The validation of a scale to measure school principals' attitudes toward the inclusion of students with disabilities in regular schools

Abstract

This paper describes the validation of a 30‐item affective instrument designed initially to measure the attitudes of school principals in government schools in Queensland toward the inclusion of students with disabilities in regular schools. The original response pool consisted of 644 returns. The data validation demonstrated that this was a reliable and valid scale. Subsequent factor analyses yielded a six‐factor solution. An examination of the item metrics and an interpretation of the factor items resulted in a decision to delete six items and one factor. The final scale of 24 items and five factors has very acceptable construct validity and psychometric properties and should be valuable in further investigations of attitudes toward inclusive education.

Teacher’s Attitude Towards the Inclusion of Students With Disabilities in Regular Schools

“…A ready-made questionnaire was used as a measuring instrument. The attitude measurement instrument used in the survey was "School Principals' Attitudes toward Inclusion (SPATI)" (Bailey, 2004).…”

Attitudes of Principals Towards Students With Disruptive Behaviour: An Australian Perspective

“…Although some empirical work has addressed the views of principals (Angelides, 2012;Avissar et al, 2003;Bailey, 2004;Bailey & du Plessis, 1998;Barnett & Monda-Amaya, 1998;Center et al, 1985;Cook et al, 1999;Graham & Spandagou, 2011;Praisner, 2003), they have not experienced the same level of attention as other groups of educators. This focus on teachers has benefits by directing attention to where inclusion happens -in classrooms.…”

“…A significant body of research currently exists that highlights the views held by teachers on the assumption that the success of inclusion is dependent on teachers holding positive views (Avramidis & Norwich, 2002;Subban & Sharma, 2006). With this same principle in mind, attitudes of a full range of education professionals have also been explored, including preservice teachers (Avramidis et al, 2000a;Spandagou, Evans, & Little, 2008), school counsellors or psychologists (Center & Ward, 1989;Roberts & Smith, 1999), special education teachers (Cook, Semmel, & Gerber, 1999), students (Bunch & Valeo, 2004) and school principals (Bailey, 2004;Barnett & Monda-Amaya, 1998;Center, Ward, Parmenter, & Nash, 1985;Graham & Spandagou, 2011;Praisner, 2003). Common among many of these studies is the finding that the views of educators vary depending on the type and severity of the disability, with less positive attitudes held towards students with more severe disabilities and students with emotional and behavioural disabilities.…”

“…Bailey and du Plessis (1997) called this 'qualified inclusion ' (p. 433). Given the substantial claims in the leadership literature around principals' influence on school practice, this study operates on the simple premise posited by Bailey (2004) that 'the person with the most organisational power in the school is in the best position to adversely or positively affect inclusion policies' (p. 77). Further, the focus on regular principals acknowledges that the majority of students with disruptive behaviours are enrolled in regular schools (NSW DEC, 2011).…”

Assessing teacher attitude toward the inclusion of students with autism.

“…The first part consisted of the School Principals' Attitudes Toward Inclusion (SPA TI) scale, which is a 30-item, 5-point Likert inventory that ranged from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The reliability coefficient for the inventory was reported by Bailey (2004) at .92 with 639 respondents. The second part asked for demographic information from each principal.…”