A mailed questionnaire containing 99 demographic and attitudinal variables regarding handicap integration drew responses from 128 regular educators and 133 special educators in 21 school districts. Separate discriminant function analyses using “I would be willing to teach a student with (a handicap)” as the criterion variable were conducted for the two groups of educators. A comparison of the group profiles revealed few similarities. Regular educator willingness depended more heavily upon demographic variables; special educator willingness, upon attitudinal variables. Teacher group membership could be predicted from the profiles with 96% accuracy in each case. The results are discussed in terms of implications for consultants and inservice and preservice programs.

The purpose of the present study was to develop a protocol for use in testing the hearing of profoundly involved multi-handicapped children. Behavioral observation audiometry, visual reinforcement audiometry, auditory brain stem response (ABR], and noisetonedifference tests were administered to 156 children with multiple handicaps. Eighty three percent of the children with normal middle ear function were estimated to haw normal heap ing or, a t worst, a mild hearing loss, by one or more of the tests. ABR was the single best test, followed by behavioral observation audiometry and noisetonedifference. However, only 65% of the children would have passed had they only been t e s l ed Hlith ABR. If agreement among two of the tests had been required, hearing loss would have been ruled out in only 34% of the children. A factor analysis revealed that the various hearing tests were associated with diffeFnt mudiial and physical conditions which might influence threshold estimation for multi-handicapped children. These results support use of a seriea=positii test battery proto= col in which individual tests are used sequentially with the purpose of ruling out moderate-profound sensorineural hearing loss.

ABR waveforms from 50 multi-handicapped children were analysed by nine judges in an investigation of scoring bias. Prior to estimating threshold for each subject, the judges were provided with either true or false ABR thresholds. This preliminary information was true in 25 of the cases and false in the other 25. The same ABR waveforms were evaluated one week later, but true/false biasing thresholds were reversed. Results revealed that while the more experienced judges were more accurate in their assessments, they were not necessarily less biased. The effects of bias were more predominant in those cases where the estimation of threshold was the most difficult.

Communication breakdowns between regular and special educators integrating students with handicaps into the regular education classroom have been associated with differences in professional orientation. The extent of these differences has not been well defined. In this study, 128 regular education teachers and 133 special educators from 21 school districts responded to a questionnaire addressing management, professional, and educational concerns relating to handicap integration (i.e., mainstreaming). The two groups of teachers were similar in their attitudes. Regular educators were more negative in their attitudes, but the differences rarely reached significance. Group differences became more apparent when attitudes concerning specific handicapping conditions were addressed. A factor analysis revealed that the components of mutual factors were frequently dissimilar. Where the defining variables were the same, the direction and intensity of the group attitudes frequently differed. The implications of these findings for special education consultants working with regular education teachers are discussed.

Teachers (n = 127) from two school districts in Ohio, USA, were surveyed for their attitudes toward the integration of handicapped children. A principal components factor analysis revealed seven clusters of items accounting for 65 per cent of the variance. A discriminant function analysis was used to determine which items could be used to predict teachers who were willing or unwilling to teach students with handicaps. Two factors, Appropriate Placement and Classroom Management, were predictive with 79 per cent accuracy when combined with items regarding teacher perceptions of the benefit of full-time regular classroom placement, teaching experience with the handicapped, and resource awareness. This information is discussed in terms of the formation of a needs assessment to be used in integration.