An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior to Examine the Impact of Classroom Inclusion on Elementary School Students

Abstract

Classroom inclusion serves as the most discussed service delivery model in the debate over the most appropriate way to provide education for students with disabilities. Integrating students with disabilities with nondisabled peers may increase attitudes of acceptance, but the literature also indicates that placement alone does not yield an increase in interaction between these two groups of peers (Brinker & Thorpe, 1986; Fryexe & Kennedy, 1995; Kennedy, Shulka, & Fryxell, 1997). This study investigated the impact of classroom inclusion on nondisabled students. Using survey research methods and guided by the Theory of Planned Behavior (Aizen, I. [1985]. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckman [Eds.], Action-control: From cognition to behavior [pp. 11–39]. Heidelberg: Springer), 593 responses were obtained from a convenience sample of 936 third, fourth, and fifth grade students and their parents from 52 classrooms spread across six different schools. Survey results were also collected from these students' parents and their teachers and used to add a richer depth to the data analysis. Implications for policy and practice are drawn. Limitations and recommendations for future research are also indicated.

KEYWORDS:

• Social justice
• inclusion
• equity
• and theory

Notes

This research project was aided by the financial support from the FAHS Beck Fund for Research and Experimentation (http://www.fahsbeckfund.org/). The FAHS Beck Fund for Research and Experimentation remains a renowned advocate for research efforts that contribute to a greater understanding of social problems affecting individuals, families and local communities.

Note. *Estimated at an average of 18 per class.

Note **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Note. *The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

Note. The chi-square statistic is the difference in −2 log-likelihoods between the final model and a reduced model. The reduced model is formed by omitting an effect from the final model. The null hypothesis is that all parameters of that effect are 0.

^aThis reduced model is equivalent to the final model because omitting the effect does not increase the degrees of freedom.