Abstract
The closure of special schools increased the number of children with disabilities in Newfoundland schools in the 1980's consequently inclusionary practices have meant that more and more teachers, including physical educators, are being involved in the teaching of children with disabilities. Research suggests that the response of school personnel to the needs of these students may be the determining factor in whether or not these children will succeed. Attitude is a key variable in determining the success of inclusive education. Two studies, in 1989 and 1999, focused on a number of variables that may affect the attitudes of teachers, including physical educators, toward teaching students with disabilities including; type of teacher, nature of disability, teacher gender, school location, teaching experience, experience with and training concerning those with disabilities and adequate resources. Some of the findings of both studies indicate that teacher attitudes: differ according to the disability and type of teacher, are related to the amount of training, experience and disability type. May be related to gender of teacher. Comparisons of the two studies sought to determine whether teacher attitudes toward teaching students with disabilities have changed over the past ten years and the implications of any changes.
Deinstitutionalization and the closure of special schools for those with disabilities increased the number of children with disabilities in the Newfoundland school system in the 1980's. Since that time we have gone from mainstreaming to inclusion. Provincial educational policy is focused on the optimum development of the individual child designed to respond to individual strengths and needs provided in the most appropriate environment. Inclusionary practices in the school system mean that more and more teachers are being involved in the teaching of children with a variety of disabilities in the regualr classroom. Evidence supports the fact that early placement in an inclusive setting, with an individualized programme, will be beneficial to a child providing that adequate resources and qualified personnel are available (Duquette & O'Reilly, 1988; Just one of the kids, 1987; Messick, 1984; Poirier, Goguen, & Leslie, 1988; Scruggs & Mastropieri, 1996; Special Education Policy, 1987; Special Education Policy, 1999 ).
Although the education of exceptional children is mandated by provincial law this is no guarantee of the success of inclusion. While the philosophy that underlies this legislation has met with approval the implementation of inclusionary practices has not been without its difficulties. The movement towards full inclusion has meant that more and more regular teachers, including physical education teachers, are required to teach children with disabilities. Researchers have identified a number of variables that may contribute to teacher willingness to include those with disabilities (Aloia, Knutson, Minner & Von Seggern, 1980; Hanrahan & Rapagna, 1987; Hundert, 1982; Kowalski & Rizzo, 1996; LaMaster, Gall, Kinchin & Siedentop, 1998; Loovis, 1986; Poirier et al. 1988; Rizzo & Kirkendall, 1995; Sideridis & Chandler, 1997; Theodorakis, Bagiatis, & Goudas, 1995; Wang & Walberg, 1983).
Evidence suggests that the response of school personnel to the needs of exceptional children may be the determining factor in whether or not the student with special needs will succeed. Indeed teacher acceptance of, and attitude towards, individuals with a disability are perhaps the most important variables in determining their success. Perhaps the most critical factors for successful inclusion are the attitude of the teacher, the learning environment including resources, and peer acceptance which is partly dependent upon teacher attitude (Heikinaro-Johannson & Sherrill, 1994; Hodge & Jasma, 1999; Just one of the Kids, 1987; Kowalski & Rizzo, 1996; Kunzweiler, 1982; Nesbit & Karagianis, 1981; Patrick, 1987; Rizzo & Kirkendall, 1995; Scruggs & Mastropieri, 1996).
In 1989 a study was conducted to investigate the attitudes of teachers in Newfoundland and Labrador elementary schools toward teaching students with disabilities in the regular physical education class (Kuester,1991). The study specifically focused on the differences in attitudes among teachers related to: 1) type of teacher, 2) nature of disabling condition, and 3) background characteristics of the educators including: gender of and degree earned by the teacher; previous experience with and number of years teaching experience with those with disabilities; and pre/inservice training for teaching those with disabling conditions. Additional information was gathered from the teachers on the specific nature of support services that they believed necessary to facilitate the successful inclusion of those with disabilities. Two primary conclusions that came from this study were that there were significant differences in attitudes between teacher groups and toward different disabling conditions. The present study was an attempt to determine whether or not the attitudes of teachers toward teaching elementary children with disabling conditions have changed.
Methods
Subjects
The schools of the province are quite diverse from very small all-grade rural schools to large urban schools. In 1997-98 there were 391 schools in the province 260 (66%) being rural/outport. School boards were purposely selected from across the province to ensure the inclusion of representative samples of schools from rural and urban areas. In the 1989 study 88 schools were selected to provide a sufficient sample size of the Newfoundland teacher population. Senior physical education students from the university were selected to participate. Of the 88 schools 49 responded, giving a response rate of 55.9%, with 41 regular, 42 special needs and 37 physical education teachers responding and 23 students (75% response rate) for a total of 143. In 1999 224 schools, all of the schools with at least grades K-6, were selected with 105 schools responding, giving a 46.6% response rate. There were 305 teacher responses with 100 physical education, 105 special needs and 100 regular class teachers and 18 students (60% response).
Instrumentation
For the purposes of both studies two criteria were considered in the selection of the instrument to measure attitudes: established validity and reliability: and inclusion of clear, simple and direct statements. The questionnaire, "Physical Educators' Attitude Toward Teaching Handicapped " (PEATH) was selected because it was designed specifically to measure the attitudes of physical educators towards teaching those with specific disabilities. The PEATID-111, a revision of the PEATH was used for the 1999 study. The instrument was developed to determine the attributes which may contribute to teachers' feelings concerning teaching physical education in the regular classroom. It consists of 12 questions, with each of 5 disabling conditions rated on the 1-5 Likert scale for each question. Several studies have been conducted using the instrument (Block & Rizzo, 1995; Kowalski & Rizzo, 1996; Rizzo, 1984; Rizzo & Vispoel, 1992; Rizzo & Wright, 1987; Rizzo & Wright, 1988 ).
Modifications to the instrument included: a language change so that the PEATH was not specific to physical educators thus enabling other specified teachers to respond to the instrument. A further modification for the 1989 study was the addition of the conditions multiple disability and physical disability with accompanying descriptions of these conditions. These revisions were evaluated by the same experts who established content validity of the original instrument and they agreed that the proposed modifications would not affect the validity of the instrument (Kuester, 1991; Rizzo, 1984). A specific demographic/background sheet was prepared which asked for information pertaining to: location and grade levels of school, teacher gender, degree earned by teacher, experience with those with disabilities and an estimate of the quality of the experience, years of teaching experience, experience teaching those with disabilities, pre/inservice training concerning those with disabilities, and the types of support services believed to be essential for successful teaching of those with disabilities.
Data collection.
For both studies written permission was obtained from the school boards. The materials were sent to the principal of each school and to the Director of the School of Physical Education, Memorial University of Newfoundland. School principals were requested to distribute the materials after selecting teachers from the three target groups. Where there was no physical education teacher the principal was asked to select a classroom teacher who taught physical education. The Director of the School of Physical Education was asked to distribute the materials to the physical education majors.
Data Analysis
Some incomplete returns were included in the analyses of the ratings of those items completed. To determine the profile of the subjects, the percentage distribution of teachers by teacher group and each of the background characteristics was calculated. Group means and standard deviations were calculated for each item for each disabling condition on the PEATH. Also, a percentage distribution on responses by teacher group and disability condition for each item was calculated. To determine attitudinal differences, if any, within and between the subject groups several analyses of variance were calculated. The independent variables included in the analyses were labeled condition, teaching groups, pre/inservice training, experience and teaching experience with those with disabilities, and the background characteristics of the teachers, including gender of teacher, location of school taught in, and degree earned by teacher. The dependent measures were the mean attitude scores for each of the five disabling conditions.
Results and Discussions
Attitudes towards teaching children with disabling conditions.
Both studies indicate that teacher attitudes differ according to labelled condition and type of teacher. Generally, the attitudes of teachers toward teaching children with disabling conditions were positive. The 1989 study suggested that physical education and regular teachers had significantly less positive attitudes than special educators towards all disabling conditions except physical disability. Physical education and regular teachers differed from physical education student teachers relative to all labelled conditions except learning disability. Student teachers and special educators differed only with respect to the label of physical disability. In the post hoc analysis of disabling condition the most favourable attitudes were toward the label of learning disabled. There was also a significant difference between the label of physical disability and all other labels, except that of developmental disability There was no significant difference between the labels of emotional disability, severe disability and development disability.
The 1999 study suggested that in general physical educators and regular educators had significantly less positive attitudes than special educators similar to the 1989 study. Special needs teachers rated more positively than all other groups towards all labeled conditions. However, the post hoc analysis of disabling condition showed there was no significant difference between learning disability and mild/moderate disability but there was between both these conditions and all other conditions with the most positive attitudes being towards learning disability followed by mild/moderate mental disability. The least positive attitudes of all groups were towards severe disability followed by emotional disability with no significant difference towards these two conditions.
Effects of training and experience of the teachers.
In both studies the effect of pre/inservice training on attitudes was found to be significant. There was a significant difference among teachers with different numbers of courses regardless of the disabling condition. Both studies indicated that teachers who had 12 or more courses differed significantly from, and had more positive attitudes than, those with 0-2 courses. In 1989 there were no significant differences between the other levels of pre/inservice training, however the latest study indicated that those with 3-11 courses were also significantly different in attitude; more positive than those with 0-2 courses with no significant difference between 3-11 and 12 plus courses.
There was also a significant difference in attitudes, regardless of the amount of pre/inservice training, towards the various disabling conditions. In 1989 there was a significant difference in attitude toward the condition learning disability (more positive) and multi-handicapped (less positive). There was no difference in attitudes towards the other three labelled conditions. The 1999 study suggested that there was no significant difference between the labels of learning disability and mild/moderate disability but there was between these two and all other labels. There was no significant difference between severe disability and behavioural disability. In neither study was the interaction of pre/inservice training X disabling condition considered significant indicating that differences in attitudes among teachers with differing numbers of pre/inservice courses were not affected by specific disabling condition and, conversely, difference in attitudes toward specific disabling conditions was not contingent upon pre/inservice training .
In both studies, as with pre/inservice training, the analysis of the effect of teaching experience with those persons with disabilities on attitudes towards various labeled conditions resulted in significant main effects, but the interaction was not significant. In the 1989 study the post hoc comparison of means for the different levels of teaching experience indicated that, generally, those teachers with less experience had more positive attitudes towards all labeled conditions. Specifically, those teachers with 0-2 years experience had more positive attitudes than those teachers with 3-5 years and more than 10 years experience. However, the new study showed that those with more experience, not less, had more positive attitudes than those with no experience and those with more than 10 years experience had the most positive attitudes.
The analysis of difference among disabling conditions produced similar results as pre/inservice training in both studies. In the 1989 study attitudes were more positive toward the label of learning disability and significantly different from attitudes towards severe disability. In the 1999 study there was no significant difference between the label of learning disability and developmental disability (more positive than) and all other labels with no significant difference either between severe disability and emotional disability. The 1999 study indicated a more positive change in attitude toward the label of mild developmental disability.
The 1989 study indicated that previous experience with persons with disabling conditions did not affect attitudes towards teaching those with disabilities. This would imply that exposure to persons with disabilities, in and of itself, does not affect, either positively or negatively, attitudes. However, the 1999 study indicated that there was a significant main effect of experience implying that experience with those with disabilities can positively affect attitudes. This change may well reflect the fact that more and more persons with disabilities are visible in society, therefore in schools, and so teachers are more aware of their abilities rather than their disabilities. In both studies there was a significant main effect of disabling condition reflecting differences previously discussed.
In the 1989 study there was no association between the number of years teaching experience with persons with disabilities and the level of satisfaction of the experience. Chi square analysis resulted in a value which was not statistically significant indicating that the two variables are independent of each other and, thus, satisfaction in teaching those with a disabling condition is not dependent upon the amount of teaching experience. However, the 1999 study, indicated that there was a statistical significance between the two variables and that those with the most teaching experience were more likely to describe their experience teaching such students as good to exceptional .
The Effects of School Location, Gender and Degree Earned
There was no significant interaction effect of gender of teacher, location of school, and degree earned on attitudes towards teaching those with disabilities in either study. Further, the main effects of degree earned and location of school were not significant. Thus, no difference in attitudes was found among teachers, according to type of school or earned degree. The main effect of gender was found to be significant and the interaction of gender and degree may be considered significant. However, there was a great disparity among groups as to numbers of males and females in each; that is, the majority of special educators and regular educators were female, while the majority of physical educators were male and there were more female than male teachers with a masters degree. Whether differences among groups are effected by gender is not definitive.
In both studies adequate resources were seen as necessary for the successful inclusion of exceptional students. The overwhelming response of all groups was that qualified, competent student aides were their top priority yet there are indications that resources have declined in the past 10 years.
A most important factor for the successful inclusion of students with disabilities is their interactions with their teachers. Both studies indicate that teacher attitudes differ according to the disability and type of teacher with the most positive attitudes being toward the labels of learning disability and mild/moderate developmental disability and the least positive toward severe disability and emotional disability. The most positive teacher group was the special needs teachers. Both studies indicate that attitudes are influenced by the amount of pre/inservice training received and teaching experience with those with disabilities. The latest study indicates that all teaching groups tend to have more positive attitudes, than 10 years ago, toward students with learning disabilities and mild/moderate developmental disability and less positive toward those with emotional disabilities and severe disabilities. Teachers also believe that adequate resources are needed for successful inclusion. The overwhelming response to the question of resources was qualified, competent student aides as the top priority yet while the number of students with disabilities in the schools has increased over the past decade it would appear that there are insufficient resources to meet the needs of students.
School home page; http://www.mun.ca/physed
 |
 |