Aspiring Elementary Teacher's Inclusion Conclusion Prior to Coursework

By determining preservice teachers’ prior knowledge, concerns, and preconceptions regarding the inclusion of students with special needs prior to beginning their first college course in Teaching Elementary Students with Special Needs, professors can better determine what to include in the university curriculum. The “Inclusion Conclusion” was based on surveys that were completed by 53 future elementary teachers. A general inductive approach to categorizing and reporting the qualitative data was utilized. Prior knowledge of people with special needs, based on experience and coursework, was examined. The students highlighted concerns about inclusion that included fear and intimidation, lack of experience, meeting the students’ needs, level of patience, peer reaction, and empathy. In this qualitative article, the preservice teachers also outlined their coursework needs as: observations/field experiences, understanding laws and IEPs, practical strategies, and preservice curriculum. Aspiring Elementary Teacher’s Inclusion Conclusion Prior to Coursework Salend (2001) explains that inclusion is an attempt to "establish collaborative, supportive, and nurturing communities of learners that are based on giving all students the services and accommodations they need to learn, as well as respecting and learning from each other's individual differences" (p. 5). A mainstreamed student with special needs is educated partially in a special 1 Hipsky: Aspiring Elementary Teacher's Inclusion Conclusion Prior to Cours Published by CORE Scholar, 2007 education program. Inclusion is full placement in general education to the maximum extent possible (Idol, 1997). Kavale and Forness (2000) emphasized that "inclusion is not something that simply happens, but something that requires careful thought and preparation . implemented with proper attitudes, accommodations, and adaptations in place" (p. 287). In 1994, the American Federation of Teachers reported that only 22% of teachers in inclusive classrooms said that they had received special training, and only half of those teachers felt that their training was “good”. There is some evidence to support the notion that general education teachers have a lack of training and insufficient skills to adequately serve students with exceptional needs (Houck & Rogers, 1994; Lieber et al., 2000; Schumm et al., 1995; Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2000; Salend, 2001; Sprague & Pennell, 2000). Typically, preservice teachers had only one course focused on exceptional children (Tomlinson, 1999). Future teachers need more opportunities to work with exceptional learners in their field experiences so that the skills learned during coursework can be practiced in a real world setting. There is a positive correlation between special education training and attitudes toward disability (Leyser & Tappendorf, 2001). If new teachers finish preservice education programs without developing a positive attitude toward people with disabilities, their attitude will be difficult to change and experiences as teachers in inclusive schooling will not be as successful (Tait &Purdie, 2000). Legal Basis for a Need for an Understanding of Inclusion In 1975 when President Ford signed into law PL 94-142, the Education for all Handicapped Children Act did more than provide that a free public education in the least restrictive environment for children with exceptionalities. PL 94-142 (which is now referred to as IDEA) explains that consultations among parents, teachers, psychologists, and physicians are required to set up an Individualized Educational Program (IEP) for each child which, taking into consideration the child’s needs, potential, and disabilities, include a statement of goals and the services to be provided to help reach those goals 2 Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 1 [2007], Art. 3 https://corescholar.libraries. wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss1/3 (Snyder, 1999). There are many cases that cite the law’s preference for the education of students working along side their peers through inclusion (Honig v. Doe, 1988; Sacramento City Unified School District Board of Education v. Rachel H., 1994; Taylor v. Board of Education, 1986). Inclusion practices are continuing to grow, with approximately 75% of students with disabilities educated in general education classrooms (U.S. Department of Education, 2000). Preservice Teachers Views of Inclusion Common concerns of most first-year teachers include: pedagogical issues, lack of administrative support, and the need for both materials and appropriate planning times are regardless if they are trained for regular or special education (Renick, 1996; Holloway, 2002). “Teacher education programs are in a position to ensure that preservice teachers acquire the knowledge, dispositions, and performances required to succeed in educating students with disabilities before they get to the classroom” (Turner, 2003, p. 492). Studies of Aspiring and Current Teachers and their Views of Preservice Special Education Training Ivey and Reinke (2002) surveyed 52 preservice teachers about their attitudes towards inclusion of students with special needs prior to and following their participation in a sixth grade outdoor education program. Ivey and Reinke stated that, “Exposure to special needs children has been limited for many of the pre-service teachers. Anxiety and apprehension are common feelings for those who have not worked with this population prior. ” After working with the students with disabilities the preservice teacher’s concerns decreased and confidence increased regarding inclusion. Kamens & Casale-Giannola’s (2004) qualitative study focused on the impact of the role of student teachers and the implications of the inclusion experience for teacher education programs. They explored the experiences of general education and special education preservice student teachers as they began to encounter the changing roles of teachers in inclusive classrooms. Kamens and Casale3 Hipsky: Aspiring Elementary Teacher's Inclusion Conclusion Prior to Cours Published by CORE Scholar, 2007 Giannola learned that providing opportunities to student teachers to practice co-teaching and experience both general and special education roles increased confidence related to inclusive practice. Alghazo and colleagues (2003) used a demographic survey and the Attitudes Towards Disabled Persons (ATDP) scale to assess the attitudes of Arab preservice educators towards persons with disabilities. The results indicated that the overall attitudes of educators towards students with exceptionalities were negative. Lanier and Lanier (1996) studied effects of twenty-eight teachers' classroom experiences on their perceived ability to include exceptional needs students in the regular classroom. The survey required the individual scoring of 60 separate classroom scenarios involving special needs students. It was taken both prior to a preservice teacher college class on including exceptional students in the regular education class, and also after three years of teaching. 88% of the teachers that were surveyed revealed that inclusion was acceptable in the classroom. The study revealed that as long as future teachers complete adequate introductory education courses their views on the possible inclusion of special students into the regular classroom will remain stable as they gain experience over time. Andrews (2002) examined the use of Web-enhanced instruction and an inclusion model case study to teach 40 preservice teachers to adapt inclusive instruction for included students with disabilities and limited proficiency in English. The study acknowledged that feedback by the field from a teacher who was experiencing inclusion issues made it possible to use a real-life case and to provide mentoring feedback from the actual case teacher on the Web. Carrington and Brownlee (2001) studied ten preservice teachers from a large university in Australia and their development regarding attitudes toward people with disabilities during a semesterlong unit. Semi-structured interviews and journals indicated that the students developed a more positive attitude and became more comfortable after interacting with the teaching assistant who had a 4 Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 2, No. 1 [2007], Art. 3 https://corescholar.libraries. wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss1/3 physical disability during the semester and the learning experience improved their knowledge about disability issues. Burke and Sutherland (2004) established that there is a statistically significant relationship difference in beliefs about preparation depending on the point that the students are in during their training. The preservice teachers assumed that their preparation programs really prepared them to work with the disabled whereas inservice teachers who are in the actual classroom did not deem that they had been well prepared. Shade and Stewart's (2001) study stated that teachers report frustration, fear, and inadequacies towards inclusive practices in the classroom. However they also stated that a single course could significantly change preservice teachers' attitudes toward the inclusion of children with mild disabilities in the general education classroom. Theoretical Framework for the Preparation of Aspiring Teachers for Inclusion By examining the prior studies of preservice teachers through a constructivist lens such as Vygotsky’s (1978), one can see that in order to help students to advance beyond their present level of development and understanding of inclusion the future teachers need to be able to interact with more experienced peers, professors, and teachers in the field. These constructivist underpinnings are reflected by Harrington's (1994), statement that, "Teaching education is not about knowledge but, rather, about knowing" (p. 190). Preservice education programs preparing for inclusion must go beyond just knowledge from text to helping to guide the future