Current Practices of Inclusive Education
A Case Study in Indonesia
Unik Ambarwati, Sisca Rahmadonna and Pujaningsih Pujaningsih
Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Colombo Street, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Keywords: Inclusive Education, Teacher.
Abstract: Increasing enrollment number of students with special needs in regular classroom required specific teaching
skills of classroom teachers. Since 2001, Indonesia has been implementing an inclusive education that leads
to urgent call for an in-depth investigation of some challenges and the need of support for teachers to provide
adequate educational services for all learners including students with special needs. This paper reports a case
study of inclusive practices in Yogyakarta, one of the cities in Indonesia which received a national award as
an inclusive city in 2015. A forum Group Discussion (FGD), interview and observation were conducted in
order to investigate the current practices and the need of support for teachers in inclusive schools. A variety
of educational practices in inclusive schools in one city in Indonesia is found that relate to the need of support
to improve collaborative work and teaching competencies in inclusive classrooms.
1 INTRODUCTION
The Government of Indonesia has signed a
Resolution related to the human rights of persons with
disabilities on 30 March 2007 in New York and
continued with the ratification of the Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on Tuesday 18
October 2011. It is clearly stated in the convention
that persons with disabilities have equal rights in
various fields, one of which is education. Long before
the ratification was signed, the policy on inclusive
education has been specifically set in the National
Education Minister’s regulation no 70 of 2009 on
Inclusive Education for learners with special needs
and gifted and talented. Furthermore, the number of
inclusive schools continues to grow from 254 schools
in 2008 to over 2000 schools in 2009. The numbers
of inclusive schools are likely to increase as the
municipalities, districts and provinces declare and
commit supporting inclusive education. Based on this
situation, it is very clear that teachers are required to
handle all learners, including children with special
needs. However, current practices of inclusive
education after more than 10 years has been
implemented is rarely being investigated. Some local
and national newspapers reported the need for support
to implement inclusive education. A local newspaper
broadcasted the limited of educational sources and
teaching skills of the teachers in inclusive schools
according to director of educational agency at South
Sumatra (Fornews, 2017). The director of educational
agency at Yogyakarta also stated that inclusive
education as mandated by national regulation need
more support (Tribun Jogja, 2016). Additionally, the
need to provide support for teachers for better
educational services for all learners is ungently
required.
Kilanowski-Press et al. (2010) stated that in order
to improve the quality of inclusive schools,
identification of common practices, the need of
support, and evaluate teachers’ efficacy are needed.
Furthermore, investigation of the inclusive practices
will gather not only valuable information about the
need of specific training for teachers but also the
excellent practices that need to be continued. Schwab
et al. (2015) revealed that teachers reported the need
of training for behavior management, while they
already feel confidence to build teamwork (co-
teaching) to support students with special needs
because the positive atmosphere at schools already
established. In Indonesia, less number of research has
been conducted to investigate the current practices of
inclusive education. Further studies of how the
current practice in inclusive school will provide
information about the need of support for practicing
teachers. Additionally, this information also
beneficial for educational institution to develop
Ambarwati, U., Rahmadonna, S. and Pujaningsih, P.
Current Practices of Inclusive Education - A Case Study in Indonesia.
In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences (ICES 2017) - Volume 1, pages 375-381
ISBN: 978-989-758-314-8
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
375

training for teachers and teacher education program
to prepare future teachers to be more capable of
supporting inclusive education. Furthermore, this
study focused on investigation of current practices
and the need of support for teachers also discussed.
2 METHODOLOGY
The FGD was conducted by inviting representatives
of teachers in Yogyakarta. In this FGD, there are two
important points was discussed, namely, a) how
teachers know the needs of each student? b) how
teachers provide educational services for students
with special needs in inclusive classrooms? School
observation was conducted in order to observe how
teachers handling children with special needs in their
class. There were five schools were visited to
represent 5 districts in Yogyakarta namely one
elementary school in Gunung Kidul, one elementary
school in Sleman, one elementary school in Kulon
Progo, one elementary school in Kota Yogyakarta,
and one elementary school in Bantul.
Descriptive analysis was employed to analyze the
data from FGD and observation. Percentage of
demographic data to represent the majority of
disabling conditions serve in inclusive classrooms is
provided. Along with this, a descriptive narrative
about current practices and the need of support for
teachers are presented.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Nineteen teachers were attended FGD from twenty-
five invited teachers. They represented 19 inclusive
schools in Yogyakarta were joined in FGD in order to
discuss their current practices and challenges in
teaching in inclusive classrooms. The average of
teaching experience of the participants is 2 years with
the longest 13 years, and the shortest is one year.
In the classroom, the number of students with
special needs approximately is two students, with the
highest number is 4 students and the lowest number
is zero students. The zero number is related to the
limited access for conducting a comprehensive
assessment for students who have academic
problems. So, the teachers stated that they might have
disabilities but unrecognized yet as students with
special needs. The highest percentage of disabling
conditions is students with mild academic problems
according to teacher report.
According to interview data, students with mild
academic problems include several disabling
conditions: slow learner, intellectual disability, and
low vision. Based on chart 1, some disabling
conditions might overlap, for example, students with
sensory problem might have an academic concern,
and students with behavior problem might have
academic difficulties and vice versa. A specific
definition for each disabling conditions that enable
school practitioners to conduct diagnosis and provide
special education services is still missing in the
national regulation no 70 of 2009. Furthermore, in
this study reported disabling terminologies as five
possible problems that can understand by teachers
easily. However, this data might not represent the real
number of students with special needs because of lack
of diagnostic procedures and bias in teacher referral.
3.1 Current Practices in Inclusive
Schools
3.1.1 Referral and Diagnostic Procedures
According to FGD and interview with some of the
teachers, referral and diagnostic procedure are varied.
One of the FGD participants stated that teachers
recognize the existence of academic problems during
the first year of schooling. Some information that
leads to referral are a low academic achievement
(below the class level), lack of concentration span
during classroom instruction, and unable to respond
appropriately, e.g., difficulties in reading and writing,
and experience specific barrier of learning, e.g.,
unable to see the written text on the blackboard.
Similarly, Dunn et al. (2009) revealed two common
criteria for teacher referral: inattention (i.e., lack of
concentration) and aptitude (poor reasoning skills,
request assistance of directions).
The teacher then refers for further assessment in
order to know the need of the student. The detailed
assessment is conducted by the expert. Most of the
expert is a psychologist in order to know the
intelligence level. In this case, the teacher referral is
based on students’ academic performance which
might be influenced by the quality of instruction
instead of a possibility of students’ disabling
condition. Fuchs and Fuchs (2006) stated that low
achievement, especially for students with learning
disability, reflects low quality of instruction.
Teachers’ sense of efficacy was found as a source of
bias in teacher referral (Podell and Soodak, 1993).
Podell and Soodak (1993) revealed that teachers with
low efficacy tend to refer students from low-SES
families for special education services. Furthermore,
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
376

the criteria of teacher referral require more specific
guidance in order to reduce the bias.
Another school applies identification of students
with special needs during the enrollment process.
This is part of school policies while many other
inclusive schools do not clearly mention it. They
interview parents to know the characteristics of the
students. This information will be accumulated with
teacher observation during instruction to make a
referral when it is necessary.
3.1.2 Referral and Diagnostic Procedures
Various educational services are provided for
students with special needs in different quantity.
Teachers reported frequent supports for students with
special needs are direct feedback, peer tutor, and
work group. The participants of FGD stated that they
provide feedback daily. According to Mitchell (2014)
feedback combined with formative assessment is one
of the suggested teaching practices in inclusive
classrooms. Feedback will inform the learners about
their progress in learning. Additionally, peer tutor is
conducted in some inclusive schools weekly. Even
though many of the students in this study have
academic difficulties, but all the teachers stated that
they never adjust the learning materials to the needs
of students. Educational services for students with
special needs provided by teachers in different
frequency can be seen in figure 1.
Figure 1: Educational services for students with special
needs provided by teachers.
Based on the observation data, teachers give
feedback individually when the students have
misconceptions. The teachers gather this information
from students’ portfolio and students responds to
teachers’ questions which indicating incorrect
answers. The teachers provide feedback by asking the
students to correct their answers and rewrite the
correct answer. If the student is still having trouble,
the teacher will explain some of the material that the
students still finds difficult. In this situation, the
teacher providing a space for students to locate their
misconceptions before making some corrections. In
line with this, Mitchell (2014) suggest considering
immediate feedback for new tasks, corrective
feedback instead of hints, and early support with
structure.
When teacher asking questions verbally and the
students provide an incorrect answer, the teachers
provide feedback as soon as possible by asking a
further explanation of the answer (i.e., why is your
answer like that?). When the students quiet and
looked confused to explain, then the teacher gives the
space to ask friends. The last option for feedback is
given some clues as keywords. Asking questions of
students with learning difficulties might lead to
embarrassing moment because they might not know
the correct answer. For this reason, teachers need to
adjust the level of complexity of the question
(Mitchell, 2014) to improve the possibility of success.
However, Mitchell (2014) suggest that teachers no
need to avoid asking questions because there are a
variety of sources for feedback (i.e., peers, books,
written, computers).
In some schools, teacher providing a formative
evaluation through verbal and written formats. In
verbal questions, teachers stated that they ask other
students as a model before they ask students with
special needs. The reason for this is increasing the
readiness of students with special needs. Written
formative assessment for students with special needs
is similar with other students. When the students with
special needs have low academic performance
compare to class goals, then teachers will reduce the
level of difficulty and conduct remedial teaching.
Some teachers conducted written evaluation by
asking the students to do problem-solving in front of
the classrooms. In this situation, teachers seemed to
pay less attention to students with special needs to
reduce harassment when the students cannot finish
the problems. Other students invited to solve the
problems and they received applause when the
answer was correct.
Teachers provided a variety of instructional tools
to ensure students with special needs comprehend the
content. Based on observational data, one of the
teachers conduct demonstration and provide a real
media to explain about musical instruments for
students with intellectual disability. Students’
responses to specific instruction are different
regarding their cognitive abilities. In line with this, a
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Services Provided by the Teacher
/day 2-3x/week /week /moon early year never
Current Practices of Inclusive Education - A Case Study in Indonesia
377

study conducted by Cho et al. (2015) revealed that
students with lower cognitive areas almost respond
incapable compared to typical peers and adequate
responders. Reading and math difficulties among
students with mild disabilities are related to their
lower cognitive abilities with different profiles.
Lower working memory skills are found in students
with intellectual disability who have more cognitive
impairments compared to students with behavior
disorders and students with learning disabilities (Peng
and Fuchs, 2016). Furthermore, the more teacher’s
understanding of each disabling conditions, the better
specific instruction they can provide to meet the
needs of each student.
According to teacher’s report and classroom
observation, it seems that the implementation of
formative assessment either verbally or written
format for students with special needs at school is
devoted to developing instruction adjustment. This is
in line with the purpose of formative assessment to
make instructional decisions based on student needs
to ensure learning for all learners (Cornelius, 2013;
Watkins, 2013). Some teachers stated that they
provide adjustment in their expectation to evaluate
student outcomes, for example, students with writing
problems will be assessed based on their writing
performance such as neatness instead of writing
structures. The teachers stated that this evaluation
would gradually improve as the students with special
needs make progress in their writing. Furthermore,
even though teachers implicitly stated the need for
differentiated instruction, but most of the teachers
reported that they rarely create individual instruction
for students with special needs. The missing of
differentiated instruction for students with special
needs in inclusive classrooms requires further
investigation. The reason for this is the previous
study shows a positive impact of differentiated
instruction on student academic achievement levels,
student motivation, and teacher perception to meet
the need of students with special needs (Watkins,
2013).
During classroom observations, teachers also
employ cooperative learning by providing
opportunities for students with special needs to work
in a group and receive support from peers. Teachers
distribute students with special needs into different
groups. Small group instructions consist of six
students, and one of the group members is students
with special needs. Some teachers stated that
sometimes they allow students with special needs
select their group based on their preference, so they
feel comfortable to work with friends. The teacher
reported that they select the leader for each group to
lead the discussion based on students’ performance.
The teacher explained that most of the time, students
with high academic performance would lead the
group, but sometimes they choose students with
special needs to lead the group. In order to increase
the quality of work group, the teacher stated that they
set up a rule before students start their collaborative
group. Furthermore, when the group is finished, they
are directed to support other groups. Not many
information can be gathered from teachers about how
they prepare the students for group works. The
previous study revealed that students in elementary
school tend to work individually, so they need support
from teachers. Kutnick et al. (2008) revealed that
relational strategy improves the student's
performance on academic achievement, motivation to
work with peers, group work, learning focus, and
communication with partners. The relational strategy
consists of sequential activities which start from
building trust, improving communication skills
through partnered discussion, and working to solve
problems in a group (Kutnick et al. 2008).
Some teachers reported that they conduct peer
tutors in their classrooms to facilitate learning of
students with special needs. For those who do not
implement this strategy stated that the number of
students with special needs and the number of tutors
is not proportional. The previous study revealed that
peer tutor could improve reading skills of students
with reading problems with several steps, such as
training for tutor material preparation (Pujaningsih et
al. 2016).
Instructional adaptation is rarely implemented
according to teachers’ statements during FGD even
though in some classrooms observation they showed
that they provide several adaptations in learning. One
of the teachers asked students with special needs
verbally because the student has difficulties in
writing. Once the student answers the questions, then
the teacher writes down on the paper, and the students
imitate it. This situation shows that the teacher
willing to support students with special needs even
though they have limited training about inclusive
education. As previously mentioned that some
teachers also have a different expectation in regards
to evaluating students with special needs, so the
teacher acceptance is clearly seen during FGD. Based
on the observation data, teachers provided prompts
and hints for students with special needs to be socially
accepted by using proper words for request help,
apologies, and praise. Based on classroom
observations, the teacher also did not hesitate to help
students with special needs whenever they asked and
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
378

managed the class adequately. Some of the students
with special needs are supported by teacher assistance
Limited specific educational services for students
with special needs is provided in inclusive classrooms
but requires more improvement. Some teachers
already provide direct feedback, different teaching
strategies, more opportunities to engage in classroom
activities through various ways, and an adjustment in
terms of the evaluation process. The reason for this
situation might relate to the lack of information for
classroom teachers to provide educational services
for students with special needs. Furthermore, support
for teachers to improve their instructional qualities in
inclusive classrooms is urgently needed.
3.2 The Need for Support
3.2.1 Systemic Procedures for Referral and
Diagnostic Process
Most of the inclusive schools in this study conduct
classroom observations as a source of information for
referral process. Some of the teachers stated that they
had tried some of the different teaching strategies to
support students who have academic difficulties after
they found some students who have low academic
achievement. They tried to support the students
before they refer to experts for further diagnostic
procedures. However, the selection of the teaching
strategies almost never relies on evidence-based
practice. Furthermore, the students’ academic
achievement might remain the same because the
instructional strategy is not working. Most of the
screening process relies on the teachers’ initiative
because there are no written guidelines about how to
conduct it. In line with this, Kugelmass (2001)
revealed one of the key components for successful
inclusive implementation is teacher initiatives which
supported by school principal as part of school
commitment in order to build an inclusive
community. With limited time and support from
schools, this process can be overwhelming for
classroom teachers. Working with parents in order to
locate the students’ problems is also stated by some
teachers. Despite the importance of parental
involvement in the implementation of inclusion
(Filler and Xu, 2006), some inclusive schools do not
include parents to develop educational services for
students with special needs. Some teachers mentioned
the reason for this is difficulties in collaborating with
parents because the parents refuse if their children are
labelled as students with special needs. One of the
reason for parent’s rejection to collaborate with the
school is parents found that their children are doing
OK at home, so they feel that their children do not
require extra services. This information might be
either correct or false that need further assessment
steps. The missing part that can be seen in the
building collaboration with parents is communicating
the student’s data and hearing parent’s concern in
regards to students’ learning. It is crucial to
communicate the evidence of students’ performance
in order to seek a better support for them at school and
home environment. When parents refused to share
some information about their children, they might
have some concern that needs to be heard. Mitchell
(2014) stated that parents of students with special
needs have extra demands on their children, feel
shame and need support to deal with their emotional
distress. The empathic approach to the family
situation and listening to parents’ voices and
acknowledging the unique needs and hopes
expectations to their children can be one of the first
steps to collaborate with them (Pérez et al., 2005).
The school might also provide a systematic procedure
to build communication with parents so sharing
detailed information about students will not only
required for parents of suspected students with special
needs.
The missing of systematic ways of providing
educational services for students with special needs
lead to some delayed intervention for students with
special needs. One teacher stated that the school
determined that one of the students has intellectual
disability in 2nd grade. The option to refer the student
to a special school was refused by the parents because
of financial issue. One systematic way of providing
educational services that already implement
worldwide is Response to Intervention (Fuchs and
Fuchs, 2006) to monitor at-risk students and
providing support in three different tiers might need
to be considered because the teacher can focus on
specific needs of the students based on their learning
achievement and provide different strategies, then
monitor students learning progress continuously.
However, the educational services for students with
special needs require adequate teaching skills and
collaborative skills among teachers.
3.2.2 Adequate Sources to Ensure Better
Educational Qualities for All Learners
3.2.2.1
Adequate Sources to Ensure Better
Educational Qualities for All Learners
Many schools during FGD stated that the availability
of support from special education teachers is limited
because they have one day scheduled for a week to
serve students with special needs. On the other hand,
Current Practices of Inclusive Education - A Case Study in Indonesia
379

teachers report that students with special needs
require support from special education teachers more.
This situation burden classroom teacher because they
felt that they are not adequately prepared to deal with
students with special needs daily while they have to
ensure learning for all students in their class. Some of
the teachers stated that they conduct peer tutor
strategy to assist students with special needs while
they focus on the rest of the class.
In this situation, teachers work alone to serve
students in their classroom including students with
special needs with limited support and limited
teaching skills. Improving teacher competencies
through workshops might be not the answer in this
situation as Indonesia government has been providing
them since 2001 all over the country. Learning from
other countries that already implement the same
strategy might lead to a solution for this problem.
Vaughn and Schumm, (1995) tried to understand the
situation in educational practice in the U.S. in the
early 90s about the teachers’ hindrance providing
accommodations for students with special needs.
They found that teachers at that time did not get
enough support while it was time-consuming and
difficult to implement different accommodations for
each student with special needs. In Israel, a similar
situation was found when regular teachers burn out
because they did not get enough support from the
organizational system at schools when they have
problems dealing with students with special needs in
their class (Talmor et al., 2005). At this point, the
need for collaborative work as school routines can
establish through pre and in-service training for
teachers is suggested by Sugai and Horner (2009),
which focuses on not only how teachers support a
student with special needs, but also the whole class to
learn together (Vaughn and Schumm, 1995).
Working as a team in order to obtain the fullest of
learning achievement for all learners including
students with special needs require some specific
skills that need to develop in training programs. Lack
of performance in those skills might reduce the
quality of team work and affect the quality of
educational programs.
3.2.2.2 Teaching competencies improvement for
inclusive classroom
As inclusive education is defined as providing a better
educational program to meet the needs of all students,
then the curriculum adjustment is a must. However,
teachers stated that they need to know more about
teaching strategies in inclusive classrooms. They
reported that their current teaching practices are
inadequate to meet the needs of students with special
needs, specifically dealing with students with
behavior problems, motivating low-interest children
to do the work, and explain behavior expectation in
the classroom. Teachers stated some teaching
competencies that urgently need to be improved are:
1) behavior management, 2) classroom management,
and 3) alternative learning strategies. Based on
teachers’ statement, it can be seen that they have the
willingness to provide educational services for
students with special needs and they feel that they
need to improve their teaching competencies handle
inclusive classrooms.
The need of support to improve teachers’
collaborative and teaching skills in inclusive
classrooms is clearly stated based on FGD and
interview in this study. Some of them already receive
some workshops about this skill and need full support
from school administrator to implement the skills and
transfer to other class as well. Building community of
learning at school can facilitate the learning process
among teachers and provide support when the sources
still limited
4 CONCLUSIONS
Current practices in inclusive schools in one city in
Indonesia are varied because there is clear guideline
or procedures to provide educational services for
students with special needs. However, providing
direct feedback for students with special needs is the
most current practice in inclusive schools in one city
in Indonesia. Along with this, teachers already have
initiatives to provide adaptation in the learning
process and refer at-risk students to expert. Some
schools already collaborate with parents, but most of
the teachers in this study reported the need to improve
parental involvement. The missing of school structure
to provide support for teachers to deal with students
with special needs lead to delayed intervention and
minimum instructional adjustment. This situation
relates to the need of support to build collaborative
work among teachers and improve teachers’
competencies in inclusive classrooms.
REFERENCES
Cho, E., Roberts, G. J., Capin, P., Roberts, G., Miciak, J.,
Vaughn, S., 2015. Cognitive Attributes, Attention, and
Self-Efficacy of Adequate and Inadequate Responders
in a Fourth Grade Reading Intervention. Learning
Disabilities Research & Practice. 30(4), 159–170.
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
380

Cornelius, K. E., 2013. Formative assessment made easy:
Templates for collecting daily data in inclusive
classrooms. Teaching exceptional children. 45(5), 14-
21.
Dunn, M. W., Cole, C. M., Estrada, A., 2009. Referral
criteria for special education: General education
teachers' perspectives in Canada and the United States
of America. Rural Special Education Quarterly. 28(1),
28.
Filler, J., Xu, Y., 2006. Including children with disabilities
in early childhood education programs: Individualizing
developmentally appropriate practices. Childhood
Education. 83 (2), 92-98.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., 2006. Introduction to response to
intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?. Reading
research quarterly. 41(1), 93-99.
Fornews, 2017. Ini Masalah Penerapan Pendidikan Inklusi
di Sekolah Umum. Fornews. Retrieved from
http://fornews.co/news/ini-masalah-penerapan-
pendidikan-inklusi-di-sekolah-umum/.
Kilanowski-Press, L., Foote, C. J., Rinaldo, V. J., 2010.
Inclusion Classrooms and Teachers: A Survey of
Current Practices. International Journal of Special
Education. 25(3), 43-56.
Kugelmass, J. W., 2001. Collaboration and compromise in
creating and sustaining an inclusive school.
International journal of inclusive education. 5(1), 47-
65.
Kutnick, P., Ota, C., Berdondini, L., 2008. Improving the
effects of group working in classrooms with young
school-aged children: Facilitating attainment,
interaction and classroom activity. Learning and
Instruction. 18(1), 83-95.
Mitchell, D., 2014. What really works in special and
inclusive education: Using evidence-based teaching
strategies, Routledge. London.
Peng, P., Fuchs, D., 2016. A Meta-Analysis of Working
Memory Deficits in Children With Learning
Difficulties Is There a Difference Between Verbal
Domain and Numerical Domain?. Journal of Learning
Disabilities. 49(1), 3–20.
Pérez C. G., Drake, C., Calabrese B. A. 2005. The
importance of presence: Immigrant parent’s school
engagement experiences. American Educational
Research Journal. 42(3), 465-498.
Podell, D. M., Soodak, L. C., 1993. Teacher efficacy and
bias in special education referrals. The Journal of
educational research. 86(4), 247-253.
Pujaningsih. Wati, U. A., Sugiarsih, S., 2016. Developing
Reading Based Peer Tutor Model for Children with
Reading Difficulties, Retrieved October 14, 2016 from
http://aasvet.yuntech.edu.tw/index.php.
Schwab, S., Holzinger, A., Krammer, M., Gebhardt, M.,
Hessels, M. G., 2015. Teaching practices and beliefs
about inclusion of general and special needs teachers in
Austria. Learning Disabilities--A Contemporary
Journal. 13(2).
Sugai, G., Horner, R. H., 2009. Responsiveness-to-
intervention and school-wide positive behavior
supports: Integration of multi-tiered system
approaches. Exceptionality. 17(4), 223-237.
Talmor, R., Reiter, S., Feigin, N., 2005. Factors Relating to
Regular Education Teacher Burnout in Inclusive
Education. European Journal of Special Needs
Education. 20(2), 215–229.
Tribun Jogja, 2016. Pendidikan Khusus perlu diperhatikan.
Tribun Jogja, Retrieved from
http://jogja.tribunnews.com/2016/04/05/pendidikan-
khusus-perlu-diperhatikan.
Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., 1995. Responsible inclusion for
students with learning disabilities. Journal of learning
disabilities. 28(5), 264-270.
Watkins, A. 2013. Teacher Perceptions of the Impact of
Differentiated Instruction and Formative Assessments
in Improving Academic Achievement, University of
Phoenix. Phoenix, Doctoral dissertation.
Current Practices of Inclusive Education - A Case Study in Indonesia
381