Exploring Mexican lower secondary school students’ perceptions of inclusion

Figures & data

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the measures

	Emotional Well-being	Social Inclusion	Academic Self-concept	General Self-Efficacy	Intention to Quit
N	673	673	673	585	585
M	3.10	3.16	2.89	3.08	1.79
SD	.63	.61	.60	.61	1.02
Min	1	1	1	1	1
Max	4	4	4	4	5

Table 2. Correlations between the scales

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
Emotional Well-being	-
(2) Social Inclusion	.54**	-
(3) Academic Self-concept	.47**	.39**	-
(4) General Self-Efficacy	.29**	.30**	.46**	-
(5) Intention to Quit	−.31**	−.11	−.17**	.04

** p < .01.

Table 3. Fit statistics of the CFA models and for the group comparison across gender

Model	χ^2wlsmv	df	p	CFI	RMSEA	SRMR	Δχ^2	Δdf	p
Baseline models
Overall	357.858	51	<.001	.981	.096	.073
Male	189.952	51	<.001	.982	.093	.079
Female	222.431	51	<.001	.981	.100	.079
Group comparison
Configural invariance	412.383	102	<.001	.982	.097	.079
Metric invariance	459.444	111	<.001	.979	.098	.083	19.074	9	.025
Scalar invariance	464.286	132	<.001	.980	.088	.079	12.027	21	.007

n = 339 male students, n = 314 female students. WLSMV = weighted least-square means and variances estimator; CFI = comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual. Δχ² = Chi-square difference tests (with reference to the previous model).

Table 4. Fit statistics of the CFA models for the group comparison across classroom settings

Model	χ^2wlsmv	df	p	CFI	RMSEA	SRMR	Δχ^2	Δdf	p
Baseline models
Overall	385.388	51	<.001	.980	.099	.074
Inclusive	203.005	51	<.001	.975	.116	.089
Non-inclusive	233.156	51	<.001	.984	.089	.073
Group comparison
Configural invariance	436.161	102	<.001	.981	.099	.078
Metric invariance	453.444	111	<.001	.981	.096	.079	6.433	9	.696
Scalar invariance	476.744	132	<.001	.980	.088	.079	80.565	21	<.001

n = 448 students in inclusive classrooms, n = 224 students in non-inclusive classrooms. WLSMV = weighted least-square means and variances estimator; CFI = comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual. Δχ² = Chi-square difference tests (with reference to the previous model).

Table 5. Fit statistics of the CFA models for the group comparison across SEN status

Model	χ^2wlsmv	df	p	CFI	RMSEA	SRMR	Δχ^2	Δdf	p
Baseline models
Overall	384.702	51	<.001	.980	.099	.074
Non-SEN	307.312	51	<.001	.982	.094	.072
SEN	154.425	51	<.001	.942	.142	.131
Group comparison
Configural invariance	461.738	102	<.001	.978	.103	.081
Metric invariance	503.543	111	<.001	.976	.103	.084	15.937	9	.068
Scalar invariance	509.683	132	<.001	.977	.092	.082	8.408	21	.993

n = 572 students without SEN, n = 101 students with SEN. WLSMV = weighted least-square means and variances estimator; CFI = comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual. Δχ² = Chi-square difference tests (with reference to the previous model).