4.4 Article

Do learners with special education needs really feel included? Evidence from the Perception of Inclusion Questionnaire and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire

期刊

RESEARCH IN DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
卷 83, 期 -, 页码 28-36

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ridd.2018.07.007

关键词

Special education needs; Inclusive education; Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire; Perception of Inclusion Questionnaire; Academic self-concept; Self-perception

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science and Culture of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: School inclusion is an important right of students in school systems around the world. However, many students with special education needs (SEN) have lower perceptions of inclusion despite attending inclusive schools. Aims: This study examined perceived levels of inclusion, academic self-concept and developmental problems in inclusive schools. Methods and procedures: The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and the Perception of Inclusion Questionnaire were administered at two measurement points (6th and 7th grade; n = 407, including 48 with SEN) at multiple inclusive schools. Responses were compared based on gender, grade level, and SEN. Factor structure and measurement invariance were evaluated. Outcomes and results: Factor structures of both questionnaires were confirmed. Academic self-concept and emotional inclusion were lower for learners with SEN. However, these effects shrank in grade 7. Similarly, academic self-concept increased between grade 6 and 7. Lastly, learners with SEN had a higher level of conduct problems. Conclusions and implications: Both instruments remain suitable for use in comparisons in inclusive schools. Significant differences exist for learners with SEN in inclusive classrooms, although these differences may shrink over time. We recommend the continued use of the Perception of Inclusion Questionnaire for information about school inclusion and for learners with SEN.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据