UNIVERZITA KARLOVA V PRAZE Pedagogická fakulta
Katedra speciální pedagogiky
DIPLOMOVÁ PRÁCE
2007 Dorji Tshewang
Roehampton University 11
London HFontys Of>Mo
A Comparative Study of Competencies of Teachers Teaching Students with Special Needs in Primary Mainstream and Special Schools in Czech Republic
A Thesis Presented in Part-Fulfillment of the M A in Special Education Needs MA S E N - Erasmus Mundus
A Joint Programme of
Roehampton University, London (UK), Fontys OSO, Tilburg (NL) &
Charles University, Prague (CZ)
By
Dorji Tshewang August 2007
I, Dorji Tshewang declare that I developed this dissertation independently with the use of the resources listed in my bibliography.
Sd: Dorji Tshewang.
Abstract
This study explores the competencies and perceptions of teachers teaching students with special needs in the primary mainstream and special schools. The study mainly focused on the four sub-scales competencies: teaching and teaching strategies, adaptation of curriculum, classroom management, assessments and on the perceptions of teachers teaching students with special needs. A total of 111 teachers from mainstream and special schools participated in this study. The competencies of teachers were examined using self-completion questionnaires followed by semi-structured interview in which 3 teachers each from mainstream and special schools were involved. All the participants were working in those schools at the time of this study. The results indicated that both the teachers teaching in special and mainstream schools were in favour of education for the students with special needs provided that teachers were trained, and resources and funding were available in schools.
Also, teachers teaching in special schools possessed more of competencies when compared to the teachers teaching students with special needs in the mainstream schools. The interview results
provided further information that constitutes to the understanding of the teachers' competencies to teach students with special needs and the reasons for difference in competencies between the two teachers working in mainstream and special schools. Finally, the results indicated the reasons for having different perceptions in educating students with special needs in integrated settings.
Keywords: Inclusion, teaching competencies, teachers of primary mainstream schools, and teachers of primary special schools.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my gratitude to the European Commission
for accepting me and the Ministry of Education, Royal Government of
Bhutan for recommending me to pursue a degree in special education
needs offered by consortium of three universities: Roehampton
University, UK; Fontys University of Applied Sciences, the Netherlands
and Charles University of Professional Education, Czech Republic.
I owe the debt of sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Iva
Strnadova for her unfailing cooperation and support, without which
this work would have never taken shape. You have really kindled an
everlasting spirit of genuine professional interest in me. Thank you for
this invaluable knowledge that I have gained from you will go a long
way in enriching special education needs in Bhutan.
I also take off my hat to tribute Dr. David Rose for providing
invaluable information and feedbacks on research methodologies and
other research materials on special education needs. Without your
untiring constant support, I would not have come out with this work.
Thank you, David for being nice to me.
My thanks also go to Dr. Marie Černá, Dr. Jacqueline, Dr. Jan Šiška,
vi
Hilary Jones, Nicole Luijten and Mikolas Pansky for their continued cooperation and support during my stay at the universities. In many
ways you all made me fee! part of your family and that made me stay in three universities very comfortable. As the same token, I also express my sincere thanks to Wim Classen and his family for lovely dinner.
I also thank the examining board for consenting to be on the
committee in spite of their busy schedules. Lastly, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all my international colleagues for
their moral support and friendship especially Kuo Hui Wen from Taiwan. Thank you all.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements v Table of Contents vii List of Figures x List of Tables xi List of Abbreviations xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1 1.2 Purposes of the Study 5
1.3 Research Questions 6 1.4 Significance of the Study 7 1.5 Operational Definition of Terms 8
1.6 Limitations of the Study 10 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 12
2.1 The Definitions of Teachers' Competencies 12 2.2 The Theories of Teachers' Competencies 13
2.2.1 Teaching Strategies 14 2.2.2 Curriculum Adaptation 19 2.2.3 Classroom Management 22
2.2.4 Assessment 26 2.2.5 Perceptions on Inclusion 29
2.3 The Impacts of Teacher Training and Its Support for 33 Competencies
2.4 Consequences of Lack of Competencies amongst 39 Teachers
2.5 Conclusion 41 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 43
3.1 Research Design 43 3.2 Participants 44 3.3 Instrumentation 46 3.4 Data Collection 49 3.5 Data Analysis 50
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND ANALYSIS 52
4.1 Background Information 52 4.1.1 Gender Distribution 52 4.1.2 Age Distribution 53 4.1.3 Comparative Age Distribution 54
4.1.4 Educational Qualification 55 4.1.5 Comparative Educational Qualification 56
4.1.6 Teaching Experiences 57 4.1.7 Comparative Teaching Experiences 58
4.1.8 Type of Schools 59 4.1.9 Certified Special Education Teachers 60
4.1.10 Certified General Education Teachers 61 4.2 The Responses of All Participants on Competencies 62
Questionnaire
4.2.1 Teaching Strategies 64 4.2.2 Curriculum Adaptation 65 4.2.3 Classroom Management 65
4.2.4 Assessment 66 4.2.5 Perceptions on Inclusion 68
4.3 The Comparison of Response on Competencies 69 Questionnaire
4.3.1 Teaching Strategies 74 4.3.2 Curriculum Adaptation 75 4.3.3 Classroom Management 75
4.3.4 Assessment 76 4.3.5 Perceptions on Inclusion 77
4.4 Interview 78 4.4.1 Teaching Strategies 79
4.4.2 Curriculum Adaptation 87 4.4.3 Classroom Management 90
4.4.4 Assessment 93 4.4.5 Perceptions on Inclusion 97
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS 102
5.1 Conclusion 102 5.2 Suggestions 105
5.2.1 Suggestions for Administrators 105 5.2.2 Suggestions for Teacher Training Institutions 106
5.2.3 Suggestions for Teachers 107 5.2.4 Suggestions for Future Researches 107
5.3 Reflection 110 Appendices 112
Appendix 1: Teachers Competencies Questionnaire 112
Appendix 2: Questions for the Interview 115
Bibliography 118
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Research design 44 Figure 3.2 Schools and number of teachers 45
Figure 4.1 Gender distribution 53
Figure 4.2 Age distribution 54 Figure 4.3 Comparative age distribution 54
Figure 4.4 Educational qualification 56
Figure 4.5 Comparative educational qualification 57
Figure 4.6 Years of teaching experience 58 Figure 4.7 Comparative teaching experience 59
Figure 4.8 Type of schools 60
Figure 4.9 Percentage of certified special education 61 teachers
Figure 4.10 Percentage of general education teachers 62
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 Table 4.2
Table 4.3
Table 4.4
Table 4.5
Table 4.6 Table 4.7
Table 4.8
Table 4.9
Table 4.10
Table 4.11
Theme of the questions 62 Frequency Distribution of Competencies Scale 63
of All the Teachers
Frequency Distribution of Competencies Scale 71 of Teachers of Special Schools
Frequency Distribution of Competencies Scale 72 of Mainstream Teachers
Comparative Responses on Competencies 73 Questionnaire between teachers of Primary
Mainstream and Special Schools
Contents and Main Themes for the Interview 78 Themes with Frequencies and Total Percentage 80 of Responses on Teaching Strategies
Themes with Frequencies and Total Percentage 88 of Responses on Curriculum Adaptation
Themes with Frequencies and Total Percentage 90 of Responses on Classroom Management
Themes with Frequencies and Total Percentage 94 of Responses on Assessment
Themes with Frequencies and Total Percentage 98 of Responses on Perceptions on Inclusion
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS IEP - Individual Education Plan
OECD - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
RSA - Royal Society of Arts SEN - Special Education Needs
UNESCO - United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UPE - Universal Primary Education ZŠ - Základní Škola
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Successful inclusion is possible where teachers display reasonably high level of teaching competencies to teach students with special education needs.
1.1 Background
Provisions of educating students with special education needs (SEN) in mainstream schools remain an important goal for many countries.
Over past fifteen to twenty years most of the policy makers around the world have taken greater initiatives to educate students with SEN in the mainstreams who were once denied access to education and later on denied their rights to study in mainstream schools.
At the beginning all countries around the world have started to set up special schools with good intensions to provide education to students with SEN as a supplement to general education provision (Ainscow &
Cesar, 2006). However, in particular, around the 1970s, the programmes spawned by special education were largely specialized and distinct from traditional education in terms of instructional approaches, curriculum content and student placement. The separate classroom programmes have failed because the programmes have not met the high standards and proved very difficult to individualize or differentiate instruction in these separate classroom programmes (Lipskey & Gartner, 1997). Therefore, the appropriateness of separate systems of education has been challenged, both from a human rights
perspective and from the view of effectiveness (Ainscow &
Haile-Giorgis, 1999; van Kraayenoord, 2003). The central and most fundamental change has been the move away from segregated provision of education for students identified as having SEN towards integrated provision in the mainstreams (Lloyd, 1997).
By the mid-1980s, in response to the inadequate system provided by special education, start to integrate students with SEN in the mainstream schools (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1994). However, integration of students with SEN in the mainstream schools have led to a new kind of educational discourse of which changing the labels of both professionals and children is a part, while the practice remained very much the same. Oliver (1996) argued that students with SEN still got an inferior education to everyone in spite of what appeared to be a great deal of change in policy in this area. Students were physically placed in the mainstream classroom without proper supports and services under the general education teachers to teach without the support they need to teach effectively (Malarz, 1996). Integration has just served to perpetuate and reinforce segregated practices (Lloyd, 1997). Students with SEN were mostly placed in mainstream schools with limited concern about their social and academic development (Nikolaraizi et al., 2005). Therefore, the move from segregation to integration based on the interest of rights and equity and was not a solution but a birth to growing discussion and debate about how policy and practice might be develop to focus, in the first place, on
integrating students with SEN into mainstream settings, which had led to the closure of great deal of segregated special provision (Lloyd, 1997). However, international policies are in place and teachers seem to adjust to their responsibilities.
Now, including students with SEN into the mainstream education classroom is becoming increasingly popular. Issues of equity and human rights have been important determinants. However, inclusion has been a major issue (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1994) though prevails in the educational policies in many countries (van Kraayenoord, 2003). The realization of inclusion is not an easy process and several issues need to be considered to make it happen (Nikolaraizi et al., 2005). The physical placement of students with SEN does not ensure that they are mentally placed in the mainstream schools (Kluwin & Gonsher, 1994). One issue that creates a major discussion concerns the social implications of inclusion is the competencies of teachers (Porter, 2001;
Loreman, Deppeler, & Harvey, 2006).
Teachers' competencies are at the forefront of concern among educators and policy makers. Research has consistently shown that teachers themselves are a primary causal driver of student achievement gains and that there are identifiable characteristics of teachers that are predictive of their success in the classroom (Darling-Hammond & Youngs, 2002). Consequently, improving the quality of teachers' competencies is a viable and important strategy
for improving student achievement. The quality of student learning is directly - although not exclusively - related to the quality of teaching.
Therefore, the first and most promising way to improve learning is to improve teaching (Angelo & Cross, 1993).
Many literatures supported the need for adequate training of teachers since many teachers were found not adequately trained or provided support services. There was significant expansion of schools and enrolment of students with SEN but many students did not survive in the system due to lack of special educational responses (Lynch, 1994).
A large number of students, who were enrolled, were found not progressing in schools. These students were found often at risk of repeating or dropping out of schools due to some reasons- environmental or cultural reasons, rigid curriculum, crude methods of teaching and teachers attitudes towards teaching and SEN (Lynch,
1994). Many students who qualified for special education were not only isolated from their peers in regular education but were also found performing very poorly in academic (Stanford Research Institute International, 1991). Therefore, the separate system of education was found to be antipathy based on the faulty and inflexible justifications. Students were classified under homogeneous group and were taught by special education teachers in different environments.
Hence, a central aspect of responsibility of teacher training
institutions is to ensure that teachers are provided with initial training and continuous practice-based, in-service training to develop and renew their competencies to teach students with SEN (Lynch, 1994).
The inclusion of any group of learners cannot proceed very far without developing the capacity of learning centres to respond to learner diversity (Savolainen, Kokkala, & Alasuutari, 2000). Trainings are to be provided in classroom strategies so that teachers can accommodate students with diverse learning in mainstream classes (Porter, 2001). Loreman et al. (2006) also supported the needs of teachers for high levels of competencies and skills of organizational changes for promoting effective learning in schools.
Therefore, investigating and understanding the skills and knowledge of teachers is imperative because learning depends mostly on teachers which ultimately influence students throughout their lives. In order to recognize a need for varying approaches to enable students to contribute to and participate in decisions about education provisions and individual education plans, teachers should be highly competent.
1.2 Purposes of the Study
This thesis is designed to explore the competencies of teachers teaching students with SEN in primary mainstream and special classrooms, which is one of the main contributors for the successful implementation of inclusion. Amongst many competencies require by
teachers, for the study include teaching strategies, classroom management, adaptations and modifications of curriculum, assessment and on perceptions of teacher teaching students with SEN in primary mainstream and special schools. Therefore, the purposes of this study were
• to explore the competencies of teachers who are entrusted with responsibility of facilitating education for students with SEN in primary mainstream and special schools
• to compare the differences between competencies of teachers who are entrusted with responsibility of facilitating education for students with SEN in primary mainstream and special schools
• to explore the teachers' needs for further improvement of their competencies in educating students with SEN
1-3 Research Questions
In view of the importance of teachers' teaching competencies in teaching students with SEN, this study aimed to investigate the current teaching competencies of teachers in primary mainstream and special schools. The research questions were developed based on the purposes of the study.
• What are the competencies of teachers teaching students with SEN in primary mainstream and special schools?
• What are the differences in the competencies of teachers teaching students with SEN in primary mainstream and special schools?
• What are the teachers' expectations and suggestions for improving the competencies of teaching students with SEN?
1.4 Significance of the Study
Exploring a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g the skills a n d knowledge of teachers is imperative because learning depends mostly on teachers who ultimately influence students' lives. The degree of knowledge and skills of teachers not only impact the performance of both teachers and students in the schools but eventually impact their lives in the society at large. How students think is connected with the way teachers think about themselves, their own competencies and vulnerabilities (Greene, Abidin & Kmetz, 1997). The way s t u d e n t s
perform at their a d u l t stage is the reflection of how teachers have shaped their behaviours.
It was hoped that the results of the study would benefit the special Education Unit personnel for developing more concrete in-service trainings for the primary school teachers; while the primary school teachers would know the specific areas in which they need further training and assistance in skills for dealing with students with SEN. It was also hoped that the study would help teacher training institutions to incorporate the results enriching their curriculum for disseminating
the best practices of classroom teaching and learning. It was also hoped to understand and articulate what competencies teachers need to have, and what might be missing among other teachers in terms of professional knowledge and skills. The study also hoped to help the policy makers and administrators to restructure the education system in best possible ways to enhance education for all children.
1.5 Operational Definition of Terms
Teaching Competencies: According to Spector and Teja (2001), competencies refer to a state of being well qualified to perform an activity, task or job function. When a person is competent to do something, he or she has achieved a state of competence that is recognizable and verifiable to a particular community of practitioners.
Based upon these competencies, one is qualified to perform his/her job in a professional manner. Special education teachers need these competencies for successful implementation of inclusive education.
Therefore, teaching competencies were defined as teaching strategies, classroom management, curriculum adaptation, and assessments in this study.
Teachers of Primary Mainstream Schools: Teachers of primary mainstream schools in this research were the teachers teaching students from 1st to 6th grade in mainstream basic schools (Základní Škola, ZŠ) in Czech Republic. All of them have students with SEN in their classes.
Teachers of Primary Special Schools: Teachers of primary special
schools in this research were the teachers teaching students from 1st to 6th grade in special basic school (Speciální Základní Škola) in Czech Republic. The schools had students with different SEN, such as learning disabilities, sensory impairments, behavioural problems and physical disabilities.
1-6 Limitations of the Study
It is significant to study about teaching competencies and perceptions of teachers teaching students with SEN in primary mainstream and special schools since teachers play a crucial role in preparing students with SEN for their future lives. However, there were some limitations to the research.
The first and foremost limitation was the areas covered under the study of the competencies of teachers. The study was limited only to four areas of competencies such as teaching strategies, classroom management, curriculum adaptation, assessment and teachers' Perceptions as an additional area which was very much linked for the implementation of above four sub-scales. Competencies are broad. It would have been informative to study all the areas "what teachers must know" in inclusive education such as policies and legislation, history of education and inclusive education, characteristics of learners, working with parents and communities, etc. However, given the time and the resources, the study focused only to four
competencies scales.
The sample size was very small and it only represented to the situation in Prague (three schools), Most (one school) and Sumperk (one school). Moreover, the samples were selected according to the convenience of the teachers.
One of the limitations was the limited use of instruments for the collection of data. There was no enough time for the researcher and the teachers to involve in paper-and-pencil tests of knowledge to study the competencies of teachers, to observe to study teachers' performance and to collect data about the teacher's influence on the progress of students to assess teachers' effectiveness as suggested by Medley and Shannon (1994). The only instruments used for in this study were questionnaire and interviews.
Another limitation was the language barrier since the researcher could not speak Czech and most of the teachers could not speak English.
The questionnaire and interview questions were translated in Czech.
Although the translators during the interview were in place, the researcher was not in a position to check whether questionnaire and interview questions were translated appropriately based on the researcher's intensions.
Finally, the collection of data was carried out from mid May to early June when schools were very busy conducting examinations and evaluating students' performance. Therefore schools were reluctant
to welcome the researcher to conduct interview or to administer questionnaire. The data collected was solely depended on the interest of the schools.
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review is divided into five sections. The first part attempts to discuss the definition of teachers' competencies. The second part explores the theories regarding teachers' competencies.
The third part discusses about the impacts of teacher training institutions and its support services provided to the teachers to improve their competencies towards educating students with SEN.
The fourth part explores the consequences of lack of teachers' competencies. The fifth part is the conclusion of the literature review.
2.1 The Definition of Teachers' Competencies
Teachers' competencies are at the forefront of concern among educators and policy makers. Research has consistently shown that teachers themselves are a primary causal driver of student achievement gains (Darling-Hammond & Youngs, 2002). However, defining teacher competencies is no easy task. Reaching consensus on a definition, even among teacher educators and researchers, is likely to be impossible. Definitions of good teaching range in their focus, e.g., the actions of the teacher, the knowledge a teacher possesses, or the creativity of the teacher.
For the study of competencies of teachers, many educators have used words such as teacher competence, teacher effectiveness and teacher performance. Sometimes, these words are synonymously used to
make judgment for the competencies of teachers even though there are conceptual distinctions between them. Medley and Shannon (1994) clarify these three terms. Teacher effectiveness is a matter of the degree to which a teacher achieves desired effects upon students.
Teacher performance is the way in which a teacher behaves in the process of teaching, while teacher competence is the extent to which the teacher possesses the knowledge and skills (competencies) defined as necessary or desirable qualifications to teach. These dimensions are important because they influence the types of evidence that are gathered in order for judgments about teachers to be made.
According to Spector and Teja (2001), "competencies refer to a state of being well qualified to perform an activity, task or job function.
When a person is able to do something, he or she has achieved a state of competence that is recognizable and verifiable to a particular community of practitioners (para.2)."
Educators and researchers have different opinions regarding definition of the teaching competencies. In this study, teaching competencies were defined as knowledge, skills, or attitudes that teachers possess to shoulder their entrusted responsibilities.
2.2 The Theories of Teachers' Competencies
Today, teachers face classrooms with diverse students' populations and are expected to be sensitive and to have skills of teaching a wide
range of students. As more and more schools become inclusive, teachers need proven strategies to ensure genuine participation of students with SEN in the general education classroom. Therefore, teachers should work under constantly changing conditions, responding to students' social, emotional, and intellectual challenges daily. Teachers must have skills and knowledge to provide opportunities for students to deepen their understanding of the natural and social worlds by building on the students' knowledge and beliefs. "Teachers' competencies" is a broad idea and include a lot of components. In this study, five components were included and discusses as follows: teaching strategies, curriculum adaptation, classroom management, assessment and perceptions on inclusion.
2.2.1 Teaching Strategies
Teaching strategies are the methods use in teaching and learning to facilitate the performance of students in the class. It includes planning, information presentation, students' assignments and activities, teaching, and adaptations of learning materials and the assessment of students' progress. They are goal-directed and consciously controllable processes that facilitate performance. Toohey's (2000) defined "the teaching strategy as all of the activities and resources that a teacher plans in order to enable students to learn" and would add "for the achievement of a particular educational purpose" (p.
152).
Teaching is one of the most demanding professions. It is particularly difficult in school settings where a large proportion of student's body is not performing well. And, with efforts to raise standards and hold teachers accountable, job stress is increasing (Porter, 2001).
Teaching is a difficult job that requires highly multiple skills and knowledge. Therefore, a teacher's confidence in his or her ability to execute appropriate teacher behaviors to positively affect student outcomes, or teacher efficacy as it is known is an essential aspect of teaching (Cambell, 1996). However, it seems that majority of teachers teaching students with SEN do not have special training and their teaching is based on their experiences and in-service trainings despite complexities of their jobs. Students are placed without proper supports and services under the general education teachers who themselves do not have support they need to teach effectively (Booth,
1996).
McGarvey, Marriot, Morgan, and Abbott (1997) found that teachers were trying to apply the principles of differentiation in their classrooms. However, many teachers faced many obstacles, including difficulty in planning lessons and in adapting their teaching methods to allow for differentiation. In addition, many teachers failed to Provide suitable instructional activities for a wide range of student attainment, especially those students at the extremes of attainment.
Many teachers provided neither sufficient challenge for a range of student attainment nor flexibility to allow for slow and accelerated
periods of learning. Further, McGarvey et al. (1997) also found out that fewer than half the teachers made provisions in class work for a wide range of student abilities.
Booth (1996) found out that teachers attempted to teach content about active learning in diverse classrooms by using passive methods which take no account of the prospective teachers' knowledge and experience. The standardized curriculum and delivery approaches have proven to be uninteresting, void of meaning of purpose, and unresponsive to the inherent diversity in background experiences, learning rates and styles and personal interests of many students (Giangreco, 1996; Smith, 2000). Further, the organizational practices of ability grouping and tracking emphasize student differences rather than their commonalities and fail to facilitate constructive interactions that build social competence and the sense of community (Giangreco,
1996).
The curriculum offer for students with SEN was found often lacked coherence, consisting of disjointed activities that were used to develop basic life skills. It often did not focus on higher-level of cognitive skills and lacks the richness of the general education curriculum. Booth (1996) mention that inappropriate curricula taught by teachers poorly prepared to teach the learners in front of them, remained widespread and major causes of student absenteeism, failure and drop out resulting for the parents to compete to get their
students into the most desired learning centres and the most successful schools.
The study conducted in Colorado in the United States revealed that early integration efforts vailed because students with SEN were placed in settings which were not designed for responding diversity in the first place. More specifically, it points to the difficulty regular teachers had in preparing adequately for the more disabled students, in the absence of appropriate training and support, which was a further factor militating against integration (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development ( OECD1 , 1999). The majority of the teachers involved in education for the students with SEN were not trained but depended on workshop sharing only. Some teachers
developed inferiority complex and felt inadequate to include all learners. As such, the vast majority of students with SEN within ordinary schools did not justify political claims of supporting inclusion as many students were required to attend the regular classroom due to lack of any suitable special educational facilities (Vlachou, 2006).
In this case, students with SEN, with very or no support at all, confront an educational system that was unable to adjust to their differences.
In a study conducted in Greece, Padelaidu (1992) found out that 89%
of the mainstream teachers studied did not feel competent to teach students considered as having SEN in their mainstream classes. The
study also found out that regular teachers had negative attitudes and did not want students with SEN to be admitted in the mainstream classroom. Teachers were afraid that their knowledge and skills were insufficient and that the placement of a child assessed as having SEN in their classroom would have negative effects on the other students in the classroom (Pijl, 1995). Most teachers did not feel competent to teach students with SEN in their classrooms and thus provide them with equal participation in teaching and learning (Angelides, 2004).
The lack of special training was a reason for mainstream teachers to feel insecure about their involvement in teaching students with SEN (Valchou, 2006).
The special education teachers felt that they had been "left alone" in their effort to respond to the complexities of their work since they did not have any formal, systematic support, information and guidance that would help them to create more effective and appropriate teaching interventions (Vlachou, 2006).
In this respect, programming and teaching students with varied SEN make teachers to think about: what to teach, what materials to use, where to get materials from, how to teach a large class with diverse needs and how to plan lessons for diverse needs which all require skills and knowledge. Moreover, these skills should gear towards the development of students' ability to think critically, create, solve complex problems and master complex subject matters. These are
the reasons for teachers to be highly skilful since inclusion demands such high levels of teaching competence and organizational changes aimed at providing effective learning (Loreman et al., 2006).
2.2.2 Curriculum Adaptation
Students with SEN demonstrate a broad range of learning abilities, learning style, and learning preferences in a different way. Moreover students with SEN are expected to participate in the general education curriculum which may need adaptations to the general curriculum in line with Individual Education Plan (IEP). Therefore, I use the term curriculum adaptation as any adjustment to the general curriculum in order to provide students with SEN meaningful access to curriculum, information, materials, equipment and instruction based on the content standards to maximize their learning.
Inclusion is centrally a c u r r i c u l u m issue since curricula c r e a t e t h e
m o s t significant barrier to learning a n d e x c l u s i o n for m a n y learners.
T h e s e barriers to learning arise f r o m rigidities of content, t h e
l a n g u a g e a n d m e d i u m of t e a c h i n g , the m a n a g e m e n t and o r g a n i z a t i o n
the c l a s s r o o m s ; l e a r n i n g styles a n d pace; t i m e f a c t o r s for
c o m p l e t i o n of curricula; m a t e r i a l s a n d e q u i p m e n t a n d a s s e s s m e n t
m e t h o d s . T h o u g h , t h e r e has b e e n c o n s i d e r a b l e d e v e l o p m e n t in
c u r r i c u l u m c o n t e n t a n d c u r r i c u l u m p l a n n i n g to a c c o m m o d a t e
s t u d e n t s f r o m different b a c k g r o u n d s , r e d u c i n g t h e original rigidities of
the National C u r r i c u l u m , still t h e p r e s e n t c u r r i c u l u m is o n e of the
major obstacles to facilitate the development of more inclusive system. The approach it adopts is itself no longer appropriate for students in an information age. The Royal Society of Arts (2002) of the UK commented:
'We still have a curriculum model close to the one that prepared students for the much more stable and certain society of the 50s where
we knew what a 'subject' was, and what you 'ought' to know about it.
Employers are now looking for, but not finding people who know how to manage themselves in a range of situations, who can recognize problems and how to solve them, who know how to communicate.
Young people know this too (p.2)."
Each student has unique strengths, challenges, and interests to
l e a r n i n g tasks, so should be the c u r r i c u l u m , which is to be based o n
their interests and needs. However in reality c u r r i c u l u m is centrally designed in many of the countries as if learners are all the same.
M o r e o v e r , the c e n t r e has the rigid c o n t r o l o v e r s c h o o l procedures such as staff appointment, distribution of textbooks, timetable prescriptions, resource allocation, in-service training and school organization (Kassiotakis & Lambrakis, 1998). Some schools are obliged to follow a common school policy; a strict academically oriented national curriculum, the same instructional guidelines and the same textbooks, which are very consistent. These c o n t r o l s have led to rigid timetabling, inflexible staffing and lack of inventiveness for effective development of students with SEN (Wedell, 2005). These
might be the reasons for the wide spread concern that the system of education in general is not turning out the kinds of citizens who are needed in the twenty-first century.
The school curriculum is not geared to the full range of potential achievement. Some areas of achievement are played down or even ignored, and students whose only excellence is in these areas become unwitting failures (Papadopoulos, 1997). Papadopoulos (1997) further mentions that the predominant focus remains an academic one, frequently quite narrowly so, with the result that success and failure at school are defined in terms of this single aspect of achievement.
The predominance of printed textbooks, oral presentation by teachers, and paper and pencil post-hoc testing has led to curricula that work for some students, but not for all. Of course those with disabilities who can't use these media are excluded. The recent educational reforms enable the teachers to use new curricula and textbooks but the long established ways of schooling (i.e. academically demanding, subject oriented and teacher controlled curriculum) have not been challenged
(Vlachou, 2006). The instructional approaches endorsed in textbooks and guidebooks are still traditional with less scope for cooperative work and individualized or active learning (Flouris, 1995). In some countries curriculum is adopted as an approach of raising attainment levels in learning centres which encourages schools to compete with
each other (Savolainen et al., 2000) which ultimately denies students with SEN to live and learn together with others in mainstream schools.
The concept of inclusion will remains in words but students with SEN will be excluded where there is rigid, academically demanding and centrally controlled curriculum.
Many studies have been carried out on teachers' competencies to adapt curriculum. Westwood (1997) described the 'tyranny of time' in classrooms trying to include students with SEN where teachers simply did not have adequate time to plan and deliver sound programmes. In a study conducted by Grbich and Sykes (1992) found out that secondary teachers in Victoria , Australia, were found to lack the skills required to modify curriculum for students with diverse abilities and were reported to be urgent need of training in this area. This concern had been also raised by Lloyd et al. (1997), who reported that teachers in New Zealand were unable to modify the curriculum to
accommodate the perceived educational needs of students with SEN despite being aware of those needs. Therefore, Porter (2001) believes the need to have skills for teachers to adapt curriculum and instructional strategies making them flexible and relevant to the needs of the students.
2-2.3 Classroom Management
One of the greatest challenges for a teacher is to maintain order in the classroom so as to achieve academic objectives. It is a great challenge
for all teachers, but is a particularly important one in the class with students with SEN. Without a background in classroom management and without expertise in how to teach diverse learners fail to increase student learning. Teachers need to have knowledge and skills to deliver the content, to mobilize the resources, to create safe and suitable environment so that every one participates in learning.
Enabling to meet the needs of the students is one of the solutions to the behaviour problems.
The classroom management includes the ways teachers create and organize teaching-learning atmosphere to promote student
motivation and engagement as well as to prevent and respond to disruptive or otherwise challenging behaviour. The primary purpose of classroom management is to maximize student attention,
Participation, i n d e p e n d e n c e , mobility a n d c o m f o r t ; to p r o m o t e peer
and adult c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d interaction; a n d to provide accessibility to
information, materials and equipment. Many researchers have mentioned that it is possible to create and sustain learning and teaching environments that are safe, secure, positive, inclusive, competent, and accommodating (e.g., Lewis & Sugai, 1999; Sugai &
Horner, 1999; Sugai, Homer, & Gresham, 2002; Sugai, Homer, &
Gresham, 2000; Walker et al., 1996).
Literature r e v e a l e d that t h e n u m b e r of s t u d e n t s with a g g r e s s i v e ,
acting out, a n d / o r antisocial b e h a v i o r w a s steadily i n c r e a s i n g a n d
contributing to unsafe and reactive learning and teaching environments (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2001). Students who experience academic difficulties were at risk for becoming involved in juvenile crime (Chavez, Oetting, & Swaim, 1994;
Gottfredson & Gottfredson, 1985), displaying behavior problems at school, and leaving school before graduation. Lietman and Binns (1993) indicated that half of students reported feeling unsafe while at school, and Rose and Gallup (1998) reported that two-thirds of parents did not feel their students were safe while at school or in surrounding neighborhoods.
Discipline systems in most schools are designed to react to rather than prevent problem behaviors. Research has shown that reactive discipline systems are ineffective and result in increases in problem behaviors, rather than improvements in behavior (Lipsey & Wilson, 1993; Mayer, 1995; Noguera, 1995; Todd, Homer, Vanater, &
Schneider, 1997). Walker et al. (1996) focus attention on the active, early, and consistent teaching and acknowledgement of appropriate behavior as the foundation for reducing problem behavior in schools.
The other adaptations include the physical organization of the classroom (Shores, Gunter, Denny, & Jack, 1993), teachers' clear expectations and routines (Gunter, Coutinho, & Cade, 2002; Shores et al., 1993), and the positive reinforcement to increase appropriate behavior (Gunter et al., 2002; Shores et al., 1993). Furthermore,
research supports the use of academic and curricular restructuring to promote high rates of correct responses (e.g., task variation, pace of instruction, opportunities for student responses, full use of the instructional time) ( A l b e r t o & Troutman, 1999; Lewis & Sugai, 1999;
Munk & Repp, 1994; Sugai & Horner, 1999), and frequent teacher movement around the classroom (Evertson, 1989; Lewis & Sugai, 1993; Shores et al., 1993). Still, teachers often face discipline problems during their routine teaching (Lang & Fox, 2003) when teachers cannot adjust teaching-learning environment to students' needs due limited knowledge and skills provided to them.
The teaching process should take into account individual differences in cognitive, emotional and motivational student functioning, on the one hand, and learning should actively engage the learner and be relevant to personal interests, experiences and needs on the other.
Moreover, the learning process must occur in an environment that contains interpersonal relationships in which learners feel appreciated, acknowledged, respected and validated (Alexander & Murphy, 1998;
Lambert & McCombs, 1998). When learners are involved, when they believe that teachers are interested personally in them, when learning is connected to the real world and their personal interests, pupils may not only become effective learners, but also enhance their social skills.
They may develop a deeper respect for their classmates and teachers as they realize how much they can learn from each other (Lambert &
McCombs, 1998).
2.2.4 Assessment
From the point of view of inclusion, the purpose of assessment is not to classify and label the students, but to identify the kind of supports and resources necessary to facilitate their teaching-learning
processes. The main aspect is to value the students' progress, identifying not only his/her difficulties but also his/her potentialities.
The other aspect is to identify the teaching and content factors that could be hindering the progress and participation of the students.
A c c o r d i n g to Nitko (1995), an assessment is the p r o c e s s of gathering information for purposes of making decisions about educational policy, about curriculum and educational programmes, or about individual students' learning. The term assessment, then, refers only to the process of gathering relevant information, for the expressed purpose of making educational decisions.
The process of learning is not the same for everyone so should be the case with teaching and assessing. Today, educational performance in any learning centres is mostly assessed through examinations that are conducted at the end of or after some years. The labour markets, educational institutions and other organizations give first priority to People who do well in the examinations (Scherer, 2005). Schools that Perform better in academic are rewarded and up-graded. Parents, educationists and policy makers look at scores of students as an evidence of learning (Scherer, 2005). Schools that want to perform
better deny access and acceptance of students with SEN. Therefore, the present system is dominated so heavily by the summative than the formative assessment for learning is in constant danger of being squeezed out (Hargreaves, 2004). It was suggested that schools' achievement in supporting students' progress had to be recognized and valued in more than academic areas (Wedell, 2003).
In this respect, the school curriculum is looked at as an important source of knowledge and skills for preparing for the diverse activities of life. Students are sorted, stratified and selected through examinations based on the fixed curriculum studied (Nitko, 1995).
Teachers teach the students as the same way they were taught, and is mostly based on teacher-centered. Booth (2002) writes the causes for student absenteeism, drop-outs and failures as the inappropriate curriculum taught by a poorly unprepared teacher. This way of teaching and assessing students' ability does not seem to justify the
real performance of the student by 'once and all' examination.
!n spite of institutionalizing the educational rights of the students there are the victims of examinations. Students with SEN are the victims as they need to prepare, read and write the exams (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization ( UNESCO) , 2001). Therefore, examinations do not seem to pave way to 'education for all' and 'the diversity of the needs'. The continuous
efforts of the students in the schools are ultimately shadowed by one
terminal. In this regard, Booth (2002) suggests introducing flexible responsive assessment policies and practice if the education system is to be responsive to the diverse needs of the students, otherwise we are robbing the rights of students to learn and live together in the regular schools.
For inclusion, early identification of students with SEN is very essential for early preparation and supports for primary schools. After problems being diagnosed the social workers or parents may provide early help by providing extra support at home, to deliver a pre-school teaching programme and to offer students places in kindergarten where specialist support for development can be provided. This process can be followed in collaboration with teachers who afterwards find easy to explore the needs of the students for better teaching and learning in schools. The nature of SEN of the students is reliant on what is reported by teachers. Many students whom teachers see as having behavioural problems of one sort or another have not been formally assessed. Thus, teachers are dependent on their own
assessment of the student's predominant difficulty.
Good instructions require constant information about the strengths and weaknesses about students' learning. It is regarded as the most crucial factor in improving the teaching and learning process for both the teachers as well as students. Therefore, teachers need to have a great role in accepting and identifying students' educational needs
and in effectively providing for them. Besides, all teachers will need to develop the skills and knowledge for accessing sources of support and guidance and implementing appropriate teaching strategies.
Special education teachers should have technical skills and procedures use for screening, assessing, and evaluating students with SEN. They must know the appropriate use and limitations of particular assessment tools, how to interpret the results, and how these results affect placement of the student. They also learn how to monitor a student's ongoing progress. But, majority of the teachers do not seem to have skills and knowledge on assessment, diagnoses and evaluation for fulfilling the needs of students. Even at present assessment is emphasized on the skills and fragmented knowledge retrieval mainly used to stimulate academic performance and inform Parents about their students' achievement (Flouris, 1995).
2.2.5 Perceptions of Inclusion
The way teachers think about their students influence they way they interact with their students, ThinKintj fltM S M ^ f i 15 W l T O ^ l With the way telphers think abqut themselves, their own
competencies
and vulnerabilities. All teachers want to maintain good attitudes towards to all students. At the same time they also want to feel competent and autonomous (Greene, Abidin & Kmetz, 1997). Thed e9 r e e of k n o w l e d g e a n d skills t h e y h a v e i m p a c t not only t h e P e r f o r m a n c e b u t also survival in s c h o o l s , for b o t h teacher a n d
students.
Teachers' attitudes towards integration and inclusive practices have been studied in many parts of the world, commencing as early as the
1950s. It is well established that teachers' beliefs and attitudes concerning students with special needs have a very powerful influence on their expectations for the progress of such students in mainstream schools (Deisinger, 2000; Minke, Bear, Deemer & Griffin, 1996;
Loreman et al. 2006). It is even argued that successful integration is only possible where teachers display reasonably positive and accepting attitudes towards students with special needs and to the
basic principles of inclusion (Beattie, Anderson & Antonak, 1997;
Giangreco, 1996). However, teachers do not feel competent to encourage learning in special needs students due to limited skills and knowledge and therefore tend to develop more negative feelings towards disabilities (Marchesi, 1998).
T e a c h e r s ' attitudes and beliefs are known to influence their teaching Practices and management strategies in the classroom, and therefore to directly influence students' learning (Smith, 2000). In particular, a teacher's beliefs about the learning capacity of a student with
disability may determine the extent to which the teacher is willing to make adjustments to teaching method, curriculum, or classroom organization, or indeed whether he or she even recognizes that some students in the class do have special needs (Westwood, 1995). It is
now generally accepted that teachers who are required to integrate students with disabilities into their classes must feel confident in their own ability to cope with the situation, and must have some positive expectations about the students' learning potential (Forlin, 1998).
Many studies have found out that with any given disability or impairment, attitude and social barriers are often the most disabling aspect of any c o n d i t i o n . Some p r e s e n t e d special needs s t u d e n t s as
"probable failures", i.e. likely to be academically unsuccessful, and also a burden (Curwin & Mendler, 1999). Some educators assume that some students with special needs are not capable of engaging and learning and treat them as visitors or as if they even do not belong to the class (Smith, 2006). The division of mainstream and special e d u c a t i o n has also bearing o n the attitudes of educators.
G e n e r a l teachers welcome the s t u d e n t s with special needs but they think that it is the responsibility of special e d u c a t i o n teachers to
prepare, and grade the special needs students" work even if students are in their classes. These beliefs will not be able to form relationships with the students, support positive learning behaviours or build an
effective learning environment in the class.
Many studies have found out that negative attitude towards disabilities is a grave barrier to inclusive education. Houck and
Rogers (1994) found that teachers prefer students whose disabilities
d o not require added responsibilities. Other studies on teachers'
attitudes also suggest that the nature and severity of the student's disability predict teachers' willingness to include students in the general classroom. Forlin, Hattie, and Douglas (1996) found out those
negative attitudes from Western Australian teachers towards students with SEN increased with the severity of disability. Teachers
had more positive attitudes towards inclusion of students with mild disabilities whereas students with severe disabilities were least favoured (Diebold & Von Eschenbach 1991; Houck & Rogers, 1994).
Far more teachers supported including students with learning disabilities, physical and sensory disabilities and those requiring little or no teacher assistance. Support for inclusion of those with emotional disturbances, more serious intellectual or behavioural disabilities was much less (Diebold & Von Eschenbach 1991; Vaughn,
S c h u m m , Jallad, Slusher, & Saumell, 1996).
Other studies have invariably found out that a good index of the quality of an inclusive program is the level of teacher support. Brophy and Everstons add to the above point that successful teachers see teaching as an interesting and worthwhile challenge that they
approach by assuming personal responsibility for the learning of their students. Teachers believe that problems could be overcome by searching solutions and are courageous enough to test their solutions
i n the classrooms. Less successful teachers see teaching a merely a
d u'l job, discussed problems as if they are too serious to be solved and behaved in ways that ensured they were not solved (as cited in
Loreman et al., 2006, p.227). In Romania a recent study conducted by UNESCO (1999), revealed that negative attitudes of teachers and adults are the major barrier to inclusion- students are not prejudiced unless influenced by adults.
2.3 The Impacts of Teacher Training and Its Support for Competencies
The skills and knowledge of teachers to deal with students with special needs depend mostly on teacher training apart from learning from their experiences, in-service trainings and knowledge gained from the talks of the experienced people. The teacher training is very
important as a necessary response to the educational needs of students. It is difficult to advance towards inclusive schools unless all teachers are specialists in special needs - have sufficient ability to teach all students (Marchesi, 1998).
Research over the recent years has consistently highlighted the fact that teachers at all levels have significant effects on their students.
However, concerns remain about the inadequacies of teacher training Programme in the view of lack of relevant materials and facilities in the institutions in both developed and developing countries. It was found that many teachers who are ill-prepared to help their students and many schools that are ill-equipped to design learning
opportunities for them.
Teachers need high level of subject knowledge, understanding of both
the nature and development of student and learning processes. To respond to the a wide range of learning needs, they have to know what determines learning of a different ages in different situations, and also they need to be able to use the evidence of students' response to decide how and when they should alter their teaching approaches. However, those needed skills and knowledge are generally been ignored as a central focus in initial teacher training (Golder, Norwich & Bayliss, 2005). Hargreaves (2004) comments that conventional teachers are not trained to take the kinds of roles now outlined for them. He further comments that the crucial study of child and adolescent development, and of the process of teaching and
learning, have been given less decreasing attention in initial and further professional development of teachers.
Manson (1999) conducted a study to determine the extent to which teacher-education programs prepared teachers to work with diverse groups of students. The study reported that many teachers admitted that there was "room for improvement" in their preparation to teach an increasingly diverse student population. For example, teachers discovered a mismatch between what they actually needed to teach students of different ethnic or racial groups and what skills their pre-service programs offered them to do the job effectively.
Tomlinson (1999) discovered that teacher-education programs in general are not preparing tomorrow's teachers for the increasing
diversity of students. The result indicated that pre-service teachers seldom, if ever, experience differentiated instruction in their teacher-preparation programs. Specifically, most teachers had only one survey course focused on exceptional students. The course was intended to help them understand the needs of academically diverse learners; however, pre-service teachers reported that it dealt exclusively with learner traits, not with methods of teaching.
In a study carried out by Hobbs and Westling (1998), involving teachers in the USA, it was found that only 29% of general educators felt that they had enough expertise or training in inclusion. For many teachers the content of their training remains unrelated to the nature of the teaching job and the conditions in which they work; there is a separation between theory and practice (Savolainen et al., 2000).
They further said that the teachers did not understand the practices of delivery and use of remediation or child-centred education. It is important to pay more attention in initial and in-service teacher education to vary strategies for remediation.
Many literatures support the need to train teachers. Stoler (1992) and Leyser, Kapperman, and Keller (1994) reported positive teacher attitudes after in-service training. To ensure good inclusion, supporting teachers as they make the necessary classroom adaptations to meet students' needs and they are actively involved in determining the form of this support. Lynch (1994) mentions that the
success of UPE depends not only depend on the quality of instruction, school curriculum and materials, but increasingly on the quality of teacher training. Perner and Porter (1998) also share concerns for thorough pre-service training and on-going in-service training opportunities to make inclusive education a success.
Qualification matters a lot in educating students with special needs. In a study conducted by Laczko-Kerr and Berliner (2002) to see the affect of certified and uncertified teachers on the p e r f o r m a n c e of students, it was found out that students of uncertified teachers did not
perform as well as students of certified teachers. In a study of the effects of teacher's content knowledge, findings revealed that students achieved more when instructed by teachers who had a college major or minor in the subject area in which they taught
(Kaplan & Owings, 2003). Students of teachers with a master's degree outperformed students of teachers without a master's degree
(Laczko-Kerr & Berliner, 2002).
A study on the relation between the basic skills of teachers and student achievement was carried out by Kaplan and Owings (2003). It
has found out that when students have a competent teacher for at 'east 3 years, achievement scores have increased more than 50 Points in math and 35 points in reading (on a 100-point scale) on standardized tests. Students in classrooms with the least competent teachers have shown close to no academic growth. Therefore,
consecutive years with competent teachers can increase student outcomes in low-achieving, middle-achieving, and high-achieving students.
Teachers are the central for all learning and are most influential persons in the lives of the students. Warnock (1978) supports the idea that no improvement in special educational provision can be achieved without certain essential and marked advances in teacher training. She continues to say that teachers who have a defined
responsibility for students with SEN should have considerable expertise and the confidence and status that go with it, if they are to work effectively.
Lynch (1994) has fundamentally opined that a systematic training of teachers to address a diversity of needs among a heterogeneous
group of students is an important goal, if Universal Primary Education
i s to be achieved through out the world. He further suggests identifying specific skill areas for inclusion in a revised teacher education, such as monitoring, reporting and communicating students's progress in a diagnostic, supportive and useful way, which
can be incorporated into overall and varied teaching/learning strategies. Significantly, Stubbs (2002) reinforces that the reform of teaching methodology and teacher training, together with a more
relevant curriculum are the means of paving way for integration.
Lynch (1994) writes:
"to be more effective for serving a greater diversity of children, then schools need to be more responsive to children's needs and teachers need a larger more differentiated repertoire of teaching strategies, as well as the capacity to conduct curriculum improvement and adjustments so as to deliver educational programs which are appropriate for all children" (p. 42).
Savolainen et al. (2000) suggest teacher education programmes to develop foundational, practical and reflective competences in teachers. In other words professional development programmes must
enable teachers to consider options, make decisions and execute actions (practical); understand how and why these actions are undertaken (foundation); and be able to reflect on what has been done and make appropriate changes.
Initiatives in teaching methods, adaptation of curriculum and instructions, adaptation of resources, methods of assessment, school organization and restructuring of school environment may help to
certain extent for inclusion but these changes will greatly depend on the support and services teachers receive. Therefore, Arbeiter and
Hartley (2002) mention that support should also as to understand a range of measures and provisions that assist teachers to respond to the needs of students with SEN in school.
Research has shown that longer, harder, and more thorough training fading to teachers' mastery of the skills on which they are being trained results in more competent teachers [Laczko-Kerr & Berliner,
2002). Therefore, it is imperative for teacher preparation programs to incorporate these aspects of pre-service and in-service training.
2.4 Consequences of Lack of Competencies amongst Teachers
The shortages of special education teachers in today's schools are due to lack of skills and knowledge and growing negative attitudes of teachers. Special education teachers leave the field at about twice the
rate of their general education counterparts (Cook & Boe, 1998).
oiiverez and Arnold (2006) view every year the increasing enrollment of identified students requiring SEN but the number of qualified teachers available to serve the needs of these students is not
increasing at the same rate. They further mention that there are extreme shortages of fully certified special education teachers.
In E n g l a n d a survey of 141 SEN c o o r d i n a t o r s showed that 72% relied on 'occasional training events' or professional development days as their only form of SEN training; none had specialist-route Master's
degrees and only 13% had certificate-level qualification in SEN.
Emphasis in training appeared to be predominantly of a practical nature (Crowther, Dyson, & Millward, 2001).
A survey in European countries: Denmark, Greece, Italy and the UK (Nutbrown & Clough, 2004) 87% of the teachers showed that their knowledge on SEN is derived from their own experience of working
Wlth students. Miller, Brownell and Smith (1999) suggest that academic ability appear to make teachers to leave the special or
general education. In support of this statement, research by Shen in 1997, also found that teachers with less experience have the tendency to leave whereas more experienced teachers tend to stay.
Due to severe shortages of trained teachers and an increased emphasis on integrated and decentralized special education within the ordinary school system there is a need to produce teachers with a broader knowledge base in special education (Lynch, 1994). Porter (2001) has also experienced the overwhelming shortages of special education teachers throughout the United States. He comments that the students with learning disabilities across the nation are being taught by individuals without training, let alone certification. There are other factors such as administrative support, class size, staffing, workload, time, syllabus, funding, collaboration with patents and related personnel and physical barriers which are beyond the scope of this writing.
Many studies have found that schools in high-poverty areas suffer
from shortages of qualified teachers (Keller, 2003). The demand for qualified special educators is growing into a crisis (Billingsley, 2004).
The shortage of qualified special education teachers is so great that any person with a bachelor's degree could be placed in a special
education classroom on an emergency credential (Lang & Fox, 2003).
sPecial education teachers face a variety of difficulties that make their challenge virtually impossible. Many are left to teach without a
curriculum, materials, support, and experienced special educators with which to collaborate. All of these factors mean that teachers are
likely to be far from competent. With all of these challenges, it is not surprising that many special education teachers leave the field before their fifth year of teaching (Whitaker, 2003).
Miller et al. (1999) commented that "age and academic ability appear to influence teachers' decision to leave the special or general education classroom (p.201)."
2.5 Conclusions
Many teachers tend to feel low self-esteem and confidence in their Professional career and some teachers even leave the schools at very early years due to lack of skills and knowledge. Some who love to work in schools do not have skills to adapt to the educational changes.
Forced by the presence of policies, students are placed without proper supports and services under the general education teachers who themselves do not have support they need to teach them effectively.
The literature reviews point out that teachers teaching students with
SEN are to be highly competent and skilful and therefore must be supported adequately in order for teachers to embrace instruction, curricula and environment that engage and encourage all students.
Therefore, the literature reviews have indicated that the policy should
f o cus on improving the teacher training colleges so as to provide
necessary skills to the teachers. They also suggest providing frequent
