.

INTRODUCTION

The principle of inclusive education is that all students, regardless of their abilities, characteristics or learning difficulties, should have the opportunity to participate meaningfully in quality education within the same learning environment. Inclusive education is more than just placing students with special educational needs in mainstream classrooms. Instead it means that schools offer responsive learning services that are sensitive to individual differences and that remove barriers to participation and achievement. Teachers are then expected to identify students’ needs, use appropriate assessments, adapt instruction, and implement interventions based on individual learning characteristics. Florian and Black-Hawkins (2011) state that inclusive pedagogy should improve learning opportunities for all students, rather than providing separate educational experiences that can reinforce labeling and exclusion. Similarly, inclusive education is about enhancing students’ presence, participation and achievement by adapting educational practices to accommodate learner diversity (Ainscow et al., 2006; Ainscow, 2020; UNESCO, 2020). The Indonesian regulatory framework also encourages the provision of inclusive education . The legal basis for inclusive education for students with disabilities and students with exceptional intelligence and/or talents is the Minister of National Education of the Republic of Indonesia Regulation No. 70 of 2009. In addition, the Indonesian education system considers education as a basic right for all citizens, as stated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and Law No. 20 of 2003 concerning the National Education System. The administration of basic education is also entrusted to district and municipal governments by Law No. 23 of 2014. Such policies also reinforce the principle that children with special educational needs should have equal access to education and adequate educational services.

However, in this policy framework the implementation of inclusive education in regular schools is still challenging. The presence of students with special educational needs does not mean that inclusive education has been successfully implemented. Inclusion is effective to the degree that schools can adapt curricula, teaching strategies, assessment methods, and classroom settings to accommodate a variety of learning needs. Previous research in Indonesia has identified some persistent issues such as the limited implementation of curriculum adaptation, unavailability of qualified special education teachers, the restriction on the types of students with special educational needs accepted by schools, the limited institutional readiness, and social barriers affecting students’ participation (Anjarsari et al., 2018; Muhibbin, 2021; Sulthon, 2019). These results suggest that there remains a discrepancy between the normative principles of inclusive education and its implementation in everyday classroom practices. Among the groups that need special attention in inclusive elementary schools are slow learner students. Slow learners usually need more time, repetition, simpler instruction, concrete learning experiences and systematic help in reaching learning objectives. They may not always be immediately identified as having difficulties because they participate in regular classrooms and may present learning characteristics that are less overt than those associated with more visible disabilities. Without proper identification and assessment, their learning difficulties may be misread as poor academic performance, lack of motivation or inability to follow classroom instruction. This is a condition that puts slow learners at risk of persistent academic difficulties, as well as reduced confidence and participation in classroom interactions.

Hence learning services to slow learners should be based on their individual academic and social needs. Assessment is important in the sense that the results of assessment are the basis for selection of appropriate instructional objectives, learning materials, teaching strategies, levels of assistance and evaluation procedures. Instructional adaptation in an inclusive classroom should not segregate slow learners from their peers but should enable them to participate meaningfully in the same learning environment. Services may include appropriate curriculum modification, simplified language and instructions, repeated explanations, remedial learning, individualized assistance, concrete learning experiences, flexible learning activities, and supportive teacher-student interactions. Such adaptations are especially important as inclusive education concentrates not just on academic achievement but also on students’ participation, independence, confidence and social interaction. The difficulties in providing these services are also evident in the elementary schools in Muara Wahau District. Area public and private elementary schools have shown a willingness to absorb students with special educational needs. However, the availability and quality of learning services has not yet been able to meet the needs of slow learner students. The preconditions described in this study suggest that teachers use relatively uniform teaching methods, while systematic differentiation according to individual needs is only limited. The academic and social needs of slow learners have also not been optimally utilized as a basis for the design of instructional services. Consequently, slow learner students have not always received the learning support appropriate to their characteristics and that allows them to effectively participate together with their normally developing peers.

The condition shows a wide gap between the principles of inclusive education and the practices in the classroom. However, although schools are willing to take students with special educational needs, teachers need practical and systematic guidance in order to translate the principles of inclusion into daily instructional practices. The problem is not only school attendance, but also the quality of educational services provided to students in regular classrooms. The lack of structured learning procedures may result in teachers relying mainly on general instructional strategies that are not sufficiently responsive to the academic and social characteristics of slow learners. Problems encountered in Muara Wahau are especially associated with the limited ability of teachers to provide appropriate learning services, the lack of systematic strategies for interaction between slow learners and their peers, inadequate differentiation, and limited use of assessment as a basis for instructional planning. From an instructional perspective, inclusive learning services can be enhanced through systematic and needs-based intervention . The Response to Intervention (RTI) framework emphasizes providing supports that increase in intensity based on how students respond and their learning needs. Tier 1 provides high-quality instruction for all students . Tier 2 provides additional small-group intervention for students who require further support . Tier 3 provides more intensive and individualized intervention for students with persistent difficulties . This principle has implications for slow learner education because instructional support can be individualized to the actual performance of the students rather than provided uniformly to all learners.

The literature has talked about inclusive education and the challenges that schools face in meeting the needs of students with special educational needs. However, there is still a need in practice for a learning service model that is tailored to the characteristics of slow learners in regular elementary schools. Current discussions are dominated by inclusive education at the level of policy, institution or general pedagogy, but teachers need an operational model that encompasses assessment, curriculum adaptation, instructional implementation and support for students' academic and social participation. The gap is felt very much in Muara Wahau District where schools have shown willingness to accommodate students with special educational needs, but are still limited in providing systematic learning services for slow learners. Thus, in this research, we will develop and analyze a learning service model of slow learner students in public and private elementary schools in Muara Wahau District. The proposed model seeks to provide teachers with practical guidance for the provision of learning services based on the assessed needs of students and to motivate their participation and social interaction with peers in inclusive classrooms. The purpose of this study is to develop a systematic and implementable learning service model for slow learner students, and to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the model in the inclusive learning environments of elementary schools. The study is expected to contribute in bridging the gap between inclusive education policy and classroom practice and to strengthen the quality of educational services for slow learner students in regular elementary schools by providing a more operational framework for assessment based and adaptive learning services.

METHOD

This research used qualitative approach and case study design to understand in depth of learning services for slow learner students at elementary schools in Muara Wahau District. The case study design was used because learning services for slow learners are closely related to the actual educational context including school conditions, teacher characteristics, student needs, parental involvement, and institutional support. The study was restricted on instructional planning, classroom implementation, teaching strategies, academic support, learning evaluation and supporting and inhibiting factors related to the provision of learning services for slow learner students. The phenomena were observed in their natural settings, with no interference in the existing educational environment. This research was conducted in public and private elementary schools in Muara Wahau District, specifically in schools situated in oil palm plantation areas. The study was conducted in a larger population of 21 elementary schools, 18 of which were public and three private. Six schools, three public and three private elementary schools were purposefully selected as sites of research based on their involvement in the provision of educational services for students with special educational needs particularly slow learners. The research participants were school principals, classroom teachers, subject teachers, teachers directly involved in supporting slow learner students, parents and other relevant educational staffs. The participants were purposively selected based on their direct involvements and knowledge about inclusive learning practices and services for slow learner students.

Data were collected through classroom observations, in-depth interviews and documentation. Classroom observation was done to directly observe how teachers planned and implemented instruction, adapted learning activities, interacted with students with slow learning and facilitated their participation in inclusive classrooms. In-depth interviews were conducted with school principals, classroom teachers, teachers in charge of supporting slow learners, parents and other relevant participants to explore their experiences, perceptions and practices related to learning services. Documents to supplement the observational and interview data included instructional materials, student assessment results, student progress records, school reports, and other documents relative to learning services for slow learner students. The use of multiple data sources allowed the study to generate a rich understanding of learning services in their real-life educational settings. Data analysis was done interactively and continuously in the research process which includes data collection, data reduction, data display and conclusion drawing. The data obtained from observation, interview, and documentation were reduced by sorting the information according to the focus of the research. The data collected were organized and reported under major themes of instructional planning, implementation, learning strategies, academic services, assessment practices, and supporting and inhibiting factors. Conclusions were built and tested by cross-referencing information across participants and data sources to ensure consistency and contextual accuracy. This iterative analytic process was intended to produce a comprehensive and contextual interpretation of learning services for slow learner students in elementary schools in Muara Wahau District.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The results show that the learning service for slow learner students in elementary schools in Muara Wahau District has been conducted through several forms of instructional adjustment. But the services have not been assembled in a comprehensive and systematic framework. Teachers have employed many methods to help slow learners. These include identification, modification of instruction, repetition, individual help, and encouragement. However, these practices are mostly based on individual teachers’ initiatives, not on the school standardized procedures. The results are presented in six main areas, namely, the identification of slow learner students, planning of learning services, implementation of learning services, evaluation of learning outcomes, supporting factors, and inhibiting factors.

Identification of Slow Learner Students

The results were that the identification of slow learner students was mostly done by the teachers’ direct observations in the daily classroom activities. Teachers identified students who were consistently behind their classmates in learning progress, especially those who required additional time to understand explanations, complete assignments and respond to instructional directions. Teachers also often used difficulties in basic academic skills such as reading, writing and numeracy as indicators of possible slow learning characteristics. Another was the need to give students explanations and instructions repeatedly before they could carry out learning activities on their own. However, the identification process was generally informal and not supported by standard procedures across the schools. Most schools had no special instruments for identification or psychometric tests to find out if students could be classified as slow learners. Thus, teachers were heavily relying on their professional experience, classroom observations, students’ academic performance as well as patterns of learning difficulties that had appeared in a systematic manner over time. Teachers were prone to record students who experienced learning difficulties repeatedly and pay extra attention to them during classroom instruction.

The process of identification also included communication between teachers and parents. Teachers wanted to know about students’ learning behaviors, difficulties, study habits, and development at home to complement their classroom observations. Teachers then took into account parents’ information when deciding on what type and how much help each individual student would need. Thus the identification process was based on observation in school and information from parents, although it had not yet evolved into a systematic multidisciplinary assessment process. This suggests that schools are aware that students have different learning abilities, but the identification process still depends largely on teachers’ subjective observations. A major weakness is the lack of standardized procedures for identification, because accurate identification is critical for the identification of appropriate educational services. The results thus indicate the necessity of a more structured identification mechanism involving classroom observation, academic assessment, documentation of student progress, parental information and, where necessary, professional assessment.

Planning of Learning Services for Slow Learner Students

The results showed that in general instructional planning for slow learner students still referred to the regular curriculum that was implemented by each school. Teachers did not prepare a curriculum completely separate for slow learner students. Instead, the curriculum, homework, speed of learning, and instructional assistance were adapted to the students’ displayed skills. With this method, slow learners could do the same classroom activities as the other students, but they could also get accommodations when necessary. In terms of instructional documents, instructors generally created similar lesson plans and learning materials for all students. More specific adaptations for slow learners were observed in actual classroom implementation than in formal instructional planning documents. When slow learner students faced difficulties, teachers simplified the learning materials, reduced the complexity or number of questions, provided additional learning time, repeated explanations, and used more concrete examples or instructional media. The results also indicated that the schools had not consistently developed individual learning programs for the slow learner students. Thus, teachers used flexible classroom practices and personal adjustments instead of systematically documented individual learning plans. In practice, teachers tailored their teaching to immediate student responses. When students struggled, teachers gave more explanation or changed the tasks; when students showed enough understanding, they were encouraged to continue with normal classroom activities. This condition indicates that adaptive practices already exist but are mostly informal. Instructional adaptations depend largely on individual teachers’ awareness, experience and initiative rather than on a structured school-wide planning mechanism. Hence, the quality and intensity of services received by slow learner students may vary from teacher to teacher and classroom to classroom.

Implementation of Learning Services for Slow Learner Students

The provision of learning services was the most visible support to slow learner students. Classroom observations revealed that teachers employed a variety of instructional strategies to support students’ understanding and engagement. These strategies included using different teaching methods, repeating learning material, giving individual assistance, using concrete examples, motivational support and positive reinforcement. The teachers used different methods of teaching like lecture, question and answer, demonstration, group discussion and immediate practice. The choice of methods was usually adapted to the properties of the learning materials and to the ability of students to understand them. Demonstration and practical activities were used more for slow learner students as these methods provided observable and concrete learning experiences. Teachers also related learning materials to objects, situations or experiences known to the students. Concrete examples were particularly helpful for slow learner students who had trouble with abstract verbal explanations. Teachers would show how things were done, provide examples or walk students through learning activities step-by-step, rather than lengthy explanations. However, the results showed that the variety of instructional media was still limited. The teachers mostly used verbal explanation and the concrete materials available. Although these practices were attempts to provide information through different forms of representation, the use of visual, interactive and other adaptive learning media had not yet been optimally developed.

Repetition was one of the most frequently implemented instructional services for slow learner students. If students didn't understand the learning material after the first explanation, teachers would re-explain it for them one-on-one or in small groups. Usually teachers tried to simplify the language and to break the material down to smaller and more manageable learning steps, rather than repeating the same explanations. This strategy was especially critical because slow learner students often required extra time and repeated exposure before they understood a concept or instruction. Teachers therefore resisted the urge to move on to the next material when students continued to struggle. The repetition provided students with the opportunity to process the information multiple times and closed the gap in learning between the slow learner students and their peers. Individual assistance was also a prominent form of learning service in the classrooms. Teachers themselves personally attended to the slow learner students in the event of their having difficulty in understanding instructions or in completing assignments. This support included re-explaining instructions, modeling how to complete tasks, providing prompts, and guiding students through individual steps of an activity. The one-on-one support allowed teachers to identify the precise difficulties students were facing and to give them the right help at that moment. But the amount of help to individuals depended upon the situation in the classroom. In classrooms with relatively large numbers of students, teachers had few opportunities to provide sustained individual support as they were responsible for attending to the needs of other students at the same time. Teachers also gave motivational and emotional support to slow learner students besides academic support. Positive reinforcement took the form of verbal praise, simple appreciation, encouragement and recognition of students’ progress. Teachers tried to redirect students’ attention away from the disability and towards continuing participation in classroom activities. The results showed that this kind of support was meant to build up students’ self-confidence and their preparedness for learning. Teachers believed that recognition of small improvements was particularly important as slow learner students often required longer periods to show academic progress. Thus, recognition was given to high achievement but also to effort, persistence, participation and incremental improvement. In summary, the implementation results indicate that teachers have formulated pragmatical adaptive strategies to support slow learner students. However, these adaptations are still largely dependent on actions at the classroom level and have not yet become a systematic school-wide practice.

The results of the study indicate that the learning services for slow learner students in elementary schools in Muara Wahau District have been implemented in the efforts of the schools to accommodate students with different learning abilities and speed from their peers. Teachers know that slow learner students require instructional modifications to participate successfully in regular classroom activities. Learning services are therefore provided with flexible methods taking into account the individual abilities and the learning speed of students. One of the most common forms of support is individual assistance, in which teachers approach students who experience difficulties, provide additional explanations, clarify instructions and guide them to complete learning tasks. The practice allows slow learner students to participate in regular classroom activities with extra support as per their needs. In addition, the learning services are characterized by the use of repetition, simplification and concrete learning experiences. Teachers describe material students have not yet learned many times and use simpler language to reduce the difficulty of processing information. To make it easier for students to understand concepts that might otherwise be difficult to grasp from abstract explanations, concrete examples related to their everyday experiences are also used. Repetition is done in whole group and individual instruction. The practices indicate that the teachers attempt to adjust the learning process to the characteristics of slow learner students by giving them extra time and multiple chances to understand the learning materials before moving to more complex content.

Instructional modifications and task adaptations are also ways in which learning services are provided. Teachers adjust the difficulty level, the quantity of work, the teaching procedures, and the types of assistance to the students’ capabilities, but not the intended end result of learning. These adjustments are important because it may be a disadvantage for slow learner students to impose the same learning demands to all students because of the difference in their learning pace and information processing abilities. In addition, classroom modifications are given, as well as remedial activities for students who have not achieved the expected learning outcomes. Remedial instruction consists of additional practice, greater repetition of explanations, and more intensive guidance. It enables teachers to identify particular learning difficulties and to provide support aimed at material not yet mastered by students. The collaboration between schools and families also helps in making these learning services effective. Teachers communicate with parents about students’ academic progress, difficulties in learning, and assistance that can be continued at home. “When parents get involved, it helps keep the support students get in school and at home consistent, which helps students grow academically and build confidence.” In general, the results show that there are various adapted practices that have been done in the learning services for slow learner students in elementary schools in Muara Wahau District, including individual assistance, repetition and simplification of instruction, concrete learning experience, modification of tasks, remedial teaching, and parent–school collaboration. However, these practices are largely teacher-initiated, suggesting the need for a more systematic and structured learning service framework to ensure the provision of appropriate support for slow learner students consistently across inclusive elementary school settings.

The Role of Teachers in Supporting Learning Success and Evaluating Learning Outcomes of Slow Learner Students

The results indicated that the assessment system used to evaluate slow learners were similar to those used to evaluate other students. However, teachers made a number of accommodations during assessment to account for differences in students’ pace and understanding. These accommodations included extra time for assignments and tests, simplified instructions, instant support during assessment, and acknowledgment of students’ learning progress instead of only their final scores. Extra time was given as slow learner students generally required more time to read questions, understand instructions, formulate answers and complete tasks. When students had difficulty with complex sentences, teachers used simpler wording in instructions. In some cases, teachers offered explanations without giving the answer outright, so that students could show what they really knew. Another key finding was that teachers valued the learning process and individual progress alongside numerical achievement. Small improvements in students’ ability to complete tasks, understand directions, participate in activities or demonstrate greater independence were recognized as meaningful progress. Evaluation, therefore, was not only whether students were performing at the same level as their peers.The findings, however, also point to the fact that differentiated assessment procedures were not yet formally standardized. Adjustments were made based on teachers’ judgment and classroom circumstances. This meant that assessment practices remained flexible, but possibly inconsistent, across classrooms and schools.

The results indicate that teachers are important in supporting the learning success of slow learner students in the elementary schools of Muara Wahau District. They are more than deliverers of instructional content; they are facilitators, motivators and mentors who respond to students’ academic and emotional needs. Teachers’ understanding of individual learning characteristics is an important foundation for determining appropriate instructional strategies. This finding is in line with Florian and Black-Hawkins (2011) who argue that inclusive pedagogy means that teachers provide opportunities to learn for all students rather than segregate students based on presumed differences in ability. Ainscow (2020) also asserts that the success of inclusive education greatly depends on the ability of teachers to meet learner diversity and remove barriers that restrict students’ participation in learning. Teachers as facilitators of learning assist slow learners to understand the learning materials through simplified and gradual explanations, concrete examples, repeated instruction, modification of tasks, and additional time for finishing the learning activities. Furthermore, teachers assist students individually when they encounter problems in understanding the instructions or doing the tasks. These results are in accordance with Suparno which stated that learning for students with special educational needs should be adaptive by choosing the right methods, media and educational services according to the individual learning needs. The findings reinforce Pujaningsih’s view that students with learning difficulties need suitable instructional accommodations to enable their optimal participation in classroom learning. In the present study, these accommodations consisted of repetition, simplified materials, concrete learning experiences, individual guidance, and remedial instruction.

Teachers also play a very important motivational and emotional role. Results indicate teachers offer encouragement, praise, individual attention, and positive reinforcement for students’ efforts and incremental progress. Such practices build confidence and willingness among students to participate in classroom activities. A good healthy teacher-student relationship creates a learning environment where slow learners do not hesitate to ask questions, respond to instructions, complete tasks and interact with their peers. This finding supports the principle of inclusive pedagogy proposed by Florian and Black-Hawkins (2011), in which meaningful participation should be extended to all learners without reinforcing labels or exclusions. Moreover, the teachers’ use of verbal repetition, concrete examples, and various ways of presenting information are signs of elements of the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework, namely the provision of multiple means of representation. However, as CAST (2024) states, inclusive learning should offer multiple means of engagement and action and expression, which remains relatively limited in the schools reviewed in this study. Also teachers are an important link between school and family, informing parents of the academic progress of students, learning difficulties and educational needs. This collaboration provides learning support outside the classroom and guidance for parents on how to support their children at home. This supports Ainscow’s (2020) assertion that effective inclusion depends on a responsive educational environment, not interventions in individual classrooms. Findings show that the role of teachers as facilitator, motivator, mentor and collaborator is fundamental to the success of slow learner students in general. Therefore, to produce more systematic and sustainable learning services for slow learner students in inclusive elementary schools, teachers’ competence in adaptive instruction, individual assistance, emotional support, and collaboration with families should be improved.

Supporting Factors for Learning Services

The implementation of learning services for slow learner students was facilitated by a number of factors such as teacher commitment, principal support, cooperation with parents, and a conducive learning environment. Teacher commitment was one of the strongest supporting factors. The teachers were concerned about students who had difficulty learning and were willing to provide further explanations, individual guidance and, in some cases, help beyond the regular classroom instruction. This commitment was instrumental in maintaining learning accommodations, even without specialized personnel and comprehensive service systems in schools. Principle support was also a factor in implementing adaptive learning practices. School principals enabled teachers to modify instructional strategies to meet students’ needs and supported classroom practices to address learner diversity. However, the level of institutionalization differed between schools, indicating that adaptive practices were not yet an established school culture. School and parents' collaboration was able to provide continuity in the learning process between the school and help at home. The communication made it possible for teachers to get information about the students’ development outside the school and for parents to understand what types of help their children needed. Parents who had engaged with their children during home learning were positively contributing to the continuity of educational support. Finally, the safe and conducive learning environment participated slow learner students. A setting that reduced pressure and provided students with opportunities to learn at an appropriate pace helped them engage with classroom activities and interact more confidently with their peers.

The results show that there are several factors that support the implementation of learning services for slow learner students in elementary schools in Muara Wahau District, namely teacher commitment, school support, parental collaboration, remedial programs, and conducive learning environment. The teachers’ commitment was identified as one of the most important factors, showing considerable concern for students who had learning difficulties. This commitment was demonstrated through one-to-one support, reiterated explanations, simplified instruction, extended learning time, positive reinforcement and remedial activities. These practices were further supported by the schools, which permitted teachers to adapt the teaching methods according to the needs of the students. This supports Florian and Black-Hawkins (2011) who argue that inclusive pedagogy means teachers offering more chances for learning to accommodate the diversity of learners rather than separating students on the basis of ability differences. Likewise, Ainscow (2020) notes that the success of inclusive education depends on the ability of schools and teachers to respond appropriately to diverse educational needs.Another important factor of support is the cooperation between schools and families. Teachers tell parents about the difficulties their students have in learning, how well they are doing in school, and what kind of support they need at home. Parents who are actively involved in their children’s learning can help to reinforce material taught at school and provide additional encouragement to help create a sense of continuation between the support children receive at school and home. Remedial programs provide students with additional opportunities to revisit and review material they have not yet mastered through repeated instruction, additional exercises and more intensive guidance. These findings support the view of Ainscow, Booth and Dyson (2006) that inclusive education should promote the presence, participation and achievement of students through changes to the learning environment and support system. So that the collaboration of teachers, school leaders, and parents is an important foundation in creating sustainable learning services for slow learner students.

Besides, a supportive and accepting school environment encourages students’ confidence and engagement in learning. An environment that recognizes differences in learning abilities allows slow learners to participate in activities with their peers without undue academic or social pressure. This result is also in accordance with Pujaningsih who stressed the importance of giving appropriate instructional accommodations to students who experience learning difficulties, and Suparno who stressed the need to adapt instructional methods, media, and educational services to the characteristics of individual students. Thus, the supporting factors identified in this study demonstrate that effective learning services are not only determined by instructional strategies but also by the collective commitment of teachers, schools, and families to develop an inclusive and responsive learning environment.

Inhibiting Factors in Learning Services

Despite the teachers’ efforts to provide adaptive services, there were several barriers that constrained the quality of learning services for the slow learner students. The major barriers identified were limited availability of special education support teachers, large class sizes, inadequate instructional facilities and media, insufficient teacher training and varying levels of parental involvement. A major challenge was the shortage of special education support teachers Most of the elementary schools involved in the study did not have specialized personnel who could systematically assist classroom teachers in the identification, assessment, planning for, and delivery of individualised assistance to slow learning students. Thus, regular classroom teachers were mainly responsible for delivering both regular instruction and additional support for students with learning difficulties. The large size of classes also reduced the teachers’ ability to offer extended individual support. Teachers had to cope with whole-class teaching while dealing with individual learning problems. Under these conditions, slow learner students were not always able to receive immediate or intensive support when they had difficulties. The implementation of instruction was also affected by the limited availability of adaptive learning media and facilities. Teachers needed more concrete, visual and engaging materials to help slow learner students grasp concepts that were hard to process with just verbal explanation. However, in many schools, the amount and varieties of such resources were still inadequate. Another major obstacle was the lack of professional training. Some teachers did not have specific training in inclusive education, identification of slow learner students, adaptive assessment, differentiated instruction or instructional strategies specifically for students experiencing learning difficulties. Many of the instructional adaptations were developed from teachers’ personal teaching experience rather than specialized professional preparation. Finally, parental involvement was highly heterogeneous. There were some parents who were supportive of learning at home and some who were restricted by working hours, occupational duties, time constraints or lack of adequate understanding of the educational needs of slow learners. This variation led to differences in the consistency of support students received between school and home.

Despite the supporting factors, the findings reveal several barriers that restrict the optimum implementation of learning services for slow learner students. The major inhibiting factors are limited teacher time, relatively large class sizes, no special education support teachers, limited adaptive learning media and insufficient teacher training. Teachers need to meet the learning needs of all students at the same time and therefore can not provide sustained individual assistance. The large number of students in the class further limits the chances of teachers to monitor closely the progress of slow learning students. In addition, most schools do not have special education support teachers to assist with identification, assessment, individual planning and intervention. Thus, learning services are largely dependent upon the knowledge, experience, and personal initiative of classroom teachers. This condition supports Ainscow’s (2020) argument that inclusive education requires systemic changes and adequate institutional support, not just the efforts of individual teachers. Other major barriers are lack of learning facilities and adaptive instructional media. 3. Slow learner students are generally helped by concrete, visual, step-by-step and repeated presentation of information. Teachers do not always have adequate access to suitable learning resources. This restriction limits the types of ways instructional content can be delivered and students can demonstrate their understanding. This finding is relevant to the Universal Design for Learning framework (CAST, 2024) that emphasizes multiple means of representation, engagement and action and expression to support learner variability. Therefore, the lack of instructional resources may limit the teachers from providing flexible and accessible learning experiences to the slow learner students.

Another deterrent is the different level of parental involvement in supporting learning at home. Some parents are unable to provide consistent help due to work demands, time constraints or lack of understanding of the educational needs of slow learners. This condition creates a discontinuity between the support students receive in school and at home. In addition, the scarce professional training for inclusive education suggests that some teachers are still acquiring instructional adaptations through personal teaching experience and not through specialized knowledge. Findings from these studies suggest that the barriers to effective services are multidimensional and cannot be addressed at the classroom level alone. Therefore, it is important to strengthen teacher professional development, provide special education support personnel, improve access to adaptive learning resources, manage classroom conditions, and increase structured school-family collaboration to improve the quality of learning services for slow learner students in the Muara Wahau District.

CONCLUSION

The result of this study concludes that the learning services for slow learner students in elementary schools in Muara Wahau District has been carried out through various instructional adjustments such as repeated and simplified instruction, individual assistance, remedial learning, concrete learning media, flexible task adjustment, positive reinforcement and communication with parents. Teachers play a key role in identifying students’ learning difficulties and tailoring teaching to their individual capabilities and speed of learning. However, services are still mainly informal and based on individual initiatives of teachers as most schools have not yet established systematic procedures for identification and assessment, individualized learning programs, structured progress monitoring, and standardized service guidelines. Effectiveness of these services is attributed to teacher commitment, principal support, parental collaboration and positive learning environment. Major obstacles to effectiveness of these services include shortage of special education support teachers, lack of teacher training, large class sizes and poor adaptive learning resources. Hence, it is necessary to strengthen a systematic, assessment-based, collaborative and sustainable school service system to provide slow learner students with appropriate educational support and opportunities to develop their academic and social potential. The results of the study suggest that elementary schools in the Muara Wahau District are recommended to develop structured and sustainable learning service systems for slow learner students by integrating early identification, learning-needs assessment, instructional adaptation, individualized support, remedial programs, and regular progress monitoring. Teachers need to be provided with ongoing professional development in inclusive education, differentiated instruction, adaptive assessment and instructional strategies for slow learner students. Schools need to improve the availability of appropriate learning media and access to special education support personnel. Parents should also be actively involved through regular communication and coordinated learning assistance at home to help ensure continuity between school- and family-based support. At the policy level, educational authorities should enhance inclusive education by providing teacher training, technical assistance, adequate resources and access to qualified professionals. Based on the findings, it is recommended for future research to investigate and assess specific intervention models for slow learner students in wider educational settings and through varied methodological approaches in order to produce stronger evidence for the establishment of effective and sustainable inclusive learning services.