Self-Image and Peer Acceptance of Dutch Students in Regular and Special Education

Abstract

This study focused on differences in well-being and peer acceptance of three groups of low-achieving students in regular and special education in the Netherlands. Well-being was assessed by means of a self-image scale consisting of 39 statements and peer acceptance through sociometric nomination and rank-order procedures. Low-achieving students in regular education who received remedial help had a similar self-image and were equally accepted by their peers as the low-achieving students in regular education who did not receive remedial support. Students in special education, however, had a slightly better self-image and were also a little more accepted by their peers than the low-achieving students in regular education. Low-achieving students in regular education who received remedial support neither profited nor suffered from their “needy” status regarding peer acceptance.

Teacher's Attitude and Peer Acceptance to Children with Special Needs in Inclusive Primary Schools

“…The scale consists of 20 items consisting of four Likert scales in the form of self-report of "positive attitude" to "negative attitude" (1)(2)(3)(4). Researchers manage the instruments in each selected school after obtaining the permission from each principal.…”

“…Children who are accepted by their peers show the characteristics of becoming themselves, happy, enthusiastic, confident but not arrogant, communicating clearly and maintaining conversation (Bakker & Bosman, 2003). Ladd & Buhs (1999) added that they are friendly, cooperative, adjusting themselves without causing problem, accepting happily of the situation that happens, having good relationships with others, sharing, taking turns in group games, being responsible, participating and enjoying social relationship, making comparisons between self and peer, emotionally mature, controlled behavior, calm, and free from anxiety, anger or jealousy.…”

Reasonable Adjustments in Learning Programs: Teaching Length, Mass and Capacity to Students with Intellectual Disability

“…The evidence from Bakker and Bosman's (2003) [21] study supported the former while Wiener, Harris and Shirer's (1990) [22] evidence supported the latter. Bakker and Bosman (2003) [21] found that socio-emotional well-being of children with LD was more positive in special education schools than in general education settings. This result suggests that children with LD may be better off in special education schools.…”

“…A landmark study by Bryan (1974) [18] and more recent studies have shown that children overrepresented in rejected or ignored groups were children with learning disabilities and were underrepresented in popular groups (Kuhne & Wiener, 2000, Stone & La Greca, 1990, Bakker & Bosman, 2003 [19,20,21]. Whilst the results from the studies contradict the contact hypothesis, it remains unclear what causes the underrepresentation in the popular group.…”

“…Two assumptions have been investigated and tested: "the students' level of academic achievement, and status as "a child with LD" contributing to a lower level of acceptance" (Bakker, et al, 2007, p. 48) [15]. The evidence from Bakker and Bosman's (2003) [21] study supported the former while Wiener, Harris and Shirer's (1990) [22] evidence supported the latter. Bakker and Bosman (2003) [21] found that socio-emotional well-being of children with LD was more positive in special education schools than in general education settings.…”