









































Opiyo, R. Global Journal of  
Transformative Education (2019) 1:1, 52-67. 
DOI  10.14434/gjte.v1i1.25981

Open Access

Published by the Global Insitutute of Transformative Education (http://www.gite.education)
© Opiyo, R. 2019 Open Access This journal is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 
NonCommercial NonDerivative 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which 
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction without revision in any non-commercial medium, provided you 
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license,

Inclusive Practice and Transformative Leadership Are Entwined: 
Lessons for Professional Development of School Leaders in 
Kenya

Rose Atieno Opiyo1

Abstract

Inclusive Education (IE) is arguably a popular discourse in education systems as, not merely a concept 
that addresses concerns of Learners with Special Needs (LSNs) but rather a relatively broad approach looking 
into how to transform learning environments to respond to diversity.At the heart of human rights movement, 
Education for All (EFA) and social equity agenda, IE has lots of educational, social and economic premiums 
attached to it. Increasingly, what slows down the progress towards IE in Kenya is documented, but still, less is 
known about leadership acumen of school leaders yet, the art and science of transformation of the school into 
an effective inclusive environment squarely lies in the province of school leaders. Anchored on the Social Model 
of Disability , this paper presents results based on an extensive secondary data review . It provides evidence 
that IE and transformative leadership are closely knit. It urges that all initiatives geared towards supporting 
effective implementation of IE must interrogate leadership ability of school leaders and develop them as critical 
ingredients in turning around schools into effective inclusive learning environments.

Keywords: Inclusive Education, School Leaders, Transformative Leadership, Professional Development

Full listing of authors and contacts can be 
found at the end of this article.

Introduction and Background
International commitment to human rights has not 

only changed our views about individual’s “disabili-
ty” but it has also reduced emphasis on deficits in any 
social context. According to Ouane (2008), Inclusive 
Education moves beyond understanding, overcoming 
or tolerating disability but rather, accepting, valuing 
and demonstrating a broad concern on gender, ethnic-
ity, social class conditions, health and human rights, to 
encompass universal involvement, access, participation 
and achievement.

Arnesen, Mietola & Lahelma, (2009), pinpoint that 
IE is not just adding on to existing structures, but per-
haps a broad outlook that entailes transformation of so-
cieties, communities and institutions such as schools to 
become diversity-sensitive. IE represents a belief that 
all students belong and are valued members of their 
classroom and school communities (Council of Minis-
ters of Education in Canada {CMEC}, 2008); Specht & 
Young, 2010). Specifically, Black- Hawkins, Florian and

Rouse (2007,p. 15) look at it as a process of increasing 
numbers of students attending mainstream schools, 
who in the past would have been prevented from doing 
so because of identified special educational needs.In 
their recommendations , Black and colleagues ex-
pressed that promotion of inclusion in regular schools 
must begin with designing buildings and facilities 
suitable for LSN. This stance is supported by Jill Black 
More (2006) who argues that diversity among learners, 
whether in linguistic, cultural or disability, is a positive 
force in educational work.

With the above difinitions in mind, inclusion means 
different things to different groups in different contexts. 
In disability conversations, Inclusive Educational Prac-
tice (IEP) addresses the current discourses and dilem-
ma between special education and integration. Broadly, 
the concept suggests a practice where (a) enrolment 
practice do not discriminate between learners with or 
without disability (b) school services and facilities are 
equally accessible to students with or without disability 
(c) curriculum programs are designed in such a way 
that learning needs are catered for (d) assessment and



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  53

certification procedures are responsive to the learn-
ing targets, goals, and outcomes (e) special services 
and equipment are supplied for learners to experi-
ence success in learning and, (f) school environment 
is friendly to both teachers and learners.

Generally, there is convergence of thought that 
IE is either, a process, an approach or a programme. 
As an ongoing process, Ainscow et al (2006) de-
scribes IE as that which has not reached a perfect 
state but rather is on the move. As a program and 
an approach, Odom (2000) looks at it as setting in 
which disabled and non-disabled peers benefit from 
common support services, an approach that entails 
addressing and responding to the diversity of needs 
of all learners through increasing participation in 
learning, cultures and communities, and reducing 
exclusion within and from education. Odom (2000) 
also adds that as an approach, it looks at teaching 
strategies or approaches that address the needs of 
students with a variety of backgrounds, learning 
styles, and abilities.To the aforementioned authors, 
IE is such a multiplex concept , basically, all that can 
contribute to an overall inclusive learning environ-
ment, in which students feel equally valued.

Timmons and Wagner (2008) looks beyond the 
education environments by seeing it as a foundation 
to an inclusive society since it provides opportunity 
for all students to be part of school communities to 
learn and grow alongside their peers. For these two 
authors, IE encompasses both academic and social 
life of a school. Corbett and Slee, (2000) supports 
inclusion as a philosophy of acceptance: 

It is about providing a framework within which 
all children- regardless of ability,  gender, lan-
guage, ethnic or cultural origin- can be valued 
equally, treated with respect and provided 
with equal opportunities at school…. is an un-
abashed announcement, a public and political 
declaration and celebration of difference which 
requires continual proactive responsiveness to 
foster an inclusive educational culture? (p. 134)

Features and Benefits of Inclusive Education
IE is not a marginal issue on how some learners 

can be integrated in mainstream education, but rather 
an approach that looks into how to transform educa-
tion systems and other learning environments in order 
to respond to the diversity and improving quality of 
education for all learners. It addresses and responds

to diversity by providing appropriate responses to the 
broad spectrum of learning needs, welcomes diversi-
ty reforms not only for special education but rather, 
reform of both the formal and non-formal education 
system benefiting all learners (Kalambouka, Farrell, 
Dyson, & Kaplan, (2007). Authors holding this view 
advance the debate on additional support to students 
within the regular school system, equal access to educa-
tion or making certain provisions for certain categories 
of children. Suffice to say, it is a never-ending search to 
find better ways of responding to diversity, living with 
difference and learning from difference. This way it 
fits as a more positive stimulus for fostering learning, 
amongst children and adults (Kalambouka, et al (2007).

Despite potential barriers to inclusion (such as 
teacher workload issues, a shortage of adequate sup-
ports, incomplete training for teachers and principals 
or legal questions) inclusive classrooms have been 
shown to benefit all students both socially and aca-
demically (Canadian Council on Learning, 2009; Cole, 
Waldron, & Majd, 2004; Crisman, 2008; Katz & Mirenda, 
2002). Convincing evidence exists affirming that it pro-
vides positive experience for all students .For instance, 
Timmons and Wagner (2008) identifies IE as a founda-
tion to an inclusive society as it provides opportunity 
for all students to be part of school communities to 
learn and grow alongside their peers.

In lieu of the above premiums, authors have con-
tinued to express that it should be further broadened 
to encompass both academic and social life of a school. 
Specifically, Timmons and Wagner’s study (2008) noted 
that children who are educated in inclusive settings are 
healthier, do better in school, enjoy going there more, 
and interact more positively with peers compared to 
students taught in less inclusive settings. Significant 
of all, LSNs from the study were more exposed to real 
environment situations with regards to diversity, and 
their non -disabled peers adopted to positive attitudes 
and actions towards them as a result of studying to-
gether in an inclusive classroom.

In determining whether education systems are in-
clusive three concepts emerge: Presence, Participation 
and Achievement of all students. “Presence” is con-
cerned with whether children are being educated and 
how reliably and punctually they attend. “Participation” 
relates to the quality of their experiences whilst they 
are inschool. To determine this, views of the learners 
must be incorporated. Finally, “Achievement” is about 
the outcomes of learning across the curriculum, not 
merely test or examination results. Definitely, this gives

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  54

it the most broad view which urges modifications in 
content, approaches, structures and strategies, with a 
common vision to cover all children of the appropriate 
age range remain a critical responsibility of the regular 
system as they seek to realization EFA goals (Kalam-
bouka, et al.2007)

In an effort to determine presence, participation 
and achievement, identification and removal of barriers 
is critical. This encompasses collecting, collating and 
evaluating information from a wide variety of sources 
in order to plan for improvement in policy and practice 
or using such evidence to stimulate creativity and prob-
lem-solving (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2006). Understanding 
of these barriers enables teachers and school leaders to 
be alert and to consider the impact the differences can 
cause. This is because it recognizes and serves many 
different categories of children who may be exclud-
ed from the education for instance : LSN, children of 
immigrants, child domestic workers, poverty stricken 
children, children of ethnic, language minorities, street 
children, children in conflict zones, child soldiers, chil-
dren of prisoners or imprisoned, and children affected 
or infected with HIV/AIDS (Department for Education 
and Skills {DfES}, 2004)

In the ensuing definitions we also appreciate that 
IE shifts away from integration. While the former views 
learners as the root cause of difficulties in the school, 
the latter shares in tenets highlighted in the social mod-
el of disability which continues to challenge systems to 
examine the barriers within the educational system and 
look for ways in which to promote participation and 
positive learning outcomes of all learner. Terzi points 
out this in her writing:

Special needs are not needs that arise in a child 
with disabilities with regard to a system that is 
fixed. Rather they are needs that arise between 
the child and the educational system as a whole 
when the system fails to adopt itself to the char-
acteristics of the child. (Terzi 2005, p. 448)
Primarily, IE aims to (a) bring out the best in the 

child, without alienating him/her, (b) provide the child 
with a warm and enriched environment, (c) assist the 
child in developing basic skills to cope with day to day 
challenges, (d) enable a child develop life skills for 
self-reliance, (e) help a child develop a desirable atti-
tude towards society. For effective assimilation of IE, 
three key aspects – policies, practices and culture – are 
important. Full presence, participation and achieve-
ment of children with disabilitie as well as, respect to 
childrens social, civil and education rights can be

realized by exploring some factors that are always left 
unexplored in less inclusive setting such as transforma-
tive leadership.

Inclusion and Education For All 
By welcoming every child, inclusion is an essen-

tial element of the whole Education For All (EFA) 
movement. It is framed within the context of wider 
international discussions around the United Nations 
Organizations’ agenda ,stimulated by the 1990 Jomtien 
Declaration. The Salamanca Statement on principles, 
policy and practice guiding education of LSNs (UNESCO 
1994) not only provides a Framework for leveraging 
policy and practice forward, but is arguably the most 
significant international document that has ever ap-
peared in IE conversations. In principle, this concept 
aligns with EFA goals as it seeks to provide universal 
access to basic education of good quality and com-
pels states to create environments in schools or basic 
education programs in which children are both able 
and enabled to learn. Such an environment must be 
inclusive of children, effective with children, friendly 
and welcoming to children, healthy and protective for 
children and gender sensitive.

The development of such child-friendly learning 
environments has increasingly been an essential part 
of the overall efforts by countries around the world 
to increase access to, and improve the quality of, their 
schools. Sharing at a meeting , held in June 2009 at Oslo 
on the results of the work of the OECD on equity in edu-
cation, a Norwegian Minister of Education (Bård Vegar 
Solhjell) in an opening speech described IE as a new 
compelling law on quality and equity for all by stating:

Inclusion and equity in education is the best long 
term instrument we have in order to secure eco-
nomic progress, as well as democracy and social 
stability…regular schools with an inclusive orien-
tation are the most effective means of combating 
discriminatory attitudes, building an inclusive 
society and achieving education for all.
IE development movement is anchored on human 

rights, equity and diversity (Riehl, 2000; Winzer and 
Mazurek, 2012) and around the right of every indi-
vidual to education, as stated in the 1948 Universal 
Declaration of Human Rights. In Article 26 , IE is not 
simply taken as a technical or organizational change 
but as movement with a clear philosophy that speaks to 
human right to education. It is a dynamic approach that 
looks at diversity and individual differences not as

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  55

problems, but as opportunities for enriching learning. 
At the core of this conversation is the pronouncement 
of UDHR, 1948 , Article 26 which states:

Everyone has the right to education... Education 
shall be free, at least in the elementary and fun-
damental stages and shall be directed to the full 
development of human personality, strengthen-
ing of respect for human rights and fundamental 
freedoms. It shall promote understanding, toler-
ance and friendship among all nations, racial or 
religious groups, and shall further the activities 
for the maintenance of peace. 
Equally, Article 2 and Article 23 of United Nations 

Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989) 
support this stance. In part, Article 23 stipulates:

 Children with disabilities should have effective 
access to and receive education, training, health 
care services, rehabilitation services, preparation 
for employment and recreation opportunities in 
a manner conducive to the child’s and to enable 
him /her achieve the fullest possible social inte-
gration and individual development, including 
his or her cultural and spiritual development.

 In the same document (UNCRC, 1989) Article 29, 
articulates central aims of education in the devel-
opment and nurturing all children to reach their 
fullest potential in terms of cognitive, emotional and 
creative capacities. Addressing this also is the UNES-
CO Convention Against Discrimination in Education 
(1960) and the Convention on the Elimination of All 
Forms of Discrimination against Women (1979) as 
the other key international human rights treaties 
that not only emphasize the prohibition but also the 
active elimination of discrimination.

A logical consequence of these rights is that all 
children have the right to receive the kind of educa-
tion that does not discriminate on any grounds such 
as caste, ethnicity, religion, economic status, refugee 
status, language, gender, disability etc. These con-
ventions not only provide measures be taken by the 
state to implement these rights in all learning envi-
ronments but demands a rights-based approach to 
education which is founded upon three principles (a) 
access to free and compulsory education, (b) equali-
ty inclusion and non-discrimination, and (c) the right 
to quality education, content and processes.

Guided by the above conventions, United Nations 
members at the World Conference on Special Needs 
Education adopted a guiding principle that schools

should accommodate all children regardless of their 
diverse physical, intellectual, social, emotional and lin-
guistic needs (UNESCO, 1994). The resulting Salamanca 
Statement recognized the necessity and urgency of 
providing education for children, youth and adults with 
special educational needs within the regular educa-
tion systems (UNESCO, 1994). IE puts emphasis on all 
groups of learners who may be at risk of marginaliza-
tion, exclusion or underachievement and gives a moral 
responsibility to families communities and states to 
ensure that those groups that are statistically most “at 
risk” are carefully monitored and that, where necessary, 
steps are taken to ensure their presence, participation 
and achievement in the education system. Based on 
the above declarations countries of the world inclusing 
Kenya are on the path towards addressing diversity in 
education environments and realization of inclusive 
schools.

Inclusive Education in the Kenyan Context
Kenya places education as top agenda in both policy 

and investment by regarding education as one of the 
inputs to ensure the quality of life of its citizens. Every 
child has the right to education irrespective of age, 
gender, background, socio-economic status, race, caste, 
creed, religion and ability. The Constitution of Kenya 
(Republic of Kenya, 2010), section 43 (1), affirms the 
right of every person to education. Further, section 53 
(1) (b) states that every child has the right to free and 
compulsory basic education. The Sessional Paper No. 
1 (Republic of Kenya, 2005a) provides a policy frame-
work for the education sector in Kenya, including the 
requisite legal context, within which to design, develop 
and implement inclusive education programs. The con-
stitution outlines policy recommendations for enhanc-
ing education access, quality, relevance, equity and 
efficiency, which are important factors in the overall 
success of inclusive education.

Specifically, two Special Needs Education Policy 
Frameworks (Republic of Kenya, 2009; 2012) address 
a wide range of critical issues impacting on special 
needs education and provides a comprehensive policy 
framework that seeks to harmonize education service 
delivery for LSNs and diverse needs in all education 
subsectors. The polices recognize that our classrooms 
have children with different experiences, skills, knowl-
edge, values and abilities which are all invaluable ingre-
dients in classroom and takes due consideration in the 
wake of increasing diversity in the society, success can 
only be guaranteed to those children who will live

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  56

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1

cooperatively with others.
All these frameworks advocate for including all 

children with diverse background and abilities and all 
those usually excluded from school and classroom par-
ticipation and learning for instance children of remote 
or nomadic population, children from linguistic, ethnic 
or cultural minorities, girl child, street and working 
children, children with disabilities, children affected by 
HIV/AIDS. The aim is geared towards (a) providing an 
understanding of the conditions for success for chil-
dren with diverse needs, (b) achieving equalization of 
educational opportunity, (c) removing barriers, and (d) 
attending to the specific needs of those who had been 
denied so far.

In order to ensure that this happens, the Kenyan 
Government believes that all learners are entitled to 
an excellent education that provide them with a gen-
uine opportunity to succeed in inclusive classrooms 
in inclusive schools. In responding to this vison, main-
stream schools and special schools in Kenya are adopt-
ing policies and practices that are driven by the desire 
to be providers of high quality education services to all 
learners regard less of their learning needs. 

The above framework outlines an explicit IE policy 
and the role of key stakeholders such as school-heads 
and general education teachers in the realization of 
this policy in creating of inclusive and child-friendly 
schools, while simultaneously focusing on a requisite 
legal framework to ensure that schools respect diversi-
ty and ensure equality of learning for all children.This 
is because schools leaders are recognized as important 
ingredients in supporting and setting a higher standard 
for inclusive practice in schools and in communities.
They can do this through Strategic Resourcing Ensuring 
an Orderly and Supportive Environment Promoting and 
Participating in Teacher Learning and Development 
Planning, and Coordinating teaching and Evaluating 
Curriculum.

Who Supports Inclusive Education in Kenya?
It is the responsibility of the Ministry of Education 

to ensure that school-accessible and child-centered 
programs are elaborated, implemented and evaluat-
ed. However, teachers, parents, communities, school 
authorities, curriculum planners, training institutes and 
entrepreneurs in the business of education are among 
education actors that serve as valuable resources in 
support of inclusion in Kenya . However, some stake-
holders are more than just a valuable resource. They 
are not only key to supporting all aspects of the

inclusion process but they can also provide the right 
atmosphere for effective implementation of IE both in 
school and in society at large.

According to Fullan (2004), progress towards an 
effective inclusive school culture depends on the will-
ingness and attitude of a number of educational stake-
holders in accepting to promote diversity and to take 
an active role in the lives of students, both in and out of 
school. Acceptance promotes optimal learning environ-
ment for IE and depends largely upon the relationship 
among teachers, parents, other students and society 
and more specifically the role of school leaders

Likewise, Lindqvist & Nilholm (2011) affirms that 
school leaders’ belief about inclusion, its process and 
their view about children’s capacity to change and be 
changed can be reflected in: (a) the way they encourage 
teacher learning through collaboration, (b) philoso-
phy, inclusive beliefs and practices, (c) the extent to 
which they collaborate with staff to develop an inclu-
sive philosophy relevant to the schools needs, and (d) 
the manner in which they actively and personally get 
involved in developing intervention strategies for at-
risk students as they dialogue with parents. As put by 
Clark, (2010) constant collaboration and training has 
a possibility of changing ideologies and perceptions of 
school leaders on inclusion and can simultaneous lead 
to reconstruction of beliefs tow diversity.

 Sergiovanni (2009) believes that school leader’s 
attitude change influences how we organize school 
to accommodate diverse needs and acknowledge that 
all children, irrespective of their race, socio-economic 
status, gender or disability, deserve quality education. 
Manisfestly, this can be detected in a shift in their value 
system and support for school based inclusion policy 
and procedures that ensure sustainability (Ainscow & 
Sandill, 2010). Conversely, negative attitudes towards 
inclusion is likely to result into exclusivity .It is asso-
ciated with lack of planning, lack of resources, lack of 
knowledge of better practices and limited experiences 
with special needs students (Bobb & Early, 2009; Ser-
giovanni, 2009).

Fortunately, negative attitudes can be minimized 
when school leaders learn and acquire the knowledge 
they need to build inclusive schools, more so, in facili-
tating teacher learning that will produce inclusive class-
rooms. Adequate knowledge will enable school leaders 
transform school into effective inclusive environment 
(Leithwood & Jantzi 2006). This then calls for prepara-
tion of school leaders who can (a) stimulate change in 
the follower’s attitudes and behavior through



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  57

empowerment, (b) those who can create a global vision 
(Bobb & Early, 2009) and (c) reshape corporate culture 
and works along with the vision towards IE.

For this reason, this paper believes that there are 
complex and interrelated factors undergird the success 
of schools with effective inclusive education models 
and that moving towards more inclusive schools and 
education systems involves a series of leadership con-
ditions both at the macro and the school level, as well 
as at the level of pedagogical practices (instructional 
leadership). Although the Ministry of Education in 
Kenya , holds the key responsibility of ensuring inclu-
sion in school, school leaders who are ministry repre-
sentations and infact ‘the eyes’ of ministry have a huge 
responsibility in causing this change based on their 
transformative leadership acumen.

Transformative Leadership that Promotes Inclusion
Transformational leadership model is used to meet 

the current demand for innovation in education sys-
tems . Indeed current trend in the literature (Cristina 
and Ann, 2010) supports the idea that (a) school inno-
vations, such as inclusion, do not occur on their own 
(b) works when it is thoughtfully developed and (c) can 
only take place when the school leader who is a trans-
formational leader, in consort with the community and 
faculty uses collaborative decision-making to develop a 
full inclusion program.

According to Precey, (2008), transformational lead-
ers strive (a) build a compelling vision of a better future 
with others underpinned by high moral confidence (b) 
inspire others to follow them and offers individualized 
support (c) articulate a vision and passion can achieve 
great things and gets things done by injecting enthu-
siasm and energy(d) establish shared organizational 
goals and models best practices and important organi-
zational values (e) display high levels of interpersonal 
engagement with a deep understanding of personal, 
team and organizational learning (f) demonstrate ex-
pectations of high performance (g) provide intellectual 
stimulation for others and seek best practices (h) create 
a productive culture with a commitment to community 
(i) develop structures to foster participation in deci-
sion-making and distribute leadership throughout the 
organization and do have great personal resilience.

They are leaders who are motivated by the impor-
tance of individualized support that promotes student 
learning., intellectual stimulation, and personal vision. 
They support others through competence building to 
create inclusive classrooms , encourage collaboration to

stimulate thinking and are grounded in understanding 
the needs of individual teachers rather than controlling 
them to meet desired outcomes (Halliger, 2005). As 
they seek to influence people by building from the bot-
tom-up rather than from the top down , they become 
overly concerned with modeling best practices and 
important organizational values, continuous profes-
sional development of teachers, shared decision making 
and leadership, experimentation, teacher reflection 
and building relationships with the school community. 
These are key ingredients for inclusivity. Transforma-
tive school leaders are also known to hold firmly to key 
values of democracy, equity, justice, emphasize social 
justice and equity and are able to live with tension as 
they display moral courage and activism. 

Based on the above arguments transformative lead-
ership is therefore more likely where schools take on 
the role of making profound social change where there 
is great inequality for example in relation to sexism, 
racism or other forms of profound exclusion. As Chris-
tiansen, Heggen and Karseth (2004) share, the job of 
leaders is to maximize the collective talent and efforts 
of all those involved in the education enterprise to pro-
mote and sustain inclusive cultures, meaning that for 
sustainability of IE transformative leadership should be 
our focus.

School leaders are the key to the success or failure 
of educational reform. They have to develop leadership 
style that meets the demands of educational change 
which is seen in the manner in which they (a) provide 
moral direction which gives meaning and significance 
to the goals of the school, (b) raise awareness, height-
en interest of followers and provide support for the 
group to carry out the full inclusion project, (c) develop 
projects and assist in overcoming challenges; provides 
vision and resources necessary to help teachers ac-
complish change, and (d) provide encouragement and 
energy to help make the innovation successful and the 
implementation of full inclusion.

Significantly, four themes emerge in relation to 
transformative leadership in effective schools: fostering 
shared vision, planning and decision-making processes, 
creating collaborative structures and processes using 
data to make decisions about curriculum and instruc-
tion, and understanding and utilizing policy to create 
comprehensive school and district wide systems. These 
themes mirror those identified by Waldron, McLeskey, 
and Redd (2014) in their case study of a highly effec-
tive, inclusive school. For this research, the themes are 
crucial because each point to potential areas of

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  58

implications not only for practice but also for focus of 
and approaches to school leadership development.

Salisbury and McGregor (2002) assert that inclusive 
education has emerged as a school wide improvement 
approach sharing characteristics of innovativeness, 
commitment to diversity, and a strong emphasis on 
school improvement. So school leaders must share 
common personal attributes such as sharing deci-
sion-making power with their staff, leading their school 
by example, extending the core values around inclusive-
ness and quality initiatives throughout the school, and 
actively promoting learning communities.

Waldron, McLeskey, and Redd (2011) acknowledge 
that strong school leadership is pivotal to effective im-
plementation of inclusive education. Their description 
of the characteristics of effective inclusive schools and 
the personal attributes of school leader of such schools 
are consistent with those articulated by Corbett and 
Slee (2000). Hehir and Kartzman (2012) affirm that 
inclusive schools are dynamic, problem solving organi-
zations.

Strong school leaders to them is one who creates 
both a sense of common purpose and internal account-
ability as well as conditions for high-quality teaching 
and learning to take place. Their stance is that com-
plex and interrelated factors undergird the success 
of schools with effective inclusive education models. 
Successful inclusive schools embrace comprehensive 
school-wide approaches, including a clear vision of high 
expectations and universally designed instructional 
practices that address both academic and behavioral 
components of schooling.

In order to develop effective inclusive schools, there 
is need for school leaders to establish collaborative 
frameworks, collegiality, and a commitment to support 
diversity among students (Kugelmass, 2004). Though 
not explicit to inclusive education implementation,Ful-
lan (2014) articulates what he terms the three keys that 
maximizing a leader’s impact. He suggests that a leader 
can achieve this by (a) ensuring intense instructional 
focus and continuous learning are the core work at the 
school. (b) working with district and system player in 
order to access the wide range of resources within the 
system to leverage leadership and inclusion success, 
and (c) be a change agent to foster school effectiveness 
and improved student learning and achievement. The 
conceptualization of the school leaders as a change 
agent is critical to inclusive implementation and its 
sustainability.

Based on seven critical competencies suggested

by Kirtman (2013), Fullan (2014) asserts that as the 
change agent, the school leaders requires these com-
petencies to facilitate the building of personal and 
organizational capacity for greater leadership success. 
With these competencies, school leaders are able to 
(a) challenge the status quo by interrogating common 
practices, takes risks, and explores innovations with the 
aim of improving the learning of all students, (b) build 
trust through clear communication and expectation to 
ensure improved performance and organizational effec-
tiveness, (c) creates commonly owned plan for success 
by working to ensure ownership of the plan, monitor-
ing implementation, and making adjustments as appro-
priate, (d) focus on the team over self by supporting the 
professional growth of all staff and seeking critical feed-
back, (e) create a sense of urgency for sustainable by 
mobilizing people to tackle core issues while matching 
passion and urgency with requisite skills, (f) commits 
to continuous improvement for self by seeking learning 
opportunities and innovative ideas to ensure sustained 
improvements, and (g) build external networks and 
partnerships to adequate and sustainable support that 
makes a positive difference to the organization (Fullan, 
2014).

This paper believes in the sentiments of Fullan 
(2014) who expressed that efficient leadership remains 
an important indicator of successful inclusive educa-
tion implementation. He established that most of the 
leadership issues effecting inclusive education imple-
mentation are known but not sufficiently addressed in 
practice.

School Leadership and Inclusive Education 
School leaders play a critical role in improving 

learning through four sets of leadership practices. 
First, they are expected to : set directions by building a 
shared vision, foster acceptance of group goals, cre-
ate high performance expectations, and communicate 
direction. Second, they shoud develop staff by: provid-
ing individualized support and consideration, offering 
intellectual stimulation, and modelling appropriate val-
ues and practices. Thirdly, effective leaders must always 
seek to: refine and align their organizations when they 
build collaborative cultures, restructure the organiza-
tion to support collaboration, build productive relation-
ships with families and connect the school to the wider 
community.Finally, they are expected to improve the 
instructional program through practices that influence 
the nature and quality of instruction in classrooms 
(Leithwood & Jantzi, 2006). Leithwood and colleague

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  59

stress that school leaders can no longer function simply 
as school managers but also double up as instructional 
leaders (Ainscow & Sandill, 2010) 

To be successful, they are also expected to distrib-
ute leadership effectively for sustainable educational 
change and improvement that translates into improved 
learning outcomes (Harris, 2014). This can be achieved 
through what Dufour and Marzano (2011) advocate; 
a shift in focus to efforts aimed at building the collec-
tive capacity of educators. The functions of the school 
leaders discussed above, do not directly address inclu-
sive education but it can be assumed that leadership 
skills in the critical areas are helpful in leading inclusive 
schools. According Guzman (1997) the core mandate of 
every school leader is to diagnose his or her particular 
school’s needs and to meet these needs by utilizing the 
resources and talents available.

Purpose of The Study 
The Special Needs Education Policy Frameworks 

(Republic of Kenya, 2009; 2012) embraces inclusive 
education as the viable option in enhancing education 
access, equity, quality, and relevance for all children in 
Kenya. The policy documents provide a comprehensive 
approach, including ways of providing an inclusive 
education of quality to all children, highlighting the 
need for teachers to be sensitive to each child’s unique 
requirements, provide child-centred, socially relevant 
and equitable teaching/learning and understand the 
diversity in their social and cultural contexts. Based on 
these frameworks, huge resources (Republic of Ken-
ya 2005a, 2005c, 2009, 2010, 2012) are channeled in 
enhancing capacities and developing training of school 
leaders and teachers. 

Nonetheless, there seems to be insufficient specif-
ics and less clarity on service delivery models. and the 
roles of stakeholders, including those of school leaders 
within the inclusive education framework .Policies ac-
knowledge monumental challenges in the provision of 
inclusive education including; high pupil-teacher ratios, 
overcrowded classrooms, absenteeism, high drop-out 
rates, high repetition rates, increased number of or-
phans due to HIV and AIDS, inadequate infrastructural 
development, weak governance and financial manage-
ment, inequitable deployment and weak management 
of teachers, and gender and regional disparities. How-
ever, concerns raised by stakeholders on what shouldbe 
the unique competencies of school leaders in creating 
change within inclusive environment has not been giv-
en due attention. 

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1

Therefore, this theoretically review presents 
perspectives of different authors on the potential of 
transformative leadership ability of school leaders in 
offering a more inclusive, equitable, and deeply demo-
cratic conception of education. Specifically, the paper 
highlights transformative leadership practices of school 
leaders that are crucial for the implementation of this 
inclusive practice.

Theoretical Framework
This theoretical review is underpinned in the 

social model of disability which is a way of viewing the 
world, based on perspectives of disabled people. This 
approach sees disability as a concept that provides us 
with an opportunity for raising serious questions about 
the nature of the existing society we live in and the kind 
of society we desire or hope for.This is where the crit-
ical analysis has to focus and the changes have to take 
place.It recognizes the centrality of institutional, ideo-
logical, structural and material disabling barriers with-
in society that is , systemic barriers, negative attitudes 
and exclusion by society (purposely or inadvertently) 
as the main contributory factor in disabling people. 

The model says that people are disabled by barriers 
in society, not by their impairment or difference. They 
believe that unadaptive, unfriendly and hostile set of 
material conditions and social relations cumulatively 
contribute to the marginalisation, disempowerment 
and exclusion of disabled people .Barriers can be phys-
ical, like buildings not having accessible toilets or they 
can be caused by people’s attitudes to difference, like 
assuming disabled people can’t do certain things. The 
social model helps us recognize barriers that make life 
harder for disabled people and urges removal of these 
barriers to create equality and offer disabled people 
more independence, choice and control

Such an inclusive outlook permits stakeholders, 
especially school leaders - change makers , to give a 
holistic view of the education system by embracing 
inclusive philosophies and ideals of inclusion.This 
when they are likely to enable teachers and learners to 
feel comfortable with diversity, see it as a challenge and 
enrichment of the learning environment, rather than 
a problem , and significant of all, to take into consid-
eration the concepts of least restrictive environment, 
home school, and education with peers as important as-
pects of special education. Figure 1 illustrates the social 
model of disability.



Figure 1. Social model of disability (Oliver, 2013).

Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  60

Methodology
A search of the published literature for this re-

view included several steps. First, personal inquiries 
and consultations were made with professionals with 
relevant research and practice interests that is trans-
formative leadership and inclusive education. Second, 
articles, journals and government policy documents 
and scholarly research reports were reviewed, focus-
ing transformative leadership and inclusive education. 
Third, relevant texts were searched for applicable 
information. 

 Finally, a site search was conducted on the World 
Wide Web of organizations, databases, references, 
and on-line publications. Data was collected and syn-
thesized from these secondary sources pertaining to 
transformative leadership and inclusive education. 
Discussion of issues was bound within the social model 
of disability which sees an inclusive approach as one 
that permits a holistic review of the education system 
having a broader view of diversity as a challenge and 
enrichment of the learning environment, rather than a 
problem and takes into consideration the concepts of 
least restrictive environment, home school, and educa-
tion with peers as important aspects of special educa-
tion. The presentation was done thematically focusing 
on the key transformative leadership indicators that 
promotes inclusive education as dicussed in subse-
quent chapters.

Discussions
Inclusion is a principle that is 

increasingly gaining attention in 
conversations about transformative 
education systems as one that cater 
for the diversity of students’ learning 
needs and their individual character-
istics such as learning motivations, 
abilities, styles and rhythm. The key 
element of inclusion is not individ-
ualization but the diversification of 
the educational provision and the 
personalization of common learning 
experiences in order to achieve the 
highest degree of participation of all 
students, taking into account their 

individual needs.
This implies advancing towards universal design, 

where the teaching-learning process and the curricu-
lum consider from the very beginning the diversity of 
needs of all students, instead of planning on the basis of 
an “average” student and then carry out individualized 
actions to respond to the needs of specific students 
or groups who were not taken into consideration by 
an education proposal based on a logic of homogene-
ity instead of diversity. The response to diversity , an 
essential condition to achieve high quality education , is 
probably the main challenge currently faced by schools 
and teachers, as it involves substantive changes in the 
existing conceptions, attitudes, curricula, pedagogical 
practices, teacher training, evaluation systems and 
school organization.

The role of the school leader is becoming critical 
in promoting the delivery of equitable education by 
teachers in an inclusive school classroom setting . First 
and foremost, it is imperative that the school leader: 
believes that outcomes can be equitable, whatever 
the individual starting points of their students, en-
thuses the staff and students to raise achievement in 
all students and measures the success of students by 
more than their academic achievement, School leaders 
should also be aware of the United Nations Charter on 
the Rights of the Child (1989), a significant driver for 
embracing diversity that legislates for every member 
state to provide education for all its children. It is the 
responsibility of a school leader to lead , promote and 
nurture inclusive attitudes and behaviours in your 
school community.This is possible by the school leaders 
with specific transformative skills.

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  61

School Leaders’ Transformative Leadership Skills
Regardless of school type, schools need leadership 

in seven critical areas. One of these is in the area of 
instructional leadership, which entails assuring quality 
of instruction, modelling teaching practice, supervising 
curriculum, and assuring quality of teaching resources 
.The second area entails cultural leadership which is 
about tending to the symbolic resources of the school, 
for example, its traditions, climate, and history .

 The third area is managerial leadership encom-
passing tending to the operations of the school such as, 
its budget, schedule, facilities, safety and security. The 
other area is human resource leadership which is con-
cerned with recruiting, hiring, firing, inducting, mentor-
ing teachers and administrators; developing leadership 
capacity and professional development opportunities.
The fourth one is strategic leadership which deals with 
promoting a vision, mission, goals, and developing a 
means to reach them

External development is the fifth domain of rep-
resenting the school in the community, developing 
capital, public relations, recruiting students, buffering 
and mediating external interests, and advocating for 
the school’s interests and The last area is micro-polit-
ical –leadership which entails suffering and mediating 
internal interests; maximizing financial and human 
resources (Leithwood, Harris & Hopkins, 2008). 

It is therefore, encouraging that a review of lead-
ership literature indicates that the issue of inclusion 
is increasingly seen as a key challenge (West, Ainscow 
& Notman, 2003). It is argued, for example, that with 
increasingly diverse populations schools need to thrive 
on uncertainty, have a greater capacity for collective 
problem-solving, and be able to respond to a wider 
range of learners.This is only possible with school lead-
ers with transformation outlook. 

The most helpful theoretical and empirical leads, 
however, are provided by Riehl (2000) who concludes 
that school leaders need to attend to three broad types 
of task of fostering new meanings about diversity, pro-
moting inclusive practices within schools and building 
connections between schools and communities . Riehl 
(2000) goes on to consider how these tasks can be 
accomplished, exploring how the concept of practice, 
especially discursive practice, can contribute to a fuller 
understanding of the work of school leaders . In her 
analysis she offers a positive view of the potential for 
leaders to engage in inclusive, transformative develop-
ments. She concludes:

When wedded to a relentless commitment to 
equity, voice, and social justice, administrators’ 
efforts in the tasks of sensemaking, promoting 
inclusive cultures and practices in schools, and 
building positive relationships outside of the 
school may indeed foster a new form of practice. 
(Riehl, 2000, p. 71). 

In support, Copland (2003) suggests, that enquiry 
can be the engine to enable the determination of lead-
ership that is needed in order to foster participation 
in learning, and the glue that can bind a community 
together around a common purpose. From literature 
sources such as Leithwood, Harris and Hopkins (2008), 
the ensuing discussion identifies special abilities of 
school leaders that are associated with the success of 
schools in fostering the achievement of all their stu-
dents, that is ability to : create inclusive cultures and 
ethos, develop strong desire for change, strive to build 
instructional teams and inclusive communities, appe-
ciate active mentorship, embrace a clear philosophy 
and positive beliefs about inclusive education, nurture 
better instructional leadership and transformed school 
leaders and promote teachers learning and staff devel-
opment as discussed below.

Create Inclusive Cultures and Ethos
School leaders set the ethos that either welcomes 

or sidelines disabled children and children with SEN; 
and they create a culture where parents are either con-
fident to engage with the school or feel they are a nui-
sance (Lamb inquiry, 2009). Suffice to say, transformed 
school leaders who foster a sense of common purpose 
and are driven by a strong personal commitment to 
equal opportunities, seem to be remarkably successful 
in leading the whole school community – staff, students 
and parents – in ways that lead to a wholehearted 
commitment to the principle of educational inclusion. 
The strong sense of common purpose that provides 
the basis for the development of practices that take 
account of the learning of every student and manifested 
in visible efforts in establishing culture and ethos that 
emphasises the importance of respecting and respond-
ing positively to diversity in all senses.

Effective school leaders also go ahead to improve 
student learning by focusing on getting relationships 
right between themselves, their teachers, students and 
parents. They are culture builders (Halliger, 2010) who

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  62

influence the school community in embracing inclusive 
attitudes and mindsets. Precey (2008) assert that real 
and sustained change is achieved by changing the cul-
ture of the school, rather than by simply changing the 
structures of the way the school operates. This means 
school leaders must seek an understanding of schools’ 
culture before leading. 

They have to Instructional leaders are viewed as 
culture builders who foster high expectations and 
standards for students, as well as for teachers (Pre-
cey,2008). They must also directly get involved in 
the teaching culture of the school, work directly with 
children and classroom teachers and base decisions on 
educational principles and values .

Develop Strong Desire for Change
Implementation of inclusive practices demand 

school leaders to take critical roles in providing a 
vision, leadership and administrative authority (Ser-
giovanni, 2009; Day & Leithwood, 2007) and challenge 
the norm of traditional approach to teaching, inspire a 
clear mutual vision of what the school should and could 
be and simultaneously, empower staff through cooper-
ative team work (Ainscow & Sandill, 2010). This means 
the school leaders will first and foremost need to buy 
in to the philosophy of inclusion, followed by influenc-
ing the formation of a school vision that will direct the 
school towards embracing inclusive goals. They must 
also seek to reconstruct the school system and commit 
to the implementation of inclusive processes.

Build and Support Instructional or Inclusive Com-
munities

School leaders can no longer function simply as 
school managers or as instructional leaders .To be 
successful in this front, they are expected to distrib-
ute leadership effectively for sustainable educational 
change and improvement that translates into improved 
learning outcomes (Rice, 2006). This can be achieved 
through what Dufour and Marzano (2011) advocate; a 
shift in focus to efforts aimed at building the collective 
capacity of educators.

Transformational leadership demands social skills 
of team building and inspiration without dominion. 
This can be evident in the way he/ she places lots of 
responsibilities on teams and team leaders. As for Hal-
liger (2005) transformational leaders must not provide 
leadership alone but shares it with teachers. This model 
is grounded in understanding the needs of individual 
staff rather than coordinating and controlling them

towards the organizations desired ends. 
As summarized by Kugelmass (2004), effective 

inclusive schools are characterized by coherent school 
cultures in which teachers and school leaders demon-
strate high levels of personal responsibility and collec-
tive commitments that place students at the center of 
educational decision making. As a result, school leaders 
need to be committed to inclusive values and to a lead-
ership style which encourages individuals to participate 
in leadership functions (Dyson, Polat, Hutcheson & 
Gallannaugh, 2004).

Practice Active Mentorship
Sugai, O’Keeffe, Horner & Lewis (2012), defines 

a mentor as a single person, whose basic function is 
to help a new leaders or subordinates. On one hand, 
Moir (2005), stresses that in promoting new innova-
tion like inclusive, education mentors are important in 
decreasing the isolation of new teachers. When they 
guide them through their first year of teaching they can 
quickly get acquainted with their new environment. 
They do this by providing practical answers, ‘posing 
important questions to prompt reflection, modelling 
teaching techniques, observing and offering feedback.

Have a Clear Philosophy and Positive Beliefs about 
Inclusive Education

One of the foundations for building an inclusive 
school is to believe that ALL children, regardless of 
their social, economic, emotional, physical or cogni-
tive background have the ability to learn. In addition, 
adequate knowledge of inclusion and its processes can 
influence school leader’s attitude and will determine 
the extent of the school’s inclusive practices, regard-
less of the school context, the emphasis they place on 
teachers learning and the emphasis they place on the 
importance of a flexible curriculum.

The way a school leader constructs and employs 
certain leadership characteristics will depend on the 
changes that are taking place at the school at a giv-
en time, the school leaders knowledge regarding the 
change that needs to be implemented compared to his/
her teachers, and the school leader’s ability to co-op-
erate with others and build teaching teams. More-
over, strategies that can effectively facilitate teachers 
learning include school based collaboration, in-service 
training and mentorship. However, the strategies that 
school leaders will use to promote teachers learning 
will depend on the school’s vision and its inclusive 
education context.

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  63

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1

Demonstrate Strong Instructional Leadership
As instructional leaders, schools where leaders are 

expected to bring change (Webb, 2005). For this rea-
son, instructional leadership would be appropriate in 
schools that need to accommodate inclusive changes 
as they promote instructional time, promote profes-
sional development; provide incentives for teachers 
as well as for learning (Halliger, 2000). At the same 
time, instructional leaders are considered to be ‘strong 
directive leaders’ (Halliger 2005) who act as the day to 
day manager of the school building, are responsible for 
timetabling teachers and evaluating them accordingly 
. This implies that when promoting inclusive practices, 
changes will be based on school and teacher evaluation. 
They must be well versed with curriculum and instruc-
tion, role models and who are not only familiar with the 
curriculum but also one who practice inclusion for LSN. 
Halliger, 2000) refers to instructional shool leadership 
as an ability to be hands on, well versed with the cur-
riculum instructions and standards set in the national 
curricular, knowledgeable about what is happening at 
the school, and one that evaluates teachers accordingly 
by providing feedback during meetings. It means that 
instructional leaders must work with their staff in for-
mulating clear and measurable goals that are focused 
on the academic progress of students

Work To Transform Other School Leaders 
The transformational leadership model enables 

meeting the current demand for innovation by empow-
ering others through a distribution of leadership (Ser-
giovanni, 2009). They do not provide leadership alone 
(Halliger, 2010), instead they share their leadership 
responsibility with other teacher, providing leadership 
for inclusive change, uses the transformational lead-
ership model to share leadership responsibilities with 
other teachers through delegation of responsibilities to 
team leaders. 

 They must be grounded in understanding the 
needs of individual teachers rather than controlling 
them to meet desired outcomes (Halliger, 2010) as 
they seek to influence people by building from the 
bottom-up rather than from the top down In addition, 
they are motivated by the importance of individualized 
support, intellectual stimulation, and personal vision by 
supporting teachers through competence building that 
will enable them to create inclusive classrooms.

They are keen in encouraging collaboration to stim-
ulate thinking and promote student learning, demands 
social skills of team building and inspiration without

dominion, concerned with modeling best practices and 
important organizational values, continuous profes-
sional development of teachers, shared decision making 
and leadership, experimentation, teacher reflection and 
building relationships with the school community .This 
is apparent as part of the responsibility to ensure that 
teaches are doing ‘a good job’ that will promote teach-
ing and learning. Her managerial role is also reflected 
in the way she is involved in different teacher meetings 
to ensure that she is aware of what is happening in the 
school (Halliger, 2000).

Promote Teacher Learning and Staff Development
Promotion of teacher learning is important to the 

inclusion process as it will equip teachers in facilitating 
inclusive classrooms . Deppler (2010) reinforcded the 
importance of teachers learning when he argued that 
improvement of schools will depend on the quality of 
teachers to meet inclusive challenges. It means then 
that transformative leaders must put more effort and 
resources to promote teachers learning.A numbers of 
strategies that can be used to motivate teachers may 
range from school based collaboration, working with 
the school community, training and mentorship. 

Bubb & Early (2009) affirm that staff development 
which involves discussing, coaching, mentoring, observ-
ing and developing others is highly effective on matters 
inclusion. Therefore transformational leaders must 
always value teachers learning, but they show it in dif-
ferent ways. For instance, by making suggestions, giving 
feedback, providing modeling, using inquiry and solicit 
advice and opinions, and giving praise.

A similar study noted other six teacher devel-
opment strategies that is, emphasizing the study of 
teaching and learning, supporting collaboration efforts 
among educators, developing coaching relationships 
among educators; encouraging and supporting redesign 
of programs; applying the principles of adult learning, 
growth and development to all phases of staff devel-
opment; and implementing action research to inform 
instructional decision making.

Significant of all is that, is the development of intel-
lectual, academic and professional capital (Sergiovanni, 
2006) while empowering and supporting teachers as 
partners in decision making (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2006) 
because there is a thin line between what happens to 
teachers and what happens to students is direct (Ser-
giovanni, 2006). For example, little collaboration among 
teachers will result in little collaboration among stu-
dents. Leithwood (2005) states that transformational



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  64

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1

leaders help staff development by maintaining a collab-
orative professional school culture and involving staff 
in collaborative goal setting (Sergiovanni, 2009)

Conclusions
Inclusive education is a process of addressing and 

responding to the diversity of needs of all learners 
through increasing participation in learning, cultures, 
and communities, and reducing exclusion within and 
from education. In spite of the dilemmas that are cur-
rently faced in inclusive schools, in many countries like 
Kenya, school leaders have a responsibility in ensuring 
that that they provide a school for ALL children. School 
leaders will need to have inclusive attitudes which will 
entail an inclusive school vision. 

Part of providing a school for ALL will also require 
school leaders to provide school leadership that will 
bring about inclusive changes; which will in turn affect 
the practices of classroom teachers. School leaders 
play an important role in motivating teachers to build 
inclusive classrooms and will need to influence and 
challenge teachers thinking by promoting inclusive 
cultures, in-service training, and enquiry and evidence 
based collaboration that will go beyond a mere trans-
fer of knowledge to the acquisition of skills that will 
encourage, nurture and facilitate learning for ALLTrans-
formative leadership skills of school leadership is criti-
cal aspect to the successful implementation of inclusive 
education. This is particularly imperative considering 
that the overarching principle of inclusive education is 
that every child counts.

Recommendations
Inclusive education demands new skills and knowl-

edge, not only for an individual teacher, but for the 
whole staff, as the whole school will need to be com-
petent in order to make inclusion work. As a result, 
continuous staff development of teachers and all school 
leaders is crucial.

a. A coordinated and multi-pronged action plan 
to spur requisite policy reforms, system align-
ments, and funding strategies in order reframe 
school leadership development.

b. Specifically, the Teachers’ Service Commission 
and Ministry of Education, Science and Technol-
ogy should collaboratively develop leadership 
standards for school leaders in order to spur 
improvements in leadership programmes’ qual-
ity and effectiveness in inclusive setting’s.

c. The County Education Committees should 
develop inclusive education indicators to be uti-
lized when designing and implementing school 
development plans.

d. Moreover, in order to model effective inclusive 
programmes and practices at least five model 
inclusive schools should be established in each 
Subcounty through a well-resourced pro-
gramme implemented by respective Subcounty 
Education Commmittees. This may act as cen-
ters of excellence and models for what leader-
ship models works for inclusive education.



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  65

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1

References
Ainscow, M., Farrell, P. & Tweddle, D. (2000). 

Developing policies for inclusive education: A 
study of the role of local education authorities. 
International Journal of Inclusive Education, 4(3): 
211–30.

Ainscow, M. (2005). Developing inclusive education 
systems: What are the levers for change? Journal of 
Educational Change, 6(2). 109-124. 

Ainscow, M., & Sandill.A. (2010). Developing inclusive 
education systems: The role of organisational 
cultures and leadership. International Journal of 
Inclusive Education, 14(4), 401-416.

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M.W., DiPietro, M. & Lovett, M.C. 
(2010). How learning works: Seven research-based 
principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: 
Jossey Bass.

Arnesen, A.L., Mietola, R. & Lahelma, E. (2009), 
Language of inclusion and diversity: Policy 
discourses and social practices in Finnish and 
Norwegian schools. International Journal of 
Inclusive Education, 11(1), pp. 97-110.

Booth, T., & Ainscow, A. (2000). Index for inclusion. 
Developing learning and participation in schools. 
London, CSIE. 

Booth, T. (2000). Meeting special needs and diverse 
education needs: Making inclusive education a 
reality. Paper presented at the World Education 
Forum, Dakar, Senegal, April 26-28, 2000.

Black-Hawkins, K. (2002). Understanding school 
cultures: Developing participation. Unpublished 
doctoral thesis: The Open University.

Black-Hawkins, K., Florian, L. and Rouse, M. (2007).
Inclusion and achievement in schools. London: 
Routledge.

Bubb, S. & Early, P. (2009). Leading staff development 
for school improvement. School Leadership and 
Management: Formerly School Organization, 29(1). 
23-37.

Canadian Council on Learning, (2007). Equality in the 
classroom: The educational placement of children 
with disabilities.

Clark.C (2010). Inclusive education and schools as 
Organizations. International Journal of Inclusive  
Education, 3(1), 37-51. in Anthony H. Normore (ed.) 
Global Perspectives on Educational Leadership 
Reform: The Development and Preparation of 
Leaders of Learning and Learners of Leadership 
(Advances in Educational Administration, Volume 
11) Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.211-241.

Crisman, B. W. (2008). Inclusive programming for 
students with autism. Principal, 88, 28-32.

Cole, C. M., Waldron, N., & Majd, M. (2004). Academic 
progress of students across inclusive and traditional 
settings. Mental etardation: A Journal of Practices, 
Policy and Perspectives, 42, 136-144.

Corbett, J. & Slee, R. (2000). An international 
conversation on inclusive education. In Armstrong,  
F., Armstrong, D. and Barton, L. (eds.) Inclusive 
Education: Policy, Contexts and Comparative 
Perspectives. London: David Fulton.

Danforth, S. (2001). A pragmatic evaluation of three 
models of disability in special education. Journal 
of Developmental and Physical Disabilities 13(4), 
343–59.

Das, A., Gichuru, M., & Singh, A. (2013). Implementing 
inclusive education in Delhi, India: Regular school 
teacher’s preferences for professional development. 
Education, 39 (5), 698-711

DfES. (2004). Every child matters: Change for children. 
Nottingham: DfES.

Dyson, A., Farrell, P., Polat, F., Hutcheson, G., 
&Gallannaugh, F. (2004). Inclusion and pupil 
achievement. (Research Report no. 578). London: 
Department for Education and Skill.

Fullan, M. G. (1995). The limits and the potential of 
Professional Development. In T. R. Guskey, & M. 
Huberman (Eds.), Professional development in 
education: New paradigms and practices (pp. 253-
267). New York: Teachers College Press.

 Fullan, M. (2004). Leadership and sustainability: System 
thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin 
Press.

Guskey, T.R. (2002). Professional development and 
teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and  
Practice, 8(3/4). 381-391.

 Guzman, N. (1997). Leadership for successful inclusive 
schools. A study of principals behaviors. Journal of 
Educational Administration, 35(5), 439-450.

Halliger, P. (2005). Instructional leadership and the 
school principal: a passing fancy that refuses to fade 
away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 48(3), 221-
239.

Hallinger, P. (2009). Leadership for 21st century 
schools: From instructional leadership to leadership 
for learning. Hong Kong, China: The Hong Kong 
Institute of Education.

http://en.copian.ca/library/research/ccl/lessons_learning/equality_classroom/equality_classroom.pdf
http://en.copian.ca/library/research/ccl/lessons_learning/equality_classroom/equality_classroom.pdf
http://en.copian.ca/library/research/ccl/lessons_learning/equality_classroom/equality_classroom.pdf


Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  66

Harrop, J. (2000). Models of inclusive practice. Special 
Children, May 2000.

Johnstone, C. J. (2007). Inclusive education in Lesotho. 
In Engelbrecht, P., Green, L. (Eds.), Responding to the 
challenges of inclusive education in southern Africa 
(pp. 25-38.). Pretoria, South Africa: Van Schaik.

Johnstone, C. J., Chapman, D. W. (2009). Contributions 
and constraints to the implementation of inclusive 
education in Lesotho. International Journal of 
Disability, Development and Education, 56, 131-148. 

Kalambouka, A., Farrell, P., Dyson, A., & Kaplan, I. 
(2007). The impact of placing pupils with special 
educational needs in mainstream schools on the 
achievement of their peers. Educational Research, 
49, 365-382.

Katz, J., & Mirenda, P. (2002). Including wtudents with 
developmental disabilities in general dducation 
classrooms: Educational benefits. International 
Journal of Special Education, 17(2).

Leithwood, K. & Jantzi,D. (2000). Principal and teacher 
leader effects: a replication. School Leadership and 
Management, 20(4), 415-434.

 Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2005). A Review of 
Transformational School Leadership Research 
1996–2005. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 
177-199. 

Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2006). Transformational 
school leadership for large-scale reform: Effects on 
students, teachers, and their classroom practices. 
School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(2), 
201-227.

Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven 
strong claims about successful school leadership. 
School Leadership and Management, 28(1), 27-42.

Lindqvist,C., & Nilholm, C. (2011). Making school 
inclusive? Educational leaders view on how to 
work with children in need of special support. 
International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(1), 
95-110

Leko, M. M., & Roberts, C. A. (2014). How does 
Professional Development improve teacher practice 
in inclusive schools? In J. McLesky., N. Woldron, F. 
Spooner., & B. Algozine (Eds.), Handbook of effective 
inclusive schools: Research and practice. (pp. 43-52). 
New York: Routledge.

Moir, E. (2005). Launching the next generation of 
teachers: The new teacher centre’s model for 
quality induction and mentoring. In H.Portner(Ed.). 
Teacher mentoring and induction: The state of the 
art and beyond.(pp. 59-73). United States: Corwin 
Press.

Mukhopadhyay, S. (2009). Factors influencing the 
practice of inclusive education in Botswana primary 
school. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). 
University of Botswana. 

Norwich, B. 2002. Education, inclusion and individual 
differences: Recognising and resolving dilemmas. 
British Journal of Educational Studies, 50(4), 482–
502.

Office for Standards in Education. (2000). Evaluating 
educational inclusion: Guidance for inspectors and 
schools. London:OFSTED.

Ocloo, M. A., & Subbey, M. (2008). Perception of basic 
teachers towards inclusive education in the Hohoe 
District of Ghana. International Journal of Inclusive 
Education, 12, 639-650. Paris, OECD.

 Oliver, M. (2013). “The social model of disability: thirty 
years on”. Disability & Society, 28(7), 1024–1026.

Opertti, R., Brady J., & Duncombe, L. (2009). Moving 
forward: Inclusive education as the core of 
education for all. Prospects. Open file: Inclusive 
Education, UNESCO-IBE, no. 151, September 2009, 
p. 205-214.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and 
Development [OECD]. (2005). Teachers matter: 
Attracting, developing and retaining effective 
teachers. Organisation for Economic Co-operation 
and Development.

Palaiologou, I., & Male, T. (2011). Learning-centered 
leadership or pedagogical leadership? An 
alternative approach to leadership in education. 
International Journal of leadership in Educational 
Theory and Practice, 15(1), 107-118.

Peters. S. (2004). Inclusive education: an EFA strategy 
for all children. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Precey, R. (2008b). Transformational School Leadership 
Development: What Works?, Journal of Research in 
Professional Development, 1, pp. 4-20. 21.

Precey, R., & Jackson, C. (2009). Transformational 
Learning for Transformational Leadership. 
Professional Development Today, 12, pp. 46-51.

Global Journal of Transformative Education (2019) 1:1



Opiyo, Inclusive Education and Transformative Leadership  67

Quinn, L. (2000). Setting a course for inclusion. Special 
Children, Summer 2000, p. 53.

Rajovic, V., & Jovanovic, O. (2013). The barriers to 
inclusive education: Mapping 10 years of Serbian 
teachers’ attitudes toward inclusive education. 
Journal of Special Education and Rehabilitation, 
14(3), 78-97.

Rice, N. (2006). Opportunities lost, possibilities found: 
Shared leadership and inclusion in an urban high 
school. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 17(2), 
88-100.

Riehl, C. J. (2000). The principal’s role in creating 
inclusive schools for diverse students: A review of 
normative, empirical, and critical literature on the 
practice of educational administration. Review of 
educational research, 70(1), 55-81. 

Sergiovanni, T.J.(2006). Leadership as pedagogy,capital 
development and school effectiveness. International 
Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory and 
Practice, 1(1), 37-46.

Sergiovanni, T. (2009). The principalship: A reflective 
practice perspective (6th ed). New York: Pearson.

Sourav Mukhopadhyay H. Johnson Nenty,I & 
Okechukwu Abosi, (2012) Inclusive Education for 
Learners With Disabilities in Botswana Primary 
Schools ;SAGE OPEN

Sugai, G., O’Keeffe, B., Horner, R. H., & Lewis, T. J. 
(2012). School leadership and school-wide positive 
behavior support. In J. B. Crockett, B. S. Billingsley, 
& M. L. Boscardin (Eds.), Handbook of leadership 
and administration for special education (pp. 37-
51). New York, NY: Routledge.

Terzi, L. 2004. The social model of disability: A 
philosophical critique. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 
21(2), 141–57.

Timmons, V., & Wagner, M. (2008). Inclusive education 
knowledge exchange initiative: An analysis of 
the statistics Canada participation and activity 
limitation survey. Canadian Council on Learning.

UNESCO. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and 
Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. 
Paris, UNESCO. Ministry of Education, Spain.

UNESCO International Bureau of Education. (2009). 
International Conference on Education. Inclusive 
Education: The Way of the Future 28th Session 
Geneva 25–28 November 2008.

UNESCO. (2010). http://www.ibe.unesco.org/
fileadmin/user_upload/Policy_Dialogue/48th_IC E/
ICE_FINAL_REPORT_eng.pdf Accessed 08/06/2010. 
Paris, France: UNESCO.

UNESCO. (2009). Policy Guidelines on Inclusion in 
Education. Paris: UNESCO.

UNESCO. (2005). Guidelines for inclusion. Ensuring 
Access to Education for All. Paris, UNESCO, 2005. 
ED/BIE/CONFINTED 48/Inf.2 – Page 8. Paris, 
France: UNESCO.

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural 
Organization. (1994). Final report: World conference 
on special needs education: Access and equality. 
Paris, France: UNESCO. 

UNESCO. Overcoming Exclusion through Inclusive 
Approaches in Education. A challenge and a vision. 
UNESCO, Paris, 2003. 

UNESCO. (2001). Open File on Inclusive education. 
Support materials for managers and 
administrators. Paris, UNESCO.

Webb, R. (2005). Leading teaching and learning in the 
primary school: From Educative Leadership to 
Pedagogical Leadership. Educational Management 
administration & Leadership, 33(69), 129-147.

1 Rose Atieno Opiyo (ropiyo@mmust.ac.ke) is a Lecturer 
in the Department of Educational Psychology at Masinde 
Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega, 
Kenya.

Author


