not read Urdu at all were
28(5.7%).
4.7.2 Status of the spelling of English and Urdu dictation (Emlah)
Table 4.27
Status of English spelling& Urdu Emlah of the SNC in the mainstream SSs
Level of the performance frequency percent
Fair 0 0
Poor 36 7.3
Very poor 312 63.0
Nothing 147 29.7
Total 495 100.0
The table 4.27 and figure 4.27 below, presents assessment of the dictation of English and Urdu that
312(63%) of the SNC had very poor performance in English spellings, and in Urdu “Emlah”. There were
147(29.7%) of the SNC in the mainstream schools, had nothing performance in English dictation & Urdu
“Emlah”. The SNC who had poor performance in English dictation and Urdu “Emalh” were 36 (7.3%) and
none of SNC of sample got fair grade in English dictation & Urdu “Emlah”. The analysis inducted that
learning outcomes of SNC in mainstream school in Urdu & English dictation and Emlah was not of stander
level.
Figure 4.26
The bar graph showing of the status in English &Urdu dictation
Fair Poor Very poor Nothing0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0
7.3
63
29.7
the status of the english & urdu spelling and dictation
PERCENT
4.7.3 Status of the English and Urdu writing
The SNC had the main difficulties in writing they struggled in copying the words, and had deficits
in expressing their view in written form. The Table 4.28 and Fig 4.27 shows the status of English and
Urdu writing, that a large number 409 (82.6%) of the SNC had very poor performance in English and
Urdu writing. 39(7.9%) the SNC could not write anything, 44(8.9%) of the SNC had poor writing and
3(0.6%) of the SNC had fair writing.
Table 4.28
The status of the writing if the SNC
Level of performance Frequency Percent %
Fair 3 .6
Poor 44 8.9
Very poor 409 82.6
Nothing 39 7.9
Total 495 100.0%
The analysis shows that the most of the SNC learning in the mainstream school had the deficits in the
writing.
Figure 4.27
The graphical representation of the assessment of English and Urdu writing
1%9%
83%
8%
The assement of the engilsh and urdu writing
FairPoorVery poorNothing
4.7.4 Status of Basic Computation of the SNC
The Table 4.29 and figure 4.27 below shows the analysis of assessment of basic computation of SNC.
Table 4.29
Status of the basic computation of the SNC in the mainstream SSs
Level of the performance frequency Percent %
Fair 5 1.0
Poor 51 10.3
Very poor 386 78.0
Nothing 53 10.7
Total 495 100.0
There were 386(78%) of the SNC had very poor condition in the basic computation, the 53(10.7%) of
SNC could not do basic computation 51 (10.3%) of SNC hadpoor status in calculating basic mathematics,
5(1%) of SNC had fair position in computation. Analysis of education status of SNC revealed that there
was no special needs child who had performance above fair grade, all SNC learning in mainstream school
had very low stander of education. The special needs children learning in mainstream school had
difficulties of doing basic mathematics that addition, subtraction, and multiplication. Evaluation of the
learning outcomes revealed an entire picture that there was need to take measures to make better
learning level of SNC.
Figure 4.28
The status of the basic computation of the SNC
1%10%
78%
11%
The status of the basic computation of the SNC
FairPoorVery poorNothing
