Running Head: ATTITUDES OF INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

The Attitudes of Teachers and Students on Inclusion of Students with Severe Disabilities

Sonia Ibarra

Concordia University

MED 5305

June 21, 2017

INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 2

Chapter 1: Introduction

The attitudes of teachers and students on inclusion of students with severe disabilities in

the general education classroom has met with some resistance by parents, teachers, community

members and students. Since the federal legislation, of the No Child Left Behind Act of

2001(NCLB) and the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (1997),

have changed the type of students found in the general education classrooms. As schools

struggle to meet the adequate yearly progress (AYP) and provide measurable assessments of

student performance of all students to include those with severe disabilities. All the mandates

placed upon the schools make it more difficult to accept students with severe disabilities in the

classrooms with non-disabled students. The fact that attitudes can be changed after just a brief

interlude gives promise to the hope of making substantive and long-lasting changes in attitudes

towards the inclusion of students with intellectual disabilities (Gaad, 2014).

Most students with severe disabilities are given an alternative assessment to show their

adequate yearly progress. The alternate assessments given to students with severe disabilities is

based on their I.Q. and their ability to meet certain criteria given by the Texas Education Agency

in order for students to qualify to take an alternate assessment. The alternate assessments contain

modified academic achievement standards in reading, mathematics, science, writing, and social

studies according to the grade level certain tests are given certain years.

Students with severe disabilities have special needs that must be met in the general

education classroom. Some students are assigned a paraprofessional or a non-disabled peer to

assist them in the general education classroom. A special education teacher may work side by

side all or part of the day with the general education teacher or consult about the needs of the
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 3

student. The student Individual Education Plan must be followed by all faculty and staff working

with the disabled students at all times.

Statement of the Problem

Since the NCLB act of inclusion of students with severe disabilities has met with

negative attitudes by the regular education teachers and students. Teachers and students

attitudes and knowledge of inclusion contribute to the success or failure of the inclusion program

of students with severe disabilities in their classrooms. Some students are given assistance to

help them function in the general education classroom. The special education teacher, general

education teacher, paraprofessionals, and students (in some cases) assist the severely disabled

student with understanding the academic content presented in the classroom. Making sure

students meet with success when it comes to understanding the rigor of the content even when it

is modified for their understanding is a challenge for all involved with educating the student.

Gaad (2014) states: For an educational system to support and enforce inclusion in its

institutions, it needs to have the backing of legislation (p. 71).

Assumptions

Schools face the challenge of providing an equitable educational success of all students

disabled and non-disabled while preserving the rigor of the academics. Students of all grade

levels would be given personnel that are highly trained to create and present the core curriculum

at a rigor that benefits all students in the general education classroom, disabled and non-disabled.

The general education students would be accepting of the disabled students and be willing to

assist them in the classrooms with or without the presence of a paraprofessional or special

education teacher in the classroom.

INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 4

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this research is to examine if the teachers and students knowledge and

attitudes of the inclusion of students with severe disabilities affects their success in the regular

education classroom. If the educational team is in place to work with the disabled students and

are accommodating and modifying the curriculum enough so that the students meet with success

but still maintaining the rigor required to meet with success. When considering the success of

inclusion, the teachers professional development and presentation of curriculum will be

considered as well as the students acceptance of students with severe disabilities in the regular

education classroom.

Research Question/Hypothesis

For the purpose of this study, the following questions were addressed:

1. Are the professional staff given sufficient professional development to present curriculum that

is properly modified for each student?

2. Are the teachers and students accepting of the students with disabilities in the general

education classroom?

3. Are the students without disabilities willing to help their disabled peers in the general

education classroom?

As part of this study, investigation included one research hypothesis:

1. The more information and preparation teachers and students are given of inclusion students in

the regular classroom, the more accepting and successful inclusion will be.

Limitations of Study
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 5

The limitations of this study lie in the attitudes and professional development vary from

school, teacher, and special education student. The students IEPs differ in academic need for

each student that may vary success. Also, the students disabilities differ from each other, in

severity and need. The amount of adult or peer assistant each student receives will vary from

school to school. The state assessment is given to each student with varied accommodations and

modifications for each individual student which may skew passing or failing rate if they were not

properly administered. Accommodations given routinely to a a student may not be allowed on

the state exam. The state assessment for students with severe disabilities is given over a period of

time, the student may be absent or having a bad and the test may only be stopped after

completing a module. While all states are required to provide a free and appropriate education

for these students, there are many differences in how localities implement the law and thus in the

actual quality of educational services for these students (E, E, E, & E).

Definition of Terms

1. Severe disability- The classifications of severe handicaps, severe/profound impairments, or

multiple disabilities are less than precise. Children so labeled present a complex picture: they

might include those with diagnoses of mental retardation, schizophrenia, autism, or cerebral

palsy. Further behavioral, sensory, or orthopedic problems may also be involved. They require

extensive ongoing support in more than one major life activity in order to participate in

integrated community settings. Most severely disabled individuals are limited in their ability to

communicate, move around and perform daily living skills.

2. Inclusion -An approach to educating students with special educational needs. ... Inclusion

rejects the use of special schools or classrooms to separate students with disabilities from

students without disabilities.

INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 6

3. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a measurement defined by the United States Federal No

Child Left Behind Act that allows the U.S. Department of Education to determine how every

public school and school district in the country is performing academically according to results

on standardized tests.

4. State exam- The State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness, commonly referred to

as its acronym STAAR (STAAR), are a series of state-mandated standardized tests used in Texas

public primary and secondary schools to assess a student's achievements and knowledge learned

in the grade level.

5. STAAR ALT-2- TEA has developed the STAAR Alternate 2 assessment to meet the federal

requirements mandated under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), a federal

education law previously known as No Child Left Behind. TEA designed the STAAR Alternate

2 to assess students in grades 38 and high school who have significant cognitive disabilities and

are receiving special education services

6. ARD committee- These letters stand for Admission, Review, and Dismissal. It is the Texas

name for the group of people who make educational decisions about the student. The purpose of

the ARD meeting is to provide an opportunity for parents and educators to discuss and develop

an educational program for the student (the I.E.P.)

7. IEP- The Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) is a plan or program developed to ensure

that a child who has a disability identified under the law and is attending an elementary or

secondary educational institution receives specialized instruction and related services

INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 7

Chapter 2: Literature Review

When looking at the literature for this research, three areas were examined: (1) the

inclusion policy; (2) the professional development and knowledge of inclusion of teachers and

students; (3) the attitudes of both teachers and student in inclusion settings. A variety of

literature has been reviewed and interpreted for this study. School districts are aware of their

obligations, by law and agency policy, to identify and provide services to all students who

require special education services. Teachers and other professionals that provide services to

students with disabilities have been trained to help the students meet with success in their goals

and objectives set forth by the ARD committees.

Most regular education teachers rely on the previous methods of the special education

teachers providing all the special services to students with disabilities. Now since the laws have

changed and students with disabilities are to be included and taught in the regular education

classrooms some regular education teachers feel it is still the responsibility of the special

education teachers to fulfill that role. Schools are needing to provide professional development

to the regular education teachers to collaborate with the special education teacher in order for the

students with disabilities to get the modifications needed to participate in the general curriculum

as their nondisabled peers.

Inclusion Policy

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires children with disabilities to have

equal educational opportunities, it specifically requires schools to support inclusion of children

with disabilities through the least restrictive environment. Congress has recognized the benefits

of inclusion. The courts have long recognized there are non-educational benefits to inclusion that
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 8

are important to the quality of life of children with disabilities-such as the opportunity to make

friends and increase acceptance among their peers (Daniel R.R.v. State Bd. Of Educ., 1989;

Sacramento City Sch. Dist. v. Rachel H., 1994). The Federal Law requires support inclusion in

three areas: placement of the child with children who do not have disabilities, access to the

standard educational or developmental curriculum, and participation in typical non-academic

activities.

An ARD committee should consider use of supplementary aids and services and other

supports to enable children with disabilities to be educated with nondisabled peers to maximum

extent appropriate (Akalin, 2014, p.40). For example; assistive technology, additional classroom

supports, or other aids and services should be provided and in place in the more inclusive setting.

A nondisabled peer can assist the disabled student with some of the work by giving a student

version of what the teacher explained. A peer can interpret information at the student level if

disabled peer is not comprehending what the teacher is asking for in an assignment.

Teacher professional development of inclusion

School districts vary on the professional development provided to the regular education

teachers to meet the needs of all its students to include those with disabilities. At the root of a

system that embraces full inclusion is a well and appropriately trained teacher (Gafoor, 2009). If

teachers responsible for inclusive practices have unclear perceptions of their role, it may

undermine the efforts in maintaining and restructuring of the program of inclusion (Gafoor,

2009). Teachers generally believe that children with special needs should be educate in general

education classrooms and that students benefit from inclusion. However, teachers report that they

have insufficient knowledge about inclusion practices and lack competency for educating

children with special needs (Akalin, Demir, Sucuoglu, Bakkaloglu, & Iscen, 2014).
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 9

The success of students with disabilities in inclusion depends on the collaboration and

training the regular education teachers receive (DeMatthews, 2015). Regular education teachers

should be trained in being an active member of the ARD committee, strategies to implement the

core curriculum according to the students IEP, and how to collaborate with the team set up for

the students with disabilities. Some principals have created a distributive leadership on their

campus to give leadership responsibilities to the regular and special education teachers

responsible of teaching the students with disabilities (DeMatthews, 2015).

Attitudes of teachers and students

The attitudes of the teachers and students play an important role in the success of

inclusion of students with disabilities. In previous years teachers have been isolated, work with

little or no inclusion of students with disabilities (DeMatthews, 2015). Much of the literature

concerning the issue of including children with disabilities in general education settings has

focused on the attitudes of teachers and other stakeholders (Cameron, 2014). The majority of

studies consider teachers attitudes towards the general concept of inclusion rather than with

respect to their actual classroom experience (Cameron, 2014). Teachers with attitudes that are

not in agreement with placing students with disabilities in inclusion tend to have difficulty

collaborating with the special educations teachers. Teachers are not as willing to implement

strategies suggested by the special education teacher because of their attitude that it is not their

job to implement the curriculum for the students with special needs.

Some teachers are hesitant to go to professional development to increase their skills and

knowledge in educating students with disabilities. When regular education teachers were

observed in the inclusion it showed teachers were more willing to teach in whole group rather

than small group while the special education teacher did mostly small group (Cameron, 2014).
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 10

When the regular education teacher did small group, it was with the general education students

and allowed the special education teacher to do small group with the disabled students. When

students with disabilities have behavior issues in the classroom some teachers complained

because of having to constantly redirect the student and not present the lesson to the rest of the

class. Some teachers contributing frustrations were that most of their attention goes to students

with disabilities and takes away attention from the other students (Cameron, 2014).

The teachers willing to increase their attention to the students with disabilities showed

students making more progress and the general education students more willing to help them if

they needed it. Teachers with an attitude of acceptance of students with special needs in their

inclusion classrooms followed suggested strategies of their colleagues and learned what the

students needed from them to succeed in the classroom. Some teachers were okay with having to

repeat instructions to their disabled students before they could understand what to do (Cameron,

2014). When teachers were prewarned about their students with disabilities and given strategies

to help them most were accepting of their students with disabilities.

Nondisabled peers in classrooms with disabled peers students showed a better attitude or

acceptance of their disabled peers when given a workshop. The content of the workshop included

awareness activities, interactions with people with intellectual disabilities, quizzes, games, and

question/answer dialogues. When students were given a chance to interact with their disabled

peers they were more willing accept and talk with each other (Gaad, 2014). Most students when

given the opportunity to interact, get to know their peers, and are able to ask questions about

them got a better understanding of their peers and were more to help them in the classroom

(Gaad, 2014).

Summary
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 11

The quality of an inclusion program varies according to program philosophy,

administrative support, teacher training, and attitudes of instructors and students (Akalin, Demir,

Sucuoglu, Bakkaloglu, & Iscen, 2014). Teacher training, experience, attitude, and knowledge are

key indicators of the quality of inclusion, and teachers need to be knowledgeable about and

experienced in inclusion practices as they work with children with special needs and attempt to

meet the diverse needs of all the children in their classrooms Akalin et al (2014). When students

are given opportunities to interact and ask questions about their disabled peers they come to

accept them as simple peers like the rest (Gaad, 2014). Once the fear of students with disabilities

is overcome most teachers and students didnt mind them in the inclusion classroom. They found

a way to collaborate, learn and help each other, just like any other classroom (Gaad, 2014).
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 12

Chapter III: Methodology

Subject Selection and Description

Students with severe disabilities have been sent to self-contained classrooms and the

attitudes of most teachers and students were that it should always stay that way. Since the case of

the Board of Ed. of Hendrick Hudson Central School Dist. v. Rowley 458 U.S. 176 (1982)

parents have been advocating for students with disabilities to be educated in the regular

educations classrooms with their same aged peers. So more and more the trend is to see more

students with severe disabilities being given instruction in the regular education classrooms. The

disagreements have been if inclusion for students with severe disabilities in the regular education

classrooms is successful. While most say failure is due to the fact that not enough resources are

given to the regular education teachers. Studies have shown a relationship between the attitudes

of the teachers and students to the success or failure of the inclusion of students with severe

disabilities. The amount of inclusion of students depends on the ARD committees decision

which does include the regular education teacher. The services and assistance provide also

depend on the committee as does the services provided to the student with severe disabilities.

What varies from school to school is the services a school is able to provide which can be

implemented and changed. Whereas the attitudes and feelings of inclusion need some work to

change.

Instrumentation

A mixed-methods approach will be used for the research study. Data from the past years

2014-2016 will be used to see the trend in attitudes toward having students with severe

disabilities in the regular education classroom. Parent permission shall be obtained from the
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 13

students in the inclusion classes for the interview and surveys given. A narrative approach will

be used to build an understanding of the teachers and students attitudes of students with severe

disabilities in the inclusion setting. A qualitative survey will be given to show what feelings and

attitudes teachers and students have toward students with disabilities being educated alongside

them in the regular education classroom. Then a phenomenological summary and interpretation

will be used from the interviews and surveys which will be used to present to the school district.

This will assist in getting a better understanding of the experience of the teachers and students in

the classroom.

Data Collection Procedures

Data on current strategies used to build and change attitudes of including students in the

regular education classroom will be collected and graphed based on surveys from 2013-2016. A

phenomenological approach will be used with the surveys and interviews to categorize and

summarize them in order to gain an understanding of their perspectives. The information can

then be presented to the schools throughout the district to begin a change in attitude and

acceptance of students with severe disabilities in the regular education classrooms. Inclusion can

work when the right attitude is presented in the classrooms.

The qualitative data from the interview and surveys will be used to show how the

attituded of teachers and students can help or hinder the success of inclusion of students with

severe disabilities in the regular education classroom. The narrative from the interviews and

surveys can be presented and would give teachers and students a foundation to begin to accept

and change their attitudes toward inclusion of students with disabilities in the classrooms.
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 14

The methodology for the quantitative data will be collected from the interview and

surveys and graphed to compare the acceptance to students with severe disabilities in the regular

education classroom. Using the survey and interview questions given at the beginning and end of

the school year to compare if the attitudes have changed in the course of one year to the next. By

conducting the surveys and interviews and graphing the information a possible pattern may be

seen as to why there may be a resistance to the inclusion of students with disabilities in the

regular classroom.

If this research could present why teachers and students are hesitant to have students with

disabilities in inclusion then a plan can be made before hand to help everyone involved to

transition better into the coming school year. Schools can help teachers and students feel more

comfortable with the inclusion programs at their school.

Survey Questions for the study

1. How do you feel having students with severe disabilities in your classroom?

2. Why do you feel this way about students with disabilities?

3. What do you know about students with disabilities?

After the year was over

4. How do you feel now about having students with disabilities in your classroom?

5. What did you learn about each other?

6. Did having professional development help you when dealing with the academics with the

students with disabilities.

Limitations
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 15

The implementation of IDEA has made it seem inclusion is forced upon schools and the

attitudes and feelings of teachers may be an issue when gathering information if inclusion is

successful. As teachers and students may have different opinions due to their own experiences

with inclusion may skew data towards one way or the other. Also, the matter of guidance and

assistance given to each teacher with students with severe disabilities may sway opinion and

attitude of having these students in the regular education classroom. Teachers and students may

not be truthful if the surveys conducted were not anonymous.

Data Analysis

Data from questionnaires and interviews will be gathered and written into a narrative

summary of the findings. A graph will be created to indicate how the attitudes have changed or

not at the end of the school year. All data will be summarized, graphed, and shared within the

school district to show that attitude and acceptance of students with severe disabilities can thrive

in the general education classroom with their same aged peers. There is a need to build a team of

teachers, paraprofessionals as well as students to make the acceptance and success of students

with severe disabilities. Teachers need to build a classroom culture of tolerance and acceptance

of all students in the classrooms with or without disabilities.

INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 16

References
Akaln, S., Demir, ., Sucuolu, B., Bakkalolu, H., & cen, F. (2014). The needs of inclusive

preschool teachers about inclusive practices. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research,

54, 39-60.

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Pub. L. No. 101-336. Retrieved from:

http://www.ada.gov

Board of Ed. of Hendrick Hudson Central School Dist. v. Rowley 458 U.S. 176 (1982).

Retrieved from: www.wrightslaw.com/caselaw.htm

Cameron, D. L. (2013). An examination of teacher-student interactions in inclusive classrooms:

teacher interviews and classroom observations. Journal of Research in Special

Educational Needs,14(4), 264-273. doi:10.1111/1471-3802.12021

Carter, E. W., Asmus, J., Moss, C. K., Biggs, E. E., Bolt, D. M., Born, T. L., . . . Weir, K. (2016,

January 1). Randomized evaluation of peer support arrangements to support the

inclusion of high school students with severe disabilities. Exceptional Children. 82(2),

209-233. doi: 10.1177/0014402915598780

Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Educ., 874F.2d 1036 (5th Cir. 1989). For complete source of

information, go to http://cases.justia.com

DeMatthews, D. (2015). Clearing a path for inclusion distributing leadership in a high

performing elementary school. Journal of School Leadership, 25(6), 1000-1038.

Retreived from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.webpro.ctx.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer

? vid=1&sid=682384ca-e0ca-4947-a8f6-15f6a8e50537%40sessionmgr4009&hid=4213
INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 17

E., E., E., & E. (n.d.). Severe and education of individuals with multiple disabilities -

definition and types of severe and multiple disabilities. Retrieved June 04, 2017, from

http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2415/Severe-Multiple-Disabilities-Education-

individuals-With.html

Gaad, E. (2014). Look whos coming to school: the Emirati student voice in an intervention-

based study on inclusion of learners with intellectual disabilities in Emirati mainstream

government schools. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs,15(2), 130-138.

doi:10.1111/1471-3802.12053

Gafoor, K. A. (2009, March 19). Inclusive education: does the regular teacher education

program make a difference in knowledge and attitudes? Retrieved June 09, 2017, from

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED507434

Glazzard, J. (2011, May 04). Perceptions of the barriers to effective inclusion in one primary

school: voices of teachers and teaching assistants. Retrieved June 09, 2017, from

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2011.01478.x/full

Kramlich, C. (2012). Perspectives from general education teachers, students and their parents:

including students with robust communication devices in general education

classrooms. Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication,21(3), 105.

doi:10.1044/aac21.3.105

Mccurdy, E. E., & Cole, C. L. (2013). Use of a peer support intervention for promoting academic

engagement of students with autism in general education settings. Journal of Autism and

Developmental Disorders,44(4), 883-893. doi:10.1007/s10803-013-1941-5

INCLUSION OF STUDENTS WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES 18

Obiakor, F. E., Harris, M., Mutua, K., Rotatori, A., & Algozzine, B. (2012). Making inclusion

work in general education classrooms. Education and Treatment of Children,35(3),

477-490. doi:10.1353/etc.2012.0020

Olson, A., Leko, M. M., & Roberts, C. A. (2016). Providing students with severe disabilities

access to the general education curriculum. Research and Practice for Persons with

Severe Disabilities,41(3), 143-157. doi:10.1177/1540796916651975

Sacramento City School Dist. v. Rachel H., 14 F.3d 1398 (9th Cir. 1994). Retrieved from:

http://cases.justia.com

Sage, R. (2007). Inclusion in schools: making a difference. London: Network Continuum

Education.

The Latest TEA News. (n.d.). Retrieved June 04, 2017, from http://tea.texas.gov