CC BY-NC-ND
0SciVerse ScienceDirect PfOCSCliCI
Social and Behavioral Sciences
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 33 (2012) 900 - 904
PSIWORLD 2011
Teachers' attitudes towards inclusive education
Ecaterina Maria Unianua*
aTransilvania University of Brasov, 29, B-dul Eroilor, Brasov, 500036, Romania,
Abstract
This study was designed to identify the major obstacles in implementing inclusive principles in mainstream schools and to analyze different aspects of the teachers' attitude towards inclusive education. A total of 112 teachers completed a questionnaire which contained 8 categories of items regarding knowledge of specific terminology, practice of inclusive education and prejudices towards children with special needs. The study revealed significant differences between teachers of different ages regarding the knowledge of main concepts of inclusion. There are also major confusions regarding the difference between inclusive education and integrated education. © 2012 Publishied by Elsevier B.'V. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of PSIWORLD2011
Keywords: inclusive education, attitude of t^ccher, children with special needs, training programms.
1. Introduction
Changing, continuous training, social equality, cooperation, evolution of technology, concern for people and for their needs regarding development, integration and innovation are a few of the main characteristics of nowadays society. Therefore, education has a major role as it is in an interactive relationship with the society and especially with the community. It is necessary that the educational system provides equal opportunities for all children, no matter what are the differences between them.
Inclusive education has been a great challenge for the Romanian educational system because it provides the principles of a new paradigm: the „interactive" or „organisational" paradigm (Clark, Dyson, Millward and Skidmore, 1995). Bearing this in mind, the concept of inclusion may become an educational priority and may replace the one of the integration of children with special needs. But, in order to do so, it is necessary to know and understand the difference between these two concepts. The term integration refers to the „placement of a student with disabilities into an ordinary school environment and regular
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 0040 - 268 - 470190; fax: 0040 - 268 - 470190. E-mail address: caty.unianu@unitbv.ro.
1877-0428 © 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of PSIWORLD2011 doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.252
curriculum, usually with/ut the curriculum being m/dified t/ any great extent" (Chhabra, Srivastava and Srivastava, 2010). On the other hand, inclusion „implies such a restructuring /f mainstream schooling that every sch//l can acc/mm/date every child irrespective /f disability (acc/mm/dati/n rather than assimilati/n) and ensures that all learners bel/ng t/ a c/mmunity" (Avramidis, Bayliss, Burden, 2000). Inclusion implies the extent of the main purpose and role of school in order to respond to the needs of a larger diversity of children.
One of the main barriers in the practice of inclusive education is represented by the teachers' attitudes towards inclusion and its principles. These attitudes are influenced by several factors such as: the degree of children' difficulties, the nature of children' disabilities, the teachers' experience with children with special educational needs, the trust in their own capabilities to implement inclusive activities (the teachers' preparedness for integrated classrooms) or the expectations towards the children no matter what are the differences between them, the curricula and so on. Previous studies support the idea that teachers perceive students with behavioural or emotional disorders as being more difficult to work with in the classroom than the other children with different disabilities (Chhabra, Srivastava and Srivastava, 2010).
Teachers do not feel that they are prepared or competent to teach both regular learners and learners with special educational needs. The main reason is that they did not have sufficient training to deal with these inclusive educational activities (Hay, Smit, Paulsen, 2001). These findings are consistent with those which underline the fact that teachers who have an opened perception over the inclusion are more confident in their own abilities to implement the inclusive education (Buell, Hallam, Gamel-McCormick, Scheer, 1999). There are many mainstream teachers who believe that children considered „different" are not their responsibility, idea which revealed the fact that there are many schools where the medical-pathological model still dominates the educational activity (Angelides, Stylianou, Gibbs, 2006).
Another factor which has a great influence on teachers' attitudes is the previous experience with children with special educational needs. Those who had a more frequent contact with people with disabilities have a more positive attitude towards inclusion than those who experienced little contact (Forlin, Tait, Carroll, Jobling, 1999).
A large number of teachers believe that the successful implementation of inclusive practices should be based on a review of the curriculum and of the teaching strategies used in classes with children with special educational needs (Ghergut, 2010).
2. Purpose of the study
The main purposes of the study were to identify the major obstacles in implementing inclusive practices in mainstream schools and to analyze different aspects of teachers' attitudes towards inclusive education. I assumed that there is a correlation between attitude towards inclusion and age of the teachers or between attitude and school environment.
3. Methodology
3.1. Participants
One hundred and twenty-six primary school teachers from four Romanian towns (Bacau, Tolpita, Odorheiu Secuiesc and Piatra Neamt) have participated in this study, primarily female (n = 108, 91.5%). Their age ranged from 20 to 59 years (mean = 42.79, SD = 8.71). The participants were not equally distributed regarding the professional environment in which they operate - rural (n = 71, 56.3%) or urban areas (n = 47, 37.3%, missing = 8, 6.3%). Most of them graduated medium level educational studies
(high-schools with pedagogical profile - n = 60), but there were also participants with a master degree (n = 2). The number of years in the work field varied from 2 to 40 years (mean = 23.66, SD = 9.09).
3.3. Instrument
The study involved a self-administrated questionnaire which contains items for demographic data and items regarding inclusive education. The participants provided some socio-demographic information such as age, gender, professional environment in which they operate, number of years in the work field, number of years in the primary school activity, level of education and residential town.
The items related to inclusive education were divided in 8 categories and they provided information regarding the knowledge of specific terminology (inclusive education, integrated education, children with special educational needs), the practice of inclusive education (projection, implementation, and evaluation of educational activities), and prejudice towards children with special needs (for example „Children with D/wn syndr/me cann/t be integrated in the c/mmunity" or „Children with special educati/nal needs sh/uld learn in special sch//ls"). The participants were asked to range on a five-point Likert-type scale the response that corresponded best to their beliefs (1 - strongly disagree, 5 - strongly agree). They were also asked to define some concepts such as inclusive or integrated education, children with special educational needs, disability, mainstream education, special educational system and so on. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was measured by Cronbach' alpha coefficient which showed a good internal consistency of the entire scale (a = .810).
4. Results
One of the purposes of my study was to identify if there are significant differences between teachers of different ages regarding their perceived competences to practice inclusive education. The results revealed the fact that there are significant differences only regarding the implementation of inclusive activities (F = 2.688, p<0.05), taking into consideration the individual characteristics of the students in the evaluation process (F = 3.882, p<0.05) and the class management (F = 3.487, p<0.05). I also wanted to identify some significant differences between teachers of different ages regarding their prejudices towards children with special educational needs. The results revealed significant differences only regarding the prejudices towards autistic children (F = 2.887, p<0.05).
The second purpose of the study was to identify if there are significant differences regarding different aspects of inclusive activities between teachers who are operating in different professional environments (schools in rural areas or urban areas). We didn't found any significant difference because the results weren't relevant at a significant level of p<0.05.
Univariate ANOVAS suggested that teachers with bachelor degrees and those with medium level education are different regarding their prejudices towards the integration of children with special educational needs in mainstream schools (F = 3.571, p<0.05).
We obtained significant differences between teachers who work with children of different ethnical background regarding their opinion towards the educational rights of children (t = .041, p<0.05).
In order to identify the teachers' prejudices towards children with special needs, the teachers were asked to range on a five-point Likert-type scale the response that corresponded best to their beliefs (1 -strongly agree, 5 - strongly disagree). They filled out a scale of 6 items which evaluated their beliefs regarding students with special educational needs, students with physical disabilities, children with parents who are not living with them (they are working in another country), children with autistic disorders and Down syndrome. The results are presented in table 1.
EcaterinaMaria Unianu / Procedia - Socialand Behavioral Sciences 33 (2012) 900 - 904 Table 1. Teachers' prejudices towards children with special educational needs
Mean Standard deviation
Every child has the right to be educated corresponding to his own development characteristics. 4.42 1.029
Children with physical disabilities should not learn in special schools. 2.92 1.520
Children with parents who are not living with them do not have a higher risk to abandon school than the others. 2.64 1.265
Children with autistic disorders can be recovered. 3.32 1.092
Children with Down syndrome can be integrated in the community. 3.40 1.161
Children with special educational needs could be 3.51 1.345
integrated in mainstream schools.
The qualitative analysis regarding the knowledge of different concepts in the inclusive domain revealed that only 21.32% of the respondents defined correctly the concept of inclusive education and 20.44% the concept of integration. A total of 73 respondents (53.67%) confused inclusive and integrated education meanwhile 17 participants didn't respond to this question of the questionnaire.
5. Discussions
The differences between teachers of different ages regarding the implementation of inclusive activities, taking into consideration of the individual characteristics of the students in the evaluation process and the class management suggest that teachers with more experience in the primary school are more convinced that they are capable to adapt the educational activity in order to take into consideration all children's needs. This could be explained by a larger professional experience, self-confidence and more types of students which have learned under their careful supervision. These results are consistent with those of Kalyva, Gojkovic and Tsakiris (2007) or Avramidis, Bayliss and Burden (2000) who found that those teachers with more relevant experience in teaching have a more positive attitude towards inclusion than those without experience in teaching.
The level of education is an also an important factor in developing a certain attitude towards inclusive education. At the bachelor level, the educational plan of the faculties includes some disciplines which are trying to form the base for knowledge regarding special education, children with special educational needs, inclusion, learning difficulties and so on. The high school curriculum was not sufficiently developed in order to teach students about these issues and form a proper attitude towards them. The quality of inclusive education depends primarily on the level of professional qualification and also on the skills needed in the field of social networking (Ghergut, 2010). But we also have to observe that the knowledge of basic concepts such as inclusion or integration is a very weak one. The inclusive education represents a very large domain which cannot be taught in one semester of the bachelor degree programme. Therefore it is necessary to rethink and reform the bachelor programme curricula in order to assure a better understanding and a better training of the teachers for inclusive education.
Teachers who work with children with different ethnical backgrounds are more opened to the idea of inclusion than those who don't work with such categories of children. The results are consistent with
those which have revealed the importance of professional background and experience in developing positive attitudes towards inclusion. Teachers with more experience in working with children from different ethnical areas are more tolerant and more opened regarding cultural issues.
Despite the fact that the majority of teachers declare that it is important for every child or student to be educated corresponding to his level of development and his needs, the results showed that there still are prejudices regarding children with special educational needs. One possible explanation could be that mainstream teachers don't know very well the main characteristics of children with different disabilities (physical, autistic disorders, Down syndrome, emotional problems or behavioural disorders). They need support from school counsellor or school psychologist in order to help every child and to develop an efficient educational activity.
6. Conclusions
Teachers' attitudes towards inclusive education could be formed and developed in the context of an educational system which can provide some specific conditions in order to have a good practice in this field. Those conditions refer to a restructure of the curricula, more help from support teachers, more time for preparing the educational activities, decreasing the number of students in one class, creating and developing opportunities for interactive partnerships between teachers, students, support teachers and parents and so on. The reform of the curriculum should be made in parallel with a proper training for teachers regarding their knowledge of inclusion and its principles. The difficulties are inherent to any change or reform, but it is necessary to develop an educational system which can properly respond to all the needs, characteristics and individual differences of all children in school.
References
Angelides, P., Stylianou, T., Gibbs, P. (2006). Preparing teachers for inclusive education in Cyprus. Tracking and Trachrr Edrcation, 22, 513-522
Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P., Burden, R. (2000). A survey of mainstream teachers' attitudes towards the inclusion of children with
special educational needs in the ordinary school in one local education authority. Edrcational Psychology, 20, 191-211 Buell, M.J., Hallam, R., Gamel-McCormick, M., Scheer, S. (1999). A survey of general and special education teachers' perceptions
and inservice needs concerning inclusion. International Jorrnal of Disability, Drvrlopmrnt and Edrcation, 46, 143-156 Chhabra, S., Srivastava, R., Srivastava, I. (2010). Inclusive education in Botswana: the perceptions of school teachers. Jorrnal of
Disability Policy Strdirs, 20, 219-228 Clark, C., Dyson, A., Millward, A. & Skidmore, D. (1995). Dialectical analysis, special needs and schools as organisations. In
Clark, C., Dyson, A., Millward, A. (eds) Towards inclrsivr schooling? (pp. 78-95). London: David Fulton. Forlin, C., Tait, K., Carroll, A. and Jobling, A. (1999). Teacher education for diversity. Qrrrnsland Jorrnal of Edrcational Rrsrarck, 15, 207-225.
Ghergut, A. (2010). Analysis of inclusive education in Romania. Results from a survey conducted among teachers. Procrdia Social
andBrkavioral Scirncrs, 5, 711-715 Hay, J.F., Smit, J., Paulsen, M. (2001). Teacher preparedness for inclusive education. Sortk African Jorrnal of Edrcation, 21, 213218
Kalyva, E., Gojkovic, D., Tsakiris, V. (2007). Serbian teachers' attitudes towards inclusion. International jorrnal of Sprcial Edrcation, 22, 30-34
