This report from the UNs education agency calls on the international community to endorse the

approach of inclusive schools by implementing practical and strategic changes.

In June 1994 representatives of 92 governments and 25 international organisations formed the World
Conference on Special Needs Education, held in Salamanca, Spain. They agreed a dynamic
newStatement on the education of all disabled children, which called for inclusion to be the norm. In
addition, the Conference adopted a newFramework for Action, the guiding principle of which is that
ordinary schools should accommodate all children, regardless of their physical, intellectual, social,
emotional, linguistic or other conditions. All educational policies, says the Framework, should stipulate
that disabled children attend the neighbourhood school 'that would be attended if the child did not
have a disability.'
Education for all
The Statement begins with a commitment to Education for All, recognising the necessity and urgency of
providing education for all children, young people and adults 'within the regular education system.' It
says those children with special educational needs 'must have access to regular schools' and adds:
Regular schools with this inclusive orientation are the most effective means of combating discriminatory
attitudes, creating welcoming communities, building an inclusive society and achieving education for all;
moreover, they provide an effective education to the majority of children and improve the efficiency
and ultimately the cost-e ffectiveness of the entire education system.
Call to governments
The World Conference went on to call upon all governments to:
give the 'highest policy and budgetary priority' to improve education services so that all children
could be included, regardless of differences or difficulties.
'adopt as a matter of law or policy the principle of inclusive education' and enrol all children in
ordinary schools unless there were compelling reasons for doing otherwise.
develop demonstration projects and encourage exchanges with countries with inclusive schools.
ensure that organisations of disabled people, along with parents and community bodies, are
involved in planning decision-making.
put greater effort into pre-school strategies as well as vocational aspects of inclusive education.
ensure that both initial and in-service teacher training address the provision of inclusive
education.
Inclusive schooling
The Statement also calls on the international community to endorse the approach of inclusive schooling
and to support the development of special needs education as an integral part of all education
programmes. In particular it calls on UNESCO, UNICEF, UNDP and the World Bank for this endorsement.
It asks for the United Nations and its specialised agencies to 'strengthen their inputs for technical co-
operation' and improve their networking for more efficient support to integrated special needs
provision. Non-governmental organisations are asked to strengthen their collaboration with official
national bodies and become more involved in all aspects of inclusive education.
As the UN agency for education, UNESCO is asked to:
ensure that special needs education forms part of every discussion dealing with education for
all.
enhance teacher education in this field by getting support from teacher unions and associations.
stimulate the academic community to do more research into inclusive education and
disseminate the findings and the reports.
use its funds over the five-year period, 1996--2001, to create an expanded programme for
inclusive schools and community support projects, thus enabling the launch of pilot projects.
Equalisation of opportunity
The Framework for Action says 'inclusion and participation are essential to human dignity and to the
enjoyment and exercise of human rights.' In the field of education this is reflected in bringing about a
'genuine equalisation of opportunity.' Special needs education incorporates proven methods of teaching
from which all children can benefit; it assumes human differences are normal and that learning must be
adapted to the needs of the child, rather than the child fitted to the process. The fundamental principle
of the inclusive school, it adds, is that all children should learn together, where possible, and that
ordinary schools must recognise and respond to the diverse needs of their students, while also having a
continuum of support and services to match these needs. Inclusive schools are the 'most effective' at
building solidarity between children with special needs and their peers. Countries with few or no special
schools should establish inclusive not special schools.
Page last updated: Monday 05 August 2013
Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education
supporting inclusion, challenging exclusion
http://www.csie.org.uk/inclusion/unesco-salamanca.shtml
Creating Positive School Experiences for Students with Disabilities
By: Amy Milsom (2006)
Individuals with disabilities often are stigmatized, encountering attitudinal and physical barriers both in
work and in daily life. Although federal legislation (e.g., Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990) protects
the inherent rights of individuals with disabilities, that legislation cannot always protect them from
subtle forms of discrimination and prejudice. School-age students with disabilities often have negative
school experiences related to their having a disability, and school counselors, administrators, and
teachers can help to create more positive school experiences that promote their academic, career, and
personal/social growth. By examining the attitudes and behaviors of school staff and students as well as
systemic factors related to the school, school counselors in collaboration with other school personnel
can determine areas for intervention and respond accordingly.
Attitudes towards students with disabilities
For the past 20 years, researchers have examined the attitudes of a variety of professionals toward
individuals with disabilities. Although many researchers found that people in general possess negative
attitudes toward individuals with disabilities (Gething, LaCour, & Wheeler, 1994; Yuker, 1994), much of
the research provided comparisons of only one group of individuals to another without identifying
attitudes as positive or negative. In relation to school counselors and educators, very little research has
been conducted in the past 10 years, and most of that research has focused on teachers and/or has
examined attitudes toward inclusion, as opposed to attitudes specifically toward students with
disabilities. The research summarized below suggests that school personnel and students might possess
slightly negative attitudes toward students with disabilities and that the attitudes of school counselors
are similar to, if not more positive than, those of other school personnel.
Recent research suggests students and teachers possess somewhat negative attitudes toward students
with disabilities, or that they view individuals with disabilities as different from and inferior to
individuals without disabilities (Gething et al., 1994). From their meta-analysis of research studies
published from 1990 to 2000, examining attitudes toward children with disabilities, Nowicki and
Sandieson (2002) concluded that children without disabilities generally preferred to interact with
children without either physical or intellectual disabilities. Furthermore, McDougall, DeWit, King, Miller,
and Killip (2004) examined the attitudes of ninth-grade students toward students with disabilities and
found that, although the majority had attitudes classified as neutral to positive, slightly over 20% had
negative attitudes. They also found that females had slightly more positive attitudes than did males, and
students who had a friend or classmate with a disability had more positive attitudes than those students
without direct contact with students with disabilities. Finally, Hastings and Oakford (2003) found that
student teachers possessed more negative attitudes toward students with behavioral and/or emotional
problems than toward students with cognitive disabilities. The former were perceived to have a more
negative impact on the school and on other students.
In comparing attitudes of various professionals toward students with disabilities, Yuker (1994) reported
few differences among the attitudes of regular education teachers, special education teachers,
administrators, and other educators toward students with disabilities, but he did not state whether their
attitudes tended to be positive or negative. Additionally, Carney and Cobia (1994) examined the
attitudes of counselor education graduate students and found that students in the school counseling
program had significantly more positive attitudes than students in the community counseling program,
but significantly less positive attitudes than rehabilitation counseling students. Again, whether
individuals with more positive attitudes actually possessed positive attitudes or simply less negative
attitudes is unclear. Finally, Milsom (2001) found school counselors to have attitudes toward students
with disabilities similar to those of pre-service teachers reported by Eichinger, Rizzo, and Sirotnik (1991).
With regard to attitudes about inclusion, Isaacs, Greene, and Valesky (1998) surveyed elementary school
counselors and found that they had somewhat positive attitudes about inclusion. In contrast, Praisner
(2003) found that a majority of school principals had either negative or ambivalent attitudes toward
inclusion. She found that principals who had completed more training (both pre-service and inservice)
related to inclusion and special education had more favorable attitudes. Prior positive experience with
students with disabilities also resulted in more positive attitudes toward inclusion among principals.
Yuker and Block (1986) reported that attitudes toward individuals with disabilities are positively
correlated with attitudes toward mainstreaming. Although mainstreaming and inclusion are
conceptually different (see Alley, n.d., for definitions of these concepts), both relate to the idea of
integrating students with disabilities into regular education classrooms. There is no research to support
positive correlations between attitudes about inclusion and attitudes toward students with disabilities;
however, given the positive correlation between attitudes toward students with disabilities and
attitudes toward mainstreaming, it seems likely that such a relationship might exist.
Behaviors towards individuals with disabilities
Just because an educator or a student possesses a negative attitude does not necessarily mean that
individual will act negatively toward a student with a disability. Thoughts and actions are often separate;
however, negative attitudes have been linked to bias and discrimination (Millington, Strohmer, Reid, &
Spengler, 1996). In fact, educators who have negative attitudes toward students with disabilities tend to
expect low achievement and inappropriate behavior from those students (Beattie, Anderson, &
Antonak, 1997). The negative attitudes of school personnel and students toward students with
disabilities can manifest themselves in a variety of ways.
Praisner (2003) suggested that the attitudes of school principals "could result either in increased
opportunities for students to be served in general education or in limited efforts to reduce the
segregated nature of special education services" (p. 136). She found that principals with positive
attitudes were more likely than principals with negative attitudes to recommend inclusive educational
placements for students with disabilities. In essence, future opportunities for students with disabilities
might be hampered by a principal who possesses a negative attitude, particularly if those students are
prevented or discouraged from completing regular academic coursework (e.g., algebra) required for
admission to a 4-year college.
One might question the effectiveness of a school counselor who possesses a negative attitude toward
students with disabilities. If, as suggested by Hannah (1988), teachers who have negative attitudes are
often reluctant to teach students with disabilities, it seems likely that school counselors who have
negative attitudes would be reluctant to become involved with students with disabilities. Professionals
who are uncomfortable with individuals who have disabilities might avoid contact with those individuals
or "neglect opportunities for their clients' development" (Beckwith & Matthews, 1994, p. 53). Thus,
school counselors who are uncomfortable with students with disabilities might choose to avoid
participating in Individualized Educational Program meetings and/or rely on other school personnel to
address those students' academic, career, and personal/ social needs. In addition, Bowen and Glenn
(1998) suggested that school counselor bias against students with disabilities could result in a school
counselor having low expectations for students with disabilities. In this sense, school counselors whose
behaviors are consistent with their negative attitudes might discourage students with disabilities from
pursuing more rigorous courses of study, potentially limiting their future career options. In fact, Janiga
and Costenbader (2002) reported that students with disabilities are most often encouraged to pursue
vocational education.
Educators who have negative attitudes toward students with disabilities tend to expect low
achievement and inappropriate behavior from those students.
Student behaviors related to negative attitudes toward their peers with disabilities are also important to
examine. As discussed previously, students prefer interacting with peers without disabilities (Nowicki &
Sandieson, 2002), and related to that finding, Heinrichs (2003) indicated that students with disabilities
experience more rejection by peers than do students without disabilities. Bullying directed toward
students with disabilities is common, and Heinrichs suggested that the cognitive, behavioral, and/or
physical differences of these students make them "easy targets" (p. 196). Bullying can take many forms,
and rejection can have long lasting effects (Beale & Scott, 2001).
Student outcomes related to negative attitudes and behaviors
Individuals with disabilities often internalize negative attitudes (Brillhart, Jay, & Wyers, 1990). Moreover,
the negative attitudes and actions of others can negatively affect the behavior, social relationships,
education, employment, and health of individuals with disabilities (Yuker, 1994) because their self-
perceptions are greatly influenced by the attitudes and expectations of others (Oermann & Lindgren,
1995). For example, if educators have low expectations in terms of academic achievement and
appropriate behavior from students with disabilities (Beattie et al., 1997), then those students may be
more likely to behave as expected. That is, they might exhibit inappropriate behavior and put little effort
into schoolwork.
Medina and Luna (2004) explored the experiences of Mexican-American students enrolled in special
education and reported negative educational and personal/social outcomes. The students reported
feeling disrespected by teachers, indicated that teachers did not notice derogatory comments directed
at them by their peers without disabilities, and reported that they did not believe that their teachers
cared about them. They also reported feeling "alienation, disinterest, and anxiety regarding their
classrooms, teachers, and classmates" (Medina & Luna, p. 15). Similarly, Rodis, Garrod, and Boscardin
(2001) reported that students with disabilities often felt misunderstood by both teachers and peers.
For all students, negative attitudes and behaviors exhibited by peers can have long lasting effects.
For all students, negative attitudes and behaviors exhibited by peers can have long-lasting effects.
Bullying and relational aggression have been addressed in recent professional literature, and the
avoidance or rejection of students with disabilities by their peers as well as potential physical or verbal
aggression directed toward them should be viewed as bullying and addressed as such. Numerous
negative outcomes have been associated with bullying (see Seals & Young, 2003), and common
outcomes include academic problems, absenteeism, loneliness, and loss of friends (Roberts & Coursol,
1996).
Understanding attitudes
Negative attitudes and behaviors of students toward their peers with disabilities may occur for many
reasons, but empirical research has not identified any specific causes. Nevertheless, assessing student
attitudes is important prior to implementing any school-based intervention. Salend (1994) identified a
number of methods for assessing the attitudes of regular education students toward students with
disabilities, including sociograms, direct observation, and formal attitude assessments.
Although research identifying reasons for negative student attitudes is scarce, a number of explanations
for negativity from educators toward students with disabilities have been proposed. Research cited
previously (i.e., Praisner, 2003) suggests that one reason school personnel might possess negative
attitudes toward students with disabilities is that they did not receive adequate training regarding those
individuals and therefore feel unprepared to provide services to students with disabilities effectively.
This theme has consistently emerged in literature related to both school counselors and teachers.
School counselors surveyed by Milsom (2002) reported completing minimal formal training related to
students with disabilities prior to being employed as school counselors and indicated they felt
somewhat prepared to provide services to students with disabilities. Additionally, Forlin (2001) reported
that teachers felt stressed when working with students with disabilities because they did not possess
knowledge or feel competent. Finally, Pavri (2004) found that both special education and regular
education teachers received little to no pre-service training related to effective inclusion for students
with disabilities. In fact, special education teachers reported receiving less training in this area than did
regular education teachers.
In addition to not feeling prepared, school personnel also face demands placed on them by superiors.
Disability legislation (e.g., Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) and current educational reforms,
including No Child Left Behind, create systems in which school personnel are held accountable for
student outcomes. Forlin (2001) found that teachers reported high levels of stress when they felt they
personally would be held accountable for the educational outcomes of students with disabilities. The
teachers also worried that spending more time addressing the needs of students with disabilities would
result in their having less time to focus on students without disabilities. "The highest levels of stress
appear to come from a teacher's personal commitment to maintaining effective teaching for all students
in their classes" (Forlin, p. 242).
Thus, understandably, negative attitudes seem to characterize educators who care about students and
about being effective but who may have little control over or support for their work. Stress and
frustration seem to be natural outcomes, in such situations. It seems likely that the majority of teachers
would be more positive if they had more knowledge about students with disabilities and effective
strategies for working with those students.
Interventions to improve attitudes
As advocates for students with disabilities, school counselors are positioned to take the lead in their
buildings to ensure that these students have positive school experiences, develop skills for future
academic and career success, develop social skills, and enjoy emotional health. A number of programs
could be initiated in an effort to address the training needs of school personnel and to facilitate positive
interactions among all students. Self-awareness is important, however, and school counselors can
benefit from taking time to honestly assess their own beliefs about and attitudes toward students with
disabilities prior to accepting or volunteering to work on school-based interventions. School counselors
who possess negative attitudes might consider participating in professional development activities (see
Milsom, 2002) to address their own biases. Because school counselors are responsible for meeting the
needs of all students, comfort with and positive attitudes toward working with students with disabilities
can be viewed as important qualities of a professional, ethical, and multiculturally competent school
counselor.
Targeting School Personnel
Given the limited amount of training related to students with disabilities completed by many school
personnel, and given the research suggesting that more positive attitudes are associated with greater
amounts of pertinent pre-service education, in-service or other professional development activities can
be viewed as a critical intervention related to creating positive school experiences for students with
disabilities. Praisner (2003) advocated in-service training related to students with disabilities in general,
and Pace (2003) found professional development seminars effective in increasing awareness about
students with disabilities among regular education student teacher supervisors. However, other
researchers have recommended identifying one specific content area (e.g., behavioral interventions for
students with disabilities) as important for teacher professional development.
Numerous researchers (Lieberman, James, & Ludwa, 2004; Pavri, 2004; Schepis, Reid, Owenbey, & Clary,
2003) have recommended that school staff be trained to help promote cooperative relationships
between students with disabilities and students without disabilities. They suggested that successful
interactions between these students often do not occur naturally, and teachers must be able to
facilitate interactions effectively if they want students with disabilities to engage socially with their
peers. Additionally, Salend (1994) indicated that successful inclusion for students with disabilities into
regular education classrooms (i.e., students succeeding academically and socially) requires cooperative
interactions between students with disabilities and students without disabilities.
Pavri (2004) found that both general and special education teachers needed ideas for initiating and
supporting cooperative social interactions between students with disabilities and students without
disabilities. Additionally, through their research Schepis et al. (2003) found that preschool teachers who
completed a professional development training designed to give them strategies for helping students
interact were able to increase the interpersonal interaction between students with disabilities and those
without disabilities. Over time the student interactions increased both when the teachers were present
and when they were not, suggesting that teachers can learn to facilitate cooperative relationships
among these students and that students can learn how to interact if they are provided with
opportunities and/or encouragement.
Professional development activities also can be designed to help teachers in the classroom. Vaughan
(2002) and Corbett (2001) suggested that schools can better address the needs of all learners if teachers
learn to modify classroom lessons in ways that will benefit the range of learning styles present in any
classroom. Students with disabilities are not the only students who can benefit from creative methods
of instruction and assessment, and perhaps helping teachers reframe the way they approach teaching in
general will result in less frustration related to having to accommodate students with disabilities. School
principals can model or co-teach in an effort to train teachers in new techniques (Doyle, 2002).
It seems likely that the majority of teachers would be more positive if they had more knowledge about
students with disabilities and effective strategies for working with those students.
How can school counselors, who also might have limited knowledge of this type of content, take any
sort of leadership role in the process? First, they might bring to the attention of administrators the need
for training and support in this content area and advocate that in-service time be devoted to addressing
effective practices for working with students with disabilities. School counselors then might serve as
coordinators and collaborators, identifying individuals who can provide this type of training. School
counselors with limited knowledge about students with disabilities also will likely learn a lot in the
process.
Intervening with Students
Teachers are being encouraged to help students develop cooperative relationships, and research
examining student attitudes toward their peers with disabilities has suggested that contact with
students with disabilities might lead to positive attitudes. In fact, Lieberman et al. (2004) noted that
positive contact with students with disabilities is the only effective way to help students gain an
understanding of and knowledge about students with disabilities. Therefore, student interaction seems
an important goal, and structured activities have been recommended with regard to helping students
develop skills to successfully interact with each other. A number of specific suggestions have been
provided in the literature.
Salisbury, Gallucci, Palombaro, and Peck (1995) provided recommendations for promoting social
interactions between students with and without disabilities. Included in their list were cooperative
learning groups, which they indicated could provide both social and academic benefits to students with
disabilities. Additionally, they suggested that teachers engage students in collaborative problem-solving
(e.g., through regular classroom meetings) in order to provide students a voice for concerns related to
students with disabilities and to help them develop understanding or empathy. More specifically,
students who must generate possible reasons for a student with a disability behaving in a particular way
might develop a greater understanding of and empathy for that student. Peer tutors also were
suggested as a way both to assist students with disabilities academically and to promote positive
interactions between students. Finally, Salisbury et al. recommended modeling from teachers as an
effective way to teach students how to interact. Through watching a teacher interact with a student
with a disability, other students not only will learn how to interact with that student (e.g., perhaps it is
important to interact with a student who has a right-eye visual impairment by remaining visible to the
student's left eye), but also will see that the student is similar to them in many other ways.
Research examining student attitudes toward their peers with disabilities has suggested that contact
with students with disabilities might lead to positive attitudes.
In addition to being able to interact cooperatively with each other, students benefit from gaining an
appreciation for diversity in general. Heinrichs (2003) suggested that schools can help students develop
tolerance and respect for differences by teaching empathy and anger-management skills and promoting
respect for others via the general curriculum. The variety of character education programs available can
be used as a foundation from which discussions and activities specific to students with disabilities can be
incorporated.
School counselors can promote similar agendas (i.e., diversity and cooperation) via direct service
activities with students. Both small group and classroom guidance activities can be designed to promote
respect for differences and interaction among students with and without disabilities. Additionally,
school counselors could serve as coordinators of peer tutoring programs and collaborate with teachers
in the implementation of classroom-based activities.
School-Wide Considerations
Successful implementation of any type of programming depends on support from administrators and
cooperative efforts from school personnel. Vaughan (2002) recommended that schools make time to
assess their cultures (i.e., attitudes and beliefs about students with disabilities) as well as existing
policies and procedures. Negative messages can unintentionally be communicated to students via
language or procedures. For example, schools that single out students with disabilities as different (e.g.,
issuing special diplomas for students in special education), rather than acknowledge that all students
learn differently, might unintentionally communicate to those students that they are less worthy than
other students. Students are savvy to the beliefs of school personnel, even when those beliefs are not
verbalized. Educators should "show high levels of personal commitment, hope, and optimism" (Attfield
& Williams, 2003, p. 32) so that students do not limit their aspirations. For example, by inviting and
encouraging all students to participate in college fairs or register for college admissions exams, school
personnel communicate their belief that all students have a right to pursue post-secondary education.
In another effort to prevent students with disabilities from being singled out, school personnel might
examine their enforcement of school rules. All students should be expected to adhere to school rules,
and disciplinary actions should be equitable (Salisbury et al., 1995). Bullying and teasing will likely ensue
when some students are held to different standards than others. Similarly, high expectations for all
students with regard to both behavior and academics (Corbett, 2001; Salisbury et al.) will help students
with disabilities reach their potential and help other students develop an understanding that students
with disabilities do not need special treatment in every area of their life.
Finally, schoolwide initiatives to promote and celebrate diversity have been encouraged (Kugelmass,
2001). For example, student projects, school activities, and artwork on the walls can be highlighted.
McDougall et al. (2004) recommended the implementation of school-based programs that emphasize
success for all students rather than competition as well as programs that focus on respect and
cooperation.
Conclusion
School counselors can draw from their training and conduct needs assessments to identify potential
systematic, programmatic, and attitudinal areas for change in order to create positive environments for
students with disabilities. In collaboration with other school personnel they can help to establish school
policies that communicate respect, high expectations, and interest in equitable outcomes for all
students. They also can bring to the attention of administrators the importance of ongoing professional
development for school personnel in relation to working with students with disabilities. Whether it be
through direct services offered to students or in collaboration with teachers, school counselors can help
students develop appreciation for students with disabilities and related skills for successfully interacting
with them. Finally, by communicating high expectations and providing support, school counselors can
help students with disabilities understand that their disabilities should not be reasons to limit their
aspirations
http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/26319/

Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education
Volume 2
Number 7 Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education
Vol. 2, No. 7 (Winter/Spring 2011)
Article 5
2011
Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of
Students with Autism and Emotional Behavioral
Disorder
Jennifer M. Cassady
Follow this and additional works at: http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie
Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Curriculum and Social Inquiry Commons,
Disability and Equity in Education Commons, Special Education Administration Commons, and the
Special Education and Teaching Commons
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CORE Scholar. It has been accepted for
inclusion in Electronic Journal for Inclusive
Education by an authorized administrator of CORE Scholar. For more information, please contact
corescholar@www.libraries.wright.edu,.
Repository Citation
Cassady, J. M. (2011). Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism and Emotional
Behavioral Disorder,
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, 2 (7).Teachers Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students
with Autism and Emotional
Behavioral Disorder
Xavier University
Jennifer M. Cassady
Abstract
General education teachers have differing views about the inclusion of students with disabilities in
mainstream classrooms. However, the type and severity of the childrens disabilities affect teachers
willingness to accommodate certain students and their confidence that they will effectively manage
their classroom. It has been reported that teachers have expressed concerns about having students
with autism and emotional behavioral disorder in the general education setting because of the
childrens lack of social skills, behavioral outbursts, modifications made to the curriculum, and lack of
training and supports. Many instructors do not believe they are able to teach these populations
effectively while simultaneously teaching a large group of typically developing students. Teachers
attitudes toward their current student population with special needs dramatically affect the success and
effectiveness of their instruction. Using a snowball sampling method, 25 general education teachers
were surveyed regarding their willingness to include a child with autism and a student with EBD in their
classroom to determine if there was a significant difference in their attitudes toward the disabilities. An
independent sample t-test was used to compare the mean scores of the data in addition to a descriptive
statistics method to examine the ranges of the two groups. Results suggest that the presence of typical
characteristics of the two disabilities influence teachers willingness to have the populations in their
classrooms. The significant difference in mean scores suggests that the participants were more
1
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011accepting of having a student with autism in their general education
classrooms than a student who has
EBD.
Teachers Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism and Emotional
Behavioral Disorder
Does a students disability affect the way in which they are welcomed in the classroom? In
recent years, there has been a significant movement of children with special education needs away from
segregated settings and into general education classrooms (Avramidis, Bayliss, & Burden, 2000, p. 277).
This movement is due in large part to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of
2004. This law was passed to ensure that diverse and exceptional learners in the United States were
given a free and appropriate public education that met their needs in the least restrictive environment
(IDEIA, United States Department of Education, 2004). Avramidis et al. define inclusion as restructuring
educational provision to promote belonging, i.e. all pupils in a school see themselves as belonging to a
community, including those with significant disabilities (p. 278). However, the effectiveness of
inclusion may be influenced by the attitudes of the school personnel who are directly involved. Lopes,
Monteiro, and Sil (2994) found that the majority of teachers are not fully receptive to inclusion because
they do not know how to differentiate instruction or what kind of support to provide to the children
with disabilities (p. 413). Soodak, Powell, and Lehman (1998) report, Teachers attitudes toward
integration appear to vary with their perceptions of the specific disability as well as their beliefs about
the demands that students instructional and management needs will place on them (p. 481). The fact
that school personnel may treat individuals differently based on their diagnosis implies that their
attitudes toward inclusion should be further explored.
It is important to identify teachers attitudes toward inclusion because it can dramatically affect
their performance and the success of children with disabilities in the classroom. According to Avramidis
2
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5et al. (2000), Professionals attitudes may act to
facilitate or constrain the implementation of policies
the success of innovative and challenging programs must surely depend upon the cooperation and
commitment of those most directly involved (p. 278). Soodak, Podell, and Lehman supports this
finding, reporting, Teachers who embraced the responsibility to be inclusive have also elevated the
quality of instruction, and the instruction was deemed more effective than that of teachers who had
dissimilar beliefs concerning inclusion (as cited in Ryan, 2009, p. 181). Their conclusion indicates that
an increased receptivity toward including students with special needs is associated to greater teacher
efficacy, higher rates of teacher collaboration, and an increased likelihood to differentiate instruction.
Therefore, negative views of inclusion will influence interactions with children who have disabilities
(Ryan, 2009, p. 185). Avramidis et al. found that those who do not fully agree with inclusion are less
likely to individualize lesson plans according to students needs and are less confident that they can
implement the requirements of individualized education plans (p. 289). When general education
teachers have negative attitudes toward inclusion and are unwilling to have students with disabilities in
their classroom, they may not provide the necessary supports that would create a beneficial learning
environment for the students.
Many factors may affect educational professionals attitudes toward the inclusion of students
with disabilities including the level of confidence they have to teach the children, the support they are
receiving, and opportunities for collaboration. Avramidis et al. (2000) report:
Regular teachers attitudes reflected lack of confidence in their own instructional skills and quality of
support personnel available to them. They were positive about integrating only those whose
disabling characteristics were not likely to require extra instructional or management skills from the
teacher (p. 279).
3
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011The apprehension they may feel, whether it is due to lack of experience
or an overall skepticism of the
idea of inclusion will affect the efficacy of the teachers. Ross-Hill (2009) explains that not offering
frequent and substantial training brings about tension, stress, and strain for both teachers and students
alike in inclusive settings (p. 189). Therefore, providing teachers with support will improve the overall
implementation of inclusion, making it more beneficial for the students. The support given by the
principal, based on their beliefs about the importance of including children with disabilities, strongly
dictates the general educators teaching methods and behavior (p. 281). Soodak et al. (1998) state,
Teachers are more willing to accommodate students in their classrooms when they perceive that their
school administration fosters a supportive climate and when the culture of the school encourages
teaming and collaboration (p. 483). Adequate support from administrators is likely to increase teachers
likelihood of collaborating with special educators in order to solve problems in the inclusive classroom
(Ross-Hill, p. 191). It is likely that these partnerships and support systems increase overall acceptance of
inclusion, compensate for any insecurities, and improve educational professionals attitudes towards
having students with a variety of disabilities in the general education classroom (Soodak et al., p. 493).
Research has found that the nature and type of the disability can influence teachers attitudes
towards inclusion (Ryan, 2009, p.185). Avramidis et al. (2000) explain, Multiple interpretations of
labels occurs when teachers attribute different characteristics to a label based on their experience
which could be positive or negative (p. 282). It was discovered that the nature and severity of the
disabilities in the study and the perceived stress that would be put on the teacher significantly
influenced the educators opinions toward including the students with special needs in the classroom (p.
289). According to Lopes et al. (2004), students with special needs present serious challenges to
teachers because they are difficult, time-consuming, and frustrating (p. 413). Children with autism and
emotional behavioral disorders generally exhibit different behaviors in the classroom than their typically
4
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5developing peers and require individualized
attention from professionals. Therefore, teachers attitudes
regarding the inclusion of these students will be explored.
Past research regarding the attitudes of educational professionals toward inclusion has been
contradictory and inconclusive. Teachers have reported both positive attitudes toward the inclusion as
well as strong negative feelings about having students with various disabilities in the general education
classroom (Avramidis et al., 2000, p. 288). However, existing research has primarily focused on
teachers perspectives of the general idea of inclusion. It is unclear from previous studies whether or
not teachers have differing opinions toward the inclusion of students with autism and emotional
behavioral disorders. The need further exists to better understand educational professionals attitudes
in order to determine the acceptance these students have in general education classrooms.
Professionals attitudes toward the inclusion of students with autism and emotional behavioral
disorders will be examined using a quantitative approach. The results will be beneficial to numerous
individuals, including those directly involved with the inclusion process. This study may help general
educators identify any biases they have toward specific disabilities that may affect the manner in which
they interact with certain students. This realization may guide them to seek additional information
about how to effectively include these students. Special educators may also recognize that they need to
offer more support to the general education teachers when they are teaching students with certain
disabilities. The information this study will provide will help educational professionals to identify their
general attitudes toward the inclusion of specific students, which will hopefully result in more effective
and appropriate inclusive practices.
Literature Review
Because the inclusion of students with disabilities is enforced in a growing number of schools in
the United States, it is important to evaluate the viewpoints of those who are directly involved. Several
5
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011studies have been conducted to assess general education teachers
attitudes toward inclusion and how
their opinions affect the successful implementation of the process. According to Avramidis et al. (2000),
One of the main barriers to the implementation of integrating students with significant disabilities has
been identified as teachers attitudes (p. 278). The negative attitudes toward accommodating students
with special needs in mainstream classrooms are a consequence of a variety of factors. Many teachers
feel that they are not prepared to meet the needs of students with special needs. Teachers may see the
child as a burden on the classroom, a student who decreases the effectiveness they have when
instructing the rest of the typically developing students. Teachers have reported feelings of frustration
and guilt due to the time that is taken away from the majority of the students in order to accommodate
the needs of one student with special needs. The inordinate amount of time needed to attend
additional meetings, complete paperwork, and collaborate with specialists is seen as unfair in
comparison to the time devoted to the other students in the class (Horne & Farrell, 2009, p. 280).
Despite these difficulties teachers experienced, educators have also reported the benefits of inclusion.
Bunch and Finnegan describe teachers experiences of positive effects on the social development of
both the students with special needs and those who are typically developing. They found peer
interaction through modeling and simple physical proximity appeared to increase self-esteem for all
students and promote a sense of belonging for students with learning needs (as cited in Horne &
Farrell, p. 274). It is unknown if the benefits of inclusion outweigh the stress it can place on a teacher
and their students because each classroom is filled with unique individuals.
Obviously, there are pros and cons associated with the inclusion of students with disabilities.
Teachers have observed and experienced both the benefits and negative consequences the process has
on the classroom as a whole. However, the type of disability and the nature of the behaviors
manifested by it may sway teachers overall attitudes in a positive or negative way (Avramidis et al.
2000, p. 278). The actions and behaviors of students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders
6
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5are typically different from those exhibited by
typically developing children. Consequently, the attitudes
toward these two populations of students affect the quality of the inclusive experience.
Autism. The inclusion of children with autism can be advantageous for all students if it is done in an
appropriate manner with adequate professional support. IDEIA was passed to ensure that students with
autism were included with their typically developing peers as much as possible (IDEIA, United States
Department of Education, 2004). According to McGregror and Campbell (2001):
Integration of children with autism has two clear goals. The first is to honor the right of all
members of a community to take full part in its day-to-day life. The second goal is to improve
the quality of childrens social interaction and academic development through daily contact with
typically developing peers (p. 190).
This is to allow them to participate in their society while they advance their academic and social skills.
Inclusion gives students with autism the opportunity to look at their typically developing peers as role
models. The children with disabilities can emulate their peers behavior and follow their lead in order to
complete tasks in a more socially acceptable manner. However, these goals are sometimes hard to
attain given the challenges manifested by the disability.
The characteristics that are associated with autism make it difficult for teachers to successfully
include students with the disability in their mainstream classroom. Many children with autism have
relatively high mental capacities that enable them to do a variety of activities both inside and outside
the school setting. Jordan states that despite this populations intellectual capability, These children
retain most of the ASD-related impairments, including impairment in social interaction, deviant or
bizarre communication, and persistent patterns of restricted and stereotyped behavior throughout their
lives (as cited in Emam & Farrell, 2009, p. 407). The unusual behavior exhibited by these children may
interfere with the positive relationships they have with others, making the socialization hard to attain.
In particular, the hyperactivity/impulsivity and opposition/defiance were rated as having highly
7
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011conflictual effects in the classroom (Robertson, Chamberlain, & Kasari,
2003, p. 128). These behaviors
are detrimental in an inclusive classroom because they may cause frequent disruptions and distractions,
which decreases learning time and restricts their opportunities for participation to school activities and
affect their relationships with teachers and peers. (Emam & Farrell, p. 408).
Social constraints of students with autism may have negative effects on their relationships with
others. Baron-Cohen reports that individuals with autism have difficulties in social understanding
owing to theory of mind problems, i.e. the ability to attribute mental states such as beliefs, feelings, and
desires to oneself and others (as cited by Emam & Farrell, 2009, p. 408). Theory of mind includes
recognizing nonverbal communication and facial expressions as well as the ability to expect certain
emotions given a specific context. Incomprehension is responsible for the inability to convey
appropriate messages, which is detrimental to the interactions and relationships with others (p. 413).
The lack of emotional understanding typically results in the students behaving in inappropriate ways or
not being sensitive to the feelings and needs of those around them. The teacher-pupil relationship then
lacks shared moments that are commonly results of making jokes and relating to one another. A child
with autisms inability to take the perspective of teachers creates a gap between them . . . As a result,
teachers learn to distance themselves in the same way as the pupils do (p. 412). The effects of autism
substantially impact the daily interactions of the child and those around them.
Teachers especially experience increased tension when trying to include this population of
students in their classroom. Implicit tensions arise from the educators beliefs that they are unable to
address the individuals needs and simultaneously teach the remaining students. Instructors experience
explicit tension due to the frustration from the manifestations autism has in their classroom. The
significant stress that is continuously present affects the teachers acceptance of the student with
autism and the desire to include them (p. 411). McGregor and Campbell (2001) found that the
unpredictable nature of young children with autism has the potential to cause extreme confusion and
8
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5distress with general education teachers.
Consequently, educators must reorganize their class structure
as well as their teaching methods in order to promote the acquisition and generalization of knowledge
(p. 202). Because autism is such a complex disability, it is hard for teachers to make generalizations
regarding the best and most effective ways to teach the population. It is necessary to explore teachers
opinions toward students with this condition because their attitudes greatly affect their relationship
with the students as well as the overall quality of instruction.
Emotional behavioral disorder. The number of students with emotional behavioral disorder who are
being served in the general education setting is increasing rapidly (Niesyn, 2009, p. 227). The influx of
this student population has impacted teachers attitudes toward instructing in an inclusive setting. They
are faced with additional challenges in regards to disruptive behavior that they may not be prepared to
manage. The behavioral manifestations of EBD have the potential to dramatically affect the overall
atmosphere of the classroom. Abrams (2005) reports that students with emotional behavioral disorders
are frequently verbally and physically aggressive, hyperactive, and oppositional. They can also exhibit
depression, restlessness, poor impulse control, frustration, and a lack of self-control (p. 40). Kutash and
Duchnowski (2004) found that this population of students is behind in cognitive and academic
functioning and has a tendency to score lower on standardized tests than their typically developing
peers (p. 245). In addition to limited academic skills, students with EBD are ostracized and rejected from
the peers (Heflin & Bullock, 1999, p. 106). This is often a direct result from the negative behaviors they
exhibit both inside and outside the classroom. The compilation of academic and social failures
oftentimes produces low levels of motivation and an overall negative opinion toward school (Abrams, p.
40). The teachers are forced to deal with the lack of effort and consequences of the disorder in addition
to their responsibilities toward the other children.
Due to the academic, social, and behavioral needs of students with EBD, a high degree of
support is required from skilled professionals (Heflin & Bullock, 1999, p. 104). In many cases of inclusive
9
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011settings, this responsibility falls on the general education teacher, who
may or may not be adequately
equipped or prepared to manage the task. General education teachers feel overwhelmed by having to
try new teaching strategies and behavior management techniques when serving students with EBD. It is
difficult for them to find the time to make curricular modifications while simultaneously planning
lessons for the typically developing students. Other problems the teachers encounter in addition to
their overwhelming workloads are insufficient support and training (p. 106). Niesyn (2009) found that
traditional teacher education training primarily focuses on preparing teachers to work with groups of
students across content domains with less attention given to individual differences or special needs (p.
227). Therefore, many teachers may be unprepared to work with students who have EBD as well as
being unaware of effective instructional or classroom management skills (Abrams, 2005, p. 41). In
addition to the stress of accommodating unconventional needs, Center and Steventon (2001) reported
that general education teachers are also concerned with meetings and paperwork that are required
from professionals who teach students with special needs. They feel that parents and administrators
have unrealistic expectations when it comes to both the quantity and quality of the work that
accompanies the undertaking of having children with EBD in the classroom (p. 333). The abundance of
pressures and difficulties general education teachers face influences their daily encounters with their
students.
Teachers relationships with their students who have emotional behavioral disorder significantly
impact their overall attitudes toward including the children in the classroom. Avramidis et al. (2000)
discovered that teachers identified students with EBD as being the most difficult to serve and cause the
most stress in the mainstream classroom (p. 279). Teachers tend to react to the behavioral and social
deficits of this population of students with anger and frustration. Instead of understanding that the
behavior is due to a diagnosed disorder, many educators immediately resort to punishment. As a result,
students feel rejected and learn to distrust the adults and have negative expectations of their teachers
10
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5and of themselves. This becomes a cycle in the
classroom and causes low levels of motivation from both
the instructors and the students (Abrams, 2005, p. 41). Soodak et al. (1998) found that teachers had the
most negative attitudes about inclusion of students with behavioral disorders (p. 483). This affects the
interactions between the adult and child on a daily basis. Robertson et al. (2003) found that teachers
have closer relationships and experience less conflicts with children who have fewer behavioral
problems. Their research suggests Children who have warm, close, and communicative relationships
with their teachers are considered better adjusted and have better subsequent relationships with
teachers and with peers (p. 124). Because many teachers fear their own teaching and management
capabilities with students with EBD, they experience negative attitudes toward welcoming them into the
classroom and less likely to form close bonds (Soodak et al, p. 483). Teachers are anxious that the
required instruction and adaptations are not feasible in the mainstream classroom. The expected
challenges make it difficult for general educators to accept students with EBD (Niesyn, 2009, p. 228).
Because acceptance helps when dealing with stress and managing difficult situations, it is important to
examine teachers attitudes toward students with special needs such as EBD.
Significance of the Study
Numerous studies have been completed that explore the characteristics of students with autism
and emotional behavioral disorders as well as teachers opinions toward including them in the general
education classroom. However, further research must be done to compare instructors attitudes of the
two populations directly. The study is significant due to the fact that educators opinions toward
inclusion affect the relationships and supports that are provided in the classroom. The results of the
study are significant because if general education teachers have negative attitudes toward inclusion and
are unwilling to have students with disabilities in their classroom, they may not provide the necessary
supports that would create a beneficial learning environment for the students. The presented
11
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011information will help general educators identify their attitudes toward
the inclusion of specific students,
which will hopefully result in more effective and appropriate inclusive practices.
Research Question
The objective of the following study is to compare the willingness of teachers to have students
with autism and emotional behavioral disorders in the general education classroom. The purpose is to
answer the question: Do general education teachers have differing attitudes toward including students
with autism and emotional behavioral disorder?
Methodology
Participant Selection and Demographics
Participants included twenty-five general education teachers that have had previous experience
with students with special needs or will have the opportunity to work with them in the future. The
surveyed teachers live in various states in the United States, including: Ohio, Kentucky, Massachusetts,
Pennsylvania, and New York. Participants included both males and females whose ages ranged from
twenty to sixty years. The participants have had between one and forty years of teaching experience.
Instrument
Data was collected using a brief survey that was created by the researcher. Participants read
two profiles about students with special needs and completed surveys about each child. One profile
included the characteristics commonly associated with autism and the other stated those associated
with emotional behavioral disorders. The surveys were five-point Likert scales that assessed the level to
which the participants agreed or disagreed with a statement about the inclusion of that student.
Survey questions. The survey consisted of 15 statements that assessed the participants opinions about
the benefits of including a student with special needs, concerns or anxieties when teaching the student
with a disability, and beliefs about how their attitudes affect the inclusion process. Participants were
asked to rate their level of agreement with the following statements:
12
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5 It would be academically advantageous for this
student to be in the general education setting.
It would be academically advantageous for the typically developing students to have this
student in the general education setting.
This student should be fully included in the general education setting.
Where possible, this student should be included in the general education setting.
This student would be socially accepted by the other students in the class.
I would feel confident teaching this student in my classroom.
I would be able to adapt my lessons to meet the needs of this student.
I would feel confident implementing and meeting the requirements indicated in this students
IEP.
I would have the time to make adaptations, go to IEP meetings, and collaborate with other
professionals for this student.
I feel confident collaborating with colleagues to provide coherent reaching programs for
students.
I feel confident teaching typically developing students without a special educator present for
this student.
I would participate in training in order to meet the needs of this student.
Support and training to meet the needs of this student is available and easily accessible.
Successful integration is dependent on my attitude toward that student.
I would have an overall positive attitude including this student in my classroom.
Procedure for Gathering Data and Informed Consent
Participants were recruited using snowball sampling. The researcher asked participants to
complete the surveys and identify others to become members of the sample. There are no gatekeepers
to this population given the method of recruitment. All participants were given informed consent prior
13
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011to completing the surveys. They understood the purpose and any risks
that were associated with the
study. They were also advised of the benefits of participating in the study and that the information they
provided about the attitudes of including students with autism and emotional behavioral disorders will
benefit the teaching community. They understood that they were free to withdraw at any time and that
refusal to participate would have no effect on future services from the involved university. They were
told that their names would not be associated with the research findings in any way, their identity will
remain anonymous, and the answers they gave could not be linked to the participant. The consent
stated that the data would be stored in a secure location so that only the researcher will have access
and the data will be destroyed shortly after the completion of the research study. Finally, they were
given the contact information of the researcher if they have any questions or concerns.
Analysis
Rationale for Analysis
An independent samples t-test was used to compare the mean scores of the participants
responses regarding the inclusion of a student with autism and a student with EBD. This test was used
to determine whether there is a statistically significant difference in the mean scores for the two groups.
The data for Marco, the student with autism, were recorded in Group 1 and the data for Dylan, the
student with EBD, were recorded in Group 2. The results were also evaluated using a descriptive
statistics method. The frequencies of the scores will be analyzed in order to compare the ranges of
Group 1 with Group 2.
14
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5Results
Group Statistics
Grou
p N Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
Score 1 25 55.08 9.543 1.909
2 25 49.48 10.465 2.093
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
m Equal variances
assumed
.589 .446 1.977 48 .054 5.600
Equal variances not
assumed
1.977 47.598 .054 5.600
Independent Samples Test
t-test for Equality of Means
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence Interval of
the Difference
Lower Upper
m Equal variances
assumed
2.833 -.095 11.295
Equal variances not
assumed
2.833 -.097 11.297
15
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the
acceptance scores of children with
autism and EBD in regular education classrooms. There was a significant difference in scores regarding
children with autism (M = 55.08, SD = 9.543) and children with EBD, M = 49.48, SD = 10.465; t (48) =
1.977, p = .054 (two-tailed). The magnitude of the difference in the means (mean difference = 5.600,
95% Cl: -.095 to 11.295 was moderate (eta squared = .075).
The following table shows the frequency of the total scores of the 15 statements regarding
Marco, the student with autism:
Autism Scores
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 38 1 4.0 4.0 4.0
39 1 4.0 4.0 8.0
40 1 4.0 4.0 12.0
43 1 4.0 4.0 16.0
46 1 4.0 4.0 20.0
47 2 8.0 8.0 28.0
52 1 4.0 4.0 32.0
53 1 4.0 4.0 36.0
54 1 4.0 4.0 40.0
55 3 12.0 12.0 52.0
56 2 8.0 8.0 60.0
57 1 4.0 4.0 64.0
58 1 4.0 4.0 68.0
59 1 4.0 4.0 72.0
63 1 4.0 4.0 76.0
64 1 4.0 4.0 80.0
65 1 4.0 4.0 84.0
67 2 8.0 8.0 92.0
69 1 4.0 4.0 96.0
72 1 4.0 4.0 100.0
Total 25 100.0 100.0
16
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5The following graph represents the frequency of
the total scores for Marco:
17
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011The following table shows the frequency of the total scores of the 15
statements regarding
Dylan, the student with EBD:
The following graph represents the frequency of the total scores for Dylan:
EBD Scores
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 33 4 8.0 16.0 16.0
42 2 4.0 8.0 24.0
44 2 4.0 8.0 32.0
45 1 2.0 4.0 36.0
46 3 6.0 12.0 48.0
49 2 4.0 8.0 56.0
53 1 2.0 4.0 60.0
55 3 6.0 12.0 72.0
56 1 2.0 4.0 76.0
59 2 4.0 8.0 84.0
61 1 2.0 4.0 88.0
66 2 4.0 8.0 96.0
67 1 2.0 4.0 100.0
Total 25 50.0 100.0
Missing System 25 50.0
Total 50 100.0
18
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5Summary - Conclusions and Recommendations
Summary of Research Findings
The results of the study contribute to an understanding of general education teachers attitudes
toward the inclusion of children with autism and emotional behavior disorder. The findings suggest that
the presence of typical characteristics of the two disabilities influence teachers willingness to have the
populations in their classrooms. In general, the participants felt that it would be more advantageous to
have the child with autism be included in their regular education classroom than the child with EBD.
They also expressed a larger amount of confidence implementing the Individual Education Plans,
adapting lessons according to the students needs, and collaborating with colleagues to create
appropriate programs and accommodations for children with autism. The general education teachers
would execute these required actions to a more appropriate degree for students with autism.
In addition to the evidence from the t-test, the descriptive statistics method also showed that
Marco, the student with autism, was favored over Dylan. The sum of the participants responses for
Marco ranged from 38 to 72. In contrast, the sum of the participants responses for Dylan ranged from
33 to 67. This indicates that the general education teachers were more accepting of having a student
with autistic characteristics in their classrooms than those associated with students who have emotional
behavioral disorder. The results suggest that participants would prefer to have a student who does not
understand nonverbal behavior or humor, avoids eye contact, and becomes upset when the daily
routines are changed over a student who ignores undesirable requests, argues with others, and refuses
to complete assignments. The participants are more confident teaching children with autism in an
inclusive setting and would be more willing to provide the necessary supports that would create a
beneficial learning environment for the students.
19
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011Application/Agreement to Field of Special Education
Because there have been few studies directly comparing teachers attitudes toward including
students with autism and those with EBD, the results of this study contribute to the research of special
education. Professionals must examine the results and discover strategies to increase the willingness of
general education teachers to have students with autism and emotional behavioral disorder in their
classroom. This may mean more preparation and practice teaching students with disabilities at the
college and university level. Schools may also want to offer additional and mandatory training programs
specifically regarding how to accommodate the special needs of these populations of students.
Teachers may become more knowledgeable about the best practices to promote their academic, social,
and behavioral skills. As a result, regular education teachers would be more confident dealing with
problem behaviors, implementing the students individualized education plans, and collaborating with
their colleagues to make necessary accommodations. If these steps were to occur and general
education teachers attitudes towards including students with autism and EBD improved, then the
students would have more opportunities to learn with their typically developing peers. The students
would also be more likely to be placed in a less restrictive environment, according to the continuum of
services outlined in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004.
Limitations
Although the information gained from the study is valuable, there are some limitations that
should be taken into consideration when examining the results. One limitation to the study was that
only 25 participants were included in the sample. More general education teachers should have been
surveyed to obtain more accurate results regarding their attitudes toward including students with
disabilities. However, having 25 participants is acceptable due to the fact that this was a pilot study.
Another limitation was that participants were contacted using a snowball sampling method. The
20
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5researcher asked participants to complete the
surveys and identify others to become members of the
sample instead of following strict randomization procedures. Using another method such as
probabilistic, systematic, or stratified sampling would have resulted in acquiring a sample that better
represented the population being examined. Recognizing these limitations offers important
implications for future researchers.
Recommendations for Future Research
Future research should continue to evaluate general educators attitudes toward the inclusion
of students with disabilities. Variables such as age, years of teaching, and previous experience with
special education should be studied in order to discover what factors lead to accepting environments for
students with special needs. Teachers attitudes toward inclusion need to be evaluated before and after
participating in various training sessions that explains special needs students behaviors and offers
strategies to accommodate their needs in the classroom. Researchers would then be able to identify the
information that is most valuable for educators to know when dealing with students with disabilities. As
a result, future programs would be more helpful for professionals and would better prepare them to
manage these students with their typically developing peers. This study should also be duplicated using
a larger sample size of participants who have been selected using a more randomized procedure to
acquire more accurate results. Completing this research would further advance the knowledge of
professionals involved in the field of special education.
References
Abrams, B. J. (2005). Becoming a therapeutic teacher for students with emotional and behavior
disorders. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(2), 40-45.
21
Cassady: Teachers' Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Autism
Published by CORE Scholar, 2011Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P., & Burden, R. (2000). Student teachers'
attitudes towards the inclusion of
children with special educational needs in the ordinary school. Teaching and Teacher Education,
16(3), 277-93.
Center, D. B., & Steventon, C. (2001). The EBD teacher stressors questionnaire. Education and
Treatment of Children, 24(3), 323-335.
Emam, M. M., & Farrell, P. (2009) Tensions experienced by teachers and their views of support for
pupils with autism spectrum disorders in mainstream schools. European Journal of Special Needs
Education, 24(4), 407-422.
Heflin, L., & Bullock, L. (1999). Inclusion of students with emotional/behavioral disorders: A survey of
teachers in general and special education. Preventing School Failure, 43(3), 103-111.
Horne, P. E., & Timmons, V. (2009) Making it work: Teachers perspectives on inclusion. International
Journal of Inclusive Education, 13(3), 273-286.
Kutash, K., & Duchnowski, A. J. (2004). The mental health needs of youth with emotional and
behavioral difficulties placed in special education programs in urban schools. Journal of Child
and Family Studies, 13(2), 235248.
McGregor, E., & Elaine, C. (2001). The attitudes of teachers in Scotland to the integrations of children
with autism into mainstream schools. SAGE Publications and The National Autistic Society, 5(2),
189-207.
Niesyn, M. E. (2009). Strategies for success: Evidence-based instructional practices for students with
emotional and behavioral disorders. Preventing School Failure, 53(4), 227-233.
22
Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 7 [2011], Art. 5
http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss7/5Lopes, J. A., Monteiro, I., & Sil, V. (2004).
Teachers perceptions about teaching problem students in
regular classrooms. Education and Treatment of Children, 27(4), 394-419.
Robertson, K., Chamberlain, B., & Kasari, C. (2003). General education teachers relationships with
included students with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33(2), 123-130.
Ross-Hill, R. (2009). Teacher attitudes towards inclusion practices and special needs students. Journal of
Research in Special Educational Needs, 9(3), 188-198.
Ryan, T. G., (2009). Inclusive attitudes: A pre-service analysis. Journal of Research in Special Educational
Needs, 9(3), 180-187.
Soodak, L., Podell, D., & Lehman, L. (1998). Teacher, student, and school attributes as predictors of
teachers' responses to inclusion. Journal of Special Education, 31(4), 480-497.
United States Department of Education (2004). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement
Act of 2004. (P.L. 108-447). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Appendices
2