Page 11 - IJPS-11-6

International Journal of
Population Studies Education of Rohingya disabled children

Theories

Functional Enhancement of foreign Community
social system aid and cooperation participation

Inherited derivation
• Statelessness
• Limited movement within
boundary
• Communal violence
• Ransom

Relative Influx and Ensuring basic
deprivation of Massive shelter in facilities in Rohingya
Rohingya people persecution by makeshift camps, including
in Myanmar state in 2017 camps in education for children
Bangladesh

Conceited deprivation
• Limited scope of education
• Unemployment
• Limited access to health
provisions
• Insufficient water and
sanitation facilities
• Fragile shelters

Figure 3. Theoretical framework

External factors
Institutions, interaction of actors, Enabling
humanitarian policy, fund, community environment
engagement, etc. (Maximizing Enhancing
supportive education for
factors and children with
Internal factors minimizing disabilities
Strategies, environment of learning obstructive
centers, capacity building, issues)
teaching-learning process, etc.

Figure 4. Operational framework

2.1. Sample technique, specifically focusing on centers where
This study utilized focus group discussions (FGDs) and children with disabilities are enrolled. A total of 100
a survey involving children with disabilities. A total of children with disabilities (53 boys and 47 girls) were the
120 participants took part, including 100 children. The primary respondents in the survey.
research was conducted in 10 Rohingya camps: Camps 2.2. Instruments
2W, 4, 7, 11, 12, 14, 24, 25, 26, and 27. A total of 20
participants – including teachers from the Rohingya Van and Angehrn (2017), Ali et al. (2020), Rashid et al.
camps and host communities, as well as parents of (2020), and Azman et al. (2021) suggest that 5 – 10
children with disabilities – participated in separate participants are standard for an FGD, with smaller groups
FGD sessions. The list of FGD participants is presented often being more informative. Following this scholarly
in Tables 1 and 2. From a total of 3,470 LCs, 80 were recommendation, we selected five participants for each
selected using a non-probability purposive sampling 1-h FGD session. Two sets of FGD protocols – one for

Volume 11 Issue 6 (2025) 5 https://doi.org/10.36922/ijps.8097