Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Australia and New Zealand Joumal of Developmental Disabilities 1994,Vo1. 19, No. 1, 11-23
ATTRIBUTIONS OF THE SOCIAL
ACCEPTANCE AND INTEGRATION
OF CHILDREN WITH MILD
INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY
C h r i s For l in 1
University of Western Australia
P e t e r C o l e z
Edith Cowan University
One hundred and fifty regular class grade six and seven children responded to a magnitude scale instrument after viewing a video depicting a teacher interviewing a student playing the role of a target child with a mild intellectual disability. The study was conducted in two schools, one traditional, the other progressive. Subjects (male and female) were randomly exposed to one of two teacher attitude conditions (positive or neutral) and one of two child attitude conditions (confident or non-confidetu). The social acceptance of a child with a mild intellectual disability was seen to be dependent upon an interaction reflected in the school attended, the teacher's attitude and the regular class children's gender. Similarly, acceptance of integration was dependent upon the school attended, the teacher's attitude and the target child's attitude. These interactions highlight the importance of the school factor and the teacher's attitude on regular class peers' attributions of children with a mild intellectual disability. Discussion focuses on the implications of the findings for the success of current integration policies.
Service delivery in special education has changed dramatically in the last twenty years. During the 1970s and 1980s children with a mild disability were increasingly integrated into regular classrooms. Following the implementation o f Public Law 94-142 (1975) in the U S A and the Education Act (1981) in the UK, which supported the principles of integration, many other countries enacted policies requiring the inclusion of students with a disability in regular classrooms. Mainstreaming is now considered the least reswictive placement for many children with a disability.
Attitudes held by persons without a disability involved in the integration process are important i f children with a disability are to be accepted into regular classrooms and if schools are to cater for every child's special needs and encourage "the provision of a real opportunity to become independent" (Beazley, 1984, p. 301 ). The ultimate success or failure of the in tegration policy is dependent to a large degree on the level o f acceptance by persons most closely associated with students with a disability. Especially important in this regard are the attitudes of regular class teachers and their peers.
Address for correspondence: IChris Forlin, Graduate School of Education, The University of Western Australia Nedlands WA 6009 Australia 2peter Cole, Professor of Education, Edith Cowan University Churchlands WA 6018 Australia
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
12 ATTRIBUTIONS OF SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE AND INTEGRATION
Many factors influence the integration process. Successful integration is determined to some degree by the first contact established between children with a disability and their non- handicapped peers (Siperstein & Bak, 1985). If students with a mild intellectual disability am socially competent, then their level of acceptance by regular class peers is likely to increase, whereas if the same students are socially incompetent, social rejection is the likely outcome (Gottlieb, Semmel, & Veldman, 1978). First impressions of behaviour patterns of these children are especially influential in determining subsequent social status within the regular class (Johnson & Johnson, 1984). Positive attitudes towards children with a mild intellectual disability have been linked to perceived similarities in adjustment, background and interests (Bak & Siperstein, 1987; Fox, 1989). Regular class students' understandings of the concept of intellectual disability and associated behaviours are important in this context (Goodman, 1989). Regular class students sometimes express stereotypic expectations towards these children if countervailing action is not taken to change negative attitudes (Miller, Malcame, Clarke, Lobato, Fitzgerald, & Brand, 1989).
If regular class students have a good knowledge and understanding of handicapping conditions, their attitudes toward low achievement am often more accepting (Hanrahan, Goodman, & Rapagna, 1990). Labelling a child with a disability does not necessarily influence attitude development (Budoff & Siperstein, 1982), but perceptions of competence in academic work predict more positive attitudes (Gottlieb, 1974). Increased tolerance and acceptance of children with a disability tends to occur when students exhibit withdrawn tendencies rather than aggressive behaviour (Bak & Siperstein, 1986). If a physical disability is linked with mild intellectual disability, there is often an increased level of social acceptance ffurnham & Gibbs, I984). Many researchers have suggested that an increase in the physical proximity between regular school children and children with a disability, by itself, is not sufficient to promote acceptance of children with a mild intellectual disability, nor does such action lead to the success of the integration process (Voeltz, 1980; Hayes &Gunn, 1988; Fox, 1989). However, participation in intervention programs which directly structure the interaction between people with and without disability has led to significant increases in accepting attitudes towards people with a disability (Gething, 1984; Re, 1987).
The importance of the attitudes of principals, teachers and school psychologists towards the integration of children with an intellectual disability has been highlighted by several Australian researchers (Center, Ward, Parmenter, & Nash, 1985; Center & Ward, 1987; Center & Ward, 1989). Integration has been shown to be most successful when teachers show positive attitudes towards the implementation of an integration policy (Mandell & Swain, 1978). Research on teachers' attitudes has endeavoured to establish the factors that determine these positive attitudes. The important factors in this relationship appear to be the degree of impairment of the students (Bochner & Pieterse, 1989), the level of support offered to the regular class teacher, teacher education programs, both preservice and inservice (Harvey & Green, 1984), the age of the children in the program (Larrivee & Cook, 1979) and class size (Mandell & Strain, t978). Johnson and Johnson (1984) found teachers' attitudes were strongly related to the kinds of processes used to implement and structure integration programs. A high level of cooperation between special and regular principals has led to positive attitudes about the type and amount of integration occurring (Bain & Dolbel, 1991). Teachers' attitudes have also been found to be a strong predictor of teachers' performance in programs of integration (Thousand & Burchard, t990) and have been influential in determining levels of acceptance of students with a mild intellectual disability (Sykes, 1989).
It has been suggested that teachers have the ultimate responsibility for the success of integration. Cohen and Cohen (1986) have stated that"the success or failure of integration schemes must depend very significantly, in the last resort, on the beliefs, values and attitudes of teachers" (p. xix). There
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
FORUN & COLE 13
is substantial evidence to suggest that there is a close connection between beth teachers' and regular school children's attitudes towards children with an intellectual disability, and that children's attitudes are influenced by their teachers' attitudes (Goodman, 1990).
Different school behaviours and differences in attitudes contribute to a general overall school effect. The British project Fifteen Thousand Hours was one of the fast studies which demonstrated convincingly that schools with different leadership styles have different effects on students' attainments Gutter, Maughan, Mortimore, & Ouston, 1979). Their findings indicated a strong probability that the associations between school processes and outcomes reflected a causal process. Such studies suggest that children's behaviours and attitudes are shaped to some degree by their experiences at school, which in turn combine to create the ethos, behaviour, attitudes and character- istics of the school as a whole. A school's ethos has been found to ameliorate pupils' deviant behaviours and attitudes ~u t~r , Maughan, Morfimore, & Ouston, 1979; Smith & Tomlinson, 1989).
Coleman, Hoffer, and Kilgore's (1982) analysis of the data of the High School and Beyond project shows that differences in policies that were employed by schools accounted for some of the variability in student behaviour and attitudes. Raudenbush and Bryk (1986) re-examined the data from this study using a hierarchical linear model and their results supported a partial school- effects explanation, with students' attitudes linked to school characteristics. Similar results have since been found by Jenson (1986), and Newman, Rutter and Smith (1989).
The present research reports on aninvestigation oftheeffect ofschool attended, teachers' attitudes, self-attitudes of children with a mild intellectual disability and gender differences of regular students' attributions to children with a mild intellectual disability. The primary focus was on the effect of the school factor as a critical determinant of the expressed attributions of primary school children. The degree to which the school attended and the subject's gender affect students' attributions were examined separately for the three dependent variables of social acceptance, integration and academic competence.
METHOD
Two south-east metropolitan primary government schools in Perth, Western Australia, were chosen for this study. No education support centres or units for children with a disability were attached to these schools. The schools were selected because of their organizational differences, espeeiallyin the area of management and discipline.
The first schoo 1 w as quite large with 389 pupils and 18 staff. The school was a well preserved early Australian federation style btfilding with recent additions and excellent facilities throughout. While the area was close to the city and contained a large number of newly constructed fairly expensive apartments, the majority of the children came from families who lived in the older homes surrounding the school. There was a high proportion of single parent families and families where both parents worked.
This school was organized on a progressive model. It encouraged a student-centred focus towards behavioural management and advocated a children's needs and rights policy. All planning and programming was child-orientated with a focus on developing the children's positive attitudes to school. Academic achievement was encouraged and a holistic approach to education was seen as important. Year seven students were actively involved in school policy development and several were selected by their peers each semester to act as school leaders. The homework policy in the
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
14 ATTRIBUTIONS OF SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE AND INTEGRATION
early years was informal and parents were encouraged to make these periods enjoyable limes for sharing play and work experiences. In later years homework was directed to skills practice and project work. There was a very active and supportive parent-teacher association and the school conducted on-going serf-esteem programs for the staff, students and parents. The school offered a large selection of extra-curricular activities, which were well supported by staff, students and parents.
The second schoolwas smaller with 225 pupils and 14 staff. The buildings were set around acenWal quadrangle. This school was in the same educational region as the fn'st school but situated further from the city. The homes in this area were mostly built at the same lime as the school and were on traditional suburban blocks. The school contained a number of migrant children from diverse backgrounds in the early primary years. Many parents were single mothers and the employment level was fairly low.
This school was selected because it demonstrated a more traditional teaching approach. The school discipline policy had a teacher-directed emphasis, involving reinforcement offered in the form of stickers, faction points and praise. A top-down model of leadership was apparent and a benevolent authoritarian teacher-dominated approach to discipline and behaviour problems was observed, The students were not activelyinvolved in decision-making aboutpolicy or discipline. There was a general lack of parental involvement in the school. The school' s maj or goal for the year was to improve parent participation, and they were working to generate enthusiasm from the parents. A newly formed parent council had recently conducted its first meeting. The homework policy was based on a natural enthusiasm approach and accepted by the children on a 'need to learn' basis. A few students were involved with weekend sports which were coached by one parent.
The subjects were 150regular year six and year seven school children randomly drawn from both schools. The mean chronological age of the students from the progressive school was 11 years 4 months. The mean chronological age of the students from the traditional school was 11 years 7 months. There were 74 male students and 76 female students in the sample.
Procedure
The research was designed to examine subjects' responses to specified behaviours exhibited by a teacher and a target child. A video-tape of a teacher interviewing the target child was made for use in the study. The experimenter acted the role of the teacher and a normal 11-year-old female acted the role of the target. The target child was from another suburb and was not known to any of the subjects. A video script was written to introduce a young girl (called Annie) to the subjects. The intention was to prompt responses from the subjects regarding their attributions to the target child. For all conditions the target was introduced to the subjects as a mentally retarded student "who may be joining their class". The label mentally retarded was suggested by the schools as being one which the students were familiar with.
The subjects were randomly assigned to four experimental treatment groups, each group viewing a different video presentation. The following four video combinations were used: for Presentation A positive teacher/confident target child model; for Presentation B a positive teacher/non- confident target child model; for Presentation C a neutral teacher/confident target model and for Presentation D a neutral teacher/non-coniident target model. The videos were presented to each group by the experimenter.
For the positive teacher condition, the video displayed the teacher presenting a positive image and being supportive of the target child. The teacher showed a positive attitude towards the child's ability to cope in an integrated setting. The teacher used body language to express enthusiasm for
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
FORUN & COLE 15
this placement and conveyed support for the possible placement of the target in a regular classroom.
For the neutral teacher cond/tion, the video depicted the teacher demonstrating a non-supportive attitude to integration of the target child. No sign was given to the subjects that the target child could cope in aregular classroom. The teacher's body language did not encourage acceptance of Annie into the regular classroom and no expression of support was presented.
For the confident target child condition, the video displayed the target child portraying a highly confident attitude to the proposed integration into a regular class. She depicted a child happy and excited about joining a new class and keen to meet her new peers.
For the non-confident target child condition, the video depicted the target child showing no visual expression of confidence, and no overt desire to meet her new class. She gave no indication of desire to join the class and spoke in a bland disinterested manner.
Magnitude scales
Three eight-item scales were constructed using a magnitude scaling technique (Lodge, 1981) to examine the subjects' attributions to the target on three dependent variables. The social acceptance scale requested information on the subjects' social acceptance of Annie. This scale contained questions of the kind "How much world you like to make Mends with Annie?" and "How much would you like to sit next to Annie?". The integration scale requested information on the subjects' attributions of how Annie would react to her new surroundings. This scale contained questions of the kind: "How much do you think Annie will like her new school?" and "How much do you think Annie will like recess?". The academic competence scale requested inform ation on the subjects' attributions to the target child's likely performance on academic school tasks. This scale contained questions of the kind: "How well do you think Annie will do in mathT' and "How well do you think Annie do in reading?".
The items were written according to the criteria suggested by Kerlinger (1986). The first item on each scale required subjects to indicate their attributions towards an ' average' new child. This formed the reference line. The following seven items required the subjects to rate the target child compared to their attributions towards the 'average' child. These formed the response lines. A magnitude value was calculated to express the relationship between each subject' s reference line and the mean of their response lines (relative to one) for each of the three scales. After the log transformations for each scale, a magnitude value greater than one indicated a more positive response to the target child than to an average child and a magnitude value less than one indicated a more negative response. The refiability of each scale was calculated using coefficient alpha (Cronbach, 1951 ). The reliability of the magnitude scale for the dependent variable Social Acceptance was 0.92, for the dependent variable Integration was 0.96, and for the dependent variable Academic Competence was 0.94.
The two experimental variables were the target teacher's attitude condition (positive, neutral) and the target child's attitude condition (confident, non-confident). The two classification variables were gender (male, female) and the subjects' school (progressive, traditional). A randomized blocks design was employed to test the hypotheses. Data from the 150 primary school subjects were analysed using the Super ANOVA statistical analysis program. The results of the analysis with respect to the three dependent variables (social acceptance, integration and academic competence) are presented below.
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
16 ATTRIBUTIONS OF SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE AND INTEGRATION
RESULTS
The three dependent variables of social acceptance, integration and academic competence are analysed separately. Univariate analysis of variance was used to test the hypotheses.
Attributions of social acceptance
The three-way interaction between the school factor, teacher's attitude factor and students' gender factor for the dependent variable of social acceptance was significant (F[1,133] = 5.45, p < 0.05). Male subjects from the progressive school expressed a lower level of response towards the target child when the teacher's attitude was positive (M= 0.68, SD= 0.63) than when the teacher's attitude was neutral (M = 1.23, SD = 1.73). In the traditional school a reverse effect was noted for male subjects with the response being lower for the teacher' s neutral attitude (M= 0.97, SD = 0.61 ) than for the teacher's positive attitude (M = 1.84, SD = 1.96). Female subjects from both schools exhibited similar levels of social acceptance towards the target child, irrespective of the teacher's attitude (see Table 1). Figure 1 depicts the key findings.
Table 1
Means Table for Individual Cells for Dependent Variable: Social Acceptance
Teacher attitude
Gender positive N neutral N
Progressive School
Female 23 hi 1.13 1.17 SD 0.29 0.35 Male 22 M 0.68 1.23 SD 0.63 1.73
Traditional School
Female 16 hi 1.13 1.27 SD 0.45 0.57 Male 14 hi 1.84 0.97 SD 1.96 0.61
22
24
15
14
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
FORUN & COLE 17
The interaction between the school factor and teacher's attitude factor (F( 1, 133) = 4.21, p < 0.05) was significant, as was the interaction between gender and child's attitude factor (F(1, 133) = 6.03, p < 0.05). These effects were confounded by the higher-order three-way interaction already reported. Differences in gender, school attended and teacher's attitude appeared to affect students' attributions in a complex manner. Overall, female subjects from both schools demonstrated similar levels of social attribution to the child with a mild intellectual disability, regardless of teacher attitude. Male subjects' social acceptance of the child with a mild intellectual disability showed a different pattern of responses between schools, and was conditional upon the teacher's attitude. No other interactions or main effects were significant for the dependent variable of social acceptance.
,13
£)
3,0"
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5 I I I I
Neutral Positive Neutral Positive
(Teacher's Attitude) (Teacher's Attitude)
Progressive School Traditional School
Subject's Gender
Male
Female
Figure 1. Plot indicating the interaction among school, teacher and gender variables for the dependent variable Social Acceptance
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
18 A'n'RIBUTION$ OF SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE AND INTEGRATION
Attributions of integration
The three-way interaction between the factors of school type, teacher's attitude and child's attitude for the dependent variable of integration was significant (F(1, 134) = 7.35, p < 0.05). This result differs from the pattern of the interaction for the dependent variable of social acceptance, although the teacher attitude factor and school were confounding influences in both interactions. For the neutral teacher model together with the non-confident target child, subjects from the progressive school and the traditional school did not differ in their attributions of the mildly intellectually disabled child's ability to integrate (see Table 2). Subjects from the progressive school gave a lower rating for the neutral teacher model together with confident target child than did subjects from the traditional school. For the positive teacher model and confident target child a different effect was noted between schools. The subjects from the traditional school rated the child with a mild intellectual disability lower (M = 1.28, SD= 0.71) than those from the progressive school (M = 2.02, SD = 1.60).
Table 2
Means Table for Individual Cells for Dependent Variable: Integration
Teacher attitude
Target child's positive N neutral N attitude
Progressive School
Confident M 2.02 SD 1.60 Non-confident M 1.34 SD 0.47
Traditional School
Confident M 1.28 S.~ 0.71 Non-confident M 2.98 SD 4.57
23 23 1.35 0.60
22 23 1.56 0.66
15 14 1.96 1.18
15 15 1.49 1.30
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
FORLIN & COLE 19
When the target child was presented as being confident and the teacher's attitude as positive, students' attributions in the progressive school to the target child were higher. It can be seen in Figure 2 that this was not the case for students in the traditional school. Regular class students' attributions to the child with mild disability varied depending updn the teacher's attitude, the target child's attitude and school attended. It was expected that if both the teacher and the target child expressed positive attitudes about the proposed integration that regular class students would react with more favour'able attributions to the target child, but this finding was not common to both schools. There appeared to be other contextual variables that affected students' attributions, which were linked to differences in the climate of the schools as well as to the attitude of the teacher and the child with a mild intellectual disability. No other effects for the dependent variable of integration were significant.
3.0
2.5
2,0
1.5
1.0-
0.5 I I ' I l
Neutral Positive Neutral Positive
(Teacher's Attitude) (Teacher's Attitude)
Progressive School Traditional School
Target Child's Attitude
• Non-con fident
at Confident
Figure 2. Plot indicating the interaction among school, teacher and gender variables for the dependent variable Integration
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
20 ATTRIBUTION8 OF SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE AND INTEGRATION
Attributions of academic competence
There were no significant interactions or main effects for the dependent variable academic competence. This confirmed the expectation that regular class students' attribution levels of academic achievement to children with a mild intellectual disability are not affected by the teacher's and the child's different expressed attitudes. Regardless of variation in the teacher's and the child's attitudes, peers' gender or school attended, regular class students gave similar attributions of academic competence to the mildly intellectuaUy disabled child.
DISCUSSION
The results of the present study reveal complex patterns in conditions affecting students' attributions to children with an intellectual disability. The attributions of social acceptance by regular class children of the target child varied considerably between the progressive school and the traditional school, and this effect was confounded by the subjects' gender and the teacher's attitude. Female students from both types of school showed similar levels of social acceptance towards the target child with a mild intellectual disability and their attributions were not affected by the target child' s responses or the teacher's attitude. However, this was not the case for the male students. The male students from the traditional school were significantly more accepting than were the male students from the progressive school when the teacher's attitude was positive. In this instance the teachers' attitude had a significant influence on the male students' attributions towards the target child.
Complex patterns were also found for the attributions of integration by regular class children towards the child with a mild intellectual disability. The students from the traditional school were significantly more supportive of the integration of the target child when the teacher was positive, but only when the target child demonstrated a non-confident attitude towards the placement. When the child's attitude was confident, they predicted a lower degree of successful integration for the target child. In the progressive school a different result was obtained. The students' attributions toward integration were higher when the teacher demonstrated a positive attitude and the child was also confident about the proposed integration. When the child was non-confident similar attribution levels toward integration were recorded across both teacher attitude conditions.
It is too often presumed that a teacher' s attitude toward integration will independently affect re gular students' altitudes to children with a disability. It has been suggested that the type of school will independently affect students' attitudes, or that the gender of the student will independently affect outcomes. However, such simple causal models appear to have little foundation. The findings of the present research suggest that teachers' attitudes and type of school covary with outcomes, but not in a simple independent pattern. A complex pattern has been revealed with school type being a critical determinant in a complex interaction with other variables affecting the acceptance of children with a mild intellectual disability.
The implications of the results of this study should be of concem to all educators, especially teachers in schools and those involved in implementing integration policies. Success of the integration of children with a disability relies largely upon the attitudes of their non-disabled peers. The attributions made by students in respect to a new student with a disability being integrated into their school is a good indicator of their social acceptance of all children with a disability. Those responsible for integration must, therefore, look at the interaction among several of the factors described here before making recommendations for placement.
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
FORLIN & COLE 21
To what extent dimensions of organizational differences between the schools account for the different attitudes found in this study is not clear. However, the research evidence does demonstrate that it is essential to consider a school's ethos and administration policies when considering regular class students' attributions to children with a disability. While it is obvious that the school cannot be viewed in isolation, it is clear that the school effect is part of a highly multifaceted phenomenon of causal relationships.
Although previous researchers have shown significant correlations between results obtained in laboratory settings and actual classroom settings (Siperstein, Bak, & O'Keefe, 1988), concern is often expressed over the reactions of regular class children to vignettes in contrived social situations. To offset this, subjects in the present study were exposed to a an enrolment situation that is a common occurrence in schools. As far as possible the reality of the context was emphasized. In this context the teacher and target child depicted typical behaviours observed by students in schools. Similarly, it was not possible to present students with a full range of teacher attitudes that they are likely to encounter in schools. The diehotomising of the teacher's attitude into positive and neutral, while not being exactly comprehensive, did allow for comparison of pupil responses to 'average' opposing types of attitudes expressed by teachers in general.
Integration is not to be viewed as an easy option in policy making. It requires a collaborative effort between special and regular class teachers to ensure adequate time is devoted to preparing for both the special needs of children who am to be mainstreamed and the regular class children who are to accept them. Existing attitudes need to be examined and a determined effort made to establish a positive and encouraging school climate for the integration of an increasing number of children with mild intellectual disability.
REFERENCES
Bain, A., & Dolbel, S. (1991, March). Regular and special education principals' perceptions of an integration program for students who are intellectually handicapped. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 33-43.
Bak, J.J., & Siperstein, G.N. (1986). Protective effects of the label "Mentally Retarded" on children' s attitudes toward mentally retarded peers. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 91 (1), 95-97.
Bak, J. J., & Siperstein, G. N. (1987). Similarity as a factor effecting change in children's attitudes toward mentally retarded peers. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 91(5), 524-531.
Beazley, K.E. (1984). Report of the committee of inquiry into education in Western Australi¢ Perth, Western Australia: Government Printer W.A.
Bochner, S., & Pieterse, M. (1989). Preschool directors' attitudes towards the integration of children with disabilities into regular preschools in New South Wales. InternationaIJournalofDisability, Development and Education, 36(2), 133-150.
Budoff, M., & Siperstein, G. N. (1982). Judgements of EMR students toward their peers: Effects of label and academic competence. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 86(4), 367-371.
Center, Y , & Ward, J. (1987). Teachers' attitudes towards the integration of disabled children in regular schools. The Exceptional Child, 34, 41-55.
Center, Y., & Wan:l, J. (1989). Attitude, s o f school psycho lo gists towards the integration ( m ~ g ) of children with disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 36(2), 117-131.
Center, Y., Ward, J., Parmenter, J., & Nash, R. (1985). Principals' attitudes towards the integration of disabled children into regular schools. The Exceptional Child, 31, 104-113.
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
22 ATTRIBUTIONS OF SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE AND INTEGRATION
Cohen, A., & Cohen, L. (1986). Special educational needs in the ordinary school: A sourcebook for teachers. London: Harper & Row.
Coleman, J. S., Hoffer, T., & Kilgore, S. (1982).High schoolachievement. New York: Basic Books. Cronbach, L. L (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-
334. Fox, L. C. ( t 989). Peer acceptance of learning disabled children in the regular classroom. Exceptional
Children, 56(1), 50-59. Fumham, A., & Gibbs, M. (1984). School children's attitudes towards the handicapped. Journal
of Adolescence, 7, 99-117. Gething, L. (1984). Cumberland's strategy for changing attitudes towards disabled people. Journal
of the Disability Advisory Council of Australia, 1, 44-51. Goodman, LF. (1989). Does retardation mean dumb? Children's perceptions of the nature, cause,
and course of mental retardation. The Journal of Special Education, 23(3 ), 313-327. Goodman, J. F. (1990). Variations in children's conceptualizations of mental retardation as a function
of inquiry method. Journal of Child Psychology, 31 (6), 935-948. Gottlieb, L (1974). Attitudes toward retarded children: Effects of labeling and academic performance.
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 79(3), 268-273. Gottlieb, L, Semmel, M. I., & Veldman, D. L (1978). Correlates of social status among mainstreamed
mentally retarded children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(3 ), 396-405. Hanrahan, J., Goodman, W., & Rapagna, S. (1990). Preparing mentally retarded students for
mainstreaming: Priorities ofregularclass and special school teachers.AmericanJournalon Mental Retardation, 94(5), 470-474.
Harvey, D., & Green, K. (1984). Attitudes of New Zealand teachers, teachers in training and non- teachers toward mainstreaming. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 19(1 ), 34-44.
Hayes, K., & Gunn, P. (1988). Attitudes of parents and teachers toward mainstreaming. The Exceptional Child, 35(1), 31-37.
Jensen, G. F. (1986). Explaining differences in academic behaviour between public-school and catholic-school students: A quantitative case study. Sociology of Education, 59, 32-41.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1984). Classroom learning structure and attitudes toward handicapped students in mainstream settings: A theoretical model and research evidence. ERIC Document.
Kerlinger, F. N. (1988). Foundations of behavioral research (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Larrivee, B., & Cook, L. (1979). Mainstreaming: A study of the variables affecting teacher attitude. The Journal of Special Education, 13(3), 317-321.
Lodge, M. ( 1981 ).Magnitude scaling: Quantitative measurement ofopinions. Sage University paper series on quantitative applications in the social sciences. Beverly Hills & London: Sage.
MandeU, C. J., & Strain, P. S. (1978). An analysis of factors related to the attitudes of regular classroom teachers toward mainstreaming mildly handicapped children. Contemporary Educa- tional Psyehology, 3, 163-168.
Miller, C. T., Malcarne, V. L., Clarke, T., Lobato, D., Fitzgerald, M. D., & Brand, P. (1989). What mentally retarded and nonretarded children expect of one another. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 93(4), 396-405.
Newman, F., Rutter, R., & Smith, M. (1989). Organizational factors that affect school sense of efficacy, community, and expectations. Sociology of Education, 62, 221-238.
Raudenbush, S., & Bruk, A. (1986). A hierarchical model for studying school effects. Sociology of Education, 59, 1-17.
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
FORLIN & COLE 23
Re, M. ( 1987 ). Changing children' s attitudes. Interaction, 1 (4), 25- 26. Report of the committee of inquiry into the education of handicapped children & young people
(1978). Special education needs. Chairman: H.M.Wamock. London: H.M. Stationery Office. Rutter, M., Maughan, B.,Mortimore, P., &Ouston, J. (1979). Fifteen thousandhours. London: Open
Books. Siperstein, G. N. & Bak, J. J. (t985). Effects of social behavior on children's attitudes toward their
mildly and moderately mentally retarded peers. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 90(3), 319-327.
Siperstein, G. N., Bak, J. L, & O' Keefe, P. (1988). Relationship between children' s attitudes toward and theft social acceptance of mentally retarded peers. American Journal on MentaIRetardation, 93(1), 24-27.
Smith, D. L, & Tomlinson, S. (1989). The school effect. Exeter: Policy Studies Institute. Sykes, S. (1989). Integration in Victorian schools: A review of policy and progress (1984-1989).
International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 36(2), 85-106. Thousand, J. S., & Burchard, S. (1990). Social integration: Special education teachers' attitudes and
behaviours. American Journal on MentaI Retardation, 94(4), 407-419. Voeltz, L. M. (1980). Children's attitudes toward handicapped peers. American Journal of Mental
Deficiency, 84(5), 455-464.
oo0oo,
J In
telle
ct D
ev D
is D
ownl
oade
d fr
om in
form
ahea
lthca
re.c
om b
y U
nive
rsity
of
Auc
klan
d on
12/
05/1
4Fo
r pe
rson
al u
se o
nly.
