Cognitive Algebra Underlying Special Education Teachers’ and Psychology Students’ Attitudes Towards School Inclusion of People with Intellectual Disability
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6000/2292-2598.2014.02.01.4Keywords:
Intellectual disability, school inclusion, cognitive algebra, attitudes, special education teachersAbstract
Attitudes towards regular school inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities (ID) are affected by factors such as disability severity, educational level, and teacher experience. Nevertheless, the ways that teachers integrate these factors to form inclusion judgments remains unclear. The current paper explores what systematic cognitive algebra rules are used to cognitively integrate this set of inclusion factors by special education teachers and psychology students. To do so, 469 special education teachers and psychology students were asked to take part in two experimental cognitive algebra studies. In each study, participants had to read a set of school inclusion scenarios and rate the probability that a scenario actor with ID could be successfully integrated into a regular school program. To this purpose, factor effects on successful school inclusion and ID related to individuality, situational aspects, and contextual considerations (e.g., school environment, grade level taught) were explored. Results suggested that participants showed attitudes to school inclusion ranking from light to moderate positive values. Situational factors, as well as context factors, were judged to be more significant than other factors in elementary education. These factors were integrated by following a cognitive summative rule. Overall, judgment for successful school inclusion follows a summative rule to integrate sources of information. This rule is maintained irrespective of the disability under consideration. However, valuation of each source of information does depend on the type of the current study sample. Implications of these results for inclusion of people with disabilities in regular schools are discussed in this paper.
References
World Health Organization. World report on disability. Author 2011 [cited 2012 November 20]: from: http://www.who.int/ disabilities/world_report/2011/en/
Corrigan PW. Mental health stigma a social attribution: Implications for research methods and attitude change. Clin Psychol-Sci Pr 2000; 7(1): 48-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.7.1.48 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy/7.1.48
Corrigan P, Watson AM. Understanding the impact of stigma on people with mental illness. World Psychiatry 2002; 1(1): 16-20.
Alahbabi A. K-12 Special and general education teacher´s attitudes toward the inclusion of students with special needs in general education classes in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Int J Spec Educ 2009; 24(2): 42-54.
Ross-Hill R. Teacher attitude towards inclusion practices and special needs students. J Res Spec Educ Needs 2009; 9(3): 188-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2009.01135.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2009.01135.x
Kalyva E, Gojkovic D, Tsakiris V. Serbian teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion. Int J Special Education 2007; 22(3): 31-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250701430869
Gaad E. Cross-cultural perspectives on the effect of cultural attitudes towards inclusion for children with intellectual disabilities. Int J Inclus Educ 2004; 8(3): 311-328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1360311042000194645 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360311042000194645
Mahat M. The development of a psychometrically-sound instrument to measure teachers’ multidimensional attitudes toward inclusive education. Int J Spec Educ 2008; 23(1): 82-92.
Waddington EM, Reed P. Parents’ and local education authority officers’ perceptions of the factors affecting the success of inclusion of pupils with autistic spectrum disorders. Int J Spec Educ 200; 21(3): 151-164.
Malinen O, Savolainen H. Inclusion in the east: Chinese students’ attitudes towards inclusive education. Int J Spec Educ 2008; 23(3): 101-109.
Al-Zyoudi M. Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education in Jordanian schools. Int J Spec Educ 2006; 21(2): 55-62.
Westwood PS. Making special schools ordinary: is this inspirational or confused thinking? Int J Spec Educ 2001; 16(1): 7-21.
Fontana D, Lari Z. The Curriculum in Special Needs Education in Pakistani schools. Int J Spec Educ 2001; 16(1): 21-41.
Leyser Y, Kepperman G, Keller R. Teacher attitudes toward s mainstreaming: A cross-cultural study in six nations. Eur J Spec Needs Educ 1994; 98(1): 1-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0885625940090101 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0885625940090101
Florez GMA, Aguado DAL, Alcedo RMA. A review and analysis of programmes promoting changes in attitudes towards people with intellectual disability. Annuar Clin Health Psych 2009; 5: 81-94.
Gao W, Mager G. Enhancing pre-service teachers’ sense of efficacy and attitudes toward school diversity through preparation: a case of one U.S. Inclusive teacher education program. Int J Spec Educ 2011; 26(2): 92-107.
Oreshkina M. Education of children with disabilities in Russia: on the way to integration and inclusion. Int J Spec Educ 2009; 24(3): 110-120.
Raver SA. India: training teachers for children with Mental retardation. Int J Spec Educ 2001; 16(1): 54-67.
Gaad E, Khan L. Primary mainstream teacher´s attitudes towards inclusion of students with special education needs in the private sector: A perspective from Dubai. Int J Spec Educ 2007; 22(2): 95-109.
Scruggs TE, Mastropieri MA. Teacher perceptions of mainstreaming/inclusion 1958-1995: A research synthesis. Except Children 1996; 63(1): 59-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299606300106
Cook B. A comparison of teachers' attitudes toward their included students with mild and severe disabilities. J Spec Educ 2001; 34(4): 203-213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002246690103400403 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002246690103400403
Anderson NH. Methods of information integration theory. New York: Academic Press 1982.
Anderson NH. A functional theory of cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum 1996.
Morales GE. Functional measurement to cognitive mechanisms underlying attitudes toward sexuality and intellectual disability: New empirical directions. In: Peterson NE, Campbell W, editors. Sexuality: Perspectives, Issues and Role in Society. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 2012; pp. 29-54
Anderson NH. Unified social cognition. USA: Taylor & Francis Group, L.L. 2008.
Guedj M, Muñoz-Sastre MT, Mullet E, Sorum PC. Is it acceptable for a psychiatrist to break confidentiality to prevent spousal violence? Int J Law Psychiatr 2009; 32(2): 108-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2009.01.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2009.01.003
Falconi A, Mullet E. Cognitive algebra of love through the adult life. Int J Aging Hum Dev 2003; 57(3): 275-290. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/NPQH-MDLX-F48U-AA35
Neto F, Mullet E. Decision making as regards migration: Wage differential, job opportunities and the network effect. Acta Psychol 1998; 98(1): 57-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(97)00035-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(97)00035-8
Farkas AJ. Cognitive algebra of interpersonal relationship. In: Anderson NH, editor. Contributions to information integration theory. Vol. 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum 1991; pp. 43-99.
Guillet L, Hermand D, Mullet, E. Cognitive processes involved in the appraisal of stress. Stress Health 2002; 18(2): 91-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smi.927 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.927
Lazreg CK, Mullet E. Judging the pleasantness of form–color combinations. Am J Psychol 2001; 114(4): 511-533. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1423608 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1423608
Mullet E, Morales MGE, Makris I, Rogé B, Munoz-Sastre M. Functional measurement: an incredibly flexible tool. Psicologica 2012; 33: 631-654.
Falconi A, Mullet E. Cognitive algebra of love through the adult life. Int J Aging Hum Dev 2003; 57: 277-292. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/NPQH-MDLX-F48U-AA35 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/NPQH-MDLX-F48U-AA35
Esterle M, Muñoz-Sastre MT, Mullet E. Judging the acceptability of sexual intercourse among persons with learning disabilities: French lay people’s viewpoint. Sex Disabil 2008; 26(4): 219-227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11195-008-9093-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11195-008-9093-9
Morales MGE, Lopez REO, Esterle M, Muñoz-Sastre MT, Mullet E. Judging the acceptability of sexual intercourse among people with learning disabilities: A Mexico-France comparison. Sex Disabil 2010; 28(2): 81-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11195-010-9147-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11195-010-9147-7
Morales GE, Lopez EO, Mullet E. Acceptability of sexual relationships among people with learning disabilities: Family and professional caregivers’ views in Mexico. Sex Disabil 2011; 29: 165-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11195-011-9201-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11195-011-9201-0
Hervé C, Mullet E, Sorum PC. Age and medication acceptance. Exp Aging Res 2004; 30(3): 253-273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03610730490447886 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03610730490447886
Makri I, Mullet E. Judging the pleasantness of contour–rhythm–pitch–timbre musical combinations. Am J Psychol 2003; 116(4): 581-611. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1423661 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1423661
Simeone A, Hermand D, Mullet E. Judging the probability to be infected through sexual contact. Risk Health Safety Environ 2001; 12: 255-280.
Mullet E, Sorum PC, Teysseire N, et al. Functional Measurement in the Field of Empirical Bioethics. Psicologica 2012; 33: 665-681.
Morales GE, Lopez EO. Down syndrome, beyond the intellectual disability: persons with their own emotional world. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 2013.
Morales GE, Lopez EO, Charles DJ, Castro C, Sanchez MP. Parental and educators´ judgments and attitudes toward life challenges of persons with intellectual disability: functional measurement contributions to special education from a cognitive algebra approach. In Thurgood A, Schuldt K, Eds. Caregivers: Challenges, Practices and Cultural Influences. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 2013; pp. 97-117.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
