International Journal of Inclusive Education

ISSN: 1360-3116 (Print) 1464-5173 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tied20

Pre-service education and attitudes towards

inclusion: the role of the teacher educator within a
permeated teaching model

Jackie Lambe

To cite this article: Jackie Lambe (2011) Pre-service education and attitudes towards inclusion:
the role of the teacher educator within a permeated teaching model, International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 15:9, 975-999, DOI: 10.1080/13603110903490705

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603110903490705

Published online: 11 Mar 2011.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1034

View related articles

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tied20

Download by: [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] Date: 13 June 2016, At: 10:43
 International Journal of Inclusive Education
Vol. 15, No. 9, November 2011, 975 –999

Pre-service education and attitudes towards inclusion: the role of

the teacher educator within a permeated teaching model
Jackie Lambe*

School of Education, University of Ulster, Coleraine, UK

(Received 6 August 2009; final version received 16 November 2009)
Taylor and Francis
TIED_A_449486.sgm

International
10.1080/13603110903490705
1360-3116
Original
Taylor
2010
je.lambe@ulster.ac.uk
JackieLambe
0000002010
00 &Article
Francis
(print)/1464-5173
Journal of Inclusive
(online)
Education
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

This study examines the role of teacher educators working within a permeated
teaching model in Northern Ireland, and student teachers’ attitudes towards special
educational needs (SEN) and inclusion. A cohort of 125 student teachers
representing eight subject areas responded to a survey exploring attitudes towards
issues relating to inclusive education. Interviews conducted with the subject
teacher educators examined their beliefs about inclusion, personal efficacy and the
extent to which the outworking of a permeated model was an effective method of
programme delivery. The findings indicate that while student attitudes towards the
philosophy of inclusion were generally positive, those of the teacher educators
were not necessarily reflected in the views of their subject group. The research
evidenced a lack of uniformity in approach in promoting inclusion and inclusive
practices across subjects, suggesting that the use of a permeated model did not
always provide equity of student experience when selection of course content was
the choice of the individual subject tutor. Teacher educators identified lack of
personal knowledge, time restrictions within the pre-service programme and lack
of resources as the main barriers to effective practice in supporting student
teachers’ learning in SEN and inclusion.
Keywords: teacher educator; pre-service education; SEN and inclusion;
permeated teaching model

Background
During the past decade policy and legislation have provided the vision and the legal
framework that has raised the profile of inclusion, making it difficult not to concur
with Booth et al. (2000, 15) that it has become the ‘keystone’ of UK government
policy on education. Where possible, schools in the UK have now a ‘duty to educate
children with special educational needs in ordinary schools’ (DfES 2002, Chapter 10,
Section 316).
International responses to inclusive education while using similar language have
tended to develop structures within the context of the individual country or more accu-
rately, continent. While the terms ‘inclusion’ and ‘integration’ can still be presented
as having the same meaning and are often used interchangeably, it is not always clear
that they have a common meaning that spans international boundaries (Avramidis and
Norwich 2002).

*Email: je.lambe@ulster.ac.uk

ISSN 1360-3116 print/ISSN 1464-5173 online

© 2011 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603110903490705
http://www.tandfonline.com
 976 J. Lambe

Defining inclusion therefore remains complicated, is often contentious and can

still give rise to dissent and disagreement amongst policy-makers and educational
practitioners (Lunt and Norwich 1999; Norwich 2002; Lindsay 2003; Leyser and Kirk
2004). Carrier (1990) suggests that our understanding of ability and disability is a
cultural construction where those who are the dominant group in the society define
people as ‘those who can’ and ‘those who can’t’. The use of the expression ‘needs’
can also suggest dependency and inadequacy (Corbett 1996), and the separation of
mainstream and special education perpetuates difference promoting the medical view
of disability with attention placed on the learners’ perceived disability. This is the
model that continues to permeate teacher education and the beliefs, attitudes and prac-
tices throughout education.
Inclusion, whether in the social or educational sense, sits within a framework of
social justice, and human rights is a broad socio-political concept (Mittler 2000;
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

Avramidis and Norwich 2002) reflecting a shift in the debate from concerns about
supporting the rights of learners with impairments (the context of disability) to a focus
on all learners who are vulnerable to exclusion and to exclusionary pressures within
society. It stresses a shift of emphasis away from the assessment, categorisation and
educational placement of learners according to their disabilities, and towards engage-
ment by a system that is fully responsive to educational difficulties (Ainscow 1999).
Potential barriers to inclusive practice have been identified as both pedagogical
and attitudinal (Corbett 1996; Ainscow 2000) and yet, despite continuing challenges,
Kluth, Straut, and Biklen (2003, 13) suggest that in the context of contemporary
educational practice the notion of the average learner is now increasingly perceived as
a myth by teachers who ‘are recognising the need to individualise and honour the
unique profiles of all students’.

Teachers and attitudes towards inclusion

Research suggests that attitudes, beliefs and behaviour are all linked and that attitudes
are essentially about the nature of likes and dislikes (Droba 1933). Bem (1970) asserts
that liking or disliking identifiable aspects of an environment has foundations in
emotions, behaviour and the social influences placed upon the individual. The
application of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) considers the antecedents of atti-
tudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control which will determine an
individual’s intentions and actions. When applied to inclusive education, the TPB
would suggest that a teacher’s engagement and commitment to inclusive practices is
likely to be influenced by three things: (1) attitudes towards the concept of inclusion;
(2) perceptions of social pressure to support it; and (3) perceptions of control and
efficacy.
Figure 1 presents a conceptual framework for TPB based on the work of Fishbein
and Ajzen (1975) and adapted within the context of teachers’ attitudes towards
inclusive education.
Research relating to inclusive education has long recognised that positive teacher
Figure 1.Adapted
Source: Theoryfrom
of planned
Fishbeinbehaviour.
and Ajzen (1975).

attitudes are important to the successful implementation of inclusive practices

(Scruggs and Mastropieri 1996; Carrington 1999; Avradamis and Norwich 2002;
Norwich 2002).
One of the premises of this research study is that pre-service education may be the
most effective time to develop positive attitudes (Harvey 1985; Forlin, Hattie, and
Douglas 1996; Cook 2002; Shippen et al. 2005; Lambe and Bones 2006a; 2006b;
 International Journal of Inclusive Education 977
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

Figure 1. Theory of planned behaviour. Source: Adapted from Fishbein and Ajzen (1975).

2006c; Lambe 2007) and as such the factors that influence these attitudes should be
identified and actively promoted (Ford, Pugach, and Otis-Wilborn 2001; Martinez
2003; Romi and Leyser 2006; Lambe 2007; Lambe and Bones 2008). Positive atti-
tudes, however, cannot automatically be legislated for. Studies have shown that in
addition to the approach used in structuring the processes to implement inclusion (Slee
2001), teachers’ and training teachers’ attitudes are influenced by the amount and type
of education and academic preparation received (Wilczenski 1993; Avramidis,
Bayliss, and Burden 2000; Martinez 2003; Lambe 2007).
If the active promotion of inclusion and inclusive practices within pre-service
education is key to increasing student teachers’ positive perceptions of personal
efficacy and confidence, then it is essential that teacher educators must believe in the
importance of inclusive practices (Kurz and Paul 2005). While there has been consid-
erable research around student teachers’ attitudes and the factors influencing these,
there has been little around the role of teacher educators who must also be considered
key personnel in the progression of the inclusion agenda.

Research aim
This paper reports on part of a longitudinal research study exploring the factors of
influence on Northern Ireland (NI) student teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion. This
aspect of the research examines the role of the teacher educator and student teachers’
attitudes towards inclusion within a pre-service programme that employs a permeated
teaching model.

Inclusive education: the Northern Ireland context

Throughout the past decade Northern Ireland, a region of the UK, has been emerging
from a long and violent history of internal religious and political conflict. While
 978 J. Lambe

significant advances continue to be made towards transforming NI into a more

peaceful and increasingly inclusive society, tradition, religion and social politics have
continued to hold sway over important aspects of the education system. The model for
pre-service education is based on a generalist approach, and special education is not a
separate branch of teacher education as it is, for example, in the USA (Pugach 1995).
There is no requirement for additional qualifications made on those teaching learners
with special educational needs (SEN) in special or mainstream schools. Across Ireland
(North and South) there is a lack of common approach as to how student teachers are
prepared for inclusive schooling (Kearns and Shevlin 2006). In contrast to much of the
rest of the UK and Europe, a system of academic selection at age 11 has been retained
in NI as the means of placing pupils in post-primary schools (Hyland et al. 1995;
Gallagher and Smith 2000; Carlin 2003).
The language of inclusion, though routinely used within policy documents and
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

Department of Education (NI) reports, does not translate easily into a reality of inclu-
sive education in NI, and while academic selection remains may not fully extend to
all schools there. It might be concluded that while there is some inclusion, it is gener-
ally to be found in the non-selective schools attended by those who have already been
excluded by a system that to date favours academic elitism (Lambe and Bones
2006a).

Current developments
Recently, NI has sought to bring some of the issues relating to SEN and inclusion
within educational and social reform (Northern Ireland Executive 2001; Equality
Commission 2004). For schools, policy and legislative developments have also
brought new statutory arrangements for special education and a revision of the terms
that identify and deal with disability discrimination. The Special Education Needs and
Disability (NI) Order (SENDO, 2005) should have effectively removed any caveats
for education that existed in the earlier Disability Discrimination Act (DfEE 1995).
The adoption of a revised curriculum (DE 2007) aspires to bring about new expecta-
tions and accountability for all pupils through school development plans and new self-
evaluation strategies, including individual education plans and the introduction of
pupils profiles (CCEA 2004).
Within this revision of the curriculum, there is now a statutory requirement that
all pupils including those with SEN should have the same access to all the learning
pathways available to their peers (DE 2004, 2007). Embedded in this is the belief
that equitable provision should provide the underlying principle of education and
that the rights and interests of the individual child should be foremost in decision-
making.
This research study has been conducted against a background of emerging policy
and legislation which has included a widespread administrative review extending
across all aspects of the education system in NI. Recommendations made by the Bain
report (DE 2006) present a future vision for education in NI that is radically different
from the past.
A radically revised, skills-orientated curriculum has also been introduced in
2008 after almost a decade of review and consultation with all main stakeholders,
including pupils, teachers, employers and parents (CCEA 2004; DE 2006, 2007).
The caveat here, however, is that the revised curriculum was developed in the
expectation that the system of academic selection would end the year after its
 International Journal of Inclusive Education 979

introduction. The removal of selection, however, continues to be a hugely contro-

versial issue, and while 2008 should have been the last year of academic selection,
lack of political cross-party support has left much uncertainty as to how this will
happen. With this current political impasse, only time will show if opportunities to
embrace a more generative and far-reaching model of inclusive schooling will be
fully realised.
In a survey on the inclusion of pupils with SEN in mainstream classrooms, the
Department of Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI) pointed to the need for, ‘a
fundamental review of in-service and Initial Teacher Education (ITE), focusing on the
extent to which the courses deal with special needs issues’ (2003, 5). This was flagged
again in recommendations made by Harland et al. (2002) as part of longitudinal
research that reviewed the extent to which the NI curriculum was fit for purpose.
Abbott (2006, 638) also found that some head teachers in NI felt that those in pre-
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

service were not fully prepared for inclusive classrooms and despite praising student
teachers’ ‘motivation’ and ‘enthusiasm to learn’. Abbott concludes that there are
implications for teacher trainers in NI ‘in respect of inclusion within the three phases
of teacher training – initial, induction and early professional development – in respect
of its scope and depth’.

SEN and inclusion teaching provision within ITE: a permeated model

At the University of Ulster as with the other ITE providers in NI, the Post-Graduate
Certificate in Education (PGCE) year is 36 weeks in length and is a combination of
theory and practice, with 24 weeks spent gaining school-based experience supported
by 12 weeks based in a higher education institution (HEI). It is a time-limited, inten-
sive programme with the demands of the curriculum making time a precious
commodity. While there are a number of short elective programmes offered to
students (of which SEN and inclusion is one), the majority of student teachers on the
PGCE will only take part in a generic programme of face-to-face lectures, seminars
and workshops designed to help inform and prepare them for the practicalities of
teaching an increasingly diverse group of learners found in mainstream post-primary
schools. In relation to SEN and inclusion, the PGCE programme follows a permeated
model. Because of the historical make up of subject-orientated post-primary
programmes, work around SEN and inclusion is the responsibility of the individual
subject tutor. This may be supported with some generic lectures by guest speakers
with perceived expertise in various areas relating to SEN. This should mean that work
relating to learning about SEN by the main subject tutors, therefore permeating the
whole PGCE programme with the support of generic sessions, lectures and work-
shops.
SEN content that is diffused or permeated across taught elements of ITE has been
criticised for lacking focus or for having questionable quality (Dwyfor-Davies and
Garner 1997; Mittler 2000). Content-driven programmes have also come in for criti-
cism for imparting facts rather than confronting attitudes and values (Hastings et al.
1996). To share the common challenges of inclusive education, there may be a need
to move away from what we presently see as separate but parallel training towards a
more integrative and collaborative training model where educators from diverse
disciplines will work closely together within the training institutions and within the
schools (Blanton et al. 2001; Slee 2001). The changing face of education in NI will
warrant new approaches, initiatives and practices within pre-service education.
 980 J. Lambe

Method
Participants
There were two sets of research participants used in this study. The first was the cohort
of 125 student teachers enrolled on a one-year post-primary PGCE at the University
of Ulster. Each student is training to teach one of the following eight specialist subject
areas: art and design, English, geography, history, home economics, music, technol-
ogy and design and physical education.
Though the student numbers participating in this research (n = 125) may appear
moderate, with the exception of English (which is also offered by another ITE
provider in NI), they represent the entire population of training teachers in these
subject-specialist areas at post-primary level. As such they are an important response
group. Table 1 presents the biographical details of the student cohort.
The second participant group was made up of the eight teacher educators who had
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

individual responsibility for each of the PGCE subjects. Five of the group were men
and three were women with an age range between 45 and 64. All but one of the teacher
tutors had attended an academically selective school.

Research instrument
As part of the larger study, a specially constructed survey (Lambe and Bones 2006a;
2006c; Lambe 2007) had been used as an initial data-gathering method. The
researcher-administered survey was anonymous and participants were informed both
verbally and in writing, and their permission sought in advance. The study conforms
to the guidelines provided by the School of Education at the University of Ulster
Research Ethics Information Code of Practice (2006).
The main researcher is the author of this paper and the teacher educator responsi-
ble for the overview of special needs education on the PGCE programme.

Table 1. Biographical details of the student cohort (n = 125).

Student characteristics %
Gender
Female 72
Male 28
Age
21–25 70
26–30 16.7
31–35 4.6
36–40 2.5
40–47 1.8
School
Non-selective 27.6
Selective 72.4
School type
All boys 15
All girls 30.2
Co-ed 53.7
 International Journal of Inclusive Education 981

The survey sought to examine the following issues:

(1) beliefs about the purpose of schools and attitudes towards organisational
issues within teaching;
(2) concerns or anxieties about teaching within an inclusive educational class-
room; and
(3) personal beliefs and attitudes towards the ideology of inclusive education.
The student group was surveyed at three key points during the training year. First at
the initial point of entry to the PGCE programme (Lambe and Bones 2006a) and again
on the completion of each of two extended school-based placements (Lambe and
Bones 2006c; Lambe 2007). The aim of the research was to identify if attitudes
towards inclusion changed across the pre-service year and to pinpoint the factors that
influenced attitude change. The data for this study were drawn from the results of the
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

final survey taken near the end of the PGCE year.

This study utilises both qualitative and quantitative data-gathering methods to exam-
ine the possibility of a link between the type of curriculum subject studied and student
attitudes, and additionally, if any connection could be identified between the attitudes
of individual subject tutors and those of their students. Interviews were conducted with
each subject tutor by the researcher and the findings were qualitatively analysed (Miles
and Huberman 1994; Vaughan, Schumm, and Sinagub 1996) so as to explore and clarify
any emerging themes. Direct quotations drawn from the tutor interviews were also used
to illustrate each theme heading and add support to the findings.

Analysis of data
This part of the analysis set out to discover if student attitudes might be associated with
the subject specialism studied. Eleven statements were drawn from the 27 in the orig-
inal survey (Appendix 1). This refined selection represented the key questions relating
to inclusion and beliefs about the arrangements for post-primary schooling in NI. The
subject results are presented as percentages (descriptive data) because in this case the
small number of students in some of the subject groups make using Chi-square
unreliable. Tables 2 and 3 present the student responses under the subject studied.
The qualitative data drawn from the interviews with the subject tutors were
analysed thematically using a qualitative approach as recommended by Vaughan,
Schumn, and Sinagub (1996) and where the researcher specifically searched within
the interview text for the following information:
● Key themes or common threads found by the researcher reading and re-reading
interview notes.
● Specific phrases or sentences that were used regularly by the tutors within the
discussions so as to aid the selection of category headings relevant to the research.

Findings
Part 1: subject variables
By the conclusion of the PGCE programme respondents have studied and taught their
specialist subject in a range of classroom settings. Additionally, their responses at this
stage of the research would also be informed by a combination of contact with
individual subject tutors, general academic study and classroom practice.
 Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

Table 2. Subject results: art, English, geography, history.

982

Subject
Art English Geography History
Don’t Don’t Don’t Don’t
J. Lambe

Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Statements
I think all teachers should 100 0 0 100 0 0 90 10 0 100 0 0
experience teaching pupils with
special educational needs
I think you need to be a special 58.3 25 16.6 76.9 7.6 15.3 90 0 10 41.6 25 33.3
kind of teachers to teach pupils
with special educational needs
I think you need a special interest 75 8.3 16.6 92.3 0 7.6 70 20 10 41.6 25 33.3
in special education to be an
effective teacher of SEN
I am concerned I will not have the 66.6 0 33.3 38.4 23 38.4 80 20 0 8.2 0 91.6
skills required to teach special
educational needs in an
inclusive setting
I think that changing the 33.3 25 16.6 38.4 38.4 23 30 50 20 50 16.6 33.3
education system in Northern
Ireland from selective to non-
selective is the only way to
cater for all pupils
Having pupils with diverse special 16.6 25 58.3 53.8 23 23 80 20 0 50 8.3 41.2
educational needs in the
classroom is unfair to other
pupils who may be held back
 Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

Table 2. (Continued).
Subject
Art English Geography History
Don’t Don’t Don’t Don’t
Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

I would prefer to teach in a 41.2 25 16.6 30.7 23 23 60 10 30 16.6 25 58.3

selective educational system if I
had the choice
It is more important for schools to 16.6 16.6 66.6 15.3 7.6 76.9 10 20 70 16.6 8.2 75
promote academic achievement
than social inclusion
It is more important for schools to 41.2 33.3 25 30.7 15.3 53.8 60 20 20 25 33.3 41.2
promote social inclusion than
academic achievement
I think it is impossible to try and 66.6 8.2 25 53.8 30.7 15.3 80 20 0 41.6 25 33.3
accommodate too many
differences in one classroom
The best way to ensure equality of 16.6 41.2 41.2 23 38.4 38.5 0 30 70 41.6 33.1 25
provision is for all pupils to be
educated in an inclusive
classroom
International Journal of Inclusive Education
983
 Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

Table 3. Subject results: home economics, music, physical education, technology and design.
984

Subject
Home economics Music PE Technology and design
Don’t Don’t Don’t Don’t
J. Lambe

Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Statements
I think all teachers should experience 100 0 0 100 0 0 94.4 5.5 0 100 0 0
teaching pupils with special educational
needs
I think you need to be a special kind of 58.3 25 16.6 85.7 0 14.2 44.4 18.8 38.8 50 16.6 33.3
teachers to teach pupils with special
educational needs
I think you need a special interest in special 75 8.3 16.6 83.3 14.2 28.5 38.8 5.5 55.5 83.3 0 16.6
education to be an effective teacher of SEN
I am concerned I will not have the skills 66.6 0 33.3 28.5 28.5 57.1 22.2 18.8 61.6 16.6 50 33.3
required to teach special educational needs
in an inclusive setting
I think that changing the education system in 33.3 25 41.2 28.5 28.5 57.1 11.1 44.4 44.4 33.3 33.3 33.3
Northern Ireland from selective to non-
selective is the only way to cater for all
pupils
Having pupils with diverse special 16.6 25 58.3 57.1 14.2 42.8 27.7 38.6 37.6 100 0 0
educational needs in the classroom is
unfair to other pupils who may be held back
I would prefer to teach in a selective 41.2 25 16.6 57.1 0 57.1 61.1 18.8 22.2 33.3 33.3 33.3
educational system if I had the choice
It is more important for schools to promote 16.6 16.6 66.6 14.2 42.8 57.1 22.2 5.5 72.2 16.6 33.3 50
academic achievement than social
inclusion
 Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

Table 3. (Continued).
Subject
Home economics Music PE Technology and design
Don’t Don’t Don’t Don’t
Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree Agree know Disagree
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

It is more important for schools to promote 41.2 33.3 25 0 28.5 85.7 27.7 37.6 38.8 50 16.6 33.3
social inclusion than academic
achievement
I think it is impossible to try and 66.6 8.2 25 83.3 14.2 28.5 38.8 27.7 33.3 66.6 33.3 0
accommodate too many differences in one
classroom
The best way to ensure equality of provision 16.6 41.2 41.2 14.2 28.5 42.8 44.4 55.5 0 0 66.6 33.3
is for all pupils to be educated in an
inclusive classroom
International Journal of Inclusive Education
985
 986 J. Lambe

The responses across all eight subject groups show overwhelming support for
Statement 1: I think all teachers should experience teaching pupils with special educa-
tional needs. No group expressed less than 90% support for this statement.
The results of the overall student cohort had shown that 65.2% of students agreed
with Statement 2: I think you need to be a special kind of teacher to teach pupils with
special educational needs. The responses of three subject groups (geography – 90%,
music – 85.7% and English – 76.9%) showed more agreement than the responses of
the other groups. The responses from history (41.6%), physical education (44.4%) and
technology and design (50%) showed considerably less agreement than the overall
student cohort response that a ‘special’ kind of teacher was needed to teach SEN.
In response to Statement 3: I think you need a special interest in special education
to be an effective teacher of SEN, the results of three groups (English – 92.3%, music
– 83.3% and technology and design – 83.3) showed agreement more than the overall
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

student cohort response to the statement (68.5%). History (41.6%) and physical
education (38.8%) were notably less in agreement with the statement than the overall
student cohort result.
The responses of three subject groups to Statement 4: I am concerned I will not have
the skills required to teach special educational needs in an inclusive setting showed
concern about personal efficacy for inclusive teaching that was considerably above the
mean (39.3%). These were art and design (66.6%), geography (80%) and home econom-
ics (66.6%). Conversely, history (8.2%), physical education (22.2%) and technology
and design (16.6%) responses showed less concern about efficacy than the other groups.
Most subject responses remained close to the mean student cohort results (28.4%) in
agreement with Statement 5: I think that changing the education system in Northern
Ireland from selective to non-selective is the only way to cater for all pupils, with the
exception of English (38.4%) and history (50%). These two groups showed more support
for removing selection than did physical education (11.1%) whose agreement with this
statement was considerably less than all the other groups. Art and design (33.3%), home
economics (33.3%), geography (30%), music (28.4%) and technology and design
(33.3%) were close in agreement to the overall student cohort results (28.4%).
In response to Statement 6: Having pupils with diverse special educational needs
in the classroom is unfair to other pupils who may be held back, there were high levels
of agreement by geography (80%) and technology and design (100%) when compared
with the overall group results for this statement (45.5%). Art and design and home
economics (16.6%) and physical education (27.7%) responses indicated less agree-
ment with the statement than the student cohort response. The subject responses for
Statement 7: I would prefer to teach in a selective educational system if I had the
choice showed strongest agreement from geography (60%), physical education
(61.1%) and music (57.1%). Art and design and home economics stayed closest to the
overall results (46.1%), while history (16.6%), English (38.4%) and technology and
design (33.3%) indicated less agreement with the statement.
The group responses to the Statement 8: It is more important to promote academic
achievement than social inclusion were all close to the population response to the
statement (16.9%). In response to Statement 9: It is more important for schools to
promote social inclusion than academic achievement, geography (60%), technology
and design (50%), home economics (41.2%) and art and design (41.2%) showed
notable agreement. Music (0%) and history (25%) responses showed less agreement,
while English (30.7%) and physical education (27.2%) remained close to the average
student response to the statement (36%).
 International Journal of Inclusive Education 987

Two subject groups, music (83.3%) and geography (80%), showed notably more
agreement with Statement 10: I think it is impossible to try and accommodate too
many differences in one classroom than the overall student response (57.3%).
Two group responses, history (41.6%) and physical education (38.8%), showed
less agreement, while the other subject groups (art and design, English, technology
and design and home economics) were in line with the overall PGCE group responses.
The subject groups were divided in their responses to Statement 11: The best way to
ensure equality of provision if for all pupils to be education in an inclusive classroom.
The level of agreement to this statement by the overall PGCE student cohort was
24.7%. The English group responses were close to this figure at 23%. However, no
technology and design student agreed with the statement, while in music (14.2%) and
home economics (16.6%) agreement responses were considerably lower than the
overall group response to the statement. History (41.6%) and physical education
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

(44.4%) responses indicated more support for inclusive education as an issue of

equality than the other subjects.
Notably, the findings showed that two subjects (art and home economics) had
exactly the same responses to each of the statements in the survey.

Part 2: subject tutors and inclusive education

Because of the permeated nature of the PGCE programme, the views and the contri-
bution of the teacher educators have important relevance to the research. The interests
and attitudes of individual tutors may potentially influence the amount of time spent
and the teaching methodologies used to support learning about the issues relating to
SEN and inclusion. Currently, each tutor has autonomy in how much (or little) time is
set aside within subject sessions for this work. To gain insight into current practice
across the subject areas, the researcher interviewed each of the eight subject tutors
individually. The development of the interview schedule (Appendix 2) with the
subject tutors was also influenced by the need to examine closely (for the first time)
current practice relating to SEN and inclusion within specific subject areas.
The questions were designed to provide a rich base of information about current
practice within subject areas and to allow tutors to articulate their personal beliefs and
attitudes about inclusive education. For the most part, these examined beliefs and
attitudes towards inclusion and mirrored those examined within the student survey,
but additionally questions were included about the teacher educators’ perceptions of
his or her role in promoting inclusive education. There were seven interview questions
which examined the following themes:
(1) The extent of individual tutors’ experience teaching SEN and perceptions
about personal efficacy.
(2) Beliefs towards inclusive education.
(3) Role of the teacher educator in facilitating learning about SEN and inclusion.

Tutors interviews: themes emerging

Responses to Theme 1 (Questions 1 and 2): the extent of individual tutors’
experience teaching SEN and their perceptions about personal efficacy
None of the tutors had this experience, though most did claim to have taught learners
with SEN in a mainstream setting (home economics, physical education, geography,
technology and design) though not within the last eight years.
 988 J. Lambe

There was not always a consensus on what was meant by SEN. One tutor tended
to see having SEN as a way of describing learners who were not academically able to
keep up with their peers and felt he had had little success:

It depends what you mean by SEN. I certainly taught children who have lagged desper-
ately behind the rest of the class, in high school English and if I were honest I’d say I
probably made little progress with them, in terms of cultivating skills and or understand-
ing. (English)

None had experience in a special school or unit setting. Most of the tutors described
their experience as teaching in a ‘mixed ability’ situation in a non-selective school
often without the kind of classroom assistant support found in today’s classrooms:

Often, I experienced whole class teaching without support, but in my later career I bene-
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

fited from an SEN teacher in class with me and in the case of supporting those with phys-
ical disabilities, a classroom assistant. (Art)

I have taught children in a differentiated learning situation but my own teaching history
was grammar school based and in those days the words special educational needs was
never used in that context. (History)

All the tutors felt that they would personally benefit from more time and further
support and training to help them prepare student teachers for inclusive classrooms:

The main difficulty is getting time to get up to speed with changes that are happening
and then working out ways to help student teachers deliver. (History)

Most tutors also recognised the need for the PGCE team to develop a more coherent
strategy across the subject areas for supporting teaching and learning in the area of
SEN and inclusion. This would be a considerable shift away from the current
provision which allows the individual tutor total freedom within the allotted subject:

I think we need to develop a more joined up strategy within the PGCE tutor team. (Home
economics)

As a classroom teacher my practice was too much trial and error and more empathy than
understanding … I would benefit from exploring the issues as a course team and
identifying key principles and ideas. (Music)

Tutor responses to Theme 2 (Questions 3, 4 and 5): beliefs towards inclusive

education
Tutor attitudes towards inclusion and the notion that every teacher in NI would teach
pupils with SEN (DfES 2004) elicited a mixed response.
Only one was unequivocal in support of inclusion. Most gave positive responses,
but then qualified these by adding provisos or caveats that related to the need for time
and adequate resources to support it both in the university setting and in schools:

Yes if we have sufficient time to include all the essential skills, knowledge and under-
standing. It is a very complex and sophisticated agenda which must be given sufficient
time and resources not just while the students are in the HEI but also when they are on
practice in school. (Technology and design)
 International Journal of Inclusive Education 989

Despite finding inclusive education, a laudable aspiration, one tutor expressed

some scepticism that empirical research evidence supporting inclusion was suffi-
ciently convincing:

As an aspiration the idea is a desirable and appealing one. Like mixed ability teaching I
would like convincing evidence that it can be done in general practice. My fear, as with
mixed ability teaching is that its success in practice may depend on the exceptional
practitioner. (Geography)

Only one tutor expressed negative attitudes towards inclusive education based on
his perception that to be an effective subject specialist teacher and an effective inclu-
sive educator was incompatible:

The practical reality of a teacher truly mastering her subject and being skilled as an SEN
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

teacher is asking too much. (English)

There was also a reminder that ITE must be seen as a three-year model (pre-service,
induction and early professional development), therefore supporting young teachers to
become effective inclusive educators could not just be seen as the responsibility of the
HEI:

Additionally we need to recognise that SEN should be a developmental path through

Initial, Induction and EPD/CPD and there should be ‘real’ (authentic) progress on the
pathways. (Technology and design)

As far as ‘promoting’ the philosophy of inclusion was concerned, two tutors did
not see it as their role. One tutor felt uncomfortable with the notion of advocating it
as a preferred model:

‘Promote’ is too strong a word here. I believe that we should teach ‘about’ inclusion
without advocating or promoting this as such. (Geography)

Another felt that while liking the ideology the reality was not feasible:

I like the idea of inclusive teaching but where that means the inclusion of children with
pronounced learning needs, it’s asking too much of a regular teacher. (English)

The majority of the tutor group, however, felt that it was their role to actively promote
the inclusive education and they gave descriptions as to how they do this within their
subject such as the following:

Yes through overt and implied teaching methods. Overt, through activities that target
specific contexts within the subject and have specified outcomes. For example, through
school-based activities and through peer support. Implied teaching methods could be
through examples, discussions and explanations. (Physical education)

I believe that every child should be valued and given some opportunities according to
their needs and abilities. To do this it is essential first to get to know the pupils’ back-
ground and put in place a system to deliver lessons appropriate to these needs. (Home
economics)

One tutor in particular had considered his teaching model in some detail and artic-
ulated the principles of his own practice. This tutor saw promoting inclusive education
as a key aspect of his professional role:
 990 J. Lambe

Inclusive education is the recognition of diversity, reflecting difference and equity of

provision. These would be principles that I aspire to in my practice. Through teaching I
would hope to: (1) disseminate these principles by example; (2) present inclusion issues
as challenges to effective practice not barriers; and (3) see it as an integral part of a
teacher’s role and his or her professionalism. (Technology and design)

The tutor responses tended to be divided as to the skills that student teachers
needed. Some described a ‘content’-orientated approach to learning about SEN and
inclusion. The language tended towards the medical approach to SEN:

The student teacher needs opportunities to develop his or her understanding of a range
of SEN conditions. (Geography)

Students need to know about the medical and psychological basis of the main ‘types’ of
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

SEN they may encounter. (Music)

A knowledge of the subtleties of individual needs, a commitment to inclusion,

empathetic understanding, coolness, patience, cooperative working/collegiality and
confidence. (Physical education)

There is a need to develop a ‘child centred’ approach and good ‘people skills’. Also an
attitude that success comes in different ways in an SEN classroom and should be valued
as comparable to academic achievement. (Art)

Tutor responses to Theme 3 (Questions 6 and 7): the role of the subject tutor in
facilitating learning about SEN and inclusion education
Approaching issues relating to SEN and inclusion tended to reveal the implicit pressures
that a selective system can place upon tutors. Some teaching approaches tended to be
concerned with preparing student teachers for pupils with academic learning difficulties
rather than an acknowledgement of the much broader brief that inclusion extends to.
One tutor described a problem-solving approach used within his current practice:

I challenge students to illustrate the inclusive nature of the tasks and challenges that they
are posing for pupils. Workshops are the major vehicle for this in the present PGCE
programme. (Physical education)

Some tutors did, however, also recognise the limitations of current provision within
his subject:

Probably narrowly and inadequately! Concentration on teaching the less able and those
with minor literacy problems. The provision of specific or alternative teaching and learn-
ing strategies and activities, referenced in most subject sessions and supplemented by a
full session led by a classroom teacher. (History)

I think we all have to recognise that we probably haven’t addressed these issues as fully
as we should be now doing. I would look at differentiated learning approaches in my
subject but I don’t think that is really what is meant by inclusive education. I think it is
something I need to address in my own teaching. (Music)

Finally, tutor responses to the question ‘Do you believe that all teachers should be
prepared and ready to teach pupils with diverse SEN in an inclusive setting?’ were
varied across the spectrum. Some were supportive of the idea:
 International Journal of Inclusive Education 991

I see this legislation (rightly or wrongly) as an important support for the rights of the
parent to choose the school that they believe is most appropriate for their child. The
consequence is that every teacher will have to respond positively to all the children in
their class including children with SEN. (History)

Some, while supporting the philosophy, were not convinced that every teacher would
be comfortable teaching in an inclusive classroom despite the training and support
offered:

I think that all teachers should be prepared … to teach in an inclusive setting, but not all
personalities are comfortable in this setting, nor would training necessarily make them
more prepared. As with all aspects of teaching those who believe in and are committed
to what they do have more success than the conscripted! (Geography)
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

One tutor felt that while the theory might be seen as commendable, it was in his
opinion neither possible nor realistic to expect all teachers to be competent to teach
learners with diverse SEN in an inclusive classroom:

I think the theory of the thing is commendable but the practical reality of a teacher truly
mastering her subject and being skilled as an SEN teacher is asking too much. (English)

Discussion
Across all eight subjects students claimed overwhelming support for all teachers
teaching pupils with SEN. However, as the survey statements began to require the
students to refine and clarify their beliefs beyond simply agreeing with the principals
of inclusion, responses in some cases grew less emphatic. While most student teachers
agreed they would be happy to teach in a non-selective system, many responses
showed less conviction or understanding as to the practicalities of how inclusion
would work in practice. The findings, however, did not always show subjects that
might be considered text based (such as history or English) as any less likely to
support inclusive education as did subjects that might be considered practical or skills
based (such as art and design, home economics or physical education). In considering
subject as a possible variable for influencing attitudes towards inclusion for example,
the results highlighted that the history group showed considerable support for
inclusion and inclusive practices and had the highest perceptions of their personal
efficacy for teaching in an inclusive classroom amongst all the subject groupings.
Conversely, the three subject groups who expressed most concern about personal
efficacy were art and design, geography and home economics which represent a cross-
section of text-based, practical and skills-based subjects.
The results, however, showed that there were considerable differences in attitude
between some of the practical subjects (art and home economics) and the others as to
the effect of the inclusion on general pupil progress. Eighty per cent of geography and
all technology and design students, for example, felt that inclusion of learners with
diverse needs in mainstream would be ‘unfair’ to other children who would be ‘held
back’. Neither was it possible to identify a clear link with individual tutors as in this
case the geography tutor had been much less positive about promoting inclusion than
the technology and design tutor had been. The responses of the art and home econom-
ics groups were completely aligned. A possible interpretation for this might be found
in the fact that both subjects have considerable practical aspects that require the use of
 992 J. Lambe

‘hands-on’ experiential learning approaches. As subject specialists they face common

classroom demands that are core to the practical nature of each and both are now
required by the NI curriculum to underpin practical outcomes with extensive theoret-
ical content.
There is then an imperative for pre-service programmes to develop ways not only
to promote positive attitudes towards inclusion but also to provide learning
programmes that support new teachers to work effectively with pupils who have
diverse SEN within the mainstream classroom. Martinez (2003, 478) suggests that
the ‘reality of inclusive practices warrants research that investigates best practices’,
while Wilkins and Nietfield (2003, 119) conclude that ‘training programmes should
be re-evaluated to better prepare teachers for increased diversity in the classroom’.
Successful implementation of inclusion and increasing inclusive practices present
clear challenges to all those working within the educational process and for those
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

participating in it. Attitudes towards inclusive education will inevitably reflect the
influence of personal values and experiences as is suggested by the TPB. Profes-
sional attitudes are likely to be shaped and influenced by a combination of variables
that may include personal history and experience, the influence of the attitudes of
peers, tutors or school staff, the ethos and culture of the school, attitudes of society
towards inclusion, lack of experience and the quality of training provision within
ITE. Personal attitudes and values will certainly define the level of professional
commitment (Avramidis and Norwich 2002) however, while positive attitudes are
important they cannot alone guarantee the successful implementation of inclusion in
practice. The research findings revealed little support by student teachers for estab-
lishing the radical model of inclusion as has been described by Norwich (1997, 448)
as ‘full non-separatist inclusion’ that would provide for the inclusion of all children
at all times in a mainstream classroom. This concurs with the findings of other simi-
lar or related international research (Avramidis and Norwich 2002; Romi and Leyser
2006). There was also little evidence that by the end the student teachers supported
the full re-conceptualisation of education in NI as described by Slee (2000) so as to
lay the foundation for full inclusion. None had ever experienced a fully inclusive
model of education and despite wishing to support the principles of inclusion drew
back from embracing something that would be a radical change from the systems
they knew.
Despite supporting inclusion in principal, there was some evidence in the
responses to suggest that many student teachers found it difficult not to associate
inclusive classrooms with pupil underachievement. The findings tend to concur with
Nagata (2005) cited by Kurz and Paul (2005) that while able to define inclusion
student teachers (as with many experienced teachers) struggle to enact inclusive
practices.
Research generally concurs that not all teachers will automatically hold positive
attitudes towards inclusion (Vaughan et al. 1996; Florian 1998; Van Reusen, Shoho,
and Barker 2000) nor have the necessary knowledge and skills to be effective
inclusive educators (Soodak and Podell 1996; Avramidis, Bayliss, and Burden 2000;
Van Reusen, Shoho, and Barker 2000).
Negative professional attitudes towards inclusion are often based on perceptions
of a lack of personal efficacy (Avramidis, Bayliss, and Burden 2000). If teachers are
to be equipped to fulfil government expectations that they should all teach learners
with SEN (DfES 2004), then this has clear implications for improving provision
throughout teacher education (Ainscow 1999; Slee 2001).
 International Journal of Inclusive Education 993

Interviews with the teacher educators did provide an important insight into aspects
of current practice within subject areas. Attitudes towards inclusion, however, were as
varied amongst the tutors as with the student group. Some claimed to be actively
promoting inclusion and inclusive teaching within their subject, while others who
stated positive personal attitudes towards inclusion appeared concerned with aspects
of personal efficacy. Those who expressed less positive attitudes expressed concerns
around issues of pedagogy and classroom management. While most claimed to have
taught learners with SEN at sometime during their career, none of this experience was
recent and tended to be in a teaching situation requiring with what might be described
as mixed ability teaching rather than inclusive teaching.
Current practice within subject areas was identified as being varied during the
interviews with the teacher educators. Personal values and beliefs of tutors about
promoting inclusive education influenced the emphasis placed on these issues within
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

individual subject areas. Some tutors objected to the notion that they should be
expected to promote inclusion as an educational model because they felt it implied
imposing specific values that were not necessarily their own, and they felt uncomfort-
able with this. Other tutors who had claimed support for the philosophy of inclusion
also admitted this did not necessarily translate into classroom practice. In the final
analysis, there was a lack of equality and consistency of provision amongst the subject
areas. The findings of this research identified the potential for the subject tutor to
influence student attitudes towards inclusive education. However, to be effective
tutors need first to acknowledge and rationalise their own beliefs and commitment to
promoting inclusive education.
The lack of uniformity in approach across the subjects did suggest that there was
little of equity of experience for all PGCE students. Moreover, the tutors themselves
identified lack of personal knowledge, time restrictions within the PGCE
programme and lack of resources as the main barriers to effective practice in
supporting student teachers’ learning in SEN and inclusion. Most of the teacher
educators did highlight the importance of positive attitudes towards teaching inclu-
sively as key to ensuring good classroom practice and saw this as more important
than the practical barriers.

Conclusion
If the implementation of new educational structures in NI is to be successful, it is
important that teachers and teacher educators hold positive attitudes towards it. In any
rationalisation of pre-service training provision, those responsible for ITE
programmes may have to address this issue. It may well require the provision of what
Slee (2001) describes as ‘interdisciplinary studies of exclusion and inclusion’ with the
aim of ‘weaving the preparation for inclusive teachers right across the fabric of their
teacher-training curriculum’ (120). While it might appear to be the obvious and even
most efficient method of delivery, using permeation as a model presents inevitable
challenges around ensuring equity of student experience. Gabel (2001) states that the
goal of the teacher educator must be to prepare those in pre-service to recognise the
potential of all the learners in their charge. Additionally, they must be encouraged to
reflect on their own knowledge and beliefs about students who have additional needs
and disabilities. The teacher educators themselves must ‘believe in the importance of
inclusive practices, and be able to support students in twenty first century classrooms’
(Kurz and Paul 2005).
 994 J. Lambe

While there may be a presumption that ITE tutors automatically support a policy
of inclusive education, this may not be the case. Lack of interest, experience and
personal efficacy may have considerable influence on the quality of teaching of those
about to enter the profession, on issues relating to SEN and inclusion. There may be
some inherent dangers in using a permeated teaching model because of the assumption
that all tutors believe in inclusive education and are sufficiently experienced and knowl-
edgeable in delivering an effective programme around it within their subject areas.
The findings of this small study present a diversity of opinion between the subject
tutors and their students that is likely to be mirrored in other ITE programmes that use
a permeated model for teaching about SEN and issues around inclusion. Ensuring
positive attitudes and developing the teacher’s personal identity as a teacher of all
rather than some will offer challenges for many professionals in NI in the future. One
of the challenges to this may be that there are many teachers and teacher educators
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

who have spent all or most of their careers in the selective school sector where the
focus is on academic achievement not inclusion. Alongside this, there still exists the
belief that the education of many learners with SEN should be ‘the responsibility of
the specialist’ (Booth et al. 2000, 13).The research findings point to an acknowledged
need to up-skill and support subject tutors on the current issues around inclusive
education and on how to help their students support inclusion in the broadest sense,
that is, within and beyond their subject area. This will require developing an
understanding that inclusion is much more than mixed ability teaching or simply in
developing strategies to support differentiated learning.
In this context, the researcher acknowledges that the same study carried out in
another institution might yield different results. While the numbers participating in the
study were moderate, they did constitute in per cent almost half of all post-primary
PGCE students and their tutors in NI and so the conclusions may offer an additional
contribution to knowledge in this overall research area.

Notes on contributor
Jackie Lambe is a lecturer in education at the University of Ulster. She is programme director
for PGCE Art and Design, with responsibility for SEN and Inclusion Education for all post-
primary PGCE programmes. Her research interests relate to Initial Teacher Education and
issues around Special Educational Needs and Inclusion, the use of ICT and Art and Design
Education.

References
Abbott, L. 2006. Northern Ireland head teachers’ perceptions of inclusion. International
Journal of Inclusive Education 10, no. 6: 627–43.
Ainscow, M. 1999. Understanding the development of inclusive school. London: Falmer.
Ainscow, M. 2000. Reaching out to all learners: Some lessons from international experience.
School Effectiveness and School Improvement 11, no. 1: 1–19.
Avramidis, E., P. Bayliss, and R. Burden. 2000. A survey into mainstream teachers’ attitudes
towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the ordinary classroom
in one local educational authority. Educational Psychology 20, no. 2: 191–211.
Avramidis, E., and B. Norwich. 2002. Teachers’ attitudes towards integration/inclusion: A
review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education 17, no. 2: 129–47.
Bem, D.J. 1970. Beliefs, attitudes and human affairs. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Blanton, L.P., C. Griffin, J.A. Winn, and M.C. Pugach, eds. 2001. Teacher education in
transition: Collaborative programs to prepare general and special educators. Denver,
CO: Love Publishing.
 International Journal of Inclusive Education 995

Booth, T., M. Ainscow, K. Blacks-Hawkins, M. Vaughan, and L. Shaw. 2000. Index for inclu-
sion: Developing learning and participation in school. Bristol: Centre for Studies on
Inclusive Education.
Carlin, J. 2003. The Northern Ireland selective system: A wind of change. The Irish Journal
of Education 24, no. 2: 70–9.
Carrier, J. 1990. Special education and the explanation of pupil performance. Disability,
Handicap and Society 5, no. 1: 211–25.
Carrington, S. 1999. Inclusion needs a different school culture. International Journal of Inclu-
sive Education 3, no. 3: 257–68.
CCEA (Council for the Curriculum Examinations and Assessment). 2004. Way ahead (post
primary): The revised curriculum and its assessment. Belfast: CCEA.
Cook, B. 2002. Inclusive attitudes, strengths, and weaknesses of pre-service general educators
enrolled in a curriculum infusion teacher preparation program. Teacher Education and
Special Education 23, no. 3: 262–77.
Corbett, J. 1996. Bad-mouthing: The language of special educational needs: A cultural
analysis. London: Cassell.
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

DE (Department of Education). 2004. Future post-primary arrangements in Northern

Ireland: Advice for the post-primary review working group (The Costello Report).
Bangor: DE.
DE. 2006. Schools of the future: Funding, strategy, sharing. Report of the independent
strategic review of education (The Bain Report). Bangor: DE.
DE. 2007. The education (Northern Ireland) (curriculum minimum content) order. Bangor: DE.
Department of Education and Training Inspectorate. 2003. Report of a survey of the provision
for pupils with special educational needs in mainstream schools. Bangor: DE.
DfEE (Department of Education and Employment). 1995. The Disability Discrimination Act.
London: HMSO.
DfES (Department of Education and Skills). 2002. Special Educational Needs and Disability
Act. London: DfEE.
DfES. 2004. Removing barriers to achievement: The governments’ strategy for SEN. London:
DfES.
Droba, D.D. 1933. The nature of attitudes. Journal of Social Psychology 4: 444–63.
Dwyfor-Davies, J., and P. Garner, eds. 1997. The views of newly qualified teachers concern-
ing SEN provision in ITE courses. In At the crossroads: Special educational needs and
teacher education, 6–18. London: David Fulton.
Equality Commission. 2004. Commission response to OFMDFM. Consultation paper: A
single equality bill for Northern Ireland. Belfast: Equality Commission.
Fishbein, M., and I. Ajzen. 1975. Belief, attitude and behaviour: An introduction to theory
and research. Philippines: Addison-Wesley.
Florian, L. 1998. An examination of the practical problems associated with the implementa-
tion of inclusive education policies. Support for Learning 13, no. 4: 105–8.
Ford, A., M.C. Pugach, and A. Otis-Wilborn. 2001. Preparing general educators to work well
with students who have disabilities: What’s reasonable at the preservice level? Learning
Disability Quarterly 23, no. 4: 275–85.
Forlin, C., J. Hattie, and G. Douglas. 1996. Inclusion: Is it stressful for teachers? Journal of
Intellectual & Developmental Disability 21, no. 3: 199–217.
Gabel, S. 2001. ‘I wash my face with dirty water’: Narratives of disability and pedagogy.
Journal of Teacher Education 52: 31–47.
Gallagher, T., and A. Smith. 2000. The effects of the selective system of secondary education
in Northern Ireland (Research papers). Vols. 1–2. Bangor: DENI.
Harland, J., H. Moor, K. Kinder, and M. Ashworth. 2002. Is the curriculum working? The
key stage 3 phase of the Northern Ireland curriculum cohort study. Slough: NFER.
http://www.nicurriculum.org.uk/search/index.asp?zoom_query=harland+report (accessed
August 5, 2009).
Harvey, D.H. 1985. Mainstreaming teachers attitudes when they have no choice about the
matter. Exceptional Child 32, no. 9: 163–73.
Hastings, R.P., A. Hewes, S. Lock, and A. Witting. 1996. Do special educational needs
courses have any impact on student teachers’ perceptions of children with severe difficul-
ties? British Journal of Special Education 23, no. 3: 139–51.
 996 J. Lambe

Hyland, A., K. Milne, G. Byrne, and J. Dallat. 1995. Irish educational documents. Vol. 3.
Dublin: Church of Ireland College of Education.
Kearns, H., and M. Shevlin. 2006. Initial teacher preparation for special educational needs:
Policy and practice in the North and South of Ireland. Teacher Development 10, no. 1:
25–42.
Kluth, P., D. Straut, and D. Biklen. 2003. Access to academics for all students: Critical
approaches to inclusive curriculum, instruction and policy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Kurz, N., and P.V. Paul. 2005. Toward an inclusive teacher education program. Journal of
Teaching and Learning 3, no. 2: 17–27.
Lambe, J. 2007. Northern Ireland student teachers changing attitudes’ towards inclusive
education during initial teacher training. International Journal of Special Needs 22, no. 1.
http://www.internationaljournalofspecialeducation.com/articles.cfm?y=2007&v=22&n=1
Lambe, J., and R. Bones. 2006a. Student teachers’ attitudes to inclusion: Implications for
initial teacher education in Northern Ireland. International Journal of Inclusive Education
10, no. 6: 511–27.
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

Lambe, J., and R. Bones. 2006b. Student teachers’ perceptions about inclusive classroom
teaching in Northern Ireland prior to teaching practice experience. The European Journal
of Special Needs Education 21, no. 2: 167–86.
Lambe, J., and R. Bones. 2006c. The effect of school-based practice on student teachers’
attitudes towards inclusion in Northern Ireland. Journal of Education for Teaching:
International Research and Pedagogy 33, no. 1: 99–113.
Lambe, J., and R. Bones. 2008. The impact of a special school placement on student teacher
beliefs about inclusive education in Northern Ireland. British Journal of Special Needs 35,
no. 2: 108–17.
Leyser, Y., and R. Kirk. 2004. Evaluation inclusion: An examination of parental views and
factors influencing their perspectives. International Journal of Disability, Development
and Education 51, no. 3: 271–85.
Lindsay, G. 2003. Inclusive education: A critical perspective. The Gulliford Lecture. British
Journal of Special Education 30, no. 1: 3–12.
Lunt, I., and B. Norwich. 1999. Can effective schools be inclusive schools? Perspectives on
educational policy. London: Institute of Education.
Martinez, R. 2003. Impact of a graduate class on attitudes toward inclusion, perceived
teaching efficacy and knowledge about adapting instruction for children with disabilities
in inclusive settings. Teacher Development 7, no. 3: 473–87.
Miles, M.B., and A.M. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative data analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Mittler, P. 2000. Working towards inclusive social contexts. London: David Fulton.
Nagata, N. 2005. Characteristics of teacher preparation programs and the issue perceptions of
teacher educators in deaf education. Unpublished doctoral diss., Ohio State University.
Northern Ireland Executive. 2001. Draft programme for government. Belfast: OFMDFM.
Norwich, B. 1997. A trend towards inclusion: Statistics on special school placements and
pupils with statements in ordinary schools 1992–1996. London: CSIE.
Norwich, B. 2002. Education, inclusion and individual differences: Recognising and resolving
dilemmas. British Journal of Educational Studies 50, no. 4: 482–502.
Pugach, M.C. 1995. On the failure of imagination in inclusive schooling. Journal of Special
Education 29, no. 2: 212–23.
Romi, S., and Y. Leyser. 2006. Exploring inclusion pre-service training needs: A study of
variable associated with attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs. European Journal of Special
Needs Education 21, no. 1: 86–105.
Scruggs, T.E., and M.A. Mastropieri. 1996. Teacher perceptions of mainstreaming/inclusion,
1958–1995: A research synthesis. Exceptional Children 63, no. 1: 59–74.
Shippen, M.E., S.A. Crites, D.E. Houchins, M.L. Ramsey, and M. Simon. 2005. Preservice
teachers’ perceptions of including students with disabilities. Teacher Education and
Special Education 28, no. 2: 92–9.
Slee, R. 2000. Meaning in the service of power (Keynote address at the International Special
Needs Congress). Manchester: Manchester University.
Slee, R. 2001. ‘Inclusion in practice’: Does practice make perfect? Educational Review 53,
no. 2: 113–23.
 International Journal of Inclusive Education 997

Soodak, L.C., and D.M. Podell. 1996. Teacher efficacy: Toward the understanding of a multi-
faceted construct. Teaching and Teacher Education 12, no. 4: 401–12.
Van Reusen, A.K., A.R. Shoho, and K.S. Barker. 2000. High schools teacher attitudes toward
inclusion. High School Journal 84, no. 2: 7–20.
Vaughan, S., J.S. Schumm, B. Jallad, J. Slusher, and L. Samuell. 1996. Teachers views of
inclusion. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice 11, no. 1: 96–106.
Vaughan, S., J.S. Schumm, and J. Sinagub. 1996. Focus group interviews in education and
psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wilczenski, F.L. 1993. Changes in attitudes toward mainstreaming among undergraduate
education students. Educational Research Quarterly 17, no. 1: 5–17.
Wilkins, T., and J.L. Nietfeld. 2004. The effect of a school-wide inclusion training
programme upon teachers’ attitudes about inclusion. Journal of Research in Special
Educational Needs 4, no. 3: 115–21.
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016
 998 J. Lambe

Appendix 1. Initial survey instrument: student teachers’ attitudes towards

inclusive education in NI

1. I think all teachers should experience teaching pupils with SEN.

2. I think that streaming is the best practice for dealing effectively with pupils of different
abilities.
3. It is more important for schools to promote academic achievement than social inclusion.
4. I think that changing the education system in NI from selective to a non-selective one is
the best way to cater for all pupils.
5. The most important role of a school is to ensure academic excellence.
6. Mainstream schools should not be allowed to exercise policies and structures that cater
only for the needs of certain pupils, thereby excluding others with SEN.
7. Mainstream schools should have the final say in which pupils they can enrol.
8. I have no experience in working with special education needs.
9. I am concerned I will not have the skills required to teach SEN in an inclusive setting.
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

10. I think some people claim to have SEN to get extra attention and special treatment.
11. Emotional and behavioural problems are often just an excuse for lack of self-discipline.
12. Pupils with emotional and behavioural problems should be excluded from mainstream
classes as they disrupt other pupils’ progress.
13. It is a parent’s role to ensure their child behaves properly.
14. I think that parents are often to blame for their child’s poor behaviour.
15. I think it is impossible to try and accommodate too many differences in one classroom.
16. Education has a first duty to look after the interests of pupils who are trying to learn.
17. I think you need to be a special kind of teacher to teach pupils with SEN.
18. I think your need a special interest in SEN to be an effective teacher of SEN.
19. A teacher should be concerned with educational issues and not be expected to deal with
a pupil’s emotional and behavioural problems.
20. I would prefer to teach in a selective educational system if I had the choice.
21. I don’t think I would have done as well academically if I had been in an inclusive
classroom when at school.
22. I think I would have benefited from being part of an inclusive classroom.
23. I enjoyed school and never had any real problem with learning.
24. It is more important for schools to promote social inclusion than academic achievement.
25. The best way to ensure equality of provision is for all pupils to be educated in an inclusive
classroom.
26. Having pupils with diverse SEN in the classroom is unfair to other pupils who may be
held back.
27. Parents should have the final say in which school their child attends.
 International Journal of Inclusive Education 999

Appendix 2. Interview schedule with teacher educators

1. Have you ever taught pupils with SEN and if so, in what context?
2. How well equipped do you feel for preparing student teachers for teaching SEN in an
inclusive classroom?
3. In the recent government document Removing Barriers to Achievement (DfES 2004, 56),
one of its guiding statements is the expectation that every teacher would teach pupils with
SEN and that ‘we must ensure that they are equipped with the skills to do so effectively’.
Do you believe that all teachers should be prepared and ready to teach pupils with diverse
SEN in an inclusive setting?
4. Do you believe it is part of your role to promote inclusive education? If so how would you
go about this in your teaching?
5. What skills do you believe are needed for student teachers to teach effectively in an
inclusive classroom?
6. How do you presently approach the issues of teaching SEN/Inclusion with your students?
Downloaded by [Pontifica Univ Catolicaperu] at 10:43 13 June 2016

7. Do you feel that the changes in legislation (SENDO, 2005) and the change of post-primary
arrangement in 2008 will have any influence on how you teach about SEN and issues
relating to inclusion? If so could you describe in what ways?