Inclusive education is often perceived as a foreign concept, although it is strongly emphasized in educational programs driven by development partners in Nepal and other low‑resource countries(Maudslay, 2014) This may have further contributed to the persistent gap between policy and practice in the field (Sharma et al., 2013; Sharma & Mullick, 2020). To reduce such gaps, positive cultural aspects and initiatives need to be explored and brought to light.

This qualitative study aims to identify less resource‑demanding and alternative solutions for the success of inclusive education, as an endeavor to explore contextual and culturally appropriate approaches in low‑resource settings. It does so by examining stakeholders’ experiences of enabling inclusive education in Nepal, which is the main research question.

Sociocultural approach (Chirkov, 2020; Rogoff, 2003; Vygotsky, 1978) provides the framework for interpreting the qualitative data. Drawing on Vygotsky’s foundational ideas and Rogoff’s elaboration of context‑specific sociocultural learning, the data are understood in terms of both formal and tacit mutual learning among stakeholders within their context.  Chirkov (2020) introduced the Theory of Sociocultural Models (TSCMs) to explain the role of both conscious and unconscious sociocultural models (SCMs). SCMs are conceptualized as complex tools consisting of social, cultural, and psychological processes through which members of cultural groups interpret the world. This framework explains how SCMs are developed at the personal psychological level and how they collectively construct shared public values.  Chirkov thus expands the mechanisms of the sociocultural nature of learning to the development of cultural communities that share similar SCMs. He provides a clear distinction between the private and public aspects of such models and explains the mechanisms by which they are internalized at the psychological level in relation to public reality (Chirkov, 2023). This perspective supports the interpretation of stakeholders’ views on positive endeavors related to inclusive education in the context of Nepal, where culture is assumed both to facilitate and to constrain inclusive education, thereby contributing to the co‑creation of a more inclusive culture through communities (Göransson & Nilholm, 2014).  

This qualitative interview-based case study (Thomas, 2021; Yin, 2018) draws on data gathered through interviews with 26 stakeholders, including graduates with disabilities, teachers who teach in inclusive settings in mainstream schools, and teacher educators. Eight graduates with disabilities, eight teachers from four mainstream schools with experience teaching students with disabilities in inclusive settings, and ten teacher educators were interviewed for qualitative data collection using semi‑structured interview guidelines (Galletta, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Graduates with disabilities were purposively selected, as they were expected to provide insights into the causes of positive experiences; they had attended different mainstream schools across the country. Teachers were selected based on their experience of teaching and supporting students with disabilities in inclusive settings, with three from urban schools in the capital city, Kathmandu, and one from a rural school in the western region. Teacher educators working in the Central Department of Education were interviewed to identify their experiences with disability‑inclusive education across a broad range of activities, including initial teacher education, curriculum development for schools and higher education, research, and in‑service teacher training. Research participants were not confined to specific geographic areas or locations, as far as possible, in an effort to enrich the data for theoretical generalization, which is a main feature of qualitative research (Braun et al., 2022) , although they do not represent the complex ethnic, linguistic, or geographical diversity of the multicultural and highly diverse Himalayan country. The qualitative interviews with stakeholders situated at different levels focused on strengths, with the aim of uncovering possibilities. The 45‑ to 60‑minute recorded interviews were transcribed and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis (Braun et al., 2022)

Study findings suggest that within the framework of uncritically adopted top‑down models of inclusive education, graduates with disabilities mainly acquire positive experiences through proactive teacher agency, supportive family and societal culture, and personal motivation. Although proactive teacher agency is shaped and formed to meet societal expectations, it still operates largely within the premises of traditional didactic teaching strategies. This pedagogical backdrop is, however, compensated for by teachers’ additional efforts to meet the diverse needs of students with disabilities, enabling them to gain educational access in appropriate environments and increasing their opportunities for participation so that they can follow existing educational provisions. Teachers and teacher educators acquire necessary skills and knowledge through sociocultural forms of informal learning. Thus, culture plays a crucial role in learning for students, teachers, and teacher educators, particularly in the absence of systematic training opportunities. At the same time, aspirations to follow global trends and policy initiatives provide a foundation for the development of inclusive education in the low‑resource context of Nepal. Stakeholders’ positive experiences and proactive agency provide a foundation for conceptualizing “Enabling Inclusive Education” as a concept with the potential to incorporate contextual, cultural, and alternative resources to develop inclusive education in ways that address the complex and broader educational challenges of resource‑constrained environments such as Nepal. By combining literature with the findings, the concept is defined while proposing a suitable model of inclusive education. A culturally appropriate model, named the Mandala Model of Enabling Inclusive Education, aligned with the sociocultural approach, is proposed. It comprises four basic components: 1) Challenging Disabling Barriers and Fostering Impactful Enablers 2) Transformation Through Cultural Strength and Reflexive Approach 3) Autonomy and Positive Freedom Based on Social Justice Principles 4) Fostering Proactive Agency and Collaborative Partnership as a Tool for Participation.

Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., Davey, L., & Jenkinson, E. (2022). Doing Reflexive Thematic Analysis. In S. Bager-Charleson & A. McBeath (Eds.), Supporting Research in Counselling and Psychotherapy : Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Research (pp. 19–38). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13942-0_2 Chirkov, V. (2020). An introduction to the theory of sociocultural models. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 23(2), 143–162. Chirkov, V. (2023). Alfred Schutz’s ‘Stranger’, the theory of sociocultural models, and mechanisms of acculturation. Culture & Psychology, 29(1), 116–138. Galletta, A. (2013). Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond: From research design to analysis and publication (Vol. 18). NYU press. Göransson, K., & Nilholm, C. (2014). Conceptual diversities and empirical shortcomings–a critical analysis of research on inclusive education. European journal of special needs education, 29(3), 265–280. Hausstätter, R. (2014). In Support of Unfinished Inclusion. Scandinavian journal of educational research, 58(4), 424–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2013.773553 Lomas, T., Lea, W., Paige, W., G., O. L., & and Kern, M. L. (2021). Third wave positive psychology: broadening towards complexity. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 16(5), 660–674. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2020.1805501 Maudslay, L. (2014). Inclusive education in Nepal: Assumptions and reality. Childhood, 21(3), 418–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568213514778 Muthukrishna, N., & Engelbrecht, P. (2018). Decolonising inclusive education in lower income, Southern African educational contexts. South African Journal of Education, 38(4), 1–11. Nganga, L., Madrid Akpovo, S., & Kambutu, J. (2020). Culturally Inclusive and Contextually Appropriate Instructional Practices: Rethinking Pedagogical Perspectives, Practices, Policies, and Experiences in Early Childhood Education Programs. Journal of research in childhood education, 34(1), 2–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2019.1697153 Rix, J. (2020). Our need for certainty in an uncertain world: the difference between special education and inclusion? British Journal of Special Education, 47(3), 283–307. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford university press. Sharma, U., Forlin, C., Deppeler, J., & Yang, G.-x. (2013). Reforming teacher education for inclusion in developing countries in the Asia Pacific region. Asian Journal of Inclusive Education, 1(1), 3–16. Sharma, U., & Mullick, J. (2020). Bridging the gaps between theory and practice of inclusive teacher education. In Oxford research encyclopedia of education. Thomas, G. (2021). How to do your case study. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (Vol. 86). Harvard university press. Zwart, R. C., Korthagen, F. A., & Attema-Noordewier, S. (2015). A strength-based approach to teacher professional development. Professional development in education, 41(3), 579–596.