University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Teachers' perspectives on the inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorders in the general education classroom: a gap analysis

(USC Thesis Other)

Teachers' perspectives on the inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorders in the general education classroom: a gap analysis

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 1

Teachers’ Perspectives on the Inclusion of Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the
General Education Classroom: A Gap Analysis
by
Shelley L. Morris

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2020

Copyright 2020 Shelley L. Morris
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thank you to my dissertation chair, Dr. Angela Hasan. Your genuine kindness, sense of
calm, and approachability gave me the encouragement I needed to survive the dissertation
process. I would also like to thank my dissertation committee members, Dr. Margo Pensavalle
and Dr. David Cash. Your suggestion to take a mixed methods approach to my research allowed
me to capture rich data that will be used to ignite the changes needed to improve inclusion within
my organization.
I also want to thank my principal, my team, as well as the teachers and the office staff at
my school site. You have no idea how much your words and notes of encouragement kept me
motivated to keep pushing forward.
Finally, I want to thank my family. To my children, Tate and Tabitha, you are the
inspiration in everything I do. You have been so patient, so loving, and I am so pleased to let
you know, mom is finally done with her “school project”. To my dog, Jessie, thank you for the
timely reminders to step away from my desk to play or go for a walk. To my mom and dad,
thank you for raising me to be a fighter. Because of you, I am strong, resilient, and persistent. To
my mother-in-law, I am so fortunate to have you in my life. I will always be thankful for your
never ending support and genuine interest in my research. Last but not least, to my husband,
Mike, now referred to as Mr. Dr. Morris, I could not have made it through without you. You are
my best friend, my biggest cheerleader, and I love you with all of my heart.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2
LIST OF TABLES 4
LIST OF FIGURES 6
ABSTRACT 8
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 9
Organizational Context and Mission 10
Organizational Performance Status 11
Related Literature 11
In-Service Professional Development 12
Attitudes, Beliefs, and Perceptions 13
Educational Systems and School Culture 14
Importance of Addressing the Problem 16
Organizational Performance Goal 18
Description of Stakeholder Groups 18
Stakeholders Groups’ Performance Goals 19
Stakeholder Group for the Study 20
Purpose of the Project and Questions 21
Methodological Framework 22
Definitions 22
Organization of the Project 23
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 25
Influences on Teachers’ Perspectives about Inclusion of Students with Autism 26
In-Service and Professional Development Training 26
Teachers’ Attitudes, Beliefs, and Concerns 29
Educational Systems and School Culture 33
Role of Stakeholder Group of Focus 37
Clark and Estes’ Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences Framework 38
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences 39
Knowledge and Skills 39
Motivation 42
Organization 48
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Teachers’ Knowledge 53
and Motivation and the Organizational Context
Conclusion 58
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 60
Participating Stakeholders 60
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 4

Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale 61
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale 61
Observation Sampling Criteria and Rationale 62
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale 64
Data Collection and Instrumentation 65
Data Analysis 69
Validity and Reliability 71
Credibility and Trustworthiness 72
Ethics 74
Limitations and Delimitations 76
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS 78
Participating Stakeholders 79
Results 83
Knowledge Results 83
Motivation Results 93
Organizational Results 98
Findings 106
Synthesis 111
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS 113
Organizational Context and Mission 113
Organizational Performance Goal 113
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 116
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 129
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach 145
Limitations and Delimitations 145
Recommendations for Future Research 147
Conclusion 148
REFERENCES 150
APPENDIX A 159
APPENDIX B 163
APPENDIX C 164
APPENDIX D 166
APPENDIX E 168
APPENDIX F 169
APPENDIX G 172

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 5

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Performance Goals 19
Table 2. Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments for Knowledge Gap Analysis 41
Table 3. Motivation Influences and Assessments for Motivation Gap Analysis 47
Table 4. Organizational Influences 53
Table 5. Summary of Validated and Partially Validated Influences 112
Table 6. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 117
Table 7. Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 122
Table 8. Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 127
Table 9. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 131
Table 10. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 132
Table 11. Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 133
Table 12. Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program 138
Table 13. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 140

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 6

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation within Organization 56
Cultural Models and Settings.

Figure 2. Response to item: “Please select the choice below that best describes the 79
grade level(s) you teach.”

Figure 3. Response to item: “How many years have you been teaching?” 80

Figure 4. Response to item: “Please select the choice below that best describes your 81
teaching assignment.”

Figure 5. Response to item: “Which subject areas do you currently teach? Please 82
select all that apply.”

Figure 6. Response to item: “I have a strong understanding of the behaviors of 84
students with ASD.”

Figure 7. Response to item: “Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders have the 85
requisite academic skills to be successful in a general education classroom
setting.”

Figure 8. Response to item: “The inclusion of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders 91
in the general education classroom can be disruptive to the learning of
non-disabled students in the classroom.”

Figure 9. Response to item: “Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders who learn 94
alongside their non-disabled peers in the general education classroom
demonstrate higher levels of social skills.”

Figure 10. Response to item: “Differentiating lessons to address the learning needs of 96
students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general education classroom
requires increased preparation time.”

Figure 11. Response to item: “I am confident in my ability to teach students with Autism 99
Spectrum Disorders in a general education classroom setting.”

Figure 12. Response to item: “Overall, approximately how many hours have you. 100
received training from your district to teach students with Autism Spectrum
Disorders in the general education classroom setting?”

Figure 13. Response to item: “I have received professional training in my school 101
district that has helped me to effectively address the learning needs of
students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general education classroom.”

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 7

Figure 14. Response to item: “My school district is concerned with providing the 102
best educational opportunities for students with Autism Spectrum
Disorders.”

Figure 15. Response to item: “Site administration provides me with the necessary 103
resources to meet the learning accommodations of students with Autism
Spectrum Disorders in the general education classroom.”

Figure 16. Response to item: “My school site promotes a sense of community by 104
engaging students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in activities that foster
a sense of belonging.”

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 8

ABSTRACT

This paper discusses various reasons why teachers express adverse perspectives toward
the inclusion of students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in the general education
classroom. In several surveys, teachers’ concerns have been communicated stating that ongoing
professional development is not sufficient, and the inclusion of students with ASD in the
mainstream classroom negatively impacts the learning of general education students. Additional
studies have shown that school systems do not effectively advocate the inclusion of students with
ASD which validates a culture of segregation and further marginalizes their potential for high
level learning experiences. These findings suggest that in order for students with ASD to
experience greater success in school, career, and society, educational systems must provide
professional development, and create buy-in with teachers by emphasizing and reinforcing the
importance of inclusive practices to increase equity and academic success for students with ASD
in the general education classroom.
Keywords: autism, access, equity, marginalization, training, inclusion

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 9

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

This study addresses the problem that educators express adverse perspectives towards the
inclusion of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) in the general education
classroom. The National Institute of Mental Health (2016) states that ASD is the name given to
describe a group of developmental disorders with a wide range of symptoms and skills. It is a
neurodevelopmental disability characterized by impaired social communication skills, as well as
restrictive or repetitive behaviors (American Psychological Association, 2013). Statistics from
the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2014) indicate that one in every 59 children, age
eight, has ASD, with males outnumbering females by four to one. Furthermore, incidents of
autism have increased 150% since 2000 (Autism Society of America, 2018).
According to Braunsteiner and Mariano-Lapidus (2014), inclusion is the fundamental
right of all children and adults to fully participate and contribute in all aspects of life and culture,
without restriction or threat of marginalization. The unfavorable perspectives of educators
towards inclusion is important to address because it presents a lack of educational equity, access,
and opportunity for students with ASD (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014). To ensure that
students with disabilities are provided a free and appropriate public education (FAPE), it is
recommended that they be placed in the least restrictive environment (LRE) which is often
referred to as inclusion or mainstreaming. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA) (2004) mandates that teaching children with autism is no longer the sole responsibility of
special educators, and requires all educators to focus on best practices to address the learning
needs of all students in the general education classroom. Most recently, IDEA (2015) was
amended through Public Law 114-95, named Every Student Succeeds Act. In this law Congress
states in part, “Disability is a natural part of the human experience…Improving educational
results for children with disabilities is an essential element of our national policy ensuring
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 10

equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for
individuals with disabilities.”
This problem is important to address because it is the primary role of educational
institutions to respond to the diverse learning needs of all students. Reform is necessary to
change teachers’ perspectives about the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education
classroom, and develop educational systems that properly and consistently respond to the needs,
characteristics, and individual differences of all children in a school (Avramidis & Norwich,
2002; Carter et al., 2017). From a societal standpoint, Pijl et al. (2003) found that non-disabled
students developed a positive attitude towards disabled peers as a result of an inclusive class
setting (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014). Moreover, Salend (2011), found that students
with disabilities that were educated in inclusive class settings were more likely to pass
standardized tests, earn high school diplomas, attend college, obtain jobs with higher salaries,
and live with greater independence as adults (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014).
Organizational Context and Mission

The organization studied was Inland Empire School District (IESD) pseudonym. The
district is located in Riverside County, California, United States, and serves approximately
19,000 students from preschool through twelfth grade. Nearly 80% of students qualify as Low
Income, over 30% are English Learners, and over 100 students are identified as Foster Youth.
The mission of IESD is to educate all students by providing them with unlimited learning
opportunities so they can achieve success in college, career, and in life. The overarching goals
of the district are for all students to be college and career ready, learn in a safe and inviting
school environment, and for all students to feel connected to their school community through
engaging educational practices and partnerships with parents and the community.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 11

Organizational Performance Status
The organizational performance problem driving this study is the lack of success for
students with ASD in Inland Empire School District. By May 2021, 100% of students with
disabilities (SWD), specifically students with ASD, enrolled in IESD middle and high schools
with will receive a free and appropriate public education to ensure access and equity in the least
restrictive environment. The Director of Special Education reinforced this goal as well as
teachers’ legal responsibility to provide FAPE in the LRE in January 2018. The goal was
derived through data analysis indicating that SWD/ASD who received most of their education in
a separate classroom setting were performing below standard on benchmarks and summative
assessments. The district will continue to use performance indicators such as CAASPP scores,
benchmark assessments, the California School Dashboard, and progress/grade report data to
track progress of students with disabilities/ASD who transition to the general education
classroom.
Related Literature

In 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed, followed by the
Americans with Disabilities Act Amendment (ADAA) in 2008 to protect the rights of people
with disabilities, and foster their educational and employment opportunities. Despite the
mandates of ADA, many teachers display conflicting attitudes and/or prejudices towards the
inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom (Carroll, Forlin, & Jobling,
2003; Costley, 2013; Lindsay, S., Proulx, M., Scott, H., & Thomson, N., 2014). This paper will
explore the impact of in-service professional development for teachers; their perspectives and
concerns; and the culture and educational systems of school districts and school sites regarding
the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 12

In-Service Professional Development
Current professional development does not equip teachers with the necessary skills to
teach, differentiate, and adhere to the accommodations of students with ASD in an inclusive
classroom setting, nor does it emphasize its importance. Until recently, with the Every Student
Succeeds Act (2015), there was no clarity in requirements for general education teachers to be
highly qualified to work with SWDs, yet there has been an expectation for them to teach in an
inclusive classroom (McCray et al., 2011). Sansoti and Sansoti (2012) posit that a lack of
experience working directly with students with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder
(HFASD) is commonly identified as the cause of teachers’ resistance to inclusion. They must
have a general understanding of instructional implications for students with ASD, assessment
strategies for analyzing specific support needs, and techniques known to be effective in the
improvement of behavioral, social, and academic outcomes of students with ASD (Sansoti &
Sansoti, 2012).
The link between motivation to engage in inclusionary practices is directly related to
teachers’ perceived abilities to be successful in the task, and low self-efficacy, or lack of
confidence, is attributed to teachers feeling ill-prepared to teach students with ASD (Busby et al.,
2012). Findings from McCray et al. (2011) show that limited preparation has consistently been
found to heighten fear and reduce teachers’ sense of self-efficacy when challenged with the
demands of an inclusive classroom setting. In 2009, the United States Department of Education
published statistics showing that the inclusion of SWDs had increased to 52.1% of the population
spending 79% of their educational day in the general education classroom, highlighting the need
for all teachers to be prepared to work with learners of all abilities.
A study using in-depth interviews (13 elementary school teachers in Ontario, Canada) to
explore strategies for teaching students with ASD showed that several teachers expressed that
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 13

formal training in working with children with ASD must be provided through continuing
education and teacher credentialing programs (Lindsay et al., 2014). Moreover, they conveyed
that informal training such as observing more experienced teachers who successfully meet the
educational needs of students with ASD would benefit their implementation of inclusive
practices. Studies have shown that although some teachers have positive intentions towards
inclusive practices, the outcomes of their efforts are ineffective in meeting the educational needs
of students with ASD (Busby et al., 2012). Additionally, they fail to address the social aspect of
inclusion in their classrooms that is essential to the progress of ASD learners; some stating that it
is up to the student to fit in and figure out how to work with others in group situations (Little,
2017).
In a survey of 48 American public and private higher education institutions, data indicate
that teachers did not receive instruction that was relevant to the inclusion of students with
disabilities (Carroll et al., 2003). Likewise, of 231 teachers surveyed in Northern Ireland, 96%
indicated that professional training did not adequately prepare them to meet the challenges of
inclusive education. Although some of these teachers sympathize with students with disabilities,
their lack of self-efficacy with inclusive practices has led to frustration and discomfort as they do
not know how to meet their educational needs (Carroll et al., 2003). These findings strongly
suggest that teacher professional development is directly related to teachers’ perceptions and
attitudes regarding the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education setting.
Attitudes, Beliefs, and Perceptions
Many teachers display adverse attitudes, beliefs, and concerns regarding the inclusion of
students with ASD in the general education classroom. According to Clampit et al. (2004), one
of the key elements for a successful inclusion program is the positive attitudes of teachers, and
understanding their perceptions about inclusion is a necessary step toward effective inclusionary
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 14

practices in schools (Fuchs, 2010). Numerous studies have shown that nearly 75% of teachers
reportedly believe that inclusion would not succeed, and they were not in favor of inclusion
(Fuchs, 2010; Young, Mannix McNamara & Coughlan, 2017). In some cases, general education
teachers believe that the education of students with ASD is the responsibility of special educators
(Busby et al., 2012).
Main concerns of general education teachers include: concern for students without
disabilities, the added workload/time to accommodate the learning needs of SWDs, litigation,
and how to effectively implement inclusive practices (Costley, 2013). A school district in
Florida (ADA 62,200), experienced a disproportionate increase (288%) in students being
identified with autism from 1994 to 2004. During a study of inclusive practices in this district, it
was revealed that many teachers discovered that they could not apply uniform behavioral
expectations for all students as this would be a detriment to students with ASD; on the contrary,
other teachers were concerned with accommodating the needs of students with ASD as they felt
it to be unfair to students without disabilities and it would be viewed as “preferential treatment”
(Sansoti & Sansoti, 2012). These conflicting attitudes, beliefs, and concerns about the inclusion
of students with disabilities in the general education classroom has a negative effect on the
behavior they display as the classroom teacher, student learning, and the overall success of
inclusive practices (Fuchs, 2010; Young, et al., 2017; Tonneson & Hahn, 2016).
Educational Systems and School Culture
Educational systems and the culture of school sites do not effectively advocate for the
inclusion of students with autism in the general education classroom. Inclusive education must
be understood as a school-wide philosophy that provides the support and resources needed to
provide a quality education for all students (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014; Tonnesen &
Hahn, 2016; Young et al., 2017). Notwithstanding, Robinson (2011) has likened the educational
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 15

system in the United States to that of a factory for standardization; the worth of students is based
on test scores. This system denies access to, and marginalizes SWDs as they are not afforded the
same learning experiences of students without disabilities (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus,
2014). Furthermore, Baker (2002) found that school system practices can be inflexible with
standard norms, tracking, and an emphasis on normalizing students (Connor & Baglieri, 2009).
Segregated educational settings, such as special education classrooms, put students with
ASD at a disadvantage. Findings show that students with ASD are often relocated to separate
classrooms because they are not viewed as being normal in how they speak, behave, learn, and
interact socially (Morcom & MacCallum, 2012). These students are viewed from a
clinical/medical perspective in how they can be treated, rather than looking at the educational
environment to see how students with ASD can be included and accepted (Connor & Baglieri,
2009, Rodden, Prendeville, Burke, & Kinsella, 2019). The school system itself focuses on the
needs of the whole school instead of placing focus on students as individuals; this further
promulgates the limitations in quality learning for SWDs (Connor & Baglieri, 2009). As an
example, the New York State Education Department (2013) reported that only 27% of SWDs
graduated with a regular high school diploma. Students must be granted access to a quality
education in all levels of schooling to ensure equity, access, and opportunity to SWDs. The
advocacy of inclusive practices requires all school personnel to value diversity and embrace the
differences and learning needs of all students (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014). School
districts should take steps to ensure that teachers are prepared to implement inclusion practices.
Teachers who collaborate with each other report increased self-efficacy, professional worth, and
creativity. This positive perception influences the successful application of programs and
inclusionary practices (Costley, 2013).
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 16

A key variable for success of students with ASD in inclusive settings is the overall school
environment. School site practices and policies are essential to creating an environment that is
receptive to, and accepting of, the inclusion of students with ASD in the mainstream classroom.
Over the past 10 years, school systems have been working toward the implementation and/or
betterment of inclusive practices (Crosland & Dunlap, 2012, Young, et al., 2017). Data from the
U.S. Department of Education (2010), show that participation of students with ASD in the
general education classroom for 80% of the day continues to increase. This ongoing increase
suggests that schools need to create collaboration models that bring all levels of educators from a
school site together to learn more about students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs),
and how to support their educational and social needs.
As previously stated, students with ASD benefit from learning in the general education
classroom (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014). Notwithstanding, decisions for IEPs
require the input of educators which is based on their understanding of inclusive education and
their personal beliefs about inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom
(Sansoti & Sansoti, 2012). This further impresses the importance that ongoing professional
development at the district and site levels is essential to the promotion of inclusive education for
students with ASD.
Importance of Addressing the Problem

This problem is important to solve because research indicates that students with ASD
who receive an inclusive education in the general setting have better academic outcomes than
those segregated to special education settings; experience improved social acceptance and peer
relations, increased self-esteem, and greater postsecondary success in education and the
workforce (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014; Tonnesen & Hahn, 2016). Mental health
disabilities like ASD are not visible like physical handicaps, therefore society is largely
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 17

uninformed about how to educate these individuals. To address this issue, Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of
disability, was passed by the federal government in an effort to “level the playing field” for
people with disabilities. Currently, a lack of effective in-service training programs, educators’
adverse attitudes, and educational systems and culture are not sufficiently meeting the
obligations of this law, and do not fully ensure the civil rights and educational needs of students
with ASD. Professional training programs must improve, teachers’ attitudes must continue to
evolve, and educational leaders must create systems and a school culture that promotes the
inclusion of students with ASD. This expectation must be supported with ongoing professional
development, and transform schools’ approach to education and that of SWDs/ASD with a
curriculum that teaches disability as diversity (Connor & Baglieri, 2009).
It is a top priority for educators to provide a high-quality education to students of all
abilities, and maximize their learning potential. Although more research is necessary to truly
implement inclusive educational opportunities for students with ASD (Crosland & Dunlap,
2012), findings to this point have proven that students with ASD who are educated in the general
education setting are more likely to graduate from high school, enter college and the workforce;
earn higher wages, and experience greater independence as adults (Braunsteiner & Mariano-
Lapidus, 2014). If this problem is not solved, and the increased inclusion of students with ASD
in the general education setting does not become a standard practice in all educational systems,
these individuals will continue to be marginalized, and society will have failed to bring equity,
access, and opportunity to a group of students who would benefit academically and socially from
an education received in the same setting as their non-disabled peers.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 18

Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2021, 100% of students with disabilities/Autism Spectrum Disorder enrolled in
IESD middle and high schools with will receive a Free and Appropriate Public Education
(FAPE) to ensure access and equity in a Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). To recap, the
Director of Special Education established this goal in January 2018. The goal was derived
through data analysis indicating that SWD/ASD who received most of their education in a
separate classroom setting were performing below standard on benchmarks and summative
assessments. The district will use performance indicators such as CAASPP scores, benchmark
assessments, the California School Dashboard, and progress/grade report data to track progress
of students with disabilities/ASD who transition to the general education classroom.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
At Inland Empire School District (IESD) pseudonym, the stakeholders who contribute to
the achievement of the district’s organizational goal include:
1. IESD Board of Trustees—this group serves students by approving educational and
funding decisions for the district based on the needs of student learning and well-
being. The Board contributes to the district’s organizational goal by holding other
stakeholders accountable for progress and the ultimate achievement of said goal.
2. District and Site Administration—this group serves as the liaison between the Board
and site level administration and stakeholders. They provide data to the sites
informing them of areas for growth, equity, and access. Site level administration is
accountable for providing district leaders with regular benchmark data towards the
completion of the organizational goal. Site administration also works directly with
teachers, staff, students, and parents to create action plans to achieve organizational
goals.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 19

3. General and Special Education Teachers—this group executes the action plan for the
organizational goal in the classroom, provides benchmark data to site administration
to show progress, and participates in professional learning opportunities as needed to
better their instructional practice as it pertains to the organizational goal.
4. Students—this group sets individual goals with the guidance of teachers, counselors,
staff, and parents, and engage in their educational opportunities to achieve said goals.
5. Parents—this group supports students throughout their education, and partners with
teachers and site leadership to support the instructional and learning efforts of
stakeholders.
Stakeholders Groups’ Performance Goals
Table 1

Organizational mission, global goal and stakeholder performance goals

Organizational Mission
IESD’s mission is to educate all students by providing them with unlimited learning
opportunities so they can achieve success in college, career, and in life.
Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2021, 100% of students enrolled in IESD middle and high schools with Autism
Spectrum Disorder (ASD) will receive a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) to
ensure access and equity in a Least Restrictive Environment (LRE).

Administration Teachers Students
By January 2021, IESD
Administration,
specifically the Director of
Special Education, will
analyze the performance
data of students with ASD
By January 2021, IESD general and
special education teachers will have
demonstrated proficiency in
implementing instructional strategies
to accommodate the learning needs of
students with ASD in the general
education classroom; adjusted lessons
By May 2021, students
with ASD in IESD will
optimize their learning
in the general education
setting, and set
benchmark goals to
reflect on their
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 20

enrolled in general
education classrooms.
in all core academic areas to provide
accommodations, and analyze
performance data to assess growth.
academic growth as
they learn alongside
non-disabled peers.

Stakeholder Group for the Study
Although all stakeholders play an instrumental role in the achievement of the overall
organizational goal to prepare all students for success in college and career, it is essential to
improve teachers’ instructional practice in order to increase the inclusion of students with ASD
in the general education setting. Therefore, the stakeholders of focus for this study will be middle
and high school general and special education teachers. The stakeholders’ goal is to increase the
effectiveness of inclusion for students with ASD in the general education setting to provide
learning opportunities that prepare them for success in college, career, and life.
This goal was established due to assessment results for students with disabilities
indicating that those who have been placed in a general education setting perform at higher
levels than SWD/ASD who receive Specialized Academic Instruction (SAI) in a separate
classroom setting. The input of the Board of Trustees, district and site administration, and
teachers was considered in the establishment of this goal. It is important for teachers to achieve
this goal because students with disabilities, specifically ASD, who are educated in the general
education setting are more likely to graduate from high school, enter college and the workforce,
earn higher wages, and experience greater independence as adults (Braunsteiner & Mariano-
Lapidus, 2014). If this problem is not solved, and the increased inclusion of students with ASD
in the general education setting does not become a standard practice and expectation in IESD,
these students will continue to be at risk of marginalization, and IESD will not achieve its
mission to provide equity, access, and opportunity to all students in the district.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 21

Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study is to discover why teachers in Inland Empire School District
hold adverse attitudes about educating students with ASD in the least restrictive environment of
the mainstream classroom despite the expectation to uphold federal legislation and civil rights
laws that mandate equality and inclusion of students with disabilities. This study will examine
the limitations in knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational factors that influence
teachers’ attitudes about inclusion using Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model.
Specifically, the limitations that are preventing the district from achieving its organizational goal
to provide 100% of students with disabilities enrolled in middle and high schools in the least
restrictive environment by May 2021. The analysis will begin by establishing a list of potential
needs and will then move to examining these systematically to focus on actual or validated
needs. Although all stakeholders in IESD play an instrumental role in the achievement of the
overall organizational goal to prepare all students for success in college, career, and life, it is
essential to improve general and special education teachers’ instructional practices in an effort to
increase the inclusion of students with ASD in the mainstream classroom. Therefore, the
stakeholders of focus for this study will be middle and high school general and special education
teachers.
The following questions will guide the needs analysis that will address the knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organizational resources and action plan for the stakeholder group
selected for this study:
1. How are IESD teachers’ knowledge/skills and motivation related to the inclusion of
students with Autism Spectrum Disorder in the general education classroom?
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 22

2. What is the interaction between the context of IESD’s organizational culture and
teachers’ knowledge and motivation regarding inclusion of students with ASD in the
general education classroom?
3. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions to achieve the organizational goal?
Methodological Framework
This study was conducted using a mixed-methods research design and used Clark and
Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework to identify the knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational influences that are preventing IESD from achieving its organizational goal.
Assumed interfering elements will be generated based on personal knowledge and related
literature. These elements will be validated by using surveys, observations, and interviews,
literature review, and content analysis. These methods will also allow for the recommendation
and evaluation of research-based solutions for the organization.
Definitions
Autism: A mental condition, present from early childhood, characterized by difficulty in
communicating and forming relationships with other people and in using language and abstract
concepts.
Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD): A general term for a group of complex disorders of
brain development. These disorders are characterized, in varying degrees, by difficulties in social
interaction, verbal and nonverbal communication and repetitive behaviors.
Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE): An educational right of all children in
the United States that is guaranteed by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Individuals with
Disabilities Act (IDEA). Under Section 504, FAPE is defined as, "...the provision of regular or
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 23

special education and related aids and services that are designed to meet individual needs of
handicapped persons as adequately as the needs of nonhandicapped persons are met and are
based on adherence to procedures that satisfy the requirements of" the section. Under the IDEA,
FAPE is defined as an educational program that is individualized to a specific child, that meets
that child's unique needs, provides access to the general curriculum, meets the grade-level
standards established by the state, and from which the child receives educational benefit. The
United States Department of Education issues regulations that define and govern the provision of
FAPE. To provide FAPE to a child with a disability, schools must provide students with an
education, including specialized instruction and related services, that prepares the child for
further education, employment, and independent living.
Inclusion: Inclusion in education refers to a model wherein students with special needs
spend most or all of their time in the general education classroom with typically-abled students.
Inclusion rejects but still provides the use of special schools or classrooms to separate students
with disabilities from students without disabilities.
Least Restrictive Environment (LRE): Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) is the
requirement in federal law that students with disabilities receive their education, to the maximum
extent appropriate, with nondisabled peers and that special education students are not removed
from regular classes unless, even with supplemental aids and services, education in regular
classes cannot be achieved satisfactorily. [20 United States Code (U.S.C.) Sec. 1412(a)(5)(A); 34
Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) Sec. 300.114.].
Organization of the Project
This problem of practice is organized as a five-chapter mixed-methods study that
explores the elements of Inland Empire School District reaching its goal to have 100% of middle
and high school students with ASD enrolled receive a Free and Appropriate Public Education
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 24

that ensures them access and equity in a Least Restrictive Environment by May 2021. Chapter
One introduced the problem of practice surrounding the assertion that teachers express adverse
perspectives regarding the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom, as
well as potential influences on teachers’ attitudes and the importance of addressing the problem.
Chapter Two is an in-depth review of the literature and the introduction of a gap analysis
associated with Clark and Estes’ (2008) KMO influences as they pertain to the conceptual
framework. Chapter Three details the methodological approach and rationale as it pertains to
the knowledge/skills, motivation, and organizational influences of the study. It includes
sampling criteria for participating teacher stakeholders, survey instrumentation, observation and
interview protocols and procedures, and data analysis, as well as ethics and potential
limitations/delimitations as they relate to data collection. Chapter Four contains specific
information captured during data collection, and a discussion of results and findings. Chapter
Five provides detailed recommendations and best practices that will contribute to IESD meeting
its mission and global goal.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 25

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The purpose of this study is to discover why teachers in Inland Empire School District
hold adverse attitudes about educating students with ASD in the least restrictive environment of
the general education classroom. Over 40 years ago, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, was passed by the
federal government in an effort to “level the playing field” for people with disabilities. To
further impress the importance of inclusion, the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (2004) mandates that teaching children with autism is no longer the sole
responsibility of special educators, and requires all educators to focus on best practices to
address the learning needs of all students in the general education classroom. Furthermore,
Public Law 114-95, Every Student Succeeds Act (2015), impresses the importance of ensuring
equality of opportunity and full participation for individuals with disabilities. Despite this
legislation, however, teachers continue to express conflicting attitudes about the inclusion of
students with ASD in the general education classroom.
Chapter Two is divided into three major sections. The first section will present a review
of the literature that examines the assumed influences of teachers’ attitudes about the
implementation of inclusive practices in the general education classroom. This section will
begin with a review of in-service professional development and training, followed by a review of
teachers’ attitudes, concerns, and beliefs that influence inclusion. This section will conclude
with a review of the influences of educational systems and school culture on inclusive practices.
The second section will review the role of middle and high school teachers concerning the
inclusion of students with ASD. To follow, the third section of Chapter Two will conclude with
a detailed exploration of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on teachers’
perceptions about inclusion using Clark and Estes’ (2008) Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 26

Influences on Teachers’ Perspectives about Inclusion of Students with Autism
As mentioned in Chapter One, incidents of Autism Spectrum Disorder continue to be on
the rise as diagnoses have increased by 150% since 2000 (Autism Society of America, 2018).
With this increase, teachers are seeing more children with ASD in the general education
classroom (Hart, 2013; Ostmeyer & Scarpa, 2012). Notwithstanding, many teachers have
conflicting attitudes about the inclusion of students with ASD in their classrooms. This
misguided attitude is important to address because it presents a lack of educational equity,
access, and opportunity for students with ASD.
In-Service and Professional Development Training
A significant factor to achieving successful inclusion of students with ASD in the
mainstream classroom requires adequate preparation of teachers and staff (Dybvik, 2004; Eldar;
Symes & Humphrey, 2011). Interestingly, teachers meet state certification standards as being
highly qualified educators, however, no requirement exists that qualifies general education
teachers to educate students with autism (Busby et al., 2012; McCray et al., 2011). Furthermore,
there is an expectation for them to teach in an inclusive classroom setting. Kosko and Wilkins
(2009) found that teachers needed at least eight hours of professional development over a period
of three years in order to improve their self-perceived ability to adapt instruction to children with
diverse needs. That stated, there is an urgent need to enhance professional learning regarding
inclusion as some teachers have not experienced the inclusion of students with ASD in their
career as a teacher, and/or have little understanding of what is required to accommodate their
learning needs (Higginson & Chatfield, 2012; Peters & Forlin, 2011). To further impress that
point, Riley (2008) explains that teachers need varied and overlapping professional development
programs for effective delivery of inclusive services (Higginson & Chatfield, 2012). Thus, the
review of the literature for this influence indicates: (1) a need for increased technical knowledge
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 27

and evidence-based practices, (2) training can influence teachers’ professional practice, and (3)
training is related to teachers’ perspectives about inclusion.
Technical Knowledge and Evidence-Based Practices. It is essential that teachers
understand autism and how to support the learning needs of a student with ASD, and be
knowledgeable of practical techniques on how to address problems with behavior and social
communication (Ferraioli & Harris, 2011; Hart; Leblanc et al, 2009; Peters & Forlin, 2011).
Nevertheless, many teachers feel that they lack the specialized knowledge that would enable
them to effectively teach students with ASDs (Humphrey & Lewis, 2008; Leblanc et al, 2009).
Teachers require techniques that are known to be effective in the improvement of behavioral,
social, and academic outcomes of students with ASD (Sansoti & Sansoti, 2012). It is also
important for teachers to understand that students with ASD benefit from learning in mainstream
classrooms, and likewise, their typically-abled peers benefit from being exposed to children with
diverse abilities and behaviors (Dybvik, 2004). Moreover, students with ASD who are fully
included exhibit higher levels of engagement and social interaction, give and receive higher
levels of social support, have a wider social network, and have more advanced individual
education goals than their counterparts in segregated placement (Braunsteiner & Mariano-
Lapidus, 2014; Eldar, 2011; Tonnesen & Hahn, 2016). Included students also have the chance to
meet more positive role models, and to become members of the same society that they will
eventually share as adults (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014; Eldar, 2011; Tonnesen &
Hahn, 2016).
Influence of Training on Teachers’ Professional Practice. McCray et al. (2011)
indicate that limited preparation has consistently been found to heighten fear and reduce
teachers’ sense of self-efficacy when challenged with the demands of an inclusive classroom
setting. Likewise, Jennett, Harris, and Mesibov (2003) argue that teachers of students with ASD
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 28

in mainstream settings are vulnerable to burnout due to the unique behaviors of ASD,
particularly if teacher training and preparation to support students is inadequate (Emam &
Farrell, 2009; Hart, 2013; Loiacono & Palumbo, 2011). The National Curriculum for Teachers
Education and Curriculum Framework for Quality Teacher Education promote the importance of
training to better equip teachers with strategies to deal with inequities, differences, and students
with disabilities (Costley, 2013). Additionally, having the opportunity to see colleagues at work
is crucial to the success of teachers’ attempts to develop their professional practice. Hiebert,
Gallimore, and Stigler (2002) believe that it is through shared experiences that colleagues can
help one another to articulate what they currently do, and define what they might like to do in
their inclusive classrooms (Ainscow, 2007). Teachers also expressed that informal training such
as observing more experienced teachers who successfully meet the educational needs of students
with ASD would benefit their inclusive practices (Lindsay et al., 2014).
Training as it Relates to Teachers’ Perspectives About Inclusion. Training, in
particular, has been consistently shown to have a positive influence not only on the general
philosophical views of mainstream teachers linked directly to the broad concepts of inclusion,
but also on their perceived abilities to create lessons and teach within the special educational
domain (Leblanc, Richardson, & Burns, 2009). Furthermore, research suggests that teachers
who receive training and support tend to be more willing to accept students with ASD within
their classrooms (Eldar; Leblanc, Richardson & Burns, 2009). Avramidis, Bayliss and Burden
(2000), Horrocks et al., (2008), and Huang and Wheeler (2007) believe that training teachers to
work with students with ASD not only makes them feel more confident in dealing with such
students, but result in them having a more positive attitude towards inclusion (Symes &
Humphrey, 2011). Such training may include how teachers adjust curriculum and pedagogy for
students’ individual needs, how to adapt the set-up of a classroom (daily routines, small groups,
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 29

etc.), and how to create a classroom culture in which students with ASD are supported in their
development of academics and social skills (Symes & Humphrey, 2011).
Teachers’ Attitudes, Beliefs, and Concerns
Becoming more inclusive is a matter of thinking and talking, reviewing and refining
practice, and making attempts to develop a more inclusive culture (Ainscow, 2007). Still,
teachers’ attitudes, beliefs, and lack of ownership impact the success of inclusion for students
with ASD in the general education classroom. One of the key elements for a successful
inclusion program is the positive attitudes of teachers (Blecker & Boakes, 2010, Costley, 2013;
McCray, et al., 2011). Specifically, positive attitudes of teachers can include a willingness to
learn more about the learning needs of students with ASD, an openness to related professional
development, and a proactive approach to promoting a school-wide acceptance of students with
ASD (Blecker & Boakes, 2010, Costley, 2013; McCray, et al., 2011). A survey administered by
McHatton and McCray (2007) captured data on the perceptions of elementary and secondary
educators about inclusion. This survey revealed that teachers can have the knowledge, skills,
and dispositions necessary to be successful in an inclusion classroom, however, this all can be
overshadowed if the teacher is resistant to, or does not believe in inclusive practices (McCray et
al., 2011). Furthermore, comments analyzed from the open-ended responses from this survey
suggest that teachers are more willing to comply with inclusive practices because they are “less
afraid” (McCray, et al. 2011, p. 148) and have a “greater appreciation” (McCray, et al. 2011, p.
148) of inclusion. Nevertheless, researchers stated that compliance does not equate to
acceptance or a supportive and effective learning environment.
Understanding teachers’ perceptions about inclusion is a necessary step toward effective
inclusionary practices in schools (Costley, 2013), and educators must keep in mind that, if they
want to change a student’s behavior, they must also change something that they themselves are
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 30

doing (Hart, 2013). Building on this perspective, the teacher–student relationship is viewed as a
living system and a vehicle through which positive emotional experiences, concrete help,
information, and support can be organized and transmitted (Emam & Farrell, 2009). The
perceptions of teachers in inclusive classrooms are especially important because they may
influence the attitudes of other students (Ferraioli & Harris, 2011). These perceptions can be
exhibited in how teachers address behaviors of students with ASD, if they regularly include them
in all learning activities, and show concern and support for the social inclusion of students with
ASD.
Influence of Attitudes. Teachers’ negative feelings about the inclusion of students with
disabilities in the general education classroom have a negative effect on their behavior, student
learning, and the overall success of inclusive practices (Fuchs, 2010). Factors leading to
teachers’ negative feelings may include a lack of education and in-service training with regard to
mainstream practices, lack of support from school administrators, and concerns with time for
planning and collaboration with special educators. Rose (2008) indicates that reasons for such
feelings can result in teachers taking a confrontational approach towards students with ASD who
do not respond to conventional teaching approaches, and potentially view the difficulties
encountered with these students as being an issue within the child rather than a result of
classroom management (Peters & Forlin, 2011). Lack of experience working with students with
ASD is commonly identified as the cause of teachers’ resistance to inclusion (Sansosti &
Sansosti, 2012). Moreover, Costley (2013) indicates that teachers who collaborate with each
other report increased self-efficacy, professional worth, and creativity. Naylor (2002) found that
workload and stress levels had increased significantly because they were left to cope with low
levels of support in dealing with “exceptional” (Leblanc, et al., 2009 p. 167) students, which, in
turn, resulted in students not having their targeted needs met. This issue has highlighted feelings
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 31

of teacher inadequacy when it comes to effectively dealing with children with identified special
needs in the mainstream classroom (Leblanc et al., 2009). When educators doubt their abilities to
meet the particular needs of their assigned students, stress, anxiety, and general levels of
uneasiness rise dramatically (Leblanc et al, 2009).
Perception of General Education Teachers’ Role. DeSimone and Parmar (2006) and
Kosko and Wilkins (2009) found that teachers’ beliefs about their role as teachers of children
with diverse needs is a strong predictor of what happens in classrooms, and professional
development is important in the formation of positive teacher attitudes (Higginson & Chatfield,
2012). Teachers that accept their role as a teacher to all students in the classroom, and view
every student in the classroom as a student they feel can succeed, experience more success with
inclusion (Lindsay et al., 2014). A survey administered by McHatton and McCray in 2007 to
elementary and secondary teachers revealed teachers’ perceptions that students with behavior
disorders are less suitable for inclusion in the general education classroom (McCray et al., 2011).
This survey also showed that secondary school teachers are more resistant to inclusion overall
than elementary school teachers.
Busby et al. (2012) posit that lack of motivation and self-efficacy in teachers are often
causes of ineffective teaching of children with ASD. This link between motivation to engage in
inclusive practices is directly related to one’s perceived ability to be successful in the task itself
(Busby et al., 2012). This lack of self-efficacy is due to teachers’ feelings that they are not
prepared to teach students with autism, and promulgated their belief that the education of
children with autism is the responsibility of special educators (Busby et al., 2012). This lack of
self-efficacy will be further examined in the motivational influences section of this chapter.
From 1994 to 2004, a school district in Florida (ADA 62,200), experienced a
disproportionate increase (288%) in students being identified with autism (Sansoti & Sansoti,
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 32

2012). During a study of inclusive practices in this district, it was revealed that many teachers
discovered that they could not have uniform behavioral expectations for all students as this
would be a detriment to students with ASD; on the contrary, other teachers were concerned with
accommodating the needs of students with ASD as they felt it to be unfair to students without
disabilities and it would be viewed as “preferential treatment”. These issues are directly related
to deep-seated values and beliefs about whose ultimate responsibility it is to ensure the learning
and participation for students with ASD (Humphrey & Lewis, 2008). Furthermore, evidence of
teachers who differentiated instruction was also a variable, both across and within schools; some
teachers actively sought out information about pupils in order to differentiate the work
appropriately, and others did not. Scheuermann and Webber (2001) believe, without exception,
within this dynamic, teachers are seen as playing a critical role in helping students with ASD
overcome many challenges, but particularly those they face in fully inclusive educational settings
(Leblanc et al., 2009).
General Education Teachers’ Concerns. Costley (2013) found that the main concerns
of general education teachers include: (1) Concern for students without disabilities; (2) Added
workload/time to accommodate the learning needs of students with disabilities; (3) Litigation;
and (4) Implementation of inclusion practices. Teachers also raise concerns about the organic
nature of a child’s disability, their lack of prior experiences working with children with special
educational needs, and inadequate teacher training necessary to address the educational needs of
all children (Peters & Forlin, 2011). Santoli, Sach, Romey, and McClurg (2008) suggest that
time is still a key factor in successful inclusion of students, and is a significant area of concern
for teachers. They need time to collaborate, time to attend meetings that include all stakeholders,
and time to attend trainings that could provide them with the strategies needed to educate all
students, including those students who have autism (Goodrow, 2016).
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 33

Although most teachers concur with the concept of inclusion, they continue to have
concerns about implementation (Higginson & Chatfield, 2012). These concerns include a lack of
knowledge and experience, as well as the need for continued learning where they are supported
within a collaborative environment (Higginson & Chatfield, 2012). Teacher attitudes are likely
to be influenced by the ease of implementing the supports needed for included students and their
peers, however, challenging behavior is a significant concern for teachers who may worry about
managing the child, and the potential negative impact on other students (Ferraioli & Harris,
2011).
Educational Systems and School Culture
Schein (1985) suggests that cultures are about the deeper levels of basic assumptions and
beliefs that are shared by members of an organization, operating unconsciously to define how
they view themselves and their working contexts (Ainscow, 2007). Establishing effective
school-wide inclusion is more likely to be successful in educational environments where there is
a culture of collaboration that encourages and supports change (Ainscow, 2007). Furthermore,
effective inclusionary cultures involve school communities to work together to address barriers
experienced by diverse learners. Notwithstanding, educational systems and the culture of school
sites do not adequately advocate for the inclusion of students with autism in the general
education classroom. Findings suggest that diversity must be viewed as an enrichment of the
overall school community to foster acceptance in the inclusive classroom (Braunsteiner &
Mariano-Lapidus, 2014; Rodden, et al., 2019). Furthermore, time and resources must be
provided/funded by districts/site administration for teachers to be able to design lessons and
instructional strategies to meet the needs of educating all students in the classroom (Rodden, et
al., 2019). The following explores the organizational barriers that prevent school systems and
school sites from achieving optimal levels of inclusion for students with ASD: (1) the role of
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 34

school systems, (2) the philosophy of school systems, (3) the impact of school culture, and
finally, (4) educational equity.
Role of Educational Systems to Educate Students with Autism. Booth and Ainscow
(2000) suggest that inclusive practices need to be underpinned by the production of inclusive
policies and the creation of inclusive communities and cultures (Humphrey, 2008). As the
number of children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders increases, schools must ensure that
general and special educators are prepared to teach these students effectively and to respond to
their behavioral issues (Costley, 2013; Hart, 2013). In 2014, the Center for Disease Control
(CDC) found that 1 in every 59 children from a sampling of eight-year-olds were identified with
ASD (CDC, 2019). This data shows a 250% increase in the prevalence of children identified
with ASD from 6.7 per 1000 children in 2000 to 16.8 per 1000 children in 2014, which
highlights the need for all teachers to be prepared to work with all learners.
Booth and Ainscow (2000) concluded that the principles of inclusive cultures guide
decisions about policies and the everyday practices of schools so that the learning of all students,
including those with ASD, is supported through a continuous process of school development
(Angelides, Antoniou, & Charalambous, 2010). Willms (2003) emphasizes that the importance
of inclusion as a social principle has been clearly noted as well as the need for promoting its
value among parents of students in high-status classes and schools, and among the principals and
teachers who work in those settings. Furthermore, strong leadership is needed to coordinate the
academic staff around the concept of inclusion and to implement it, and the principal’s
leadership is a key to its success (Eldar, Talmor, & Wolf-Zukerman, 2010). Harding (2009)
indicates that site leadership is essential in facilitating a successful inclusive model through
having a clear understanding of what inclusion is, and how to work with all key stakeholders
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 35

including parents, teachers, support staff, and students to make inclusion a positive experience
for those involved (Goodrow, 2016).
System Philosophy about Inclusion. Inclusive education must be understood as a
school-wide philosophy that provides the support and resources needed to deliver a quality
education to all students (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014). Crosland and Dunlap (2012)
suggest that the overall school environment is a key variable for success of students with ASD in
inclusive settings. School site practices and policies are essential to creating an environment that
is receptive to, and accepting of the inclusion of students with disabilities in the general
education classroom. Creating collaboration models bring all levels of educators from a school
site together to learn more about students with IEPs and how to support their educational and
social needs. This practice can help mitigate the medical conceptualizations of disability that
contribute to the lack of growth and support for inclusion (Braunsteiner and Mariano-Lapidus,
2014).
It is also vital that the administration of the school and the school board are fully
supportive of creating highly effective inclusive classrooms, and ready to provide the support
and resources to ensure this goal is achieved (Ferraioli & Harris, 2011). Inclusive environments
need visionary leadership with clear expectations for staff and students in the environment, as the
idea of inclusion is often not fully understood by educational staff, and must be explained and
encouraged by leadership in the educational setting (Goodrow, 2016). If support is not
forthcoming, the teachers will begin to feel that they are out on a limb and working on their own.
Graydon (2006) posits that the principal is a role model for teachers, and the entire school can
change dramatically when he or she establishes a philosophy for inclusion, and leads the way to
best practices (Eldar et al., 2010). None of the strategies outlined here or elsewhere are likely to
be successful unless they are underpinned by core values and attitudes that include: respect for,
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 36

and celebration of diversity, as well as a commitment to reaching out to all learners, a philosophy
of excellence for all, and the notion that inclusion is a process rather than a state (Humphrey,
2008).
School Culture. Salend (2011) indicate that inclusive school environments and classes
in the United States show that students with disabilities being educated in the inclusive
classroom are more likely to pass state exams, complete high school, obtain jobs, earn higher
salaries, and live independently (Braunsteiner and Mariano-Lapidus, 2014). If students feel that
they are encircled by an environment of love and care, then it will be difficult for them to be
isolated and marginalized (Angelides et al., 2010). Glashan, MacKay, and Grieve (2004) argued
that judgement of the success of inclusion is contingent upon the quality of support as perceived
by teachers (Emam & Farrell, 2009). Booth and Ainscow (2002) consider school culture as the
basis for developing inclusive practices community which is characterized by safety, acceptance
and collaboration. In this type of community, all are valued, and this forms the basis for higher
achievement by all students (Angelides, et al., 2010). Hargreaves (1995) argues that cultures can
be seen as having a reality-defining function, enabling those within an institution to make sense
of themselves, their actions and their environment. Thus, in this sense, they are evidence of how
the culture of the workplace impacts how teachers see their work and their students (Ainscow,
2007).
Equity: Segregated and Inclusive Settings. Braunsteiner and Mariano-Lapidus (2014)
state that segregated educational settings such as special education classrooms put SWDs at a
disadvantage. The New York State Education Department (2013) reported that only 27% of
SWDs graduated with a regular high school diploma. Students must be granted access to a
quality education in all levels of schooling and the promotion of inclusive practices requires all
school personnel to value students with diverse learning needs (Connor & Baglieri, 2009).
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 37

School system practices can be inflexible with standard norms, tracking, and an emphasis on
normalizing students (Baker 2002), and SWDs are relocated to separate classrooms because they
are not viewed as being normal in how they speak, behave, learn, etc.
Crosland and Dunlap (2012) indicate that SWDs are viewed from a clinical/medical
perspective in how they can be treated instead of looking at the whole system’s environment to
see how SWDs can be included and accepted. The school system itself focuses on the school as
a whole instead of students as individuals which leads to limitations in quality learning for
SWDs. Curriculum that teaches disability as diversity can transform a school system’s approach
to education and that of students with disabilities. School systems need to work on greater
receptivity to the inclusion process, which starts with a proactive approach to improve practices
in the inclusive program (Crosland & Dunlap, 2012).
Role of Stakeholder Group of Focus
The stakeholder group for this study includes general and special education teachers at
Inland Empire School District middle and high school sites. This stakeholder group plays an
instrumental role in this study as it explores teachers’ perspectives about the inclusion of students
with ASD in the general education classroom. As professionals, teachers are required to earn a
teaching credential specializing in a specific subject area from an accredited university.
Furthermore, they are required to complete a term of student teaching that provides them with a
firsthand opportunity of what it is like to teach in the classroom. Once teachers have obtained
employment, they are expected to create standards-based lesson plans, and employ differentiated
instructional strategies that assist students of all learning levels to access the curriculum. The
literature review for this study indicates that this stakeholder group on a macro level does not
possess the requisite knowledge and skills, and is by and large not prepared to educate students
with ASD in the general education classroom. It is further indicated that the motivation of this
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 38

stakeholder group is influenced by a lack of self-efficacy that hinders their persistence and
mental effort towards the implementation of inclusive practices (Clark & Estes, 2008; Mayer,
2011; Rueda, 2011). Finally, the literature indicates that organizations, in this case the school
district, play a key role in how teachers perceive and/or implement inclusive practices. The data
captured from these stakeholders through a survey, observations, and interviews will be
compared to the findings in the literature review.
Clark and Estes’ Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences Framework
The components of Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework underscores the
knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences contributing to IESD’s ability to
provide 100% of its students with ASD a free and appropriate public education in the least
restrictive environment by May 2021. Middle and high school teachers are the stakeholder
group for this study, therefore the first section will address the knowledge and skills indicated in
the literature to be essential in providing an appropriate education for students with ASD in the
general education classroom. The second section will look at the motivational factors and
theories that influence teachers’ attitudes about inclusion, specifically: (a) self-efficacy theory,
(b) expectancy value theory, and (c) attribution theory. Lastly, the third section will examine
factors within the organization that potentially influence teachers’ attitudes about inclusion; the
culture of the organization as it pertains to serving students with special education needs, school
systems and processes, and assumed barriers within the organization that lead to lower levels of
inclusion in the general education classroom for students with ASD. Forthcoming in Chapter 3,
these KMO elements will offer the objectives guiding the methodology of research.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 39

Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Knowledge and Skills
Knowledge influences. Teachers who are more knowledgeable about Autism Spectrum
Disorder tend to be more successful in the implementation of inclusive practices in the
mainstream classroom. (Segall & Campbell, 2012). Nonetheless, research indicates that
educators have adverse attitudes towards the inclusion of students with ASD in the general
education classroom (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014; Carroll, Forlin, & Jobling, 2003;
Busby et al., 2012; McCray & McHatton, 2011). Addressing this problem of practice requires
scientific assessment to determine what teachers actually know about ASD and inclusive
practices (Mayer, 2011). Research suggests that teacher training programs do not adequately
prepare general education teachers with instructional strategies for inclusive teaching (Fuchs,
2010; Sansoti and Sansoti, 2012); and school systems do not effectively promote inclusion of
students with ASD (Segall & Campbell, 2012; Gavaldà & Qinyi, 2012).
In order for the organization to achieve its global goal, it must first address educators’
lack of knowledge and skill regarding inclusion and provide detailed information about Autism
Spectrum Disorder (Clark & Estes, 2008). The breadth of knowledge required to address the
problem incorporates three knowledge types as described by Krathwohl (2002): Declarative,
Procedural, and Metacognitive. Declarative knowledge refers to knowledge that is basic to
specific domains and includes things such as terminology that one must know or be familiar with
in order to function effectively in a given area (Rueda, 2011). For this study, declarative
knowledge is teachers’ knowledge of behaviors specific to ASD that impact student learning
(Segall & Campbell, 2012), as well as the research indicating that students with ASD who are
educated in the mainstream classroom experience greater postsecondary success than those
educated in a segregated setting (Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014).
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 40

Procedural knowledge refers to knowing how to do something, and the criteria for using
such skills (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). Regarding inclusive practices, teachers need to
know how to differentiate instruction in the mainstream classroom to enhance learning for
students with ASD. Teachers also need to know how to diffuse and address behaviors that are
characteristic of students with ASD (Roberts & Simpson, 2016). Metacognitive knowledge is
the awareness of one’s own cognition and thought processes that allow one to know when and
why they do something; it also allows one to consider contextual and conditional aspects of a
given problem (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). An example for this study is that teachers need
to understand how their perceptions and attitudes about inclusive practices impact the learning of
students with ASD, as well as how to reflect on their self-efficacy when educating students with
ASD in the mainstream classroom. This study will focus on the declarative knowledge influence
of teachers’ overall knowledge of ASD and their attitudes about inclusive practices, and
knowledge influence of increased in-service training.
According to Vygotsky, students’ disabilities become more intensified if they are denied
access to the mainstream classroom (Morcom & MacCallum, 2012). One of the key elements
for successful inclusion programs is the positive attitudes of teachers and understanding their
perceptions about inclusion is a necessary step toward effective inclusive practices in schools
(Fuchs, 2009-2010; Roberts & Simpson, 2016; Segall & Campbell, 2012). Metacognitive
knowledge can provide teachers with insight into their own beliefs and how it impacts the
learning of students with ASD, and can assist them in pinpointing specific areas for instructional
growth.
Table 2 shows the organizational mission and global goal, as well as information specific
to knowledge influences, knowledge types, and knowledge influence assessments. As Table 2
indicates, two factual influences and one procedural influence will be used to further explore
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 41

educators’ attitudes about the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom.
Table 2

Knowledge Influences, Types, and Assessments for Knowledge Gap Analysis

Organizational Mission
Inland Empire School District’s mission is to educate each student by providing unlimited
learning opportunities to help them achieve success in college, career, and in life.

Organizational Performance Goal
By August 2021, 100% of students enrolled in IESD middle and high schools with Autism
Spectrum Disorder (ASD/HFASD) will receive a Free and Appropriate Public Education
(FAPE) to ensure access and equity in a Least Restrictive Environment (LRE).

Stakeholder Goal
By May 2021, IESD general education teachers will have demonstrated proficiency by
implementing instructional strategies for accommodating the learning needs of SWDs in the
general education classroom; adjusted lessons in all core academic areas to provide
accommodations and analyze performance data to assess growth.

Knowledge Influences

Teachers need to acquire
specific knowledge about
Autism Spectrum Disorder
(ASD), and how its
behaviors impact how
students with ASD access
learning in the mainstream
classroom.

Teachers need to know
how to implement
instructional strategies to
accommodate the learning
needs of students with
ASD in the mainstream
classroom.

Knowledge Type

Declarative

Procedural

Knowledge Influence
Assessment

Use a questionnaire to
assess teachers’
knowledge of ASD
behaviors and
instructional strategies
that best support
students with ASD.

Use a questionnaire to
assess if teachers know
how to accommodate or
are confident in
accommodating the
learning needs of
students with ASD.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 42

Teachers need to recognize
that perceptions about
inclusion are key elements
in the success or failure of
inclusive practices, and
impact their individual
instructional practice.

Metacognitive

Observe teachers in the
classroom.

Interview teachers to
find out what they think
about inclusive
practices as they pertain
to their individual
professional practice.

Motivation
Motivation gets us going, keeps us moving, and tells us how much effort to spend or
work on tasks (Clark & Estes, 2008). Research indicates that teachers are resistant to the
implementation of inclusive practices in the general education classroom (Braunsteiner &
Mariano-Lapidus, 2014; Carroll et al., 2003; McCray & McHatton, 2011). Motivation plays a key role
in the achievement of Inland Empire School District’s stakeholder goal to increase teachers’
proficiency of instructional strategies to accommodate the learning needs of students with
Autism Spectrum Disorder in the general education classroom. To determine the motivational
factors that have caused this gap in the implementation of inclusive practices, three types of
motivational processes must be considered: Active choice, persistence, and mental effort (Clark
& Estes, 2008; Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011). Although many motivational theories play a role in
the gap in performance at IESD schools, this study will focus on: (1) self-efficacy theory to
examine teachers’ confidence in their abilities to incorporate inclusive practices in the general
education classroom, (2) expectancy value theory to explore teachers’ beliefs about the
importance of inclusion to student learning in IESD, and (3) attribution theory to examine and
understand what motivates teachers’ instruction in an educational setting.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 43

Self-efficacy theory. Self-efficacy theory is a foundation for human motivation, well-
being, and personal accomplishment (Bandura, 2000; Pajares, 2006). Unless humans believe
they can achieve desired outcomes and minimize failures, they have little incentive to choose to
take action (Bandura, 2000). Furthermore, individual perception of self-efficacy influences how
people think about a particular endeavor; erratically, strategically, optimistically, or
pessimistically, and whether or not they choose to persist (Bandura, 2000). Research indicates
that self-efficacy motivates people to engage in a particular goal or task; they tend to complete
tasks in which they are confident and competent, and avoid those in which they do not feel as
capable (Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011). That stated, if teachers have a negative perception about
inclusive practices, or do not feel confident in their abilities to implement such practices, it is
unlikely that they will put forth the mental effort, and likely that they will engage in task
avoidance.
The quality of teacher preparation programs is the most important factor influencing pre-
service teachers’ motivation for teaching children with autism (Busby et al., 2012). The link
between motivation to engage in inclusionary practices is directly related to teachers’ perceived
abilities to be successful in the task, and low self-efficacy is attributed to teachers’ feeling ill-
prepared to teach students with ASD (Busby et al., 2014). Findings from McCray and McHatton
(2011) show that limited preparation has consistently been found to heighten fear and reduce
teachers’ sense of self-efficacy when challenged with the demands of an inclusive classroom
setting. Additionally, teachers who collaborate with each other report increased self-efficacy,
professional worth, and creativity. This positive perception influences the successful application
of programs and inclusionary practices (Costley, 2013). Although many teachers sympathize
with students with disabilities, their lack of self-efficacy with inclusive practices has led to
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 44

frustration and discomfort as they do not know how to meet their education needs (Carroll et al.,
2003).
Expectancy value theory. Eccles (2006) states that expectancy value theory is
individuals’ choice, persistence, and performance; and can be explained by their beliefs about
how well they will perform on an activity, and the extent to which they value the activity.
Ability belief is an individual’s perception of his or her current competence at a given activity
with a focus on present ability, while efficacy-expectancy belief is an individual’s belief that he
or she can accomplish a task and is focused on the future. Outcome expectancy is a belief that a
given action will result in a given outcome (Eccles, 2006; Rueda, 2011).
There are four components of value to this motivational theory: Attainment, intrinsic,
utility, and cost (Eccles, 2006). Attainment value is the importance of doing well on a given
task, and intrinsic value is the enjoyment or meaning individuals believe can be gained from
doing a task (Eccles, 2006). Utility value is the usefulness of doing a task to meet individuals’
future goals, and cost value is the extent by which an activity limits access to other activities, the
effort it will take to accomplish the activity, and the emotional toll while engaging in the activity
(Eccles, 2006). When an individual can see how their work will contribute to the organizational
goal, they are more likely to invest time and mental effort to accomplish a task.
Studies have shown that although some teachers have positive intentions towards
inclusive practices, the outcomes of their efforts are ineffective in meeting the educational needs
of students with ASD (Busby et al., 2012). This lack of success negatively impacts how teachers
view their ability to educate students thus negating the attainment value of the activity.
Research also suggests that teachers lack the intrinsic motivation to implement inclusive
practices in the mainstream setting (Avramidis & Norwich, 2002). Because educational systems
do not promote a consistent culture that embraces inclusion of students with ASD, teachers are
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 45

not afforded the opportunity to value the practice as relevant and important (Avramidis &
Norwich, 2002; Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014; Carroll et al., 2003; McCray &
McHatton, 2011). The same can be stated for the utility value of inclusion; because the school-
wide expectation and support of inclusion has not been consistent, teachers do not see the value
of how inclusive practices can enhance their professional practice in addition to the overall
success of students with ASD. Finally, teachers do not see the cost value of the additional time
required to receive training or spend the additional time necessary to create inclusive lessons
(Fuchs, 2010).
Attribution theory. Weiner (1986, 1992) states that individuals are conscious and
rational decision makers who are motivated by goals of understanding and mastering the
environment and themselves. According to Weiner’s early work, attribution theory explains why
individuals respond differently to the same event (Anderman & Anderman, 2006). An
explanation posited by Anderman and Anderman (2006) states that attribution theory provides an
important method for examining and understanding motivation in academic settings.
Furthermore, it examines individuals’ beliefs about why certain events occur, and the influence
on motivation and behavior (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Young, et al., 2017). Weiner’s
attribution model claims that both environmental and personal factors influence the types of
attributions individuals will likely make when achievement-related events occur. Three causal
dimensions of attribution theory are: locus, stability, and controllability; all of which affect
learners’ subsequent motivation toward a particular task (Anderman & Anderman, 2006).
Although his research was focused on students learning in school settings, Weiner’s model can
also be applied to teachers’ attitudes about learning and implementing inclusive practices.
Teachers’ attributions for inclusive practices. Teachers’ motivation to create lessons
and implement inclusive practices for students with ASD is influenced by their beliefs about
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 46

inclusion as well as their perceived success about the task (Anderman & Anderman, 2006). In
order for teachers to be motivated, they need to acknowledge that their attitudes, or internal
locus, about inclusion, have a direct correlation to the success or failure of the practice, not their
cognitive abilities (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Fuchs, 2010; McCray & McHatton, 2011).
Additionally, they need to understand that their mental effort is controllable and the systematic
change in direction of instructional practices is an external locus outside of their control;
mistakes will be made, but they will decrease over time with long-term effort (Anderman &
Anderman, 2006).
General education teachers’ apprehension can be attributed to the following perceptions:
(1) Added workload/time to accommodate the learning needs of students with ASD; (2) The
chance (external locus) of litigation (unstable and uncontrollable); (3) How to effectively
implement inclusive practices, which is stable and uncontrollable (Anderman & Anderman,
2006; Costley, 2013); and (4) A belief that the education of students with ASD is the
responsibility of special educators (Busby et al., 2012). Nevertheless, it is the primary job of
educators to provide a high-quality education to students of all abilities in an effort (stable and
controllable) to maximize learning potential. As teachers learn more about Autism Spectrum
Disorder and become better trained in inclusive practices, they may be more apt to attribute
outcomes as a result of their own efforts, rather than the perceived abilities of a student with
ASD.
Table 3 shows the organizational mission and global goal, as well as information specific
to the three assumed motivational influences and motivation influence assessments to further
explore educators’ attitudes about the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education
classroom.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 47

Table 3

Motivational Influences and Assessments for Motivation Gap Analysis

Organizational Mission
Inland Empire School District’s mission is to educate each student by providing unlimited
learning opportunities to help them achieve success in college, career, and in life.

Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2021, 100% of students enrolled in IESD middle and high schools with Autism
Spectrum Disorder (ASD/HFASD) will receive a Free and Appropriate Public Education
(FAPE) to ensure access and equity in a Least Restrictive Environment (LRE).

Stakeholder Goal
By January 2021, IESD general education teachers will have demonstrated proficiency by
implementing instructional strategies for accommodating the learning needs of SWDs in the
general education classroom; adjusted lessons in all core academic areas to provide
accommodations and analyze performance data to assess growth.

Assumed Motivational Influences Motivational Influence Assessment
Self-Efficacy:
Teachers need to have confidence that their
participation in professional development to
create inclusive classroom practices will enhance
their ability to implement said practices.

Expectancy Value:
Teachers need to see the value of inclusive
practices as useful and worthwhile in order to
successfully implement those practices in their
own classrooms.

Attribution Theory:
Teachers need to attribute the achievement of
students with ASD to their instructional efforts
rather than issues beyond their control.

Interview question(s) such as:
Once you receive necessary training
information to create inclusive practices,
over time, how will you implement
inclusive practices to benefit students
with ASD in your classroom?

Interview question(s) such as:
How much time does it require for you to
successfully implement inclusive
practices in your classroom? Please
provide your perspective and specific
examples as to how effective the time
spent has been on the success of students
with ASD in your classroom.

Interview question(s) such as:
How can you influence success of
students with ASD? Please explain how
you have created inclusive learning
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 48

opportunities for students with ASD that
are specific to academic performance and
social skills in your instructional practice.

Organization
General theory. Organizations exist to achieve established goals and objectives, and
according to the structural frame as described by Bolman and Deal (2013), they increase
efficiency and enhance performance by putting the right people in the right roles. Furthermore,
organizational goals are accomplished through the interacting processes of knowledge, skills,
and motivation to operate successfully (Clark & Estes, 2008). At times, however, organizations
lack efficient work processes necessary to achieve performance outcomes; Clark and Estes
(2008) identify these issues as organizational barriers. In order to successfully achieve
established goals, it is essential for leaders to identify the barriers that slow the process, and
problem solve accordingly. Moreover, leaders must be cognizant that people tend to attribute
their lack of knowledge and skills to the organization rather than their own efforts (Anderman &
Anderman, 2006; Clark & Estes, 2008). For the purpose of this study, the focus is on
organizational influences that impact the teacher stakeholder group as they relate to cultural
models and cultural settings.
School systems and culture. It is the primary role of educational institutions to respond
to the diverse learning needs of all students. Reform is necessary to change teachers’ attitudes
about the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom and develop
educational systems that properly and consistently respond to the needs, characteristics, and
individual differences of all children in a school (Avramidis & Norwich, 2002). School systems
are continually working toward the implementation and/or betterment of inclusive practices
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 49

(Crosland & Dunlap, 2012; Young, et al., 2017). The continued increase of students being
identified with ASD suggests that schools need to create collaboration models that bring all
levels of educators from a school site together to learn more about students with Individualized
Education Programs (IEPs), and how to support their educational and social needs.
A key variable for success of students with ASD in inclusive settings is the overall school
environment. Inclusive education must be understood as a school-wide philosophy that provides
the support and resources needed to provide a quality education for all students (Braunsteiner &
Mariano-Lapidus, 2014; Morcom & McCallum, 2012); inclusion is not simply about instruction,
it is about belonging (Morcom & McCallum, 2012). That stated, educational systems and the
culture of school sites do not effectively promote the inclusion of students with autism in the
general education classroom (Roberts & Simpson, 2016). Segregated educational settings, such
as special education classrooms, put students with ASD at a disadvantage (Pearson, 2015).
Furthermore, school systems need to make inclusionary practices part of the overall school
culture and an expectation of human rights (Connor & Baglieri, 2009; Kratochvilova, 2015;
Morcom & McCallum, 2012). Findings show that students with disabilities are often relocated
to separate classrooms because they are not viewed as being normal in how they speak, behave,
learn, and interact socially. This lack of procedural knowledge validates a culture of segregation
and further marginalizes the students with ASD by denying them higher level learning
experiences (Gavaldà & Qinyi, 2012).
Culture is a way to describe the core values, goals, beliefs, emotions, and processes that
people learn over time (Clark & Estes, 2008). Work culture is present in our conscious and
unconscious understanding of who we are, what we value, and how we do what we do as an
organization; all of which can guide decision-making about organizational goals and the
processes and procedures used to achieve them (Clark & Estes, 2008). Rueda (2011) states that
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 50

organizations are categorized by cultural models which help define what is customary; they are
shared mental schema or a basic understanding of how business is done (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001). Organizations are also comprised of various cultural settings, also referred
to as social contexts, where policies and practices are established and the visible aspects of the
organization play out (Rueda, 2011; Schein, 2017). Clark and Estes (2008) posit that in order to
fully understand performance within an organization, the interconnection of knowledge, skills,
motivation, and organizational influences must also be realized.
Educational organizations are complex systems that are very different from other
organizations; there is an increased emotional element as the achievement of performance
outcomes is directly tied to the success and well-being of children (Rueda, 2011). The following
sections describe the cultural setting influences necessary for understanding Inland Empire
School District’s impact on teachers’ perspectives about the inclusion of students with Autism
Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in the general education classroom. First, the focus will discuss the
cultural model of acceptance and promotion of school-wide inclusion. Second, the focus will
delve into the cultural setting and necessary resources to uphold IESD’s commitment to educate
each student.
Stakeholder specific factors. The following sections highlight the two cultural setting
influences that are essential to IESD’s impact on teachers’ perspectives of inclusive practices.
The first influence focuses on the cultural setting where district and school leaders exhibit the
acceptance and promotion of school-wide inclusion for students with diverse learning needs,
specifically, students with ASD. Second, the discussion transitions to the cultural settings that
provide teachers increased opportunity for collaboration and observation to develop their
abilities to implement inclusive practices in the general education classroom.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 51

Culture of acceptance and promotion of school-wide inclusion. There needs to be an
acceptance and promotion among IESD school leaders and teachers to embrace inclusive
practices for students with ASD in the general education classroom, a commitment to the
organizational mission, and recognition that students with ASD are included in this commitment.
A key variable for success of students with ASD in inclusive settings is the overall school
environment (Crosland & Dunlap, 2012). That stated, there are many layers of the educational
system involved in promoting and providing successful programs from legislation about
educational rights at the national level to implementation of inclusive practices in the classroom.
In early 2018, IESD leadership impressed upon administration that IESD is in the midst
of a culture shift, and it is no longer acceptable to educate students in a separate setting (S.
McMillan pseudonym, personal communication, January, 2018). Additionally, they have tasked
site leadership to communicate a clear understanding of the district’s goal to educate each
student, emphasizing that Special Education is meant to supplement General Education, not
replace it. This message reinforces the legal mandate of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA) to provide students a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in the
least restrictive environment (LRE).
Opportunity for collaboration and observation. In order for educational systems to
promote a consistent culture that embraces inclusion of students with ASD, they must afford
teachers the appropriate training and opportunity to value the practice as relevant and important
(Avramidis & Norwich, 2002; Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014; Carroll et al, 2003;
McCray & McHatton, 2011). Freeman (2006) states that there are compelling reasons to believe
that establishing a positive school-wide culture of inclusion can have a significant impact on
students with ASD (Crosland & Dunlap, 2012). That stated, this effort requires boundless
support from organizational leaders as well as building the capacity of teachers through
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 52

deliberate funding and decision-making (Kratochílová, 2015; Roberts & Simpson, 2015).
Costley (2013) found that teachers believe inclusion programs would improve if they received
clear expectations from administrative leadership about implementation, had ample time to
collaborate with one another, and were provided the necessary training to feel confident
delivering inclusive practices.
In addition to training, teachers may also benefit from the opportunity to observe other
teachers as they use inclusive practices in their classrooms (Fuchs, 2010). Furthermore, they
may seek out aspirational school settings in other districts who have proven to be successful with
inclusive practices in the general education setting. IESD is currently supporting teachers
through the implementation of a classroom collaboration model where students with ASD and
other learning disabilities are educated in the mainstream setting by a general education teacher
with the support of a special education teacher. This organizational shift to address barriers has
merit in its effort to increase inclusive practices, however, progress towards significant change is
slow moving. As IESD persists to make the necessary changes, the organization must ensure
that all employees attain adequate knowledge and skills, motivation, and support to make
progress towards organizational goals; all of which must be in place and aligned with each other
to achieve optimal success (Clark & Estes, 2008). Table 4 shows a summary of organizational
influences as they relate to IESD’s global goal, as well as a brief description of possible
assessment tools to measure the assumed influences on this goal.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 53

Table 4
Organizational Influences
Organizational Mission
Inland Empire School District’s mission is to educate each student by providing unlimited
learning opportunities to help them achieve success in college, career, and in life.
Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2021, 100% of students enrolled in IESD middle and high schools with Autism
Spectrum Disorder (ASD/HFASD) will receive a Free and Appropriate Public Education
(FAPE) to ensure access and equity in a Least Restrictive Environment (LRE).

Assumed Organizational Influences Organizational Influence Assessment

Cultural Model Influence:
School leaders need to create buy-in with teachers
by advocating and reinforcing the importance of
inclusive practices to increase equity and
academic success for students with ASD in the
general education classroom.

Cultural Setting Influence:
Teachers require training and collaboration time
to become informed of inclusive practices that can
be incorporated into lessons in the general
education classroom.

Create interview questions that provide
data as to how teachers perceive the
current system of educating students with
ASD, and how they can individually
contribute to greater acceptance of
inclusive practices.

Create interview questions to assess how
much collaboration time teachers need to
adjust their current lessons/units and
instructional strategies to become better
informed of inclusive practices, and what
specific actions or trainings are necessary
to support their efforts.

Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Teachers’ Knowledge
and Motivation and the Organizational Context

A conceptual framework, often used interchangeably with theoretical framework,
grounds a study in the relevant knowledge bases that lay the foundation for the importance of the
problem of practice and research questions (Rocco & Plakhotnik, 2009). The most important
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 54

thing to understand when creating a conceptual framework is that it is a model of what the writer
plans to study, establishes the current status of research findings, and demonstrates a rationale for
further investigation; in essence, it informs research design (Maxwell, 2013). A conceptual
framework guides a writer’s strategy for sampling, assesses the type of data to collect, and helps
determine which instruments or methods would be most useful to collect that data (Maxwell,
2013). Furthermore, a conceptual framework requires close attention to the validity of
information and data discovered in the literature review, combined with consideration of
personal experience and disclosure of potential biases to determine the merit of furthering the
study, and how to build upon previous research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The conceptual
framework exhibited here considers previous research on teachers’ attitudes about the inclusion
of students with ASD in the mainstream classroom. This framework aims to use prior research
to improve the current educational system within the context of Inland Empire School District by
achieving the stakeholder goal to improve teachers’ proficiency in the utilization of inclusive
practices in the general education setting.
Creswell & Creswell (2018) posit that philosophical worldviews influence the practice of
research and must be identified by the researcher to reveal the ideas they bring to their study.
These worldviews are developed based on a variety of influences including past research
experiences, and the beliefs held by a researcher that often lead to strong research methods.
Additionally, a basic assumption of critical inquiry in a particular society, in this case study, the
inclusion of students with ASD, is the goal to challenge, transform, and empower the oppressed
group (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Although this study exhibits aspects of a transformative
worldview as it involves the inclusion of a marginalized group, it better emulates a philosophical
worldview, as it can be more closely identified with a pragmatic worldview (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). Pragmatism is a worldview that arises from actions, situations, and
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 55

consequences (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). By applying a pragmatic approach, the researcher
derives an understanding of the research problem by using all approaches available, or mixed-
methods (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Thus, in this mixed-methods research, the researcher will
use both quantitative and qualitative data to provide the best understanding of the problem
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). This study looks closely at teachers and their attitudes about the
inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom.
While each of the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are
initially researched in isolation as to their impact on teachers’ attitudes about the inclusion of
students with ASD in the mainstream classroom, the combination of each plays an instrumental
role in this paradigm (Clark & Estes, 2008). This conceptual framework illuminates the manner
in which knowledge and motivation work alongside the IESD organizational context to achieve
the IESD stakeholder goal for teachers to demonstrate proficiency by implementing inclusive
strategies for accommodating the learning needs of students with ASD in the general education
classroom; adjusted lessons in all core academic areas to provide accommodations, and analyze
performance data to assess growth by January 2021. Figure 1 on the following page explains
this conceptual framework.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 56

Figure 1. Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation within Organizational Cultural
Models and Settings.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 57

This figure exhibits the relationship between the assumed knowledge and motivational
influences impacting teachers’ attitudes about the inclusion of students with ASD in the general
education classroom within the organizational context of middle and high schools in IESD. The
large blue circle represents IESD as the organization as well as the cultural models and settings
that exist within the district. The goal of the organization, or rather IESD’s mission to the
community, is to provide students with unlimited opportunities to achieve success in college,
career, and life. The Cultural Model includes the expectation of student-centered learning, an
acceptance of diversity, and ongoing instructional change to meet the equity and educational
needs of each student. The Cultural Setting includes district support of teachers through
professional development and collaboration that is aligned with IESD’s standards for excellence
in education.
The green circle that lies within the larger blue circle represents middle and high school
teachers within Inland Empire School District. Positioned within the green circle are the
knowledge and motivational influences that are preventing the district from achieving its goal.
The knowledge influences are declarative and procedural in relation to the problem of practice as
teachers require more knowledge about autism spectrum disorder, and more professional
development to learn how to provide inclusive instruction. It also includes metacognitive
knowledge influences indicating that teachers need to recognize why perceptions impact their
professional practice. The motivational influences associated with the problem are concerns
with self-efficacy, expectancy value, and attribution theory as they relate to teachers’ attitudes
about the inclusion of students with ASD in the mainstream classroom. These influences must
be addressed as organizational goals are achieved by a system of interacting processes of specific
knowledge and motivation to function successfully (Clark & Estes, 2008). Also, within the
green circle is a purple oval that represents the intended performance outcome regarding
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 58

teachers’ attitudes about inclusive practices. Once the district has addressed organizational
barriers impacting teachers’ knowledge and motivation, they must acknowledge the impact their
attitudes have on the education of students with ASD and the organizational goal. Lastly, there
is an arrow indicating the relationship of all items in the blue circle and how they impact the
achievement of the stakeholder goal.
The purpose of this mixed-methods study is the better understand how knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences interact to promote change in teachers’ perspectives
about the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education setting. At present, students’
needs are not being adequately met, and they are not experiencing academic success; therefore,
the district continues to fall short of achieving its global goal. This conceptual framework posits
that if the knowledge and motivational influences are addressed to better inform teachers about
inclusive practices, they will experience an increase in self-efficacy in the implementation of said
practices and take ownership of their responsibility to educate students of all abilities. Moreover,
the organization will increase the likelihood of achieving its global goal.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study is to explore general education teachers’ attitudes and concerns
regarding the inclusion of students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in the general
education classroom. The literature presented in this chapter revealed that teachers’ attitudes
about inclusion are impacted by: a) a lack of knowledge and motivation to appropriately educate
students with ASD; b) a deficiency of ongoing professional development in school districts
regarding instructional practices for students with ASD; and c) school systems that do not
promote the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom. Furthermore,
findings in the literature indicate that teachers’ lack the knowledge and skills necessary to create
inclusive lessons, as well as the motivation to implement said lessons with confidence. These
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 59

deficiencies in knowledge and motivation interacting alongside the assumed organizational
influences play an instrumental role in the educational rights of students with ASD. The
conceptual framework exhibited in this chapter considers previous research on teachers’ attitudes
about the inclusion of students with ASD in the mainstream classroom, and aims to use that
research to improve the current educational system within the context of Inland Empire School
District.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 60

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
This study explored teachers’ perspectives about the inclusion of students with Autism
Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in the general education classroom in Inland Empire School District in
Riverside County, California. This chapter presents the research design of this improvement
study, and the methodological approach used for data collection and analysis to answer the
following research questions:
1. How are IESD teachers’ knowledge and motivation related to the inclusion of
students with ASD in the general education classroom?
2. What is the interaction between the context of IESD’s organizational culture and
teachers’ knowledge and motivation regarding the inclusion of students with ASD
in the general education classroom?
3. What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions to achieve the organizational goal?
To begin, the reader will find a description of participating stakeholders, followed by the
sampling criteria and rationale for those selected to participate in surveys, observations, and
interviews. Next, the process for data collection and instrumentation is presented for both the
quantitative and qualitative phases of the study, including the methods used to guide data
analysis. Lastly, the credibility and trustworthiness, validity and reliability, and ethics of the
research design of the study are justified, as well as the limitations and delimitations of the study.
Instruments for data collection used in this study are located in the appendices following the
reference section.
Participating Stakeholders
Although various stakeholders play an instrumental role in the achievement of the overall
organizational goal to prepare all students for success in college, career, and life, it is essential to
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 61

improve teachers’ instructional practice to increase the inclusion of students with Autism
Spectrum Disorder in the general education setting. Therefore, the stakeholders of focus for this
study were middle and high school teachers employed by Inland Empire School District.
Teachers play a pinnacle role in the learning dynamic that takes place in the classroom, and can
provide firsthand information about their professional practice. Using the research questions as a
guide, the selection of teachers within the overall population of middle and high school teachers
was narrowed in the sampling process based on specific criteria (Maxwell, 2012).

Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Participants must have been current employees of IESD. It was not feasible
to survey retired teachers nor would they have had current knowledge of instruction in IESD.
Criterion 2. Participants from IESD were identified as middle school or high school
teachers. This study was specific to middle and high school inclusion, therefore elementary
teachers’ perspectives were not considered.
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
There were approximately 300 middle and high school teachers employed in IESD when
the survey was administered. The survey was sent to all teachers meeting this criteria in pursuit
of full participation. Using an explanatory sequential design as described by Creswell and
Creswell (2018), this quantitative data was collected first as its results informed eligible
participants for the subsequent qualitative observations and interviews (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The survey was created using the online platform, Qualtrics, and distributed via email to
all middle and high school teachers.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 62

Observation Sampling Criteria and Rationale
In an effort to select teachers from the larger survey group who were willing to be
observed, it was essential to consider participants who met criteria that would best address the
research questions for this study.
Criterion 1. Only participants who voluntarily provided contact information via the
survey were selected for observation.
Criterion 2. Of the teachers who volunteered to be observed, each must have had at least
five years of teaching experience. This information was identified based on initial contact via
email or by phone conversation.
Criterion 3. Of the teachers with at least five years of teaching experience, each must
have had at least three years of teaching experience in a classroom setting that included students
with ASD. This information was identified based on initial contact via email or by phone
conversation.
Criterion 4. Students with ASD must have been enrolled in the class period selected for
observation. For the purpose of this study it was necessary to observe the interactions of
teachers and students with ASD in the inclusive classroom setting.
Criterion 5. Participants selected for observation must have taught a general education
course that met graduation requirements and/or ‘a-g’ college admission requirements for the
University of California and California State University schools. These requirements were
aligned with IESD’s organizational goal regarding student success.

Observation Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
Non probability sampling is the method of choice for most qualitative research (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). Therefore, purposeful sampling was used to select observation participants for
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 63

this study. Patton (2015) posits that when using a purposeful sampling strategy, a researcher
should capture what is typical, normal, and average for the setting, people, and activities of
interest to the research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Because the objective of this study was to
identify the knowledge, skills, and motivational influences affecting the average teacher in an
inclusive classroom setting, purposeful sampling was the most suitable method to use for
observation selection.
The criterion requiring a minimum of five years of experience allowed for teachers to
have had ample exposure to a wide variety of learners (i.e. special needs, gifted, English
learners), and mitigated instructional errors that are more common with novice
teachers. Typically, teachers with greater years of service have also honed their classroom
management skills which indicate a higher level of competence and self-efficacy in the
educational setting. The rationale for the third criterion is that the research questions for this
study required responses from teachers with experience in the inclusive classroom setting. The
rationale for the fourth criterion ensured that the researcher had the opportunity to capture
observational data of the interactions of teachers and students with ASD, and the dynamics of
instruction and learning. Lastly, the rationale for the fifth criterion is that students with ASD are
often already included in non-academic electives as part of their Individualized Education
Program (IEP) to provide instructional minutes in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). It
was important to observe teachers’ instruction in the mainstream classroom setting in which
students with ASD are not consistently included.
A total of 3 classroom observations of willing respondents were conducted for this study.
These participants were selected from the preceding quantitative survey as they responded to the
final survey question requesting participants to volunteer for a follow up classroom observation
and interview. Each participant provided a personal email and/or contact number; of the nine
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 64

survey participants who provided contact information, five were ultimately willing to follow
through with observations and interviews when contacted via email, and three were actualized as
they met all criteria.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
In an effort to select teachers from the observation group who were willing to be
interviewed, it was essential to consider criteria that would best address the research questions
for this study.
Criterion 1. Of all voluntary respondents, only teachers who participated in the
classroom observation phase of this study were selected to participate in interviews.
Criterion 2. Participants selected for interviews must have had at least five years of
teaching experience in IESD.
Criterion 3. Of the teachers with at least five years of teaching experience in IESD, they
must have had at least three years of teaching experience in a classroom setting that included
students with ASD.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
As previously stated, data for this study was collected using an explanatory sequential
design, therefore interviewing participants who were previously observed was the next and final
step in the sequence for data collection. Because the objective of this study was to identify the
knowledge, skills, and motivational influences affecting the average teacher in an inclusive
classroom setting, interviews were the most suitable method to discover what specifically occurs
with teachers’ attitudes about inclusion, why it occurs, the impact on students’ learning, and the
relationship between the findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additional rationale for the second
criterion is that teachers with at least five years of experience in IESD have a better grasp of the
school district as an organization, as well as its culture and that of their respective school sites to
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 65

provide informed responses to the interview questions relevant to the organization. A total of
three in-depth interviews of willing respondents were conducted following three classroom
observations of the same respondents.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Creswell and Creswell (2018) define mixed-methods research as an approach in social
science by which the investigator gathers both quantitative and qualitative data, integrates the
two, and draws interpretations based on the strengths of both to better understand the problem
being researched (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Data collected for teachers’ perspectives on
inclusion included a survey distributed to all middle and high school teachers in IESD,
observations of teacher participants who provided contact information via the survey to be
observed in their inclusive classroom setting, and follow up interviews with those teachers whose
classrooms were observed. Using a mix-methods approach allowed for triangulation of the
research to mitigate bias as each method of the research was checked by another to gain a solid
understanding of the teachers’ perspectives about inclusion (Maxwell, 2013).
Surveys
The survey amassed valuable data directly aligned with the research questions for this
study. It was created using the online platform, Qualtrics, and sent to all middle and high school
teachers via a blind copied email to their school email addresses directly from Qualtrics.
Included with this email was an introductory statement and an assurance of anonymity. The
responses provided a quantitative description of IESD teachers’ levels of training to teach in an
inclusive classroom setting, their perspectives about the effectiveness of inclusion, and to what
extent they viewed the district as being supportive of inclusive practices.
There are three middle schools and three comprehensive high schools within IESD with
an approximate total of 300 classroom teachers. In an effort to encourage the greatest
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 66

participation possible, and provide increased accuracy to inferences made during data analysis,
the first instrument used for data collection was a 16-question survey sent to all middle and high
school teachers in September 2019. The survey included demographic items to allow the
researcher to disaggregate responses regarding teachers’ years of experience, whether they were
middle or high school teachers, general or special educators, and subject areas taught. The
remaining questions were crafted to explore teachers’ knowledge of ASD, their attitudes about
inclusion, and their perspectives of the implementation of inclusive practices in IESD. As a
reminder, an explanatory sequential design approach was used for this study, meaning the results
of this survey were used to inform the qualitative phase, observations and interviews (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).
Observations
Observations allow researchers the opportunity to draw inferences that cannot be
obtained from interviews alone, and are used to describe settings, behaviors, and events that
capture a more direct understanding of one’s perspectives by viewing their actions in the
research setting (Maxwell, 2013). Although the survey provided significant data regarding
teachers’ perspectives about inclusion, it was essential to further examine how they implemented
inclusive instructional practices. Classroom observations began in mid-October 2019 and were
completed by late October 2019. The role of the researcher during this qualitative phase was that
of an observer as participant. Adler and Adler (1998) describe the observer as participant as a
role where the observer’s activities are known to the group being observed, and allow for the
researcher to observe and interact closely enough with the group without engaging in an active
role (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As an outsider, an observer will notice things that have become
second nature to the participants themselves. By recording this behavior as it happened, the
researcher was able to triangulate her findings by anchoring interview questions based on what
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 67

was observed in the classroom (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For this study, a small subset of
voluntary survey respondents were selected to be observed in their classrooms. The observations
of these teachers allowed the researcher an opportunity to gather a firsthand account and rich
description of actual inclusive classroom settings. Furthermore, observations afforded the
occasion to see the behaviors among students, teachers, and support staff during instruction, and
draw inferences about perspectives prior to participant interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
This method provided insight into each participants’ perspective of which they might not directly
state in an interview (Maxwell, 2013).
Each observation was recorded in as much descriptive detail possible, and cited direct
quotations and observer comments. The researcher used Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) checklist
of elements likely to be present in any setting which included: (1) the physical setting, (2) the
participants, (3) activities and interactions, (4) conversations, (5) subtle factors, and (6) the
researcher’s effect on the observation. Each observation was approximately 55 minutes in
length, and was followed by an immediate write up of field notes. Gaining entry was not an
issue as each observation took place in the researcher’s district of employment, the participants
volunteered to be observed, and the site administration approved of each observation in advance.
Interviews
Interviews were conducted soon after the completion of each classroom observation.
They began in late October 2019, and were completed by early November 2019. This schedule
allowed time for teachers to get settled into the new school year, and have ample time to become
familiar with their students’ learning modalities. Interview notes were reviewed and member
checks were conducted to ensure that respondents’ perspectives were accurately represented, and
permissions were confirmed to use any direct quotations. Three individual interviews from a
sampling of middle school and high school teachers were conducted. Each interview ran
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 68

approximately 45-60 minutes in duration for a total of about 2-3 hours. (Creswell & Creswell,
2018; Krueger & Casey, 2009).
Interviews provided the opportunity to have open dialogue with teachers about the
inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom. The questions were highly
descriptive and purposefully aligned with the research questions from the conceptual framework.
They were intended to examine the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational factors
that impact teachers’ attitudes about the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education
classroom. Interviews also explored teachers’ experiences, how they construct worldviews of
their professional practice, and what meaning they attribute to their experiences in educating
students with ASD (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The protocol used for interviews was semi structured. Krueger and Casey (2009) state
that having a written plan forces the researcher to think through a study in a logical manner and
ensure that adequate time is available to collect data. That stated, use of this protocol allowed
the researcher to create a plan that was implicit in design and provided flexibility for revisions
based on data obtained via surveys, as well as during observations and initial interviews
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Because teachers’ instructional practices can be a
topic that is very personal in nature, interviewing teachers face-to-face was a helpful approach to
further elaborate on the results of the survey and the findings of observational data.
Interview procedures were informal in nature. Each participant elected to be interviewed
at their respective school site in a private office setting that was quiet, comfortable, and available
without interruption for the duration of the interview (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Maxwell,
2013). The time of interviews varied from before school hours, during non-instructional time,
and after school hours depending on the preference of each respondent. The researcher captured
data from each interview with detailed notes, and paused questioning as needed to confirm
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 69

statements and seek permission to use direct quotes (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Maxwell, 2013;
Patton, 2002). Although each interview commenced with the same set of questions specific to
the research, on occasion it was necessary to rephrase questions for the individual participant
when they required clarity, or to gather information specific to events observed in their preceding
observation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally, the topic of inclusion proved to be a
current topic of high interest in IESD, and consequently all three participants took their
respective interviews in a direction that was organic yet still aligned with the study (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2002).
In an effort to set a comfortable tone, each interview began with a few questions that
were more factual in nature and easier to answer, such as participants’ educational background
and teaching preparation (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Once a rapport of trust had been
established with each respondent, the interview transitioned to questioning that assessed their
knowledge of students with ASD, and the training they have received to effectively teach this
student demographic. In the final part of the interview, participants were asked for their insight
about how the school and district in which they teach incorporated and promoted a culture of
inclusion at the school site. At the conclusion of each interview, participants were thanked for
their time, provided reassurances about confidentiality, and asked if they had any questions about
how their responses would be used for the study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Data Analysis
The data analysis for this study incorporated quantitative data from the survey, and
qualitative data from observations as well as interviews. The stakeholder group for the survey
was a group totaling 96 responses, and the primary instrument used for the survey was Qualtrics,
an online survey platform. Aside from general questions seeking demographic information and a
few requesting interval and ordinal data, a Likert scale of measurement was used for the
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 70

remaining questions asking respondents to rate items on a scale of strongly agree to strongly
disagree with no option for somewhat agree/disagree, I don’t know, or not applicable.
Frequencies for Likert scale items that generated ordinal data were calculated, and descriptive
statistical analysis was used for questions that produced interval data. Salkind (2017) insists that
a visual representation is a much more effective way to examine the characteristics of, and
greatly improve the understanding of a data set. That stated, the results of the survey as shown in
Chapter Four, are presented using graphs and charts that best provide a visual description of each
data set.
Data analysis took place throughout data collection for both observations and interviews,
and the researcher was the primary instrument used for this qualitative portion of the research.
Observer comments were analyzed at the conclusion of each observation, and analytic memos
were written to document thoughts or inferences as they related to the conceptual framework,
and make connections to the researched literature. This process allowed the researcher to make
sense of the data and establish themes, as well as modify interview questions as appropriate for
triangulation of data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Similar steps were used during data analysis following each interview with the addition of
transcription and coding. In the first phase of analysis, the researcher annotated transcripts to
make connections to make connections to the research questions. Next, open coding was used to
identify empirical codes and applying a priori codes from the conceptual framework. In the
second phase of data analysis, empirical and a prior codes were aggregated into analytic/axial
codes. In the third phase of data analysis, pattern codes and themes that emerged in relation to
the conceptual framework and study questions were identified.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 71

Validity and Reliability

Validity and reliability were essential to the ethics of this research study, and the
trustworthiness of its results. Firestone (1987) posits that validity in quantitative research must
prove to the reader that collection and analysis procedures have been followed, and the results
measure what they were intended to measure (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam and Tisdell,
2016; Salkind, 2017). To ensure validity for the quantitative phase of this mixed-methods study,
a brief survey was used to draw meaningful and useful inferences from the results and apply
them to the research questions (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To
mitigate threats to validity with participant selection, the survey was distributed via email to all
stakeholders of focus in IESD using a secure hyperlink from Qualtrics to assure participants that
their responses would remain anonymous. Another benefit to using Qualtrics was that the
researcher was able to monitor response rates that indicated when it was necessary to issue email
reminders soliciting survey participation. Additionally, each respondent received a message at
the conclusion of the survey to thank them for their participation and confirm the recording of
their responses.
Reliability refers to the consistency and repeatability of a research instrument, in other
words, the approach indicates consistency across different researchers and test administrations
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). To confirm reliability in the quantitative phase of this study, the
survey administered to participants maintained consistency by using a Likert Scale to measure
responses ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree with no option given for somewhat
agree/disagree, I don’t know or not applicable. Furthermore, the survey was piloted to three
similar stakeholders prior to administration who made recommendations that were used to
improve questions and gain insight about stakeholders as a means to solicit a greater rate of
response (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Lastly, the email included an introduction to the
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 72

researcher and rationale for the survey, as well as an invitation for further participation in the
form of a classroom observation and interview with the safeguard of confidentiality.
Credibility and Trustworthiness

The purpose of using a mixed-methods approach in this study was to triangulate the data.
Using multiple sources helps researchers gain a more solid understanding of the problem being
investigated, while enhancing the credibility of conclusions as opposed to a singular approach
(Maxwell, 2013). Therefore, the results captured from one method of data collection were used
to check on another to see if methods with different strengths and limitations supported a single
conclusion (Maxwell, 2013).
As the key instrument for the qualitative phase of this mixed-methods study, the
researcher conducted observations and interviews, and maintained accountability for the
credibility of findings and the trustworthiness of the research process (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
First, in order to establish an atmosphere of trust, the researcher fully explained the purpose of
the study and the data collection process using familiar terminology, as well as provided each
participant with information on how the findings would be used. The goal for each observation
and interview was to gather rich, descriptive data that addressed the research questions in the
conceptual framework. Bogdan and Biklen (2007) posit that a good interview involves good
listening; that stated, the researcher sought to understand each respondent’s account, and listened
carefully to each participant without interrupting (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). Those who
participated provided responses that were candid, honest, and in-depth for each interview, which
served as an indicator of their trust in the researcher (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). All additional steps
necessary were taken to ensure that a standard of clarity and consistency remained evident to
each stakeholder throughout the data collection process. Lastly, an extended effort was made to
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 73

build and maintain trust by assuring participants that they could take a break or stop the
interview at any time (Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
To further emphasize the credibility of this data collection method, the researcher focused
on three specific strategies to enhance the integrity of data collection and data analysis: 1)
practiced reflexivity, 2) captured and recorded rich data, and 3) followed through with member
checking. Probst and Berenson (2014) indicate that reflexivity is an awareness of how a
researcher affects or is affected by the topic being studied (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). It was
critical to this study that the researcher consider all biases and positionality as they pertained to
the problem of practice to mitigate any effects to the findings of the study (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Specifically, throughout the research process, the researcher maintained awareness of her
position as a site administrator in IESD, that she is a parent of a child with ASD, was a
supervisory administrator for special education for 15 years who initiated the implementation of
a co-teach inclusion model of instruction at both middle and high school levels. Although it was
not possible for the researcher to completely disregard personal and professional experiences
with this topic, explaining these potential biases positioned the researcher as someone who was
trustworthy, and collected and analyzed data that was credible with minimal bias (Maxwell,
2013).
Second, to maintain or increase credibility the researcher captured and recorded rich data
from all participants. This task was accomplished by taking copious, low-inference notes
throughout the interview process that were highly descriptive of interactions with each
participant (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The written notes were used to document permissions
from participants to include direct quotes, as well as note observer comments regarding changes
in tone, emotional responses, and facial expressions. Moreover, the researcher used a recording
device to further reduce the influence of any inferential comments that may have been noted
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 74

during interviews (Maxwell, 2013). Ultimately, all data collected from participant interviews
were included to support the overall findings of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The final strategy used to maintain credibility in the process, and trustworthiness in the
researcher was the initiation of member checks. Member checks is a term used to describe a
system of soliciting feedback about data and emergent findings from people involved in a
research study, and can be an essential step to validate and/or clarify any statements that
participants made during the interview process (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Participants were invited to review preliminary findings and data analysis to assess the validity
of the researcher’s interpretations. In doing so, they were able to recognize their contributions to
the findings, and offer suggestions to better express their perspectives (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Member checks were also a tactic used to triangulate data with survey responses and
observation data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton,
2002).
Ethics
Reliability and validity of a mixed-methods research study depends on the ethics of the
investigator and the consistency of the instruments used to collect data (Creswell & Creswell,
2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The investigator for this study surveyed, observed, and
interviewed middle and high school teachers to collect data regarding their attitudes about the
inclusion of students with Autism Spectrum Disorder in the mainstream classroom. Because in-
person observations and interviews were used as a means of obtaining information, the
researcher held an ethical obligation to ensure that no harm came to any participant who
provided access and consent (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). It was also important that the researcher be
cognizant at all times of her role and responsibility as a researcher by ensuring that all
participants were respected as human beings first and foremost, and treated accordingly
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 75

(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). All participants were given a sufficient description of the purpose of
the study so they could make an informed decision as to whether or not they completed the
survey, and furthermore if they chose to participate in the observation and interview phase of the
study (Glesne, 2011; Rubin & Rubin, 2012). All participants who consented to be observed and
interviewed were required to sign an informed consent agreement to confirm: (1) their
understanding of the purpose of the study, (2) they are voluntary participants whose identity will
be kept confidential, (3) they give permission to an audio recording of the interview, and (4) they
are free to stop the interview and/or recant their contribution at any time (Glesne, 2011; Krueger,
2009; Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
During the data collection phase of this study, the researcher served as an assistant
principal at a high school in Inland Empire School District. In that capacity as a site
administrator, she supervised a variety of employees at the school site, including several teachers
who were eligible to participate in this study. To mitigate the potential for any teacher to feel
coerced into participation due to that supervisory position, the researcher chose to only observe
and interview eligible teachers outside of her supervisory purview (Maxwell, 2013). When
recruiting participants, the researcher emphasized the purpose of the study as well as her role as a
researcher to assure those who consent to observations and interviews that her employment as a
site administrator would have no bearing on the data collection process. The information
obtained through observations and interviews was kept confidential and was analyzed
accordingly to maintain all participants’ anonymity. Lastly, as an additional measure to ensure
no harm comes to participants of this qualitative study, the researcher completed the online CITI
Training required by the University of Southern California (USC) to obtain a certification to
conduct research, and submitted a defense proposal to USC’s Institutional Review Board (IRB)
that was approved prior to any data collection.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 76

Limitations and Delimitations
All research studies encounter limitations beyond the researcher’s control. They can
include researcher biases, access to a reliable sampling of participants, financial resources, time,
etc. (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Simon, 2011). The purpose of this particular study was to
explore the knowledge/skill, motivation, and organizational influences as they pertain to
teachers’ perspectives about the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education
classroom. Prior to engaging in data collection, the researcher assumed the potential for three
limitations including: (1) time for data collection, (2) the observer impact on the classroom
setting during observations, and the integrity of teachers’ responses to interview questions, (3)
the researcher’s own personal and professional positionality as it related to the problem of
practice.
Time was a limitation because there are optimal windows of time available during each
school year to conduct teacher surveys, observations, and interviews. Based on the researcher’s
experience as an educator, it was prudent to schedule data collection after summer break so
teachers were well-rested to start the school year with a fresh perspective. The second limitation
was the integrity of information collected from teachers during data collection. This limitation
was curbed to an extent with the promise of anonymity and confidentiality as well as
emphasizing participants’ right to withdraw from observations and interviews at any time, but
one can never be entirely certain that everything that was stated was the absolute truth. Another
limitation to this study is that although the researcher selected middle and high school teachers,
which total more than 300 potential respondents, there were other stakeholders involved with the
education of students with ASD, including school psychologists, instructional aides, district and
site administrators, parents, and students. Lastly, despite her best efforts, a researcher can never
be completely unbiased during the process of data collection. She did, however, practice
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 77

reflexivity as it related to the problem of practice, was non-judgmental, sensitive, and respectful
to all participants as they shared their knowledge and experience about the inclusion of students
with ASD in their classrooms (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Maxwell, 2015; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016).
This study and its stakeholders also presented various delimitations, over which the
researcher had some control. First, the problem of practice selected surrounded inclusion in
middle and high schools which was an item of conversation between IESD and the teachers’
union at the time of data collection. Second, the research questions were written in alignment
with discussions already taking place in IESD middle and high schools so the topic will be
familiar to interview participants. Lastly, because the stakeholder sampling for this study is one
that exists in numerous school districts throughout the state of California, the findings have the
potential for generalizability and could serve as a resource for schools/districts outside of the
organization (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 78

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The results and findings of this mixed-methods data analysis served the ultimate purpose
of this study: An improvement study to discover why teachers in Inland Empire School District
hold adverse attitudes about educating students with ASD in the least restrictive environment of
the general education classroom. The following research questions were answered as a result of
this data analysis:
● How are IESD teachers’ knowledge and motivation related to the inclusion of
students with Autism Spectrum Disorder in the general education classroom?
● What is the interaction between the context of IESD’s organizational culture and
teachers’ knowledge and motivation regarding the inclusion of students with ASD
in the general education classroom?
● What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions to achieve the organizational goal? The answer to this research question
if forthcoming in Chapter Five.
To validate the assumed influences stated in Chapter Two of this study, both quantitative
and qualitative data were collected; quantitative data was collected via an online survey,
followed by qualitative data which was collected through classroom observations and in-person
interviews. The results and findings in this chapter are organized according to the assumed
knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational influences presented in Chapter Two.
Research questions one and two were answered based on the analysis of results and findings
surrounding the assumed influences.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 79

Participating Stakeholders
Quantitative data was collected through an online survey to approximately 300 middle
and high school teachers in IESD. Ultimately, 96 teachers responded to the survey for a
response rate of 32%. Of the 96 respondents, nine agreed via the survey to be contacted for a
follow-up observation lasting one class period, and an in-person interview that would last no
more than one hour. Of those who responded, 21.88% were teachers from the middle schools,
and 78.13% were teachers from high schools (Figure 2). The majority of respondents, 71.8% in
total, had 10 years or more of teaching experience, while only 7.29% indicated that they had
been teaching for 2 years or less. The remaining 20.84% of respondents ranged from three to
nine years of teaching experience (Figure 3). A sample of three teachers agreed to participate in
both observations and interviews allowing for the collection of qualitative data to further explore
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to the problem.

Figure 2. Response to item: Please select the choice below that best describes the grade level(s)
you teach.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 80

Figure 3. Response to item: How many years have you been teaching?
As indicated in Figure 4, the vast majority of teachers responding to the survey were
general educators, 85.26%, while special educators represented the remaining 14.74%. This data
is significant to this study as the problem of practice surrounds teachers’ perspectives about the
inclusion of students with ASD in the mainstream classroom.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 81

Figure 4. Response to item: Please select the choice below that best describes your teaching
assignment.

The final demographic survey item disaggregated information revealing which subject
areas were taught by the respondents and how many in each subject area (Figure 5). This data is
highly relevant to this study as students with ASD are not consistently included in core academic
areas (English Language Arts, Math, Science, and Social Science), and the data collected from
teachers in these subject areas is essential to answering the research questions.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 82

Figure 5. Response to item: Which subject areas do you currently teach? Please select all that
apply.

A total of three teachers volunteered to be observed and interviewed, and met all the
criteria for this study. The first participant, P1, has been a teacher for almost 18 years, and has
experience teaching both core academics and elective courses. She currently partners with a
special educator and instructional aide in an inclusive classroom setting. The second participant,
P2, is a general educator with five years of experience in a core academic course, and currently
partners with a special educator in an inclusive classroom setting. The third participant, P3, has
been a teacher for over 20 years, has most of her experience in special education, and currently
teaches with a general educator in an inclusive classroom setting. To maintain confidentiality,
each participant was referred to as P1, P2, and P3 in all observation and interview notes, and will
be referred to as such in the following sections.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 83

Results
Knowledge Results
As indicated in the review of the literature, it is important for teachers to be
knowledgeable about the individual behaviors of students with ASD and how they impact
learning. The knowledge influences explored in this section presented one gap that was
validated, and two gaps that were partially validated. An influence was considered validated
when the triangulation of survey results, observations, and interviews indicated that the gap was
significant, and needed to be improved. An influence was considered partially validated when
the triangulated results indicated that the gap was significant based on part of the data, but there
was little to no gap in another part of the data.
Knowledge Influence 1: Teachers need to acquire specific knowledge about Autism
Spectrum Disorder (ASD), and how its behaviors impact how students with ASD access
learning.
Survey results: According to the survey, approximately 63% of teachers strongly agreed
or agreed that they have a strong understanding of the behaviors of students with ASD (Figure
6). Based on the review of the literature indicating that most teachers do not feel that they have
the requisite knowledge to educate students with ASD in the general education setting, these
results indicate a heightened sense of self-efficacy in teacher respondents. The data collected
from this survey question (Figure 6) paralleled data collected from observational data and
participant interviews.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 84

Figure 6. Response to item: I have a strong understanding of the behaviors of students with
ASD.

Survey results: Additional data from the survey regarding teachers’ declarative
knowledge was that students with ASD have the requisite academic skills to be successful in a
general education setting. Figure 7 shows that 85% of teacher respondents strongly agreed or
agreed that students with ASD have the requisite academic skills to be successful in the general
education classroom. These results are aligned with the three classroom observations and follow
up interviews.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 85

Figure 7. Response to item: Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders have the requisite
academic skills to be successful in a general education classroom setting.

Observation data: In all three observations for P1, P2, and P3, the students with ASD
exhibited the requisite skills to learn in the general education setting, and were observed as being
successful when appropriate accommodations were used by the teachers and/or instructional
aides to help said students access the learning.
In P1’s classroom, the researcher was able to identify the one male student with ASD.
When later asked in the interview, about this individual student’s performance and behaviors in
class, P1 described the boy as “being quiet and withdrawn most of the time, but will participate
when prompted.” This student was accommodated with a 1:1 instructional aide. When asked
about the dynamic between the aide and the student, P1 stated that the aide was essential to the
student’s ability to access the curriculum, and posited that “he would likely do nothing without
her assistance.” There was also a special education teacher who arrived about 15 minutes into
the class period. This teacher sat in a chair and watched the lesson. The researcher did not see
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 86

this teacher monitor the work of students in the classroom or engage in any instructional
activities.
When the researcher observed P2’s classroom, she noted that P2 involved her students
with ASD in the class discussion about a novel they were reading. P2 also partnered with a
special educator in her classroom. During the observation, P2 provided step-by-step directions
to students with a visual example of how she wanted students to take notes for the reading. She
then asked students to volunteer to read aloud, and one of them was a student with ASD. When
it was his turn, he was told to read one page. At one point, he skipped a line in the reading, and
P3 provided guidance to get him back on track, and assured him he was fine. At various points,
the class discussed the reading, and the special educator took notes on the whiteboard based on
students’ responses. Overall, it appeared that both educators share responsibility in the delivery
of curriculum, and both tend to the needs of all students in the classroom.
When observed in the classroom, the researcher noted that P3 monitored the learning of
all students in the classroom, but paid particular attention to three specific students, all of which
have ASD. One student, a female, was seated in the front of the class and wore noise canceling
headphones around her neck, another was seated in the middle of the class and he was highly
participatory, and the third student, a male, sat on the side of the classroom near the front, and
remained silent throughout most of the period. The first two were fairly easy to identify as being
students with ASD based on their behaviors, although subtle, however the researcher found it
necessary to ask P3 for confirmation about the third student. P3 described him as high-
functioning in academics, but rarely spoke or engaged in social communication.
Interview question: Please explain your understanding of Autism Spectrum Disorder
(ASD) and its characteristics.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 87

When P1 was asked to explain her understanding of ASD, she stated, “Students on the
spectrum can have behaviors that range from moderate to more severe.” She elaborated further to
explain that, “Some students are more high functioning while others are very quiet, some even
non-verbal...volume can be an issue.”
P2 described students with the disorder as being “high-functioning to low-functioning,
and those students who are high-functioning typically are intelligent in areas like content and
facts, but may lack emotion and/or social skills.”
P3 stated, “Autism has a broad spectrum of characteristics...it’s very individual, but
students with autism can learn. It is a communicative disorder where students often have
difficulty with social skills.” P3 expressed that students with ASD have, “little social interaction
with their peers and seem to migrate towards adults.” Lastly, P3 said, “Some students seem to
struggle with negative behaviors because it is difficult for them to communicate...they don’t
know how to control their emotions...I’ve taught students ranging from completely withdrawn to
physically aggressive and combative.”
Interview question: Please describe your level of knowledge and skill as it pertains to
instruction of students within an inclusive classroom setting. Which of those skills would you
say is your strength, or an area you think could be improved?
P1 stated, “My skill comes from teaching for over 17 years...I can modify an assignment
on the spot.” She added, “I don't have a ‘sped’ credential...I follow the IEP, but it only tells you
how to accommodate, not how to instruct a student for that class.” For her strength, P1 stated,
“Modification is a strength...I also teach skills such as note taking, organization, time
management.” For skill improvement, P1 stated, “I still need to learn strategies specific to
teaching students with autism.”
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 88

When asked to describe her knowledge and skill pertaining to instruction of students
within her classroom, P2 stated, “I become familiar with each student’s IEP and reference it
often to make sure I am accommodating their needs.” She added, “When I meet with these
students to discuss their academic progress, I have the IEP out and ask them if I am doing
enough to accommodate their learning...I want to make sure they know I am following it.” In
regard to instructional strategies, P2 stated, “I make sure to differentiate my lessons, and try to be
aware of activities that might be socially uncomfortable.” She elaborated, “For example, I try
not to push interaction too much...I want them to be comfortable.” She also said she does not put
a student on the spot to speak, “I ask them ahead of time if they would like to respond, and give
them a specific question to allow them time to prepare a response.” Then, “If that student has
trouble articulating their response when sharing in front of the class, I will clarify by asking, ‘Are
you saying…?’ This gives them a chance to confirm what they’re saying.” As her strength, P2
stated, “I establish a relationship with each of my students to make connections.” Regarding
improvement, P2 stated, “I need to learn more strategies for differentiating instruction.”
P3 is authorized to teach students with ASD, but stated, “Most of my knowledge is more
from exposure to the students on a day-to-day basis for over 20 years.” As previously stated, P3
has the training and experience to differentiate lessons for students with ASD, thus is able to
make adjustments with relative ease, but added, “I’ve learned to look at each student as an
individual which helps me learn their triggers (what sets them off).” She also stated, “I know
that my students have personal space issues, and they can get frustrated or shutdown when they
can’t do something perfect.” Regarding an area for improvement, P3 said, “I want a better
understanding of each individual’s de-escalation needs…of sorts.”
Overall, the gap in teachers’ knowledge about ASD and how its behaviors impact how
students with ASD access learning was partially validated by the data. Survey responses
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 89

indicated that the majority of teacher respondents have a strong understanding of ASD which
was aligned with participant observation and interviews. Nevertheless, more than one-third of
survey respondents indicated that they did not have a strong understanding of the disorder
(Figure 6). Additionally, P1 and P2 expressed a need for additional knowledge to help them
address the learning needs of students with ASD.
Knowledge Influence 2: Teachers need to know how to implement instructional strategies
to accommodate the learning needs of students with ASD in the mainstream classroom.
Survey results: No survey question was administered to address this influence.
Observation data: As previously noted, in all three observations for P1, P2, and P3, the
students with ASD were observed as being successful when appropriate accommodations or
strategies were used by the teachers and/or instructional aides to help said students access the
learning.
Interview question: Which instructional strategies/activities have you found to be
especially effective in the inclusive classroom setting?
P1 has found that group work, partner projects, and graphics are helpful for her students
with autism. She explained, “Students participate more when working with gen ed
students...they prompt them to work otherwise the student just sits there until given directions.”
P1 also said, “Graphics, whether directions or samples, help them accomplish more...less ways to
get confused.” P1 also expressed that although she has built her skills through classroom
experience, she still needs to learn instructional strategies specific to teaching students with
ASD.
P2 shared, “I build trust and a sense of comfort.” She also shared her own strategy for
collecting feedback about her lessons from students with ASD, “I ask all students to reflect on
classroom activities, and I pay particular attention to what my students with autism recommend.”
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 90

In doing so, P2 has collected a go-to toolkit of strategies for differentiating lessons for students
with ASD, but said she still wants to learn more strategies to differentiate her instruction.
P3 shared, “Giving choices to students that are high-functioning is a good strategy.” Also,
“Who they partner with is important, or even not forcing them to partner if they like to work
independently.” She also stated, “I take a subtle approach to not make them stand out to other
students.” An example, “I go to a lot of different kids to help in class, not just them.” Lastly, P3
said, “I know that some of them just prefer to talk to adults.”
Interview question: How does the special education staff at your school site support
your instruction in the inclusive classroom setting?
When asked about the support of special educators on site, P1 expressed with frustration,
“They're not. There is a teacher in my classroom, but she just tells kids to get their work done.
She is no help with modifying assignments or addressing behaviors.”
Notwithstanding, P2 has experienced some level of support at her school site to meet the
needs of her students. She said, “The collab teacher takes her role very seriously...we work
together.” She also stated, “I get emails from case carriers and the school psychologist to check
in on students’ progress, and I am included in IEPs where I get to talk to the student, parents, and
case carrier all at once.” P2 also said, “The special ed staff holds a roundtable meeting every
year where they give us students’ IEP accommodations.”
P3 said, “We hold a roundtable to give teachers the ‘IEPs at a glance’ for each student
they have in gen ed.” She expanded to state, “This gives them a folder of more detailed
information, and helps us establish a rapport with teachers.” Also, “We show teachers how to
read IEPs, and answer their questions.” Additionally, P3 said, “I collaborate with gen ed teachers
when needed by email, or have conversations in the hall about students...communicate with
parents if issues arise, and hold meetings that aren’t IEPs.”
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 91

Overall, the gap in teachers’ procedural knowledge of how to implement instructional
strategies to accommodate the learning needs of students with ASD in the mainstream classroom
was partially validated. Although interview participants expressed a desire for formal training,
they seem to have experienced instructional success by accessing strategies on their own based
on data from observations and interviews.
Knowledge Influence 3: Teachers need to recognize that perceptions about inclusion are
key elements in the success or failure of inclusive practices, and impact their individual
instructional practice.
Survey results: The results shown in Figure 8 indicate that nearly 60% of teachers
surveyed either strongly agreed or agreed that the inclusion of students with ASD can be
disruptive to the learning of non-disabled peers in the general education classroom.

Figure 8. Response to item: The inclusion of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the
general education classroom can be disruptive to the learning of non-disabled students in the
classroom.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 92

Observation data: Although it is difficult to measure one’s perception about inclusion
without hearing their perspective, the researcher made an inference about that the special
educator assigned to P1’s classroom. This teacher sat in a chair and watched the lesson;
however, the researcher did not see this teacher monitor the work of students in the classroom or
engage in any instructional activities. It can be inferred that this teacher does not recognize how
her perceptions impact student learning, or she does not understand what her role is for an
inclusive classroom setting.
Interview question: How do you view your role and responsibility for the education of
students with ASD in the inclusive classroom setting?
P1 explained, “I view my role as collaborative, but the other teacher in my class does
not.” She further expressed, “It should be a partnership but it is not...the special education
teacher is more like an additional aide, but actually the 1:1 aide is more collaborative.” P1 added,
“We have not been trained to co-teach together in an inclusive classroom.”
P2 said about her role and responsibility, “Same as with any other student...I’m sensitive
to their needs, but still hold them to the standard of any human being.”
From P3’s perspective, she shared that, “Much of what I do is facilitate differentiation,
and in some ways, provide direction to instructional aides and gen ed teachers within the collab
classroom.” An example she gave, “An aide was getting frustrated because a student was not
responding to his directions.” When appropriate, P3 spoke with the aide to explain, “The student
was not ignoring you, he was just not able to verbally express what he needed so he shut down.”
Another example P3 gave was in a general education English class, “The teacher was having
difficulty helping a student with autism understand characterization.” P3 was able to diagnose
the problem informing the teacher that, “Characterization is difficult for her because it is hard for
her to relate with the perspectives and feelings of others.” She further explained, “Teaching
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 93

regular ed kids doesn’t require as much attention to these types of things.” In conclusion, P3
added, “I assist and move students to success with both academics and social goals.”
Overall, the gap in teachers’ metacognitive knowledge was validated. Teachers need to
recognize that perceptions about inclusion are key elements in the success or failure of inclusive
practices/programs, and impact their individual instructional practice.

Motivation Results
As indicated in the review of the literature in Chapter Two, teacher motivation is
essential to the successful implementation of inclusive practices. The motivation influences
explored in this section presented one gap that was validated, and two gaps that were partially
validated. An influence was considered validated when the triangulation of survey results,
observations, and interviews indicated that the gap was significant, and needed to be improved.
An influence was considered partially validated when the triangulated results indicated that the
gap was significant based on part of the data, but there was little evidence or no gap in another
part of the data.
Motivation Influence 1 (Self-Efficacy): Teachers need to have confidence that their
participation in professional development training to create inclusive classroom practices
will enhance their ability to implement said practices.
Survey results: According to Figure 9, over 60% of teachers either strongly agreed or
agreed that they were confident in their ability to teach students with ASD in the general
education classroom setting, while the remaining 40% disagreed or strongly disagreed.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 94

Figure 9. Response to item: I am confident in my ability to teach students with Autism Spectrum
Disorders in a general education classroom setting.

Observation data: No observational data was collected for this influence.

Interview question: What advice would you give to a teacher who is opposed to, or
worried about teaching in an inclusive classroom setting?
P1 said she would tell them, “It will challenge you, but at the end you will become a
better teacher because at the end you will have a wider variety of strategies that you can use to
help any student.”
P2 offered, “I would tell them that there is nothing to worry about, but get familiar with
the IEP, know the accommodations and try to not...well, be aware of the IEP but get to know the
student for more than being autistic.” She added, “Relationships go a long way in the
classroom.” Lastly, she said, “I would also tell them, get comfortable with your collab teacher
and use them so you each know your roles and can meet students’ needs.”
P3 said, “I would advise they read up on autism behaviors...what it looks like in high
school.” She added, “Reach out to special ed staff for support.” P3 shared the belief, “They will
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 95

find that these kids will be successful in their classes if the appropriate accommodations are put
into place.”
This gap in motivation was partially validated as the survey results showed that a solid
portion of teachers feel confident in their abilities to teach students with ASD. Although no
interview questions specifically asked about self-efficacy, a portion of P1’s response to a
forthcoming interview question about experience indicated a lack of self-efficacy when she
stated, “All that I really know to do is accommodate their assignments,” but further expressed,
“I've never been able to actually help them learn because I have never learned how to.”
Furthermore, throughout the interview process, respondents expressed a need for training to get
better at inclusive instruction.
Motivation Influence 2 (Expectancy Value): Teachers need to value inclusive practices as
useful and worthwhile in order to successfully implement those practices in their own
classrooms.
Survey results: A majority of teachers, 76%, strongly agreed or agreed that students with
ASD who learn alongside their non-disabled peers in an inclusive classroom, demonstrate higher
levels of social skills (Figure 10).
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 96

Figure 10. Response to item: Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders who learn alongside
their non-disabled peers in the general education classroom demonstrate higher levels of social
skills.

Observation data: Although the researcher was able to observe students with ASD
communicating with general education peers in all three classroom observations, extended
observation time would be required to fully validate the expectancy value of inclusion.
Interview question: No interview question was asked specific to this influence.
This motivation gap was partially validated as the survey provided results to show the
value of inclusive practices, but not the value of time and training to implement practices.
Similarly, the observations in the classroom were aligned with the survey response for Figure 10,
however, they also did not provide data about the value of time or training to implement
inclusive practices.
Motivation Influence 3 (Attribution Theory): Teachers need to attribute the achievement
of students with ASD to their instructional efforts rather than issues beyond their control.
Survey Results: No survey question was administered to address this influence.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 97

Observation data: The researcher was able to observe P1, P2, and P3 making an effort to
educate students with ASD in their inclusive classroom setting. During each observation, the
teachers were actively addressing students’ individual needs by repeating directions, explaining
things differently, or providing visual examples to guide learning.
Interview question (revisited): Describe your experience working with students with
disabilities, specifically autism, over the course of your teaching career. In that time, has
anything in particular (challenging situation, great colleague/mentor, significant event)
shaped your attitude/perspective about students with autism?
When asked about her overall experience of teaching students with ASD, P1 stated, “I
have them in class from time to time...all that I really know to do is accommodate their
assignments,” but further expressed, “I've never been able to actually help them learn because I
have never learned how to.” P1 shared that her teaching has transitioned over time when working
with students with ASD, “I know now how easily a student can be impacted...triggered by any
particular situation or event.” P1 stated that, “Kids in high school, for the most part, have kind of
figured out how to do high school; they have it down.”
P2 shared a challenging situation regarding a student who did not respond well to class
competition activities. “His first outburst was a big learning moment for me in my teaching
career...I really didn’t know what to do.” She said, “I asked the student to step out into the
hallway, and told the class that we will continue as normal when we come back in.” In the
hallway she told the boy, “We can’t win everything but we can try to control the way we act.”
She further stated, “This was a big wakeup call...I felt knowledgeable, but I didn’t know how to
handle it.” P2 concluded that, “I knew anything competitive was not going to work with this
particular student...it was teams instead of individual for that class.”
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 98

P3 shared a challenging situation. “I was teaching a low cog (cognitive) math class, and I
had a student who was non-communicative. The family had a lawyer, they wanted him in
Algebra 1.” She said, “We put him in the class, but this was eye-opening for me...I wondered
how much he actually understood.” “It made me realize that their lives must be so difficult...they
can’t communicate, and they have people who don't really understand them making decisions
about where they should be placed.”
Interview question: What do you think is the most important factor you would attribute
to the success of inclusive education for students with ASD?
P1 stated, “Lots of support...multiple levels of support.” Also, “Kids with autism can
follow the rules and follow directions, they just need to be taught.” Furthermore, “Like the boy
in my class, when there is an expectation of learning, with support, he can do the assignments, he
just needs a little more time or another explanation.”
P2 stated, “The most important thing is to be sensitive to their needs but hold them to the
standard; how we get there might be different, but we’re going to get there.”
P3 emphasized, “You have to have a growth mindset, a positive mindset, and training for
teachers.”
This gap in motivation was validated. Although teachers were observed making efforts
in their instruction to help students with ASD access the curriculum, interview responses
indicated that they attribute student success to training.
Organizational Results
As indicated in the review of the literature in Chapter Two, it is important that teachers
feel supported and have direction to effectively implement inclusive practices. The
organizational influences explored in this section presented gaps that were both validated. An
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 99

influence was considered validated when the triangulation of survey results, observations, and
interviews indicated that the gap was significant, and needed to be improved.
Cultural Setting Influence: Teachers require training and collaboration time to become
informed of inclusive practices that can be incorporated into lessons in the general
education classroom.
Survey results: The majority of teachers, over 76%, strongly agreed or agreed that
differentiating lessons to address the learning needs of students with ASD requires increased
preparation time (Figure 11), while 24% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

Figure 11. Response to item: Differentiating lessons to address the learning needs of students
with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general education classroom requires increased
preparation time.

Survey results: The results in Figure 12 indicate that 93% of teachers have received five
hours or less of formal training in IESD to teach students with ASD in the general education
setting. This figure is aligned with the information captured in interviews with P1, P2, and P3.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 100

Figure 12. Response to item: Overall, approximately how many hours have you received
training from your district to teach students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general
education classroom setting?

Survey results: As shown in Figure 12, teachers have received little or no training from
IESD to teach students with ASD, thus the results indicated in Figure 13 are aligned as over 88%
of teachers disagreed or strongly disagreed that they have received training in IESD to help them
effectively address the learning needs of students with ASD in the general education classroom.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 101

Figure 13. Response to item: I have received professional training in my school district that has
helped me to effectively address the learning needs of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders
in the general education classroom.

Survey results: Based on the results from Figure 14, over 65% of teachers indicated that
their site administration does not provide them with the necessary resources to meet the learning
accommodations of students with ASD in the general education classroom.
From the data captured from in-person interviews, it can be inferred that one of the
necessary resources to meet accommodations is professional development.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 102

Figure 14. Response to item: Site administration provides me with the necessary resources to
meet the learning accommodations of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general
education classroom.

Observation data: Although, the researcher could not make observations for all aspects
of this influence, she was able to make inferences about each teacher’s skills with inclusive
instruction. The teachers observed exhibited instructional skills that appeared to be effective
with students with ASD in the inclusive classroom.
Interview Question: Please share the professional development training you received in
IESD prior to being assigned to an inclusive classroom setting.
In response to receipt of professional development, P1 simply stated, “None.”
P2 stated, “There’s been no training...just the round table.” She further stated, “This is a
common frustration among teachers.”
P3 said, “I’m not sure if I had any training on the collab itself before being added to a gen
ed classroom.”
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 103

Overall, based on consistencies between the survey results and information captured
through interviews, this cultural setting influence was validated. A significant gap exists in both
training and collaboration time. The district needs to recognize that teachers require training and
collaboration time to become informed of inclusive practices that can be incorporated into
lessons in the general education classroom.
Cultural Model Influence: School leaders need to create buy-in with teachers by
advocating and reinforcing the importance of inclusive practices to increase equity and
academic success for students with ASD in the general education classroom.
Survey results: In relation to organizational culture, Figure 15 shows that 50% of
teachers either strongly agree or agree, and 50% of teachers either disagree or strongly disagree
as to whether IESD is concerned with providing the best educational opportunities for students
with ASD.

Figure 15. Response to item: My school district is concerned with providing the best
educational opportunities for students with Autism Spectrum Disorders.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 104

Survey results: Although teachers indicate that the school/district are moderately
concerned with the education of students with ASD, over 68% of respondents strongly agreed or
agreed that their school site promotes a sense of community by engaging students with ASD in
activities that provide a sense of belonging (Figure 16).

Figure 16. Response to item: My school site promotes a sense of community by engaging
students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in activities that foster a sense of belonging.

Observation data: The researcher did not observe inclusive activities outside of the
academic classroom setting.
Interview question: Please describe the elements of an inclusive school culture. How
does the school district and site leadership promote a culture of inclusion at your school site?
P1 said, “I see them out and about at lunch...right now I see them in pockets or they’re
hiding...it’s just easier for them to deal.” She also shared, “The district has stated that everyone
will be included, but that is all that they have done...if there is additional support, I haven't
experienced it.” In reference to the school site, P1 said, “We used to have Best Buddies (a lunch
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 105

program where students with autism socialize with general education students), and students
were included at dances, basketball games, but I don’t see that anymore.”
P2 described an inclusive school culture as, “We have inclusive classrooms, and students
are placed in the least restrictive environment...we just received an email about autism training.”
P3 offered, “Students are encouraged to join clubs that are social, like Lunch Bunch
pseudonym (a lunch club where students with autism play board games or video games with
general education students).” She said in class, “I’ve had students harass others with autism, and
I make it very clear that it’s not okay...I ask them, ‘Would you let someone do this to someone in
your family?’ to give them some perspective.”
Interview question: In the classroom, how do you encourage a culture of acceptance and
a sense of belonging as an equal peer for students with autism?
When asked about a sense of belonging for students with ASD, P1 stated that within her
classroom, “Everybody participates and the students create norms...one norm being that students
will not laugh at one another.” Regarding the student with ASD in her class, she posited that,
“Students are used to having these kids in their classes...they know he’s different, and they just
go with it.”
While P2 stated, “I lead by example so when a student with autism blurts something out,
I just go with it doesn’t draw more attention to the behavior.” P2 also incorporated literature
written by a person with ASD, and she said that as a result, “I think this book has prompted
conversations about diverse perspectives and connections to real life.”
When teaching in an inclusive classroom, P3 stated, “I facilitate conversations if a
student with ASD is struggling to communicate...I partner them with other students so they are
not singled out, and let them work alone if needed.”
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 106

Overall, this organizational influence was validated. Although efforts have been made to
advocate acceptance and embrace inclusive practice, survey results and interview responses
indicated that more needs to be done to reinforce the importance of inclusive practices to
increase equity and academic success for students with ASD in the mainstream classroom.
Findings
The survey results for this study combined with classroom observation data and interview
responses indicated a significant connection between teachers’ knowledge and motivation and
the implementation of inclusive practices in the general education classroom.
Research Question 1: How are IESD teachers’ knowledge and motivation related to the
successful inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom?
Teachers’ knowledge and motivation are both related to the inclusion of students with
ASD in the general education classroom. Having general knowledge about ASD as well as how
it impacts students’ learning is related to if, and how a teacher implements inclusive practices in
the classroom. Based on the data collected, teachers require and desire increased knowledge so
they can better address the learning needs of students with ASD through appropriate inclusive
practices. Teachers’ motivation is also related to inclusion because teachers are concerned about
the quality of instruction they provide to students. That stated, because they are not completely
confident (self-efficacy) in what they are supposed to be doing to address the learning needs of
students with ASD, they have a difficult time with implementation of inclusive practices.
Through the process of data collection, three themes were found in relation to teachers’
knowledge and motivation surrounding inclusion: training, initiative, and perspective. Each of
these themes support the research question of how teachers’ knowledge and motivation are
related to the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 107

Finding 1: Teachers need training to provide effective inclusive education to students with
ASD.
All data collected pointed to a need for teacher training for both knowledge of ASD,
knowledge of inclusive instructional strategies, and knowledge about how to work
collaboratively with another educator in an inclusive setting. Teachers who are more
knowledgeable about ASD tend to be more successful in the implementation of inclusive
practices in the mainstream classroom (Segall & Campbell, 2012). As previously exhibited
through survey results, middle and high school teachers have not received the requisite training
to teach in an inclusive setting, but they have been assigned to teach in one with the expectation
of successful outcomes. In the interviews, P1 stated that she had not been trained and anything
she has done to accommodate students with ASD has come from her years of teaching
experience. P2 expressed that a lack of training is a common frustration among teachers
assigned to an inclusion classroom, and she also has created her own methods for
accommodating students’ needs. As a special educator, P3 has been trained to provide direct
instruction to students with autism, but has not been trained in how to co-teach with a general
educator in the mainstream classroom. Similar to P1 and P2, she also has sought out ways to
provide accommodations in the inclusive classroom setting.
Finding 2: Teachers have exhibited initiative to meet the needs of students with ASD in the
general education classroom.
Based on the survey question seeking teachers’ perspectives about their effectiveness,
paired with perspectives revealed through interviews, the researcher inferred that teachers have
shown initiative to accommodate students with ASD despite a reported lack of training,
resources, and support from the organization. To revisit, P1 and P2 have modified assignments
or how they deliver instruction when teaching an inclusive class. P2 performed her own research
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 108

with student feedback exercises on lessons, to gather input on what aspects of instruction worked
well for her students with ASD. Lastly, the special educator, P3, reported how she helps general
educators better understand the behaviors and learning needs of students with autism. These
actions exhibit a professional initiative to provide all students with access to the curriculum. It
also shows that teachers are motivated to provide students with ASD, the education they need.
Finding 3: Teachers hold a positive perspective about the inclusion of students with ASD
in the general education classroom.
Overall, based on all three methods of data collection, the researcher found that teachers’
perspectives about the inclusion of students with ASD in the mainstream classroom are positive.
Their reports indicate a belief that these students have the academic skills to be successful
(Figure 7), and hold a belief that students' social skills develop when they learn with typically
abled peers (Figure 10). To revisit comments shared by interview respondents, P1 stated about
her student, “...when there is an expectation of learning, with support, he can do the assignments,
he just needs a little more time or another explanation.” She also stated, “Students participate
more when working with gen ed students...they prompt them to work...” P2 has taken her
inclusive assignment very seriously, and stated her perspective, “The most important thing is to
be sensitive to their needs but hold them to the standard; how we get there might be different, but
we’re going to get there.” Lastly, P3 shared advice that she would give to teachers who are
worried about teaching in an inclusion classroom, “They will find that these kids will be
successful in their classes if the appropriate accommodations are put into place.”

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 109

Research Question 2: What is the interaction between the context of IESD’s culture and
teachers’ knowledge and motivation regarding the successful inclusion of students with
ASD in the general education classroom?
The interaction between the context of IESD’s culture and teachers’ knowledge and
motivation is essential to the successful inclusion of students with ASD in the mainstream
classroom. Teachers reported a belief that IESD is concerned with providing the best
educational opportunities for students with ASD (Figure 15), and advocates a sense of belonging
(Figure 16), however, three themes became evident from the data revealing that the interaction
between teachers and the district is fragmented: (1) A lack of training in inclusive instructional
practices and collaborative teaching for the inclusive classroom setting, (2) A lack of resources
needed for teachers to be successful providing instruction to students with ASD in the general
education classroom, and (3) A general lack of direction from IESD in reference to the
instructional expectations of teachers in the inclusive setting.
Finding 1: Professional development in IESD is not sufficient to meet the knowledge and
motivation needs of teachers who are assigned to teach in an inclusive classroom.
Based on survey results, the researcher discovered a significant need for professional
development with inclusive instruction. Clark and Estes (2008) posit that procedural knowledge
increases when declarative knowledge required to perform the skill is available or known.
Figure 12 showed that 93% of teacher respondents have received five hours or less of training
from IESD to teach students with ASD in the general education classroom. Additionally,
through interviews, teachers expressed a strong desire for formalized training to ensure that they
are helping students with ASD to learn. Based on observations, it appeared to the researcher
that co-teaching worked within the classroom setting for both P2 and P3, but did not work in
P1’s classroom. As previously stated, P1 has developed her professional practice throughout her
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 110

near 18-year career, and based on the classroom observation and interview seems to be confident
in her abilities. Notwithstanding, she still feels like she can do more to educate students with
ASD, but has not received the training to do so, nor has she been trained in how to teach in an
inclusive classroom setting with a special educator. P2 is still in the first five years of her career,
and although she is making efforts to accommodate the learning needs of her students with ASD,
she is not entirely confident in her practice. She expressed a level of frustration at times as well
as a desire for training. The special educator, P3, is trained and holds the authorization to teach
students with ASD so she is confident in her abilities, and has received training specifically
intended for special educators. That stated, she has not received training on how to work in an
inclusive classroom setting with a general educator.
Finding 2: IESD does not provide adequate resources to support the knowledge and
motivation needs of teachers who are assigned to teach in an inclusive classroom.
Based on the results shown in Figure 14, 65% of teachers reported that site administration
does not provide the necessary resources to meet the learning needs of students with ASD in the
mainstream classroom. It could also be inferred from Figure 11 which showed that 76% of
teachers reported that differentiating lessons for students with ASD requires additional time, that
time itself is a desired resource that teachers need to be successful in an inclusive classroom.
Finding 3: IESD needs to communicate a clear direction to inform teachers of the
instructional expectations for the inclusive classroom setting.
Aside from IESD’s organizational goal to provide students with unlimited learning
opportunities, and a general expectation for students with ASD to be included in the mainstream
setting by assigning teachers to inclusive classes, teachers have not received clear direction from
the district on what instruction should look like in an inclusive classroom. Although the three
participants have made gains with their inclusive instruction, they also expressed frustration with
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 111

IESD about a lack of clarity as to what they should be doing, how they should be teaching, and
what outcomes are they trying to achieve. As previously shared, P1 shared her perspective, “The
district has stated that everyone will be included, but that is all they have done...if there is
additional support, I haven't experienced it.”
Research Question 3: What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organizational solutions to achieve the organizational goal?
The recommendations for solutions for the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences presented will be presented in Chapter Five.
Synthesis
The synthesis of data collected from both quantitative results and qualitative findings
allowed the researcher to validate or partially validate the assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences established in Chapter Two. Table 5 provides a summary for the
validation for each of these influences.
Data collection and analysis revealed more moderate gaps in knowledge and motivation
influences of teachers’ perspectives about inclusion. With a few exceptions, teachers reported or
exhibited appropriate levels of knowledge and motivation, however, the data highlighted
significant gaps in the organization’s cultural setting and cultural model. Data analysis also
pointed to a disconnect between the context of IESD’s organizational culture and teachers’
knowledge and motivation regarding the inclusion of students with ASD in the general education
classroom. In summary, teachers have reported that they believe students with ASD can be
successful in the general education classroom, and they have shown a willingness to implement
inclusive practices. Notwithstanding, IESD has not effectively created buy-in with teachers by
advocating and reinforcing the importance of inclusive practices to increase equity and academic
success for students with ASD.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 112

Table 5
Summary of Validated and Partially Validated Influences
Assumed Influence Validated Partially Validated
Teachers need to acquire specific knowledge about
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), and how its behaviors
impact how students with ASD access learning.
(Knowledge 1)
X
Teachers need to know how to implement instructional
strategies to accommodate the learning needs of students
with ASD in the mainstream classroom. (Knowledge 2)
X
Teachers need to recognize that perceptions about
inclusion are key elements in the success of inclusive
practices, and impact their individual instructional
practice. (Knowledge 3)
X
Teachers need to have confidence that their participation
in professional development to create inclusive classroom
practices will enhance their ability to implement said
practices. (Motivation 1)
X
Teachers need to see the value of inclusive practices as
useful and worthwhile in order to successfully implement
those practices in their own classrooms. (Motivation 2)
X
Teachers need to attribute the achievement of students
with ASD to their instructional efforts rather than issues
beyond their control. (Motivation 3)

Teachers require training and collaboration time to
become informed of inclusive practices that can be
incorporated into lessons in the general education
classroom. (Cultural Setting)

School leaders need to create buy-in with teachers by
advocating and reinforcing the importance of inclusive
practices to increase equity and academic success for
students with ASD in the general education classroom.
(Cultural Model)
X

X

X

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 113

CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
Organizational Context and Mission

As a reminder, the organization studied was Inland Empire School District which is
located in Riverside County, California, United States, and serves approximately 19,000 students
from preschool through twelfth grade. Nearly 80% of students qualify as Low Income, over
30% are English Learners, and over 100 students are identified as Foster Youth. The mission of
IESD is to educate all students by providing them with unlimited learning opportunities so they
can achieve success in college, career, and in life. The overarching goals of the district are for
all students to be college and career ready, learn in a safe and inviting school environment, and
for all students to feel connected to their school community through engaging educational
practices and partnerships with parents and the community.
Organizational Performance Goal
By May 2021, 100% of students with disabilities (SWD), specifically students with ASD,
enrolled in IESD middle and high schools with will receive a free and appropriate public
education to ensure access and equity in the least restrictive environment. The Director of
Special Education reinforced this goal as well as teachers’ legal responsibility to provide FAPE
in the LRE in January 2018. The goal was derived through data analysis indicating that
SWD/ASD who received most of their education in a separate classroom setting were
performing below standard on benchmarks and summative assessments. The district will
continue to use performance indicators such as CAASPP scores, benchmark assessments, the
California School Dashboard, and progress/grade report data to track progress of students with
disabilities/ASD who transition to the general education classroom.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 114

Description of Stakeholder Groups
At Inland Empire School District, the stakeholders who contribute to the achievement of
the district’s organizational goal include:
1. IESD Board of Trustees—this group serves students by making educational and
funding decisions for the district based on the needs of student learning and well-being.
The Board contributes to the district’s organizational goal by holding other stakeholders
accountable for progress and the ultimate achievement of said goal.
2. District and Site Administration—this group serves as the liaison between the Board
and site level administration and stakeholders. They provide data to the sites informing
them of areas for growth, equity, and access. Site level administration is accountable for
providing district leaders with regular benchmark data towards the completion of the
organizational goal. Site administration also works directly with teachers, staff, students,
and parents to create action plans to achieve organizational goals.
3. Teachers—this group executes the action plan for the organizational goal in the
classroom, provides benchmark data to site administration to show progress, and
participate in professional learning opportunities as needed to better their instructional
practice as it pertains to the organizational goal.
4. Students—this group set individual goals with the guidance of teachers, staff, and
parents, and engage in their educational opportunities to achieve said goals.
5. Parents—this group supports students throughout their education, and partners with
teachers and site leadership to support the instructional and learning efforts of
stakeholders.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 115

Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study
By January 2021, IESD teachers will have demonstrated proficiency by implementing
instructional strategies for accommodating the learning needs of students with ASD in the
general education classroom, adjusted lessons in all core academic areas to provide
accommodations, and finally, they will have analyzed performance data to assess growth.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study was to discover why teachers in IESD hold adverse attitudes
about educating students with ASD in the least restrictive environment of the mainstream
classroom despite federal legislation and civil rights laws that mandate equality and inclusion of
students with disabilities. By using Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis model, this study
examined the limitations in knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational factors that were
influencing teachers’ attitudes about inclusion and preventing the district from achieving its
organizational goal to provide 100% of students with ASD enrolled in middle and high schools
in the least restrictive environment by May 2021. The analysis began by establishing a list of
potential needs then examined each need systematically to focus on actual or validated needs.
Although all stakeholders in IESD played an instrumental role in the achievement of the overall
organizational goal to prepare all students for success, it was essential to improve teachers’
instructional practices to increase the inclusion of students with ASD in the mainstream
classroom. Therefore, the stakeholders of focus for this study were middle and high school
teachers.

The following questions guided the needs analysis that addressed the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources, and the action plan for the stakeholder group selected
for this study:
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 116

● How are IESD teachers’ knowledge and motivation related to the successful
inclusion of students with ASD in the general education classroom?
● What is the interaction between the context of IESD’s organizational culture and
teachers’ knowledge and motivation regarding inclusion of students with ASD in
the general education classroom?
● What are the recommended knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
solutions to achieve the organizational goal?
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
Introduction. Data analysis validated or partially validated the assumed knowledge
influences for this study. The assumed declarative, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge
influences indicated in Table 6 were developed based on the related literature reviewed for this
study. Clark and Estes (2008) posit that many times gaps in performance outcomes are caused
by a lack of knowledge or skills. Based on the results and findings from this study, it became
evident that IESD teachers’ perspectives about the inclusion of students with ASD in the
mainstream classroom have impacted performance outcomes. That stated, Table 6 describes the
recommendations for influences that were validated or partially validated based on theoretical
principles cited below.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 117

Table 6
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Validated:
Yes,
Partially, or
No
(V, P, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
General education
teachers need to acquire
specific knowledge about
Autism Spectrum
Disorder (ASD), and how
its behaviors impact how
students with ASD access
learning (D).

P Y
Procedural knowledge
increases when
declarative knowledge
required to perform the
skill is available or
known (Clark & Estes,
2008).

Teachers who are more
knowledgeable about
Autism Spectrum
Disorder (ASD) tend to
be more successful in
the implementation of
inclusionary practices
in the mainstream
classroom. (Segall &
Campbell, 2012).

Provide general education
teachers with practical
information specific to
ASD (for those who still
require this knowledge),
the manifestation of its
behaviors, and how those
behaviors impact access to
learning for students with
ASD. Additionally,
provide teachers with a
toolkit/descriptions of
instructional strategies to
accommodate the learning
needs of students with
ASD in an inclusive
classroom setting.

Teachers need to know
how to implement
instructional strategies to
accommodate the learning
needs of students with
ASD in the mainstream
classroom (P).
P Y
Procedural knowledge
refers to knowing how
to do something, and
the criteria for using
such skills (Krathwohl,
2002; Rueda, 2011).
Regarding inclusive
practices, teachers need
to know how to
differentiate instruction
in the mainstream
classroom to enhance
learning for students
with ASD. Teachers
also need to know how
to diffuse and address
Provide authentic,
research-based training and
demonstrations of the steps
for inclusive practices that
have proven to be highly
effective in addressing the
learning and behavioral
needs of students with
ASD in the mainstream
classroom. This training
may include a progressive
protocol for teachers to
follow step-by-step.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 118

behaviors that are
characteristic of
students with ASD
(Roberts & Simpson,
2016).
Teachers need to
recognize why
perceptions about
inclusion are key elements
in the success or failure of
inclusive practices, and
impact their individual
instructional practice (M).
V Y
Metacognitive
knowledge is the
awareness of one’s own
cognition and cognitive
processes that allow
one to know when and
why they do
something; it also
allows one to consider
contextual and
conditional aspects of a
given problem
(Krathwohl, 2002;
Rueda, 2011).
Provide general education
teachers opportunities to
observe peers who are
successfully implementing
inclusive strategies for
students with ASD in the
mainstream classroom, and
reflect on their own
instructional practices to
affirm a positive mindset
or initiate effective change
as needed.

Increasing teachers’ knowledge of ASD. The results and findings of this improvement
study indicated that 37% (P) of IESD teachers need to acquire specific knowledge about Autism
Spectrum Disorder (ASD), how its behaviors impact how students with ASD access learning,
and inclusive strategies to accommodate the learning needs of students with ASD in the
mainstream classroom. A recommendation using Information Processing Theory has been
selected to close this declarative knowledge gap. Moreover, procedural knowledge increases
when declarative knowledge required to perform the skill is available or known (Clark & Estes,
2008). Teachers who are more knowledgeable about ASD tend to be more successful in the
implementation of inclusive practices in the mainstream classroom (Segall & Campbell, 2012).
This would suggest that providing teachers with a toolkit of information and strategies would
support their learning and professional practice. The recommendation then is to provide general
education teachers with information specific to ASD and its behaviors, as well as a
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 119

toolkit/descriptions of instructional strategies to accommodate the learning needs of students
with ASD in an inclusive classroom setting.
General education teachers must have a solid understanding of instructional implications
for students with ASD, as well as strategies for evaluating their support needs, and methods
known to be effective in the growth of their behavioral, social, and academic performance
outcomes. (Black-Hawkins, 2012; Kozleski & Waitoller, 2010; Sansoti & Sansoti, 2012).
Furthermore, this new knowledge must be meaningful in its purpose, be connected to prior
instructional learning, and practical in how teachers can apply it to their instructional practice
(Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011).

Implementation of inclusive instructional strategies. The results and findings of this
improvement study indicated that 40% of general education teachers need to know how to
implement instructional strategies to accommodate the learning needs of students with ASD in
the mainstream classroom. A recommendation rooted in Social Cognitive Theory has been
selected to close this procedural knowledge gap. Procedural knowledge refers to knowing how
to do something, and the criteria for using such skills (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011).
Regarding inclusive practices, teachers need to know how to differentiate instruction in the
mainstream classroom to enhance learning for students with ASD. Teachers also need to know
how to diffuse and address behaviors that are characteristic of students with ASD (Roberts &
Simpson, 2016). This would suggest that providing training to enhance their procedural
knowledge would support teachers’ instruction. The recommendation then is to provide
authentic, research-based training and demonstrations of the steps for inclusive practices that
have proven to be highly effective in addressing the learning and behavioral needs of students
with ASD in the mainstream classroom. This training may include a progressive protocol for
teachers to follow step-by-step.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 120

No requirement exists for general education teachers to be highly qualified in working
with students with disabilities, yet there is an expectation for them to teach in an inclusive
classroom (McCray et al., 2011). Because general education teachers lack procedural knowledge
in how to create and implement lessons that differentiate instruction for students with ASD,
many are fearful and/or resistant to inclusion (Busby et al., 2014; McCray et al., 2011; Sansoti &
Sansoti, 2012). That stated, social cognitive theory suggests that general education teachers may
benefit from training that models to-be-learned strategies from credible sources who have
experienced success with inclusive instruction (Rueda, 2011). If teachers observe/learn step-by-
step from a reputable peer how to transfer their learning into their professional practice, they will
be more likely to persist and increase mental effort toward inclusive instruction (Mayer, 2011;
Rueda, 2011).
Impact of teachers’ perceptions on their instructional practice. The results and
findings of this improvement study indicated that 60% of teachers need to recognize that
perceptions about inclusion are foundational to the success or failure of inclusive
practices/programs, thus impacting their individual instructional practice. A recommendation
rooted in Attribution Theory (Anderman, 2006; Eccles, 2006; Mayer, 2011) has been selected to
close this metacognitive knowledge gap. Metacognitive knowledge is the awareness of one’s
own cognition and cognitive processes that allow one to know when and why they do something;
it also allows one to consider contextual and conditional aspects of a given problem (Krathwohl,
2002; Rueda, 2011). This would suggest that providing teachers opportunities to observe
inclusive instruction and reflect on their instructional practice would augment their thinking.
The recommendation then is to provide general education teachers opportunities to observe peers
who are successfully implementing inclusive strategies for students with ASD in the mainstream
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 121

classroom, and reflect on their own instructional practices to affirm a positive mindset or initiate
effective change as needed.
According to research, one of the key elements for a successful inclusion program is the
positive attitudes of teachers, and understanding that their perceptions about inclusion is a
necessary step toward effective inclusionary practices in schools (Fuchs, 2009-2010; Roberts &
Simpson, 2016; Segall & Campbell, 2012). General education teachers’ apprehension can be
attributed to the following perceptions: Added workload/time to accommodate the learning
needs of students with ASD; the chance (external locus) of litigation (unstable and
uncontrollable); how to effectively implement inclusive practices, which is stable and
uncontrollable (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Costley, 2013); and their belief that the education
of students with ASD is the responsibility of special educators (Busby et al., 2012). In order for
teachers to be motivated, they need to recognize that their attitudes, or internal locus, about
inclusion, have a direct correlation to the success or failure of the practice, not their cognitive
abilities (Anderman & Anderman, 2006; Fuchs, 2010; McCray & McHatton, 2011). As teachers
learn more about ASD and become better trained in inclusive practices, they may be more apt to
attribute outcomes as a result of their own efforts, rather than the perceived abilities of a student
with ASD.
Motivation Recommendations
Introduction. Data analysis was validated or partially validated for the assumed
motivation influences for this study. The motivation influences in Table 7 identify the assumed
motivation influences based on motivation theory and the research supported in the review of
literature. Motivation gets us going, keeps us moving, and influences how much effort to spend
on any particular task (Clark & Estes, 2008). In relation to general education teachers’
motivation to implement inclusive practices, Table 7 indicates they lack self-efficacy, do not see
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 122

the value of inclusive practices, and attribute any failures with inclusion to the abilities of
students with ASD rather than their lack of effort towards implementation. Table 7 also offers
recommendations for these motivational influences based on theoretical principles.
Table 7
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence

Validated:
Yes,
Partially,
or No
(V, P, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
General education teachers
need to have confidence that
their participation in
professional development
training to create inclusive
classroom practices will
enhance their ability to
implement said practices.
(Self-efficacy)

P Y Learning and
motivation are
enhanced when
learners have
positive
expectancies for
success (Pajares,
2006). Unless
humans believe
they can achieve
desired outcomes
and minimize
failures, they have
little incentive to
choose to take
action (Bandura,
2000).
Provide teachers with
professional development
that builds their self-efficacy
by offering the opportunity to
create lesson plans for an
inclusive classroom setting
and/or make adjustments
(differentiate) to their current
lessons to meet the
educational needs of students
with ASD. This professional
development should include
modeling of lessons by a
skilled peer to share
expectations and guide
teachers through the process,
while also providing specific,
constructive feedback when
they independently build
lessons on their own.

Teachers need to see the
value of inclusive practices
as useful and worthwhile in
order to successfully
implement those practices in
their own classrooms. (Task
and utility value)

P Y Expectancy value
theory is
individuals’ choice,
persistence, and
performance; and
can be explained by
their beliefs about
how well they will
perform on an
activity, and the
extent to which they
value the activity
(Eccles, 2006;
Pajares, 2006).
Provide teachers
opportunities to observe
other teachers (similar
subjects/grade levels) who
are experiencing success (as
indicated by student
performance) with inclusive
instruction so they can see,
in-person, the positive
impact/value inclusive
practices have on the
learning of students with
ASD. Additionally, provide
teachers with students’
individual performance data
that illuminates their
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 123

academic improvement as a
student in an inclusive
classroom setting.
Teachers need to attribute the
achievement of students with
ASD to their instructional
efforts rather than issues
beyond their control.
(Attribution Theory)
V Y Learning and
motivation are
enhanced when
individuals attribute
success or failure to
effort rather than
ability (Anderman
& Anderman,
2009).
As teachers begin to
implement inclusive lessons,
administration will provide
them with accurate feedback
about their instruction, and
attribute their success to the
efforts they have made to
improve their professional
practice.

General education teachers need to believe they are prepared to teach students with
ASD. The results and findings of this improvement study indicated that 40% of general
education teachers need to have confidence that their participation in professional development
to create inclusive lessons/practices will positively enhance their ability to implement said
practices. A recommendation rooted in self-efficacy theory has been selected to close this self-
efficacy gap. Learning and motivation are enhanced when learners have positive expectancies
for success (Pajares, 2006), and according to Bandura (2000), unless humans believe they can
achieve desired outcomes and minimize failures, they have little incentive to choose to take
action. This would suggest that providing general education teachers the opportunity to see a
demonstration of what they need to do, as well as guided practice with feedback would increase
their self-efficacy. The recommendation then is for IESD to provide a professional development
where general education teachers have the opportunity to watch a skilled peer model an exemplar
of inclusive lesson planning/implementation, guide them through building/delivering an
inclusive lesson of their own, and provide specific and constructive feedback to improve their
self-efficacy.
Individual perception of self-efficacy influences how people think about a particular
endeavor; erratically, strategically, optimistically, or pessimistically, and whether or not they
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 124

choose to persist (Bandura, 2000). Research indicates that self-efficacy motivates people to
engage in a particular goal or task; they tend to complete tasks in which they are confident and
competent and avoid those in which they do not feel as capable (Pajares, 2006). If teachers have
a negative perception about inclusive practices, or are not confident in their abilities to
implement such practices, they will not put forth the mental effort, and will likely engage in task
avoidance (Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011). The link between motivation to engage in inclusionary
practices is directly related to teachers’ perceived abilities to be successful in the task, and low
self-efficacy is attributed to teachers’ feeling ill-prepared to teach students with ASD (Busby et
al., 2014). Findings from McCray and McHatton (2011) show that limited preparation has
consistently been found to heighten fear and reduce general education teachers’ sense of self-
efficacy when challenged with the demands of an inclusive classroom setting. Additionally,
teachers who collaborate with each other report increased self-efficacy, professional worth, and
creativity. This positive perception influences the successful application of programs and
inclusionary practices (Costley, 2013). Although many teachers sympathize with students with
disabilities, their lack of self-efficacy with inclusive practices has led to frustration and
discomfort as they do not know how to meet their education needs (Carroll et al., 2003).
Teachers need to see the value of inclusive practices. The results and findings of this
improvement study indicated that 23% of teachers need to learn the value of inclusive practices
as useful and worthwhile in order to successfully implement those practices in their own
classrooms. A recommendation rooted in expectancy value theory has been selected to close this
value gap. Expectancy value theory is individuals’ choice, persistence, and performance; and
can be explained by their beliefs about how well they will perform on an activity, and the extent
to which they value the activity (Eccles, 2006; Pajares, 2006). This would suggest that providing
teachers with specific examples that emphasize the value of inclusive practices would help them
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 125

increase their task and cost value. The recommendation then is to provide teachers opportunities
to observe other teachers (similar subjects/grade levels) who are experiencing success (as
indicated by student performance) with inclusive instruction so they can see, in-person, the
positive impact/value inclusive practices have on the learning of students with ASD.
Additionally, provide teachers with students’ individual performance data that illuminates their
academic improvement as a student in an inclusive classroom setting.
Utility value is the usefulness of doing a task to meet individuals’ future goals, and cost
value is the extent by which an activity limits access to other activities, the effort it will take to
accomplish the activity, and the emotional toll while engaging in the activity (Eccles, 2006).
When an individual can see how their work will contribute to the organizational goal, they are
more likely to invest time and mental effort to accomplish a task (Pintrich, 2003). Because the
school-wide expectation and support of inclusion has not been consistent, teachers do not see the
value of how inclusive practices can enhance their professional practice in addition to the overall
success of students with ASD.
General education teachers need to attribute the effective implementation of
inclusive practices on factors they can control. The observation and interview findings of this
improvement study indicated that general education teachers must attribute achievement of
students with ASD to their own efforts rather than issues that are beyond their control. A
recommendation rooted in attribution theory has been selected to close this motivational gap.
Learning and motivation are enhanced when individuals attribute success or failure to effort
rather than ability (Anderman & Anderman, 2009). This would suggest that feedback teachers
receive about their performance regarding inclusion should be based on their level of effort
towards the task. The recommendation then is for administrators to provide teachers with
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 126

accurate feedback about their implementation of inclusive practices, and attribute their success or
failure to the effort they have made towards the task, not their teaching ability.
Weiner (1986, 1992) states that individuals are conscious and rational decision makers
who are motivated by goals of understanding and mastering the environment and themselves.
Another explanation posited by Anderman and Anderman (2006) states that attribution theory
provides an important method for examining and understanding motivation in academic settings.
Although his research was focused on students learning in school settings, Weiner’s model can
also be applied to teachers’ attitudes about learning and implementing inclusive practices.
Teachers’ motivation to create lessons and implement inclusive practices for students with ASD
is influenced by their beliefs about inclusion as well as their perceived success about the task
(Anderman & Anderman, 2006). As teachers learn more about Autism Spectrum Disorders and
become better trained in inclusive practices, they may be more apt to attribute outcomes as a
result of their own efforts, rather than perceived abilities of a student with ASD. Therefore, the
recommendation is to base teachers’ feedback about their inclusive instruction on effort rather
than ability.
Organization Recommendations
Introduction. Data analysis was validated or partially validated for the assumed
organizational influences for this study. Table 8 shows the assumed influences based on the
reviewed literature for this study. According to Clark and Estes (2008), performance gaps are
caused by a lack of efficient and effective work systems/processes as well as a lack of alignment
and/or requisite resources to achieve the organizational goal. Table 8 indicates the importance of
the cultural setting and cultural model are influencing general education teachers with inclusive
practices. Table 8 shows the recommendations for these influences based on leadership and
accountability principles.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 127

Table 8
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence

Validated:
Yes,
Partially, or
No
(V, P, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
Teachers require training and
collaboration time to become
informed of inclusive
practices that can be
incorporated into lessons in
the general education
classroom.
(Cultural Setting)
V Y Leadership
Principle 10:
Organizational
effectiveness
increases when
leaders ensure that
employees have the
resources needed to
achieve the
organization’s goals
(Waters, Marzano &
McNulty, 2003).

Establish clear
expectations from
administrative
leadership on
allocating adequate
training and time
for collaboration
on implementation
practices.
School leaders need to create
buy-in with teachers by
advocating and reinforcing
the importance of inclusive
practices to increase equity
and academic success for
students with ASD in the
general education classroom.
(Cultural Model)
V Y Accountability
Principle 3:
Understanding the
meaning of equity,
diversity and access
in your
organizational
context enhances the
capacity to improve
organizational
climate and
outcomes (Darling-
Hammond, 2007;
Lim, Haddad &
Daugherty, 2013;
Trenerry & Paradies,
2012).
School leaders
need to clearly
communicate a
school-wide
philosophy that
advocates and
reinforces the
importance of
inclusive practices
in order to provide
the support and
resources needed
to deliver a quality
education for all
students.

Teachers require training and time to implement inclusive practices. The results and
findings of this study indicated that 93% of teachers have received five hours or less of training,
and 76% of teachers indicated a need for time to differentiate lessons for students with ASD in
the general education classroom. A principle rooted in organizational change theory has been
selected to close this resource gap. Organizational effectiveness increases when leaders ensure
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 128

that employees have the resources needed to achieve the organization’s goals (Waters, Marzano
& McNulty, 2003). This would suggest that offering training for teachers about inclusion, and
providing planning time will increase effectiveness of implementation. The recommendation
then is to establish clear expectations from administrative leadership to offer training and
allocate adequate time for collaboration on implementation practices. As an example, site
administration may provide release time, and/or dedicate staff development time for teachers to
collaborate about inclusive practices.
Clark and Estes (2008) state that organizations must ensure that all employees attain
adequate knowledge and skills, motivation, and support to make progress towards organizational
goals; all of which must be in place and aligned with each other to achieve optimal success. This
statement is closely aligned with Kratochílová (2015) and Roberts & Simpson (2015) who have
found that this effort requires boundless support from organizational leaders as well as building
the capacity of teachers through deliberate funding and decision-making. In order for
educational systems to advocate a consistent culture that embraces inclusion of students with
ASD, they must afford teachers the appropriate training and opportunity to value the practice as
relevant and important (Avramidis & Norwich, 2002; Braunsteiner & Mariano-Lapidus, 2014;
Carroll et al., 2003; McCray & McHatton, 2011). Therefore, school administrators need to
establish clear expectations to general education teachers about the implementation of inclusive
practices, as well as allocate adequate time for them to collaborate regarding said practices.
School leaders need to create buy-in to increase equity and academic success. The
results and findings of this study indicated that 61% of school leaders need to create buy-in with
teachers by advocating and reinforcing the importance of inclusive practices to increase equity
and academic success for students with ASD in the general education classroom. A principle
rooted in accountability theory has been selected to close this organizational gap. Understanding
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 129

the meaning of equity, diversity and access in your organizational context enhances the capacity
to improve organizational climate and outcomes (Darling-Hammond, 2007; Lim, Haddad &
Daugherty, 2013; Trenerry & Paradies, 2012). This understanding would suggest that clearly
communicating an organizational philosophy will increase equity of outcomes in the
organization. The recommendation then is that school leaders need to clearly communicate a
school-wide philosophy that advocates and reinforces the importance of inclusive practices in
order to provide the support and resources needed to deliver a quality education for all students.
A key variable for success of students with ASD in inclusive settings is the overall school
environment (Crosland & Dunlap, 2012). There needs to be an acceptance and advocacy among
IESD school leaders and teachers to embrace inclusive practices for students with ASD in the
general education classroom, a commitment to the organizational mission, and recognition that
students with ASD are included in this commitment. Segregated educational settings, such as
special education classrooms, put students with ASD at a disadvantage (Pearson, 2015).
Findings show that students with disabilities are often relocated to separate classrooms because
they are not viewed as being normal in how they speak, behave, learn, and interact socially. This
lack of knowledge validates a culture of segregation and further marginalizes students with ASD
by denying them higher level learning experiences (Gavaldá & Qinyi, 2012). School leaders
need to create collaboration models that bring all levels of educators from a school site together
to learn more about students with ASD, and how to support their educational and social needs.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The New World Kirkpatrick Model was used to design this evaluation plan (Kirkpatrick
& Kirkpatrick, 2016). This model includes four levels of evaluation, emphasized the importance
of beginning at Level 4: Results to ensure that training participants have a clear understanding of
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 130

desired outcomes and continually align their performance to meet expectations. As the model
pertains to the IESD stakeholder goal of focus, teachers will have the opportunity to work
towards improving and implementing their inclusive instructional practice with full knowledge
of what results should look like. They will also have the opportunity to make adjustments to
work performance through the training process using the feedback provided by site leadership
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
To recap, the mission of Inland Empire School District is to educate each student by
providing unlimited learning opportunities to help them achieve success in college, career, and in
life. The overarching goals of the district is for all students to be college and career ready, learn
in a safe and inviting learning environment, and for all students to feel connected to their school
community through engaging educational practices and partnerships with parents and the
community.
By January 2021, IESD teachers will have demonstrated proficiency by implementing
instructional strategies for accommodating the learning needs of SWDs, specifically students
with ASD, in the general education classroom; adjusted lessons in all core academic areas to
provide accommodations, and analyzed performance data to assess growth. By May 2021, 100%
of students with disabilities ASD enrolled in IESD middle and high schools with will receive a
Free and Appropriate Public Education to ensure access and equity in a Least Restrictive
Environment.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators. Table 9 below displays the intended outcomes to be
achieved by IESD general education teachers in their progress towards the implementation of
inclusive practices to benefit students with ASD. If the internal outcomes are met as expected as
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 131

a result of training and organizational support for general education teachers’ implementation of
inclusive instructional practices, then the external outcomes should also be realized.

Table 9

Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes

Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increased number of
students with ASD being
included in academic
general education courses.
Percentage of students with ASD
assigned to general education
courses using previous school
year as baseline data.
IEP amendments, students’
course schedules.
Increased educational
opportunities to promote
a school-wide philosophy
that support the inclusion
of students with ASD.
Percentage of students, teachers,
parents and staff indicating
knowledge and/or recognition of
the inclusive philosophy.
Survey administered through
student information system
(SIS); survey to teachers/staff
using Google forms or Survey
Monkey.
Improved performance
scores in standardized
testing for students with
ASD.
Number of students with ASD
scoring at higher performance
levels.
CAASPP data, benchmark
and/or common assessment data
(Math and ELA), California
School Dashboard.
Internal Outcomes
Publication of a written
schedule with checkpoints
dedicated to teachers
sharing effective inclusive
practices during
department planning time.
Number of minutes from
department meetings.
Data comparison of the number
of inclusive lessons shared from
the start of the school year to the
end of the school year by
teacher/department.
Administration scheduled
regular observations to
support inclusive practices
and provide specific
feedback.
Number of observations
completed by administrators.
Administration to log classroom
visits and track feedback
provided to teachers.
Increased teacher self-
efficacy in the
implementation of
inclusive practices.
Number of third party
observations of confidence
indicators related to teacher
Administer a survey at the start
and end of the school year to
compare levels of self-efficacy;
in-person (1:1) conversations
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 132

implementation of inclusive
practices.
regarding professional growth
within departments and with
immediate supervisor.
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The stakeholders of focus are middle and high school teachers
implementing inclusive instructional practices for their academic class assignments. The first
critical behavior is that teachers must meet regularly to share effective practices. The second
critical behavior is for administration and teacher leaders to observe inclusive lessons to identify
effective practices and areas for improvement. The third critical behavior is for teachers to
reflect on their professional practice based on constructive feedback. The specific metrics,
methods, and timing for each of these behaviors are shown Table 10 below.

Table 10

Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s) Method(s) Timing
1. Teachers meet to
share effective
inclusive practices and
set schedules for peer
observations.

Required Drivers:
Reinforce, Encourage,
Monitor
Number of meetings
and agenda/minutes
for each meeting, as
well as a calendar of
planned observations.
Department members
will take turns sharing
instructional practices
that work, adjust lessons
accordingly, analyze
student performance.
Behaviors are given
30-90 days to
develop.
2. Teachers regularly
schedule observations
with administration
and teacher leaders.

Required Drivers:
Accountability,
Encourage, Reward
Frequency of
observations and
specificity of
feedback.

Track observation dates
and feedback on a
Google form.
Once per quarter per
teacher the first year
of dedicated
implementation.
3. Teachers will
reflect on their
Percentage of teachers
whose self-efficacy
Individual teacher will
review the effectiveness
Once per quarter.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 133

instructional practice
and indicate levels of
confidence (self-
efficacy).

Required Drivers:
Encourage, Reward,
Monitor
has increased by
engaging in reflective
practices for 2 specific
lessons.
of inclusive lessons,
track changes as needed,
reflect on professional
practice.

Required drivers. Teachers will require increased support from their peers, site
administration, and the district to reinforce their training on how to implement inclusive practices
in the mainstream classroom setting. They will also need encouragement to persist when
instructional challenges arise, and rewarded for their efforts and progress towards instructional
shifts. Table 11 below shows the recommended drivers to support critical behaviors of teachers.

Table 11
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Provide teachers opportunities
to meet and collaborate on
inclusive instructional
practices.
Bi-monthly 1, 3
Provide teachers opportunities
to practice inclusive
instruction, and give feedback
for continued growth.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Trainer provided
toolkit/descriptions to teachers
of instructional strategies to
accommodate the learning
needs of students with ASD in
an inclusive classroom setting.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 134

Provide teachers authentic,
research-based training and
demonstrations of the steps for
inclusive practices that have
proven to be highly effective
in addressing the learning and
behavioral needs of students
with ASD in the mainstream
classroom. This training may
include a progressive protocol
for teachers to follow step-by-
step.
Year one, then as needed
thereafter based on multiple
measures of performance data
for students with ASD.
1, 2, 3
Provide refresher training. Second semester, as needed 3

Encouraging
Provide opportunities for
teachers to observe other
(mentor) teachers (similar
subjects/grade levels) who are
experiencing success (as
indicated by student
performance) with inclusive
instruction so they can see, in-
person, the positive
impact/value inclusive
practices have on the learning
of students with ASD.
Once a month at first, and
quarterly thereafter.
1, 3
Provide teachers professional
development that builds their
self-efficacy by offering the
opportunity to create lesson
plans for an inclusive
classroom setting and/or make
adjustments (differentiate) to
their current lessons to meet
the educational needs of
students with ASD.
Once each semester 1, 2, 3
Rewarding
As teachers begin to
implement inclusive lessons,
provide them with accurate
Ongoing 2
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 135

feedback about their
instruction, and attribute their
success to the efforts they
have made to their
professional practice.
Monitoring
Provide teachers opportunities
to reflect on instructional
practices to affirm a positive
mindset or initiate effective
change as needed.
Quarterly 2, 3
Provide teachers 1:1 meetings
with site administrator to
discuss progress of inclusive
instructional practices.
Quarterly 2, 3
Provide teachers opportunities
to review the impact their
inclusive instruction has had
on student performance data.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3

Organizational support. In order for general education teachers to demonstrate
proficiency in the implementation of inclusive practices for students with ASD, they must
receive adequate support from district and site administration. School leaders must establish
expectations that clearly communicate a school-wide philosophy that advocates and reinforces
the importance of inclusive practices by providing the support and resources needed to deliver a
quality education for all students. Specifically, IESD and site administration must allocate the
time necessary for teachers to collaborate and become informed of inclusive practices that can be
incorporated into lessons in the general education classroom. Lastly, school leaders need to
create buy-in with teachers by advocating and reinforcing the importance of inclusive practices
to increase equity and academic success for students with ASD. These organizational efforts are
essential for stakeholders to achieve critical behaviors, and ultimately the required drivers
necessary for the success of students with ASD in an inclusive classroom setting.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 136

Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Once teachers have completed professional learning on how to create
and implement inclusive instructional practices, they will be able to:
1) Articulate the behaviors of ASD and the impact they have on how students with the
disorder access learning (Declarative).
2) Implement instructional strategies that accommodate the learning needs of students with
ASD in the mainstream classroom (Procedural).
3) Recognize that perceptions about inclusion are key elements in the success or failure of
inclusive practices/programs, and impact their individual instructional practice
(Metacognitive).
4) Attribute enhanced ability to implement inclusive instructional practices to professional
development training on the creation of said practices. (Motivation).
5) Value inclusive practices as useful and worthwhile because they have been successful
with implementation in their classrooms (Expectancy Value).
6) Attribute the achievement of students with ASD to their own instructional efforts rather
than issues beyond their control (Attribution).
7) Use collaboration time to stay informed and updated on inclusive practices (Cultural
Setting).
8) Advocate the importance of inclusion to increase equity and academic success for
students with ASD.
Program. It is recommended that IESD provide general education teachers with a 4-day
training program (Two 8-hour work days in the fall semester/Two 8-hour work days in the spring
semester, or a total of 32 hours) to ensure they achieve the learning goals listed above. This
program should provide teachers with effective professional development to address their lack of
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 137

knowledge in differentiation, as well as inclusive strategies to better educate students with ASD.
The professional development should be facilitated by the Director of Student Services, and
include the modeling of inclusive lessons by a skilled peer to share expectations and guide
teachers through the process. Both program leaders should also provide specific and
constructive feedback when teachers independently build lessons on their own. Teachers will
also benefit from detailed job aids distributed at the first training day for them to use when
creating and/or implementing lesson plans that include: 1) A list of instructional strategies that
assist with differentiation, 2) A toolkit to assist teachers in identifying specific behaviors and
potential triggers of those behaviors, and 3) A guide of appropriate responses/interventions for
teachers to manage and mitigate behaviors of students with ASD.
IESD will also provide planning time for collaboration teams to meet and lesson plan on
a regular basis; teachers would benefit from an 8-hour planning day on a quarterly basis (every
45 days) for a total of 32 hours over the course of the school year. To address the need for daily
planning and reflection on their instructional practice, it is suggested that collaboration teachers
be assigned common preparation periods in the master schedule of classes which would amount
to approximately 165 hours over the course of the school year. This time should prove to be
instrumental in the success of each teaching team as both the general education teacher and
special education teacher would have a daily opportunity to build a trusting symbiotic
relationship. Lastly, teachers will also work closely with site leaders to promote a school-wide
understanding of how to provide a welcoming and inclusive learning environment that provides a
sense of belonging for students with ASD.
Evaluation of the components of learning. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) posit
that Level 2 Learning can be evaluated with formative methods to assess participants’
knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment of the organizational goal. Level 2
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 138

evaluation allows leaders to determine whether participants have adequate knowledge of the
goal, can demonstrate that knowledge through performance of an activity, see the benefit or
usefulness of what they are being asked to do, and have enough confidence and commitment to
the activity by engaging in constructive conversation about implementation (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Below, Table 12 illustrates the methods or activities and timing of the
professional development program provided to teachers to help them achieve their learning goals
as well as their knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment to said goals.
Table 12
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program.
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Discussions in department meeting minutes
indicating solid knowledge of the behaviors
that impact learning for students with ASD.
Each monthly department meeting.
Training activities that allow presenters to
assess knowledge of participants, i.e. a quiz
game, think-pair-share, etc.
During training.
Observation of facilitator demonstrating an
inclusive lesson.
During training.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Application of learned inclusive instructional
strategies (role play).
During training.
Walkthrough of inclusive lessons to be taught. Each monthly department meeting.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Open discussion of individual perceptions
about inclusion.
During training.
Acknowledgement that training on inclusive
instruction can enhance professional practice.
During training.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 139

Effort placed on creating and implementing
inclusive instruction.
Each monthly department meeting.

Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Successful demonstration of inclusive lessons
with specific feedback.
Department meeting.
Successful implementation of inclusive lessons
with specific feedback.
Self-reflection following lesson (ongoing).
As observed by administration during
classroom visits.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Evidence of consistent implementation in the
classroom.
Within 90-120 days of training.
Reflection of instructional progress. Within 90-120 days of training.

Level 1: Reaction
According to the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) New World Model of Evaluation,
Level 1 Reaction is the degree to which participants find the training favorable, engaging, and
relevant to their jobs. Level 1 reactions can be evaluated formatively based on instructor
observation, and summatively using written post-training surveys, interviews, or focus groups
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). It is also recommended that Level 1 Reaction be kept simple
by only seeking information necessary to move to Level 2 Learning. Table 13 below indicates
the methods or tools and timing of teachers’ reactions during training days and following
department meetings.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 140

Table 13
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Attendance at all four (4) training days Two (2) sessions per semester.
Observation of teachers by director and
presenter.
During each of the four (4) training sessions.
Contributions made to training activities. During each of the four (4) training sessions.
Relevance
Post-training evaluations/surveys. Following each of the four (4) training
sessions.
Check-ins throughout each training through
questions and commentary during group
activities.
During each of the four (4) training sessions.
Customer Satisfaction
Post-training evaluations/surveys. Following each of the four (4) training
sessions.
Check-ins throughout each training through
questions and commentary during group
activities.
During each of the four (4) training sessions.

Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. Prior to the end of each session,
the facilitators will formatively evaluate the program based on their observations of teachers’
reactions throughout the training. The observation data collected can measure Level 1
engagement and allow for adjustments in the delivery of content, as well as address any
distractions or concerns that might divert teachers’ full focus (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
At the end of each of the four training sessions, general education teachers will complete a short
survey to measure their immediate reaction to the training session as well as newly acquired
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 141

Level 2 learning. The survey will also include questions that will indicate any changes/increases
to individual self-efficacy as well as the likelihood of applying new learning to the inclusive
classroom setting. This evaluation instrument can be found in Appendix E.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Four weeks after each of the
first three training sessions, the facilitator will administer a survey with Likert Scale items as
well as a few open-ended questions using Kirkpatricks’ Blended Model of evaluation
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This interval of time will provide facilitators an opportunity
to tailor subsequent sessions based on teachers’ learning needs. This survey will be used to
measure all four of Kirkpatricks’ levels of evaluation by gathering information about teachers’:
self-reported knowledge about the elements of inclusive lesson planning (Level 1); attitudes
about creating inclusive lessons (Level 2); application of inclusive lessons in the classroom
(Level 3); and improvement with inclusive lesson planning and implementation that support
IESD’s organizational goals (Level 4). Appendix F is an example of the Blended Evaluation
items that reflect all four levels including the alignment of previously stated critical behaviors
(Table 10) and required drivers (Table 11). Lastly, before the beginning of the first training
session, and upon completion of the fourth and final training session, teachers will be asked to
rate the program based on Kirkpatricks’ Four Levels of Training Evaluation to assess their
learning experience both before and after the program. This survey can be found in Appendix G.
Data Analysis and Reporting
IESD has stated clearly in its organizational mission that the inclusion of students with
disabilities, including those with ASD, is the expectation of all school sites in the district. To
achieve this mission, school sites were directed to provide inclusive classroom learning
experiences in the form of collaboration (also known as Collab) courses to provide LRE for all
students. This directive was meant with the best of intentions; however, general education
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 142

teachers have been assigned to teach Collab classes with little to no training; this poor execution
has led to less than successful implementation outcomes for the past two years. Acknowledging
this lack of success, it is prudent for IESD to identify what training teachers still need to provide
effective instruction and learning experiences in an inclusive classroom environment.
The evaluation tools administered to teachers immediately after the first training, and
again after 4 weeks, measured Level 1: Reaction and Level 2: Learning. This feedback is
essential for training facilitators to tailor each subsequent training to best meet teachers’ needs as
seen in the visual representation below labeled Image A. Both formative and summative data
collection and analysis for Levels 1 through 4 will be shared with all teacher participants as well
as IESD leadership. This data will be accompanied by recommendations for district-wide
improvement and a return on expectations.

Image A: Assumed Data for Kirkpatrick’s Level 1 & 2 Data
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 143

Image B: Assumed Data for Kirkpatrick’s Level 3 & 4 Data
Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model was used to evaluate this training program for
inclusive practices. This model is a framework in which four levels of evaluation are used to
assess the value of training programs beginning with Level 4: Results. For planning purposes,
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) emphasize the importance of focusing on the expected
outcome upon the completion of a training program so each participant has a clear understanding
of what needs to be achieved. As Level 4 applies to IESD middle and high school teachers, they
will be able to clearly articulate the district’s goal to increase the inclusion of students with ASD
in general education classrooms, increase educational opportunities to advocate a school-wide
philosophy that supports the inclusion of students with ASD, and improves performance scores
in standardized testing for students with ASD.
Level 3: Behavior is the most important level of evaluation as participants must transfer
the knowledge and skills they learned in the training (Level 2), and apply it in their professional
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 144

practice to achieve results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). It is essential during Level 3 for
the organization to monitor and account for critical behaviors which should be observable and
performed consistently. This is also the time for leaders to ensure they are providing participants
with required drivers to support their efforts through the application process as well as hold them
accountable for work performance as it aligns with the organizational goal (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Specific to IESD, teachers will meet to share effective inclusive practices
and schedule peer observations, administration and teacher leaders will observe inclusive lessons
to identify effective practices and areas for improvement, and lastly, teachers will reflect on their
professional practice based on constructive feedback to continually work toward expected
outcomes.
Level 2: Learning is the degree to which participants develop the knowledge, skills,
attitude, confidence, and commitment to achieve the intended goal (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). As this level applies to IESD, teachers will acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to
create and deliver inclusive lesson plans, as well as improve their perspectives about inclusion.
Level 2 will also assist to increase teachers’ self-efficacy, or confidence, about implementation,
and increase their commitment to apply new learning to their instructional practice.
The final level of the New World Kirkpatrick Model is Level 1: Reaction. As described
by Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016), this level is the degree to which participants find a
training engaging and relevant to their professional practice. Relevance to classroom instruction
is a key component of training for IESD teachers. Engagement will be measured through simple
observation by facilitators, whereas relevance and satisfaction of the training will be measured
using post-training surveys. Ultimately, using the New World Kirkpatrick Model will provide
IESD the opportunity to establish and/or fine tune training programs, focus on the application of
knowledge and skill as it transfers to the inclusive classroom setting, and carefully analyze data
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 145

to identify and focus on that which is clearly aligned with expected outcomes (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
The Clark and Estes (2008) framework, although formulaic, proved to be a strength for
the organization of this mixed-methods study. Their framework provided a step-by-step guide
for the researcher to follow once the organizational goal was established and its underlying
problems with achievement were identified. The interconnectedness of the KMO influences was
also helpful for a novice researcher. Knowledge influences were assumed once the problems
with achieving the organizational goal were identified, then motivation influences were assumed
based on K, and finally, the organizational influences were assumed based on M which made it
feasible for the researcher to see the progression of the study. Use of the Clark and Estes (2008)
framework for gap analysis was highly appropriate for researching an educational organization.
Furthermore, it seems that many of the organizational issues that arise on any given day in the
world of middle or high school education can be reviewed and addressed with KMO as it guides
thinking from problem through solution. Weaknesses in the methodology and follow-through of
data collection for this study will be discussed in the following section, Limitations and
Delimitations.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study has a few fundamental limitations, most shared in Chapter Three, for a reader
to consider when assessing the validity and reliability, and credibility and trustworthiness of its
results, findings, and recommendations. First, time was a limitation because there are few
optimal windows of time available during each school year to conduct teacher surveys,
observations, and interviews. Based on the researcher’s experience as an educator, it was
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 146

prudent to schedule data collection after summer break so teachers were well-rested to start the
school year with a fresh perspective. Additionally, the actual amount of time available to
conduct surveys, observations, and interviews proved to be a limitation. Once the researcher
narrowed willing respondents to those meeting all criteria, only three participants were
actualized to continue with the qualitative phase of data collection. More time would have
allowed the opportunity to extend the survey window and encourage increased responses, and
potentially increase the number of participants for observations and interviews.
The second limitation was the integrity of information collected from teachers during
data collection. This limitation was curbed to an extent with the promise of anonymity and
confidentiality as well as emphasizing participants’ right to withdraw from observations and
interviews at any time, but one can never be entirely certain that everything that was reported or
stated was the absolute truth. A third limitation to this study is that although the researcher
selected middle and high school teachers, which totaled more than 300 potential respondents,
there are other stakeholders involved with the education of students with ASD, including school
psychologists, instructional aides, district and site administrators, parents, and students.
A fourth limitation was discovered by the researcher during data analysis regarding the
alignment of survey and interview questions to the findings for the KMO influences. The
phrasing of two questions seeking information about professional development elicited almost
identical responses, and two interview questions were not entirely applicable to the purpose of
the study. Although this discovery did not compromise the validity and reliability or the
credibility and trustworthiness of the study, more detailed information could have been captured
to better address the research questions for this study with more careful consideration of each
question’s relevance. Lastly, despite her best efforts, a researcher can never be completely
unbiased during the process of data collection. The researcher did, however, practice reflexivity
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 147

as it related to the problem of practice, was non-judgmental, sensitive, and respectful to all
participants as they shared their knowledge and experience about the inclusion of students with
ASD in their classrooms (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Maxwell, 2015; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016).
This study and its stakeholders also presented various delimitations, over which the
researcher had some control. First, the problem of practice selected surrounded inclusion in
middle and high schools which was an item of conversation between IESD and the teachers’
collective bargaining unit at the time of data collection. Second, the research questions were
written in alignment with discussions already taking place in IESD middle and high schools, so
the topic was familiar to survey respondents, as well as observation and interview participants.
Lastly, because the stakeholder sampling for this study is one that exists in numerous school
districts throughout the state of California, its findings have the potential for generalizability and
could serve as a resource for schools/districts outside of the organization (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016).
Recommendations for Future Research
This study about teachers’ perspectives surrounding inclusion leaves plenty of
opportunities for future research. The methodology for this study could be used for similar
school districts, or it could be modified to capture perspectives from elementary school teachers,
or other stakeholders within education such as administrators, psychologists, parents, and
students. Based on the limitations of this study, it is strongly recommended that more time
would allow a researcher to conduct several classroom observations with participants to collect
richer data, and follow up with interviews for each as done in this study. It is recommended that
survey and interview questions for future research be reviewed carefully to ensure strong
alignment with the research questions and assumed KMO influences of the study to capture the
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 148

most pertinent data possible. Additionally, based on some unexpected survey results indicating
that teachers possess more knowledge about students with ASD than the researcher assumed, as
well as a solid view of their self-efficacy, it is recommended that a few questions be removed or
rephrased to reflect this finding. One final unexpected, yet impressive, discovery was that the
teachers interviewed for this study had all taken the initiative to research how they could better
address the needs of the students with ASD in their classrooms. That stated, it is recommended
that the interviews include questions to delve further into the steps teachers have taken to
research instructional needs when they have not been provided the education or training to
support students with special needs.
Conclusion
The organizational problem for this study was a lack of academic success for middle and
high school students with ASD in Inland Empire School District based on a variety of
performance indicators. Furthermore, many students with ASD were not receiving inclusive
academic instruction in the least restrictive environment. This problem was important to address
because research has shown that students with ASD who learn in the general education setting
experience better academic outcomes than those educated in special education classroom.
Although all stakeholders play an important role in the overall achievement of student learning,
it was essential to improve teacher’s instructional practice to increase the inclusion of students
with ASD in the general education classroom. Consequently, the stakeholder of focus for this
study was middle and high school general and special education teachers.
Once the problem was identified, and the stakeholders were selected, a mixed-methods
research design was used to maximize data collection for this study. Furthermore, because this
was an improvement study, Clark and Estes’ (2008) KMO Framework was used to organize the
research. The results and findings of this study revealed a significant gap in professional
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 149

development for inclusive instructional practices. Data also showed that although teachers have
not received the necessary training, many reported a strong sense of self-efficacy in their abilities
to educate students with ASD in their inclusive classrooms. Furthermore, and previously stated,
teachers also showed remarkable initiative in their individual research efforts to explore
instructional strategies to teach students with ASD in the general education setting. The level of
commitment and willingness of teachers to provide better learning experiences for students with
ASD shows a strong possibility that the recommendations to solve this organizational problem
will be accepted and implemented in the district. Moreover, these recommendations could
potentially be used to address similar issues in other educational settings outside of IESD. Most
importantly, if this organizational problem is solved, it means that not only will more students
with ASD learn in an inclusive classroom, they can enjoy a greater sense of belonging, and their
opportunities to attend college, have success in the workforce, and live with greater
independence as adults will be actualized.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 150

REFERENCES
Ainscow, M. (2007). Taking an inclusive turn. Journal of Research in Special Educational
Needs, 7(1), 3-7. Retrieved from doi: 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2007.00075.x.
American Psychiatric Association (2019). Retrieved from: www.psychiatry.org/.
Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2006). Attributions. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/attribution-theory/.
Angelides, P. Antoniou, E., & Charalambous, C. (2010). Making sense of inclusion for
leadership and schooling: a case study from Cyprus. International Journal of Leadership
in Education, 13(3), 319-334. doi: 10.1080/13603120902759539.
Autism Society of America (2018). Retrieved from: https://www.autism-society.org/.
Avramidis, E. & Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers’ attitudes towards integration/inclusion: a
review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17(2), 129-147.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.
Black-Hawkins, K. (2012). Developing inclusive classroom practices: What guidance do
commercially published texts offer teachers? European Journal of Special Needs
Education,27(4), 499-516.
Bleck, N. S., & Boakes, N. J. (2010). Creating a learning environment for all children: Are
teachers able and willing? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(5), 435-447.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). In Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership (5th
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 151

Braunsteiner, M. & Mariano-Mariano-Lapidus, S. (2014). A perspective of inclusion:
Challenges for the future. Global Education Review, 1(1), 32-43. Retrieved from
http://ger.mercy.edu/index.php/ger/article/download/12/13.
Busby, R., Ingram, R., Bowron, R., Oliver, J., & Lyons, B. (2012). Teaching elementary
children with autism: Addressing teacher challenges and preparation needs. Rural
Educator, 33(2), 27-35. Retrieved from
http://epubs.library.msstate.edu/index.php/ruraleducator/article/view/146/190
Carroll, A., Forlin, C., & Jobling, A. (2003). The impact of teacher training in special education
on the attitudes of Australian preservice general educators towards people with
disabilities. Teacher Education Quarterly, Summer 2003, 65-79.
Carter, E. W., Gustafson, J. R., Sreckovic, M. A., Dykstra Steinbrenner, J. R., Pierce, N. P.,
Bord, A., Stabel, A., Rogers, S., Czerw, A., Mullins, T. (2017). Efficacy of peer support
interventions in general education classrooms for high school students with autism
spectrum disorder. Remedial and Special Education, 38(4), 207-221.
Cassady, J. M. (2011). Teachers’ attitudes toward the inclusion of students with autism and
emotional behavioral disorder. Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, 2(7), 5.
Retrieved from
https://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1127&context=ejie.
Center for Disease Control (2019). Retrieved from
https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data/index.html.
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 152

Connor, D. J. & Baglieri, S. (2009). Tipping the scales: Disability studies asks “how much
diversity can you take?” In S. Steinberg (Ed.), Diversity and multiculturalism: A reader.
New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Costley, K. C. (2013). Ongoing Professional Development: The Prerequisite for and
Continuation of Successful Inclusion Meeting the Academic Needs of Special Students in
Public Schools. Online Submission. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED541075.pdf.
Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Crosland, K. & Dunlap, G. (2012). Effective strategies for the inclusion of children with autism
in general education classrooms. Behavior Modification, 36(3), 251-269.
doi: 10.1177/0145445512442682.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Race, inequality and educational accountability: the irony of ‘No
Child Left Behind’, Race Ethnicity and Education, 10:3, 245-260,
DOI: 10.1080/13613320701503207.
Dybvik, A. C. (2004). Autism and the inclusion mandate. Education Next, 4(1), 1-10.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/.
Eldar, E., Talmor, R., and Wolf-Zukerman, T. (2010). Successes and difficulties in the
individual inclusion of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in the eyes of
their coordinators. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(1), 97-114,
doi: 10.1080/13603110802504150.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 153

Emam, M. M. & Farrell, P. (2009). Tensions experienced by teachers and their views of
support for pupils with autism spectrum disorders in mainstream schools. European
Journal of Special Needs Education, 24(4), 407-422, doi: 10.1080/08856250903223070.
Ferraioli, S. J. & Harris, S. L. (2011). Effective educational inclusion of students on the autism
spectrum. J Contemp Psychother, 41(19), 19-28. doi: 10.1007/s10879-010-9156-y.
Fuchs, W. W. (2010). Examining teachers’ perceived barriers associated with inclusion. SRATE
Journal, 19(1), 30-35. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ948685.pdf.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5.
Gavaldá, M. S. & Qinyi, T. (2012). Improving the Process of Inclusive Education in Children
with ASD Mainstream Schools. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46,
4072-4076.
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Goodrow, M. (2016). A Study of Teachers’ Challenges with the Inclusion of Middle and High
School Students with Autism.
Hart, J. E. (2013). Navigating autism’s swirling waters. Kappan, 94(4), 24-27. Retrieved from
www.kappanmagazine.org.
Higginson, R. & Chatfield, M. (2012). Together we can do it: a professional development
project for regular teachers of children with autism spectrum disorder. Kairaranga 13(2),
29-40.
Humphrey, N. (2008). Including pupils with autistic spectrum disorders in mainstream schools.
Support for Learning, 23(10), 41-47.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 154

Humphrey, N. & Lewis, S. (2008). What does ‘inclusion’ mean for pupils on the autistic
spectrum in mainstream secondary schools? Journal of Research in Special Educational
Needs, 8(3), 132-140. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2008.00115.x.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2004). Retrieved from https://sites.ed.gov/idea/.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2015). Retrieved from https://sites.ed.gov/idea/.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
Kozleski, E. B. & Waitoller, F. R. (2010). Teacher Learning for Inclusive Education:
Understanding Teaching as a Cultural and Political Practice. International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 14(7), 655-666.
Kratochvílová, J. (2015). Learning conditions – part of the support system for pupils in an
inclusive classroom. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 637-643.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41, 212–218. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2.
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Chapter 2: Planning the focus group study. In Focus
groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.) (pp. 29-31). Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE Publications.
Leblanc, L., Richardson, W. & Burns, K. A. (2009). Autism spectrum disorder and the inclusive
classroom: Effective training to enhance knowledge of ASD and evidence-based
practices. Teacher Education and Special Education, 32(2), 166-179.
Lim, N., Haddad, A., & Daugherty, L. (2013). Implementation of the DoD diversity and
inclusion strategic plan: A framework for change through accountability. Santa Monica,
CA: RAND Corporation, RR=333-OSD, 2013.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 155

Lindsay, S., Proulx, M., Scott, H., & Thomson, N. (2014). Exploring teachers’ strategies for
including children with autism spectrum disorder in mainstream classrooms.
International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18(2), 101-122.
doi: 10.1080/13603116.2012.758320.
Little, C. (2017). Supporting Social Inclusion for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders:
Insights from Research and Practice. New York, NY: Routledge.
Loiacono, V. & Palumbo, A. (2011). Principals who understand applied behavior analysis
perceive they are better able to support educators who teach students with autism.
International Journal of Special Education, 26(2), 212-222.
Lynch, S. L. & Irvine, A. N. (2009). Inclusive education and best practice for children with
autism spectrum disorder: an integrated approach. International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 13(8), 845-859. doi: 10.1080/13603110802475518.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
McCray, E. D. & McHatton, P. A. (2011). “Less afraid to have ‘them’ in my classroom”:
Understanding pre-service general educators’ perceptions about inclusion.
Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(4), 135-155. Retrieved from
http://www.academia.edu/download/4321005EJ960622.pdf.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Messiou, K. (2017). Understanding marginalisation through dialogue: A strategy for promoting
the inclusion of all students in schools. Educational Review, 1-12.
Moores-Abdool, W. (2010). Included students with autism and access to curriculum: What is
being provided? Issues in Teacher Education, 19(2), 153-169.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 156

Morcom, V. E. & MacCallum, J. A. (2012). Getting personal about values: scaffolding student
participation towards an inclusive classroom community. International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 16(12), 1323-1334. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2011.572189.
National Institute of Mental Health. (2016). Autism Spectrum Disorder. Retrieved from
https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/autism-spectrumdisordersasd/index.shtml.
Ochs, E., Kremer-Sadlik, T., Solomon, O., & Gainer Sirota, K. (2001). Inclusion as social
practice: Views of children with autism. Social Development 10(3), 399-419.
Ostmeyer, K. & Scarpa, A. (2012). Examining school-based skills program needs and barriers
for students with high-functioning autism spectrum disorders using participatory action
research. Psychology in the Schools, 49(10), 932-941. doi: 10.1002/pits.21646.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Peters, B. & Forlin, C. (2011). Chinese children with ASD in Hong Kong (SAR):
development of inclusive practice, Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs,
11(2), 87-98. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2010.01179.x.
Roberts, J. & Simpson, K. (2016). A review of research into stakeholder perspectives on
inclusion of students with autism in mainstream schools. International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 20(10), 1084-1096.
Roberts, R., Beadle-Brown, J., & Youell, D. (2011). Promoting social inclusion for children
and adults on the autism spectrum – reflections on policy and practice. Tizard Learning
Disability Review, 16(4), 45-52. doi: 10.1108/13595471111172840.
Rocco, T. S., & Plakhotnik, M. S. (2009). Literature reviews, conceptual frameworks, and
theoretical frameworks: Terms, functions, and distinctions. Human Resource
Development Review, 8(1), 120-130.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 157

Rodden, B., Prendeville, P., Burke, S., & Kinsella, W. (2019). Framing secondary teachers’
perspectives on the inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorder using critical
discourse analysis. Cambridge Journal of Education, 49(2), 235-253. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2018.1506018.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.) (pp. 85-92). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Salkind, N. J. (2017). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (4th ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Sansoti, J. M. & Sansoti, F. J. (2012). Inclusion for students with high functioning autism
spectrum disorders: Definitions and decision making. Psychology in the Schools,
49(10), 917-931. doi: 10.1002/pits.21652.
Segall, M. J. & Campbell, J. M. (2012). Factors relating to education professionals’ classroom
practices for the inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorders. Research in
Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6(3), 1156-1167.
Symes, W. & Humphrey, N. (2011). School factors that facilitate or hinder the ability of
teaching assistants to effectively support pupils with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs)
in mainstream secondary schools. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs,
11(3), 153-161. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01196.x.
Tonnesen, B., & Hahn, E. (2016). Middle school students’ attitudes toward a peer with autism
spectrum disorder: Effects of social acceptance and physical inclusion. Focus on Autism
and Other Developmental Disabilities, 31(4), 262-274: SAGE Publications.
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 158

Trenerry, B., & Paradies, Y. (2012). Organizational Assessment: An Overlooked Approach To
Managing Diversity and Addressing Racism in The Workplace. Journal of Diversity
Management (JDM), 7(1), 11-26. https://doi.org/10.19030/jdm.v7i1.6932.
United States Department of Education. Retrieved from:
https://www.usa.gov/federal-agencies/u-s-department-of-education.
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J. & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora, CO: Mid-
continent Research for Education and Learning.
Wikipedia. Retrieved from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusion_(education).

Young, K., Mannix McNamara, P., & Coughlan, B. (2017). Authentic inclusion - utopian
thinking? - Irish post-primary teachers’ perspectives of inclusive education. Teaching
and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 68(2017), 1-
11. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.07.017.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 159

APPENDIX A
SURVEY INSTRUMENT PROTOCOL
(Sent via email to Stakeholder Group)

Dear Teacher:
My name is Shelley L. Morris, and I am an assistant principal at XXHS (pseudonym for
school site) doing research for my dissertation. I am studying middle and high school teachers’
perspectives about the inclusion of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general
education classroom. I would greatly appreciate your participation in my research by completing
a short 3-minute survey. Your responses to this survey will remain anonymous.
At the end of this survey, you will be asked if you would be willing to be observed in
your classroom and interviewed following the observation. Your participation in an observation
and interview as well as all information gathered will remain confidential. Thank you for your
consideration, and I look forward to your response.
Follow this link to the Survey:
Take the Survey
Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser:
https://usc.qualtrics.com/jfe/preview/SV_0iWAuoFDq6YIJXT?Q_CHL=preview
Follow the link to opt out of future emails:
Click here to unsubscribe

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 160

Survey: Demographic Information

Question 1
Please select the choice below that best describes the grade level(s) you teach.
High School (9 - 12)
Middle School (7 - 8)

Question 2
How many years have you been teaching?
0-2 years
3-5 years
6-9 years
10 years or more

Question 3
Please select the choice below that best describes your teaching assignment.
General Education
Special Education

Question 4
Which subject areas do you currently teach? Please select all that apply.
English Language Arts
Mathematics
Social Science
Science
Visual Arts
Performing Arts
Physical Education
Career Technical Education
World Languages

Survey: Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences

Question 5
I have a strong understanding of the behaviors of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Question 6
I am confident in my ability to teach students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in a general
education classroom setting.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 161

Question 7
Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders have the requisite academic skills to be successful in a
general education classroom setting.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Question 8
The inclusion of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general education classroom
can be disruptive to the learning of non-disabled students in the classroom.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Question 9
Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders who learn alongside their non-disabled peers in the
general education classroom demonstrate higher levels of social skills.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Question 10
Overall, approximately how many hours have you received training from your district to teach
students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general education classroom setting?
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Question 11
I have received professional training in my school district that has helped me to effectively
address the learning needs of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general education
classroom.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Question 12
Differentiating lessons to address the learning needs of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders
in the general education classroom requires increased preparation time.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 162

Question 13
My school district is concerned with providing the best educational opportunities for students
with Autism Spectrum Disorders.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Question 14
Site administration provides me with the necessary resources to meet the learning
accommodations of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general education
classroom.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Question 15
My school site promotes a sense of community by engaging students with Autism Spectrum
Disorders in activities that foster a sense of belonging.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

Question 16
If you wish to provide more detailed information in the form of a confidential interview and
classroom observation, please include your full name and personal email address or phone
number in the space below.

Once respondents completed the survey, a screen was displayed:

Thank you for your time spent taking this survey.
Your response has been recorded.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 163

APPENDIX B

OBSERVATION PROTOCOL

Date: ____________________

Time: ____________________

Duration: _________________

Participant Pseudonym: ______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

Focus of Observation:

Physical setting:

Description of participants:

Description of activities:

Description of individuals engaged in activity:

Interactions of staff with students:

Participants’ comments:

Observer Comments:

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 164

APPENDIX C

INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

Introduction for the start of each interview and transition to in-service training.
“Good morning/afternoon. Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with me
today. Your experiences and perspectives are very important to this study. Throughout the
interview, I am going to take some notes while we’re talking, and I would also like to record our
conversation to ensure that your perspectives are accurately documented. The recording is also
helpful should I need to review our conversation to verify any of my hand-written notes, and I
will be the only person to hear the recording and see the transcript. Would it be alright with you
if I record this interview? Thank you. First, I’m going to ask you some questions about your
general understanding of Autism Spectrum Disorders and experiences in the classroom.”
1. Please explain your understanding of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and its
characteristics.
2. Please describe your level of knowledge and skill as it pertains to instruction of
students within an inclusive classroom setting. Which of those skills would you say
is your strength or an area you think could be improved?
Transition to professional development.
“Now I’m going to ask you a few questions about your classroom teaching and
professional development experiences.”
3. Please share the professional development training you received in IESD prior to
being assigned to an inclusive classroom setting.
4. How do you view your role and responsibility for the education of students with ASD
in the inclusive classroom setting?
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 165

5. Describe your experience working with students with disabilities, specifically ASD,
over the course of your teaching career. In that time, has anything in particular
(challenging situation, great colleague/mentor, significant event) shaped your
attitude/perspective about students with ASD?
6. Which instructional strategies/activities have you found to be especially effective in
the inclusive classroom setting?
7. What advice would you give to a teacher who is opposed to, or worried about
teaching in an inclusive classroom setting?
8. In your classroom, how do you encourage a culture of acceptance and a sense of
belonging as an equal peer for students with ASD?
Transition to organizational (school and district culture).
“For the final part of our interview, I would like your insight about how district and site
leadership support and promote inclusion at your school site.”
9. Please describe the elements of an inclusive school culture. How does the school
district and site leadership promote a culture of inclusion at your school site?
10. How does the special education staff at your school site support your instruction in
the inclusive classroom setting?
11. What do you think is the most important factor you would attribute to the success of
inclusive education for students with ASD?
Transition to conclusion of interview.
“Thank you very much for your perspective, and this concludes the interview unless they
there is anything you would like to add that you did not have the opportunity to share during our
conversation. Once again, I want to assure you that the information shared here today will only
be viewed by me. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions.”
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 166

APPENDIX D

INFORMED CONSENT/INFORMATION SHEET

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Organizational Change and Leadership
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089
______________________________________________________________________________

INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH STUDY

Teachers’ Perspectives About the Inclusion of Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in
the General Education Classroom

You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. Please ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to try to understand why teachers express adverse attitudes about the
inclusion of students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in the general education classroom.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
Participants who voluntarily choose to participate in this study will be asked to complete a 16-
question online survey that requires approximately 3 minutes of their time. Additionally, the
final question of the survey will ask you to provide your personal contact information if you
agree to further data collection via a classroom observation, lasting no more than one class
period or less than an hour, and a follow up interview, lasting approximately 45 to 60 minutes.
You may choose to not respond to any questions asked, and you may stop the observation and
interview at any time, or retract your contributions with no explanation required.

ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Participation is voluntary for all methods of data collection. Your alternative is to not
participate.

CONFIDENTIALITY
There will be no identifiable information asked during the survey unless you provide your name
and contact information for a classroom observation and follow up interview. If you choose to
be observed and interviewed, your participation will remain confidential, and will not be shared
with anyone. This includes your colleagues and site administration. That stated, if you would
like your participation to remain confidential, it is recommended that you refrain from sharing
your participation with anyone. You have a right to review all data collected, including
observation and interview notes.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 167

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Investigator for this study is:
Shelley L. Morris
Email: shellelm@usc.edu
Phone: 949.874.0727

Dissertation Chair:
Dr. Laila Hasan
Email: hasana@usc.edu

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 168

APPENDIX E

INCLUSIVE PRACTICES
END OF TRAINING SESSION SURVEY

Date of Training Session: ________________________________________________________

Name of Trainer(s): _____________________________________________________________

Please circle the training session for which you are providing feedback:

Session 1 Session 2 Session 3 Session 4

Please mark (X)
the box to indicate
your level of
agreement with the
items listed below.

Strongly
Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
Disagree

Not
Applicable
to this
session
1. The learning
outcome was made
clear at the start of
today’s session.

2. The learning
outcome was met
by the end of
today’s session.

3. The information
presented is
relevant to my
instruction.

4. The activities
for today’s session
helped me practice
inclusive
strategies.

5. I can apply the
skills learned in
today’s session in
my classroom
immediately.

6. The skills I
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 169

learned today will
benefit my
instruction in an
inclusive
classroom setting.
7. I am committed
to incorporating
today’s learning
into my
instructional
practice.

8. Today’s session
was a valuable use
of my time.

Open-ended feedback:

9. Which part of today’s training session was most useful to your instructional practice?

10. Which part of today’s training session was least useful to your instructional practice?

11. How can this training be improved (structure, format, materials, pace, etc.)?

Your Name (optional): __________________________________________________________

Your School Site (optional): ______________________________________________________
TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 170

APPENDIX F
INCLUSIVE PRACTICES
PROGRESS CHECK SURVEY

Dear Teacher,

One month has passed since our last training session. Please complete the following survey to
self-report your level of application of inclusive practices in your classroom within the last
month. This information will be used to address your learning needs for the next training
session.

Please circle the training session you most recently attended:

Session 1 Session 2 Session 3 Session 4

Please mark (X)
the box to indicate
your level of
agreement with the
items listed below.

Strongly
Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
Disagree

Not
Applicable
to this
session
1. I was able to use
the information
presented in the
last training
session as a guide
for lesson
planning.

2. I delivered at
least one lesson
using inclusive
practices since the
last training
session.

3. The lesson(s) I
delivered since the
last training
session has
benefited my
students’ learning.

4. I collaborated
with other teachers
to share inclusive

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 171

practices that were
effective in my
instruction.
5. I will continue
to implement
inclusive
instructional
strategies into my
lesson plans before
the next training
session.

6. What knowledge, or which skills have been the most helpful to you inclusive lesson planning?

7. What questions do you have, or which areas of training do you need reviewed for the next
training session?

8. If you would like us to contact you for individual guidance prior to the next training session,
please provide your contact information below, and we will follow up within 48 hours.

Your Name (optional): __________________________________________________________

Phone or email: ________________________________________________________________

Your School Site (optional): ______________________________________________________

TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ON INCLUSION 172

APPENDIX G

PRE-/POST-TRAINING SURVEY
Please mark (X)
the box to indicate
your level of
agreement with the
items listed below.

Strongly
Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
Disagree

Not
Applicable
to this
session
1. I have a strong
understanding of
the learning needs
of students with
ASD.

2. I can create
effective lesson
plans that
incorporate
instructional
practices to help
students with ASD
access the
curriculum in an
inclusive
classroom setting.

3. I can effectively
deliver inclusive
lessons that benefit
the learning of
students with
ASD.

4. I collaborate
with other teachers
to share inclusive
practices that are
effective in my
instruction.

5. I am confident
in my ability to
create lessons and
provide effective
instruction in an
inclusive setting.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This paper discusses various reasons why teachers express adverse perspectives toward the inclusion of students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in the general education classroom. In several surveys, teachers’ concerns have been communicated stating that ongoing professional development is not sufficient, and the inclusion of students with ASD in the mainstream classroom negatively impacts the learning of general education students. Additional studies have shown that school systems do not effectively advocate the inclusion of students with ASD which validates a culture of segregation and further marginalizes their potential for high level learning experiences. These findings suggest that in order for students with ASD to experience greater success in school, career, and society, educational systems must provide professional development, and create buy-in with teachers by emphasizing and reinforcing the importance of inclusive practices to increase equity and academic success for students with ASD in the general education classroom.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A study of the leadership strategies of urban elementary school principals with effective inclusion programs for autistic students in the general education setting for a majority of the school day

PDF

Strategies to create a culture of inclusion for students with special needs

PDF

The examination of the perceptions of general education teachers, special education teachers, and support personnel on the inclusion of students with special needs

PDF

Equity and inclusion of veteran students with traumatic brain injury in higher education classrooms: a gap analysis

PDF

Narrowing the English learner achievement gap through teacher professional learning and cultural proficiency: an evaluation study

PDF

Elementary principals attitudes, perceptions, and their ability to support students with autism and emotional behavioral disturbances in inclusive settings

PDF

Investigating how general education middle school teachers support the social inclusion of students with special needs

PDF

Exploration of STEM teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and the organizational influences of culturally inclusive teaching practices

PDF

Effective implementation of technology in elementary schools: an evaluation study

PDF

Women and leadership: the impact of collegiate athletics on leader identity development and attainment of leadership positions

PDF

Inclusion of adjunct faculty in the community college culture

PDF

Trending upward: an evaluation study of teacher practices in serving special needs students in a public high school

PDF

Teachers’ experiences and preparedness to teach in an inclusive environment

PDF

Leadership and identity: perceptions, experiences and negotiations of women leaders in higher education

PDF

The impact of teacher perceptions about underrepresented students

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for marginalized students using the college-going culture: a promising practices study

PDF

E-TECH professional development: a Mountain View University initiative

PDF

The educational and professional choices of Iranian women in STEM doctoral programs

PDF

The importance of technological training among public school teachers integrating one-to-one computing: an evaluation study

PDF

The successful implementation of diversity and inclusion efforts: a study of promising practice

Asset Metadata

Creator Morris, Shelley Lynn (author)

Core Title Teachers' perspectives on the inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorders in the general education classroom: a gap analysis

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 02/10/2020

Defense Date 01/22/2020

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag access,autism,equity,High School,inclusion,mainstreaming,marginalization,middle school,OAI-PMH Harvest,Teachers,Training

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hasan, Angela (committee chair), Cash, David (committee member), Pensavalle, Margo (committee member)

Creator Email Shelleymorris74@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-267333

Unique identifier UC11673418

Identifier etd-MorrisShel-8160.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-267333 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-MorrisShel-8160.pdf

Dmrecord 267333

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Morris, Shelley Lynn

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA