Abstract: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… Show more
“…The pilot questionnaire, a preliminary needs assessment addressing the concerns of educators engaged in the handicap integration process (Gans, 1981;Gans & Flexer, in press), was answered by 127 regular education teachers and 17 special education teachers from a rural and a city school district (63% return rate). The pilot questionnaire, a preliminary needs assessment addressing the concerns of educators engaged in the handicap integration process (Gans, 1981;Gans & Flexer, in press), was answered by 127 regular education teachers and 17 special education teachers from a rural and a city school district (63% return rate).…”
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.
“…The pilot questionnaire, a preliminary needs assessment addressing the concerns of educators engaged in the handicap integration process (Gans, 1981;Gans & Flexer, in press), was answered by 127 regular education teachers and 17 special education teachers from a rural and a city school district (63% return rate). The pilot questionnaire, a preliminary needs assessment addressing the concerns of educators engaged in the handicap integration process (Gans, 1981;Gans & Flexer, in press), was answered by 127 regular education teachers and 17 special education teachers from a rural and a city school district (63% return rate).…”
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.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.