Attitudinal instrument development: Assessing cognitive, affective, and behavioral domains of teacher attitudes toward teaching all students

Figures & data

Table 1. Instruments to evaluate teacher attitudes toward inclusion published in the last 15 years

Instrument	Author	Sample includes teachers		Scope
		Pre-service	In-service
STATIC	Hastings and Oakford (2003)	Yes	No	Cognitive, affective, and behavioral
SACIE	Loreman and Earle (2007)	No	No	Cognitive and affective
ISPS	McLeskey, Waldron, and So (2001)	No	No	Affective
CIES	Sharma and Desai (2003)	Yes	No	Cognitive, affective, and behavioral
MATIES	Mahat (2008)	No	Yes	Cognitive, affective, and behavioral

Table 2. Initial factor analysis, varimax rotated component matrix

Item	Component
	1	2	3
1. All students with mild to moderate disabilities should be educated in regular classrooms with non­handicapped peers to the fullest extent possible	0.763	−0.081	0.409
2. Most or all regular classrooms can be modified to meet the needs of students with mild to moderate disabilities	0.629	0.135	0.494
3. Students with mild to moderate disabilities can be trusted with responsibilities in the classroom	0.745	0.255	0.358
4. I would like people to think that I can create a welcoming classroom environment for students with mild to moderate disabilities	0.817	0.281	0.106
5. I have a high regard for teachers who use a variety of data (e.g. health, academic, behavioral, etc.) to make instructional decisions	0.319	0.567	0.246
6. It is seldom necessary to remove students with mild to moderate disabilities from regular classrooms in order to meet their educational needs	0.234	0.001	0.614
7. Most or all separate classrooms that exclusively serve students with mild to moderate disabilities should be eliminated	−0.109	−0.032	0.721
8. Students with mild to moderate disabilities can be more effectively educated in regular classrooms as opposed to special education classrooms	0.317	0.159	0.707
9. Inclusion is a more efficient model for educating students with mild to moderate disabilities because it reduces transition time (i.e. the time required to move from one setting to another)	0.212	0.089	0.367
10. Students with mild to moderate disabilities should be taught in regular classes with non­disabled students because they will not require too much of the teacher’s time	−0.219	0.187	0.772
11. I believe including students with mild/moderate disabilities in regular classroom is effective because they can learn the academic skills necessary for success	0.220	0.681	0.422
12. I would like to be mentored by a teacher who models effective differentiated instruction	0.445	0.790	0.060
13. I want to emulate teachers who know how to design appropriate academic interventions	0.392	0.822	0.122
14. Students with mild to moderate disabilities have the ability to contribute meaningfully to their educational program	0.778	0.418	0.121
15. I would like my mentor to believe that I work well with students with mild to moderate disabilities	0.747	0.492	−0.040
16. I believe including students with mild/moderate disabilities in the regular classrooms is effective because they can learn the social skills necessary for success	0.274	0.736	0.403
17. I find that general education teachers often succeed with students with mild to moderate disabilities, when they try their best	0.065	0.605	0.369
18. I would welcome the opportunity to team teach as a model for meeting the needs of students with mild/moderate disabilities in regular classrooms	0.589	0.453	0.119
19. All students benefit from team teaching: that is, the pairing of a general and a special education teacher in the same classroom	−0.010	0.689	0.215
20. The responsibility for educating students with mild/moderate disabilities in regular classrooms should be shared between the general and special education teachers	0.362	0.505	0.082
21. Students with mild to moderate disabilities can be equal contributors in group work	0.599	0.329	0.227
22. Wording in pilot survey was grammatically poor	–	–	–
23. I believe that students with mild and moderate disabilities benefit from active learning	0.731	0.475	−0.006
24. I would like people to think that I can use flexible grouping to ensure that students with mild to moderate disabilities are effectively participating in lessons	0.605	0.650	−0.006
25. I respect teachers who find ways to create a homogeneous class	0.144	0.318	−0.106
26. I admire teachers who successfully design behavioral interventions	0.583	0.593	0.035
27. I would welcome the opportunity to participate in a consultant teacher model (i.e. regular collaborative meetings between special and general education teachers to share ideas, methods, and materials) as a means of addressing the needs of students with mild/moderate disabilities in regular classrooms	0.681	0.455	0.256

Table 3. Initial factor analysis, varimax rotated component matrix

Item	Component
	1	2	3
1. All students with mild to moderate disabilities should be educated in regular classrooms with non­handicapped peers to the fullest extent possible	0.050	0.858	0.187
2. Students with mild to moderate disabilities can be trusted with responsibilities in the classroom	0.315	0.790	0.236
3. I would like people to think that I can create a welcoming classroom environment for students with mild to moderate disabilities	0.425	0.758	−0.052
4. Most or all separate classrooms that exclusively serve students with mild to moderate disabilities should be eliminated	−0.086	0.066	0.809
5. Students with mild to moderate disabilities can be more effectively educated in regular classrooms as opposed to special education classrooms	0.230	0.482	0.684
6. Students with mild to moderate disabilities should be taught in regular classes with non­disabled students because they will not require too much of the teacher’s time	0.115	−0.126	0.848
7. I would like to be mentored by a teacher who models effective differentiated instruction	0.920	0.276	0.039
8. I want to emulate teachers who know how to design appropriate academic interventions	0.951	0.208	0.123
9. Students with mild to moderate disabilities have the ability to contribute meaningfully to their educational program	0.626	0.646	0.036
10. I would like my mentor to believe that I work well with students with mild to moderate disabilities	0.699	0.584	−0.131
11. I believe including students with mild/moderate disabilities in the regular classroom is effective because they can learn the social skills necessary for success	0.770	0.209	0.320
12. I believe that students with mild and moderate disabilities benefit from active learning	0.555	0.661	−0.076

Table 4. ATTAS-mm, varimax rotated component matrix

Item	Component
	1	2	3
1. All students with mild to moderate disabilities should be educated in regular classrooms with non­handicapped peers to the fullest extent possible	0.076	0.897	0.112
2. Students with mild to moderate disabilities can be trusted with responsibilities in the classroom	0.341	0.801	0.171
3. I would like people to think that I can create a welcoming classroom environment for students with mild to moderate disabilities	0.431	0.747	−0.112
4. Most or all separate classrooms that exclusively serve students with mild to moderate disabilities should be eliminated	−0.074	0.084	0.836
5. Students with mild to moderate disabilities can be more effectively educated in regular classrooms as opposed to special education classrooms	0.261	0.474	0.639
6. Students with mild to moderate disabilities should be taught in regular classes with non­disabled students because they will not require too much of the teacher’s time	0.147	−0.076	0.849
7. I would like to be mentored by a teacher who models effective differentiated instruction	0.919	0.265	−0.006
8. I want to emulate teachers who know how to design appropriate academic interventions	0.952	0.199	0.079
9. I believe including students with mild/moderate disabilities in the regular classrooms is effective because they can learn the social skills necessary for success	0.818	0.266	0.235

Table 5. ATTAS-mm, total variance explained

Component	Rotation sums of squared loadings
	Total	% of variance	Cumulative %
1	2.822	31.353	31.353
2	2.421	26.905	58.258
3	1.943	21.591	79.849

Table 6. ATTAS-mm summary item statistics

Statistics for scale	N		Mean		Variance	SD
	9		34.67		24.227	4.922
	Mean	Minimum	Maximum	Range	Max/Min	Variance
Item Means	3.852	2.583	4.500	1.917	1.742	0.528
Item Variances	0.699	0.424	1.142	0.718	2.695	0.039

Table 7. Reliability analysis for ATTAS-mm full scale and subscales

Component	Title	Cronbach Alpha
Full scale	Attitudes towards teaching all students	0.833
Subscale 1	Believing all students can succeed in general education classrooms	0.720
Cognitive
Subscale 2	Developing personal and professional relationships	0.928
Affective
Subscale 3	Creating an accepting environment for all students to learn	0.837
Behavioral

Hastings, R. P., & Oakford, S. (2003). Student teachers’ attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special needs. Educational Psychology, 23(1), 87–94.10.1080/01443410303223

 Google Scholar

Loreman, T., & Earle, C. (2007). The development of attitudes, sentiments, and concerns about inclusive education in a content-infused Canadian teacher preparation program. Exceptionality Education Canada, 17(1), 85–106.

 Google Scholar

McLeskey, J., Waldron, N. L., & So, T. H. (2001). Perspectives of teachers toward inclusive school programs. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 24(2), 108–115.10.1177/088840640102400205

 Google Scholar

Sharma, U., & Desai, I. (2003). Measuring concerns about integrating education in India. Asia & Pacific Journal on Disability, 5(1), 2–14.

 Google Scholar

Mahat, M. (2008). The development of a psychometrically-sound instrument to measure teachers’ multidimensional attitudes toward inclusive education. International Journal of Special Education, 23(1), 82–92.

 Google Scholar