Barriers to Inclusive Education in Brune

Barriers to Inclusive Education in Brunei Darussalam
Emily Zhang Xian yu

There has been a growing worldwide commitment to education for children with
special needs in the past few decades, especially through the United Nations’
activities and global statements, which have influenced Brunei Darussalam’s decision
to embrace the concept of inclusive education. This paper briefly describes the
current state of inclusive education and looks at the barriers to including students
with disabilities in Brunei Darussalam since the implementation of inclusive
education in the late 1990’s. Thoughtful strategies are suggested to these barriers.

Introduction
As inclusive education has become a major feature of current curriculum reform in
Brunei Darussalam (Abdul Aziz Umar, 1996), an important concern is how to
improve equity in access to quality education in Brunei Darussalam.
This paper is divided into four sections. The first part of this paper describes how
inclusion differs from mainstreaming and integration followed by a brief development
of Inclusive Education in Brunei Darussalam. The third section highlights the barriers
to the current implementation of inclusion in the country and the final section of the
paper suggests the strategies to address these barriers.
How inclusion differs from mainstreaming and integration

Why inclusion? The words “integration”, “mainstreaming” and “inclusion” are
sometimes substituted for each other, as if they all had exactly the same meaning
(Foreman, 2005). However, there are some major differences between the meanings
of the words.
Integration is a broad term used to refer to a student’s attendance at, or participation
in, activities at a regular school. The term can also refer to the process of transferring
a student to a less segregated setting (Foreman, 2005). In the earlier time, people with
a disability including children were more likely to be put into institutions or special
schools to be separated from others. The changes that have occurred over the last few
decades have meant to allow children attend regular schools but in a separated special
unit or class and this is called to be integrated. Although the students is in a special
class, it is evident that, if that class is in a regular school, the opportunities to interact
with other members of the general school community are much greater that if the
student is in an isolated special school. There is also a greater chance that the student
1

will have siblings or neighbours at the school and will come into contact with
schoolmates in out-of-school situations in the neighbourhood. However, the term
“integration” has fallen out of favour because of the implication that somebody who is
different is being “fitted in” to a regular setting in a tokenistic way (Foreman, 2005).

And Integration presumes that “segregation” exists and students are with their peers
without disabilities part-time. In reality, students who were integrated part-time were
not truly a part of the class and were often involved in activities very different from
the other students in the class (Moore, 1998).
Students are mainstreamed while they are enrolled in or participating in a regular
class. In Australia, New Zealand and other developed countries, mainstreaming is
regarded as the most culturally normative school placement; that is, it is the most
usual type of placement in these cultures. Many parents and school systems consider
that mainstreaming should be the standard placement for all students, except under
exceptional circumstances (Kenny, Shevlin, Noonan Walsh & McNeela, 2005).
Mainstreaming brought students with special education needs into general classrooms
only when they didn’t need specially designed instruction – when they could keep up
with the “mainstream” (Moore, 1998).
Internationally, inclusion is increasingly seen more broadly as a reform that supports
and welcomes diversity amongst all learners (UNESCO, 2001). It means full
inclusion of children with diverse abilities in all aspects of schooling that other
children are able to access and enjoy. It involves regular schools and classrooms
genuinely adapting and changing to meet the needs of all children, as well as
celebrating and valuing differences. This definition of inclusion does not imply that
children with diverse abilities will not receive specialized assistance or teaching

outside of the classroom when required, but rather that this is just one of many options
that are available to, and in fact required of, all children (Loreman and Deppeler
2001).
Educating children part-time in special schools and part-time in regular schools is
not inclusion. Educating children in special, mostly segregated, environments in
regular schools is not inclusion. Educating children in regular classes, but requiring
them to follow substantially different courses of study inters of content and learning
environment to their peers, is also not inclusion (unless all children in a class follow
individual programs).
Integration programs aim to involve children with diverse abilities into the existing
classes and structures within a school. They endeavor to “normalize”, to help a child
fit in to a pre-existing model of schooling. Inclusion differs in that it assumes that all
children are a part of the regular school system from the very beginning of school.
The need, therefore, for children to adapt to a school setting is not an issue as they are
already a part of that system (Loreman 1999).

2

Inclusion is accomplished through educational strategies designed for a diverse
student population and collaboration between educators so that specially designed

instruction and supplementary aids and services are provided to all students as needed
for effective learning (Moore, 1998).
Inclusive education in Brunei
Brunei Darussalam is a small country located on the north-west end of Borneo Island
in South East Asia. It is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations and an
independent Malay Islamic Constitutional Monarchy, which is ruled according to
Islamic values and traditions by the present King His Majesty Sultan Haji Hassanal
Bolkiah Mu’izzadin Waddaulah (Ministry of Industry and Primary Resources, 2004).
The population of Brunei Darussalam is estimated at 414,400 (Brunei Education
Statistic Handbook 2006-2010).
The government has adopted a 7-3-2-2 structure of education for its formal school
system – a pattern representing 7 years of primary education including one year in
preschool, 3 years lower secondary, 2 years upper secondary or GCE “O” Level and 2
years GCE “A” Level / matriculation or pre-University (Ministry of Education,
2004b). It is evident that much has been accomplished within the country over the
past few decades to enhance services and support for students considered to have
special education needs. Statements found in the National Education Policy (Ministry
of Education, 1992, p.7) highlight an education system that aims to:
…give all Brunei children every opportunity to achieve at least an upper
secondary or vocational education…To provide opportunities for all children in

Brunei Darussalam to develop to their full potential so that they play a useful role
in the development of the country…
The focus on providing opportunities for all Bruneian children has led to a practice
of admitting children with special needs, especially those with mild disabilities, into
regular schools. However, many of these children met with academic failure and
subsequently repeated grade levels (Koay, 2007). To arrest the large number of
students who were failing the system, the Ministry of Education introduced special
education into mainstream schools to provide the needed assistance to help children
and youth with special needs cope better (Csapo & Omar, 1996). The adoption of the
Special Education Proposal by the Ministry of Education in 1994 was a turning point
in the development of special education in Brunei Darussalam (Koay,1996).
Relevant government policies have been established to facilitate development. The
Declaration of Rights of Disabled Persons (UN, 1975) calls for member countries to
support human rights, education, integration, full employment, and conditions of
economic and social progress for persons with disabilities. The Convention on the
Rights of the Child reaffirms the rights of all children to equal education without
3

discrimination within the mainstream education system (UN, 1989). In 1994,
representatives from 92 governments including Brunei Darussalam and 25

international organizations attended the World Conference on Special Needs
Education in Salamanca, Spain (Norjum, 2002). The Salamanca Statement and
Framework for Action on Special Needs Education (UNESCO, 1994) urged all
governments to adopt, as a matter of law or policy, the principles of inclusive
education.
The former Minister of Education, during the opening address of the 1 st National
Conference on Special Education in 1996 (Abdul Aziz, 1996), stressed that:
We must look at how the system can better serve all children, including children
with special needs who require special education and related services if they are
to realize their full potential… The special education, or special needs agenda in
Brunei Darussalam, is an essential element of the drive for education for all. The
emphasis is on inclusive education where the aim is to respond to the needs of all
children.
All children in Brunei are now entitled to 12 years of free education in government
schools. Under the Compulsory Education Order of 2007, attendance during the first
nine years is mandatory for children of school age (Fitzgerald, 2010). In March 2005,
Brunei Darussalam became one of the most recent members of the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The government is
committed to ensuring “Education for All” and the provision of “Inclusive Education”
in accord with UNESCO policies.

Relevant literacy described Learning Assistance Model as the implementation of
special education into regular schools in Brunei Darussalam. The Special Education
Needs Assistance (SENA) teachers are responsible for identifying students with
special needs by using various screening tests designed by SEU (SEU, 1998a). A draft
Individual Education Plan (IEP) is prepared by the SENA teacher, with input from
class teachers and parents. The draft IEP is then presented to the school Based Team
(SBT), comprising the head teacher as chairperson, SENA teacher, regular class
teacher and parents (SEU, 1998c). The SBT discusses the various
adaptations/modifications in the draft IEP to ensure that the student receives an
appropriate education program to meet his or her individual needs. Members of the
SBT collaborate and discuss ways to ensure the provision of appropriate resources
and support for students with special needs at the school level (SEU, 1998b). The
teamwork and successful partnerships generated by the SBT help promote decisionmaking and shared responsibility, thus translating inclusive education into reality
(Norjum, 2000).
Once the IEP for a student has been approved, it is implemented and monitored by
the LAT in collaboration with regular class teachers. From time to time, depending on
4

the needs of the student, he or she may be pulled out for a short period to the Learning
Assistance Centre (LAC) for individual or small group instruction by the LAT. In the

LAC, the LATs use a variety of teaching materials and teaching strategies, such as
direct instruction, task analysis, and reinforcement such as token economy system,
precision teaching and record keeping procedures to monitor student progress. The
LAT also helps the class teachers to plan and make instructional adoptions for
students with special needs, demonstrates teaching techniques and assists to monitor
the student’s progress (Koay & Sim, 2004).
Existing Barriers
Despite all efforts and achievements in Brunei Darussalam related to the Education
for All initiative, a daunting array of challenge still confronts policy makers, school
staff and professionals working in the field of special education (Fitzgerald, 2010).
There are also many barriers to meaningful inclusion, however in this paper, three
main barriers namely Teachers’ attitude; insufficient human resources and Community
attitude are discussed.
1. Teachers’ attitudes
Inclusion implies accommodating the learning environment and curriculum to meet
the needs of all students and ensuring that all learners belong to a community.
Inclusion or lack of it is also about equity of access to quality education and can be
related to aspects of social disadvantage, oppression and discrimination (United
Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific [UNESCAP],
2002). Unfortunately many educators have reservations about inclusion or supporting

the wide spread placement of students with special needs in general classrooms
(Bradshaw, 2004; 2003).
The enrolment of a child with a disability will sometimes require considerable effort
on the teacher’s part, and pre-service teachers, teachers and principals often worry
that they will not have the teaching competencies or physical resources needed to
include children with a disability in their classes (Lambe & Bones 2006; Bailey & du
Plessis 1998).
In general, regular school teachers are opposed to having disabled students in their
classrooms (Jamieson, 1984; Jones, Gottlieb, Guckin & Yoshida, 1978; Knoff, 1985).
Some studies suggest attitudes toward inclusion were strongly influenced by the
nature of disabilities (Avramidis, Bayliss & Burden, 2000; Dean, Elrod &
Blackbourn, 1999). The more severe or profound the students’ disability the more
likely such a child may be rejected by regular school teachers, non-disabled peers in
an inclusive setting, and parents of non-disabled children (Heward, 1996). Among the
partially or mildly disabled students who are includable in ordinary schools, regular
school teachers may prefer more those who have learning disorders and might prefer
5

least those with mental and behavioural disorders (William & Algozzine, 1979;
Vandivier & Vandivier, 1981).

One possible reason for this stance or resistance seems to be due to regular teachers’
lack of appropriate skills to properly help severely disabled students in mainstream
schools.
2. Teacher/pupil ratio and insufficient human resources
Looking at the past 15 years since Brunei implemented Inclusive Education, more
than 300 local teachers have acquired tertiary qualifications in the field at Certificate,
Bachelor or Masters Degree levels. A majority of these teachers have completed their
studies within the country, taking courses developed by the University of Brunei
Darussalam (UBD), in collaboration with the Special Education Unit of Ministry of
Education. Many additional government scholarships have been awarded to local
citizens to study developments in the field abroad and obtain internationally
recognized qualifications at overseas institutions. The expertise they have developed
and the skills that they have acquired have generally been put to good use in schools
upon their return. These Special Education Needs Assistance (SENA) teachers in
government primary schools are assigned full-time responsibility for students with
special needs in their respective schools, equivalent arrangements are not generally
provided at secondary level. Many secondary teachers have obtained relevant
university qualifications to work as SENA teachers over the past ten years, with direct
government sponsorship and support (Koay, 2008; Lim, Mak, & Koay, 2006).
However, few have ultimately been assigned to positions like full-time special

education needs coordinators (SENCOs) or SENA teachers in government secondary
schools upon completion of their studies. Direct, ongoing assistance for students with
special needs and consultative and collaborative support for their teachers has been
limited accordingly. In the non-government schools, fewer than 10% of schools
currently employ qualified special education teaching staff to support students with
SEN (Fitzgerald, 2010).
The need for additional funds to be provided to schools for the purposes of educating
children with diverse abilities and impairments has long been recognized by
researchers (O’Grady 1990; O’Shea and O’shea 1998).
Teachers and parents unfamiliar with the terminology or the conditions involved can
often become anxious about the capacity of schools to include children with
disabilities (Florian & Rouse 2001; Sharpe & Howes, 2003; Szecsi & Giambo, 2007).
When insufficient human and material resources are available to assist classroom
teachers in providing relevant educational activities for those who require extensive
support, the problems are compounded. Parents may seek alternative placements for
the children concerned in external community facilities or programs that seem able to

6

provide more assistance, in Brunei, they go for Pusat Ehsan Al-Ameerah Al-Hajjah
Maryam, Pusat Kemahiran Belia and Pulaie Centre (SEU, 2002).
During an interview by The Brunei Times, Jasmin Ahmad, the coordinator for Pusat
Ehsan Al-Ameerah Al-Hajjah Maryam mentioned that inclusive education has its
benefits, but also pointed out that special needs individuals need proper attention (The
Brunei Times, 2008). The current high teacher-pupil ratio in Brunei shows that paying
individual attention to students in large classes is very difficult (Yoong, Lourdusamy,
Nannestad, & Veloo, 2001; Yusop, Douglas, & Mak, 2001; Vaiyatvutjamai &
Clements, 2004), including students with disabilities further increases the
complexities of a progressively more difficult and demanding job.
Specific strategies and action plans are urgently required within both the government
and private school sectors to address the matter.
3. Community Attitudes
Within Brunei Darussalam, community support for those with special needs is
widespread. Sufficient financial donations have been garnered from business
organizations and general community members to enable the establishment and
maintenance of a range of non-government organizations to support children of
school age who have very high support needs. These include SMARTER (the Society
for the Management of Autism Related Issues in Training, Education and Resources),
Learning ladders (for children with autism) and Pusat Ehsan Al-Ameerah Al-Hajjah
Maryam (for those with intellectual disabilities). Media coverage of special events for
children with disabilities is extensive and community members and volunteers
provide regular, on-going assistance at the facilities listed. However, the interest
shown and support provided often reflects undertones of sympathy, care, charity,
abnormality, separation and protection. There is little emphasis upon the
implementation of inclusive educational approaches or equal educational rights for the
children involved (Fitzgerald, 2010). The emphasis on “special education” seems
actually is doing more “segregating” than “inclusion”. Parental demand has generally
fuelled the growth of such organizations. Families typically seek placement for their
children at such centers if government schools have difficulty meeting their specific
needs and cannot match the facilities and services provided. It is stated that:
… under the MoCYS, indicates that a total of 176 individuals are enrolled at
these centers. These children may or may not be attending school whether primary or
secondary on a full time basis. They are registered to attend the Centre programs on a
regular basis at least once or twice a week. In most instances the majority of schoolaged individuals were placed at these centers due to parents’ choice … (UNESCO,
1998)

7

Although relying primarily upon charitable support, the community organizations
listed offer individualized programs for the children however, in separate, well
resourced, but segregated facilities.
Thoughtful Strategies
There is no doubt significant efforts have been made since mid nineties to introduce
more inclusive educational approaches in Brunei Darussalam. Research at the same
time showed barriers and challenges in the file. However, new thoughtful strategies
and commitments are required to ensure the continuation of this process.
1. Teacher training
As Hobbs and Westling (1998) suggested that “the degree of success of inclusion can
be related to several factors, perhaps the most important being teachers’ preparation,
attitudes, and opportunity for collaboration’ (p.13). Positive attitudes towards children
with diverse abilities are essential to the success of inclusion programs; these
attitudes, however, can, and need to be fostered through training and positive
experiences with children with diverse abilities. Teacher education programs that
engage participants in knowledge construction and heterogeneous classroom teaching
and learning are necessary, but it also essential that teacher training institutions
provide relevant opportunities for pre-service teachers to develop personal
philosophies that promote classroom environments supportive of participation and
achievement for all learners.
The existing training programs for special education teachers - pre-service and inservice training in the country should carry on as several studies have suggested that
teachers trained in special education are more positively inclined to include students
with disabilities into regular classes compared to their counterparts without any such
training (Kelly, 1994; Stoler, 1992).
At the mean time, training for regular classroom teacher should not be neglected.
Lack of understanding of students with SEN may cause exclusion and discrimination;
it is not surprising to find that mainstream classroom teachers, who have limited
experience of teaching SEN students, were less accepting of them when compared to
teachers in special schools. The heavy demands placed on them in their workplaces,
and the long-standing perspective that students with SEN were already adequately
catered for, reduced their interest in and feeling of responsibility for such students.
Therefore, the appropriate training not only has a positive impact on regular class
teachers’ attitudes but it also significantly enhances their confidence in teaching in
inclusive classrooms.
2. Inclusion requires curriculum adaptations and accommodations

8

Issues surrounding curriculum provision to children with diverse abilities and their
peers in inclusive settings are central to successful inclusion (Margolis and Truesdell
1987; Clough 1988; Gormley and MsDermott 1994; Carpenter 1997; Cole and
McLeskey 1997; Loreman 1997).
A suitable curriculum for disabled learners is one that equips learners with practical
skills useful for leading a productive and meaningful life (Australian Education
Council, 1991). Such a desirable curriculum should be flexible to address individual
differences and take into consideration the dynamic nature of life that change with
time and technology (Olivier & Williams, 2005). Flexibility of the curriculum is even
more important for students with intellectual difficulties (Donald, Lazarus &
Lolwana, 1997). A flexible curriculum might make it possible to vary the teaching
strategies, assessment techniques, and counseling sessions. In addition, the ideal
curriculum should also have adequate social and ecological validity (Mash & Terdal,
1988). Students with special needs require more practical than academic skills
(Martinez, 1987) which they should be able to use insightfully and productively
(Trafton & Claus, 1994). The curricula should also emphasize social skills as such
skills are more important to disabled than non-disabled students (Fields, 1997).
The Special Education Unit in conjunction with the Curriculum Development
Department produced a curriculum guide for students with high support needs (SEU,
2005). The guide, which is in form of intervention lesson plans, focuses on the
following topics: communication; gross and fine motor skills; social skills; self care;
health and safety; Islamic religious education; self-direction; functional academics;
leisure skills; work skills; information communication technology (ICT) skills;
assessment; and individualized education plans (IEP). The curriculum guide was
officially launched and explained to teachers at a conference organized by the
Ministry of Education (SEU, 2007; Lim, 2007a,b; Yeo, 2007). However there are not
many relevant researches on how the curriculum has been adapted in inclusive
classroom and the result is not clear.
In fact, there needs to be differentiation of the curriculum materials for students with
additional needs rather than a watering-down of what is presented to the remainder of
the class (Westwood, 2001) and it is simply unachievable just by a regular classroom
teacher. Given our cultural, racial, economic, and religious diversity, the idea that one
educator working alone can successfully meet the widely diverse needs of all students
seems outdated and impractical. A teacher working alone with traditional teaching
methods (e.g., teacher-directed, predominately independent or competitive student
work structure; the same performance standard for all children) will be frustrated by
student diversity. There is commonly the need for additional support in planning and
implementing the learning and teaching adaptations. The support can come from
specialists within the school or from a broader range of special personal within the
education jurisdiction or beyond (Bello, 2006; Broderick, Mehta-Parakh, & Reid,
2005).
9

Generally, to achieve a successful curriculum, collaborative planning can be
introduced to inclusive schools in Brunei, it is a team effort in which each member of
the team supports the others in developing appropriate instructional plans and in
designing differentiated learning and teaching activities for students with additional
needs (Conway, 2005). In Brunei Darussalam, Regular Teacher (RT), Special
Education Needs Assistance Teacher (SENA), instructional assistants or
paraprofessionals, community volunteers and specialists need to work cooperatively
on curriculum adaptation and implementation in order to maximize the participation
for students with high support needs.
3. Community organizations
It is evident that considerable effort has been expended by existing community
organizations namely SMARTER, Learning Ladders and Pusat Ehsan, to ensure that
appropriate facilities, equipment, resources and staff are available to support students
with high support needs within Brunei Darussalam. In this regard, what has been
achieved must be considered exemplary. It is also evident, however, that these well
establishments entail a high degree of separation and exclusion from mainstream
educational process. They reflect more traditional, segregated approaches to the
provision of educational opportunities for students with special needs, rather than the
inclusive education models now being promoted at national and international levels
(Fitzgerald, 2010).
Similar study of implementing Inclusive Education in Hong Kong by Don-il Kim
(2003) point out, the Hong Kong government’s government policy support full
participation in education and promote equal opportunities for children with SEN,
however, many mainstream schools are not ready to admit students with SEN,
especially those with more severe disabilities – and many students and parents share
this view – because of lack of understanding and prejudice against people with
disabilities, and a belief that it is better for children with a disability to be educated in
special schools or segregated settings. Having investigated the issue involved, the
government put some effort into promoting integration and introduced the Pilot
Project on integration in 1997 (Cheung, & Hu, 2007).
Therefore, close collaboration between representatives from the Ministry of
Education and community agencies mentioned previously to enhance national
provisions for students with high support needs is important. Some sharing of
resources and delineation of complementary school and external agency
responsibilities may help resolve existing dilemmas. Centers established by such
community organizations provide viable examples of the facilities, staff and resource
levels needed to deliver relevant, individualized programs for such children. Research
has shown that the inconsistence of IEP when such students move from primary
school to secondary school in Brunei Darussalam. Approximately 426 students in
10

government schools follow individualized remedial education plans during their
primary schooling (UNESCO, 2008). These plans are specifically designed to address
their learning difficulties and needs. SENA teachers in the respective primary schools
help implement such plans. However, the number of students with IEP decreased
dramatically when they move to the secondary level. In the same document, the total
number of SN children in secondary school level was only 80. While comparable
provisions remain unavailable in secondary school, it is likely that parents will
continue to seek alternative placements for their children (Fitzgerald, 2010). But with
continuing effort to promote inclusion and improvements in educational practice,
parents should see less need for separate programs and alternative choices.

Conclusion
In the past decade, Brunei Darussalam has achieved significant developments in
promoting the practice of inclusive education within its mainstream schools. To
inform the future direction and development of inclusive education policy and
practice in Brunei Darussalam, it is important that current practices related to school
and tertiary levels be monitored and evaluated. This paper discussed three main
barriers to beneficial and meaningful inclusive education in the country. In fact, it
must always remembered that barriers are often temporal and that with determination,
effort, resources, time and further strategies planned and developed, their effects can
certainly be reduced and eventually eliminated.
With suitable opportunities to maximize children’s potential, there is a far greater
chance that they will become socially active, productive, contributing community
members. As Lindqvist (as cited in UNESCO, 2005) wrote some 15 years ago, “it is
not our education systems that have a right to certain types of children. Therefore, it is
the school system of a country that must be adjusted to meet the needs of all children”
(p.13).

11

Word count: 4488
References
Abdul Aziz bin Begawan Pehin Udana Khatib Dato Seri Paduka Haji Awang Umar,
Pehin Orang Kaya Laila Wijaya Dato Seri Setia Awang. (1996). Opening Address. In
Conference Proceedings of the First National Conference on Special Education (pp.15). Bandar Seri Begawan: Special Education Unit.
Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P. & Burden, R.(2000). A survey into mainstream teachers’
attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the
ordinary schools in one local educational authority. Educational Psychology, 29(2),
193-213.
Bello, D.A. (2006). The status of special education services in Catholic high schools:
Attributes, challenges, and needs. Exceptional Children, 72, 461-481.
Bradshaw, L.G. & Mundia, L. (2004). The construct of disability. Paper presentation
for SEAMEO-UNESCO International Conference on Education in the ASEAN
Region, Conference Proceedings, Bangkok, Thailand. May 25,2004.
Bradshaw, L.G. (2003). Brunei SENA teachers speak out. Studies in Education, 8(1),
1-10.
Broderick,A., Mehta-Parakh, H., & Reid, D.K. (2005). Differentiating instruction for
disabled students in inclusive classrooms. Theory into Practice, 44, 194-202.
Carrington, S. (2006). Developing an inclusive school culture. In M. Keeffe & S.
Carrington(Eds.), Schools and diversity. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education
Australia
Cheung, H.Y.& Hu, L.H.M. (2007). Conceptions and challenges within the inclusive
Asian classroom. In Phillipson, S.N.(Ed.), Learning diversity in the Chinese
classroom: Contexts and practice for students with special needs (pp 65-93). Hong
Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Conway, R. (2005). Adapting curriculum, teaching and learning strategies, in
12

Inclusion in Action (3rd edition) (pp 114-178). Melbourne, Australia:
Australia Pty Ltd.

Harcourt

Dean, B.R., Elrod, M., & Blackbourn, G.F.(1999). Rural General Education
-Teachers’ Opinion of Adaptations. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 18(1), 5-11.
Fisher, J. (2007). Teacher leadership and organizational change: A teacher leader’s
experience in a P-12 school. Toowoomba, Queensland: University of Southern
Queensland.
Fitzgerald, K.W. (2010). Enhancing Inclusive Educational Practices within Secondary
Schools in Brunei Darussalam. The Journal of International Association of Special
Education, 11(1), 48-55.
Florian, L. & Rouse, M. (2001). Inclusive practice in English secondary schools:
Lessons learned. Cambridge Journal of Education, 31(3), 399-412.
Foreman, P. (2005). Introducing inclusion in education. In Inclusion In Action (3 rd
Edition) (pp 2-41). Melbourne, Australia: Harcourt Australia Pty Ltd.
Heward, W.L.(1996). Exceptional Children: an introduction to special education.
Englewood Cliffs, CA: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Hines, J.T. (2008). Making collaboration work in inclusive high school classrooms:
Recommendations for principals. Intervention in School and Clinic,43(5), 277-282.
Jamieson, J.D. (1984). Attitudes of Educators Towards the Handicapped. In
R.L.Jones(Ed.), Attitudes and Attidude Changein Special Education: Throy and
Practice (pp206-222). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
Jones, R.L.,Gottlieb, J.,Guckin, S.,&Yoshida, R.K. (1978). Evaluating Mainstreaming
programs: models, caveats, considerations and guidelines, Exceptional Children, 44,
588-601.
Kenny, M., Shevlin, M., Noonan Walsh, P., & McNeela, E. (2005). Accessing
mainstream: Examing the struggle for parents of children who have learning
difficulties. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 5, 11-19.
Koay, T.L & Sim, W.K. (2004) Thoughtful Strategies For Inclusive Classrooms in
Brunei Darussalam, International Journal of Special Education, 2004 Vol 19(2), 1-13.
Lambe, J., & Bones, R. (2006). Student teachers’ perceptions about inclusive
classroom teaching in Northern Ireland prior to teaching practice experience.
European Journal of Special needs Education, 21, 167-186.

13

Lim, L. (2007a). The processes and practices in curriculum delivery. Paper presented
at the Curriculum Guide for Students with High Support Needs Conference organized
by the Special Education Unit, Ministry of Education, Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei
Darussalam, 3-4, September, 2007.
Lim, L. (2007b). Reference framework for the effective use of the curriculum guide
for students with high support needs. Paper presented at the Curriculum Guide for
Students with High Support Needs Conference organized by the Special Education
Unit, Ministry of Education, Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei Darussalam, 3-4,
September, 2007.
Loreman, T., Deppeler, J.M. (2009). Inclusive Education in Victoria: The UNESCO
Education for All 2000 Assessment, National Council on Intellectual Disability, ACT
Australia, pp.13-17.
Moore, C. (1998). Educating students with disabilities in general education
classrooms: A summary of research. University of Oregon: Oregon. Retrieved from
http://www.bsnpta.org/geeklog/public_html/filemgmt/filemgmt_data/files/Inclusion_
Research_Summary.pdf
Norjum binti Haji Yusop, Hajah. (2000) Call to work as a “School Based Team” News
Express, p.7.
Sharpe, M.N. & Hawes, M.E. (2003). Collaboration between general and special
education: Making it work: Issue Brief. National Centre on secondary Education and
Transition, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.ncset.org/.
Special Education Unit (1998a). Special Education Handbook for LATs. Bandar Seri
Begawan: Ministry of Education.
Special Education Unit (1998b). Special Education Handbook for teachers. Bandar
Seri Begawan: Ministry of Education.
Special Education Unit (1998c). Special Education Handbook for headmasters.
Bandar Seri Begawan: Ministry of Education.
Special Education Unit (2002). Annual report. Bandar Seri Begawan: Ministry of
Education.
Special Education Unit (2005). Curriculum guide for students with high support
needs. Bandar Seri Begawan: Curriculum Development Department.
Special Education Unit (2007). Curriculum Guide for Students with High Support
needs Conference organized by the Special Education Unit, Ministry of Education,
14

Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei Darussalam, 3-4, September, 2007.
Szecsi, T. & Giambo, D.A. (2007). Inclusive educational practices around the world:
An introduction. Childhood Education, 5(2/3), 163-177.
The Brunei Times. (2008). Is Inclusive education good for special needs students?
Retrieved
from
http://www.bt.com.bn/home_news/2008/08/13/is_inclusive_education_good_for_spec
ial_needs_students.
UNESCO. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework on Special Needs
Education. Paris: Author.

UNESCO. (2005). Guidelines for inclusion: Ensuring access to education for all.
Paris: United nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
UNESCO. (2009). Brunei Darussalam National Report on the provision of inclusive
quality primary and secondary education for children with special needs and special
educational needs. Jakarta, Indonesia, 3-5 November 2009.
Retrieved from http: //unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001868/186836e/pdf
United Nations Economic and Social Commission For Asia and the Pacific
(NESCAP). (2002). Summary paper: Current trends impacting the situation of people
with disabilities. [Electronic Version]. Retrieved from http://unescap.org/decade/ots
%20-5zopdf/SUMMARY_PAPER3.DOC
Vaiyatvutjamai, P., & Clements, M.A.K. (2004). Analyzing errors made by middle
school students on six linear in equations tasks. In I.P.A. Cheong, H.S. Dhindisa, I.J.
Kyeleve, and O. Chukwu, Globalization trends in science, mathematics and technical
education: Proceedings of the annual conference of the Department of Science,
Mathematics and Technical Education (pp 173-182). Gadong: University of Brunei
Darussalam.
Vandivier, P.L.,& Vandivier, S.C.(1981). Teacher attitudes towards mainstreaming
exceptional students, Journal for Special Educators, 7, 381-388.
Watson, E.(2009). Inclusion: An examination of attitude congruency within
elementary schools. Unpublished Ed.D., Walden University, United States,
Minnesota.
Williams, R.J., & Algozzine, B.(1979). Teachers’ attitudes toward mainstreaming, The
Elementary School Journal, 80(2), 63-67.

15

Yeo, V. (2007). Implementing instructional strategies for and activities for students
with intellectual impairment. Paper presented at the Curriculum Guide for Students
with High Support Needs Conference organized by the Special Education Unit,
Ministry of Education, Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei Darussalam, 3-4, September,
2007.
Yoong, W.K., Lourdusamy, A., Nannestad, C.L., & Veloo, P.K. (2001). Concerns of
mathematics and science teachers in Brunei Darussalam. In W.K.Yoong and
M.A.K.Clements, Energizing science, mathematics, and technical education for all:
Proceedings of the sixth annual conference of the Department of Science and
Mathematics Education (pp 354-363). Gadong: University of Brunei Darussalam
Yusop, N., Douglas, L., & Mark, L. (2001). Brunei mathematics screening tests for
lower primary levels: A preliminary study. In W.K.Yoong and M.A.K.Clements,
Energizing science, mathematics, and technical education for all: Proceedings of the
sixth annual conference of the Department of Science and Mathematics Education (pp
257-263). Gadong: University of Brunei Darussalam.

16