a comparative study of attitude of … · 568 | p a g e a comparative study of attitude of primary...

568 | P a g e

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ATTITUDE OF

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS

TOWARDS INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

Prof.(Dr.) Jai Parkash1, Dr. ( Mrs.) Sushma Hooda

2

1Principal,

2Assistant Professor, JCD(PG)College of Education,Sirsa, (India)

ABSTRACT

The thinking that has developed during the last 50 years in the disability field has had significant influences not

only on special education but also on practice in regular education. Current thinking and knowledge demands

the responsibility for all the learners should remain with the regular classroom teacher. The country has

witnessed a phenomenal expansion of educational _opportunities in the post independence period. However,

disabled children have not benefited substantially from this growth in education facilities. As documented in the

National Policy on Education Programmed of Action (1986) not more than one percent of children with mental

retardation are estimated to be in schools. A person with Disability (Equal Opportunity, Protection of Rights

and Full Participation) Act, 1995, speaks about the education of children with disabilities up to the age of 18

years in an appropriate environment. In this research 100 Primary and 100 Secondary school teachers were

selected by random technique from Sirsa District schools. Teacher attitude scale towards inclusive education

authored by Dr. Sood V. & Dr. Anand Aarti was used. In this study, the statistical techniques Mean, Standard

Deviation & 't' test were used. In this study it is found that There exists significant difference, between attitudes

of Primary & Secondary school teachers towards inclusive education and secondary school teachers are having

more attitude towards inclusive education . There exists significant difference between attitudes of Male &

female Primary and secondary School teachers towards inclusive education and female Primary and secondary

school teachers are having more attitude towards inclusive education . A significant difference between attitudes

of rural & urban Primary and Secondary school teachers towards inclusive education is found . Urban Primary

and Secondary school teachers are having more attitude towards inclusive education.

KEY WORDS: Inclusive Education, Primary School Teachers, Rural, Secondary School Teachers,

Urban.

I. INTRODUCTION

Education is as old as human race it has been playing a very dominant role in bringing the desire changing in the

society since its inception. That is why the right of education finds a place constitution in constitution in

fundamental for every citizen. In 1945 the League of Nations adopted the University Declaration of Human

Rights. In the field of education, Article 26 of the Declaration proclaims the right of every citizen to an

569 | P a g e

appropriate education regardless of gender, race, color and religion. This right is also enshrined in the

constitutions of all independent nations. In almost every country, children and adults are being excluded from

formal education altogether, some of those who go to school do not complete. They are gradually and

deliberately pushed out of the school system because schools are not sensitive to their learning styles and

backgrounds. In gesture of sympathy some children are sorted out into categories and placed in separate special

schools, away from their peers. This has led to the development of two separate systems of education within

countries, regular and special education. However, in recent years the rational for having two parallel national

systems of education has been questioned and the foundations of special education have begun to crumble.

The idea is that the concept of integration should be replaced by a move towards inclusive education. Integration

demand that "additional arrangements was made to accommodate pupils with disabilities "within a system of

schooling that remains largely unchanged", inclusive education on the other hand, aims to restructure schools in

order to respond to respond to the learning needs of all children. Thus integration calls for separate arrangements

in the regular school for exceptional children mainly those traditionally labeled as disabled, through such

practices as withdrawal, remedial education and/or mainstreaming.

However, inclusive education, in the first instance, recognizes that special learning needs can arise from social,

psychological, or disability factors, hence the use of the term "Children with special needs" rather than -"children

with disabilities." Second, it recognizes that any child can experience difficulty in learning or short-lived or long-

term, at any time during the school career and, therefore, the school must continually review itself to meet the

needs of all its learners.

Although the terms special educational needs and 'Least Restrictive Environment call for abandoning Categories

of disability and associated labels as well as increased provision in the regular class, there has not been

agreement in practice at national and local level. Inclusive education in agreement in practice at national and

local level. Inclusive education in different parts of the world led UNESCO to convene, with assistance of the

government of Spain, the 1994 World Conference at Salamanca. At the end of the conference, the Salamanca

Statement and Framework for Action was unanimously adopted by acclamation (UNESCO, 1994).

The implications for inclusive education are wide. Different countries, regional, local communities and

professionals are at different levels of Conceptualization While sonic are at the inclusive education for all, stage,

others are at the special education, stage, and still others somewhere in-between.

Inclusive schooling, on the other hand; is opposed to the concept and rat of special education. It demands that

schools should change in to r be able to meet the learning needs of all children in a given amenity. It seeks to

improve the learning outcomes of students in academic achievements, social skills and personal development.

Clearly this is the purpose of the School improvement movement, which aims to develop schools that are

effective for all. Effective schools see pupils experiencing difficulty in learning "as indicators of the need for

reform" (Ainscow, 1991). These schools are characterized by (Ainscow, 1991; Hopkins, Ainscow and West,

1994).

1. Strong administrative leadership and attention to quality of instruction.

2. Emphasis on student acquisition of basic skills.

570 | P a g e

3. High expectations for students and confidence among teachers' that they can deal with children's individual

needs.

4. Commitment to provide a broad and balanced range of curriculum experiences for all children.

5. Orderly, safe climate conducive to teaching and learning.

6. Arrangements for supporting individual members of staff through staff development, using both the

workshop and the workplace.

7. Frequent monitoring of student progress.

Providing appropriate education to mentally Retarded children is an important issue by the experts in the field. It

was realized that timely intervention could bring out improvement in the mentally challenged children could lead

to independent living to the maximum extent possible. The education of mentally challenged children includes

functional academics, social competency skills self help and recreational supportive general education

environment that includes appropriate educational and social support and services. Inclusive education has

evolved as a movement to challenge exclusionary policies and practices and has gained momentum over the past

decade. Inclusive education has become the most effective approach to address the learning needs of all the

students in regular school and classroom. UNESCO, World Bank and non-government organizations jointly

contribute to a growing consensus that all children have the right to educate together, regardless of their

disability and that inclusive education is a human rights that makes good Educational and social sense..

II. APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING INCLUSIVE EDUCATION

Shaffner and Buswell (1996), mentioned that in implementing inclusive education, attention should be paid to

three levels: the broad society and education system, the school and the classroom. As a societal and education

system level factors as the following have been identified as playing important roles: the policy context of the

wider community, collaboration between govt, agencies and between them and non-government organizations.

To bring about inclusion, according to Oliver (1996), changes must take place at all levels of society. These

include differences become positively valued education systems becoming morally committed to the integration

of all children into a single education system, school becoming welcoming environment, teacher becoming

committed to working with all children, curriculum becoming free of disability content disabled people

becoming give skills to enter the labor market.

With particular reference to the unique needs of students with mental retardation in accessing the general

curriculum. Whemeyer, Lance and Bashinski (2002), present a multistep multi-level decision-making model. It

invokes three levels of action (planning, curriculum and instruction), three levels relating to the scope of

instruction (whole school, partial school and individualized) and three levels of curriculum (adaptation,

augmentation and alteration). At one extreme, this model suggests that some students have extensive needs for

support, significant alterations to the general curriculum and individual teaching; at the other extreme, some have

only intermittent needs for support, minor adaptation to the general curriculum and Li school-wide

implementation of high quality instructional strategies.

571 | P a g e

III. JUSTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM

For this purpose it is required to know the attitude to teacher's towards inclusive education. This can give us an

insight to understand teacher's perception and enable us to take necessary steps to prepare teacher's to accept the

concept in true sense of the term. Nothing much has been done to understand teacher's attitude in this regard.

With this consideration the present study is taken up to analyze teacher's attitude about the inclusive education

for children. The researcher decided to do research on the topic A Comparative Study of Attitude of Primary

and Secondary School Teachers Towards Inclusive Education which remained untouched in Sirsa District after

consultation with my supervisor Dr. Jai Parkash, Principal, Jan Nayak (P.G.) College of Education, Sirsa

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

"A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ATTITUDE OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL

TEACHERS TOWARDS INCLUSIVE EDUCATION."

IV. OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS USED IN THIS RESEARCH

Teacher Attitude: The word attitude is define with in the frame work of social psychology as a subjective

on mental preparation for action. It defines out word and visible posture and human beliefs attitude determine

what each individual will see hear, think.

Inclusive education: Inclusive education is asset of values, principles and practices that seeks more effective

and meaningful education for all students, regardless of whether they have exllptionlity labeesor not (Micheal

F. Giangreco) (1997)

Primary School Teachers': Plan and conduct education programme for primary student to develop literacy

numeracy and physical, emotional, textual and social growth.

Secondary School Teachers': Teachers' who is teaching after middle level (secondary level) called

Secondary school teachers. Secondary school teachers educate students in grades 6-10.

V. OBJECTIVES

1. To study and compare the difference between attitudes of Primary and Secondary school teachers towards

inclusive Education.

2. To study and compare the difference between attitudes of Male and Female Primary school teachers towards


3. To study and compare the difference between attitudes of Male and Female Secondary school teachers

towards inclusive Education.

4. To study and compare the difference between attitudes of Rural and Urban Primary School teachers towards


5. To study and compare the difference between attitudes Rural and Urban Secondary school teachers towards


572 | P a g e

VI. HYPOTHESES

H1 There is no significant difference between attitudes of Primary and Secondary school teachers towards


H2 There is no significant difference between attitudes of Male and Female Primary school teachers


H3 There is no significant difference between attitudes of Male and Female Secondary school teachers


H4 There is no significant difference between attitudes of Rural and Urban Primary school teachers


H5 There is no significant difference between attitudes Rural and Urban Secondary school teachers towards


VII. DELIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The study was delimited in the following respect :

1. A sample of 200 teachers (100 Primary School teachers and 100 Secondary school teachers) was selected.

This study was restricted to Sirsa District only.

2. The investigator was used one independent variable i.e. Teacher Attitude Scale towards inclusive education

developed by Vishal Sood & Aarti Anand.

SAMPLE

100 Primary and 100 Secondary school teachers was selected by random technique from Sirsa District schools

SAMPLE DESIGN

Total Teacher 200

Total Teachers - 200

Number of students drawn form different schools are given below

573 | P a g e

VIII. TOOL USED IN THIS RESEARCH

Teacher attitude scale towards inclusive education authored by Dr. Sood V. & Dr. Anand Aarti was used.

IX. METHODOLOGY

For achieving objectives of research, the investigator was used descriptive survey method for the present study.

X. POPULATION

All the primary and secondary school teachers working in Sirsa District was constitute the population.

XI. STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES:

In this research, the statistical techniques like Mean, S.D. & 't' test technique was used.

XII. RESULTS & ANALYSIS OF DATA

“Analysis is a process which enters in one form or another from the very beginning. It may be fair to say the

research consists in general of two large steps the gathering of data and the analysis of this data. But, no amount

of analysis can validity extract from the data factors which are not present.”The interpretation of research data

cannot be considered in the abstract. In view of the diversity of the research methods used in education and the

corresponding diversity of data they seek, the interpretation of seek data is best considered with in the context of

each of the methods.

Hypothesis No. : 1 There is no significant difference between attitudes of Primary and Secondary school

teachers towards inclusive Education.

Sr. No. Name of School No of Students

1 Govt. Primary School (I), Ding Mandi 25

2 Govt. Primary School (II), Ding Mandi 25

3 Govt. Girl Primary School, Ding Mandi 25

4 Govt. Primary School, Jodhkan 25

5 Govt. Secondary School, Ding Mandi 25

6 Govt. Secondary School, Jodhkan 25

7 Govt. Secondary School, Sirsa 25

8 Govt. Secondary School, Suchan 25

Total 200

574 | P a g e

Table 1.1

Mean, S.D. 't' value of attitude of Primary & Secondary School teachers Towards inclusive

Education

Teachers N M S.D. DF 't'

Value Level of Significance

Attitude of Primary school teachers

towards inclusive education 100 117 12.88

198 5.72 Significant at both levels i.e.

.05 & .01 Attitude of Secondary school teachers

towards inclusive education 100 128 14.37

df = 198, .05 = 1.98, .01 = 2.63

Interpretation: The mean & S.D. of attitude of primary & secondary school teachers' towards inclusive

education is 117, 128 and 12.88, 14.37 respectively. The calculated 't' value is 5.72 which is more than standard

table value at df 198, which is 1.98 & 2.63 at .05 & .01 level of significance. Therefore, the hypothesis no. 1

There is no significant difference between attitude of primary and secondary school teachers towards inclusive

education is rejected. The mean value of secondary school teachers is more than primary school teachers.

Therefore it is confirmed that the attitude of secondary school teachers towards inclusive education is more than

attitude of towards inclusive education of primary school teachers.

Fig. 1.1

Hypothesis No. 2 There is no significant difference between attitudes of Male and Female Primary school


Table 1.2

Mean, S.D. and 't' value of attitude of Male and Female Primary

School Teachers Towards Inclusive Education

Teachers N M S.D. DF 't' Value Level of Significance

Attitude of Male Primary

School Teacher 50 92.12 14.68

198 3.88 Significant at both levels

i.e. .05 & .01 Attitude of Female

Primary School Teacher 50 100.67 16.46

df = 98, .05 = 1.98, .01 = 2.63

575 | P a g e

Interpretation : The mean & S.D. of attitude of male and female primary school teachers towards inclusive

education is 99.12, 14.68 and 100.67, 16.46 respectively. The calculated 't' value is 3.88 which is more than

standard table value at df 1.98, which is 1.98 & 2.63 at .05 & .01 level of significance. Therefore, the hypothesis

no. 2 There is no significant difference between attitude of primary school teachers' inclusive education is

rejected. The mean value of female primary school teachers is more than male primary school teachers.

Therefore it is confirmed that the attitude of female primary school teachers towards inclusive education is more

than male primary school teachers attitude of towards inclusive.

Fig. 1.2

Hypothesis No. 3 : There is no significant difference between attitudes of Male and Female Secondary

school teachers towards inclusive Education.

Table 1.3

Mean, S.D. and 't' value of attitude of Male and Female Primary School Teachers Towards

Inclusive Education


Attitude of Male



.05 & .01 Attitude of Female


df = 98, .05 = 1.98, .01 = 2.63

Interpretation : The mean & S.D. of attitude of male and female primary school teachers towards inclusive


standard table value at df 98, which is 1.98 & 2.63 at .05 & .01 level of significance. Therefore, the hypothesis

no. 3 There is a no significant difference between attitude of male and female secondary school teachers

inclusive education is rejected. The mean value of female secondary school teachers is more than male

secondary school teachers. Therefore it is confirmed that the attitude of female secondary school teachers

576 | P a g e

towards inclusive education is more than attitude of towards inclusive education of female secondary school

teachers.

Fig. 1.3

Hypothesis No. 4 : There is no significant difference between attitudes of Rural and Urban Primary school


Table 1.4

Mean, S.D. and 't' value of attitude of rural and urban Primary



Attitude of rural



.05 & .01 Attitude of urban


df = 98, .05 = 1.98, .01 = 2.63

Interpretation : The mean & S.D. of attitude of rural and urban primary school teachers towards inclusive



no. 4 There is no significant difference between attitudes of Rural and Urban Primary school teachers towards

inclusive Education is rejected. The mean value of urban primary school teachers is more than rural primary

school teachers. Therefore it is confirmed that the attitude of urban primary school teachers towards inclusive

education is more than attitude of towards inclusive education of rural primary school teachers.

Fig. 1.4

577 | P a g e

Hypothesis No. 5 There is no significant difference between attitudes rural and urban Secondary school teachers


Table 1.5

Mean, S.D. and 't' value of attitude of rural and urban Secondary


Teachers N M S.D. DF 't'

Value Level of Significance

Attitude of rural Secondary

School Teacher 50 90.34 13.12


.05 & .01 Attitude of urban

Secondary School Teacher 50 100.31 17.10

df = 98, .05 = 1.98, .01 = 2.63

Interpretation : The mean & S.D. of attitude of rural and urban secondary school teachers towards inclusive



no. 4 There is no significant difference between attitudes of Rural and Urban Secondary school teachers towards

inclusive Education is rejected. The mean value of urban secondary school teachers is more than rural secondary

school teachers. Therefore it is confirmed that the attitude of urban secondary school teachers towards inclusive

education is more than attitude of towards inclusive education of rural secondary school teachers.

Fig. 1.5

XIII. DISCUSSION

1. In hypothesis No. HI There exists significant difference, between attitudes of Primary & Secondary school

teachers towards inclusive education, because the calculated 't' value is more than standard table value at both

level of significance there for hypothesis No. I is rejected. The mean value of attitude of Secondary school

teachers is more than attitude of primary school teachers therefore the attitudes of Secondary school teachers is

greater than primary school teachers. This finding is supported by Sonam Bansal (2013) study on attitude of

578 | P a g e

primary school teacher towards inclusive education and in her study it was found that secondary school teachers

has more attitude towards inclusive education as compared to primary school teacher and it was also found that

urban primary teachers has the more attitude than rural primary school teacher. This might be due to the reason

that Secondary School teachers have more knowledge about the children-learning environment because of the

present day practice of inclusion of special need children.

2. In hypothesis No. H2 — There exists significant difference between attitudes of Male & female primary

school teachers towards inclusive education, because the calculated 't' value is more than standard table value at

both levels significance therefore hypothesis No. II is rejected. The mean value, of attitudes of Female primary

school teachers is more than attitude of male primary school teachers therefore the attitudes of Female Primary

School teachers' is greater than Male Primary school teachers'. So, it can be interpreted that the female teachers’

attitude is more positive towards inclusive education as compared to their counterparts. It might be due to the

reason that the female teachers are more aware about the inclusive education rather than their male counterparts.

3. In hypothesis No. H3 — There exists significant difference between attitudes of Male & Female Secondary

school teachers towards inclusive education because the calculated 't' value is more than standard table value at

both level of significance, therefore hypothesis No. III is rejected. The mean value of attitudes of female

Secondary school teachers is more than male Secondary school teachers, therefore the attitudes of female

secondary teachers is greater than Male Secondary school teachers towards inclusive education.

4. In hypothesis No. H4 — There exists significant difference between attitudes of rural & urban primary

school teachers towards inclusive education because the calculated t value is more than standard table value at

both level of significance, therefore hypothesis No. IV is rejected. The mean value of attitudes of urban primary

school teachers is more than rural primary school teachers'. Therefore, the attitude of urban primary school

teachers is greater than rural primary school teachers towards inclusive education. So, it can be interpreted that

the urban teachers’ attitude towards inclusive education is more positive in comparison to rural teachers. This

might be due to the fact that the urban teachers’ are more aware about inclusive education because in urban

schools there are more facilities for inclusive education and all the teachers using internet and media are more

aware than rural teachers.

5. Hypothesis No. H5 — There exists significant difference between the attitudes of rural & urban Secondary

school teachers towards inclusive education, because the calculated 't' value is more than standard table value at

both levels of significance, therefore hypothesis No. V is rejected. The mean value of attitudes of urban

Secondary school teachers towards inclusive education is more than rural Secondary school teachers, therefore it

is confirmed that the attitudes of urban secondary school teachers towards inclusive education in more than rural

Secondary school teachers.

XIV. CONCLUSION

To conclude it can be said that inclusive education is a mandate today. In fact inclusive education is the need of the

hour. It becomes a crucial issue in the field of education, which attracts all concerned. It is a matter of immense

pleasure that inclusive education is in a progressive way all over the world, but still there is room for improvement. To

579 | P a g e

remove the gap between inclusion and exclusion, teachers, parents, society, administrators and government should

collectively work to implement the policies of inclusive education.

XV. EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS

In this research the attitude of Secondary school teacher towards inclusive education is more than primary school

teachers' because they are more qualified & nature & aware towards inclusive education. The primary school

teachers' should be motivated to aware regarding inclusive education. The female teachers' working in upper

primary & primary school teaching has their attitude greater than male teachers' working in upper primary &

primary schools as the female more awareness regarding equality in Indian constitution & have good awareness

towards inclusive education. The male teachers' should be motivated so that they may also have greater attitude

towards inclusive education. Similarly the teachers' work upper primary & primary teachers' working in urban

areas have greater attitude towards inclusive education. As compare to primary & secondary school teachers

working in rural areas because teachers' of urban areas one having more, knowledge and qualification & have

stronger attitude towards inclusive education as compare to teachers' working in rural areas. Therefore the

teachers' working in rural areas must be motivated to aware them towards inclusive education.

XVI. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

[1]. In this research, we have selected random sample of 100 Primary school & 100 Secondary school teachers

which may be increased.

[2]. We have selected one District Sirsa of Haryana, another district may be selected.

[3]. We have selected one variable i.e. Attitude of Teachers towards Inclusive Education, another variable may

be taken for further study.

[4]. We have used mean, S.D. t test, ANOVA & ANCOVA may be used.

[5]. We have selected sample from School, sample from College, University may be taken.

XVII. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, the investigator wishes to express her reverence and thanks to God almighty, without whose

providence nothing would have been possible. Then, It is my profound privilege to express my indebtedness and

deep sense of gratitude to my Co-author Dr.(Mrs.) Sushma Hooda Assistant Professor JCD College of

Education, Sirsa for her keen interest, valuable suggestions , encouragement and above all highly inspiring

cooperation which shaped the work into present. The investigator is extremely thankful to Principal, Primary

and Secondary School Teachers , who render all possible help to collect data for the study .I would be failing in

my duties if I don’t make a mention of my parents for going through the manuscript and completing of this

study. I owe my sincere thanks to all the staff members of J.C.D. (P.G.) College of Education. Last but not the

least, I would like to thank all the concerned, who helped me directly or indirectly in the successful completion

of this research work.

580 | P a g e

REFERENCES

[1] Chatterjee & Mishra (2014). A Comparison of Teachers Attitudes towards their Included Students with ild

and Severe Disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 34(4), 203-213.

[2] Forlin, C., Keen, M., Barrett, E. (2008): The concerns of mainstream teachers: Coping with inclusivity in

an Australian context. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 55, 3, 251–264.

[3] Gaskin (2013). Techniques of Attitude Scale Construction, New York Appleton-Century Crofts Inc.

[4] Edwards, A.L. and Kilpatrick, F.P. (1948). A Technique for the Construction of Attitude Scales. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 32, 374-384.

[5] Jerlinder, K., Danermark, B., Gill, P. (2010): “Swedish Primary School Teachers’ Attitudes to Inclusion –

The Case of PE and Pupils with Physical Disabilities.” European Journal of Special Needs Education, 25,

1, 45–47.

[6] Jordan, A., Schwartz, E., McGhie-Richmond, D. (2009): Preparing teachers for inclusive classrooms.

Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 535–542.

[7] Julka, Anita (1998). Teacher Empowerment and Successful main mainstreaming of visually Imparied

Children. In Sixth Survey of Educational Research, I, 206, New Delhi: NCERT.

[8] Majda Schmidt, Ksenja Vrhovnik (2015):Attitudes Of Teachers Towards The Inclusion Of Children With

Special Needs In Primary And Secondary Schools. 51, 2, 16-30.

[9] Patton & Townsend (2005). Special Education in India- Search for Operating in Britain and India. In

sixth Survey of Educational Research, 1, 203, New Delhi: NCERT.

[10] Rangasayee & Anand (2009). Methodology of Educational Research (4th revised edition). New Delhi :

Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. Likert, R.A. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes.

Archives of Psychology, No. 140.

[11] Bansal Sonam (2013): A study on Attitude of Primary School Teachers towards Inclusive Education ,

International Journal of Education,Vol.1 55-64.

[12] Sood, Vishal, Anand Arti (2011). Teacher Attitude Scale towards Inclusive Education, (TASTIE)-

National Psychological Corporation, Bhargava Bhawan 4/230, Kacheri Ghat, Agra.

a comparative study of attitude of … · 568 | p a g e a comparative study of attitude of primary...

Documents