Presented at ISEC 2000

The School Principal and Inclusion: A Cross Cultural Research Investigation

Gilada Avissar - Beit Berl Teachers' Training College, Haifa University, Israel

Contributions from: Shunit Reiter, Haifa University, Israel and Yona Leyser, Northern Illinois University, USA.

Abstract

Mainstreaming and inclusion of students with special educational needs are becoming a matter of priority in many countries around the world. In Israel, special education legislation passed in 1988 mandates that students with disabilities be mainstreamed to the maximum extent possible and indeed increasing numbers of these students are place in regular education settings. One of the key figures with regards to any educational change is the school principal, although only a limited number of investigations about principals and inclusion are reported in the literature.

The purpose of this study was to examine the perception of principals and practices of inclusion in Israel. Several research procedures, including quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Questionnaires were sent to 204 elementary schools in the largest school district. Responses were received from 110 (54%) principals. Also conducted were interviews with teachers in 30 schools as well as in-depth interview with 6 of the principals.

The major findings revealed that the principals (95% of whom were females) stressed the social benefits of inclusion over the physical and instructional aspects. Generally, the principals were supportive of inclusion, yet noted that inclusion depends on the severity of the students' needs. Schools were found to practice a wide range of inclusion models and to offer a variety of educational alternatives. The most prevalent ones are individual pull-out programs. Findings are compared to data reported in similar research carried out in the U.S.A., Canada, the U.K. and Australia.

The discussion stresses the need for international input to identify leadership styles and practices that have significance in making schools more inclusive while acknowledging local, cultural, political and social contexts.

Mainstreaming and inclusion of students with special educational needs are becoming a matter of priority in many countries around the world. The focus of the movement to include students with disabilities in general education, has recently shifted from viewing inclusion as an innovation within special education toward viewing it with the broader context of school restructuring (Lipsky & Gartner, 1996, Sebba & Ainscow, 1995)

Serving in a leadership position in school life the principal plays a major function in implementing change (Fullan and Stiegelbauer, 1991, Hall & Hord, 1987) This is corroborated by findings of the Rand Change Agent Study that was carried out in the United States in the early 70's. It pointed out clearly that one of the key figures with regards to any educational change is the school principal. Thus, the school principal is the key change agent. However, only a limited number of investigations about principals and inclusion are reported in the literature.

The goals of this research arre twofold:

1. To identify and characterize perception and practice of school principals with regards to inclusion.

2. To uncover and clarify the Israeli scene with regards to principals and inclusion.

An extensive search of Eric and EBSCO databases and major special education journals (in English) between the years 1985 and 1999 yielded 125 articles about school principals and inclusion. Of these, 13 publications were research reports pertaining to perceptions, attitudes and practice (Arick & Krug, 1993; Bain & Dolbel, 1991; Barnet & Monda-Amaya, 1998; Center, Ward, & Nash, 1985; Cook, Semmel & Gerber, 1999; Downing, Eichinger & Williams, 1997; Duquette, & O`Reilly, 1988; Dyal, Flynt S.W. & Walker-Bennett, 1996; Forlin, 1995; Garvar-Pinhas, & Schmelker-Pedhazur, 1989; Janney, Snell, Beers, & Raynes, 1995; Stanovich, & Jordan, 1998; Villa, Thousand, Meyers, & Nevin, 1996). They were carried out in Canada, Australia and the U.S. Of these, 5 were studies of principals only; 7 compared both teachers, regular and special education and principals and 1 explored teachers' attributions of principals.

In 9 of the 13 studies the principles of integration/inclusion were favored, encouraged or stated as a desirable goal. Generally, principals were found to hold more positive attitudes toward inclusion than teachers.

In the 4 studies that investigated the success of inclusion, social success was perceived as a major goal. As for preferred educational placement, traditional service i.e., a special class, a pull-out program alongside full inclusion is favored and more prevalent. The degree of acceptance of students with disabilities declines with years of teaching experience. It is also related to the severity of the disability. Where gender is specified the majority of the principals are male.

Since the passage of the Special Education Law in 1988 (in Israel) the Director General of the Ministry of Education has issued nearly twenty different publications of regulations in an effort to promote an inclusive policy and to outline the ways and means for implementation. It was stated (May 1998 circular) that one of the cornerstones of the Israeli educational system is its willingness and obligation to cater to the educational needs of ALL children, in particular those with learning difficulties, in inclusive rather than exclusive settings.

In the present research, the school principal is examined as a change agent in light of three aspects of leadership that provide a basis for implementing change:

One: A clear educational vision;

Two. A school atmosphere that promotes participation and collaboration; c. Behaviors and practices that promote change. Several areas of interest underlie the theoretical background, as follows:

1. Understanding educational change as researched by Fullan, 1992; Fullan, 1993; Cuban, 1998; Janney, Snell, Beers & Raynes, 1995; and others.

2. The change process as it is related to inclusion as presented in the works of Fullan et al, 1991; Udvari-Solnar & Thousand, 1995; Cuban, 1996; Ainscow, 1995; Ainscow, Hopkins, Southgate & West, 1994; and others.

3. The school principal as a change agent as researched by Sergovanni, 1995; Fullan et al, 1991; and the Rand Change Agent Stduy.

4. Inclusion modes - physical, social and academic. This distinction can be found in the works of Lipsky & Gartner, 1996; Skertic, 1991; Scruggs, 1993; and others. 5. School principals and inclusion.

The research questions are:

1. What is the principals' perception of inclusion?

2. What is the principals practice with regards to inclusion?

3. What is the correlation between perception and their practice?

4. What is the correlation between the principals' background variables and the practice of inclusion?

5. What is the correlation between the schools' background variables and the practice of inclusion.

Methodology:

All elementary schools' principals in the largest school district in Israel (total = 204). Responses were received from 110 (54%) principals. Plus 181 teachers who were recommended by their principals. They participating principals are mainly females (95%), mostly veteran teachers and experienced principals. Over half have a Bacherlo's degree and another 25% have their Master of Ph.D.. The most prevalent in-service course taken has to do with the implementation of change. Tables No. 1 and No. 2 present the principals' background data

Table No. 1 : Principals' professional development

Table 2: Principles' demographics

Much effort was spent in developing and devising several new research instruments as well as adapting existing ones. The research methodology combined quantitative as well as qualitative measures. The quantitative research instruments included two questionnaires - one for principals, the other for teachers. The purpose of the first was to identify the principals' perceptions and to learn about their inclusive practices. The purpose of the latter was to identify the principals' behaviors and actions based on teachers' attributes. Qualitative data was gathered by using semi-structured interviews with 6 principals and open-ended interviews with teachers from 30 of the participating schools. The purpose was to uncover the school's practices and the existing educational alternatives in relation to inclusion modes. Table No. 3 presents the research procedures used:

Table No. 3: Research Procedures

A variety of research instruments was used. The principals perception was asses by analyzing their responses to 6 different vignettes. Each vignette describes a case and is constructed of two parts - the first part describes the problem and the second part describes the educational/school solution. The cases are based on true stories. Three identical questions were presented at the end of each story:

1. What in your opinion is the expected learning success of this student?

2. What in your opinion is the expected social success of this student?

3. In your opinion, how severe is the students' problem?

The responses were presented on a 1-5 Lickert Scale.

An additional source of information with regards to the principals perception were the teachers' responses about the school climate with regards to inclusion. Principals' practice was determined based on three instruments, as follows:

One. A question about the existing educational alternatives for SN students.

Two. A Lickert scale instrument containing 17 statements about inclusive practices in schools.

Three. Teachers' responses with regards to the duration of inclusive practices in their school.

The Participating Schools:

The teachers report a supportive climate in most of the schools with regards to inclusion. Inclusive measures have been carried out since the passage of Special Education Law in 1988. Tables No. 4 and No. 5 present their responses.

Table No. 4: School Climate with regards to Inclusion, Teachers' Responses (N=181)

Table No. 5: Duration of Inclusion, Teachers' Responses (N=81)

Results:

Perception:

The principals stressed the social benefits of inclusion over the physical and instructional aspects. They are supportive of inclusion, yet noted that inclusion depends on the severity of the students' needs. They perceive that learners with special needs are more likely to succeed socially, compared to the success in the physical and instructional mode of inclusion. Illustration No. 1 present their responses.

Illustration No. 1: Means of possible social success and/or educational success as perceived by the principals in response to 6 stories

Practice:

Schools practice a wide range of inclusion models and offer a variety of educational alternatives. The most prevalent ones are individual pull-out programs.

Demographic Data:

Significant Correlations were found between demographic variables such as age and level of education of the principal, size of the school and perception of the severity of the disability, modes of inclusion and availability of pull-out programs. Principals with a high level of education perceive the severity of the disability higher. Principals with a high level of education practice more pull-out program. The older the principals, less inclusive practices are implemented. Principals with more in-service training for inclusion practice more pull-out programs. Where there are less teachers with special education training on staff, the instructional mode of inclusion is more prevalent. Where there are more teachers with special education training on staff, there are more pull-out programs. There are more special classes in the bigger general schools than in the smaller ones. I.e., the smaller practice more inclusive classes.

Discussion:

One. Women in leading positions - does it make a difference? Apparently it does. One of the explanations for the fact that the social aspects of inclusion were emphasized seems to be related to the fact that most of the participating principals are females. As noted in the literature, women in leading positions tend to emphasize the social aspects of management (for example: Greenfield, 1987; Hersey & Blanchard, 1988)

Two. An over-all system overview: looking at the school principal is a must when analyzing reforms and changes.

Three. The more we do and the more we know - the less we want to….? The disturbing conclusion of the correlations found through the demographic variables. These finding coincide with findings in other research of the topic of inclusion, principals and teachers alike.

The (local) cultural context - what effect does it have? This being the first study of its kind carried out in Israel it calls for more. The State of Israel is home to a population from diverse ethnic, religious, cultural and social backgrounds. It is a small country with a population of above 5.5 million. 81% of the population is Jewish and 17% are Arab (mostly Muslim). Over a million immigrants have been absorbed in the last ten years alone. The bulk is from the former Soviet Union. Another large group came from Ethiopia. 16% of the government expenditure is in the area of defense. The regular budget of the Ministry of Education in 1996 compared to 1994 has increased in real terms by 30%. In 1997/1998 school year 1,540,000 pupils were enrolled in educational facilities under the supervision of the Ministry of Education.

d. Implementing change - looking at legislation, perception and practice: Three major laws govern the educational scene in Israel: Compulsory Education Law (1949); State Education law (1953) and Special Education Law (1988). The first states that all children between the ages of 5 (compulsory kindergarten) and 15 (grade 10) inclusive, are provided with education free of charge. The second regulates a six-day school week and determines the content and procedures of State Education and the latter states the purpose of special education for individuals between the ages of 3 and 21.

The research instruments used and developed need to be tested and possibly improved. It is recommended to embark on a state-wide effort to provide the school principals with in-service training to enhance their knowledge, to clarify perceptions and to develop skills to facilitate the practice of inclusion. Since the present research pointed out several areas of discrepancies between the "Espoused Theories" and the "Theories in Use", between perception and practice, it is recommended that the Ministry of Education re-evaluates the new organizational practice of inclusion and its conceptual framework. The program to integrate SN pupils within regular classes was designed to encourage the integration of pupils who could be integrated into the regular classrooms and prevent referring them to placement within special classes and special schools. This program operates as part of the efforts to implement the Special Education Law.

Selected Bibliography:

Ainscow, M. (1995). Education for All : Making it Happen? Birmingham, England.: Keynote address presented at the 4th ISEC (International Special Education Conference).

Ainscow, M., Hopkins, D., Southgate, G., & West, M. (1994). Creating the Conditions for School Improvement, London: David Foulton.

Arick, J.R., & Krug, D.A. (1993). Special Education administrators in the United States : Perceptions on policy and personnel issues, The Journal of Special Education, 27(3), pp. 348-364.

Bain, A. & Dolbel, S., (1991), Regular and special education principals' perceptions of an integration program for students who are intellectually handicapped, Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 26, pp. 33-42.

Barnet, C., & Monda-Amaya, L.E., (1998). Principals' knowledge of and kttitudes toward inclusion, Remedial and Special Education, May/June, 19(3), pp. 181-193.

Center, Y., Ward, J., Parmenter, T. & Nash, R. (1985). Principals' attitudes towards the integration of disabled children into regular schools, The Exceptional Child. 32(3), pp. 149 - 161.

Cook, B. G., Semmel, M. I. & Gerber, M. M., (1999), Attitudes of principals and special education teachers toward the inclusion of students with mild disabilities: Critical differences of opinion, Remedial and Special Education, 20(4), pp. 199-207.

Cuban, L. (1988). A Fundamental Puzzle of School Reform, Phi Delta Kappan, 70 (5), pp. 341-344.

Cuban, L. (1996). Myths about Changing Schools and the Case of Special Education, Remedial and Special Education. 17(2), pp. 75-82.

Downing, J.E. Eichinger, J. & Williams. L.J., (1997), Inclusive education for students with severe disabilities: Comparative view of principals and educators, Remedial and Special Education, 18. Pp. 133-142.

Duquette, C. & O`Reilly, R. (1988). Perceived attributes of mainstreaming, Principal change strategy and teacher attitudes toward mainstreaming, The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, XXXIV (4), pp. 390-402.

Dyal A.B., Flynt S.W., & Walker-Bennett D., (1996), Schools and inclusion: Principals' perceptions, Clearing House, Sep/Oct, 70(1), pp. 32-35.

Forlin, C. (1995). Educators` beliefs about inclusive practices in Western Australia, British Journal of Special Education, 22(4), pp. 179-185.

Fullan, M. (1992). Successful School Improvement: The Implementation Perspective and Beyond, Buckingham, England: Open University Press.

Fullan, M. (1993). Change Forces: Probing the Depth of Educational Reform, London: The Falmer Press.

Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The New Meaning of Educational Change, New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Garvar-Pinhas, A. & Schmelker-Pedhazur, L. (1989). Administrators' and teachers' attitudes toward mainstreaming, RASE: Research and Special Education, 10(4), pp. 38 - 42.

Greenfield, W.D. (1987). Institutional Leadership: Concepts, Issues and Controversies,Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Hall, G. E. & Hord S .M. (1987). Change in Schools, Facilitating the Process, New York, New York: State University of New York Press. Hersey, P. & Blanchard K.H. (1988). Management of Organizational Behavior - Utilizing Human Resources, 5th Edition. Prentice-Hall.

Janney, R.E., Snell, M.E., Beers, M.K. & Raynes, M. (1995). Integrating students with moderate and severe disabilities into regular education classes, Exceptional Children, 61(5), pp. 425-439.

Lipsky, D. & Gartner, A. (1996). Inclusion, School Restructuring and the Remaking of American Society. Harvard Educational Review, 66(4), pp. 762-793.

Scruggs, T.E. (1993). Special Education and the Problems of Schooling, Educational Theory, 43 (4), pp. 433-447.

Sebba, J. & Ainscow, M. (1996). International Development in Inclusive Schooling: Mapping the Issues. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(1), pp. 5-17.

Sergivanni, T.J. (1995). The Principalship: A Reflective Practice Perspective, Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 3rd Edition.

Skertic M.T. (1991). Behind Special Education: A Critical Analysis of Professional Culture and School Organization, Denver Colorado: Love Publishing Co.

Stanovich, P.J. & Jordan, A. (1998). Canadian teachers' and principals beliefs about inclusive education as predictors of effective teaching in heterogeneous classrooms, The Elementary School Journal, 98(3), pp. 221-238.

Udvari-Solner, A. & Thousand J. (1995). Effective Organizational, Instructional and Curricular Practices in Inclusive Schools and Classrooms. In: C. Clark, A. Dyson, & A. Millward (Eds.). Towards Inclusive Schools, London: David Fulton Publishers, pp. 149-163.

Villa, R.A., Thousand, J.S., Meyers, H. & Nevin, A. (1996). Teacher and administrator perceptions of heterogeneous education, Exceptional Children, 63(1), pp. 29 - 45.

Index