Regular-Classroom Teachers' Attributions and Instructional Prescriptions for Handicapped and Nonhandicapped Pupils

Abstract

The study examined regular-classroom teachers' attributions and instructional prescriptions for normal achieving (NA), educationally handicapped (EH), and educable mentally retarded (EMR) pupils. Teachers were provided an experimental packet containing simulated background and current achievement information on an NA, EH, or EMR pupil. Background descriptive information reflecting an NA, EH, or EMR pupil affected teachers' failure but not success attributions as well as the manner in which they revised their failureattribution ratings. In addition, it was found that teachers' initial instructional prescriptions were anchored by descriptive information reflecting characteristics of NA, EH, and EMR pupils. However, as teachers continued to receive current achievement information their instructional decisions appeared to be more weighted on pupils' current performance and less on achievement history. Findings are discussed in light of attributional research and current federal legislation mandating education of handicapped pupils in regular-education settings to the maximum extent possible.Attribution theorists are concerned with individuals' perceptions of causes of events in their environments (Kelley, 1967;Weiner, 1972). Of particular interest to educators are the attributional investigations of Weiner and his colleagues (see Weiner, 1972Weiner, , 1974, who examined the antecedents and behavioral consequences of individuals' perceptions of the causes of their own and others' successes and failures on tasks. Moreover, there is evidence to suggest that teachers' educational prescriptions are, in part, a function of their attributions for student success and failure on achievement tasks. Research in attribution theory may be interpreted to suggest that a teacher may ascribe the following attributions for pupil performance: pupil ability, effort, mood, or luck; task difficulty; or teacher ability and effort (Rosenbaum, Note 1; Weiner, 1972). Weiner and Kukla (1970) reported that manipulation of information regarding pupil ability, effort, and performance on a task affected teachers' rewardpunishment feedback to the pupils. In addition, findings from research on teacher expectations may be interpreted to suggest that information on students' ability, for instance, IQ scores and labels such as &dquo;gifted,&dquo; may affect teacher interactions with students (Rubovits & Maehr, 1971).'This paper is based on a dissertation submitted to the University of California, Los Angeles, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the doctoral degree. at MCMASTER UNIV LIBRARY on March 31, 2015 sed.sagepub.com Downloaded from 326With the passage of P.L. 94-142, it is required that exceptional pupils be placed in the least restrictive educational alternative. That is, to the maximum extent possible, handicapped pupils are to be educated with children that are not handicapped. Therefore, many exceptional pupils classified as educationally handicapped (EH) -i.e., pupils of normal intelligence exhibiting behavioral and/or learning p...

Children With Mild Learning Difficulties in an Integrated and in a Special School: Comparisons of Behaviour, Teasing and Teachers' Attitudes

“…The ability and attitudes of teachers are important factors in ensuring the success or failure of integrating the child with special needs into mainstream schools. A few years after the enactment of The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (1975) in America, some negative attitudes towards mainstreaming wereapparent (Palmer, 1979) although Guerin and Szatlocky (1974) did find some teachers favourably inclined to integration practices. Many mainstream teachers indicated their lack of support for the integration of the child with special needs (MacMillan et al, 1978).…”

Influences on the sociometric ratings of mildly handicapped children: A path analysis.

“…These communications can take the form of expressions of approval or disapproval for a student's behavior or achievement. Additionally, instructional arrangements made to accommodate children achieving at different levels (Palmer, 1979;Shavelson & Borko, 1979) may make subtle statements to students about the performance of their classmates. For years, teachers have tried to hide grouping strategies with clever names (e.g., bluejays, red robins, etc.)…”

Effects of Dynamic Assessment on Teachers’ Expectations of Handicapped Children

“…Palmer (1979) found background information to be most influential in determining teachers' initial prescriptions for handicapped students. In a follow-up study, however, he found that teachers upgraded their expectations and their level of educational prescriptions when told that the child was actually performing at a higher level than had been expected based on the historical information (Palmer, 1980).…”