Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs doi: 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2009.01130.

Volume 9 Number 3 2009

173179

Teachers beliefs about inappropriate behaviour: challenging attitudes?

jrs3_1130 173..179

Ann M. Grieve
University of Strathclyde

Key words: Behaviour, dissonance, teacher beliefs, staff development.

This paper focuses on taking a rst step in the process of inuencing teachers attitudes by building a description of beliefs about inappropriate behaviour that can be used in staff development work to provoke dissonance-led change. It describes a study, undertaken in two parts, exploring teachers attitudes to inclusion, and ascertaining their views on the personal qualities believed important in successfully supporting students whose behaviour was considered inappropriate for mainstream classrooms. Cognitive dissonance can be a tool for teacher educators to challenge teachers awareness of the foundations of their existing practice and then to create and develop new ways forward. The studies reported in this paper suggest that teacher attitudes to the inclusion of students with behaviour which challenges, and the notion that such behaviour is beyond the inuence of the teacher, is not consonant with their ability to identify personal qualities which are effective in supporting those same students.

inappropriate behaviour with other different ideas. Dissonance, assumed to arise from such comparisons where there is inconsistency in the beliefs one holds, may be seen as a catalyst for promoting cognitive change. Hubermans, (1993) model of cognitive restructuring, consistent with Piagetian theory, suggests that in any sort of exposure to different ideas, something unexpected enough to cause cognitive dissonance has to be evident. However, it is also important that the unexpected ideas have to be plausible. Hubermans model implies that change in beliefs about inappropriate behaviour might be inuenced by presenting beliefs from within the profession (i.e., from other colleagues) that reject the idea that behaviour is beyond teacher inuence. This paper focuses on taking a rst step in the process of inuencing teachers attitudes by building a description of beliefs about inappropriate behaviour that can be used in staff development work to provoke dissonance-led change. Such a description is likely to have plausibility for other teachers, one of the conditions for change in Hubermans model, because the beliefs are those of other teachers. There is no intention in the paper to test this conceptual change model. Rather, the intention is to take the rst in a sequence of steps suggested by the model, and this rst step is concerned only with description of beliefs. This paper rst reports on a survey carried out in one local authority that aimed to gather data regarding teachers beliefs about the realities of including young people with conduct issues in mainstream classrooms. The paper then examines the views of teachers on the personal qualities they felt were important in supporting students whose behaviour was considered inappropriate for mainstream classrooms. Teachers attitudes towards inclusion were explored because it has been suggested that in order for any teacher to be effective they have to have a strong commitment to inclusion (Avramidis, Bayliss & Burden, 2000; Jordan & Stanovich, 2003; Visser, Cole & Daniels, 2002). Commitment can be conceptualised in terms of attitudes, which many psychologists have dened as a blend of beliefs and values: values can be understood as principled preferences for acting in accordance with beliefs (Lieberman, 2001). Teachers attitudes to inclusion permeate their day-to-day

Introduction The concept of inappropriate classroom behaviours is one that continues to exercise the minds of teachers and educationalists nationally and internationally. Many writers (Croll & Moses, 1985; Kyriacou & Sutcliffe, 1979; Munn, Lloyd & Cullen, 2000) note that the causes of behaviour that challenge teachers are most often seen as being attributed to a range of factors. However, it seems that some teachers see inappropriate behaviour as something which is within the child and therefore beyond their inuence (Denholm, 2006). There is little evidence for this belief, and since beliefs inuence practice (Richardson, 1990), it seems important to encourage change towards beliefs that inappropriate behaviour is related to a range of factors if inclusive education strategies are to be successful. Piagetian theory implies that a powerful way of challenging beliefs is to ask teachers to compare their own ideas about
2009 The Author Journal compilation 2009 nasen

173

Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 9 173179

teaching and inform the ethos of the classroom (GTCS, 2005; Oliver, 1992). Teachers beliefs about the students in their class would underpin the hidden curriculum for example, the messages of whom and what is valued, how and what interactions are acceptable (Croll, 2001). It is clear from literature that national and local government and practitioners have very subjective views of inclusion and behaviour. Twenty-rst century Scotland has a vision that education is intended to enable all children to develop as successful learners, condent individuals, responsible citizens and effective contributors to society (SEED, 2004). Allied to this vision there is a presumption that all children will be educated in their local mainstream primary school (SEED, 2000). Within the diverse range of children in mainstream primary schools there are those whose behaviour in class presents a challenge to the teacher. These children are recognised to have additional support needs (SEED, 2004). Design of the study This qualitative study was designed in two parts. First it endeavoured to explore practitioner beliefs on inclusion. The method chosen for the study drew on the tradition of grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). The notion of emergence, which resonates with the principles of grounded theory, was a powerful inuence on the choice of process. It began with no clear hypothesis about including pupils with inappropriate conduct. Instead it aimed to clarify and give a thick description (Creswell, 1998) of how inclusion is revealed in school practice. It used, in part, aspects of a phenomenological approach to gauge teachers attitudes towards supporting children whose behaviour challenged either their expectations or the expectations of the school community (Creswell, 1998). The second part of the study asked teachers to rate personal characteristics considered effective in supporting pupils whose behaviour was considered to be inappropriate. Outline of the data gathering Data was gathered from one local authority, chosen on the grounds of accessibility and the variety of communities in which schools were situated. These included, for example, urban areas, coastal holiday towns and island communities. Using this range of schools meant that results might represent various contexts in which indiscipline might occur (Robson, 1993). A survey was conducted to gather data regarding primary teachers attitudes to the realities of including young people with conduct issues in their mainstream classes. A questionnaire was distributed to all teachers (N = 511) in the local authoritys 53 primary schools and all were invited to respond. The survey asked teachers for their views on the local authoritys policy of, wherever possible, including all young people with behavioural issues in mainstream schools. Thirty-six of the primary schools responded, with 201 responses from teachers. The questionnaires were then scrutinised by a small team of colleagues which included the writer for statements that appeared to have signicance and this allowed practitioners statements to be grouped into meaning units (Creswell,

1998, p. 50) and for an essence of practitioners experience to be constructed. The scrutiny concluded that two principal themes were recurring in the data: shared understanding of terminology, and attitudes towards inclusion. A further round of data gathering, using the same local authority and schools, employed a two-page survey, rated using a 5-point Likert scale. This survey was based on the construction of a conceptual framework for assessing teacher effectiveness. The conceptual framework was drawn up in two ways: gathering evidence from teachers, and gathering perspectives from literature. Practitioners perspectives of characteristics seen in teachers successful in supporting students whose behaviour was challenging were gathered using nominal group technique (LTDI, 1999), a rapid method of eliciting key themes from witnesses with relevant experience of the issues under investigation. The participants in the nominal group were 21 teachers from a central Scotland local authority who had chosen to come on a postgraduate course on supporting learners whose behaviour could be challenging. The group comprised support teachers, classroom teachers (both primary and secondary) and teachers from the pre-ve sector. This may appear to be an opportunistic sample; however, this was not the case: all the teachers were volunteers, attending a course on challenging behaviour, and so could be seen both as participants with a commitment to the eld of challenging behaviour and with a degree of relevant experience in it. There is a literature on teaching that covers a number of perspectives on the concept of effectiveness. The literature comprises government guidelines and policies; literature on effective teachers, literature on behaviour management and general literature on classroom management; literature on emotional intelligence; research into pupil attitudes and lists generated by experienced practitioners. Using this range of literature sources ensured that any concept of effectiveness that were measured would have been validated by reference to at least two of the sources used. There was, therefore, a strong element of agreement on the characteristics that nally informed the content of the survey. The data from the nominal group technique and the characteristics of effectiveness recurring in the literature led to the proposal that 44 characteristics of teachers could be justied as valid indicators of the concept of effectiveness in the support of young people whose behaviour is challenging in the classroom. Postal responses to the survey were sought from teachers identied by their head teacher as effective in supporting pupils who behaved inappropriately in class. The response rate was N = 80. At all times due consideration was given to ethical aspects of the investigation. Condentiality was maintained by coding schools for administrative purposes, and all questionnaires were anonymous.
2009 The Author Journal compilation 2009 nasen

174

Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 9 173179

The data collected were interrogated by four numerical approaches (1) summary of basic data, (2) quartiling, (3) charting means and standard deviations and (4) principal components analysis. The results were rst collated as the distribution of the scores for each question 144. The mean response for each question was then plotted. Quartiling is a technique which makes no assumptions about the differences between points on the scale (Altman & Bland, 1994). The frequency of ratings of 5 was isolated to identify the characteristics teachers rated as most important in effectively supporting youngsters with challenging or inappropriate conduct. Finally, an analysis of means and standard deviations was carried out. The mean is the most usual summary statistic for numerical data, but in this case the standard deviation was specied, because the data were based around a restricted set of values. This gave a measure of spread of the data about the mean. Findings 1 What is inappropriate behaviour a shared understanding? There appeared to be a discrepancy between what teachers in the various schools considered to be inappropriate behavioural issues. Some teachers described childrens behaviour as high tariff or at the edge. Behaviours described in these terms included violence, for example. Others also included the lower level of disruptive behaviour that occurs on a day-to-day basis, such as talking out of turn, lack of attending to tasks, or failing to follow instructions. Attitudes towards inclusion The respondents divided into three groups of roughly equal size, based on their attitudes to inclusion. The rst group included those teachers who felt that they could espouse the idea of inclusion, but only where there was adequate additional support available. Teachers described this support as ideally daily, on a one to one basis and involving the removal of pupils from the classroom if their behaviour became disruptive. This can only be implemented if there is full time support for every pupil who requires it (respondents emphasis) This will only work if support from professional staff is given as required by the school. Disruption was dened as disturbing the other pupils work and this included lack of time for teachers to deal with issues of conduct, and a bias in their time towards supporting the children with issues of inappropriate behaviour. One third of all the teachers felt that the inclusion of pupils with social, emotional and behavioural difculties was detrimental to the education of others in all circumstances. Often the impact on normal children is underplayed. They can be frightened and stressed by the problem pupils. The views of class teachers were sometimes couched in terms of a balance between the rights of children with social, emotional and behavioural difculties and the the rights of normal children in the class. We shouldnt compromise the education of the majority to accommodate the minority.
2009 The Author Journal compilation 2009 nasen

My concern is also for the normal children. Many parents of ordinary children get annoyed that these problem pupils are getting a better deal. It makes me extremely angry that these childrens rights are more important than the rights of normal children. Some teachers responded in terms of their own feelings of inadequacy when faced with the support of children whose behaviour was inappropriate. I am not trained to deal with disruptive pupils. It is just assumed that you will be able to handle badly behaved pupils even though no training is provided. Teachers recognised that there were factors external to the school that affected the way pupils behaved in class, but saw these as validation of exclusion from mainstream. Some children will never t in no matter what we do due to home circumstances. A lot of the problems are due to home background where we have very little inuence. The nal group of respondents felt that children with social, emotional and behavioural difculties deserved a higher quality of support than mainstream schools could offer. They felt that these children would be better catered for in a unit or special school, where it was perceived that appropriately qualied staff would be better able to cater for their needs. Teachers who responded to the survey were in agreement that inclusion of youngsters with social, emotional and behavioural difculties caused staff additional stress. Teachers are feeling like failures; I am a 33-yearold teacher who is trying desperately to hold on to any enthusiasm left for the job . . . this is making a hard job impossible. Only a few (N = 3) teachers agreed wholeheartedly that inclusion was something which if achieved could positively transform schools. I believe it is a positive step forward for these children and their families. It raises awareness and positive challenges that need informed approaches, team effort and professional support. These teachers saw their role as s a multi-faceted one, concerned far more with a holistic or all-encompassing approach to behaviour management in order to support pupils whose behaviour was considered inappropriate. Findings 2 Across the survey the characteristics with which most teachers were in agreement in terms of importance were remarkably similar, no matter which method of analysis was used. In the most basic analysis, the majority of the respondents scored all the characteristics quite highly, assigning scores of 35 for most. This was not entirely surprising, as the characteristics were gathered from government papers and documents and literature readily available. They were, in fact, all important for teachers to consider. The results showed no correlation between the variables of response to questions and years of teaching

175

Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 9 173179

experience nor was there any signicant correlation between any of the 44 variables and gender. Quartiling Characteristics that were highly rated by the majority of teachers were those which had to do with teachers personal qualities (Table 1). Analysis of means and standard deviations The table below indicates the characteristics with which most teachers were in agreement (Table 2). Principal components analysis The data were subjected to an exploratory principal components analysis to identify patterns in the data, highlighting their similarities and differences. These revealed that amongst the 44 attitude statements, two principal components accounted for half of the variance with the remaining components playing quite minor roles in the overall structure. There were two tight clusters of attitude statements showing high loadings on the two principal components (Table 3). Discussion The use of normative terms such as high tariff behaviour or even the label social, emotional and behavioural

difculties in literature and rhetoric implies there is a common understanding of what is meant by these terms. The teachers in this survey did not have a shared understanding of what these terms mean when related to their own practice. This is perhaps because inappropriate behaviour is a concept that is to some extent socially constructed, and will vary from school to school, and even classroom to classroom (Oliver, McClintock, Hall, Smith, Dagnan & Stenfert Kroese, 2003 in Male, 2003). A shared understanding of what is difcult or inappropriate behaviour in a classroom context is essential for effective and inclusive practice within the community of the school. In this survey, 35% of teachers expected some support in dealing with indiscipline. A shared understanding of what constitutes an acceptable standard of behaviour is essential to the success of any partnership. A number of teachers used the term normal children when discussing inclusion, implying that those with social, emotional and behavioural difculties were in some way abnormal. These observations are similar to those made by teachers in the study conducted by Armstrong and Galloway, (1994) where teachers described particular pupils as disturbed. There is an issue in the use of language of this sort. It perhaps denies the complexity of circumstances that interrelate to create the difculties a child is experiencing (Miller, Ferguson & Byrne, 2000; Miller, Ferguson & Moore, 2002). These complex circumstances may of course be within the child alone but the act of applying labels may suggest that this is always the case, and teachers can feel absolved from responsibility. If children are regarded as abnormal, then this changes the focus of the response to the needs of the child from the mainstream classroom teacher to someone else. No explicit comments were made about adapting or changing methods of teaching or delivery of the curriculum to accommodate the needs of children with behavioural difculties, although one teacher responded general staff development in this area would be helpful . . . reecting on our interactions with pupils and moving away from a child decit model. This might be because most teachers implied

Table 1: Characteristics obtained by quartiling the data

Is concerned about the quality of his/her teaching Stays calm and composed in trying situations Knows pupils well Is caring and approachable Creates and sustains a positive climate for learning for all Is enthusiastic and can motivate pupils Takes time to listen to pupils Maintains good discipline Uses praise appropriately Is well prepared Exhibits positive regard, concern, and respect for students Establishes good relationships with pupils

Table 3: Characteristics obtained component analysis of the data

Maintains good discipline Uses praise appropriately. Establishes good relationships with pupils Is caring and approachable Is concerned about the quality of his her teaching Is enthusiastic and can motivate pupils Is well prepared Stays calm and composed in trying situations

by

principal

Creates and sustains a positive climate for learning for all

Table 2: Characteristics obtained by Analysis of Means and Standard Deviations of the data
Creates and sustains a positive climate for learning for all Establishes good relationships with pupils Exhibits positive regard, concern and respect for students Is caring and approachable Is well prepared Maintains good discipline Takes time to listen to pupils Uses praise appropriately

Stimulates student interest in learning by teaching enthusiastically Takes time to listen to pupils.

176

2009 The Author Journal compilation 2009 nasen

Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 9 173179

that the children had to t the current system, not that the system might have to be altered to include a diverse range of pupils. Support given to teachers should be sufcient for them to carry out their normal daily teaching. This exemplies the perspective, discussed by Galloway and Goodwin, (1987) that teachers felt it was not their role to support troublesome pupils. Visser et al., (2002) discussed the idea of inclusion perceived as a placement and participation in common learning experiences, as opposed to an approach that welcomes and celebrates diversity and values all pupils for their contribution. The emphasis on placements is challenging to schools because of the practicalities that such an approach poses. Teachers may feel that they fail to be inclusive because they lack skills to support the substantial differences in learners, because the physical environment is inappropriate; or because they feel pressure not to exclude in cases where conduct is involved. However, there were strong views expressed on appropriate forms of in-class support. Pupils with inappropriate behaviour should not be given interesting tasks and outings as this seems very unfair to those who conform to the rules. This point of view causes some concern, because a positive, inclusive school ethos in which all pupils are valued has been consistently shown from research (see e.g., Munn, Cullen, Johnstone & Lloyd, 1997; Visser et al., 2002) to be an important factor in promoting positive behaviour. Teachers felt tensions between raising attainment and including children who are disaffected and disruptive in the classroom, and so they felt that inclusion was inappropriate. I constantly hear the twin mantras inclusion and raising attainment. In my experience it is impossible to achieve both effectively . . . it is usually the attainment levels which fall. It is extremely difcult to deliver curriculum effectively in a class which is disrupted regularly and often in a violent way other pupils suffer. Corbett (2001) suggested that it is difcult to promote community values, social learning and co-operation, the basis of inclusive education, in such a climate. Fullan (2005) suggested that local arrangements (p. 12) to support pupils do not always take account of the competing agendas of inclusion, attainment and achievement. Unrealistic expectations, curriculum delivery, overload and rigidity were also cited as unhelpful by teachers in Bennetts (2006) research. Teachers also related issues of inclusion to parents. Some felt that the wider parental community was unaware of the problems that the inclusion of young people with social, emotional and behavioural difculties in mainstream classes caused. Others placed the blame for those with social, emotional and behavioural difculties squarely with parents and home circumstances. Bennett (2006) suggests that this is in accordance with the ndings of other investigations carried out by, for example, Croll and Moses (1985); Miller (1995); Miller and Black (2001). Recent government policy in Scotland has changed the classroom environment and teachers must assimilate the
2009 The Author Journal compilation 2009 nasen

consequences of the inclusion agenda and current understandings of social justice. Valuing diversity is not unproblematic. Oliver, (1992) suggested that inclusion is a process that demands changes in the ethos of schools. It demands a commitment from all members of staff to reducing barriers to participation and to promote learning for all pupils. More than this, it requires the commitment of quality support offered to schools. While recognising that, in inclusion terms, pupils with behavioural difculties are far more difcult to include than other pupils, many schools do not yet have mechanisms in place to disseminate features of good, inclusive practice. This is despite a number of government initiatives highlighting and attempting to disseminate features of successful inclusion and good practice in all sectors of education (see, e.g., HMIE, 2005, 2006). There are some difculties associated with looking at the development of new thinking on inclusion, based on the idea of a culture of learning and participation for all (Booth, 2000). This is because of the past segregation of special and mainstream ideologies. This is further complicated by teachers own constructs of special needs and how these should be responded to. Worse, not all views are explicitly stated; they are often to be inferred from the structures and systems in place in the different sectors of education. How a teacher constructs both a problem and its solution depends on traditions of practice in that situation (Clough & Corbett, 2000). A range of beliefs, countless sorts of practice and individual and group struggles have helped to make inclusion a multi faceted issue. It is difcult to develop classrooms that are safe, secure, accepting, collaborating, and stimulating, and in which everyone is valued until teachers tackle their own prejudices about children whose behaviour may be inappropriate (Booth, 2000). Characteristics highlighted in the second part of the study seemed to be concerned with relationships and classroom interactions. The characteristics selected indicate actions underpinned by aspects of personal qualities suggesting the esteem in which all pupils are held. The data gathered show patterns of thinking which seem to suggest that teachers in this local authority rated affective qualities as signicant in successful interactions with youngsters who display conduct considered inappropriate in classrooms. It seems that practitioners described effective teaching in terms of teacherstudent relationships. In that context, a teachers interpersonal skills are central to creating and maintaining a positive working climate. Each aspect of the numerical analyses of the data seems to support the view that effectiveness in the eyes of teachers relates to relationships in action. Essentially, effective teachers have to be excellent communicators as well as ne craft workers (Wubbels, Levy & Brekelmans, 1997). In the 1960s and 1970s, questionnaires were devised to ascertain teachers attitudes, and these appeared to be a better indication of effectiveness than previous attempts to research personalities. Teachers who were considered to be more or less effective differed in the

177

Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 9 173179

amount of empathy and caring that they demonstrated. Teachers who knew about childrens abilities and aptitudes, home environment, emotional problems and attitudes were more effective in enhancing childrens learning and social development (Ojemann & Wilkinson, 1939). This was reinforced by the work of Burrell, (1951) which demonstrated that teachers who made an effort to meet a childs emotional needs enhanced that childs learning, and also the pupils behaviour in class improved. Clearly, effective teachers must have an interpersonal style that promotes a positive affective classroom climate. Conclusion The purpose of this study was to explore the beliefs expressed by teachers in one local authority regarding the inclusion of children with inappropriate behaviour in mainstream primary schools. The results of the study indicate that the attitudes and beliefs of teachers regarding inclusion and behaviour are signicant in how inclusion operates within a school. Teachers beliefs about the causes of inappropriate behaviour seem to inuence their response to the problem. Like practitioners in other studies, teachers believed that parents had a signicant role to play in the management of inappropriate behaviour. The concept of inclusive thinking highlights the need to build and sustain positive learning communities. Teachers reported that this thinking does not t well with a culture of attainment and measurable results. The study also sought to ascertain what practitioners themselves rated as important in supporting students whose conduct was deemed inappropriate. The ndings indicate that there is agreement on the sorts of personal qualities, which they feel are important in the effective support of youngsters with behaviour that is challenging in the context of mainstream classrooms. These qualities should perhaps be promoted in initial teacher education alongside the more traditional teaching of strategies for classroom management. This paper set out to describe teacher attitudes and perceptions and to consider how continuing professional development (CPD) could challenge the attitudes of teachers by provoking consideration of other views. If we acknowledge that inclusive education is a desirable aim for 21st century schooling, then the focus of staff development should be on how to develop appropriate knowledge, skills and attitudes. We need also to consider the rst steps in the process of inuencing teachers attitudes more positively. Teachers need safe yet demanding contexts within which to explore their own attitudes towards, and beliefs about, diversity. This would stand alongside the more traditional CPD concerned with the development of appropriate teaching approaches and strategies. Such continuing professional development could be planned to accommodate the inherent complexity of inclusive education, rather than relying on a standards, competency based approach (Edwards, Gilroy & Hartley, 2002). Cognitive dissonance can be a tool for teacher educators to challenge teachers awareness of the

foundations of their existing practice and then to create and develop new ways forward.

Address for correspondence Dr Ann M Grieve, Faculty of Education, University of Strathclyde, Southbrae Drive, Glasgow G13 1PP, UK. Email: ann.grieve@strath.ac.uk.

References Altman, D. & Bland, J. (1994) Quartiles, quintiles, centile and other quantiles. British Medical Journal, 309 (6960), p. 996 <http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/ 309/6960/996> (accessed 22 February 2008). Armstrong, D. & Galloway, D. (1994) Special educational needs and problem behaviour: making policy in the classroom. In S. Riddell & S. Brown (eds), Special Educational Needs Policy in the 1990s, pp. 17596. London: Routledge. Atherton, J. (2005) Learning and teaching: cognitive dissonance and learning <http://www. learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm> (accessed 22 February 2008). Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P. & Burden, R. (2000) A survey of mainstream teachers attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the ordinary school in one Local Educational Authority. Educational. Psychology, 20 (2), pp. 193213. Bennett, P. (2006) Helpful and unhelpful practices in meeting the needs of pupils with emotional and behavioural difculties: a pilot survey of staff views in one local authority. British Journal of Special Education, 33 (4), pp. 18994. Booth, T. (2000) Controlling the agenda: policies on inclusion and exclusion in England. In D. Armstrong, F. Armstrong & L. Barton (eds), Policy, Contexts and Comparative Perspective, pp. 7899. London: David Fulton. Burrell, A. (1951) Facilitating learning through emphasis on meeting childrens basic emotional needs: an in-service training program. Journal of Educational Sociology, 24 (7), pp. 38193. Clough, P. & Corbett, J. (2000) Theories of Inclusive Education. London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Corbett, J. (2001) Supporting Inclusive Education: A Connective Pedagogy. London: Routledge. Creswell, J. (1998) Qualitative Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Croll, P. (2001) Children with statements in mainstream key stage two classrooms: a survey in 46 primary schools. Educational Review, 53 (2), pp. 13745. Croll, P. & Moses, D. (1985) One in Five. The Assessment and Incidence of Special Educational Needs. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
2009 The Author Journal compilation 2009 nasen

178

Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 9 173179

Denholm, A. (2006) Violent pupils allowed back to school. The Herald, 01 February. <http:// www.theherald.co.uk/news/55322.html> (accessed 22 February 2008). Edwards, A., Gilroy, P. & Hartley, D. (2002) Rethinking Teacher Education: Collaborative Responses to Uncertainty. London: Routledge Falmer. Fullan, M. (2005) Leadership and Sustainability: System Thinkers in Action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Galloway, D. & Goodwin, C. (1987) The Education of Disturbing Children. New York, NY: Longman Inc. General Teaching Council of Scotland (GTCS) (2005) Discipline in Scottish schools: A survey of Teachers Views. Edinburgh: Author. Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIE) (2004) Inclusion and Equality: Evaluating Education for Pupils with Additional Support needs In Mainstream Schools. Edinburgh: Author. HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIE) (2005) A Climate for Learning. Edinburgh: Author. HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIE) (2006) How Good is our School? Edinburgh: Author. Huberman, M. (1993) The Lives of Teachers. New York: Teachers College Press. Jordan, A. & Stanovich, P. (2003) Teachers personal epistemological beliefs about students with disabilities as indicators of effective teaching practices. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 3 (1), pp. 114. Kyriacou, C. & Sutcliffe, J. (1979) Teacher stress and satisfaction. Educational Research, 21 (2), pp. 8996. Learning Technology Dissemination Initiative (LTDI) (1999) The Evaluation Cookbook. Edinburgh: Author. Lieberman, D. (2001) Another face in our family tree. Nature, 410 (6827), pp. 41920. Male, D. (2003) Challenging behaviour: the perceptions of teachers of children and young people with severe learning disabilities. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 3 (3), pp. 16271. Miller, A. (1995) Teachers attributions of causality, control and responsibility in respect of difcult pupil behaviour and its successful management. Educational Psychology, 15 (4), pp. 45772. Miller, A. & Black, L. (2001) Does support for home-school behaviour plans exist within teacher and

pupil cultures? Educational Psychology in Practice, 17 (3), pp. 24562. Miller, A., Ferguson, E. & Byrne, I. (2000) Pupils causal attributions for difcult classroom behaviour. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70 (1), pp. 8596. Miller, A., Ferguson, E. & Moore, E. (2002) Parents and pupils causal attributions for difcult classroom behaviour. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72 (1), pp. 2740. Munn, P., Cullen, M. A., Johnstone, M. & Lloyd, G. (1997). Exclusions and In-school Alternatives. Interchange, No. 47. Edinburgh: The Scottish Ofce. Munn, P., Lloyd, G. & Cullen, M. A. (2000) Alternatives to Exclusion from School. London: Paul Chapman (Sage Publications). Ojemann, R. & Wilkinson, F. (1939) The effect on pupil growth of an increase in teachers understanding of pupil behavior. Journal of Experimental Education, 8, pp. 14347. Oliver, C., McClintock, K., Hall, S., Smith, M., Dagnan, D., & Stenfert Kroese, B. (2003) Assessing the severity of challenging behaviour: Psychometric properties of the challenging behaviour interview. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 16, pp. 5361. Oliver, M. (1992) Changing the social relations of research production? Disability, Handicap and Society, 7 (2), pp. 10114. Richardson, V. (1990) Signicant and worthwhile change in teaching practice. Educational Researcher, 19 (7), pp. 1018. Robson, C. (1993) Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner Researchers. Oxford: Blackwell. Scottish Executive Education Department (SEED) (2000) The Standards in Scotlands Schools Etc. Act. Edinburgh: Author. Scottish Executive Education Department (SEED) (2004) A Curriculum for Excellence The Curriculum Review Group. Edinburgh: Author. Visser, J., Cole, T. & Daniels, H. (2002) Inclusion for the difcult to include. Support for Learning, 17 (1), pp. 2325. Wubbels, T., Levy, J. & Brekelmans, M. (1997). The changing lives of children: paying attention to relationships. Educational Leadership, 54 (7), 8286. <http://pdonline.ascd.org/pd_online/classmanage/ el199704_wubbels.html> (accessed 13 December 2004).

2009 The Author Journal compilation 2009 nasen

179