2.

1 Models of Disability
The concept of disability has been existent for ages. The Bible chronicles the presence of persons
who are blind and crippled who needed to be healed. Cultural narratives like "The Hunchback of Notre
Dame" and "Kampanerang Kuba" depict disability as a source of fear and ridicule. Even Philippine history
has records of disability through the Apolinario Mabini, who was unable to walk because of a physically
impairing condition called poliomyelitis. Clearly, disability cuts across countries, cultures, and timelines.
But perhaps it is part of human nature to react negatively to anything perceived as different or out of the
ordinary. There is often resistance, especially when people are met with situations that they are unfamiliar
with. Persons with disabilities (PWDs) are not exempted from this type of treatment.
How PWDs were once treated is not something any nation would be proud of. Historically, people
formed opinions and reactions toward disability in a similar pattern. It was consistent for almost every
country: society first took notice of those with physical disabilities because they immediately stood out,
then they noticed those with less apparent developmental conditions because they acted differently. As
soon as the "deviants" were "identified," segregation, exclusion, isolation, and other forms of violence and
cruelty followed. Prior to the Age of Enlightenment in the 1700s, these were common practices highly
accepted by society. Such practices, which are now considered discriminatory and violating of human
rights, were evident in all aspects of community: living spaces, health care, education, and work.
For instance, there was a time when the status of PWDs was in question. In earlier times, PWDs
were seen as social threats capable of contaminating an otherwise pure human species (Kisanji 1999).
Therefore, as much as communities needed to be protected from them, PWDs also had to be protected
from society. Some people saw them as menaces, while others treated them as objects of dread, pity,
entertainment, or ridicule. At best, they were put on a pedestal and perceived as Holy Innocents or eternal
children who could do no wrong (Wolfensberger 1972). At worst, they were killed or treated as sub
humans devoid of any rights (Kisanji 1999, Wolfensberger 1972).
Sociology reminds us that human behavior must always be studied in relation to cultural, historical,
and socio-structural contexts. In fact, the best way to understand why people think or act the way they do
is by looking at what was happening to their community at a certain point in time. Events tend to shape
one's beliefs and values system. As such, it is important that we examine historical highlights to
appreciate man's perspectives on disability (see Figure 2.1).
 Smart's study in 2004 (as cited in Retief and Letsosa, 2018) emphasizes that models of disability
are important as they serve several purposes: (1) they provide definitions of disability, (2) they offer
"explanations of causal and responsibility attributions", (3) they are based on "perceived needs," (4) they
inform policy, (5) they are not "value-neutral," (6) they define the academic disciplines that focus on
disability, (7) they "shape the self-identity of PWDs," and (they can provide insight on how prejudices and
discriminations occur. This last statement, in particular, has proven to be very powerful in helping us see
how, to a certain extent, society is unconsciously led to respond to disability.

2.1.a The Moral/Religious Model

The Medieval age is said to have started from AD 476, the year the Roman Empire fell, and ended
toward the early 1800s, eventually ushering in the Renaissance age and Age of Discovery. This period
saw the Church as one of the most influential figures in Europe. The idea of God as an all-powerful being
was so strong in man's consciousness that it affected the way society treated PWDs at the time. Parents
who bore children with disabilities were seen from within a spectrum where on one end, God was
punishing them for a sin that needed to be atoned, and at the other extreme, He was blessing the family
by giving them a precious gift that only they could care for. The middle ground was to see disability as a
test of faith and an opportunity to redeem oneself through endurance, resilience, and piety (Niemann
2005 as cited in Retief and Letsosa 2018).
Such perspectives are rooted in a moral or religious model of disability, which sees disability as
either a blessing or a curse. It is characterized by notions of charity and caretaking. However, Jackson
(2018) adds that protection is also a primary concern as there is an instinct to protect both persons with
disabilities for their vulnerability and the economic and social order which might be disrupted by "deviant
members" of society. It is considered the oldest model of disability and is evident in many religious
traditions. For instance, biblical scripture would refer to persons with chronic illnesses like leprosy as
unclean, while those considered demonically possessed may actually have had mental illnesses (McClure
2007 as cited in Retief and Letsosa 2018) or seizure disorders. In one strand of the moral/ religious
model, disability is equated with the sin, evilness, or spiritual ineptness of either the PWD or of a PWD's
family member. Such a belief can then cause not just the PWD's isolation but also the exclusion of the
entire family unit from communal events (Rimmerman 2013 as cited in Retief and Letsosa 2018). On the
other hand, for those who view disability as a blessing, disability either becomes one's ticket to heaven or
an opportunity toward character development.
In addition, some cultures who ascribe to a moral/religious model of disability may also lean
toward a type of mystical narrative. Their belief is that disabilities may impair some senses yet heighten
others, thereby "granting him or her 'special abilities to perceive, reflect, transcend, be spiritual"" (Olkin
1999 as cited in Retief and Letsosa 2018). For the most part, the core response to this model was the
establishing of segregated institutions where PWDs could be kept. In the United States, United Kingdom,
and Australia, asylums for the "mentally ill, retardates, degenerates, and defectives" were built (Jackson
2018). Segregated residential schools and workhouses with dormitories located miles away from town
centers were also erected. Although the moral/religious model is not as dominant now as it used to be
during the Medieval times, the perspective is still reflected in some places where religion plays a huge
influence on daily life.

2.1.b The Biomedical/Individual Model

Historians and scientists alike consider the Copernican Revolution, that is, the discovery of
Nicolaus Copernicus that the center of the universe was the sun and not the Earth, is one of the most
controversial yet significant discoveries of all time. It was revolutionary and bold because it dared to
contradict the Bible as well as then-considered fundamental truths. But it was a breakthrough that
triggered major changes in the fields of science, philosophy, theology, and education. Most evident was
its contribution to scientific and technological advancements. What was not as apparent was how it paved
the way for people to also shift mind-sets from a religious perspective to a more evidence-based model of
disability called the biomedical (medical) model. Here, PWDs are seen as persons who are ill and meant to
be treated or "made more normal." Olkin (1999 as cited in Retief & Letsosa 2018: 2-3) wrote:
"Disability is seen as a medical problem that resides in the individual. It is a defect in or failure of a
bodily system and as such, is inherently abnormal and pathological. The goals of intervention are cure,
amelioration of the physical condition to the greatest extent possible, and rehabilitation (i.e ., the
adjustment of the person with the disability to the condition and to the environment). Persons with
disabilities are expected to avail themselves of the variety of services offered to them and to spend time in
the role of patient or learner being helped by trained professionals" (p. 26).
Whereas a moral/religious perspective sees disability as something permanent, the biomedical
(medical) model considers disability as a "glitch" the PWD is born into, which needs assessment and
fixing. While Oliver (1990) refers to the model as the individual model, Nankervis, 2006 as cited in
Jackson, 2018, p.3 describes it to be a normative model based on a person's levels of deficiency
"compared to a normative state" (Jackson 2018). Such a perspective pushes forth the idea that PWDs
have problems. It also reinforces the notion that those "without disabilities" (i.e., the able-bodied or
typically developing) are superior to those with disabilities, and that they have a primary responsibility
over the welfare of the disabled. Most interventions are thus devoted to making sure that the PWD
catches up with his/her peers – a practice that is very much ingrained in society to this day (see Figure
2.2).

It was during the 15th century when more schools for PWDs started to emerge in Europe. These
first special schools were built by private philanthropic institutions. Although they initially catered only to
those with sensory impairments such as deafness and blindness, other schools soon started accepting
other disability types into their student roster. Interestingly, the curriculum for such educational institutions
was different from that of public schools (Kisanji 1999). In special schools, the main focus was on building
the vocational skills of students-a clear sign that the biomedical model sees PWDs as different from the
majority. The idea of institutionalizing or bringing PWDs to asylums or hospitals for custodial care when
they have become too difficult to manage also reached its peak with the reinforcement of the biomedical
model (Jackson, 2018; Pritchard, 1960 and Bender, 1970 as cited in Kisanji, 1999).

2.1.c The Functional/Rehabilitation Model

The scientific breakthroughs experienced from the time of Copernicus up until the early 1900s
brought about changes in all aspects of life, including warfare and the concept of power. When World War
I happened, communities witnessed perfectly healthy people leave to serve the country only to come back
disabled physically, neurologically, or mentally. It was then that people started to realize that not all
disabilities are inborn. Physical and Occupational Therapies soon became prevalent modes of
rehabilitation for much of the service-related injuries the soldiers sustained (Shaik & Shemjaz 2014)
(National Rehabilitation Information Center, 2018).
The functional/rehabilitation model is quite similar to the biomedical model in that it sees the PWD
as having deficits. These deficits then justify the need to undergo rehabilitate intervention such as
therapies, counseling, and the like in the aim of reintegrating the disabled into society. The main
difference between the two models is in the concept of habilitation and rehabilitation. The biomedical
model often suggests habilitation, which refers to help given to those whose disabilities are congenital or
manifested very early in life in order to maximize function. On the other hand, the functional/rehabilitation
model refers to the assistance given by professionals to those who have an acquired disability in the hope
of gaining back one's functionality.
The biomedical and rehabilitative models, together with the dawn of clinic-based assessments in
the 1950s and its proliferation during the 1960s onward, show how much society has placed value on
convention, performance, and achievement. Anyone whose performance does not fall within the norm of
a population is automatically deemed different and deficient. In living spaces, such persons were shunned
by society. In educational settings, such students were advised to transfer schools for a more specialized
type of education (Clough in Clough & Corbett 2000). In workplaces, they were segregated or refused
opportunities. Either way, both models constantly put the PWD at a disadvantage. They become easy
targets for pity or recipients of charitable work. Moreover, both promote an expert client type of
relationship between the "non-disabled" and the "disabled," where the PWD is automatically perceived as
inferior. At the very least, this relational exchange benefits the client as the expert can help improve his or
her state. However, at the extreme, this collaboration "undermines the client's dignity by removing the
ability to participate in the simplest, everyday decisions affecting his or her life" (Jean 2012).

2.1.d The Social Model

What we need to understand about models and frameworks is that they have a strong yet subtle
way of influencing a person's beliefs, behaviors, and values systems. For example, a Filipino born and
raised in the United States who comes to the Philippines would most likely act more American than
Filipino, not because he resists his roots but because of his exposure to Americans, not Filipinos. He may
not have been raised this way intentionally but constant interaction with others of a particular culture can
strongly influence a person's way of life.
Clough (Clough & Corbett 2000) points out that the social (sociological) model became society's
reaction to how the biomedical perspective viewed disability. In fact, Mike Oliver, a lecturer in the 1980s
who coined the term "social model" and is considered one of its main proponents, wrote a position paper
directly reacting against how the medical field has been reinforcing a disabling view of PWDs. According
to the sociological response, disability occurs as a result of society's lack of understanding of individual
differences. PWDs are seen as disabled not because they are deficient but because society "insists" they
are deficient and disadvantaged. Norms, after all, are determined by society.
The underlying principle of the social model of disability is that disability is a social construct,
where standards and limitations that society places on groups of people are what disable a person. With
this perspective, from government laws to education to employment opportunities to access to communal
facilities take on a different meaning. For instance, a person with paraplegia (a condition that causes
impaired functioning of the legs) who uses a motorized wheelchair, should be able to go around on own.
The mayor in her town put up an elevator by the foot bridge to help people get to the top easily without
having to climb up the stairs. Although there are facilities in the foot bridge to get her from one side of the
highway to the other, she wonders how she could get to the foot bridge from her house. Public
transportation, unfortunately, is not accessible from her home. And even if it were, none of the transports
would be able to take a wheelchair. Jana, on the other hand, also has paraplegia but lives in a
neighboring town as Mara's, where the local government provides shuttles for those with physical
disabilities. She has a wheelchair herself, though it is not motorized. Despite this, Jana is able to go
around by herself because her town provides continuous access from one point to the next. This example
shows that what is truly disabling is not the physical condition the way the medical model would adhere
to, but the lack of opportunities and restrictions given to a person, as the social model would push for (see
Figure 2.3).

2.1.e Rights-Based Model and Twin Track Approach

The rights-based model of disability is a framework that bears similarities with the social model.
Although most practitioners see the two as one and the same, Degener (2017 in Retief & Letsosa 2018)
argues their nuances. While the social model reiterates social factors and dynamics that form our
perceptions of disability, the rights-based model "moves beyond explanation, offering a theoretical
framework for disability policy that emphasizes the human dignity of PWDs" (Degener 2017:43). It
immediately recognizes the PWDs' vulnerability and tries to address this by upholding and safeguarding
their identities and rights as human beings. Moreover, while "the social model is mostly critical of public
health policies that advocate the prevention of impairment, the human rights model recognizes the fact
that properly formulated prevention policy may be regarded as an instance of human rights protection for
PWDs" (Degener 2017:52).
A rights-based approach to education ensures that all energies are devoted to the realization of
each learner's right to education. It is built on the principle that education is a basic human right and
therefore all must have access to it. There are four key actors directly involved in such a model: (1)
the government as duty-bearers, (2) the child as the rights-holder, (3) the parents not only as duty-bearers
but also as representatives of the child, and (4) the teachers, both as rights-holders and duty-bearers (Van
den BruleBalescut & Sandkull 2005).
At best, lobbyists and practitioners now promote a twin track approach, which combines the social
model and the rights-based model. A marrying of the two perspectives allows for holistic changes to
occur, with the option of promoting individual needs whenever necessary. For instance, in education, this
would mean allowing a PWD to join the mainstream yet be given opportunities for disability-specific
programs in case additional support Is needed (Chassy & Josa 2018).

2.2 What is Special Needs Education?

 In its totality, the vision of education for humanity is noble and appropriate. However, for any given
population, statistical data shows that people possess different aptitude and skill levels depending on
standards or expectations that society ultimately dictates and holds as true. This is what Clough refers to
as a "pathology of difference" (Clough & Corbett 2000). A normal distribution showing student
performance would illustrate that there will always be those performing closely with each other-what
statisticians and educators call the average population-but there will also always be those who fall at the
tail ends of the curve. Those at the extremes would either possess exceptionally high capabilities or
extremely low skill levels. Sometimes, this is because of a medical, developmental, or neurological
disability that a learner has. Other times, it is because they just happen to be among highly exceptional
people. Either way, the fact remains: teaching strategies that normally work with the average population
will not work the same with those at the extremes. The students would not be able to learn as fast, as
much, and as well as most. With scenarios like these, one eventually would have to wonder-how does
education address this reality? This then becomes the very definition of Special Education.
Historically, Special Education has been regarded as "an attempt to increase the fairness of
universal public education for exceptional learners" because there are "those with special difficulties or
extraordinary abilities in learning" (Kauffman & Hallahan 2005). Acknowledging learner differences, the
essence of special education lies in its goal to educate a certain population of students, particularly those
at the tail ends of a normal statistical distribution of performance (Thomas & Loxley 2001) (see Figure
2.4). In other words, special education tries to ensure that those perceived to have difficulties learning will
be taught, albeit in a different way.

Not everyone reacts to learner diversity the same way. Unfortunately, the defaults framework
societies seem to operate on remains to be the medical model. As such, simply asking people to take on
a more sociological standpoint appears much more difficult than it seems. It is unclear as to how society
is expected to shift paradigms. Moreover, it is questionable if we can even reach that point given the
discomfort and resistance others have shown against the social model. It has long been regarded that the
key to nation-building is education accessible to all types of learners. This accessibility is the of inclusive
education.

2.3 Why Inclusion?

Inclusive education is an educational practice that places students with disabilities in the general
education classroom along with typically developing children under the supervision and guidance of a
general education teacher (Del Corro-Tiangco, 2014). It takes root in special needs education and is
 anchored on the philosophy that every child has an inherent right to be educated equally with his peers,
no matter how different he/she may appear to society.

The global arena has been consistently vocal in its stand on children, persons with disabilities, and
education. In as early as 1948, there have already been worldwide declarations on children and their right
to be educated (Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948; United Nations Convention on the Rights of
the Child 1989). In 1990, many countries banded together for the world declaration of Education for All
(EFA), which stated that all children must have access to complete, free, and compulsory primary
education.

The Guidelines for Inclusion (2005) published by UNESCO enumerates four key elements:

1. that inclusion is a process, that is, "a never-ending to find better ways to respond to diversity
2. that inclusion involves preventive dimension, specifically in identifying and removing potential to this
process through "collecting, collating, and evaluating information" for improving policy and practice
3. that inclusion is all about the "presence, participation, and achievement" or learning outcomes of all types
of students; and
4. that inclusion puts "particular emphasis on learners who may be at risk of marginalization, exclusion, or
underachievement," and therefore, they must be consistently monitored and represented in the inclusive
process.
Figure 2.5 enumerates factors that are distinctly inclusive (Booth and Ainscow 2002):
2.4 The 2030 Agenda
The goal of inclusion is for every fabric of society to embrace diversity. It is for this reason that all
these treatises state the need for a paradigm shift to address the issues of inclusion in education.
Inclusive education is not merely a call toward educational reform for those with additional needs. It is
simply a call to improve the quality of education for all learners, because "every learner matters and
matters equally" (UNESCO 2017:12, 2005). This is also reflected in the current framework being followed
for the implementation of inclusive practices, which is the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
The SDGs are considered road maps or blueprints that were developed by the United Nations to
ensure a better and sustainable future for everyone. It consists of 17 global goals set by the United
Nations for the year 2030, each addressing one specific area of development (see Figure 2.6).
 Of particular interest to the global education community, however, is SDG 4: Ensure inclusive and
equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all" (United Nations General
Assembly). Therefore, the need to remove all barriers to inclusion by addressing all forms of exclusion
and marginalization is of utmost importance.

The Philippine Laws for People with Disabilities (PWDs) (Pangalangan & Litong, 2014)
 BP 344 (1983) - Accessibility Law
 RA 7277 (1992) - Magna Carta for Disabled Persons

1. Equal rights and privileges of PWDs on employment, education, health, telecommunications, auxiliary
social services, accessibility, political, and civil rights
2. Penalties for violations of law
 Administrative Order 35 (2002) - National Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation (NPDR Week) every
3rd week of July
 Guidelines in the Admission of Students with Disabilities in Higher Education and Post-Secondary
Institutions in the Philippines (2004)
 RA 9442 (2007) - Amendment of RA 7277 (Privileges to PWDs)

1. 20% discount privileges to PWDs o Change name from "Magna Carta for Disabled Persons" to "Magna
Carta for PWDs"
2. Added a clause on deliverance from public ridicule and vilification
 NCDA Administrative Order No. 001, s. 2008 - Guidelines on the Issuance of PWD ID Cards relative to
RA 9442
 RA 10070 (2010) - Amendment of RA 7277 (Implementation of Programs and Services for PWDs in every
province, city, and municipality - PDAO Law)
 RA 10366 (2013) - Accessible Polling Places for PWDs and Senior Citizens
 Proclamation No. 688, S. 2013 - Declaring the Period of 2013-2022 as the Philippine Decade of "Make
the Right Real" for PWDs
 RA 10524 (2013) - Amendment of RA 7277 (Expanding the Positions Reserved for PWDs)

1. 1% of all government agencies, offices, corps shall be reserved for PWDs

2. Private companies with over 100 employees are encouraged to reserve at least 1% for PWDs
 RA 10754 (2016) - An Act Expanding the Benefits and Privileges of PWDs

1. Exemption of VAT on the following sale of goods and services

2. Inclusion of funeral services
 Civil Service Commission MC No. 20, s. 2017 - express lanes for PWDs in all commercial and
government establishments
 RA 11228 (2019) - Amendment of RA 7277
 All PWDs shall be automatically covered by the National Health Insurance Program (NHIP) of the
PhilHealth and that the PhilHealth shall develop exclusive packages for PWDs that will address their
specific health and development needs.