Masaryk University

Faculty of Education

Dissertation

Brno 2008

By: Amal Saleh Al-Hamli,B.A.,Dip., M.A.

Masaryk University
Faculty of Education

INVESTIGATION OF SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHERS' ATTITUDES

TOWARDS EDUCATION OF PUPILS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS IN
RIYADH CITY IN THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA

( Dissertation )

2008

Supervisor: PhDr. Barbora Bazalov?, Ph.D.

By: Amal Saleh Al-Hamli,B.A.,Dip., M.A.

ii

DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my husband whose endless support and
inspiration gave me the strength I needed through the challenging time I spent
working on this project. I also dedicate it to my loving children, Nawaf and Saud,
whose love and presence helped me overcome any obstacle in my life.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First, I thank Allah my Creator and sustainer for all the Mercy He Bestowed
and Showered upon me, providing for me every need, energy, and knowledge to
achieve this humble effort.

I would like to express the deepest appreciation to my supervisor, PhDr.

Barbora Bazalov?, Ph.D. for her assistance, support, and academic guidance
throughout my doctoral program. Without her invaluable comments, suggestions
and guidance, this study would have been exponentially more difficult. Thank you
PhDr. Barbora, ph.D.

I would also like to extend my appreciation to prof. PhDr. Marie V?tkov?,

CSc. for her support and guidance.

My deepest thanks go to Saudi Ambassador to the Czech Republic Prince

Mansour bin Khalid bin Abdullah bin Farhan Al-Saud for his support, guidance,
and encouragement .

I would like to thank the ministry of education, General Secretariat of Special

Education in The kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Educational district in Riyadh City.

More personally, I would like to express my gratitude to all the individuals

at the Saudi Cultural Office in Vienna, for their understanding and
encouragement throughout my years of study, and for their academic guidance.

iv

I am also grateful to my family. To my father, and my siblings, thank you for

your love and encouragement throughout this journey. Special thanks to my
precious husband and my wonderful children Nawaf, and Saud. Thank you all.

Table of Contents

DEDICATION

..

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Table of Contents

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

.iii

iv

..

..

vi

...

Need for the Study

Purpose of the Study

Research Questions

...

Limitations
Delimitations

...................

..............................
.........................

.
.

...

4
.

.....

.
..

....

..

Research Hypotheses
Limitations and Delimitations of the Study

..

6
.

Definitions of Selected Terminology Used in the Study

.....

Pupils with Special Needs

..

Special Education

...

Attitude

CHAPTER 2 : REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

..

...

INTRODUCTION
Education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Historical perspective
Special Education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

...

..9

........

10

.................15

The History of the Development of Special Education in Saudi Arabia ..

15

Special Education Policy in Saudi Arabia

18

The Group Benefiting From Special Education

..

....................21

Educational Placement for pupils with special needs in Saudi Arabia

vi

.24

The Training of Special Education Teachers

...

Special educational needs

...

..

Definitions and terminology

..

...

...

Types of special educational needs

..

..

Special education settings

..

.29

.. 31

..

Attitude

27
27

..

Prevention and early intervention

..26

..

..32

.. .. ..34

Definitions of Attitude

...

Importance of Attitudes

....

34

...

34

..

35

..

History of the Measurement of Attitudes

Research Variable of Teachers' Attitudes

....

43

Research Variable of Gender

...

44

Results of Teachers' Attitudes and Gender

......

.....45

Research Variable of Teachers' Attitudes about Education/Training

...

46

Research Variable of Teachers' Attitudes and Teaching Experience

...

50

Overall Findings Related to the Researcher's Study

Family Support

....53

..

.....53

Inclusion Practices of pupils with Special Needs into Regular Classroom

Versus Separation

..

Studies Related to Attitudes Of Saudi Special Educators

CHAPTER 3 : METHODOLOGY

.....
...

56
60

........................................66

Chapter Overview ..................................................................................................66

Ethical considerations in the study ........................................................................66
Site Description .....................................................................................................68
Populations ...........................................................................................................68
Sampling strategy ................................................................................................68

Research method .............................................................................................69

vii

Measurement method ...........................................................................70

Structure of questionnaire survey

....71

Questionnaire contents

Procedure of data collection

72
72

Data Analysis Procedures

74

CHAPTER 4 : RESULTS ......................................................................................76

Teachers' Demographic Characteristics

76

Teachers' Teaching Background

..

..78

Factor Analysis of Teachers' Attitudes Items

...

. 82

General Description of Teachers' Attitudes toward education of pupils with Special

Needs (Research Question One)

..

..

86

Overall Teachers' Attitudes

.86

Differences in Teachers' Attitudes by Gender, Education Level, and Teaching

Experience in General and Special Education

..

..90

Gender

90

Education Level

.92

Teaching Experience

...

94

General Education

...

95

Special Education

..

Analysis of the Four Factors

....

The Summary of Results

.98
101

103

CHAPTER 5 : CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MINISTRY OF

EDUCATION AND FUTURE RESEARCHS ..............................................................105
Introduction
Conclusion

...

Recommendations for the SMOE and Future Research

viii

...

105

105

...

108

Recommendations for the Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia

... .108

Recommendations for Future Research

...

111

113

ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION

..
.

REFERENCES

..

LIST OF TABLES

115
129

LIST OF FIGURES

.132

APPENDICES

Appendix A : SETA Questionnaire (English Version )

....

134

Appendix B : SETA Questionnaire ( Arabic Version )

...........

142

..

147

Appendix C : CODED SETA ITEMS

ix

.133

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

In many parts of the world, the period from the 1970s to the 1990s witnessed
a number of important landmarks for disabled individuals. Notable among them
have been the passage of Section 504 of the U.S. Rehabilitation Act of 1973; U.S.
Public Law 94-142 in 1975; the designation of 1981 as united Nations Year of the
Disabled, and 1981-1991 as the International Decade for the Disabled; and passage
in 1990 of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Yet the battle for emancipation of
handicapped individuals is still far from won; legal support for institutional reform
is only the first step in a long journey.

In any society, the absence of supportive legislation for disabled individuals

implies the acceptability of negative attitudes. It indicates lack of concern for the
protection of disabled people and acceptance of limited efforts to provide open
opportunities. Even with the legal protections now in place, however, it is clear
that public attitudes cannot be changed by legislation alone. While access to public
places and educational opportunities may be legislated, acceptance cannot.
Societal attitudes toward those who are disabled, therefore, are among other
critical factors in the struggle for equality. Attention must be focused on the
attitudes of individuals toward their disabled neighbors.

At the heart of the movement by educators, advocates, and legislators toward

improved opportunities for disabled people are efforts to legitimize the principle of
deinstitutionalization and to work toward its realization (Wolfensberger, 1983;

Novak & Berkeley, 1984). Deinstitutionalization may be defined as making

available to handicapped individuals patterns and conditions of everyday life that
are as close as possible to those of people in mainstream society. According to
Jones (1987), attempts have been made in the U.S. to lower the barriers to physical
access, employment, and education. Both the courts and congress seem to assume
that full integration into communities and schools will eventually follow, serving
to modify traditional prejudices toward handicapped people. It may be, however,
that genuine change can be achieved only through a better understanding of
attitudes toward the status and treatment of people with handicaps in schools and
other social institutions (Albrecht, 1976; Jones, 1987).

Need for the study

A number of researchers have attempted to examine and analyze the
attitudes of special education personnel toward the disabled pupils they serve. For
example, studies by Jones (1987) and Lane (1988) indicate growing emphasis-among educators, psychologists, and counselors--on the importance of measuring
attitudes in a psychometrically adequate fashion. Because in-service teachers
exhibit strong interaction with and influence on young people with disabilities,
knowledge of their attitudes toward the disabled is of major significance.

Many countries lack adequate research on issues that affect special

education; Saudi Arabia is one of those countries.
The attitudes of in-service teachers are particularly crucial, because teachers
are responsible for educating handicapped pupils and preparing them for transition
into the adult world. Teacher attitudes, therefore, can profoundly influence the
future lives of their pupils.

Three points of significance warrant this particular study. Overall, they

include: (l) lack of current research in Saudi Arabia on issues pertaining to special
education; (2) lack of special education teacher preparation programs; and (3)
investigator's findings. Each point is addressed in the following paragraphs.

First, existing research in Saudi Arabia shows that few studies have been
conducted on issues related to the education of pupils with special needs in Saudi
Arabia . This study updates the existing body of knowledge about special
education in Saudi Arabia.

Second, most of Saudi special education teachers currently receive no course

work or experience to prepare them to enter the field of special education. The
investigator's believes that universities in Saudi Arabia must provide instruction to
prepare future special education teachers to enter the classroom. The result of this
study provides evidence to Saudi educators and policy makers for the need for
such course work devoted to special education issues.

Third, the investigator's study provides new findings that teachers,

professionals, and policy makers can use to help them in designing new programs
that are appropriate for pupils with special needs.

In summary, special needs education programs in Saudi Arabia benefit from

the increased understanding of pertinent special education issues that are gained as
a result of the study, as described in the paragraphs above.

Purpose of the study

There are three major purposes of this study: (1) Saudi special education
teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs, (2) update all
educators, (3) recommendations. Each purpose of the study is discussed in
following paragraphs:

First, the study investigates Saudi special education teachers' attitudes to

learn their opinions about the importance of special needs education in the country.
All Saudi citizens deserve a quality education (Ministry of Education, 1978). The
investigator's opinion is that if educators ignore pupils with special needs, they
lose a small, but vital, group of people who could contribute to the country's
economy while providing purposeful experiences in their own lives.

Second, this study updates existing literature about special education and
provides current information for special education teachers, university educators,
and policy makers.

Third, if the recommendations of this study are endorsed by the Saudi

Arabian Ministry of Education, then colleges and universities will update the
curricula to include special education courses for preservice teachers who plan to
work with pupils with special needs. The update means that the study investigates
Saudi special education teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special
needs in the hope that further development of special education in Saudi Arabia
continues.

In summary, this study provided an opportunity to investigate the important

and under-investigated topic of special education in Saudi Arabia, and provide upto-date findings that can be used to strengthen existing special education programs.

Research Questions

This study attempts to answer the selected research questions. They are listed
and explained below.
1.What are the attitudes of Saudi special education teachers toward education of
pupils with special needs?
2.Does teacher's gender have an impact on attitudes toward education of pupils
with special needs?
3.Does teacher's education/training have an impact on attitudes toward education
of pupils with special needs?
4.Does teacher's experience have an impact on attitudes toward education of pupils
with special needs?

First, attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs are critical
because many research studies (Downs, 2003; Miller and Sammons,1999; and
others) have documented the effect of attitude on special education.
Second, the impact of gender on teachers' attitudes toward education of
pupils with special needs has also been proven to be an important variable
(Alghazo, 2003; Jobe, Rust & Brissie, 1996; Shaila, 2004; and others).
Third, the impact of education/training on teachers' attitudes toward
education of pupils with special needs has received the attention of researchers and
has been found to be an important variable (Al-Abdulghafour, 1999; Wilczenski,

1991; and others).

Fourth, the impact of experience on teachers' attitudes toward education of
pupils with special needs has been documented to be an important variable
(AIghazo, 2004; and others). These studies, and others, are fully explored in
Chapter 2: Review of the Literature.

Research Hypotheses

There are several research hypotheses for this study. They are listed below.
1.There are no significant differences in attitudes among Saudi special education
teachers towards education of pupils with special needs.
2.Teacher gender has no significant impact on their attitudes towards education of
pupils with special needs.
3.Teacher education/training has no significant impact on their attitudes towards
education of pupils with special needs
4.Teacher experience has no significant impact on their attitudes towards
education of pupils with special needs.
In summary, this study investigates these four research hypotheses in order
to prove or disprove these hypotheses.

Limitations and Delimitations of the study

This study was conducted under both limitations and delimitations, which
are described below.

Limitations :
The limitation follows:
1. The study is limited to investigating special education teachers' attitudes

toward education of pupils with special needs. Therefore the results of this study
may not be the same for teachers who work with pupils with special needs in
general classroom settings.

Delimitations :
The delimitations follow:
1.

The limitation is limiting research resources to the collections and

databases of the University Libraries and general libraries in Saudi Arabia.

2. This study was delimited to investigating teachers' attitudes in Riyadh,
therefore, the results of the study may not apply to other countries.
3. The research for this study was delimited to special education teachers
in Riyadh only.

Definitions of selected Terminology used in the study

The following specific terms are used in this study. They are: (1) pupils with
special needs, (2) special education, and (3) attitude. Each term is defined below.

Pupils with Special Needs:

Pupils with special needs are those with learning problems in one or more
areas of sensory, physical, cognitive, or other areas of functioning (Alkhaldi,
Abdulwahad, Almutairi, Mohamad, Alenezi, Botaiban, Almusailaikh, Fekri, &
Naif (2002). When referring to children with a disability, teachers refer to an
inability or reduced capacity to perform a task in a specific way. For example, if
the teacher observes the child putting a five-piece puzzle together, and a child is
unable to do so, the teacher might infer the child lacks the capacity to perform the
puzzle task. A disability is a limitation imposed on an individual by a loss or
reduction of functioning, such as the paralysis of leg muscles, absence of an arm,

or loss of sight. It can also refer to problems in learning. As Gargiulo (2003) noted,
limitations only become disabilities when they interfere with a person's attainment
of his or her educational, social, or vocational potential.

Special Education :
As stated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA,
p.12) special education is, "specially designed instruction, at no cost to parents, to
meet the unique needs of a child with a disability, including instruction conducted
in the classroom, in the home, in hospitals and institutions, and in other settings,
and instruction in physical education."

Attitude :
In classic studies by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975, p.8) attitude is defined as "a
latent or underlying variable that is assumed to guide or influence behavior." They
further state that it is a "learned predisposition to respond in a consistently
favorable or unfavorable manner with respect to a given object" (p.10). All human
beings develop attitudes throughout their lifetime as a result of personal and
professional interactions. In citing the researcher, Cook (2000) divides attitude into
three elements: (1) cognition (a person's perception or beliefs about a subject); (2)
affect (the perceptions beneath these beliefs as well as the positive or negative
charge or feeling that a person has toward another); and (3) behaviorresponses(person's intention to behave in a certain way towards another).

CHAPTER 2
Review OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction :
This chapter examines the education system in Saudi Arabia and its
relevance to the area of research. It is hoped that it will provide shed a light on the
educational culture within the Saudi context, particularly in relation to the
educational provision available to children experiencing special educational needs.
Prior to doing this, it is necessary to introduce the educational stages that learners
have to experience during their educational life, and give a series of major
statistically-based studies on teacher attitudes of special education teachers and the impact
of gender, education/training and experience on their attitudes,

Saudi Arabia lies at the cross-roads of three continents: Asia,

Africa and Europe. The Kingdom is 2,240,000 square kilometers in area (865,000
square miles) and makes up about 80% of the total area of the Arabian Peninsula
(Microsoft Encarta 96 Encyclopedia, 1996). The total area of Saudi is nearly six
times the area of the British Isles, four times that of France and about a third of
that of the United States of America (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1970). The
country borders on Jordan, Iraq and Kuwait to the north, Qatar and the United
Arab Emirates and the Arabian Gulf to the east, Oman and Yemen to the south,
and the Red Sea to the west (Middle East and North Africa Yearbook, 1994). The
country of Saudi Arabia consists of five main regions: the Central region, Najd;
the Eastern region, Al-Ahsa; the Southern region, Asir; the Western region, AlHijaz, and the Northern region. These are sub-divided into a total of 13

administrative divisions, each with its own Amir (governor) and capital city
(Rashid and Shaheen, 1992).

The religion of the people of Saudi Arabia is Islam. Indeed Islam

covers all aspects of the peoples'-lives and has a particular emphasis in the field of
education. Culture in Saudi Arabia can be defined in religious terms. Muslims
believe in Allah (God) and He is the creator of the universe. Islam looks to
education as a religious duty for all, males and females (Al-Salloom, 1989).

Education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Historical perspective

At the time Saudi Arabia was founded in 1932, education was not
accessible to everyone and was limited to individualized instruction, mainly at
schools based in urban mosques. These schools taught Islamic law and basic
literacy skills. A little over 60 years later, Saudi Arabia now has a nationwide
educational system that provides free training, to all citizens, from primary school
through university. While the study of Islam remains at its core, the modem Saudi
educational system provides quality instruction in diverse fields of modem and
traditional arts and sciences. This diversity helps meet the Kingdom's growing
need for highly educated citizens to build on the rapid progress achieved in the
past few decades.

In 1927 a decision was taken to establish the first formal authority to

be responsible for education in Saudi Arabia. The authority at that time was called
"The Council of Education". This council remained in charge of education in
Saudi Arabia until the foundation of the Ministry of Education in 1953, which
shares with some other authorities the supervision of education in Saudi Arabia. In

1963, the Supreme Committee was chaired by the King and included in its
membership were the ministers of education, Interior, Defence, and later,
Ministers of Information, Labour and Social Affairs, the General Presidency for
Girls' Education was also included as a member of the Committee, The Committee
was responsible for setting out all policies in regard to education in Saudi Arabia.
However, at present; there are three main executive authorities responsible for
education provision, including kindergarten education, and the implementation of
state policy on education. These three main authorities include the Ministry of
Education, which is responsible for a) setting up the education policy within the
state policy framework, b) constructing the educational programmes and curricula
for boys' education in the first and second levels of education (below higher
education); the General Presidency for Girls' Education, created in 1960, which is
responsible for girls' education at all levels, plus the coeducational kindergartens
and the eleven girls colleges, until 2002 when it was abolished and its
responsibilities were given to the Ministry of Education; and the Ministry of
Higher Education, which was established in 1975 and is responsible for
conducting and coordinating higher education of universities and its executive
secretariat (Al-Senble et al., 1998).

The above-mentioned three authorities are not the only parties

responsible for education in Saudi Arabia. Other public authorities as well as the
private sector are also involved. These include the ministries of Defence,
Petroleum, and Health; the General Presidency of Technical Education and
Vocational Training; and the private sector; the latter provides education for
around six percents of the total number of students in Saudi Arabia. The structure
of the educational ladder in Saudi Arabia is displayed in Figure 2.1 (p.14 ).

The educational system in Saudi Arabia is divided into the common

three levels generally found elsewhere in the world. The kindergarten, two years,
comes before the primary school that represents the first level of education. It is
not however, necessary for primary school pupils to join kindergarten before
joining the primary stage. The second level of education is divided into two main
stages, the intermediate stage and the secondary stage, with a period of study of 3
years in each. In Saudi Arabia, this second level of education is characterized by
its diversity of instruction as, in addition to the public and new intermediate
schools, there are the schools of teaching the holy Quran. In addition to the public
high schools, there are also agricultural, industrial, and commercial schools. The
diversity of education at this level aims at linking Saudi Arabian education to plans
for national development in order to produce students with a range of
specializations. At the tertiary level, we find that Universities provide education in
a variety of different fields, including religion, the humanities and social, physical,
and applied sciences. The following is a summary of each type of educational
provision:
Kindergarten
Is the preparatory stage, which provides a child with educational and
social experience before they attend a primary school. A child may spend one or
two years in private/state kindergarten, before attending primary school. It is
however, important to note that as mention above a child does not have to a join a
kindergarten before being accepted into a primary school (Al-Senble et al., 1998).

Primary stage
Children join this stage when they are six years old. This stage lasts for
6 years, as the pupil is transferred from one year to another after passing exams
that after attending two semesters for each subject. The percentage mark for each

semester is 50 % of the total score; 15 % being assigned to the year's work and 35
% for the end year exam. The pupils that attain the required standard in the sixth
year of this stage receive a Primary School Certificate which enables them to go
on to the intermediate stage of learning (Al-Senble et al., 1998).
Intermediate stage
Students can join this stage after receiving their Primary School
Certificate. They remain in this stage for three academic years and those who
succeed in the last year receive the middle efficiency Certificate which enables
them to join the first year of secondary school. The system of exams at this stage is
essentially the same as seen at the primary stage (AlSenble et al., 1998).
Secondary stage
The secondary school stage has its own special nature, including the age
of its students, and the special personal characteristics found at this stage. Students
in this stage need special guidance and preparation, including different branches of
study assigned by specialist institutions. This stage includes high schools,
scientific institutes of secondary school, Dar-Attawheed school (Islamic studies
school), institutes of teacher education, professional institutes (e.g. those devoted
to agricultural, industry, and commerce), artistic and finally, athletic institutes, and
secondary schools for the teaching of the Quran (AlSenble et al., 1998).
Higher and college education
Saudi Arabia has eight Universities, with eighty two associated colleges
in addition, there are 22 colleges for teacher education belonging to the Ministry of
Education, 16 colleges belong to the general Headship for teaching girls, and 7
colleges belong to the General Institute for the Technical Education and
Vocational Training (Al-Hakeel, 1986, p. 27-37).

The following figure illustrates the various stages that learners have to follow
during the educational process.
Figure 1: The education system of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

University college age

4 years length

OR

University age 4 years

length or more

Grade
Age
Grade

Age

16

17

1
15

OR

Grade

Age

16

17

Arts Department

Science Department
Secondary Stage

Grade
Age

1
2
12
13
Intermediate Stage

3
14

Grade

Age

10

11

Elementary Stage

Grade
Age

Infant
6+

Nursery Preliminary
7
8
Kindergarten

OR

Home

Special Education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

The History of the Development of Special Education in Saudi Arabia
The ministry of Education of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia had been
attempting to develop and diversify, education according to a specific plan aimed
at giving all citizens in all parts of the country the opportunity to receive an
education. In doing this, the ministry did not ignore the importance of the
education of children with disabilities. The earliest recorded history of special
education was in 1958 when Al-Ghanem, a blind man, learned the Braille system
of reading and writing from an Iraqi man visiting Saudi Arabia at that time. AlGhanem then introduced the Braille system to a few blind men who were attending
the general public school. This private effort lasted for about two years. The
government supported this undertaking and

offered the opportunity to use

government buildings and materials to teach these blind men in the evening (AlMosa, 1999). Due to its success, in 1960 two years after those initial Braille
classes, the Ministry of Education opened the first Institute for the training of the
blind. It was called The Institute of Light for the Education and Training of the
Blind in Riyadh. This Institute was the first real step toward organized special
education in Saudi Arabia. In 1962, the Ministry of Education established the first
Administration of Special Education, which was at that time providing services for
the blind, deaf, and students with mental retardation. In 1964, the first school for
blind girls was founded. In the same year, the first deaf school, Al-A mal Institute,
was established in Riyadh City to provide education for deaf children. Also, the
first specialized institute for children with mental retardation, A l-Riaih Institute,
was opened in 1971. And later, in 1972, the Ministry of Education passed
Resolution No.674/36/40 to upgrade the Administration of Special Education to
the Directorate-General of Special Education with three specialized departments.
The latter includes the administration of programs for individuals who are blind,

deaf, or have mental retardation. Also, these three departments are responsible for
the preparation and execution of educational programs for each group, male and
female, monitoring educational progress and ensuring that the schools follow the
established program. The programs included the publication of special education
curricula and the provision of technical assistance. Also, these programs provide
parents with information regarding the benefits of special education for their
children. In 1983, The Directorate-General of Special Education was named the
General Secretariat of Special Education, with the same specialized departments.
The General Secretariat of Special Education continued in its efforts to open
special Institutes each year to ensure that each local educational district had the
proper facilities to accommodate the students with disabilities in their area (AlMosa, 1999).

In 1996, the General Secretariat of Special Education began overseeing

the planning and implementation of programs for students with disabilities at all
levels throughout the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia developing new and different
educational administrations for students with different disabilities. The General
Secretariat is divided among seven departments. These include the Educational
Administration for the Blind, the Educational Administration for the Deaf, the
Educational Administration for the Mentally Retarded, the Educational
Administration for Learning Disabled students, the Educational Administration for
gifted students, the Educational Advisory Unit, and the center for Physical
Therapy and Training (Al-Mosa,1999).

The Educational Administrations for each of the categorical areas take

care of the preparation and administration of educational programs for all students
with disabilities who are qualified to receive services. They also monitor the

programs progress and ensure its effectiveness, and play a role in enlightening
students with disabilities in the value and benefits of these educational programs,
which are specially adapted to their abilities, so that they will achieve enhanced
abilities that will help them be more independent.

The Educational Advisory Unit provides for the continuous

evaluation of educational programs and social services. This evaluation is
performed through field visits. It also is involved in preparing the curriculum and
educational books and choosing suitable equipment. Moreover, it works to
improve teaching methods as well as provide meetings of teachers in schools for
the purpose of staff development and training.

The Physical Therapy and Training Unit cares for students with
special needs and offers physical and occupational therapy focused on the specific
disabilities of individual students.

The General Secretariat of Special Education set up critical objectives

to help its various departments work to develop and improve and special education
for all students with disabilities in Saudi Arabia. These objectives included the
planning and preparing of special programs, the supervision of their
implementation and the follow up of their progress. Additionally, the General
Secretariat formulated the policies and the procedures that the separate
departments must follow in their administration of special education programs and
other activities related to their specific areas, and offered technical and
administrative help whenever needed. They drafted the necessary plans to ensure
the covering of all the Kingdom s needs in terms of institutes and programs, and
distributed them according to each district s needs. Another task of the Secretariat

involved participation in educational research programs in special education, the

writing of books and the selection of suitable assessment instruments, and in
preparing training programs in special education at its various levels. Finally, they
directed participation in debating groups, meetings, and conferences related to
each separate specialization (Al-Mosa, 1999).
Currently the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has three government
agencies that administer the different types of services for individuals with
disabilities: 1) The General Secretariat of Special Education which develops the
specific social and technical services; 2) The Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs
that supervises programs which focus on training and rehabilitation; and 3) The
Ministry of Health that provides integrated medical, psychological, and counseling
services as part of its physical rehabilitation programs. In addition, the General
Presidency of Youth Welfare provides a variety of sports, cultural, and recreational
activities for individuals with disabilities (Ministry of Education, 1978).

Special Education Policy in Saudi Arabia:

The Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia did not ignore the
importance of the education of pupils with disabilities. It has been attempting to
provide them with an appropriate education equal to that of non-disabled pupils.
Articles 29 to 61 of the general education policy in Saudi Arabia specify two
important principles of Islam in relation to special education and in achieving the
overall purpose of education. First, as Islam is a combination of religion and
secularism, the demonstration of the full harmony between science and religion is
found in the Islam Law, and Islamic thought meets all the human needs in their
highest forms and at all ages. The caring for students with academic delays,
eliminating as many of their disabilities as possible, and establishing special and

appropriate environmental and provisional programs to fit their needs is an

exemplification of Islamic thought (Ministry of Education, 1978).

In 1990-1992 the Education Policy in the government of Saudi Arabia

focused on the education of children with disabilities and initiated reforms and
new and special policies and principles for special education. These included 1) a
ministerial order s instruction that no students may be dismissed from any level of
education for repeated failure as long as he / she is still in the age bracket of that
level; 2) the establishment of new units and facilities and modernizing existing
ones to improve the care and services offered to students with disabilities; 3) the
improvement of curricula for special education; and 4) the establishment of a
program at the King Saud University s College of Education to prepare teachers
specialized in the teaching students who are blind, deaf and have mental
retardation (Ministry of Education,1990).

The objectives of special education policy in the Kingdom of Saudi

Arabia are to provide students with disabilities with a free and appropriate
education and appropriate rehabilitation programs. It also is intended to help
students with disabilities to discover their skills according to their abilities.
Moreover, it designs special and suitable plans and programs to enable students
with disabilities to better understand the values and conditions that affect their
lives and to prepare them to share with normal people in all aspects of life. In order
to achieve these objectives, The General Secretariat of Special Education set up
the following principles:
1.To identify students with special needs and their locations to provide them with
special education programs;
2. To discover each child s skills and abilities, and develop each of these through

special and appropriate education and activities;

3. To use appropriate related services and materials that may enable students with
special needs to improve their skills according to their abilities;
4. To provide stability and medical, psychological and social care to help students
with disabilities become as independent as possible;
5. To design individualized plans and programs that correspond with each child s
abilities;
6. To make other members of society aware of the various types of existing
disabilities and the manner and ways in which one should associate with and relate
to

these

children

with

disabilities;

7. To adapt schools to provide they have an appropriate environment and the

necessary materials and services necessary for students with disabilities;
8. To prepare students with disabilities for public life so that they become
productive members of society, able to support themselves and productively
participate

with

others;

9. To provide families who have children with disabilities with information

regarding the ways they might deal with their children in their homes; and
10. To provide recourse to educational, psychological, and social researchers to
develop and improve special education programs. This includes coordinating the
participation of professional development activities such as study scholarships,
conferences, seminars and future plans for education expansion. Also to facilitate
the needs assessment of manpower, equipment, books, and materials (Al-Mosa,
1999).

The Group Benefiting From Special Education:

According to Al-Mosa (1999), the General Secretariat of Special
Education identified students who are to be the beneficiaries of special education
program policy in Saudi Arabia. These beneficiaries included students with visual
impairments, hearing impairments, and mental retardation. They also included
gifted students, students with learning disabilities, students who have emotional
and behavior disturbances, and those with speech and language impairments.
Finally, students with autism, physical impairments, and those with multiple
disabilities were also to be served. It should be noted that these categorical
disability areas are the same ones included in the United States IDEA with the
exception of students with traumatic brain injury.

As noted previously, all of these students with different special needs

receive free and appropriate services and programs from different departments in
the General Secretariat of Special Education in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The
separate agencies who oversee the services are the Educational Administration of
the Blind, Educational Administration of the Deaf, the Administration of the
Mentally Retarded, Educational Administration for Learning Disabled Students,
the Educational Administration for Gifted Students, the Educational Advisory
Unit, and the Center for Physical Therapy and Training (Al-Mosa, 1999). Table 2.
1 shows the categories of special need catered for in school year 2003-04, with
numbers of programs and students, while Table 2. 2 shows the types of service
provided.

Table 2. 1: Special education programs and institutes by Type of Disability.

Type of Disability

1)Audio-impaired:
a) deaf
b) bad hearing
c) multi-impaired
Total
2)Visually impaired:
a) blind
b) bad eyesight
c)
multiimpaired
Total
3)Mentally retarded
a) Educable
b)
multiunpaired
Total
Autistic
Learning disability
Physical Disability
Gifted
Total

Institutes,
centers

Programs

Number of students

177
66
7

5013
1197
32

250

6242

116
1
10

1258
2000
43

127

3301

396
21

9880
161

417
27
732
1
6
1560

10041
203
9204
1642
1448
34597

Source : General Directorate of special education ( 2004 )

Table 2:2 Types of Service Provision

Service Type

Type of Disability

Number of Institutes and

programs

1) Residential institutes

Deaf
Blind
Mentally retarded

11
5
4

Total
Deaf
Blind
Mentally retarded

20
9
1
8

Total
Hearing and speech
Learning disability
Gifted
Blind

18

Total
Adult deaf, illiteracy
Autistic
Multi-impaired

19
10
13
10

Total
Deaf
Bad hearing
Mentally retarded
Autistic
Multi-impaired

33
2
17
162
1
5

Total

187

Learning disability
Visual impairment
Audio impairment

270
33
7

Total

310
4
2

2) Daytime institutes

3) Support centers

4) Classrooms attached
to SE institutes

5) Classrooms attached
to mainstream school

6) Resource rooms

7.Peripatetic teacher
8.Counsellor teacher

Source :Al-Mousa ( 2000 )

Educational Placement for pupils with special needs in Saudi Arabia:

In 1962, when the Ministry of Education passed Resolution No. 674/36/40

to establish the Department of Special Education as a General Directorate, students
with disabilities (i.e., blind, deaf, mentally retarded) who were receiving special
education services at that time were getting their education in two types of
programs, Residential Institutes, a kind of program that provided facilities to house
students as well as to educate them, and Day Institutes, a program where students
with special needs commuted to these Institutes daily.

Today, and since 1997, educational placements for students with

disabilities in Saudi Arabia have increased from two types of placements to five.
The present tendency in educating students with disabilities in Saudi Arabia is to
educate them in public schools with students without disabilities. This new trend
produces an educational perspective, for example, that educating children with a
hearing impairment in public schools with normal hearing children will help deaf
children to learn how to function in a hearing world and to promote their
socialization and academic skills.

In order to educate students with disabilities in public schools, the

General Secretariat of Special Education upgraded to three more educational
placement options for students with disabilities in addition to the two placements
mentioned previously. Self-contained classes (day classes in public schools) were
established in public school buildings. Adequate materials and equipment and
certified teachers with experience with students with disabilities were provided.
These classes have a minimum of five students. In addition, students with
disabilities participate in extracurricular activities with nondisabled students (Al-

Mosa, 1999). Resource rooms are programs where students with disabilities spend
50% of their school day in regular classes with nondisabled students. These
programs provide special materials and equipment and a certified resource room
teacher who may provide individualized services to students with disabilities
varying in age and academic achievement. An Itinerant & Counselors program
provides follow- up and support for students with disabilities who are educated
full-time in general education classes. The counselor teacher may teach in a
resource room and provide assistance to the regular teacher who teaches the
student with a disability in his or her classroom. In contrast, the itinerant teacher
may work with students with disabilities from several different schools (Al-Mosa,
1999).

In order to improve and develop all of these programs, the General

Secretariat of Special Education mandated the Education Advisory (E.A.) Unit to
provide for the continuous evaluation of the educational programs and social
services under the General Secretariat. This function is performed through field
visits. It also performs research, reviews reports, and evaluates programs. The E.A.
Unit is concerned with reviewing the curriculum and suggesting revisions,
modernizing and correcting programs, and fitting programs to each group s needs
in the context of continuous educational development. The General Secretariat
works to improve special education methods, use of available aids, and raises the
standards of teachers (Al-Mosa, 1999).

The E. A. Unit is also involved in preparing the curriculum and

educational books, and choosing suitable equipment. It prepares guidance
pamphlets, monitors their implementation and holds debate groups and meetings in
the schools and institutes for the purpose of improving their educational activities.

Finally, it prepares policies for the various out-of-class activities, supervises their
implementation, and evaluates the results (Al-Mosa, 1999).

The Training of Special Education Teachers:

Historically, even though there were no universities and colleges that
prepared special education teachers in Saudi Arabia, the Ministry of Education
established some training programs for preparing teachers to be able to work with
students with disabilities. To do this, the Ministry of Education selected a group of
qualified teachers who had experience in the public schools of not less than three
years, and who had a wish to work with children with disabilities. These
individuals were sent to a training course for a period of between six months and
two years so that they might specialize in the teaching of students with disabilities.
Some of these courses were provided within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and
some outside of it in neighboring Arab states or in foreign countries. Advisers and
some of the specialized employees arranged debate groups and conferences within
the Institutes in which the teachers work in order to increase their knowledge of
new developments and more advanced methods (Al-Mosa, 1999) .

Although there are many universities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,

there is only one university that offers a Bachelor of Arts degree in Special
Education. This degree is granted from King Saud University in Riyadh City. The
program was started in 1984, thus, it is a relatively new department. The goal of
this department is to train undergraduate students to be qualified teachers of
children with special needs including mental retardation, deaf or hard of hearing
students, blind students, and students with severe disabilities. Recently, the
Department of Special Education at King Saud University has started to offer

some new majors in the areas of learning disability and behavior disorders. Most
of the faculty in this department are from foreign Arabic speaking countries. In
addition to a lack of universities that offer degrees in special education, another
limitation is that there are no graduate degree programs in existence at this time.
Therefore, there is a shortage of both Saudi and Arabic speaking faculty members
to staff any new programs that other universities might want to initiate. New
programs would need to attract international faculty and there is much time lost
because Saudis with B.A. degrees in the special education field are sent abroad by
the government for masters or Ph.D. Degrees in special education.

Special educational needs

Definitions and terminology:
In the UK the nation of SEN is very often defined in the literature in terms of
achievement and obedience to schools' rules and regulations for instance,
Galloway et al (1999) perceived SEN as:

"Whether a child's educational attainments are regarded as

evidence of learning difficulties depends largely on what the
dominant authority expects children to achieve. Whether a child's
behavior is seen as a problem depends on how children are
expected to behave."
(Galloway et al.,1999,p.13)

The term of special educational needs has been stemmed from the
philosophy of Warnock Report (DES, 1978). It describes a wide range of
difficulties that may impair children's ability to achieve their time in school
(Stakes and Hornby, 2000).

The term includes all children who may have difficulty achieving their full
potential in school such as those traditionally considered as in need of special
education (deaf, blind or results retarded), those who dyslexic or gifted and these
with emotional or behavioral difficulties (Hornby, 1998).

The recent updated code of practice (DfES, 2001a) states that children have
special educational needs if they have a learning difficulty, which calls for special
educational needs to be made for them.

Learning difficulty has been defined as meaning "significantly greater

difficulty in learning than the majority of children of the same age", or a disability
that prevents or hinders them from making me of the kind of educational facilities'
generally provided for children of the same age in schools'.

Some authors such as Booth, Ainscow, Black-Hawking, Vaughn and Shaw

(2000) have refused to accept this term. They claimed that such term is associated
with an approach that can be a barrier to the development of inclusive practice in
schools. They believe that the term confers a label leading to lowered expectations
and focusing attention on certain difficulties and encouraging teachers to regard
special education as the task of the specialist.

Okpanachi (1995) regards special needs education as a tool for developing

children with SEN capacity to the maximum in relation to differences from the
normal children in mental traits, sensory abilities, communication abilities, social
behavior and physical characteristics.

Booth et al (2000) prefer the term "barriers to learning and participation" to

overcome such difficulties. Mittler (2000) argues that the world "special" is
anachronistic and discriminatory as it covers those lining in poverty because the
education system has not been able to meet their needs.

Types of special educational needs:

Currently there are various terms of SEN used by researchers
interchangeably to describe a rather complex phenomena. However, these terms
e.g. impairment, disability, and handicap are not different types of special needs,
but rather terms associated with very different theoretical understandings. Stephen
et al (1988) argue that the term impairment refers to a mental or physical in
capacity while disability refers to the relocation of function or non-existence of a
particular body part or organ. He refers to handicap as a degree of disability, which
makes life unusually difficult (Stephen et al., 1988). Hewitt and Furness (1977)
defined children with special needs by considering only their disabilities,
regardless of what help they need.

Hallahan and Kauffman (1991) defined children with special needs as "those
who require special education and related services if they are to realize their full
human potentia1." The specify the children with special needs according to the
degree of their incapacity such as: mental retardation, learning disabilities,
emotional disturbances, physical disabilities, disordered speech, impaired hearing,
impaired sight, or a special gift or talents". The term exceptional children have
been also used to mean in education:
1. Intellectual variations and or differences; those who are very slow to learn and
these who are intellectually superior.
2. Communication differences, for those children who have learning disabilities

or speech and language impairment.

3. Sensory differences for these with auditory a visual impairment.
4. Behavioral differences, including children who are emotionally disturbed or
social maladjusted.

5. Multiple special needs conditions, including children with combinations of

impairments.
6. Physical differences, including children with no sensory handicaps that impede
mobility and physical vitality.
7. Mild special needs children include, children with mild mental retardation,
learning disabilities, communication disorders or behavioral disorders (Kirk
and Gallagher, 1989).

Different ways have been taken to define the special needs pupils. The
doctor's definition of a special child will be medically based, whereas a social
workers' definition will consider behavioral and social factors more.

In Saudi Arabia, there are three categories of those children with mild
special needs; mildly mentally retarded emotionally disturbed, and children with
learning difficulties (Wood, 1993). The first category is defined as the limited
cognitive ability that logs children by two to five grades. Children of the first
category usually show special problems in personal and social characteristics.

Specific learning disabilities refer to learning difficulties that restrict the

student's competence in information processing, fine motor skills and working
memory.

The second category includes those children with emotional disturbance and
who have severe emotional problems that prevents them from making the
necessary adjustments for effective functioning in the culture. Those children's
behavior may range from aggressive destruction to complete withdrawal. They
have in appropriate social and personal learning (Telford and Sawvey, 1972). They
are incompetence and incapable to do what is expected of their normal peers.
Those children suffering from emotional disturbance have one of the
following characteristics: .
1. Unable to learn.
2. Unable to establish or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships with
peers and teachers.
3. In appropriate behavior or feelings under normal circumstances.
4. Having a general wood of unhappiness or depression.
5. A tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with personal or
school problems. (Kirk and Gallagher, 1989).

Prevention and early intervention:

In order to reduce the proliferation of disability, all efforts should be given to
early identification and intervention (Mittler, 1992; Smith et al., 1983). The
concentration shall be on all aspects of the earliest years of a child's life.
Also, the integration can be preferable applied in the early years of school
life since many handicapped children fall further and further behind their normal
peers as they get older (Smith et al., 1983).

Many intervention programs have shown that early intervention should be

based on one of three models:
1. Home-based programs, where the child can be provided with a teacher trainer
who visits them at home on a regular basis.
2. Centre-based programs, where the child takes part in programs in special
education settings.
3. A program that combines home and centre as settings for intervention (Reward
and Orlansky, 1980) .

The importance of the early years of life and the first school for young
disabled children has been emphasized by Chazzan, Laing, and Davies (1991).
They mentioned that the nature and levels of abilities of disabled children may not
be known clearly until they have spent along time at school, especially the mildly
disabled children.

The importance of early intervention seems to be whether it starts at home or

takes place in nurseries and kindergartens; such intervention is helpful for
increasing the child's potential growth and development in the early stages of life.

Special education settings:

A wide variety of education settings exist, such as:

1) Residential schools :
These are physical units in which the disabled children are provided special
education. This type deprives children of any association with other normal peers
in society. The traditional boarding school is used for blind and deaf children. The
traditional type of school serves the mentally retarded and socially maladjusted
(Dunn, 1973). The children in such schools are served and cared for 24 hours a day

but children can visit their homes weekly or at other intervals, depending on their
parent's wishes. (Hallahan and Kauttman, 1991).

2) Special Day schools :

It serves one type of children with special needs such as mentally retarded,
deaf: blind, or physically handicapped children. However, the isolation of these
children from their peers in society through the day school remains the main
problem (Dunn, 1973). Children in these schools usually return to this home after
school hours (Hallahun and Kauffman, 1991).

3) Mainstreaming Interpretation:
Addresses a variety of educational options for students with special needs,
rather than isolated alternatives. A large number of pupils can be enrolled in
regular classes with or without additional services (Turnbull and Shulz, 1979).
Stephen et al (1988) stated that mainstreaming is the education of children with
mild special needs in regular classrooms. It is a concept that exemplified the least
restriction environment provision of public law 94-142.

4) Normalization:
Provides the opportunity for every disabled. person to have an education and
living environment that is very close to what is regarded to be normal (Hallahan
and Kauffman, 1991). Complete normalization requires two kinds of integration:
Physical and social.

Attitude
Definitions of Attitude :
Fishbein and Ajzen (1997, p.6) perceive attitude as "a learned
predisposition to respond in a consistently favorable or unfavorable manner with
respect to a given object". Eagly and Chaiken (1993, p.1) defined an attitude as "a
psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with
some degree of favour or disfavour". This definition incorporates the notion that
attitudes are learned responses with enduring qualities. It also points out that
attitudes result in negative or positive behavior. Zimbardo and Ebbesen (1970)
define attitudes as "either mental readiness or implicit pre-dispositions that exert
some general and consistent influence on a fairly large class of evaluative
responses" (p.6). Scharm (1982) points that the attitude is "An assumed case of
tendency to respond by approving or rejecting a specific position"(p.209)

It is clear from what is mentioned above that attitude is a complicated

concept. However, irrespective of the difficulty of specifying a comprehensive
attitude concept, the defining characteristics of attitude can be specified from its
definitions, which include :
1. Attitudes are basically nervous and mental acquired from individual
experiences.
2. Attitudes are acted out in individual acceptance of social behaviors.
3.Attitudes can be also expressed in language.

Importance of Attitudes:

Attitude has an important role in relation ship between individuals in a

society where attitudes help the individual in social adaptation. This is attained by

the individual and his/her participation in acceptance of attitudes conceived by the

society. Evans (1965, p.9) stated that "Attitudes are playing a major role in human
life as a motive for conduct in the various aspects of this life"

History of the Measurement of Attitudes :

The scientific study of attitudes was initiated in Germany in the 1850s with
the investigation of subjects' responses to certain classes of social stimuli (Trandis,
Adamopoulos, & Brinberg, 1984). The term "attitude," however, was not used
until 1862 by the British psychologist Herbert Spencer (Allport, 1935). At the turn
of the nineteenth century, most social psychologists agreed that people's thoughts
and actions were strongly influenced by their mental sets and attitudes.

In 1901, Baldwin (reported in Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980) offered a definition

of attitudes as the "readiness for attention or action of a definite sort." Thomas and
Znaniecki (1918) are often credited with originating the use of attitudes to
explicate

social actions. They suggested that attitudes influence cognitive

processes, helping to determine an individual's potential and actual responses.

Similarly, Watson (1925) equated the field of social psychology with the study of
attitudes.

As the concept of attitude gained increased popularity among theoreticians

and researchers, attempts were made to construct psychometric techniques for its
measurement. One of the first and most successful research endeavors in the
measurement of attitudes in the united States was the pioneering work of L.L.
Thurston (1927, 1928, 1931; Thurston and Chave, 1929). Thurston argued that
attitudes toward a particular object could be measured by a single score, based on
the respondent's verbal report, reflecting his or her position on an affective

dimension in regard to the attitude referent. That method has come to be

commonly known as the Equal Appearing Intervals (or Consensual Location)
Scale.

Rensis Likert (1932), in an attempt to decrease the complexity and reduce

the laborious scale construction procedures of Thurstone's method, and to
circumvent its statistical assumptions, proposed an alternative, simpler technique
for measuring attitudes. Likert's method has since been widely used by researchers
to construct attitude rating scales. It yields a single score, presumably representing
the degree of favorableness manifested by the respondent toward the attitude
referent.

The past forty years have seen many studies dealing with attitudes
toward persons with disabilities, and various measures of attitudes towards persons
with disabilities have been developed. The early scales tended to be simple, often
psychometrically inadequate instruments which measured attitudes toward specific
disabilities, such as blindness or deafness. Yuker, Block, and Young (1966)
presented a brief review of instruments developed prior to 1964, but that review
related only to physical disabilities, and is out of date today. Shaw and wright
(1967) provided limited information and copies of a few scales. The development
of more psychometrically adequate research instruments began in the early 1960s.
Among those instruments are the Attitude Towards Disabled Persons Scale
(ATDP) and the Opinion about Mental Illness Scale (OMI). These two instruments
are still extensively used.

Attitudes toward persons with disabilities have changed over the years, at
least partly as a consequence of legislation relating to discrimination against

persons with disabilities, the mainstreaming of children in schools, and to some

extent the mainstreaming of disabled persons into society. Attitude measurement
techniques also have changed. They have become increasingly sophisticated, with
current emphasis on the use of a multidimensional scale. As Antonak and Livneh
(1988) point out, these changes mean that some of the items that appear in older
instruments are no longer meaningful. This implies a necessity either to modify
existing scales or to develop new ones. In any case, the scales must be developed
carefully and their reliability and validity must be assessed, with new or modified
scales reflecting the multifaceted nature of attitudes. (Antonak & Livneh, 1988).

The importance of attitudes in understanding psychological phenomena was

given formal recognition early in the history of social psychology. Over the years,
attitudes have been studied with differing emphases and methods. Between the
1920s and World War II, the attention of attitude researchers was directed
principally towards definitional issues and attitude measurement. Other studies
were concerned with the relationship of attitudes to such social variables as formal
schooling, age, religion, and socio-economic status. Those findings highlighted the
importance of attitudes in relation to other socio-psychological processes, but
provided few insights into causal factors. During that period, there were also
attempts to study attitude change as a function of exposure to various sorts of
experiences; e.g., contacts with minority group members. In evaluating the work of
early researchers, however, Yuker (1987) noted the absence of properly
constituted control and comparison groups.

World War II brought with it a growing concern about the place of attitude
concepts in understanding prejudice. A study of the authoritarian personality,
which related prejudice to the personality structure associated with anti-democratic

and fascist attitudes, enriched an understanding of the ways attitudes function in

individual personality systems. (Adorno, Frenkel, Levinson & Sanford, 1950;
Himmerfarb & Eagly, 1974).

Investigations of attitudes towards people with disabilities have concerned

researchers for more than half a century, since the pioneering work of such social
psychologists as strong (1931) and Barker (1948). Although the designs of recent
studies are more sophisticated, and the statistical methods used to analyze the
attitudinal data have changed substantially from simple descriptive statistics, most
attitude instruments do not differ much from the three-options checklist used by
strong (1931) in his original investigations.

Measures of attitudes of non-disabled people toward people who are

disabled have ranged from subjective, informal, and usually psychometrically
unsound instruments (e.g., open-ended or unstructured questionnaires or
interviews) to more objective, carefully planned and developed, methodologically
sound and scorable instruments (e.g., semantic differential scales and summated
rating scale). Most measuring scales now resemble the former rather than the latter
type. (Yuker, Block & Young, 1966).

One of the first attempts to study objectively the construct of attitudes

towards disabled people was by Mussen and Barker (1943) using a series of rating
scales. The authors sought to describe the beliefs of non-disabled respondents
toward the behavioral characteristics of physically disabled people, and to measure
the degree of positive attitudes. Twenty-four five-point rating scales were used to
depict presumed personality characteristics (for example, self-pity, friendliness,
self confidence) of both physically disabled and ideal persons. Degree of favorable

attitudes toward physically disabled people was derived from those ratings by
computing the differences between the ratings of the ideal and the disabled
individual on each of the scales.

Many of the attitude studies of the 1950s and early 1960s concerned the
sensory disability of blindness. Rusalem (1950, 1965) was the first to use a device
similar to an adjective checklist to study the physical, psychological and social
traits associated by respondents with blind people. Steinqisser (1954) constructed a
100-item rating scale with three response categories (agree, neutral, disagree) to
measure attitudes toward blindness. Basing their work on steingisser's (1954) scale
and on Fitting's (1954) adjustments to blindness attitude scale, Cowen, Underberg
and Verillo (1958) developed what is probably the first psychometrically sound
summated rating scale concerning attitudes toward a group of disabled people.
Their "Attitude to Blindness Scale" (AB) became a prototype of most of the
attitude scales which followed. At approximately the same time, Lukoff and
Whiteman (1959) developed their own scales to measure attitudes toward
blindness.

Antonak (1980) suggested that a more contemporary, easy-to use, and

psychometrically sound instrument was needed by researchers investigating
attitudes toward disabled people as a group. The Scale of Attitudes Toward
Disabled Persons (SADP) was developed by Antonak (1981, 1982) as an
alternative to the Attitude Towards Disabled Persons (ATDP Form-O), for the
investigation of questions concerning the formation, correlates, and modification
of attitudes. This was the instrument used for the present study; detailed
information about it is provided in the methodology portion of this paper.

During the mid-1980s, a conference on attitudes toward people with

disabilities was held at Hofstra University. The conference agenda was organized
by professor Harold E. Yuker, one of the authors of the Attitude Toward Disabled
Persons Scale and Director of the Center for the Study of Attitudes Towards
Persons with Disabilities at Hofstra University. Professor Yuker edited and
published the conference manuscripts; the resulting publication is now considered
a significant resource for contemporary researchers investigating topics in the
attitude domain (Yuker, 1987).

However Attitude is a complex concept that is difficult to examine and

measure. There is no universally agreed upon definition of attitudes. There is
consensus that expressing attitudes involves making an evaluative judgment about
an attitudes object" (Haddock, 2004, p. 155). Sometimes how one describes their
own attitudes matches behavior and sometimes it does not (Haddock, 2004). In
spite of this difficulty in correctly understanding attitudes, knowing one's attitudes
is critically important for future modification of behavior (Jones, 1984). Attitudes,
as well as manifestations of attitudes, can be complicated by peer group pressures,
the desire to please, ambivalence, inconsistency and lack of self-awareness.

Henerson (1987) highlights four precautions that are important to keep in

mind when evaluating attitudes. :
1. Because attitudes are impossible to measure directly, one must rely on
inference.
2. It is misleading to focus on a single manifestation of attitudes because
behaviors, beliefs, and feeling may not match. Thus, it may be helpful to look
at attitudes from multiple perspectives.
3 . Attitudes change, therefore, any attitudes measurement reflects only a single

moment in time.
4. One must bear in mind that not everyone may have the same concept about
what a certain attitude is.

"Historically, direct measures of attitudes have dominated the empirical

literature on the psychology of attitude" (Haddock, 2004, p. 160). Berenson (1987)
identified surveys as an appropriate approach to measure attitudes, especially when
the people whose attitudes being investigated are able to understand the questions
and are likely to answer honestly. Past research generally used surveys in
measuring attitudes. In studies examining teachers' attitudes towards inclusion, the
survey was the most frequently used tool in measuring attitudes. As Table 3
shows, all the cited studies used surveys for measuring teachers' attitudes except
for one. The one alternative methods to surveys found in Table 2. 3 were the
Nomination Technique, which requires teachers to nominate their students
according to prompts corresponding to the attitudinal categories of attachment,
indifference, and rejection.

Table 2. 3 Comparison of Methods used to Evaluate Teacher's Attitudes

No.
Instrumentations
Method
Author
Date
Attitudes towards Disabled
Yuker, Harole &
Survey
1966
1.
2.

Persons Scale (ATDP)

The Nomination Technique

Nomination

3.

The Educational Attitudes

Survey

Survey

4.

Attitudes
toward
Mainstreaming Scale

Survey

5.

Survey

11.

Scale of Attitudes toward

Disabled Persons (SADP)
Teachers' Attitudes toward
Inclusion (T ATI)
The Opinions Relative to
Integration of Students with
Disabilities Scale
The College Students'
Attitudes Scale towards the
Handicapped
Scale of Teachers' Attitudes
toward
Inclusive
Classrooms (STATIC)
The
Interaction
with
Disabled Persons Scale
Self -Created Survey

12.

Mainstreaming Inventory

Survey

13.

The Opinions Relative to

Integration of Students with
Disabilities Scale
Attitudes towards Children
with Severe Emotional
Disturbance

Survey

Interaction with Disabled

Persons Scale (IDPS)

Survey

6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

14.

15.

Survey
Survey
Survey
Survey
Survey
Survey

Survey

Block, J.R.
Good,
T.
&
Brophy, J
Reynold, William
M. & Greco,
Victor T.
Green, K., Rock,
D.
L.,&
Weisenstein; G R
Antonak, R. F,
Cochran,
Keith
Antonak
Larrivee

1972
1980
1983
1985

H.

1993

&

1995

Samadi, Ahmad
& Sartawi, Abdul
Aziz
Cochran,
H.
Keith

1995

Tait,
Kathleen,
Purdie, Nola
Opdal, Liv Randi
& Wormnaes Siri
Shade, Richard &
Stewart, Roger
Cook, Bryan G.

2000

Minor,
Scott,
Acheson, Shawn,
Kane, Harrison,
Calahan,
Erin,
Leverntz, Kristen,
Pasden, Amy, &
Wegener,
Melanie
Thomas, Adrian,
Palmer, Jerry K,
Coker-Juneau,
Carla
J.
&
Williams, David
J.

2002

1999

2001
2001
2002

2002

Research Variable of Teachers' Attitudes :

The United States, one of the leading countries in the field of special
education, has done extensive research (e.g., Downs, 2003) on teachers' attitudes
and how these attitudes affect students with special needs. Miller and Sammons
(1999) examined the development of attitudes early in life as a result of an
individual's experiences, both positive and negative. They state that attitudes can
be changed, which contrasts to the opinion of some researchers who argue that an
attitude develops early in life and permanently imprints into an individual's
behavior. Miller and Sammons promote observing the kinds of differences among
people .- unfamiliar, unexpected, unsettling, and mixed reactions - that help form
our attitudes, and then tuning into these differences. After careful examination of
the reasons underlying attitudes about differences deliberate efforts can change
negative attitudes and behaviors to positive attitudes and behaviors.

It is important to determine teachers' attitudes toward students with special

needs. Some researchers (Alghazo, Dodeen, & Algaryouti,2003) have observed
that teachers' attitudes toward students with special needs are negative. Other
studies (e.g., Barton, 1992) suggest that general and special education teachers'
attitudes determine whether an educational program succeeds or fails. Since
teachers' attitudes are essential and important to improve the education of students
with special needs, educators should enhance and motivate teachers' attitudes by
having more direct contact that increase their abilities through encouraging their
positive behavior to change their attitudes that help improving our goals toward
education and students with special needs (Smith, Price & Marsh, 1986).

Research studies (e.g., Loomos,200l) indicates that teachers' attitudes are

affected by variables such gender, education and teaching experience. These
categories are discussed in detail in the following sections.

Research Variable of Gender :

A number of studies (e.g., Alghazo, 2003) have attempted to measure
whether the teacher's gender in any way affects his or her attitudes or behaviors in
teaching towards special education students. Pearman, Huang, Barnhart, &
Mellblom (1992) examined the inclusion of special education students in the
general classroom. Their findings indicated that men had significantly more
negative opinions of inclusion than did female teachers.

In addition, Jobe,Rust & Brissie (1996) reported opposite findings

they distributed surveys to 500 regular classroom teachers. Of these, 182 surveys
were returned, with 162 being complete and useable for the study. Of the 162
respondents whose surveys were used, 117 were females and 45 were males.
Analyses of variance, factor analysis and correlations were used to determine the
relationship of gender, teaching experience, in-service training, and special
education teaching experience with attitudes about inclusion (Abstract, p.148).
They found no significant difference between men and women in their attitudes
towards inclusion. Men showed slightly more positive attitudes than women. The
researchers also noted that men were significantly more confident than women in
their assessment of their ability to teach students with disabilities. Shaila (2004)
conducted literature review of teacher attitudes towards disabled students
according to four criteria: (1) attitudes as a construct; (2) views on attitudes
towards disabilities; (3) measurement of attitudes toward disabilities; (4) variables
that influence faculty at colleges and universities (p. 192). Shaila found the

females teachers' attitudes were affected by their gender, while another study
found that gender did not have any effect on the attitudes of faculty members
(McGee, 1989, Schoen, Usyal, & McDonald, 1986). Downs also (2003) found no
significant difference in teachers' attitudes towards the student's gender.

Results of Teachers' Attitudes and Gender:

In Arabic countries of Jordan and United Arab Emirates, Alghazo,
Dodeen, & AIgaryouti (2003) measured the attitudes of 227 male and 370 female
pre-service teachers. They found no significant difference in attitude based on
gender. Based on their study, they reported that "both males and females held
negative attitudes towards persons with disabilities (p. 510)."

In another study in the Unite Arab Emirates, AIghazo, Naggar, & Eman
(2004) measured the opinions of 64 male and 88 female teachers to assess their
attitudes toward including persons with disabilities in the regular classroom. They
found that males had less positive attitudes towards persons with disabilities in the
regular classroom than did their female counterparts. These gender differences
were significant.

In Saudi Arabia , Al-Abdul-Jabbar (1994) conducted a study of integration

of children with different disabilities in ordinary schools at primary, intermediate
and secondary levels in Saudi schools. A sample of 221 female/male
administrators and teachers was chosen from public schools in Riyadh. The study
showed that female teacher and administrators had more positive attitudes than
male teachers and administrators.

In Kuwait, Abdulrahim (1987) measured principals' attitudes, and his

findings showed no significant difference between male and female principals.

The issue of gender also considers whether male or female teachers are more
likely to refer students for special education services. McIntyre (2003) measured
teacher gender in a study in which 64 elementary schoolteachers were asked to
complete the Child Behavior Checklist (CBC) upon referring a student for special
education services (p. 382). Additionally, 32 teachers who hadn't referred any
students during the same

school year were also asked to complete a CBC,

selecting one student they would refer if they had to make a selection. Of92
responses, 25 respondents were males and 67 respondents were females. Analyses
included chi square interpretations, which showed that when students with high
levels of problem behavior are considered for referral, male teachers are much
more likely than females to decide not to refer. However, "when students with low
levels of problem behavior are considered for referral, the decisions of male and
female teachers do not differ (p. 382),"

In summary, researcher Alghazo et al. (2003); Alghazo et al. (2004);

Al-Abdul-Jabbar (1994), and Abdulrahim (1987) provide conflicting findings on
the topic of gender and whether it affects teachers' attitudes towards special
education students. This further underscores the need for updated study in this
topic because of the conflicting results of the studies cited above.

Research Variable of Teachers' Attitudes about Education/ Training :

AI-Abdulghafour (1999) examined teachers' and parents' attitudes towards
special education programs in Kuwait, and reported that the majority of
respondents indicated the need for in-service training as a priority.

Alghazo, Dodeen, & Algaryouti, (2003) used two questionnaires to

examine 597 pre-service education students from three Jordan universities and one
United Arab Emirates university. The first instrument was a demographic
questionnaire, which examined gender, amount of contact with persons with
disabilities, educational background and culture. Through this questionnaire, the
authors found that the educational background of pre-service teachers affected
their attitudes towards persons with disabilities. Students from the Colleges of
Education and Humanities demonstrated more positive attitudes than did their
peers in the College of Science. Alghazo et al. suggested that the result may be due
to the fact that students in the Colleges of Education and Humanities are required
to take courses that deal with educational approaches. The content of these courses
concentrate on individual differences and student characteristics, "while students
in the College of Science are not required to take such classes (p. 518)." Alghazo
et al. also administered the Attitudes Towards Disabled Persons (ATDP) scale,
which consists of 20 items that use a 6-point Liker scale.

Alghazo et al. also reported on earlier studies done in the United States
whose findings showed that the attitudes of pre-service and in-service teachers and
the amount of education and academic preparation they receive in teaching
students with disabilities determine the success of inclusion (Wilczenski, 1991).
Alghazo et al. summarize their study by stating that in order to achieve successful
inclusion, "teachers must receive adequate preparation(p. 516)." Alghazo et al.
suggest that, "teacher education programs prepare future teachers to accept
students with disabilities and to provide them with the necessary skills to work
effectively with these students (p. 520)." These same authors report that the United
Arab Emirates University has sought special education accreditation from the
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). As a result,

"the University now requires that all students take an introductory course in special
education entitled Education of Exceptional Children (p. 521 )."

Loomos (2001) surveyed 84 inservice teachers in a large metropolitan

school in the United States; of these, 69 surveys were returned. The three-part
survey consisted of: (1) demographic component (gender, age, race, education,
grade level taught, teaching experience, amount of interaction with persons with
disabilities); (2) open-ended questions that asked about teachers concerns for
inservice training and successful applications they had used; (3}the Opinions
Relative to Integration of Students (ORI) questionnaire. The hypotheses were
tested using ANOVA and t-tests. Although significant findings were not revealed,
Loomis did note trends in the responses of the participants between the ORI
responses and age, race, experience, and external exposure to persons with
disabilities. The respondents spoke of the value of support personnel such as
parents, aids and other students. In addition, the respondents cited the need for
inservice training to focus on needed curriculum modifications. Other training
areas in which these inservice teachers wished to receive additional training
included behavior management techniques, disability specific information, and
building collaborative relationships.

Boucier (2003) suggests that the attitudes of general education teachers

regarding the inclusion of students with special needs in the general education
classroom are affected by exposure to working with students with special needs.
Boucier used a two-part questionnaire to survey 19 general education teachers to
learn about their experience with and attitudes towards students with special needs.
The first part of the questionnaire consisted of demographic information (number
of years of teaching experience, subject taught, and gender). The second part of the

questionnaire consisted of 28 research questions aimed to probe the teachers'

beliefs about feelings of competency and experience. The questionnaire employed
a 4-point Likert scale to measure responses. Boucier found that the more exposure
teachers have towards challenged students, the more positive are their attitudes.
Boucier's findings were that general education teachers generally hold negative
attitudes towards inclusion of students with special needs in their classrooms.
These results show that increased teacher training and exposure to special
education needs and students is needed.

Trzcinka (1998) conducted a study in 87 schools in a large metropolitan

city in the United States in 87 schools, three of which contained classes. for 6-l3year-old children with MMR .The aim of the study was to "investigate the impact
of consultancy feedback, teacher participation, and feedback on curriculum change
and the attitude of teachers toward that curriculum change (p. 130). Data collection
consisted of a field study approach, in which audio cassette recordings were taken
of task force meetings and curriculum development sessions. Additionally,
documents such as intradepartmental letters and memoranda were analyzed. These
data sources were coded and patterns of occurrences were observed and recorded.
As a final step, both structured and open-ended interviews were conducted with
administrators, special education teachers and consultants. Data analysis consisted
of content analysis of categories that were established to measure trends over time,
and changes within and between groups. Trzcinka's findings Were that "when
teachers saw the benefit of a new curriculum reflected in their students' increased
skills in community living, teachers' attitudes changed" (p. 137). Trzcinka
summarized her findings with the following statements:
1.When teachers are involved in not only technical instructional policy types of
decisions, but also managerial, community and building types of decisions, these

decisions lead to teacher's attitude change.

2.When

teachers

participate

in

formal

committees,

make

committee

recommendations to administrators, while administrator makes the decision, a

change in attitude occurs.
3. When teachers share decisions with administrators, change in curriculum
occurs, and anew curriculum is developed.
4.Feedback from substantive external consultants affects teachers' attitudes.
5.Feedback from process internal consultants is least important in affecting
teachers' attitudes.
6.Feedback from substantive external consultants affects a change in curriculum
and leads to the operationalization of the new curriculum.
7.Feedback from process internal consultants has little or no effect on a change in
curriculum (p. 139).

Research Variable of Teachers' Attitudes and Teaching Experience

In Arab and other countries, the number of years experience in the
classroom was found to be an important factor that affects teachers' attitudes. To
assess teacher attitudes towards persons with disabilities in the regular classrooms,
AIghazo et al. (2004) measured experience according to three scales (one to five
years, six to 11 years, and 12 years and over). Each Likert scale was scored from 1
"strongly agree" to 5 "strongly disagree" They found significant results between
teachers with one to five years' teaching experience and those with six to 11 years,
and between teachers with six to 11 years and those with 12 years and more. Using
Tukey post-hoc analysis they noted that teachers with one to five years experience
show more positive attitudes towards the inclusion of students with mental
disabilities, as well as students with hearing disabilities, than teachers with six or

more years' experience. Further they found that teachers with greater than 12 years
experience show more positive attitudes towards students with both specific
learning disabilities and visual impairments. In short, the number of years of
teaching experience influenced the teachers' acceptance of inclusion within the
regular classroom. As teachers gained more experience in teaching, their
acceptance increased, while less experienced teachers showed lower levels of
acceptance for inclusion (AIghazo, Dodeen, & Algaryouti, 2003).

Other findings also show that teachers with seven or more years of
teaching experience were more willing to include students with disabilities than
did teachers with (0-6) years of teaching (Cook, Tankersley, Cook, & Landrum,
2000). These authors measured seventy general education teachers from
kindergarten through sixth grade and used chi-square analyses to examine whether
students with disabilities were over- or under-represented according to specific
categories (effective of teaching experience, formal training, personnel support,
and class size). Independent variables in this study were years of teaching
experience in an inclusive classroom, number of special education courses at the
college level attained by the teacher, aver number of weekly hours collaborating
with special education personnel outside the classroom, average number of hours
special education personnel were present inside the classroom, and class size.

Hodgson (1999) examined public school K-12 physical education teachers

and the relationship of their attitudes toward students with disabilities at varying
grade levels and selected teacher attributes. The study attempted to (1) find
whether their attitudes vary according to the disabling condition when working
with disabled students in regular classes; (2) whether their attitudes vary according
to different grade levels (K-5 or 6-12);and (3) whether their attitudes vary in

relation to different teacher attributes, including gender, amount of training in

special education, and amount of experience in special education. Included in her
study were 43 female and 53 male teachers who responded to a 12-item
questionnaire. Among the last criteria measured (teacher attributes), gender and
amount of education were not found to be significant variables. However, it was
found that the number of years teaching physical education inversely affected the
teachers' attitudes toward working with learning-disabled students. This finding
does not concur with other findings reported above; other studies have suggested
that greater experience leads to improved attitudes towards special education
students.

Olson (2003) reports that teachers' attitudes become more positive with
increased positive experiences with students with special needs in their classroom.
According to Shade and Stewart (2001), teachers report frustration, burden, fear,
and inadequacies when they do not believe that they have the abilities to meet the
individual needs of students with special needs.

Studies such as these show that teachers gain knowledge throughout

their experiences in schools or in other educational. environments, and many
researchers have indicated the relationship between teachers' knowledge and
experience and their acceptance or resistance towards inclusion of special needs in
their classrooms (Sack, 1998; Taylor, Richards, Goldstein, & Schilit, (1997);
Gallagher, 1985).

Overall Findings Related to the Researcher's Study :

A number of research studies, as described in the preceding section,
attest to the effect of variables such as gender, education and amount of experience
on the attitudes of special education teachers, which are the same variables that
this researcher measured in the present study. In summary, this researcher believes
these findings support the premise that extensive classes are needed at the college
level to teach students about attitudes and behaviors, exposing them to a variety of
situations in which special needs children can benefit from their positive attention.
This premise is supported by the findings reported above. It is difficult to change
attitudes. For teachers, this means hard work and commitment to creating a
classroom environment in which a teacher who has a positive attitude towards all
students will teach every single student, regardless of his or her abilities. As Miller
and Sammons (1999, p. 310) observe, "Disability diversity is a permanent feature
of our world." In recognizing the fact that student diversity exists, and that such
diversity includes special needs children, Saudi Arabia will ensure that 'no child
will be left behind.'

Family Support:
As noted earlier, family support has also proven to be an important
component of special education programs themselves (AI-Abdulghafour, 1999).
Loomos (2001) surveyed 69 educators who reported that support personnel, which
includes parents, are a very useful resource when integrating students with
disabilities into the general education environment. Many parents who take on the
challenge of their children with special needs provide support to the special
education teachers who teach their children. Campbell, Strickland, and LaForme
(1992) also reported progress in the development of students with special needs as

a result of their parents' involvement.

Cultural background has been found to be a factor in the level of support

families extend in special education programs. Since family support for special
education is vital, it is important to recognize how different cultures view
disabilities so that parent-teacher collaboration can be improved. Moll (1992)
states that a family's cultural background can be a source of knowledge for
teachers. Teachers should use the family to enhance special education
programming.

Garcia, Mendez-Perez, & Ortiz (2000) noted that minority families did not
get as involved in special education programs. This could be due to cultural and
language barriers. According to Lynch and Stein (1987), Anglo families are more
involved in their children's disabilities that are both Latino and African American
families. Latinos have a high regard for teachers and feel they are the ones best
able to deal with their children's problems.

Another aspect of family support is the use of parents of children with

disabilities as parent educators. Gallagher, Rhodes, and Darling (2004) constructed
a state model of early intervention which used parents of young children with
disabilities as parent educators. The parent educator model used one parent as the
program coordinator. Other parents were hired part time as collaborators between
agencies so that parents can know about needed resources and services for their
young children as early as possible.

Gallagher, Rhodes, and Darling also cite the work of Winton and
DiVenere (1995) who discussed four ways in which families of special needs

children can be involved in early intervention: parents as instructors, parents as

practicum supervisors, parents as team participants in staff development, and
parents and planners and policymakers. These authors stress the need to have a
variety of family involvement options because each family has unique
circumstances, and different families may want to become involved at differing
levels of participation.

Rose, Rain forth, and Steere (2003) noted with regard to the IEP that
"because family members are typically one of the most enduring sources of
support, their involvement in secondary education is essential" (p.173). Gavin,
Nelson, Purnell-Hall, and Summers (2003) report that ''the development of a
comprehensive plan for inclusion and school reform should incorporate a synthesis
of thinking and practice with respect to family-school relationships"(p.417). They
feel that parents should be the primary decision maker with regard to developing
an educational plan for their children. Educators must take into consideration that
the parents may have stress and high emotions in dealing with a child's special
needs; therefore, educators must be sensitive to parent needs. These researchers
state that good communication between parents and school personnel is essential
and that the best format for special education needs is "informal, regular, and
positive" (p. 427). They, as did Garcia, Mendez-Perez, & Ortiz (2000) report that
culture plays an important role in the family-school relationship.

In discussing the concept of inclusion of special education children in the

regular classroom, Monahan et al. (1996) report that everyone, including parents,
teachers and administrators must buy into the concept of full inclusion (p. 317).

Inclusion Practices of Pupils with Special Needs into Regular

Classroom Versus Separation
Monahan, Marino and Miller (1996) define inclusion as a "term used by the
education reform movement to challenge schools to the philosophy that all
students can learn, even those with disabilities. The terms used in special
education literature prior to the reform movement were Least Restrictive
Environment (LRE) and mainstreaming" (p. 316). The authors further report that
inclusion has become a "buzz word" across the United States. Since the passage of
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142) and the
1990 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), students with special
needs are legally entitled to receive an array of services at the site they would
attend if they did not have special needs, and these services must be in the least
restrictive environment (p. 318).

Boucier(2003) also points out that the passage of The Education for All
Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142) prompted school districts in the
United States to shift towards a more inclusive model for their students with mild
to moderate special needs (Abstract). This law mandated that students with special
needs be educated in the least restrictive environment, in other words, the
environment where they are most likely to meet with success. For mild- to
moderately-disabled students, the general education classroom provides such an
environment.

Brodsky (2001)reports that today, greater than six million disabled students
are educated in the United States, which comprises 11 % of total public school
enrollment

Given this large number, issues related to inclusion of disabled

students in the regular classroom have received considerable research attention.

Alkhaldi et a1. (2002), in a case study of including students with slow

learning and Down Syndrome students in the regular classroom, surveyed 20
sociologists and ten therapists in 12 inclusion elementary and intermediate schools.
Researchers used SPSS to analyze the survey, which consisted of five sections
with open-ended questions. These researchers found that respondents held positive
attitudes towards inclusion of students with special needs in general classrooms.

Katz & Mirenda (2002) reported that "Most research studies that have
studied the relationship between class placement and educational outcomes have
found positive effects for inclusion (p. 15)."

Al-Abdulghafour (1999) surveyed 447 administrations and teachers about

their attitudes toward inclusion of exceptional students in Kuwait elementary
schools. The survey consisted three sections: (1) administrators' and teachers'
attitudes toward inclusion in general, (2) administrators' and teachers' attitudes
toward physical, mental, hearing, and visual disabilities, and (3) administrators'
and teachers' attitudes toward the problems of inclusion. AI-Abdulghafour found
negative attitudes by administrators and general teachers toward including students
with special needs in general classrooms. However, the study found that inclusion
provides exceptional students with opportunities for positive interaction with
normal students. Al-Abdulghafour's study reported that students with physical and
visual disabilities were more accepted than other students with other disabilities.

High school teachers are expected to support inclusion. However,

teachers' beliefs and attitudes toward having students with disabilities in their
classes may affect the quality of the inclusive education (Van-Reusen, Shoho, &
Barker, 2000). To lessen teachers' negative attitudes toward inclusion, it is

important for teachers to have a significant amount of contact with students with
disabilities. The more teachers know, the more likely they are to work better with
inclusion education (Smith, Price, and Marsh, 1986 as cited in Van-Reusen,
Shoho, & Barker, 2000).

Van- Reusen, Shoho, & Barker conducted a study to determine if experience

level, content area, gender, or prior special education experience had any effect on
teachers' attitudes toward inclusion. They found that teachers who had adequate to
high levels of special education training had more positive attitudes toward having
students with special needs in their classes. The teacher's<gender, years teaching,
and content area had no effect of his /her attitude toward inclusion. These
researchers further noted that 54% of their respondents had a negative attitude
toward inclusion. This may be a result of the lack of inclusion information in
teacher preparation programs. To solve this problem, the authors suggest that
schools provide on-going development programs and not simply a one-day
workshop. Teachers also need time to network with each other on how to better
serve students with special needs.

Jobe, Rust and Brissie (1996) studied a nationwide group of diverse teachers
with respect to their attitudes about inclusion. They looked at gender, number of
years teaching, special education experience, and inclusion in-service training.
Interestingly, they found that teachers held more positive attitudes toward students
with physical disabilities as opposed to those with cognitive, emotional, or
behavioral problems. In contrast to a study by Leyser and Tappendorf (2001), this
study reported that male teachers viewed inclusion more positively than did
females. Years of teaching did not make a difference, however. If teachers had had
more in-service experience regarding inclusion, they had a more positive attitude

toward inclusion. They conclude that more research needs to be done on teachers'
attitudes toward inclusion.

Leyser and Tappendorf (200l) in their study of teachers' attitudes and

practices toward mainstreaming in rural school districts found that the teachers did
not greatly favor inclusion but, on the other hand, nor did they have a negative
attitude toward mainstreaming. They state that teachers who had three or more
courses in mainstreaming had a better grasp of teaching strategies needed for
children with special needs. Gender was also found to be a factor since female
teachers used more varied teaching methods for special needs students than did
male teachers.

Once again, it seems that the way to improve inclusion education is in the
better preparation of teachers in both pre-service and in-service education. Time is
needed for teachers to collaborate with other teachers and with school personnel.

Monahan, Marino and Miller's (1996) study evaluated teachers' attitudes

toward inclusion in South Carolina. They found through surveys that teachers felt
that special needs students required more attention and help than regular teacher
can provide. Seventy-five percent of teachers responding reported that they, as
regular teachers, did not have the necessary skills to teach special needs students.
They, as do other researchers, feel there is a need for ongoing teacher education in
order for inclusion education to succeed .

In Saudi Arabia, a number of special integration classes were opened in AlMohalab Bin Abi-Sofra School in Riyadh in 1997 by the Ministry of Education.
These classes accept only pupils who have minor disorders in hearing and speech,

and who either do not get a chance to join special institutions for the deaf, or are
unable to enrol in public schools (because of the public education policies which
do not allow children with such disabilities to join them).

Studies Related to Attitudes Of Saudi Special Educators:

The literature reviewed focused on the following studies:
1. Almarsouqi (1980) Investigated attitudes of society towards disabled people in

Saudi Arabia. The sample consisted of 13 male college teachers and 173 (l02 male
and 71 female) students enrolled in an introductory psychology class at the
College of Education in Makkah. The study examined the effect of gender,
contact, and education variables on the attitudes towards three disability groups,
visual impairment, hearing impairment, and mental retardation. The AttitudeBehavior Scale was used as a measurement tool. Research findings indicated that
attitudes were positive on the hypothetical level. On the stereotypical level,
attitudes were positive towards both visual and hearing impairment, but negative
attitudes were reported towards persons with mental retardation. Contact with
disabled persons was found to be significantly related to positive attitudes.

2. Dubis (1987) investigated attitudes of ordinary and special school teachers and

administrators towards educating children with visual and hearing impairments

and mental retardation in ordinary schools in Saudi Arabia. The total number
of subjects who participated in the study was 373 respondents. Two
instruments were used 1) the Attitude Behavior Scale- Deaf, Blind, Mentally
Retarded (ABS); and 2) the Mainstreaming Attitude Scale. The demographic
variables examined in this study were sex, age, educational level, location,
citizenship, specialization, and the type of institution.

The study results indicated that both special and ordinary educators were
positive in their attitudes toward integration of children with the three disabilities.
However, ordinary teachers showed more positive attitudes than special teachers
did, but with no significant differences. Minor differences were reported regarding
teaching experience and educational level This study also indicated that the contact
variable plays a significant role in the differences between the perceptions of
ordinary and special teachers related to attitudes towards the concept of
integration. No gender differences were reported regarding the attitudes towards
integration.

3.

Al-Sartawi and Jarrar (1988) explore the attitudes of administrators and

teachers in Saudi Arabia towards the most suitable setting for education services
for disabled children and their integration. The study included 2582 administrators
and teachers from both ordinary schools and special institutions. A questionnaire
was structured for this study which included six types of services relating to the
range of acceptance of integration. The main variables considered to measure the
degree of acceptance for integration were sex, degree of education, years of
experience, nature and place of job.

Special day schools followed by ordinary schools were selected to represent

the most suitable education settings for the deaf and blind children. Residential and
special schools were found to be the most preferable education settings for the
mentally retarded children. In this, study teachers in special schools and institutions
were more positive towards integration of the disabled, where the years of
experience and level of education of the directors play a major role in acceptance
of integration.

4. Al-Samadi and Alshinawi (1989) investigated the attitudes of a sample of 458

subjects, university students and teachers from special and ordinary schools in
Saudi Arabia towards physically disabled persons. Demographic variables such as
sex, grade level, and contact were examined. Scales for physically disablement and
social distance were used in this study. The study results indicated that there are no
significant differences among ordinary and special education teachers in their
attitudes toward disability.

5. Al-Shakhas (1990) stated the effect of knowledge about disability and the needs
of disabled peoples on the attitudes of lecturers and non-disabled peoples in
universities towards disabled students. He identifies concepts of knowledge of
disability and necessity of disability information programmes that affect the
attitudes. The researcher also reviewed the findings of the previous studies that
used information on concepts connected with individual differences, disabled
categories and characteristics of disability, and attitudes towards the disabled. The
study showed that the use of information programmes affects positively, to a
greater extent, the attitudes of teachers in ordinary schools towards disabled
students. This leads teachers to motivate non- disabled students to interact with
their disabled peers, and help them to integrate with them in the ordinary activities
at school.

6. Al-Abdul-Jabbar (1994) conducted a study of integration of children with

different disabilities in ordinary schools at primary, intermediate and secondary
levels in Saudi schools. He investigated administrators' and teachers' perceptions
about full integration of those children. A sample of 221 female/male
administrators and teachers was chosen from public schools in Riyadh. The study
showed that female teacher and administrators had more positive attitudes than

male teachers and administrators. The perception of most respondents of the

sample was positive towards full integration, especially for physically disabled
children. Their point of view was negative towards mentally disabled children.

7. Al-Dhaher (1995) investigated Saudi teachers' perceptions of the integration of

disabled students in ordinary classes in Saudi Arabia. The sample of this study
included 100 male and 100 female teachers in 6 male and 6 female schools. A
number of variables, such as age, educational level, years of educational
experience, services offered for disabled children at school, and the interaction
between teachers and parents were considered. The study revealed that the
perceptions of most of the male and female teachers towards integration were
negative. They did not approve of the integration process, and saw that it affects
the disabled children. This is not surprising, because primary schools are not ready
for the integration process, and there are no physicians' assistants or specialists
who carry out diagnosis for children to be integrated. There was no variation
between male and female teachers based on experience.

8.Al-Sartawi (1995) conducted a study in Saudi Arabia aimed at exploring the

attitudes of teachers and students towards integrating disabled students into
general education, to find out the disability category that is most likely for
integration in ordinary classes. The sample of the study comprised 349 teachers
and students from the faculty of specialized education. The study discussed the
integration concept, the requirements for the success of the process, and the
prerequisites needed before starting the process. The main findings of this study
are summarized here. In general, the attitudes of teachers and students towards
integration of disabled children in ordinary classes were negative. However,
teachers and students showed acceptance for the integration of the following

disability categories sequenced according to degree of acceptance diabetes,

physical disabled, sight weakness, speaking difficulties, hearing weakness. The
categories for which integration was rejected were sequenced as follows,
according to strong rejection: mental paralysis, deaf, mental retardation, epilepsy,
talking difficulty, and behavior disorder. The existence of statistically significant
variations in attitudes towards integration was due to the variables of
specialization, knowledge, relationship, and experience in teaching.

9. Al-Fayz (1997) investigated the attitudes of instructors and kindergarten

teachers towards integration of disabled children in pre-school educational
programmes in Saudi Arabia. The aim of this descriptive study was to investigate
the effectiveness of the participants' performance in such integration. The sample
was selected by a random sample procedure. It comprised 607 participants. They
were selected from public and private kindergartens in Riyadh. Different findings
were obtained in this study. Most of the teachers have neutral attitudes with few
positive attitudes towards integration. There were statistically significant
differences between the groups of the study in the following variables: first:
disability experience; second: training In dealing with disabled children; third:
familiarity with integration; last, educational level.

Some teachers in this study expressed their fear for the application of the
integration process. There were statistical differences in attitudes towards the
process and the supporting services between teachers, as a result of differences in
experience. Teachers who had experience in work with special needs children
showed more positive attitudes towards integration than those who did not work
with disabled children. Moreover, the study shows that there was a statistically
significant difference about the requirements for the integration process, in which

the supporting services represented the main factor.

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY

Chapter Overview
This chapter describes the survey approach used in the study. The population
employed, the adopted sampling strategy used in this survey and the research
methodology are also discussed.

Ethical considerations in the study:

Researchers are called upon to recognize their ethical responsibility in
raising and collaboratively addressing ethical issues affecting the research focus,
process and outcome, otherwise research can be fundamentally considered weak
(Deetz, 1985, p.254). This study deals with sensitive matters, therefore the
question or ethics is the one which has been carefully addressed at the beginning
and considered at each stage of the research project, starting from presenting the
research proposal and identifying the questions through to data collection,
analysis, and the interpretation of the findings. Ethical decisions are based on
several ethical principles which are accepted as key features of the research
project. These are confidentiality, informed consent, and access to records
(Kitchener, 1984; Hertz, 1996).

Confidentiality is a critical issue and must be respected. This is particularly

important where vulnerable individuals are involved and when such sensitive
topics are being studied, as is the case here. This procedure certainly reduces the
element of mistrust and encourages the respondents to co-operate with the

researcher. The confidentiality and rights of the respondents have been respected
in this study. However, the researcher may be allowed to disclose some of the
confidential information to the schools' head teachers, with the appropriate consent
of the participant. Another exception is in the case of some clear and imminent
danger to human life (Blocher, 1987, p. 26).

The capacity of individuals to give freely their informed consent to the

research is a core principle in research ethics:
" Regardless of the information divulged, research participants should be

able to trust the investigator to protect their welfare. The depth of this
trust should increase in proportion to the degree of shared intimacy and
respondent vulnerability " (Ramos, 1989, p.59 )
Under certain conditions where it is likely that the capacity for freely-given
informed consent might be diminished, the author should be aware that he has
additional duty of care to the potential participants. For example, in the study, the
subjects have not been asked to give a consent to anything that might clearly not
be in their best interest. The questionnaire was designed so that the questions are
carefully and sensitively phrased to avoid alienating respondents. However,
potential respondents were made aware of the powerful issues raised by the
questionnaire prior to agreeing to participate. For instance, the goals of the social
model of disability and the significance of educating disabled children in a proper
way.

With regard to access to the sample of this study, the researcher sought
consent from head teachers and local education authorities. Also the researcher
asked head teachers for permission to access related documents and it was
emphasized that the confidentiality of these records would be maintained.

Therefore the researcher could not initiate her researcher until the consent was
received at the beginning of the research project.

Since this research involves the collection, analysis, interpretation and

presentation of data, we also needed to recognize that certain points from the codes
of conduct set up by the Ministry of Educational regarding ethical standards are
relevant, in order to maintain the confidentiality of data collected of individuals
and groups, record information accurately, report the findings of the research
appropriately.

Site Description :
The study took place in Riyadh city in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).

Populations:
The population from which the sample of the present study was selected
comprised the female and male teachers in special education schools. It should be
noted that the study covered only the special education schools for girls and boys .
female teachers and male teachers from special education schools were involved in
the study.

Sampling strategy:
It should be made clear that all educational settings in Saudi Arabia are
based on a sex segregated system. There are restrictions for males to be involved
directly with females' education. This is one of the Islamic regulations related to
female education. For the purpose of this study, it was necessary to obtain a
representative sample of teachers from special education schools .

The aim was to give every member of the research population an equal
chance to be selected for the random sample, i.e. the non-zero probability of being
selected. The random sampling technique was applied in the case of the teachers in
the special education schools in Riyadh city. All the names of female and male
teachers were collected, each name written on a piece of paper and put in a
container, and the names were drawn one by one until the required number for the
sample was reached, which is 600.

Research method:
In general, any study should follow at least one methodology and explore it.
Also, research questions should be answered with appropriate research methods.
Harvey (1990) believed that 'methodology' is understood to be the general
principle behind research, and 'research method' is used to refer to the actual
practice of research in terms of techniques. To fulfil the purpose of this study and
to meet the study's objectives, an exploratory approach was adopted to investigate
the attitudes of the research sample. From a sociological point of view, the social
survey is one of the main methods of data collection that embodies the key
features of quantitative research (Bryman, 1996).

A survey instrument was developed based on the previous research studies

on attitudes towards pupils with special needs. The social survey model needed for
the data collection process for this research was mainly based on questionnaires
administered to the respondents involved. In 1993, Hague proposed that the
questionnaire is the most appropriate instrument when dealing with attitudes and
opinions. A further factor is the kind of respondents involved in the study. There
are certain specific skills needed in completing the questionnaire. Selfadministered questionnaires are considered suitable for the type of sample in this

study.
An additional advantage is the absence of interviewer bias (Rubin and
Babbie, 1993). With regard to this research problem which deals with sensitive
matters, avoidance of response bias is highly important, so self-administered
questionnaires allow the respondent to answer the questions freely without any
interference from the researcher which may induce bias. All of these
considerations have influenced the decision to use a questionnaire-based survey as
a data collection instrument, and rendered this method suitable for the exploration
of the attitudes of special teachers.

The questionnaire comprised several questions that were designed to seek

and collect information and data from participants regarding their perceptions of
pupils with SEN. Question content was clearly identified on the basis of the
literature review and document analysis, as well as preliminary interviews with the
children, their parents, administrators, and teachers. The survey consisted of three
subsections: teacher demographic information, teachers' attitudes, and family
support. The demographic portion of the survey contained items about teachers'
age, education, and years of experience with pupils with special needs. The
questions for the attitudes domain solicited teachers' attitudes toward education of
pupils with special needs which consisted of 39 Likert-type items (Likert, 1932).
Items, questions, and/or styles modified from different previous studies have been
utilized in the instruments of this study.

Measurement method :
In order to obtain an accurate attitudinal measurement, attitudinal questions
need to be expressed in a form of words in a scale that is meaningful to the
respondents (Oppenheim, 1999). Questions of such type were used in this survey,

and the questionnaire was used as an attitudinal measurement instrument to

explore the general views of the respondents towards education of pupils with
SEN in special education schools, in Riyadh city in Saudi Arabia.

There are many different types of scales, some of which require quite
complex construction and analysis. Thurston and Guttmann scales in particular
require careful handling. The most straightforward attitude scale is probably the
Likert, which is considered to be the simplification of the Thurston (Bell, 1999). It
is frequently used in attitude measurement in psychological and educational
studies (Oppenheim, 1999). In this method, an individual is requested to respond
to a number of statements, which are related to the attitude of subjects. The
individual shows his/her response to these sentences in relation to four strengths of
feeling. These are strongly agreed, agree , disagree and strongly disagree. Most
people prefer this method for its simplicity, high degree of stability, and because it
shows as precisely as possible the degree of individual attitude (Bell, 1999). The
use of the Likert scale has therefore been adopted in the questionnaires of the
present study.

Structure of questionnaire survey:

This survey depends on a structured questionnaire. Self-administered
questionnaires were used and sent by mail to the research subjects. As a mailed
questionnaire, there is a question of what return can be expected. Response rates
need to be considered and missing data can be a problem, which must be avoided
if possible. Factors affecting the final responses have been considered. These
factors are related to the type of population, the length of questionnaire, questions
concerning other individuals, and the use of a special class of mail or telephone on
the subsequent contact (Heberlein and Baumgartner, 1978). Repeated mailing and

telephone contact have been used as far as possible, in order to continue to

increase response rate. Finally, to avoid any missing data, each statement was
rephrased as necessary in order to remove ambiguity and to ensure that each
statement dealt with a single item (Robson, 1996).

Questionnaire contents:
The questionnaire was divided into three sections. Each section is aims to
obtain different information related to participants' personal information and their
attitudes ( see Appendix A ).
1. teacher demographic information : In the first section of the questionnaire, 11
items about personal information were included. These cover the age,
nationality, sex, educational level, years of experience, current position, and
specialization. This part aims to examine the effect of the background variables
on the attitudes of the respondents towards education of pupils with special
needs.
2. Teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs : The
second section of the questionnaire included 29 items. These items are
intended to examine participants' attitudes towards education of pupils with
special needs.
3. Family support and services : The 3ed section of the questionnaire included
10 items. These items are intended to examine participants' attitudes towards
Family support.

Procedure of data collection:

Before the distribution of the questionnaires to the participants, the
questionnaire items were translated in to Arabic. The translated instrument was

sent to two professors at The King Saud University who are experts in Curriculum
and Instruction and Special Education and who could establish questionnaire
validity. Validity refers to the degree to which an instrument measures what it is
intended to measure. The investigator's advisors share a combined total of more
than thirty years' experience with test instruments; one professor having achieved
his doctorate in 1980, while the other achieved his doctorate in 1992. Both have
demonstrated expertise through numerous years of research and publications.
These professors were able to evaluate the items on the questionnaire to establish
content validity. Through several steps, the above-mentioned professors
established both content validity. Then the translated instrument was sent to three
Arabic language specialists in the Ministry of Education to test its face validity.
Modification was done according to the specialist's comments. To test the
consistency of the questionnaires, they were administered to 14 teacher in the
special education schools . Consequently, minor modification was made before the
final Arabic version (Appendix B) was printed and distributed to 600 teachers in
special education schools. Table 3.1 gives numbers of distributed and returned
questionnaires and the response rate for teachers in special education schools. A

response rate of over 67% can be regarded as satisfactory in a mail survey This
study was conducted in the Riyadh educational district of Saudi.

Table 3.1: Numbers of Distributed and Returned Questionnaires and Response

Rate
Number distributed

Number returned

Response rate

600

404

67.3%

Data Analysis Procedures:

After receiving the completed surveys from the 404 of 600 participants in the
study, the data were coded in accord with the Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS for Windows, version 12.0.2). Each question was coded by
number, representing the numbers as found on the survey. For example, Question
#1 was Gender, and coded as 1 and 2, representing 1 (male) and 2 (female), based
on the response. Appendix C illustrates the coding treatment assigned to each
question in the survey.

Treatment of missing data was handled in the following manner. After

coding the data into the computer, all statements/questions left unanswered (i.e.,
blank) became missing data. Following methods of Roderick & Donald (2002) for
treating missing data this researcher used list wise deletion for the regression
analysis. Following the procedures of Roderick and Donald, all missing data are
excluded from tabulation. The Roderick and Donald method was used because it
reduces biased other biased procedures used in these situations such as substitution
of means for missing items.

Table 3.2 below shows how the data were analyzed to answer the research
questions in this dissertation study.

Table 3.2 Research Questions and Methods of Data Analysis

NO

Research Questions
What are the attitudes of Saudi special
education teachers toward education of
pupils with special needs?
Does teacher's gender have an impact on
attitudes toward education of pupils with
special needs?
Does teacher's education/training have an
impact on attitudes toward education of
pupils with special needs?
Does teacher's experience have an impact
on attitudes toward education of pupils with
special needs?

Methods of Data Analysis

Mean, Standard Deviation

t-test

One-Way Analysis of Variance

One-Way Analysis of Variance

Prior to analysis of data for the research questions factor analysis was used to
identify subscales for the attitude items.

Measures of mean, standard deviation, {-tests, and one-way ANOVA were

calculated to measure special education teachers' attitudes toward education of
pupils with special needs. Analysis of variance ANOVA and independent t test
{Glass & Hopkins, 1996) were calculated to determine if there were significant
differences in teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs.
Statistical. significant was established a prior at <.05 (2 tail test).

CHAPTER 4
THE RESULTS

This chapter includes several sections: introduction, teachers' demographic

characteristics, factor analysis of teachers , attitude items, general description of
teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs, differences in
teachers' attitudes by gender, education level, and teaching experience in general
and teaching experience special education. Each is presented in the following
paragraphs.

First the results chapter describes in detail the demographic characteristics of

the study sample participants. This section is followed by the factor analysis
results and the results of the descriptive statistics of the teachers' attitudes toward
education of pupils with special needs.

Different statistical tests were used to examine the statistical significance of

variables (e.g., teacher's gender, teacher's education/training, teacher's experience)
with their attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs.

Teachers' Demographic Characteristics :

The demographic information summarized in Table 4.1 indicates there were
404 teachers who participated and completed the SETA survey. All teachers who
participated work in special education schools in Riyadh city in Saudi Arabia.

Table 4.1 shows the results of teachers' gender, citizenship, age, highest level
of education, current position, and preferred school level There were 141 male
teachers (35%), and 262 female teachers (65%). There were 238 Saudi teachers
(61%), and 151 other citizenship teachers (38.7%). There were 17 teachers (5%)
between the ages of 21- 25 years, 62 teachers (18.1 %) between the ages of 26-30
years, 72 teachers (21.1 %) between the ages of 31-35 years, 85 teachers (24.9%)
between the ages of 36-40 years, and 106 teachers (31 %) 41 and older. There
were 91 teachers (23.1 %) with a diploma, 284 teachers (72.1 %) with a bachelor
degree, and .19 teachers (4.8%) with a post-bachelor degree. There were 2 teacher
aides (.5%), 363 teachers (89.9%), and 39 head teachers (9.7%). There were 68
teachers (18.8%) who prefer to teach. in the kindergarten level, 151 teachers
(41.7%) who prefer to teach in the elementary level, 85 teachers (23.5%) who
prefer to teach in the intermediate level, and 58 teachers (16%) who prefer to teach
in the high school level.

Table 4.1 Teachers' Demographic Characteristics of Gender, Nationality

, Age, Highest level of education , position, and preferred teaching level
Characteristic
Gender
n= 403
Nationality
n= 389

Age (yrs)
n= 402

Highest Level
of
Education
n=404
Current
Position
n=404
Preferred
Level of
Teaching
n=402

Male
Female
Saudi
Another country
21 - 25
26 - 30
31 - 35
36 - 40
41 & more
Diploma
Bachelor's degree
Post bachelor
Teacher aide
Teacher
Head teacher
Kindergarten
Elementary
Intermediate
High school

No. of Teachers

Valid Percent

141
262
238
151
17
62
72
85
106
91
284
19
2
363
39
68
151
85
58

35.0
65.0
61.0
38.7
5.0
18.1
21.1
24.9
31.0
23.1
72.1
4.8
.5
89.9
9.7
18.8
41.7
23.5
16.0

Teachers' Teaching Background :

The results inTab1e 4.2 show the total years of teaching experience in
general education, total years of teaching experience in special education, number
of disabilities taught, preferred type of disability to teach, and number of previous
special education courses.

Regarding teaching experience in general education, 148 teachers (36.6%)

had 0 -1 year of experience, 78 teachers (19.3%) had 2-5 years of experience, 84
teachers (20.8%) had 6-10 years of experience, 49 teachers (12.1%) had 11-15
years of experience, 26 teachers (6.4%) had 16-20 years of experience, and 19
teachers (4.7%) had 21 and more years of experience. About 56% had 5 or less

years of general teaching experience.

Regarding teaching experience in special education, 48 teachers (11.9%) had

0-1 year of experience, 126 teachers (31.2%) had 2-5. years of teaching experience
in special education, 127 teachers which is 31.4% had 6-10 years of experience, 49
teachers (12.1%)had 11-15 years of experience, 22 teachers (5%) had 16-20 years
of experience, and 31 teachers (7 .7%) had 21 and more years of experience.
About 43% had 5 or less years of special education teaching experience.

Table 4.2 summarized the specific number of disabilities taught. There were
173 teachers (44.6%) who taught one type of disability, 103 teachers (26.5%)
taught two types of disabilities, 50 teachers (12.9%) taught three types of
disabilities, 29 teachers (7.5%) taught four types of disabilities, five teachers
(1.3%) taught five types of disabilities, six teachers (1.5%) taught six types of
disabilities, one teacher (.3%) taught seven types of disabilities, and 20 teachers
(5.2%) taught eight types of disabilities.

Teachers were asked to indicate their preferred type of disability to teach. In

other words, students with which type of disability would you prefer to teach .
Table 4.2 data indicates there were 61 teachers (16.3%) who preferred to teach
students with hearing impairments, 55 teachers (14.7%) who preferred to teach
visual impairments, 59 teachers (15.7%) who preferred to teach mental retardation,
102 teachers (27.2%) who preferred to teach physical disability, 18 teachers
(4.8%) who preferred to teach autism, 25 teachers (6.7%) who preferred to teach
learning disability, and 39 teachers (10.4%) who preferred to teach Downs
Syndrome. There were 16 teachers (4.3%) who had no preference for teaching
students with a special type of disability.

Finally, teachers were asked to indicate their educational preparation in

special education. Table 4.2 data shows that there were 9lteachers (23.3%) who
had completed one course, 81 teachers (20.8%) who had 2-3 courses, 25 teachers
(6.4%) who had 4-5 courses, 20 teachers (5.1%) who had 6-7 courses, 22 teachers
(5.6%) who had more than seven courses, and 151 teachers (38.7%) who had
completed no formal course in special education.

Table 4.2 Teachers' Teaching Experience in General Education, Teaching

Experience in Special Education, Number of Disabilities Taught, Preferred
Type of Disability to Teach, previous special education courses
Characteristic

Years Teaching
Experience in
General
Education
N = 404

Years Teaching
Experience in
Special
Education
N = 403

Number of
Disabilities
Taught
N = 387

Preferred Type
of Disability to
Teach
N = 375

Number of
previous special
education
courses
N = 390

0-1
2-5
6 - 10
11 - 15
16 - 20
21 & more
0-1
2-5
6 - 10
11 - 15
16 - 20
21 & more
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
HI
VI
MR
PhD
Aut
LD
DoS
None
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
More than 7
None

No. of Teachers

Valid Percent

148
78
84
49
26
19
48
126
127
49
22
31
173
103
50
29
5
6
1
20
61
55
59
102
18
25
39
16
91
81
25
20
22
151

36.6
19.3
20.8
12.1
6.4
4.7
11.9
31.2
31.4
12.1
5.4
7.7
44.6
26.5
12.9
7.5
1.3
1.5
.3
5.2
16.3
14.7
15.7
27.2
4.8
6.7
10.4
4.3
23.3
20.8
6.4
5.1
5.6
38.7

Factor Analysis of Teachers' Attitudes Items :

The 29 Likert - scale items that assessed attitudes of special education
teachers towards education of pupils with special needs were subjected to
exploratory factor analysis in order to identify basic constructs (subscales) in the
29 items. A Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used as a measure of internal
consistency for the entire 29 items. It was calculated for all 29 items with the result
of Cronbach's alpha=0.875, which is acceptable (Miller, Salkind, 2002; Issac &
Michael, 1997).

The calculated Bartlett Test of Sphericity of 3579.539 ( p <.001 ) showed

that the correlation matrix was not an identity. Also, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
measure of sampling adequacy was calculated as .912 which exceeds the.7
criterion considered as acceptable by Kaiser 1974, (cited in SPSS, 1992). As a
result of these statistical assessments, it was decided to proceed with the factor
analysis.

The initial factor extraction using Principle Components Analysis

(orthogonal) resulted in a factor matrix with seven factors. Table 4.3 shows the
rotated (Varimax rotation) factor matrix with rotated factor loadings. The
researcher chose Varimax rotation because it results in a factor matrix with the
minimum number of variables with high loadings on a factor. For each factor,
summated Likert scale scores were computed, and then a Chronbach's alpha was
calculated to assess the internal consistency for each factor. The results follow in
Table4.4:

Table 4.3 Varimax Rotated Factor Martix : Teachers Attitudes Items by

Factors

Attitude
No.
Attit. 1
Attit. 2
Attit. 3
Attit. 4
Attit. 5
Attit. 6
Attit. 7
Attit. 8
Attit. 9
Attit. 10
Attit. 11
Attit. 12
Attit. 13
Attit. 14
Attit. 15
Attit. 16
Attit. 17
Attit. 18
Attit. 19
Attit. 20
Attit. 21
Attit. 22
Attit. 23
Attit. 24
Attit. 25
Attit. 26
Attit. 27
Attit. 28
Attit. 29

Factor
1
- .004
.119
.206
.180
.164
.110
.000
.268
.287
.268
.024
.226
.295
.385
.120
.378
.315
.577
.526
.528
.113
.433
.675
.761
.717
.120
.097
.263
.418

Factor
2
- .032
- .006
.366
.241
.215
.174
.387
.553
.398
.488
.760
.668
.549
.493
.183
.296
.196
.224
.027
.012
.020
.172
.298
.218
.158
.115
.085
.107
.127

Factor
3
.270
.661
.541
.686
.647
.257
.372
.249
.270
.044
- .044
.155
.254
.228
.026
.170
.160
.162
.175
.313
.191
.337
.015
.110
.080
.121
.049
.145
.275

Component
Factor
4
- .101
.166
.151
- .012
.221
.572
- .067
.042
.222
.133
.083
.165
.069
.194
.375
.408
.161
.073
.145
.193
.080
.405
.262
.069
.022
.143
.731
.381
.470

Factor
5
- .085
.089
.087
.186
- .199
- .388
.114
.036
- .342
- .045
.108
.069
.054
- .115
.460
.180
.130
.051
.480
.244
.107
.047
.014
- .037
.067
.683
.197
.239
.184

Factor
6
.056
- .075
- .115
- .075
.171
.176
.171
.000
- .123
- .102
.041
.056
.191
.017
- .003
- .026
.495
.269
.109
.116
- .741
- .042
- .066
.015
- .090
- .031
- .082
.377
.253

Factor
7
.697
.159
.136
.160
- .061
.119
- .379
- .035
.002
.509
- .028
.164
.011
- .032
.398
- .025
.259
.130
.035
.065
.083
- .019
.067
.053
- .001
- .140
- .004
- .074
- .054

Item underlined indicated that items belong to that factors.

Note: Factor One Items:
1. I use instructional objectives in teaching.
2. My pupils with special needs participate in class.
3. I provide a variety of learning opportunities that support pupils with special
needs.

4. I show that I understand the needs of pupils with special needs when I organize
and carry out tasks such as assignment, activities and practices.
5. In my special education classes, I have done my best to make classes interesting
for them.

Factor Two Items:

1. In my special education classes, I serve as a proper role model for pupils with
special needs.
2. I like the way I plan my special education classes.
3. I select the appropriate instructional strategies for pupils with special needs.
4. I clearly state directions to the pupils.
5. I. encourage pupils with special needs to work together and independently.
6. I get excited about the things I teach in my special education classes.
7. In my special education classes, pupils with special needs learn things that are
useful to them after completing school.

Factor Three Items:

1. I understand motivational theories and behaviors.
2. I enhance the learning skills of pupils with special needs.
3. I use assessment techniques to develop my teaching plans.
4. I understand how to be the relationships between special education school and
families.

Factor Four Items:

1. I understand how the experiences impact the pupils with special needs' abilities.
2. I like to participate in most activities in my special education classes.
3. The. government should make special education programs mandatory for all
pupils with special needs.
4. My attitude is positive when I teach pupils with special needs.

Table 4.4 Summary of Four Factors Based on Alpha and Item Mean
No.
1.
2.
3.
4.

Factors and ( number of items )

Teachers` Skills ( 5 items )
Teachers` Decision ( 7 items )
Teachers` Classroom Practices( 4 items)
Personal and Government Support (4
items)

Alpha
.753
.813
.725
639

Item Mean ( SD )
3.60 ( .37 )
3.52 ( .42 )
3.54 ( .40 )
3.54 ( .42 )

Note: mean values could range from 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree,
4 = strongly agree.

Since all of the factors except factor four appeared to have acceptable
internal consistency (Cronbach' s alpha >.7), the scree plot method was used to
determine the appropriate number of factors to be used. The factor scree plot is a
plot of the total variance connected with each factor (SPSS, 1992). A distinct break
between the steep slope of four factors and the remaining factors was shown on the
scree plot. The scree begins at the kth factor, where k is the true number of factors,
as indicated by empirical evidence. As a result, a factor model generating four
factors was then used.

After the final rotated factor analysis, four factors were identified, one with
five items representing issues related to teachers' skills. A second factor contained
seven items that represented issues related to teachers' decisions. A third factor
contained four items related to teachers' classroom practices, and the fourth factor
contained four items related to personal and government support. The specific
items associated with each factor are indicated in Table 4.3.

General Description of Teachers' Attitudes toward education of pupils with

Special Needs (Research Question One)

This section summarizes teachers' attitudes for the four factors identified in
the factor analysis. The researcher was interested in examining teachers' attitudes
by teacher gender, teacher education / training, and teacher teaching experience.
The following paragraphs and Tables 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, and 4.8 summarize the teachers'
attitudes for the four factors.

Overall Teachers' Attitudes :

Table 4.5 summarizes teachers' attitudes for factor one which consisted of
five items related to teachers' skills. The results include the mean for each item in
this factor and reveal all item means in this factor are between agree and strongly
agree on the response scale. The overall mean for factor one items was 3.60 with a
S.D.of .37.

All items in Table 4.6 relate to factor two which represents issues related to
teacher classroom practices. Overall, factor two had a total summated mean of
3.50 and S.D. of .42.

Table 4.7 represents factor three items that related to teacher classroom
practices with a total mean of 3.50 and S.D . .40. Table 4.5 indicates a total mean
of 3.50 and S.D. of .42 for factor four. Factor four includes items related to
personal and government support. Teachers. generally have positive attitudes
across the four factors related to teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with
special needs.

Table 4. 5 Summary of Teachers` Attitudes : Factor 1 ( Teacher's Skills )

No.
1.
2.

No. in
survey
19.
22.

3.

23.

4.

24.

5.

25.

Total

Factor 1 (Teacher's Skills) Item

Mean

S.D.

I use instructional objectives in teaching.

My pupils with special needs participate in
class.
I provide a variety of learning opportunities
the support pupils with special needs.

3.7
3.5

.48
.57

3.6

.52

I show that I understand the needs of pupils

with special needs when I organize and
carry out tasks such as assignment, activities
and practices.
In my special education classes, I have done
my best to make classes interesting for them.

3.6

.57

3.7

.49

3.6

.37

Response Scale : 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree.

Table 4. 6 Summary of Teachers` Attitudes : Factor 2 ( Teacher's Decision )

No.
1.

No. in
survey
29.

2.

30.

3.

31.

4.
5.

33.
34.

6.

35.

7.

36.

Factor 2 ( Teacher's Decision ) Item

Mean

S.D.

In my special education classes, I serve as a

proper role model for pupils with special
needs.
I like the way I plan my special education
classes.
I select the appropriate instructional strategies
for pupils with special needs.
I clearly state directions to the pupils.
I encourage pupils with special needs to work
together and independently.
I get excited about the things l teach in my
special education classes.
In my special education classes, pupils with
special needs learn things that are useful to
them after completing school.

3.5

.57

3.3

.71

3.5

.68

3.6
3.7

.57
.50

3.7

.54

3.5

.65

3.5

.42

Total

Response Scale : 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree.

Table 4. 7 Summary of Teachers` Attitudes : Factor 3( Teacher's Classroom

practices )
No. No. in
survey

Mean

S.D.

Factor 3 ( Teacher's Classroom practices

)Item

1.

13.

2.

14.

3.

15.

4.

16.

Total

I understand motivational theories and

behaviors.
I enhance the learning skills of pupils with
special needs.
I use assessment techniques to develop my
teaching plans.
I understand how to be the relationships
between special education school and
families.

3.5

.54

3.6

.49

3.5

.56

3.5

.58

3.5

.40

Response Scale : 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree.

Table 4. 8 Summary of Teachers` Attitudes : Factor 4 (Personal and Government Support )

No.

1.

No.
in
surve
y
17.

2.

27

3.

38.

4.

40.

Total

Factor 4 ( Personal and Government

Support ) Item

Mean

S.D.

I understand how the experiences

impact the pupils with special needs'
abilities

3.6

.57

I like to participate inmost activities

in my special education classes.
The government should make special
education programs mandatory for all
pupils with special needs.
My attitude is positive when I teach pupils
with special needs.

3.6

.56

3.4

.72

3.5

.55

3.5

.42

Response Scale : 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree.

Differences in Teachers' Attitudes by Gender, Education Level, and Teaching

Experience in General and Special Education

This section describes teachers' differences in attitudes. toward education of

pupils with special needs by examining the three variables gender, education level,
and teaching experience. Results of attitude differences using independent t test or
one-way analysis of variance follow. Normality assumption for both t test and one
way ANOVA were checked using Skewness Values and equal variance was
checked using Levene's test .

Gender :
The second research question asked was "Does teacher's gender have an
impact on attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs?" Therefore, to
provide information to answer this research question, an independent t-test was
calculated. The results indicate that the teacher's gender does not have a significant
influence on his or her attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs as
measured by factor. 1, factor 2, and factor 4 summated attitude values. However,
there is. a statistically significant difference in factor 3 attitude values when
examined by teacher gender.

The results in Table 4.9 indicate there is no gender difference in teacher's

factor 1 attitudes (t = 1.14;p = .256). There were 141 male teachers with a mean of
3.63, and 262 female teachers with a mean of 3.58.

Table 4.9 Difference in Teachers ` Attitudes in Factor 1 ( Teachers` Skills)by Gender

Factor 1 by Gender
Male
Female
Total

n
141
262
403

Mean
3.63
3.58
3.60

S.D.
.35
.38
.37

t
1.14

P
.256

Table 4.10 results indicate there is no gender difference in teacher's factor 2

attitudes (t = -.68; p = .498). There were 141 male teachers with a mean of 3.50,
and 262 female teachers with a mean of 3.53.

Table 4.10 Difference in Teachers ` Attitudes in Factor 2 ( Teachers` Decision )by Gender

Factor 2 by
Gender
Male
Female
Total

Mean

S.D.

141
262
403

3.50
3.53
3.50

.40
.43
.42

- .68

.498

However, the results in Table 4.11. indicate there is a significant gender

difference in the teacher's factor 3 attitudes ( t = 3.48; p =.001 ). Male teachers had
significantly more positive attitudes for factor 3 than did female teachers. There
were 141 male teachers with mean of 3.63, and 262 female teachers with a mean
of 3.49. the Cohen's effect size was d =.04. this indicates a small effect.

Table 4 .11 Difference in Teachers ` Attitudes in Factor 3 ( Teachers` Classroom practices )by
Gender

Factor 3 by
Gender
Male
Female
Total

Mean

S.D.

141
262
403

3.63
3.49
3.56

.34
.42
.40

3.48

.001

Table 4.12 data indicate there is no gender difference in teacher's factor 4

attitudes( t =.191;p=.849 ). TherewereJ41m.aleteachers with a mean of 3.54,and
262 female teachers with a mean of 3.53.

Table 4.12 Difference in Teachers ` Attitudes in Factor 4 (Personal and Government

Support ) by Gender
Factor 4 by
n
Mean
S.D.
t
P
Gender

Male
Female
Total

141
262
403

3.54
3.53
3.5

.41
.42
.42

.191

.849

Education Level :

The third research question was "Does teacher's education/training have an

impact on attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs?" A one-way
ANOVA was used to provide information to answer this research question. The
independent variable educational level used in the analysis had three levels ( 91
teachers with diploma degree, 284 teachers with bachelor degree, and 19 teachers
with post-bachelor degree).

Table 4.13 results indicate there is no significant educational level difference

for factor one ( F = 1.11;p =.332 ).The 91 teachers with a diploma had a mean of
3.63, 284 teachers with a bachelor degree had a mean of 3.51, and 19 teachers with
a post-bachelor degree had a mean of 3.65.

Table 4.13 Difference in Teachers ` Attitudes in Factor 1 ( Teachers` Skills)by

Highest Educational Level
Factor 1 ( Teachers` Skills)by Highest
n
Mean S.D.
F
P
Educational Level

Diploma
Bachelor
Post - Bachelor
Total

91
284
19
394

3.63
3.51
3.65
3.59

.39
.37
.36
.38

1.11

.332

However, Tables 4.14 and 4.15 results indicate there is an educational level
significant difference in teachers' attitudes for factor 2 (F = 3.27; P = .039) and
factor 3 (F = 6.51; P = 002). Data presented in Table 4.14 indicate that teachers
with a diploma had a mean of 3.61, teachers with a bachelor degree had mean of
3.48, and teachers with a post-bachelor degree had mean of 3.44. Data in Table
4.15 indicate that teachers with a diploma had a mean of 3.67, teachers with a
bachelor degree had mean of 3.50, and teachers with a post-bachelor degree had
mean of 3.60. For both factor 2 and factor3 the Scheffe post hoc test results
indicated teachers with a diploma had significantly (P < .05) more positive
attitudes than did teachers holding a bachelor degree. No other Scheffe post hoc
mean differences were found at the .05 level.

Table 4.14 Difference in Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 2 (Teachers' Decision) by

Highest Educational Level

Factor 2 (Teachers' Decision) by Highest

Educational Level
Diploma
Bachelor
Post - Bachelor
Total

Mean

S.D.

91
284
19
394

3.61
3.48
3.44
3.51

.40
.41
.37
.41

3.27

.039

Table 4.15 Difference in Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 3 (Teachers' Classroom

Practices) by Highest Educational Level

Factor 3 (Teachers' Classroom Practices)

by Highest Educational Level
Diploma
Bachelor
Post - Bachelor
Total

Mean

S.D.

91
284
19
394

3.67
3.50
3.60
3.54

.37
.41
.40
.40

6.51

.002

Table 4.16 results indicated there is no educational level difference for factor
4 (F = 2.02; p = .134). The data presented in Table 4.16 indicate that teachers with
a diploma had a mean of 3.61, teachers with a bachelor degree had mean of 3 .51,
and teachers with a post-bachelor degree had a mean of 3.58.

Table 4.16 Difference in Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 4 (Personal and

Government Support) by Highest Educational Level
Factor 4 (Personal and Government
n
Mean S.D.
F
P
Support) by Highest Educational Level
Diploma
91
3.61
.39
2.02 .134
Bachelor
284
3.51
.43
Post - Bachelor
19
3.58
.40
Total
394
3.53
.41

Teaching Experience :
The fourth research question was "Does teacher's experience have an impact
on attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs?" A one-way ANOVA
was used to provide information to answer this research question. Teaching
experience was examined using two variables: general education and special
education years of teaching experience .

General Education
The following Tables 4.17, 4.18, 4.19, and 4.20 summarize data related to
teachers' attitudes based on four factors. and years of teaching experience in
general education. For all four factors no statistically significant differences were
found when examined by general education teaching experience .

Table 4.17 data indicated there is no significant general education teaching

experience difference for factor 1 ( F= 1.73; P = .126). There were 148 teachers
with 0-1 year with a mean of 3.65, 78 teachers with 2-5 years teaching with a
mean of 3.63, 84 teachers with 610 years teaching had a mean of 3.54, 49 teachers
with 11-15 years teaching had a mean of 3.54, 49 teachers with 16-20 years
teaching had a mean of 3.48, and 26 teachers with 21 and more years teaching had
a mean of 3.59.

Table 4.17 Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 1 (Teacher's Skills) by Years of

Teaching Experience in General Education
Factor 1 (Teacher's Skills) by Years of
n
Mean
S.D.
F
P
Teaching Experience in General
Education

0 1 Year
2 5 Years
6 10 Years
11 15 Years
16 20 Years
21 & more years
Total

148
78
84
49
49
26
404

3.65
3.63
3.54
3.54
3.48
3.59
3.60

.35
.40
.39
.34
.40
.40
.37

1.73

.126

Table 4.18 summarized teachers' attitudes based on factor 2 and years of

teaching experience in general education. Results indicated there is no significant
teaching experience difference for general education in factor 2 ( F = .65; P =
.659). There were 148 teachers with 0-1 year of experience who had a mean of
3.53,78 teachers with 2-5 years of teaching experience with a mean of 3.57, 84
teachers with 6-10 years of teaching experience with a mean of 3.46, 49 teachers
with 11-15 years of teaching experience with a mean of 3.55, 49 teachers with 1620 years of teaching experience with a mean of 3.49, and 26 teachers with 21 and
more years of teaching experience with a mean of 3.46.

Table 4.18 Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 2 (Teacher's Decision)

by Years of Teaching Experience in General Education
Factor 2 (Teacher's Decision) by Years of
Teaching Experience in General Education

Mean

S.D.

0 1 Year
2 5 Years
6 10 Years
11 15 Years
16 20 Years
21 & more years
Total

148
78
84
49
49
26
404

3.53
3.57
3.46
3.55
3.49
3.46
3.52

.43
.36
.45
.37
.52
.39
.42

.65

.659

Table 4.19 indicates there is no significant teaching experience difference for

general education in factor 3( F = .25;p = .940 ). The results indicate there were
148 teachers with 0-1 year of teaching experience with a mean of 3.52, 78 teachers
with 2-5 years of teaching experience with a mean of 3.55, 84 teachers with 6-8
years of teaching experience with a mean of 3.52, 49 teachers with 11-15 years of
teaching experience with a mean of 3.57, 49 teachers with 16-20 years of teaching
experience with a mean of 3.54, and 26 teachers with 21 and more years of
teaching experience with a mean of 3.59.

Table 4.19 Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 3 (Teacher's Classroom

Practices) by Years of Teaching Experience in General Education
Factor 3 (Teacher's Classroom Practices)
n
Mean S.D.
F
P

by Years of Teaching Experience

in General Education
0 1 Year
2 5 Years
6 10 Years
11 15 Years
16 20 Years
21 & more Years
Total

148
78
84
49
49
26
404

3.52
3.55
3.52
3.57
3.54
3.59
3.53

.41
.34
.41
.38
.42
.41
.40

.25

.940

Data Summarized in Table 4.20 indicate that there is no significant general

teaching experience difference in teachers' attitudes for factor 4 (F = .97; P =
.435). There were 148 teachers with 0-1 year of teaching experience with a mean
of 3.51, 78 teachers with 2-5 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.61, 84
teachers with 6-10 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.56, 49 teachers
with 11-15 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.46, 49 teachers with 1620 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.57,and 26 teachers with 21 and
more years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.49.

Table 4.20 Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 4 (Personal and

Government Support ) by Years of Teaching Experience in General Education
Factor 4 (Personal and Government
n
Mean
S.D.
F
P
Support ) by Years of Teaching
Experience in General Education
0 1 Year
148
3.51
.43
.97
.435
2 5 Years
78
3.61
.40
6 10 Years
84
3.56
.42
11 15 Years
49
3.46
.44
16 20 Years
49
3.57
.30
21 & more years
26
3.49
.47
Total
404
3.54
.42

Special Education:
Table 4.21 summarizes the results calculated using one-way ANOV A. The
data summarize teachers' attitudes for factor 1 by years of teaching experience in
special education. There was no significant difference ( F = 2.01; p = .071). There
were 48 teachers with 0-1 year of teaching experience with a mean of 3.57, 126
teachers with 2-5 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.53, 127 teachers
with 6-10 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.59, 49 teachers with 11-15
years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.68, 22 teachers with 16-20 years of
teaching experience had a mean of 3.72, and 31 teachers with 21 and more years of
teaching experience had a mean of 3.66.

Table 4.21 Summary of Teachers' Attitudes for Factor 1 (Teacher's Skills) by Years
of Teaching Experience in Special Education
Factor 1 (Teacher's Skills) by Years of
n
Mean S.D
F
P
Teaching Experience in Special Education

0 - 1 Year
2 5 Years
6 10 Years
11 15 Years
16 20 Years
21 & more Years
Total

48
126
127
49
22
31
403

3.57
3.53
3.59
3.68
3.72
3.66
3.60

.38
.38
.38
.37
.27
.37
.38

2.01

.071

Table 4.22 data indicate there is no significant difference in teachers'

attitudes for factor 2 by years of teaching experience in special education ( F=2.l5;
p = ,059 ). The data indicate 48 teachers with 0-1 year of teaching experience with
a mean of 3.51, 126 teachers with 2-5 years of teaching experience with a mean of
3.53, 127 teachers with 6- 10 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.59, 49
teachers with 11-15 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.68, 22 teachers
with 16-20 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.72, and 31 teachers with
21 and more years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.66.

Table 4.22 Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 2 (Teacher's Decision) by

Years of Teaching Experience in Special Education
Factor 2 (Teacher's Decision) by Years of n
Mean S.D
F
P
Teaching Experience in Special Education

0 - 1 Year
2 5 Years
6 10 Years
11 15 Years
16 20 Years
21 & more Years
Total

48
126
127
49
22
31
403

3.51
3.53
3.59
3.68
3.72
3.66
3.59

.42
.44
.42
.34
.34
.42
.42

2.15

.059

The results in Table 4.23 indicate there is a significant difference in teachers'

attitudes for on factor 3 by years of teaching experience in special education (F =
2.25; p = .049). The data indicate 48 teachers with 0-1 year of teaching experience
with a mean of 3.46, 126 teachers with 2-5 years of teaching experience had a
mean of 3.49, 127 teachers with 6-10 years of teaching experience had a mean of
3.54, 49 teachers with 11- 15 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.61, 22
teachers with 16-20 years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.70, and 31
teachers with 21 and more years of teaching experience had a mean of 3.65.

Table 4.23 Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 3 (Teacher' s Classroom

Practices ) by Years of Teaching Experience in Special Education
Factor 3 (Teacher' s Classroom Practices )
n
Mean S.D
F
P
by Years of Teaching Experience in Special
Education
48
3.46
.37
2.25
.049
0 - 1 Year
126
3.49
.40
2 5 Years
127
3.54
.42
6 10 Years
49
3.61
.38
11 15 Years
22
3.70
.44
16 20 Years
31
3.65
.38
21 & more Years
403
3.54
.40
Total

Regarding teachers' attitudes for factor 4 and years of teaching experience in

special education, data in Table 4.24 indicate there is no significant difference in
teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs based for factor 4
and years of teaching experience. special education. There were 48 teachers with
0-1 year of teaching experience with a mean of 3.57, 126 teachers with 2-5 years
of teaching experience had a mean of 3.47, 127 teachers with had 6-10 years of
teaching experience had a mean of 3.56, 49 teachers with 11-l5 years of teaching
experience had a mean of 3.59, 22 teachers with 16-20 years of teaching
experience had a mean of 3.64, and 31 teachers with 21 and more years of teaching
experience had a mean of 3.48.

Table 4.24 Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 4 (personal and

Government Support) by Years of Teaching Experience in Special Education

Factor 4 (Personal and Government

Support) by Years of Teaching
Experience in Special Education
0 - 1 Year
2 5 Years
6 10 Years
11 15 Years
16 20 Years
21 & more Years
Total

48
126
127
49
22
31
403

Mean

3.57
3.47
3.56
3.59
3.64
3.48
3.54

S.D.

.38
.43
.44
.40
.31
.42
.42

1.19

.315

Analysis of the Four Factors :

A linear regression model was developed for teacher's attitudes using each of
the four factors as the dependent variables. Nine independent variables are
identified in Table 4.25.

The results in Table 4.25 revealed the number of previous special education
courses is the single statistically significant variable across all four attitude factors.
As the number of previously completed special education courses increased there
was a corresponding increase in the attitude values for each of the four factors. The
researcher notes that although the models for the four attitude factors were
statistically significant, the amount of variance ( R2 ) explained by each model
ranged from 6% for factor 2 to 8% for factor 3.

Table 4.25 Results of Regressing Attitude Factor Values on Nine Independent

Variables

NO

Independent Variable

1.

Position.
Teacher(0) Admin ( l )
Years of Teaching General
Education.
0 1 yr ( 0 ) > 1 yr ( 1 )
Years of Teaching Special
Education.
0 5 yr ( 0 ) > 5 yr ( 1 )
Number of Previous. Special
Education Courses
Age
< 30 yrs ( 0 ) > 30 yrs ( 1 )
Highest Education Level
Dip. + B.S ( 0 ) post-B.S ( 1 )
Gender
Male ( 0 ) Female ( 1 )
Nationality
Saudi ( 0 ) Other ( 1 )
Number Disability Taught

2.

3.

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Model Summary
10.

* p < . 05

** p < . 01

F
df
R2
Adj R 2
P

Factor 1
Beta

Factor 2
Beta

Factor 3
Beta

Factor 4
Beta

.026

- .089

.013

- .064

.043

.026

.085

.017

.022

.027

- .037

.187***

.157***

.143**

.176**

.001

- .037

- .005

- .047

- .041

- .127**

- .118*

- .086

.042

.080

- .103*

.029

.123*

.027

.054

- .015

- .016
2.83
9/353
.067
.044
.003

.017
2.36
9/353
.057
.033
.013

.022
3.42
9/353
.080
.057
.000

- .054
2.07
9/353
.050
.026
.031

*** p < . 001

- .082

The Summary of Results :

The results summarized in this chapter indicated that the majority of
teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs for factor one to
factor four range between agree and strongly agree. Teachers generally have
positive attitudes across the four factors related to teachers' attitudes toward
education of pupils with special needs.

The differences in teachers' attitudes for gender indicate teacher's gender

does not have a significant influence on teachers' attitudes toward education of
pupils with special needs.

Also, the results of teachers' attitudes by education level (education/training)

indicated that highest educational level completed influenced both factor 2 and
factor 3 attitude values. The Scheffe post hoc test results indicated teachers with a
diploma had significantly more positive attitudes than did teachers holding a
bachelor degree. However, the teachers' attitudes for factor 1 and factor 4 were not
influenced by teacher highest educational level. The highest education/training
variable does not have consistent influence across the four factors which measured
attitudes.

The results of regression analysis do indicate that the number of prior special
education courses does have a positive influence on teachers' attitudes toward
teaching pupils with special needs.

The results of teaching experience in both general and special education

indicated that for all four factors no statistically significant differences were found

when examined by general education teaching experience. Also, there were no

significant differences in teachers' attitudes by teaching experience in special
education. Therefore, the teachers' amount of teaching experience does not have a
significant influence on his or her attitudes toward education of pupils with special
needs.

CHAPTER5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MINISTRY
OF EDUCATION AND FUTURE RESEARCHS
Introduction :
This chapter discusses the results found in this study. Possible views of the
variables are explained in the conclusion to understand the variables and how they
might influence teachers' attitudes towards education of pupils with special needs
in Saudi Arabia . Finally, the chapter addresses recommendations, in general, for
the Saudi Ministry of Education for improving special education programs and for
conducting future research studies.

Conclusion :
This study was conducted to investigate the teachers' attitudes toward
education of pupils with special needs in Saudi Arabia . The researcher examined
the teachers' attitudes based on three variables: gender, education level, and
teaching experience. Overall, teachers generally had positive attitudes across the
four factors related to teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special
needs .
Briefly, these study results are discussed. They follow :
First, the results indicated that the teacher's gender did not have a significant
influence on his or her attitude toward pupils with special needs. In other words, the
gender, male versus female, of the teachers had no statistically significant
differences on attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs.

There are many studies in different parts of the world that have shown that the
teacher's gender did not have a significant influence on his or her attitude. For
example: Studies by Abdulrahim (1987), Hodgson (1999), Van-Reusen, Shoho, &
Barker, (2000).

There are a few studies in Saudi Arabia that lend support to the above results.
A study by Al-Dhaher (1995), was investigated Saudi teachers' perceptions of the
integration of disabled students in ordinary classes in Saudi Arabia. The sample of
this study included 100 male and 100 female teachers in 6 male and 6 female
schools. A number of variables, such as age, educational level, years of educational
experience, services offered for disabled children at school, and the interaction
between teachers and parents were considered. The study revealed that there was no
variation between male and female teachers.

Another study by Dubis (1987) revealed similar results. investigated attitudes

of ordinary and special school teachers and administrators towards educating
children with visual and hearing impairments and mental retardation in ordinary
schools in Saudi Arabia. The total number of subjects who participated in the study
was 373 respondents. Two instruments were used 1) the Attitude Behavior ScaleDeaf, Blind, Mentally Retarded (ABS); and 2) the Mainstreaming Attitude Scale.
The demographic variables examined in this study were sex, age, educational level,
location, citizenship, specialization, and the type of institution. The study results
indicated that No gender differences were reported regarding the attitudes.

In addition, the results showed the education/training variable does not have
consistent influence across the four factors that measured attitudes. These factors
are: (1) factor 1- teacher's skills; (2) factor 2 -teacher's decision making; (3) factor

3- teacher's classroom practices; and (4) factor 4- personal and government

support.

The results for both, factors 2 and factor 3, indicated that teachers with a
diploma had significantly more positive attitudes toward education of pupils with
special needs than did teachers with a bachelor's degree. Diplomas in Saudi Arabia
are one years of teaching training program, and bachelor's degree means graduates
of four year universities.

However, factor 1 and factor 4 were not influenced by education/training

(teacher's highest education level). This means that the teachers'<education/training
did not have consistent influence across the four above factors that measured
attitudes.

For all four factors, no statistically significant differences were found when
examined by general education teaching experience. This means that this variable
had no significant influence on teacher's attitudes toward education of pupils with
special needs. However, the results of teaching experience in special education
indicated that teachers' attitudes had no significant difference in teachers' attitudes
toward pupils with special needs based on factors 1, 2, and 4. Therefore, teachers'
teaching experiences do not have significant influences on Saudi special education
teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs.

As a result of linear regression analyses for the nine independent variables in

the teacher demographic information, the results found a lack of previous special
education courses that influence teachers' attitudes. Therefore, previous special
education courses have a positive influence on teachers' attitudes toward teaching

pupils with special needs. Teachers who had more previous special education
courses compared to those who had "few" to "no" courses had different attitudes
toward education of pupils with special needs.

There are many studies in different parts of the world that lend support to the
above results. Studies by Van-Reusen, Shoho, & Barker (2000), Jobe, Rust and
Brissie (1996), Hodgson (1999), and another.

Recommendations for the SMOE and Future Research:

This section discussed the recommendations for the Saudi Ministry of
Education (SMOE) and for future research. There are several recommendations
that are addressed as a result of the study and review of the literature . Each set of
recommendation is explained in the following paragraphs.

Recommendations for the Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia :

Overall, there are many recommendations that focus on the SMOE . Each is
discussed in the following paragraphs.

1. The SMOE should establish special education programs and curricula in all
Saudi universities. The reason for this recommendation is to improve the special
education teacher preparation programs, in the long run, and enhance the pupils'
learning and achievement.

2. The SMOE should take into consideration the role of parental involvement in
the successful education of pupils with special needs. These study results show

that the majority of teachers had positive attitudes toward family support and
services. Previous studies (Al-Abdulghafour, 1999,and Campbell et al., 1992)
show that the family is the essential component, the critical core of students at risk
and those in special education improvements (See Gonzalez, Brusca- Vega &
Yawkey,1997). If parents understand better their children's educational needs, the
children could benefit significantly in learning, development and overall
achievement. Teachers and parents must work closely together to facilitate pupils'
learning processes. In addition, parents benefit significantly because they will
understand their children's needs much better than who having less information
about special education. This family facilitation factors in Saudi Arabia produce
greater learning and achievement for pupils with special needs. Parents must be
given appropriate information about ways to work with their children at home.

3. The SMOE should increase the number of special education schools or facilities
so that every parent of a child with special needs has easy geographical access to a
location near by in his / her area. More specifically, this consideration is based on
building more special education schools in different geographic areas of Saudi
Arabia.

4. It is recommended that the Ministry of Education create a national awareness

program to encourage positive attitudes toward a pupils with special needs . The
program should focus on providing information about disabilities, what causes
them, the implications for quality of life for each person with special needs.

the general public in Saudi Arabia needs to become aware of children with
special needs. Therefore, the public can become educated by way of the media , by
including special needs in the regular school curriculum, and by opening up job

opportunities for student with special needs in the future. Everyone in Saudi
Arabia must know that children with special needs can become a valuable part of
society if they are provided with a proper education.

5.In addition to more course work in special education at the university levels,
there is a need for training for in-service teachers already in the field to enhance
the quality of special education in Saudi Arabia . At present, teachers already in
the field have few, if any, opportunities for professional development and
advanced learning for them selves as teachers. in. special education. Based on this
research, possible in-service training models might be developed around the
following topics: precision teaching, direct instruction, intervention programs, and
curriculum-based assessment ( Kubina , 2005).

6. Career development for future special educators should involve routine contact
with disabled individuals as a requirement for recruiting potential teachers from
the pool of applicants. This can be accomplished through a variety of services
(McCarthy, 1988), typically referred to as career education and exploration,
vocational

evaluation,

training

(personal

adjustment,

work

adjustments,

occupational skills, work hardening), and job placement. It is hoped that such an
approach may help produce teachers with more positive attitudes.

In summary, SMOE should consider seriously these recommendations for

example, increasing the number of special education courses in universities,
providing inservice teacher's training programs, establishing new special education
schools in different cities, providing job opportunities for students with special
needs, and media involvement to improve special education programs and the life
of Saudi pupils with special needs.

Recommendations for Future Research :

Based on this study, several recommendations are addressed for future
researchers. Each recommendation is explained in the following paragraphs.

1. Future researchers should focus on teachers' attitudes for specific disabilities of

children, for example (autism, learning disability, etc). This would enable teachers
who work with these pupils with needs to update their knowledge and improve
their skills in teaching in special education programs.

2. Research needs to expand the number of variables such as class. size, school
climate, curriculum, and instructional technologies and materials. This would
strengthen special education in Saudi Arabia by examining these variables in
action research as the impact achievements of special education pupils and of
course their teachers.

3. Future researchers should investigate the area of family support in depth and
examine other factors. such environment, interaction, and intervention.

4. Future studies should continually investigate teachers' attitudes toward

education of pupils with special needs. This means that future studies need to
examine other variables such as pupils ' academic achievements, pupils' behavior,
classroom ratio, and curricula such as mathematics and literacy.

5. It is recommended that a longitudinal study be used to investigate the impact of

training on teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special education

needs in Saudi Arabia. This could be accomplished by examining their attitudes

before and after participating in long term training.

6. It is recommended that future research utilize additional research methods

beyond the quantitative self- report measure used in this study, such as qualitative
interviews to examine teachers' attitudes. This could provide richer answers which
would further illuminate the underlying reasons for teachers' attitudes toward
education of pupils with special education needs and enhance our understanding of
factors related to attitudes and guide teacher training.

7. Policies, however, are initiated by administrators. A study should therefore be

conducted to assess the attitudes of administrators toward the practice and realities
of special education in Saudi Arabia.

8. The attitudes of members of the community and such significant others as

parents, siblings, and friends toward disabled individuals may affect the way
teachers view the disabled pupils entrusted to their care. Therefore, further studies
need to be geared to investigating saudian community with regard to the education
of disabled individuals.

9. Future research should be designed to investigate the influence of Saudi culture in

attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs.

In the final analyses, these recommendations focus on future studies that

might investigate teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs.

ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION
INVESTIGATION OF SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHERS' ATTITUDES
TOWARDS EDUCATION OF PUPILS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS IN RIYADH
CITY IN THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA

This study investigated teachers' attitudes toward education of pupils with

special needs in Riyadh city in Saudi Arabia. Teacher's attitudes were examined
based on three variables: gender, education/training, and teaching experience.
Research questions were as follows: (1) what are the attitudes of Saudi special
education teachers toward education of pupils with special needs, (2) does
teacher's gender have an impact on attitudes toward education of pupils with
special needs, (3) does teacher's education/training have an impact on attitudes
toward education of pupils with special needs, and (4) does teacher's experience
have an impact on attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs. The
research questions were analyzed by the Mean, standard deviation, t-test, and oneway analysis of variance. The researcher received 404 (67.3%) of the 600 surveys
sent to special education schools in Riyadh city in Saudi Arabia . Four results were
found: (1) teachers' attitudes were positive toward education of pupils with special
needs, (2) teacher's gender does not have a significant influence on his/her
attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs, (3) teacher's
education/training variable does not have a consistent influence across the four
factors measured attitudes, and (4) teacher's teaching experience in both general
and special education does not have an influence on his/her attitudes toward
education of pupils with special needs. The researcher found that a linear
regression model for the four factors is statistically significant in only the previous
special education courses variable across the four factors. The previous completed

special education courses were found to influence the special education teachers'
attitudes toward education of pupils with special needs. Finally, several
recommendations were offered to the Saudi Ministry of Education (SMOE) and
for future studies.

REFERENCES

- Adorno, T.W., Frenkel, B. E., Levinson, D.J., Sanford, R.N. (1950). The
authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.
- Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social
behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Al-Abdulghafour, M. (1999). A Study of Attitudes of Teachers and School Staff
in general Education toward exceptional children in the general elementary schools.
Kuwait, Educational journal. No, 15. volume, 8.
- Abdulrahim, A. H. (1987). Principals' attitudes toward the inclusion of
handicapped students in regular schools in the State of Kuwait. Doctoral
Dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
- Albrecht, G.L. (1976). sociology of Physical Disability and Rehabilitation.
Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
- Al-Fayz, M. (1997) "The attitude of kindergarten instructors and teachers towards
integration of disabled children in pre-school educational programme". MA
Dissertation, Saudi Arabia: King Saud University.
- Alghazo, E. M., Dodeen, H., & Algaryouti,I.A. (Dec2003). Attitudes of preservice teachers towards persons with disabilities predictions for the success of
inclusion. College Student Journal, 37(4), 515-523.
- Alghazo, E. M., Naggar, G., & Eman E.(June2004).General education teachers in
the United Arab Emirates and their acceptance of the inclusion of students with
disabilities. British Journal of Special Education, 31 (2), 94-100.
- A Literature Review. College Student Journal. 38.2 (2004): 191-198.

- Al-Hakeel, S. (1986) The Education Policy of Saudi Arabia, Dar Am Al Kutub

(Translated from Arabic).
- Al khaldi, F., Abdulwahad, S., Al mutairi, S.,Mohamad, N., Alenezi, M.,
Botaiban, A., Almusailaikh, K., Fekri, M., & Naif, A. (2002). Ministry of
Education, Educational Research Dep.Aug,2003, NO.268.
- Allport, G.W. (1935). Attitudes. In C. Murchison (Ed.) Handbook of School
Psychology (pp.798-884) Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.
- Al- Mosa, A. (1999). Maserat al tarbiah al khasahji wazarit al maa ref/ al
mumlakah al arabiyah al sa udiyah (Development of Special Education in The
Ministry of Education in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia). Riyadh, King Fahad
Library.
- Al-Mousa, Dr. L.N.B.A. (2000) Experiment of Ministry of Education in KSA in
the Field of Including Children with SEN in Mainstream Schools, The Second
International Conference for Impairment and Qualification.
- Al-Salloom, H. (1989) The System and Development of General Education and its
- Al-Sartawi , Z. (1995) "Attitudes of teachers and student to integrating
handicapped" children in regular classes" Modern Education Society, Vo!. 38, pp.
183-215.
- Al-Senble, A., AI-Khateeb, M., Mutwally, M., and Abd Aljawad, N. (1998) The
Educational System in Saudi Arabia, Dar AI-Khuraiji, Riyadh (text in Arabic).
- Antonak, R.F. (1980). Psychometric analysis of the Attitudes Towards Disabled
Persons Scale, Form-O Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 93 169-176.
- Antonak,R.F. (1981).Development and psychometric analysis of the Scale of
Attitudes Towards Disabled Persons (Technical Report No. 1). Durham, NH:
University of New Hampshire Education Department.

- Antonak, R.F. (1982). Development and psychometric analysis of the Scale of

Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation counseling
13 (2), 22-29.
- Antonak, R. (1985). Construct Validation of the Scale of Attitudes toward
Disabled Persons. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling. 16(1),7-10,48.
- Antonak, R. F. & Livneh, H. (1988). The measurement of attitudes towards people
with disabilities. Springfield, ILL: C.C. Thomas.
- Antonak, R.; & Larrivee, B. (1995). The measurement of attitudes toward people
with disabilities: Method, psychometrics and scales. Springfield, IL: Charles C.
Thomas.
- Barker, R.G. (1948). The Social Psychology Of Physical Disability. Journal Of
Social Issues 4(4), 28-38.
- Barr, J. H., Jr. (1983). Education for the handicapped in the Arabian Peninsula:
Issues and trends. Columbia University Teachers College.
- Barton, M.L. (1 992).Teachers' opinions on the implementation and effects of
mainstreaming. Chicago: Chicago Public Schools, IL. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 350 802).
-

Bell, 1.(1999) "Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-Time

Researchers in Education and Social Sciences". Buckingham: Open University

Press.
- Blucher, D. H. (1987). "The Professional Counsellor". New York: Macmillan.
- Booth, T., Ainscow, M., Black-Hawkins, K., Vaughn, M. and Shaw, L. (2000).
The Index of Inclusion: Develop in Learning and Participation in Schools. Bristol:
Centre for Studies in Inclusive Education.
- Brodsky, M. (2001). Special Ed Training Becomes Standard. National Education
Association (NEA). www.nea.org

- Bryman, A (1996) "Quantity and Quality in Social Research". Fifth Edition.

London: Routledge.
- Boucier, M. A. (2003). The Attitudes of General Education Teachers regarding
The Inclusion of Students with Special Needs in The General Education Classroom.
MS. California State University, Ful1erton.
- Campbel1, P., Strickland, B., & La Forme, C.(1992). Enhancing parent
Participation in the Individualized Family Service Plan. Topics in Early Childhood
Special Education. v. 11, n. 4, p. 112- 124.
- Chazan, Maurice, Laing, Alice, and Davies Diane (1991) Helping Five to Eight
Years Old With Special Educational Needs. UK and U.S.A, Basil Blakwell
Publisher.
- Cochran, K. (1993). Teachers' attitudes toward inclusion. Unpublished
manuscript.
- Cochran, K (Eds.). (1999). The scale of teachers' attitudes toward inclusion
(STATIC). Unpublished manuscript.
- Cook, E.; Tankersley, M.& Cook, L. (2000). Teachers' attitudes toward their
included students with disabilities. The Council for Exceptional Children, 67(1),
115-135.
- Cook, B. (2002). Inclusive attitudes strengths, and weaknesses of pre-services
general educators enrolled in a curriculum infusion teacher preparation program.
Teacher Education and Special Education, 25(3), 262-277.
- Cowen, E.L., Underberg, R.P., & Verrillo, R.T. (1958). The development and
testing of an attitude to blindness Scale. The Journal of Social Psychology, 48 297304.
- Deetz, S. (1985) "Ethical considerations in cultural research". In Frost, P., Moore,
L., Louis, M., Lundberg, C and Martin, 1. (eds.) Organizational Culture. Beverly

Hills: Sage
- DfES (Department for Education and Skills) (2001a) Special Educational Needs:
Code of Practice. Nottingham: DfES Publications
- Downs, J. M.(2003). Teachers' Attitudes and Beliefs during the Special Education
Referral Process. Diss: University of Florida, 2003.
- Dunn, L. M. (1973) "Exceptional Children in the Schools". U.S. A: Holt Rinehart
and Winston, Inc.
- Eagly, H. A and Chaiken, S. (1993) "The Psychology of Attitudes". Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich Inc.
- Encyc1opaedia Britannica (1970), Vol. 19, London: William Benton.

- Equivalent Programmes in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, AI-Mubta'ath,

Washington D.e.: Saudi Arabian Cultural Mission.
- Evans, K.M.(1965) "Attitudes and tendencies in Education". Arabic Edition.
Translation of Al-Maroof, S.A, Ridha, AR. and Al-Suliaman, M.(1999) Cairo
Mukhtar Publishing Est.
- Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, L. (1997) "Belief, attitudes, intention and behavior, an
introductory theory and research". MA: Addison- Wesley.
- Fishbein, N., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Beliej, attitude, intention, and behavior: An
introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley.
- Fitting, E.A. (1954). Evaluation and adjustment to blindness. (Research Series No.
2) New York: American Foundations for the Blind.
- Gallagher, P.A. (1985). Inservice: A mandated special education course and its
effects on regular classroom teachers. Teacher Education,8, 59-65.
- Gallagher, P.A., Rhodes, CA, & Darling, S. M. (2004). Parents as professionals in
early intervention: A parent educator model. Topics in Early Childhood Education,
24( 1), 5-13.

- Galloway. D., Armstrong. D., and Tomlinson, S., (1999) The Assessment of
Special Needs: Whose Problem? Longman Publishing, New York.
- Garcia, S., Mendez-Perez, A. & Ortiz, A. (2000). Mexican-American mothers'
beliefs about disabilities: Implications for early childhood intervention. Remedial
and Special Education, 21(2),90-100,120.
- Gargiulo, R., M. (2003). Special Education in Contemporary Society: An
Introduction to Exceptionality. WADSWORTH, Thomson Learning, Inc.
- General Directorate of special education.(2004) .Summary Statistics on Special
Education in Saudi Arabia 2003/2004 .
- Good, T., & Brophy, J. (1972). Behavioral expression of teacher attitudes. Journal
of Educational Psychology. 63, 617-624.
- Green, K., Rock, D., & Weisentein, G. (1983). Cross-Cultural Validation of the
Attitudes

toward

Mainstreaming

Scale.

Educational

and

Psychological

Measurement. 4 (4), 1255-61.

- Haddock G. (2004). In Doing social psychology research by Breakwell G.
Blackwell. UK.: Publishing Ltd.
- Hallahan, D. and Kauffman, J. (1991) Exceptional Children Introduction to
Special Education (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
- Harvey, L. (1990) "Critical Social Research ". London: Unwin Hyman.
- Heberlein, AI. and Baumgartner, R (1978) "Factors affecting response rates to

mailed questionnaires: A quantitative analysis of the published literature".

American Sociological Review, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp. 447-462.
- Henerson, M., Morrs, L., & Fitz-Gibbon, C. (1987). How to measure attitudes.
(2nd ed.) Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
- Heward, William L. and Orlansky, Michael D. (1980) Exceptional children.
U.S.A: Charles E. Merrill Fishing Co.

- Hewett, Frank M. and Forness, Steven R (1977) Education of Exceptional

Learners. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
- Himmerfarb, S. & Eagly, H.A. (1974). Orientation to the study of attitudes and
their change. In Himmerfarb, 5., & Eagly, H.A., Readings in attitude change. New
York, NY: Wiley.
- Hodgson, M. T. (1999). The Relation between Attitudes of Public School Physical
Education Teachers (K-12) toward Students with Disabilities at Different Grade
Levels and Selected Teacher Attributes. Diss. The University of Tennessee.
-

Hornby, G. (1998) Special Needs in Mainstream Schools: Teachers' Handbook,

Barbados: Ministry of Education.

- Individual with Disabilities Education Act of 1997. Retrieved February 28, 2005
from http://www.wrightslaw.com/bks/lawbk/ch4.idea.overview.pdf
- Jobe, D.; J. O. Rust; and J. Brissie. (1996). Teacher attitudes toward inclusion of
students with disabilities into regular classrooms. Education, U 7(1): 148-54.
- Jones, R. (1984). Attitudes and attitude change in special education: Theory and
practice. Reston, V A : Council for Exceptional Children.
- Jones, R.L. (1987). Attitude and attitude change in special education: Theory and
practice. ERIC, Council for Exceptional Children. Reston, VA.
- Katz, J. & Mirenda, P. (2002). Including students with development disabilities in
general education classrooms: Educational benefits. International Journal of Special
Education.! 7 (2),14-21.
-

Kirk, Samuel A. and Gallagher, James J. (1989) Educating Exceptional Children,

3rd edition. U.S.A,: Houghton Miffin Company.

- Kitchener, K. S. (1984). "intuition, Critical Evaluation and Ethical Principles.
Foundation for Ethical Decisions". Counselling Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 4368

- Kubina, R. (2005).Precision Teaching and Standard Celeration Charting (Kubina

's Publications). Retrieved from http://precisionteachingresource.net/
- Lane, Harlan (1988). Is there a psychology of the Deaf? Exceptional Children, 55,
7-15.
- Leyser, Y. & Tappendorf, K. (Summer 2001). Are attitudes and practices
regarding mainstreaming changing? A case of teachers in two rural school districts.
Education, 121 (4), 751-760.
- Likert, R. (1932) "A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes". New York:
Columbia University Press.
- Loomos, K.A. (2001). An investigation of urban teachers 'attitudes toward

students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment. Doctoral dissertation.

Loyola University.
- Lukoff, I.F. & Whiteman, M. (1959). Components and correlates of attitudes
towards blindness (OVR Project No. 346-C). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Health, Education and Welfare.
- McGee, K. A. (1989). Attitudes of the University of Virginia faculty and
administration to ward disabled college students. Doctoral Dissertation, 50, 10A,
(1989).
- McIntyre, L.L. (2003). Teacher gender: A predictor of special education referral?
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(6),382-383.
- Microsoft Encarta 96 Encyclopedia (1996) Computer CD-ROM, USA: Microsoft
Corporation.
- Middle East and North Africa Yearbook (1994) London: Europ a Publications.

- Miller, N. B., &Sammons, C. C. (1999). Everybody's different: Understanding and

changing our reactions to disabilities. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
EC307205.

- Ministry of Education (1978). Educational Policy in the Kingdom of Saudi

Arabia. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Riyadh, King Fahad Library.
- Ministry of Education (1990). Educational policy in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Riyadh, King Fahad Library.
- Minor, S., Acheson, S., Kane, H., Calahan, E., Leverntz, K., Pas den, A., &
Wegener, M. (2002). Teachers' attitudes toward children with serious emotional
disturbance. University of South Florida, FL: Research and Training Center for
Children's Mental Health. (ERIC Documents Reproduction Service No.
ED477670).
- Mittler, P. (1992) Preparing all Initial Teacher Training Students to Teach
Children with Special Educational Needs: A Case Study from England. European
Journal of Special Needs Education, 7(1), 1-9
- Mittler, P. (2000) Working Towards Inclusive Education. London: David Fulton.
- Monahan, R. G., Marino, S.B., & Miller, R. (1996). Teacher attitudes towards
inclusion: implications for teacher education in schools 2000. Education,
117(2),316-20.
- Mussen, P.H. & Barker, R.G. (1943). Attitudes towards cripples. Journal of
Abnormal and social Psychology, 39, 351-355.
- Novak, A.R. & Berkeley, T.R. (1984). A system theory approach to
deinstutionalization: Policies & research. In N.R. Ellis & N.W. Brandy (Eds.),
International Review of Research in Mental Retardation, Vol. 12. Orlando Fl:
Academic Press.
- Okpanachi, J.H. (1995) An Investigation into the Effects of In-Service Training on
the Knowledge, Attitudes and Understanding of Primary School Teachers in the
Kaduna State of Nigeria towards the Integration of Children with Special
Educational Needs in Physical Education. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Hull.

- Olson,J. M. (2003). Special Education and General Education Teacher Attitudes

Toward Inclusion. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Stout.
- Opdal, L., & Wormneas, S. (2001). Teachers' opinions about inclusion: a pilot
study in a Palestinian context. International Journal of Disability, Development and
Education, 48(2), 143-161.
- Oppenheim, AN. (1999) "Questionnaire Design, Interview and Attitude
Measurement".
- Pearman, E.L., Huang,A.M., Barnhart, m.W., & Mellblom, C. (1992). Educating

all students in school: Attitudes and beliefs about inclusion. Education and Training
in Mental Retardation. 27, 176-182.
- Ramos, M. C. (1989) "Some ethical implications of qualitative research ".
University of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville. Res Nurs Health. 1989
Feb;12(1 ):5763.
- Rashid,N.I. and Shaheen, E. (1992) Saudi Arabia and the Gulf War, International
Institute of Technology, Inc., U.S.A.
- Reynold, W. & Greco, V. (1980). The reliability and factorial validity of a scale
for measuring teachers' attitudes towards mainstreaming. Educational and
Psychological Measurement. 463-468.
- Robson, C. (1996) "Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and
Practitioner Researchers". Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
- Rose, E., Rainforth, 8., & Steere, D. (2003). Guiding principles for the education
of children and youth with severe and multiple disabilities. Effective Education for
Learners with Exceptionalities, 15,155-180.
- Rubin, A and Babbie, E. (1993) "Research Methods for Social Work". 2nd
Edition. CA: Brooks/Cole.

- Rusalem, H. (1950). The environmental supports of public attitudes toward the

blind. New Outlook for the Blind. 44, 277-288.
- Rusalem, H. (1965). A study of college students' beliefs about deaf-blindness.
New Outlook for the Blind. 59, 90-93.
- Sack, J.L. (March 25,1998). Side by side. Education Week, 17(28),34-36.
- Samadi, A. & Sartawi, A. (1995). United Arab Emirates University students'
attitudes towards the handicapped. Journal of Special Needs Education. 10(3), 242248.
- Scharm, W. (1982) "The process and effects of mass communication". Urbana
University.
- Schoen, E., Usyal, M., & McDonald, C. D. (1986). Attitudes of Faculty members

toward treatment of disabled students reexamined. College Student Journal, 21(2),

190-193.
- Shade, R. & Stew art, R. (2001). General education and special education
preservice teachers' attitudes toward inclusion. Preventing School Failure, 46(1),3741.
- Shaila Rao (2004). Faculty Attitudes and Students with Disabilities in Higher
Education:
- Shaw, M.E., & Wright, J.M. (1967). Scales for the measurement of attitudes. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
- Smith, RM., Neisword, IT. and Hunt, F.M. (1983) "The Exceptional Child: A
functional Approach". 2nd edition. U.S.A: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
- Smith, T.E., Price, B.J., & Marsh, G.E. (1986). Mildly handicapped children and
adults. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing
- Stakes, R. and Hornby, G. (2000) Meeting Special Needs in Mainstream Schools A Practical Guide for Teachers (2nd ed.), London: David Fulton.

- Steingisser, E.R. (1954). The influence of set upon attitudes towards the blind as
related to self-concept. Unpublished Masters' Thesis, University of New
Hampshire, Durham.
- Stephen, Thomas M., Blackhurts, A Edward and Magliocca, Larry A. (1988)
Teaching Mainstreamed Students, 2nd Edition. UK.: Exeter, Wheaton and Co.
- Strong, E. K. (1931). Changes of interest with age. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford
University Press.
- Tait, K. & Purdie, N. (2000). Attitudes toward disability. Teacher education for
inclusive

environments in an Australian university. International Journal of

Disability, Development and Education, 47(1), 25-38.

- Taylor, R.L., Richards, S.B., Goldstein,P.A., & Schilit, J. (1997). Teacher
perceptions of inclusive settings. Teaching Exceptional Children. 29(3), 50-54.
-

Telford, Charles W. and Sawrey, James M. (1972) The Exceptional Individual.

2nd edition. New Jersey Prentice-Hall, Inc.

- Thomas, A, Palmer, J. K., Coker-Juneau, C. J., & Williams, D. J. (2002). Factor
Structure and construct validity of the interaction with disabled persons scale.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(3), 465-83.
- Thomas, W.I. & Znaniecki, F. (1918). The Polish peasant in Europe and America.
Boston: Bader.
- Thurstone, L.L. & Chave ,E.J. (1929). The measurement of attitude. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
- Thurstone, L.L. (1927). Psychological Analysis. American Journal of Psychology.
38, 368-389.
- Thurstone, L.L. (1928). Attitudes can be measured. American Journal of
sociology. 33, 529-534.

- Thurstone, L.L. (1931). The measurement of attitudes. Journal of abnormal and

social psychology. 26, 249-269.
- Triandis, H.C., Adamopoulos, J., and Brinberg, D. (1984). Perspectives and issues
in the study of attitudes. In R.L. Jones (Ed,), Attitudes and attitude change in
special education: theory and practice. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional
Children.
- Trzcinka, S. M. (1998). Curriculum and Teachers' Attitudes: The Impact of The
Change Process in Special Education. Advances in Special Education. V 11, pages
127-146.
- Turnbull, Ann P. and Schulz, Jane B. (1979) Mainstreaming Handicapped
Students: A Guide for the Classroom Teacher. London: Allyn and Bacon Inc.
- Van-Reusen, A. Shoho, A, & Barker, K. (2000). High schoolteacher attitudes
toward inclusion. The High School Journal, 84(2), 720.
- Warnock, H. M., (1978) "Special Educational Needs: Report of the Committee of
Inquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People". London:
HMSO.
- Watson, J.B. (1925). Behaviorism. New York, NY: W. W. Norton
- Wilczenski, F. L. (1991, April). Use of the "Attitudes towards mainstreaming
scale" with undergraduate education. students. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the New England Educational Research Organization, Portsmouth, NH.
- Winton, PJ. & DiVenere, N. (1995). Family-professional partnerships in early
intervention personnel preparation: Guidelines and strategies.

Topics in Early

Childhood Special Education, 19,157-161.

- Wolfensberger, W. (1983). Social role polarization: A proposed new term for the
principle of normalization. Mental Retardation, 21, 234-239.

- Wood, I.W. (1993) "Mainstreaming: A Practical Approach for Teachers". 2nd

Edition. New York: Macmillan.
- Yuker, H.E., Block, J.R., and Young, J.H. (1966). The measurement of attitudes
towards disabled persons (Human Resources Study No. 7). Albertson, NY: Human
Resources Center.
- Yuker, H.E. (1987). Attitudes towards persons with disabilities. New York, NY:
Springer.

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 - Special education programs and institutes by Type of Disability

...22

Table 2.2 - Types of Service Provision

.23

Table 2.3 - Comparison of Methods used to Evaluate Teacher's Attitudes ..

.42

Table 3.1 - Numbers of Distributed and Returned Questionnaires and Response

Rate

73

Table 3.2 - Research Questions and Methods of Data Analysis

Table 4.1

..

75

Teachers' Demographic Characteristics of Gender, Nationality , Age,

Highest level of education , position, and preferred teaching level

..

78

Table 4.2 - Teachers' Teaching Experience in General Education, Teaching Experience

in Special Education, Number of Disabilities Taught, Preferred Type of Disability to
Teach, previous special education courses

. . ..81

Table 4.3 - Varimax Rotated Factor Martix : Teachers Attitudes Items by Factors

...83

Table 4.4 - Summary of Four Factors Based on Alpha and Item Mean

85

Table 4.5 - Summary of Teachers` Attitudes : Factor 1 ( Teacher's Skills )

...87

Table 4.6 - Summary of Teachers` Attitudes : Factor 2 ( Teacher's Decision )

..88

Table 4.7 - Summary of Teachers` Attitudes : Factor 3(Teacher's Classroom

practices )

...

.88

Table 4.8 - Summary of Teachers` Attitudes : Factor 4 (Personal and Government

Support )

......89

Table 4.9 - Difference in Teachers ` Attitudes in Factor 1 ( Teachers` Skills)by

Gender

91

Table 4.10 - Difference in Teachers ` Attitudes in Factor 2 ( Teachers` Decision

)by Gender

91

Table 4.11 - Difference in Teachers ` Attitudes in Factor 3 ( Teachers` Classroom

practices )by Gender

.91

Table 4.12-Difference in Teachers ` Attitudes in Factor 4 (Personal and

Government Support ) by Gender

..92

Table 4.13 - Difference in Teachers ` Attitudes in Factor 1 ( Teachers` Skills)by

Highest Educational Level

..

93

Table 4.14 - Difference in Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 2 (Teachers' Decision) by

Highest Educational Level

93

Table 4.15 - Difference in Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 3 (Teachers' Classroom

Practices) by Highest Educational Level

..

94

Table 4.16 - Difference in Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 4 (Personal and Government

Support) by Highest Educational Level

..

94

Table 4.17 - Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 1 (Teacher's Skills) by

Years of Teaching Experience in General Education

95

Table 4.18 - Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 2 (Teacher's Decision) by

Years of Teaching Experience in General Education

..

96

Table 4.19 - Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 3 (Teacher's Classroom

Practices) by Years of Teaching Experience in General Education

97

Table 4.20 - Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 4 (Personal and

Government Support ) by Years of

Teaching Experience in General

Education

98

Table 4.21 - Summary of Teachers' Attitudes for Factor 1 (Teacher's Skills) by

Years of Teaching Experience in Special Education

99

Table 4.22 - Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 2 (Teacher's Decision) by

Years of Teaching Experience in Special Education

99

Table 4.23 - Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 3 (Teacher' s Classroom

Practices ) by Years of Teaching Experience in Special Education

100

Table 4.24 - Summary of Teachers' Attitudes in Factor 4 (personal and Government

Support) by Years of Teaching Experience in Special Education

..

.101

Table 4.25 - Results of Regressing Attitude Factor Values on Nine Independent

Variables

..

.102

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1- The education system of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

14

APPENDICES

Appendix-A
SETA Questionnaire
( English Version )

Survey Questionnaire

Dear Sir or Madam,

This survey has in three sections(Each of these sections are described below ).
Please remember that as you respond to each of these items on the "SETA" several
things are important to think about as you give your responses to these items. First,
please remember that this is a survey of your opinions and current thinking. So,
there are NO "right" or "wrong" answers. It is your opinion, and belief. Said
differently, this survey is NOT A TEST and therefore unlike paper and pencil tests
there are NO final "correct" answers.
Second, opinions are developed over time, with age and with experiences; we do
NOT memorize them to pass a test.
Third, this survey helps to paint a picture of a variety of special education training
options, programs and services that we. in KSA may wish to think further about to
refine our opinions .. So, please be assured that your opinions are your opinions and
thoughts through years of living and working pupils with special needs and their
families.

The enclosed questionnaire is designed to measure your attitudes towards

education of pupils with special education needs .Your participation and cooperation in responding to this questionnaire is greatly appreciated.

Section 1: Teacher Demographic Information

Direction: Please complete each of these basic questions which characterize and
describe who you are in your work with pupils in special education. Please recall

that there are NO "right" or "wrong" answers to your opinions.

Section 2: Teachers' Attitudes Toward Education of pupils with special needs
Direction: In section 2, please indicate your opinions concerning Teachers'
Attitudes. For each item, there are four choices: Those with which you might
"Strongly Agree," those items in which you might "Agree," those which you might
"Disagree," and those which you might "Strongly Disagree,"
Please give your honest opinion about each of the items. In other words,
please read the item and circle the choice that best summarizes your current opinion
on that situation described by the item.
Section 3: Family Support and Services
Directions: Please circle the choice that best represents your opinion concerning
family support with their pupils with special needs.

SETA SURVEY

Section 1: Teacher Demographic Information

Direction: Please mark (X) in the appropriate answer in the following
statements.

1. I am a :

Male

Female

2. My nationality is :

Saudi

another country

3. My age is :
4. My total years of teaching from kindergarten to 12th grade regardless of
age/grade are:
5. My total years of teaching special education is:
6. My highest level of education I have completed is:
Diploma

Bachelor's degree

Master's degree

Doctorate

7. I teach the following number of disabilities:

One

Five

Two

Six

Three

Seven

Four

Eight

8. My current position in the school is:

Aide teacher

Teacher

Head teacher

9. I prefer to teach the following type of disabilities:

Hearing impairments

Visual impairments

Mental retardation

Physical disorders

Autism

Learning disability

Down's syndrome

None

10. I prefer to teach the following grade/level:

Kindergarten
Intermediate

Elementary
High school

11. How many special education courses did you complete while pursuing your degree?

One

Two-three

Four- five

Six seven

More than seven

None

Section 2: Teachers' Attitudes Toward Education Of Pupils with Special Needs

Direction: Please circle (0) in the appropriate number in the following statements to
indicate the extent to which you agree with the statement.

NO.

Items

12.

I believe a particular pupil's

disability is easier to address in
a segregated special education
school.
I understand motivational
theories and behaviors.
I enhance the learning skills of
pupils with special needs.
I use assessment techniques to
develop my teaching plans.
I understand how to be the
relationships between special
education school. And families.
I understand how the
experiences impact the pupils
with special needs' abilities.
Pupils with special needs can
hold jobs in the future after
schooling.
I use instructional objectives in
teaching.
I demonstrate respect for pupils
with special needs.
I use appropriate language
techniques to interact with
pupils with special needs.
My pupils with special needs
participate in class.
I provide a variety of learning
opportunities that support
pupils with special needs.
I show that I understand the
needs of pupils with special
needs when I organize and
carry out tasks such as
assignment, activities and
practices.

13.
14.
15.
16.

17.

18.

19.
20.
21.

22.
23.

24.

Strongly
Agree
4

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1

25.

26.
27.

28.

29.

30.
31.

32.
33.
34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

In my special education classes,

I have done my best to make
classes interesting for them.
I use individualize instruction
for pupils with special needs.
I like to participate in most
activities in my special
education classes.
My pupils with special needs
guide my instructional
decision-making.
In my special education classes,
I serve as a proper role model
for pupils with special needs.
I like the way I plan my special
education classes.
I select the appropriate
instructional strategies for
pupils with special needs.
In my special education classes,
I feel like an important teacher.
I clearly state directions to the
pupils.
I encourage pupils with special
needs to work together and
independently.
I get excited about the things I
teach in my special education
classes.
In my special education classes,
pupils with special needs learn
things that are useful to them
after completing school.
I help general teachers to
integrate pupils with special
needs in their schools.
The government should make
special education programs
mandatory for all pupils with
special needs.
Teachers feel comfortable
teaching pupils with special
needs.
My attitude is positive when I
teach pupils with special needs.

Section 3: Family Support and Services

Direction: Please circle (

) in the appropriate number in the following statements

to indicate the extent to which you agree with the statement.

NO.

Items

41.

The family plays an

important role in supporting
children with special needs.
Generally parents of pupils
with special needs
understand their children's
disabilities and needs.
Parents typically motivate
their children with special
needs.
Society accepts pupils with
special needs.
Parents care about the
learning of their children
with special needs.
Special education has been
well supported by parents of
pupils with special needs.
Teachers learn more about
their pupils with special
needs when parents
participate in school
activities.
I think parents and special
education schools have
understood their parental
rights and responsibilities in
working with their children.
I use strategies that result in
parental involvement.
Parents are concerned about
learning how to help their
children with special needs.

42.

43.

44.
45.

46.

47.

48.

49.
50.

Strongly
Agree
4

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree
1

Appendix-B
SETA Questionnaire
( Arabic Version )

Appendix-B

Appendix-C
CODED SETA ITEMS

NO

Question

Coded

Gender

Nationality

Age

Total years of teaching in general

education

Total years of teaching in special

education

Highest level of
education

Teaching the following

Number of disabilities

Current position

Prefer to teach one type of disability

1 = Male
2 = Female
1 = Saudi
2 = Another country
1 = 21 - 25
2 = 26 - 30
3 = 31 - 35
4 = 36 - 40
5 = 41& more
1 = 0 -1
2=2-5
3 = 6 - 10
4 = 11 - 15
5 = 16 - 20
6 = 21 & more
1 = 0 -1
2=2-5
3 = 6 - 10
4 = 11 - 15
5 = 16 - 20
6 = 21 & more
1 = Diploma
2 = Bachelor
3 = Master
4 = Doctorate
1 = One
2 = Two
3 = Three
4 = Four
5 = Five
6 = Six
7 = Seven
8 = Eight
1 =Aide teacher
2 = Teacher
3 = Head teacher
1 = Hearing impairments
2 = Visual impairments
3 = Mental retardation

10

Prefer to teach the following

grade/levels

11

Total of courses when

Pursuing your degree

Teachers attitudes
12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,
27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40

4 = Physical disorders
5 = Autism
6 = Learning disability
7 = Down's syndrome
8 = None
1 = Kindergarten
2 = Elementary
3 = Intermediate
4 = High school
1 = One
2 = Two
3 = Three
4 = Four
5 = Five
6 = Six
7 =Seven
8 = Eight
1 = Strongly disagree
2 = Disagree
3 = Agree
4 = Strongly agree
1 = Strongly disagree

Family support and services

41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50

2 = Disagree
3 = Agree
4 = Strongly agree