Attitudes toward Inclusive Education Scale

Abstract

The Attitudes toward Inclusive Education Scale (ATIES) is a specialized 16-item instrument designed to quantify the attitudes held by educators regarding the inclusion of students with disabilities in mainstream regular education classrooms. Developed by Wilczenski (1995), the scale is rooted in the framework established by the Attitudes Toward Mainstreaming Scale (Berryman, 1988).

The ATIES employs a clear structure, dividing its items equally into four distinct domains of integration: academic, behavioral, physical, and social integration. This allows for a nuanced assessment of attitudes across various facets of the inclusive educational environment.

Keywords

Attitudes, Inclusive Education, Mainstreaming, Students with Disabilities, Academic Integration, Behavioral Integration, Teacher Attitudes, Rasch Model, ATIES.

Authors

F. L. Wilczenski

Purpose

The primary purpose of the ATIES is to systematically measure the disposition of regular education teachers toward the practice of integrating students with various disabilities into their standard classroom settings. By quantifying these attitudes, researchers and administrators can better identify areas of resistance or support regarding inclusive education policies.

The results derived from the scale are crucial for informing professional development programs and policy implementation, ensuring that successful inclusion models are supported by positive teacher sentiment and understanding of diverse student needs.

Construct

The scale measures the psychological construct of Attitudes toward Inclusive Education. This construct is understood as an individual’s evaluative stance—their beliefs, feelings, and behavioral intentions—regarding the placement and support of students with special needs within general education settings.

Wilczenski operationalized this construct across four critical dimensions: academic integration (dealing with learning deficits), behavioral integration (managing conduct and disruption), physical integration (handling mobility and sensory needs), and social integration (addressing shyness and communication challenges).

Validity

While traditional measures of validity (such as criterion or convergent validity) are not explicitly detailed in the original abstract, the use of Rasch analysis provides strong evidence for the internal validity and measurement properties of the scale. Rasch modeling ensures that the items effectively measure the intended latent trait.

The acceptable item-fit statistics reported by the author serve as confirmation that all 16 items function coherently together to measure a single, intended construct, thereby supporting the scale’s fundamental construct validity.

Reliability

Reliability information, inherent in the results of the Rasch analysis, was documented through the reporting of infit and outfit statistics, as well as standard errors of measurement. These metrics are essential in Item Response Theory (IRT) modeling to determine the stability and precision of the scale.

The favorable item-fit statistics suggest that the items are internally consistent and reliable for measuring the attitudes of the target population without significant measurement distortion.

Factor Analysis

Dimensionality was assessed using the Rasch analysis framework. The author specifically noted that the item-fit statistics were acceptable, leading to the conclusion that the ATIES measures a unidimensional construct.

This finding is critical as it confirms that, despite having four categorized sub-domains (academic, behavioral, physical, social), the underlying attitude being measured functions as a single, cohesive latent variable, justifying the use of a total score for attitude assessment.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report attitude inventory (Likert-type rating scale)

Format: 16 items, 6-point agreement scale (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree)

Language Available: English (Original development language)

Population Group: Educators/Teachers

Age Group: Adult (Professionals)

Population Details: Participants were 445 regular education teachers drawn from urban, suburban, and rural school districts in New Hampshire, USA.

Test Methodology: Rasch analysis (Item Response Theory) was employed using the BIGSTEPS computer program to transform nonlinear raw scores into linear measures for enhanced statistical interpretation.

Keywords

ATIES, Teacher Attitudes, Special Education, Integration, Physical Disabilities, Behavioral Problems, Rasch Modeling, Measurement Scale.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not specified in source content.

Correspondence Address: Not specified in source content.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 1995 (Publication of development article).

Permissions and Fees: Information regarding current commercial licensing or fees is not available in the original publication abstract. Researchers should contact the author, F. L. Wilczenski, or the publisher, Taylor & Francis (Educational and Psychological Measurement), for usage permissions.

Reference’s

• Berryman, J. D. (1988). Attitudes Toward Mainstreaming Scale: Factorial validity for a lay population. Educational and Psychological Measurement 48:231–36.
• Wilczenski, F. L. (1992). Measuring attitudes toward inclusive education. Psychology in the Schools 29:306–12.
• Wilczenski, F. L. (1995). Development of a scale to measure attitudes toward inclusive education. Educational and Psychological Measurement 55:291–99.
• Wright, B. D., and Linacre, J. M. (1993). BIGSTEPS: Rasch-model computer program. Chicago: MESA Press.

Items of the Attitudes toward Inclusive Education Scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

The scale utilizes a 6-point Likert response format for all 16 items:

• Scoring: Strongly Agree = 6; Agree = 5; Agree Somewhat = 4; Disagree Somewhat = 3; Disagree = 2; Strongly Disagree = 1.

The items are:

1. Students whose academic achievement is two or more years below the other students in the grade should be in regular classes.
2. Students who are physically aggressive toward their peers should be in regular classes.
3. Students who cannot move without help from others should be in regular classes.
4. Students who are shy and withdrawn should be in regular classes.
5. Students whose academic achievement is one year below the other students in the grade should be in regular classes.
6. Students whose speech is difficult to understand should be in regular classes.
7. Students who cannot read standard print and need to use Braille should be in regular classes.
8. Students who are verbally aggressive toward their peers should be in regular classes.i
9. Students who have difficulty expressing their thoughts verbally should be in regular classes.
10. Students who need training in self-help skills and activities of daily living should be in regular classes.
11. Students who use sign language or communication boards should be in regular classes.
12. Students who cannot control their behavior and disrupt activities should be in regular classes.
13. Students who need an individualized functional academic program in everyday reading and math skills should be in regular classes.
14. Students who cannot hear conversational speech should be in regular classes.
15. Students who do not follow school rules for conduct should be in regular classes.
16. Students who are frequently absent from school should be in regular classes.