Special education in China has lagged behind regular education for many years, however, the past few decades, the government has made considerable efforts to develop and improve the special education system. While the citizens of China have had a generic moral interest in disability since ancient times, the development of special education schools did not occur until American and European missionaries started schools for the visually and hearing impaired in the 19th century. The next major influence in the development of the special education system occurred with China’s Cultural Revolution in 1978. Interestingly, there is not any exclusive legislation on special education but in the 1980s, the government started Learning in Regular Classrooms (LRC), which is China’s version of inclusion. LRC has progressed rapidly the past two decades; however, the quality of instruction is low due to a lack of specialists, a shortage of personnel, inadequate funding, and limited technology as well as other barriers that are delineated in the chapter. The chapter emphasizes the government’s recent efforts in in-service teacher training, the preparation of preservice teachers, working with families, developing community rehabilitation training programs, and implementing evidence-based practices. Special education in China today is at a good place but it has quite a way from the ideal situation.
As one of the fastest economically growing nations in the world over the last two decades, China has become a primary contributor to the global economy. Enormous changes along with such glamour of economic growth and prosperity have struck dramatically this world’s most populous country socially and politically on almost every aspect. However, as a sharp contrast to the image of an emerging economic giant, China is still shy away from having an advanced progressive education system of equality that can ensure education rights for all children, especially those with disabilities. Special education in China, a so-called “step child” of the whole Chinese education system, is at a new crossroad for development and reform.
The earliest idea about disability in China can be traced back to ancient time when Chinese people began to notice the existence of people with obvious disabilities (Deng, Poon-Mcbrayer, & Farnsworth, 2001; Piao, 1992). In a quite vague fashion, Confucius introduces the idea of equally treating people with exceptionality with respect and dignity in his writing of Liji (Book of Rites) in the early Chun Qiu period (770–476 BC), which is the first recording of people with disabilities in Chinese ancient literature. Despite this generic moral call for sympathy toward people with disabilities, there was no formal social support and education system to support people with disabilities at the time, and people with disabilities remained at the lowest social status in the hierarchic feudal system over the long Chinese history. It was not until the late 19th century that the embryo of special education was developed in China with the assistance of American and European missionaries (Deng et al., 2001).
Since the late 19th century, a number of special education schools for children especially with sensory disabilities were established by American and European missionaries in China. The first school for the blind in China was established in 1874 by William Moore, a Scottish Presbyterian pastor. In 1887, American missionaries Charles and Annetta Mills started the first school for blind and deaf students in Dengzhou, Shandong. Braille and sign language were introduced to China at that time, and students with visual and hearing impairments benefited from learning basic and religious knowledge and life skills through formal school education (Epstein, 1988; Yang & Wang, 1994).
The first special education school founded by Chinese people was actually in the early 20th century when an industrialist and philanthropist, Zhang Jian, established a special school for blind and deaf students in Nantong, Jiangsu, in 1916. This special school emphasized vocational training and learning of general ad basic knowledge (Yu & Zhang, 1994).
The first Chinese government-run special education school, the Nanjing Municipal School for the Blind and Deaf, was established in 1927. The school provided junior and senior high school level education as well as vocational training to students. In addition, a number of private special schools, including teacher training schools, were established. By the end of 1948 before the Communist Party came into the power, there were a total of 42 special schools in China serving more than 2,000 students with visual and hearing impairments. However, education for children with intellectual disability or other disabilities was not available.
The foundation of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 brought fundamental changes to education in the country, and as a result all private schools were taken over by the government and merged into the public education system (Ellsworth & Zhang, 2007). Ever since then, special education became part of government-supported affairs and the Chinese government took advantage of the Socialist system to build many special education schools in a relatively short period of time. By 1960, there were 479 special education schools enrolling 26,701 students with disabilities in China. The special education system was deeply influenced by the Soviet Union model (Editorial Department of Year-Book of Education, 1984). Another notable achievement was the establishment of the first special education school for children with intellectual disabilities in Dalian, Liaoning, in 1959 (Ye & Piao, 1995).
After the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese government reopened its door to the West in 1978. Along with the dramatic changes that occurred in the economic, social, and political arena, special education in China embraced a new development. Under the Reform and Open Policy, special education scholars and practitioners had opportunities to gain information and learn practical skills from other developed countries, especially the United States and some European countries. Although a separate special education system was still predominant, the principles and practices of mainstreaming and inclusion began to gain influence in Chinese special education starting in the late 1980s. These practices were labeled Learning in Regular Classroom (LRC). Essentially, LRC is China’s version of inclusion, and has some fundamental differences from the inclusion models that are practiced in Western countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom. The LRC practice has led to huge changes in special education in China because it enrolled more children with disabilities into the general education system. In addition to LRC, laws and regulations were also enacted in the 1980s that led to the result of better safeguarding education rights of all children with disabilities. More specifically, two landmark laws were passed (Gu, 1993; Xiao, 1996), namely, the Compulsory Education Law of People’s Republic of China (National People’s Congress of People’s Republic of China, 1986) and the Law on the Protection of Persons with Disabilities of People’s Republic of China (National People’s Congress of People’s Republic of China, 1990). The impetus behind these laws lead to more governmental special education regulations and guideline concerned with the following aspects: teacher preparation, inclusive education, early intervention, curriculum, diagnosis and classification, instructional education plans, and financial support.
In today’s China, more and more students with disabilities are educated in regular schools in resource classrooms with additional supports. Also, more and more special education schools are actively involved in outreach efforts to identify, classify, and certify children with disabilities from rural and economically distressed communities. According to a 2012 Ministry of Education in China (2013) educational statistics report, there are 1,853 special education schools, 178,998 special education students, and 43,697 special education teachers. In addition, the report indicates that there are 199,753 students with disabilities learning in regular schools, which accounts for 52.7% of all students with disabilities attending schools (Ministry of Education in China, 2013). Given China’s large population which is more than a billion people, there is still a long way to go in identifying, classifying, and serving students with special education needs in China as well as providing provisions and policies in the areas of legal safeguards, teacher preparation, resources, and so on forth that will ensure appropriate education for these students. While the growth of special education had slow progress and even stagnation in the 1960s and 1970s, China has exhibited a steady and progressive growth since the 1990s.
China does not have a national governmental special education law that specifies definitive categories of students with disabilities However, within China, there are several different definition systems that are associated with more generic disability and special education laws and regulations. For example, the reauthorized Compulsory Education Law (National People’s Congress, 2006) mandates that “special classes and schools should be built exclusively for children with visual and hearing impairments as well as with intellectual disabilities.” This newly reauthorized law also mandates services to students with severe problem behaviors including juvenile delinquents with special education needs. This latter provision is one of the main additions to the 1986 Compulsory Education Law. Also, the Law on the Protection of Persons with Disabilities (LPPD), which was first issued in 1990 and revised in 2008 (National People’s Congress, 2008), defines an individual with a disability as one who has abnormalities or loss of a certain organ in anatomical structure or a psychological or physiological dysfunction, which results in either a partial or entire loss of the ability to perform an activity in normal circumstances. This law further specifies disabilities in eight categories: visual impairment, hearing impairment, speech disability, physical disabilities, intellectual disability, mental disorders, multiple disabilities, and other disabilities.
Utilizing the above disability laws and acts, a group of 12 disability experts, who were led by the Chinese Ministry of Civil Affairs and China Disabled Person’s Foundation (CDPF), initiated a project to develop the first disability classification and diagnosis system in China. The project experts sought information from numerous associations of people with disabilities, family members of individuals with disabilities, and clinical practitioners. In consultation with the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security and the Ministry of Public Security and with the endorsement of many other government administrations, the experts published the Chinese Disability Classification and Diagnosis Criteria (CDCDC) in April 2011. This criterion system covers the seven disability categories mentioned above in the LPPD except for “other disabilities.” The CDCDC lays a solid foundation for clinicians, physicians, and disability professionals in the identification, diagnosis, classification, and evaluation of an individual with a disability in China. Unfortunately, this new classification system has not brought immediate impact on the special education system.
The Chinese government still has the main responsibility for educating students with intellectual, visual, and hearing impairments as well as students with problem behaviors that are covered by the Compulsory Education Law. To date, the education rights of children with severe physical and intellectual disabilities, autism spectrum disorders, cerebral palsy, and multiple disabilities are only mentioned briefly and vaguely in several regulations, such as the Suggestions on Accelerating the Development of Special Education in China (China’s State Council, 2009) and Suggestions on the Improvement of Service for People with Disabilities (China’s State Council, 2008). In special education practice, children and youth with other disabilities and severe disabilities, who lack self-help skills to participate in schools and classrooms, are likely to be excluded from school education or extensively underserved (The Office of National Sample Survey of People with Disabilities, 1988). In addition to the latter, children with other kinds of disabilities (e.g., learning disabilities) are left out from the Chinese laws and regulations.
In 2006, a comprehensive National Sample Survey on People with Disabilities was conducted in China (China’s Disabled Persons Federation, 2006). Based on a national sample of 161,479 people surveyed, it was reported that by estimate there are 82.96 million people with different kinds of disabilities in China. This figure accounts for 6.34% of the whole Chinese population. Table 1 displays China’s prevalence and incidence of disability in numbers and percentages. It is noted that physical disability and hearing impairments are the most prevalent and that intellectual disability and speech and language impairments are the least prevalent.
Table 1. Prevalence of People with Disabilities in China (National Sample Survey of People with Disabilities, 2006).
| Disability Category | Number (Million) | Percentage |
| Physical disability | 24.12 | 29.07 |
| Hearing impairments | 20.04 | 24.16 |
| Multiple disabilities | 13.52 | 16.30 |
| Visual impairments | 12.33 | 14.86 |
| Mental disorders | 6.14 | 7.40 |
| Intellectual disability | 5.54 | 6.68 |
| Speech impairments | 1.27 | 1.53 |
| Total | 82.96 | 100 |
A comparison of the 2006 results with a 1987 national sample survey indicates that the incidence of people with disabilities in China has increased significantly. Interestingly, the prevalence of persons with physical disabilities has gone up ostensibly while the prevalence of persons with intellectual disabilities has decreased significantly. To some extent, the decrease in persons with intellectual disabilities was influenced by the lower IQ cut off score used in 2006 to classify persons with intellectual disabilities. In terms of the distribution of disabilities by age (see Table 2) almost half (45.20%) of all people with disabilities are over 65 years while the proportion of children with disabilities from birth to 14 years old is only 4.66%.
Table 2. Prevalence and Incidence of Chinese People with Disabilities by Age (National Sample Survey of People with Disabilities, 2006).
| Age | Number (Million) | Percentage |
| 0–14 | 3.87 | 4.66 |
| 15–59 | 34.93 | 42.10 |
| 60–64 | 6.61 | 8.04 |
| 65 and above | 37.55 | 45.20 |
| Total | 82.96 | 100 |
Interestingly, the incident of disability for school-age children (i.e., 6–14 years old, an age range covered by the Compulsory Education Law), reveal a surprising low figure (2.46 million children) (CDPF, 2006). As shown in Table 3, children with intellectual disability are the most prevalent group (30.89%), followed closely by those with multiple disabilities (30.49%) suggesting a substantially different distribution of disability when compared with the entire population. Surprisingly, children with mental disorders (2.44%) account for the least proportion of the population with disabilities even when compared to traditionally low incidence special education populations such as those with visual impairments (5.28%) and those with hearing impairments (4.47%).
Table 3. Prevalence of Students with Disabilities (between Age 6 and 14) in China (National Sample Survey of People with Disabilities, 2006).
| Disability Category | Number (Million) | Percentage |
| Physical disabilities | 0.48 | 19.51 |
| Hearing impairment | 0.11 | 4.47 |
| Multiple disabilities | 0.75 | 30.49 |
| Visual impairment | 0.13 | 5.28 |
| Mental disorders | 0.06 | 2.44 |
| Intellectual disability | 0.76 | 30.89 |
| Speech disability | 0.17 | 6.91 |
| Total | 2.46 | 100 |
Unlike the United States and other developed countries that typically have exclusive legislations in special education (e.g., U.S. special education law, Individuals with Disability Education Act [IDEA]), there are no exclusive laws on special education provisions existing in China. However, there are a couple of more generic laws such as the 2006 Compulsory Education Law and the 2008 LPPD which offer very loosely defined protections and provisions with respect to the rights of education, work, social integration, and living for individuals with disabilities. Because of this situation, many Chinese special education professionals have called for a national policy debate on the significance of establishing an exclusive Chinese special education law to ensure the educational rights and quality of special education provisions for children with disabilities (Wang, 2007). Currently, there are no clear signs for any immediate policy initiatives from government administrative agencies or any proposals of legislative bills and actions despite growing attention to the debate surrounding the necessity and significance of developing specific special education legislations and regulations. Therefore, as a basis to understanding special education today in China, the following section reviews a few existing common laws that are closely related to special education provisions as well as some noteworthy legislation trends.
As mentioned before, The Compulsory Education Law in 2006 and 2008 LPPD are the two most powerful laws related to special education in China. The reauthorized Compulsory Education Law of 2006 includes five clauses offering special education provisions. First, it mandates that all children at the age of 6 years, regardless of gender, ethnicity, or race, are entitled to receiving 9 years of compulsory education in schools. Second, the law states that special education schools and classes shall be established exclusively for children with visual or hearing impairments and intellectual disabilities. Furthermore, regular schools shall accept children with disabilities who are able to adapt to learning in regular classrooms, and the classes need to have equipped facilities that can accommodate children’s special needs while providing training to teachers and other school personnel to better work with children with special needs. Third, extra bonus pay is a mandatory fringe benefit to all teachers who work with children with disabilities in special schools, classes, and learning in regular classes (LRC) of regular schools. In addition, for teachers working in rural or economically impoverished areas, there is another kind of government offered bonus pay. Fourth, the per capita government funding for students with disabilities shall be higher than that of normally developing students in regular schools. Lastly, the law mandates that there shall be no rejection of school-age children with disabilities in any kinds of schools, including special education schools and regular schools. In the occurrence of any rejection case, there shall be punitive consequences for school administrators in charge of school admission.
In summary, despite the nature of a general national education law, the reauthorized Compulsory Education Law (2006) reveals a legislation trend that emphasizes the enforcement of a zero reject principle of school admission for children with disabilities under the circumstances of lack of exclusive special education legislations. Further, the law provides for enhanced funding for special education (for both students with disabilities and special educators). Lastly, the law specifies necessary classroom equipment and resources for the education of students with special needs.
The LPPD, which was issued originally in 1990, is a legislative milestone in the China’s disability and special education field because it is the first law that stipulates exclusively the rights of children with disabilities for rehabilitation, education, vocation, social life, and other legal rights. This law also gives rise to specific regulations that promote prevention, early diagnosis and appropriate assessment and evaluation, and treatment of persons with a disability. Since its reauthorization in 2008, more specific provisions were stipulated related to the improvement of the quality of inclusive education for students with disabilities in compulsory education schools. In addition, LPPD stresses that vocational training centers and higher education institutions should enhance their admission and accessibility aspects for students with disabilities and highlight the importance of teacher education and professional training for special education professionals.
Compared to the Compulsory Education Law, LPPD is more comprehensive and involves almost all aspects of life for children with disabilities. Although the Compulsory Education Law and LPPD have laid a solid foundation for the provisions of appropriate education to all children with disabilities in China, they both fall short on ensuring comprehensive rights for children with disabilities since the provisions are relatively narrow and limited and the statutes are too brief and imprecise which leaves too much room for different interpretations.
Another important legal component document for China’s special education is the Regulations on the Education of Persons with Disabilities (REPD) (State Council of China, 1994). REPD focuses on nine specific special education sections that include: general provisions; preschool education; compulsory education; vocational education; secondary education and above; teachers; official funding and financial support; rewards and punishments; and supplementary provisions. In 2013, a draft of REPD reauthorization was under public and expert review. Compared to the 1994 version, the new REPD (State Council of China, 2013) draft has shown some dramatic changes in both structure and contents. For instance, it has six sections including: general provisions, special education in regular schools, special education in special schools, special education teachers, assurance and supervision, and legal responsibilities. More importantly, the new REPD displays a clear trend that puts an intensifying emphasis on the implementation of inclusive education in all schools and early childhood education in China.
However, Wang (2007) indicated that when the above Chinese education and disability laws and regulations are compared to more sophisticated special education laws in such countries as the United States and the United Kingdom, limitations and weakness are quite obvious due to their lack of exclusive provisions and nonexistence of enforceable mechanism to effectively execute the statutes. Further, China’s education and disability laws appear to use lots of rhetorical language that is often too vague to be useful regarding executive process and accountability. At this writing, China needs a more comprehensive and exclusive special education law that lays a sophisticated, evidence-based foundation for addressing critical special education issues that include the following: definition and identification of disability; accurate diagnosis; effective early intervention; access to regular schools; best practice inclusive education instruction; exemplary teacher qualities and qualifications; research-based adaptive and functional curricula; meaningful evaluation of students’ progress and outcomes; specific funding; and students and parents’ legal rights (Deng & Zhou, 2005; Pang, 2009).
In China, people with disabilities rarely choose to stand up and fight for their own rights legally due to their traditional cultural value and belief of obedience and compliance to authority and a pervasive social climate of stereotypical or discriminative attitudes toward people with disabilities. Many citizens either lack awareness of their rights or have concerns about their rights but are afraid of fighting for them publicly (Jiang, 2011). Litigations by families of children with disabilities against school authority are extremely rare if they exist at all in China. Chinese citizens live in a social and cultural context where parents regard schools and teachers as professional authorities as such they tend to believe and pay respect to professionals who in their belief can make the best decisions for their children’s education. Although parents’ responsibility for ensuring their children’s right to receive compulsory education is mentioned in some Chinese laws and regulations, the provisions are not elaborated specifically and thus are impractical (Liu, 2011). After an extensive literature search on disability litigation cases in China, the authors found only a few cases which are discussed in the next section.
One case concerned a person with a physical disability who was wheel chair bound. One day when he went to a bank to open a bank account, he was unable to enter the bank because of no accessible ramp for his wheel chair. He sued the bank and the government agencies that sponsored the bank building for not providing necessary accommodations – accessible ramp in public settings. Unfortunately, he lost the case because the court ruled that there is no specific law or regulation mandating accessible facilities in commercial buildings (Jiang, 2011). Due to publicity and hearsay, the case had a positive impact because more people with disabilities came to realize their rights and were willing to fight to protect their rights. There were a few other similar litigations involving law suits against train services for not offering accessible seats on the train for riders with disabilities and an another suit against the city metro services for denying discount tickets to people with disabilities (Chengdu Business Daily, 2009; Luan & Li, 2011).
Education interventions and services are provided to school-age children and youth with disabilities through a two-track system in China. In the Kindergarten thru-9 grade public school system, students with disabilities are educated in either segregated special education schools or regular schools through LRC models. For young children with disabilities, early intervention services are sporadic and are often targeted to special populations such as children with visual or hearing impairments (Deng et al., 2001). Positively, recent developments have focused on private kindergartens that are accepting and providing services for children with intellectual disabilities and private early intervention centers founded by parents of children with autism spectrum disorders to provide interventions for their children as well as parent training (Zhang, Wang, Xu, & Ju, in press).
Unlike many developed countries where special education schools are either no longer in existence or in the minority, special education schools in China are regarded as the backbone of the whole special education system. China has three kinds of special education schools that are funded and administered by China’s Ministry of Education. They are the Schools for the Blind and Visually Impaired, the Schools for the Deaf and Hearing Impaired, and the Schools for Children with Intellectual Disabilities (Gu, 2007). A 2012 survey reported that there are 1,853 special education schools in China of which 32 are schools for students with visual impairments, 456 are schools for students with hearing impairments, 408 are schools for students with intellectual impairments, and 957 schools for students with a variety of disabilities (Ministry of Education in China, 2013).
LRC is China’s version of inclusion. It started in the 1980s as a practical solution for allowing a large number of children with disabilities, who had no regional special schools or programs to attend, go to community regular schools to receive education (Chen, 1996). Over the years, LRC continued to evolve due to increasing legal and political supports. Today in China, LRC has become a major special education service system provider for children with disabilities, especially those with mild and moderate special education needs (McCabe, 2003). In fact, recent special education enrollment statistics show that more than half of students with disabilities attending schools are educated in regular schools via LRC (Ministry of Education in China, 2013). As for LRC practices, instructional resource classrooms are employed extensively especially in regular schools in large metropolis such as Beijing and Shanghai (Li & Zhang, 2008). Because of the emerging LRC practice, today special education schools are beginning to serve as resource centers for regular school teachers to be trained to instruct students with disabilities in their classrooms.
However, research seems to suggest that the quality of LRC instructional practices is relatively low due to: a lack of specialists; a shortage of personnel; inadequate funding; and limited technology (Qian & Jiang, 2004; Qing, Liu, Yang, & He, 2005; Xiao, 2005). Lastly, another form of China’s special education service is the limited use of self-contained classes within regular schools. In the 2012 school year, there were only 448 special classrooms attached to primary schools and 25 attached to high schools across the whole country (Ministry of Education in China, 2013).
Vocational education for students with disabilities often begins after students finish their 9-year compulsory education. But some special education schools provide vocational education in their training programs. According to China’s Disabled Persons’ Federation (China’s Disabled Persons Federation [CDPF], 2012) data, there were 152 secondary vocational training programs serving 10,442 students nationwide in 2012. The vocational training programs are highly skill oriented and skills of training are very specific to trainees with disabilities. For example, students with visual impairments are often trained in physical therapy (e.g., acupuncture and massage) and/or musical skills (Xu, 2012). In addition, most programs are highly focused on the training of practical life and work skills.
Higher education services and supports for students with disabilities began in the 1980s. With the provisions of 1990 LPPD, some universities started to admit academically capable students with disabilities who were able to pass their entrance exams (Deng et al., 2001). Currently, China has 17 higher education colleges that enroll 4,000 students with disabilities (Ding, 2013). Despite the good progress being made in higher education services and supports for students with disabilities in China, both quantity and quality of services are under question (Yu, Wang, & Chen, 2010). Furthermore, only limited opportunities exist for students with disabilities to study certain majors at selected institutions (Qu, Zhao, & Xiao, 2007).
In addition to public and private school education services and supports, community-based rehabilitation services are implemented independently and play an important role in the whole special education service and support system for people with disabilities (Tang & Cong, 2003). Under the guidance of the Developmental Guidelines of the 9th Five-year Plan for People with Disabilities (State Council of China, 1996), community-based rehabilitation services have spread across China increasingly between 1996 and 2005. According to the CDPF data (2007), 1,086 counties and 621 cities provide community-based rehabilitation services and supports for people with disabilities in 2005. While this is a positive aspect, these services and supports place more rehabilitative emphasis on health and medical welfare services rather than educational, vocational, and psychological interventions.
Research on Chinese families of children with disabilities is limited, however, recently researchers have reported a number of findings (Liu, Lambert, & Lambert, 2007; Tsang, Tam, Chan, & Cheung, 2003; Wang, Michaels, & Day, 2011; Zhang & Li, 2005). Wang et al. (2011) investigated the coping strategies to stress between Chinese and Western parents of children with severe disabilities, intellectual disabilities, and autism spectrum disorders. Their findings indicate similar levels of high stress among the Chinese and Western parents. However, Chinese parents tended to perceive higher levels of stress due to pessimism. Tsang et al. (2003) investigated coping styles and emotional feelings of Chinese parents related to raising a child with a disability. These researchers reported that stigma exists about mental illness in the Chinese culture, and many families feel ashamed about having a child with a disability, thinking that mental illness is the punishment for parents’ behavior, particularly, the mother’s behavior. Zhang and Li (2005) surveyed 200 parents of children with intellectual disabilities to investigate their stress level and influencing factors. The researcher reported there was no gender effect between fathers and mothers on stress level. However, parents of children in different grades differ significantly on stress levels and that parents’ stress is correlated highly with their coping strategies, quality of life, and children’s behavior.
As for parents’ perceived needs and support related to raising a child with a disability, Wang and Michaels (2009) noted that Chinese families of children with severe disabilities perceived the need for more community services, information, and family/social support. Further, Wang and Michaels indicated that families of children with autism spectrum disorders tended to report greater needs for information and supports than those parents of children with intellectual disabilities or physical disabilities. With respect to supports for families of children with disabilities, there is almost no systematic and comprehensive service and support system for parents of children with disabilities in China (Wang et al., 2011).
There are only a few semigovernmental organizations and nonprofit programs that aim at reducing parents’ stress and anxiety toward raising children with disabilities and/or training them in parental management skills to work with their children more effectively. China Disabled Persons Foundation (CDPF) is a semigovernmental organization that has established successfully two large parent organizational support groups. One group is for parents, relatives, and friends of people with intellectual disabilities and another is for people with mental illness and disorders. CDPF offers a platform for parents, relatives, and friends of people with disabilities to share information and their experiences with each other, work together to support families in need, improve educational quality, and protect parents’ legal rights through advocacy.
There are semigovernmental parent organizations funded by the Chinese governments to train parents of children with disabilities related to improving the quality of education and rehabilitation for their children. For example, some local and regional governments in Shanxi have started to pilot Parent School Models to integrate different resources such as medical services, and community and professional services for children with disabilities. Another type of informal family support organization is parent to parent support.
In China today, there is an increasing number of intervention programs and centers initiated by parents of children with disabilities. Parents in these programs and centers unite together to seek professional assistance, public funding, welfare, and other kinds of resources for their children with disabilities. A well respected program, which was established in 2012, is Beijing Rong Ai Rong Le Organization of Persons with Intellectual Disabilities. It is a nongovernmental organization (NGO) for people with intellectual disabilities that advocates for their rights to increase available services and assists and supports their families. Similar to all types of family or parent organizations, their partnership with the local school system is challenging and at times troubling.
Since teacher quality has been regarded as one of the most significant determinants of the effectiveness of special education services, it makes the improvement of teacher quality a priority for the country. In 2012, there were 43,697 full-time special education teachers serving 378,751 students with disabilities in special education schools (Ministry of Education in China, 2013). However, research findings indicate that more than three quarters of special education schools have a shortage of qualified teachers and thus an intense demand for special education teachers and professionals exist (Wang, 2012). Due to this shortage, teacher preparation and professional training has become a central issue of Chinese special education.
For a long period before the 1980s, special education teachers were mainly trained based on unsystematic approaches such as observation and coaching (Deng & Harris, 2008). The first special education teacher preparation program was the Teacher Education College of Zhaodong. It was established in 1981 and was followed by Nanjing Special Education Teacher Education College in 1984. After these two college programs, many other teacher education colleges followed (Wang & Gu, 2001). The early teacher education programs were 2-year college credential programs, and it was not until the 1990s that teacher college programs elevated to 3 or 4 years higher education institutions. It is estimated that thus far there are more than 50 public universities offering special education teacher preparation programs in China, and most of which were established after 2000 (Wang, 2012). There are two levels of degree programs for teacher preparation at the undergraduate level, namely, a 3-year associate degree and 4-year bachelor level degree. For graduate level special education teacher preparation, there are only a dozen master’s degree programs and three doctoral degree granting programs in the entire country.
The overall objectives of teacher preparation programs vary according to the aforementioned two-level preparation systems. For instance, research universities, which are administered directly by the Chinese Ministry of Education such as the Beijing Normal University and East China Normal University, often set their goal of preparing special education professionals who can apply innovative strategies in their teaching activities. The goal of institutions with a 3-year associate degree programs is to prepare students with practical skills to work in special education schools.
In most special education teacher preparation programs, students are required to take three kinds of curricula: general curriculum, basic subject curriculum, and professional curriculum. With a focus on equipping students with a broad knowledge base, general curriculum typically includes English, computer sciences, military knowledge, physical exercises, or sports (Li, 2012). The basic subject curriculum includes required course work in educational theories, psychology, instructional strategy, and curriculum design. The professional curriculum typically includes course work concerned with characteristics of students with different kinds of disabilities and instructional methods, Braille and sign language, and research methods in special education. In addition to the above curriculum course work, a certain number of field-based practicum hours in special education schools are required for the degrees (Wang, 2012).
In-service training is an important means for special education teachers to continuously improve the quality of their professional practices after entering the profession. Research shows that only 30.9% of Chinese special education teachers received their first degree from special education teacher programs and only 21.8% have a terminal special education degree after their first nonspecial education degree (Wang, 2012). Because of this lack of adequate and specific preservice preparations, in-service training for many special education teachers in China is necessary to make them more effective teachers.
In-service professional training for special education teachers is often more focused yet flexible to meet professional development needs of special education teachers. Because many special education teachers do not graduate with a special education degree, it is critical to offer them some systematic professional training on: instructional strategies, effective behavioral management interventions, assessment and evaluation procedures, the development of individual educational plans, and communication skills to work with families. The primary focus of in-service professional training is to enhance special education teachers’ problem solving skills. A secondary focus of in-service professional training is to offer special education teachers great opportunities to learn and keep up with the current research and evidence-based practices in the field which can enhance and improve their instruction.
Like many developing countries, China faces a severe problem of special education teacher shortage both in quantity and quality (Wang, Wang, Zhu, Feng, & Zhao, 2012). Although inclusive education practices are increasingly promoted in China, there is a dire reality that there are not enough highly qualified special education teachers in special education and regular schools who are knowledgeable about utilizing the best inclusive educational practices. This shortage of highly trained teachers is partly due to the dearth of special education graduate training programs. It is strongly recommended by the authors that both preservice and in-service preparation and training programs need to be reformed to meet the rapid growth of students with special needs who are being placed increasingly into inclusive education programs. If special education undergraduate and graduate training programs at comprehensive universities are not reformed and allowed to embrace research evidence and best practices, the special education needs of the students will not be met.
China’s special education has made great strides over the last two or three decades (Zhang et al., in press). The progress of special education in China has manifested in two main areas: (1) positive progressive changes in special education legislations and policy and (2) steady expansion and improvement of special education services and supports. Despite the lack of a specific special education law, Chinese legislations and policies on special education have continually evolved in a positive direction. Some of the new laws also have adopted broader classification system of disability categories changing its coverage from three types of disabilities to eight types of disabilities, for example, in the reauthorized LPPD. Numerous reauthorized statutes (e.g., Compulsory Education Law and LPPD) have uniformly laid emphasis on the values and principles of antidiscrimination and equality. When China became a signatory nation of the United Nations Convention on Rights for Individuals with Disabilities in 2008, it signaled the Chinese government’s attitude and determination in pursuing better protections of rights of individuals with disabilities. New government regulations (e.g., the draft reauthorization of the Regulations on the Education of People with Disabilities, 2013) have made explicit mandates in supporting the principle of zero reject regarding school admission of children with disabilities. Also, stronger governmental and political policies to development and advance special education are evident on the Chinese federal and local governments’ actions in increasing special education funding. With a goal of spending 4% of annual Gross Domestic Products (GDP) on education, the Chinese government has made a dramatic increase in its investment in special education. For example, last year a dozen Chinese universities received a special fund from the central government ranging from 10 to15 million dollars to build new teacher training centers. Hopefully, China’s recent special education legislations will continue to provide steady forward looking progressive policies and resources that will strengthen special education for students with disabilities for years to come.
Likewise, special education services in China have undergone steady growth and expansion in terms of the size of service systems and the number of students with disabilities being served since the 1980s. There has been a steady increase in the number of special education schools built over the years allowing more students with severe special needs to be educated. Also, there has been significant increases in the enrollment of students with moderate and mild disabilities in regular schools through LRC where they receive inclusive education. For example, compared with 292 special education schools in 1978, there were 1,853 special education schools at the end of 2012. Although the increase of special education schools does not seem to be in line with the international trend of reducing segregated special education schools and promoting inclusive education, special education schools in China still play a unique role in educating many Chinese students with disabilities who cannot go to regular schools for various reasons. Considering the reality and current situations in China, special education schools and inclusion (e.g., LRC) in general education schools will continue to coexist for a certain period of time to address the relatively low enrollment rate of students with disabilities especially in rural areas. The authors are optimistic that China’s recent progress in special education will eventually lead to and ensure the compulsory education rights of children with disabilities.
Lastly, China’s recent rapid progress in special education teacher training is extremely encouraging. Despite an existing shortage of teacher education programs that can prepare qualified special education teachers, there has been a steady increase in the number of special education teachers today as compared to a decade ago. This is the result of China’s funding of higher education to train more highly qualified special education teachers in a variety of institutions. In essence, both quantity and quality issues in special education teacher training programs have gained the attention of the Chinese government and educational authorities, and the government views this area as a national priority for the improvement of special education in China.
As China’s special education attempts to rapidly grow in order to meet the needs of a large underserved population of children with disabilities, there are a great number of challenges. Researchers have summarized a wide array of challenges at both macro and micro levels (Ellsworth & Zhang, 2007; Kritzer, 2011; McCabe, 2003; McLoughlin, Zhou, & Clark, 2005; Zhang et al., in press). Chief among those challenges identified are: access to special education, a lack of exclusive special education law, more professional/teacher training, best practices curriculum development and instructional strategies (e.g., whole-class teaching model), development of an accurate assessment system for diagnosis, effective student progress monitoring, meaningful evaluation of learning outcomes, expansion of early intervention, effective inclusion practices, public awareness about disabilities and special education, increased special education funding, state of the art vocational and higher education for students with disabilities, sufficient classroom and instructional resources, special teacher challenges (e.g., big class size and heavier teaching load), reformed special education teacher training, more access to transportation, the need to increase instructional technology, and consumer friendly parental advocacy. This long list of identified challenges presents Chinese special education challenges at both micro and macro levels including ecological and/or contextual challenges (e.g., societal attitude, public awareness) (Ellsworth & Zhang, 2007). In the section that follows three major areas of challenges surrounding school system are delineated, namely, policy and system barriers, lack of resources and support system (qualified professionals), and lack of evidence-based practices in special education.
The first set of school system challenges involves legislations and policies and related system barriers that impact special education. An examination of legislation in the United States or the United Kingdom reveals that these counties have highly specific and comprehensive special education laws. However, China’s legislation related to special education policies and regulations is neither detailed, nor comprehensive and exclusive which becomes a source of many special education problems in China. For example, in China’s generic disability and education laws, there are no clearly defined disability identification and classification mechanisms, no specified range of services that children with disabilities are entitled to, and no legal consequences specified for schools if they violate the rights of children with disabilities and/or families. Due to these aspects, there is no clear regulatory or executive mechanism existing for enforcing implementation of statutes related to special education system and practices. Thus, a system barrier exits which prevents the full and meaningful education of students with special education needs. This system barrier correlates with access to the right to education for hundreds of thousands of Chinese children with disabilities (especially those with severe needs and/or from rural and remote areas). Further, it interferes with the development of any formal special education system channel which could provide a remedy and enforceable provisions to educate all children with disabilities.
China’s special education system is severely challenged due to a lack of resources (e.g., school materials, funding, buildings, supplies, technology) and a support system (e.g., human capital – teachers and other professionals). Lack of funding, which is the result of poor laws and policies, becomes a strong risk factor in providing effective special education practices. Also, it leads to large class size and heavier workloads for teachers which negatively challenge them to offer effective instruction for their students with disabilities. According to McLoughlin et al. (2005), the combination of large class size, inadequate technology support, and a lack of professional supports to special and regular education teachers makes inclusive education practices extremely hard to implement if not impossible to take place in regular schools.
Teachers are the core of human power in special education. However in China, there is still a significant gap between the supply and demand for special education teachers due to the increasing number of students with disabilities that have been certified for services in LRC and the need to staff the newly built special education schools. Another complicating aspect is the lack of preservice teacher training in special education that general education teachers are exposed to during their higher education degree programs. In-service programs for general education teachers has increased, however, it remains inadequate. All of the above illustrates the need to reform teacher education for special and general education teachers at the university levels. In addition, the significant increase in students with disabilities receiving services has also created a need for support professionals such as physical therapists, occupational therapists, speech pathologists, and school psychologists. Filling this need is challenged due to the few profession support training programs at China’s higher education institutions.
Teachers in special education are left in a position where they will inevitably encounter practical and technical challenges related to effectively implementing inclusive education due to: a lack of behavioral management skills, inadequate evidence-based instructional strategies, and invalid assessment and evaluation procedures. China’s teachers have a limited exposure to established research literature in evidence-based instructional practices or are trained in outdated course work. Unfortunately, this creates weak special education practices which manifest itself in early childhood, vocational, and higher education instruction for people with disabilities. China’s special education system needs to develop a special educational service continuum for children with disabilities at different age stage. More emphasis should be placed on early childhood education which may lead to the remediation of learning and social difficulties. In addition, students with disabilities need to be exposed to vocational training during their early teenage years to enhance their job skills. Lastly, for students with disabilities that have the potential to participate in higher education, they need expanded instructional experiences in self-advocacy, time management skills, study skills, note taking, mastery of technological innovations, and independent life skills so that they are prepared to be successful at universities.
In conclusion, this chapter has painted a portrait of China’s special education through describing its origin, evolution, and progress from a legal, family, and service aspect as well as discussing issues and challenges. Despite a short and disrupted history, special education has gradually evolved over a century, particularly in the last three decades. Although steady progresses are made, special education in China still has a long way to go as it has to face a myriad of challenges and meet the growing needs of the largest disability population in the world.
Chen, Y. Y. (1996). Making special education compulsory and inclusive in China. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(1), 47–58.
Chengdu Business Daily. (2009). Disabled people sue minister of railways because of lack of seats for the disabled. Chengdu Business Daily. November 2. Retrieved from http://gongyi.sohu.com/20091102/n267889988.shtml
China’s Disabled Persons Federation. (2006). 2006 nian di er ci quan guo can ji ren chou yang diao cha zhu yao shu ju gong bao (di er hao). [Report of main findings of the second national sample survey on people with disabilities in China in 2006 (1st).] Retrieved from http://www.gov.cn/fwxx/cjr/content_1311943.htm
China’s Disabled Persons Federation. (2007). 2006 nian di er ci quan guo can ji ren chou yang diao cha zhu yao shu ju gong bao (di yi hao). [Report of main findings of the second national sample survey on people with disabilities in China in 2006 (2nd).] Retrieved from http://www.gov.cn/fwxx/cjr/content_1308385.htm
China’s Disabled Persons Federation. (2012). 2012 nian zhong guo can ji ren shi ye fa zhan tong ji gong bao. [Statistics of services for people with disabilities in China in 2012.] Retrieved from http://www.cdpf.org.cn/ggtz/content/2013-03/26/content_30440283.htm
China’s State Council. (2008). Guan yu cu jin can ji ren shi ye fa zhan de yi jian. [Suggestions on the improvement of services for people with disabilities.] Retrieved from http://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2008/content_987906.htm
China’s State Council. (2009). Guan yu jin yi bu jia kuai te shu jiao yu fa zhan de yi jian. [Suggestions on accelerating the development of special education in China.] Retrieved from http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2009-05/08/content_1308951.htm
Deng, M., & Harris, K. (2008). Meeting the needs of students with disabilities in general education classrooms in China. Teacher Education and Special Education, 31(3), 195–207.
Deng, M., Poon-Mcbrayer, K. F., & Farnsworth, E. B. (2001). The development of special education in China: A sociocultural review. Remedial and Special Education, 22(5), 288–298.
Deng, M., & Zhou, H. Y. (2005). Advocacy on the legislation of special education law in China. Special Education in China, 7, 3–6.
Ding, X. Z. (2013). Challenges and countermeasures in vocational education for people with disabilities. University Education, 5, 27–29.
Editorial Department of Year-Book of Education. (1984). Year-book of education in China 1949–1981. Beijing: Encyclopedia of China Publishing House.
Ellsworth, N. J., & Zhang, C. (2007). Progress and challenges in China’s special education development: Observations, reflections, and recommendations. Remedial and Special Education, 28(1), 58–64.
Epstein, I. (1988). Special education provisions in the People’s Republic of China. Comparative Education, 24, 365–375.
Gu, D. (2007). Analysis of special education provisions in the reauthorization of the compulsory education law. Chinese Journal of Special Education, 5, 9–12.
Gu, D. Q. (1993). Teshu jiaoyu lifa de fazhan. [Changing of legislation on special education in China]. Te Shu Jiao Yu Van Jiie, 1, 1–9.
Jiang, Y. (2011). Strategic litigation as a trigger to enforce human rights in China: From the perspective of rights of the disabled. Master’s thesis, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary. Retrieved from http://www.etd.ceu.hu/2012/jiang_yitong.pdf
Kritzer, J. B. (2011). Special education in China. Eastern Education Journal, 40(1), 57–63.
Li, H. C. (2012). A study about the status of the general educational curriculum provision of Chinese universities. Fudan Education Forum, 2(4), 21–27.
Li, N., & Zhang, F. (2008). A research on the resource room program of learning in the regular classroom in Shanghai. Chinese Journal of Special Education, 10, 66–72.
Liu, J. Q. (2011). On parents’ obligation to protect disabled children’s right to receive compulsory education. Chinese Journal of Special Education, 6, 3–7.
Liu, M., Lambert, C. E., & Lambert, V. A. (2007). Caregiver burden and coping patterns of Chinese parents of a child with a mental illness. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 16, 86–95.
Luan, Q. P., & Li, J. v. (2011, August). Shenzhen Metro Corporation, Shenzhen Futian District People’s Court.
McCabe, H. (2003). The beginnings of inclusion in the People’s Republic of China. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 28(1), 16–22.
McLoughlin, C. S., Zhou, Z., & Clark, E. (2005). Reflections on the development and status of contemporary special education services in China. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 273–283.
Ministry of Education in China. (2013). 2013 nian Quan guo jiao yu shi ye fa zhan tong ji gong bao. [Basic statistics of education in 2013.] Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/s7567/201308/156428.html
National People’s Congress of People’s Republic of China. (1986). Zhong hua ren min gong he guo yi wu jiao yu fa. [Compulsory Education Law of People’s Republic of China.] Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/moe_619/200606/15687.html
National People’s Congress of People’s Republic of China. (1990). Zhong hua ren min gong he guo can ji ren bao zhang fa. [Protection for people with disabilities law of People’s Republic of China.] Retrieved from http://www.cdpf.org.cn/zcfg/content/2007-11/29/content_30316065.htm
National People’s Congress. (2006). Yi wu jiao yu fa. [Compulsory education law.] Retrieved from http://www.law-lib.com/law/law_view.asp?id=163284
National People’s Congress. (2008). Can ji ren bao zhang fa. [Law on the protection of persons with disabilities.] Retrieved from http://www.chinanews.com/gj/kong/news/2008/04-24/1231112.shtml
Pang, Y. (2009). A review of China’s special education law and its impact on the living standards of individuals with disabilities in China. Paper presented at the 18th Annual Conference of the Global Awareness Society International, May.
Piao, Y. X. (1992). Woguo gudai dui canji ren de taidu. [Characteristics of and attitudes toward disability in ancient China]. Xiandai Te Shu Jiao Yu, 1, 34–35.
Qian, L., & Jiang, X. (2004). An investigation report on current situation of the development of mainstreaming in China. Chinese Journal of Special Education, 5, 1–5.
Qing, S., Liu, Z., Yang, X., & He, E. (2005). Probe into the supporting system and assessment of mainstreaming on children with disabilities in the country. Chinese Journal of Special Education, 10, 68–72.
Qu, X. L., Zhao, B., & Xiao, Y. (2007). Higher education for people with disabilities in China. Jiaoshi Bolan, 12, 41–42.
State Council of China. (1994). Zhong guo can ji ren jiao yu tiao li. [Regulations on the education of persons with disabilities of People’s Republic of China.] Retrieved from http://www.cdpf.org.cn/zcfg/content/2001-11/06/content_30316064.htm
State Council of China. (1996). Zhong guo can ji ren shi ye jiu wu fa zhan gang yao. [Developmental guidelines of the 9th five-year plan for people with disabilities.] Retrieved from http://www.cdpf.org.cn/zcfg/content/2001-11/06/content_30317548.htm
State Council of China. (2013). The reauthorization of regulations on the education of people with disabilities [draft]. Retrieved from http://www.chinalaw.gov.cn/article/cazjgg/201302/20130200384148.shtml
Tang, B. Y., & Cong, X. F. (2003). A study on present situation problem and measures of domestic community-based rehabilitation. Journal of Dezhou University, 19(1), 17–20.
The Office of National Sample Survey of People with Disabilities. (1988). Handbook of disabled persons in China. Beijing: Dizhen Publishing.
Tsang, H. W. H., Tam, P. K. C., Chan, F., & Cheung, W. M. (2003). Stigmatizing attitudes towards individuals with mental illness in Hong Kong: Implications for their recovery. Journal of Community Psychology, 31(4), 383–396.
United Nations Convention of the Rights for Individuals with Disabilities. (2008). New York, NY: United Nations.
Wang, H. P. (2007). A study on the necessity and feasibility of special education legislation. Special Education in China, 7, 3–6.
Wang, P., & Michaels, C. A. (2009). Chinese families of children with severe disabilities: Family needs and available support. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 34(2), 21–32.
Wang, P. S., Michaels, C. A., & Day, M. S. (2011). Stresses and coping strategies of Chinese families with children with autism and other developmental disabilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41(6), 783–795.
Wang, Y. (2012). Special education teacher preparation in China. Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press.
Wang, Y., & Gu, D. Q. (2001). The system of main curricula of special teacher preparation education programs of normal universities in the 21st century. Research in Special Education, 2, 3.
Wang, Y., Wang, Z., Zhu, N., Feng, Y., & Zhao, L. (2012). A Survey of special education schools’ faculty team structure and demands. Chinese Journal of Special Education, 11, 3–8.
Xiao, F. (1996). Teshu ertong xinli yu jiaoyu. [Psychology and education for special children.] Beijing: Huaxia Press.
Xiao, F. (2005). Mainstreaming in China: History, actuality, perspectives. Chinese Journal of Special Education, 3, 3–7.
Xu, B. (2012). Vocational education for the disabled: Problems and strategies. Journal of Zhejiang Normal University, 37(6), 95–99.
Yang, H. L., & Wang, H. B. (1994). Special education in China. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 93–105.
Ye, L. Y., & Piao, Y. X. (1995). Te shu jiaoyu xue. [The study of special education.] Fujan: Xiamen.
Yu, L., & Zhang, D. (1994). Shi lun zhangjian te shu jiaoyu sixiang tixi. zhong de zhiye jiaoyu guan. [An analysis of Zhang Jian’s vocational education ideology in developing special education]. Xiandai Te Shu Jiao Yu, 2, 9–11.
Yu, S. H., Wang, J. Y., & Chen, J. (2010). Current situation of higher education of disabled people in China and reflection on development. Theory Research, 3, 109–111.
Zhang, D., Wang, M., Xu, Y., & Ju, S. (in press). Special education in China. In and X. Li (Ed.), Education in China: Cultural influences, global perspectives and social challenges (pp. 30–47). New York, NY: Nova Scientific Publishers.
Zhang, F. J., & Li, J. (2005). Stress parents of children with mental retardation and relevant factors. Psychological Science, 28(2), 347–350.