Faculty Perceptions of Inclusive Education at Cuba-Rushford Central School

Kymrie Sisson

St. Bonaventure University

Foundations of Inclusive Education

Dr. Anne-Claire Fisher

 Faculty Perceptions 1

Introduction

Is a school whose administration states that they are fully inclusive, really fully

inclusive? Do all teachers, both in general and special education, agree with the

administration, or do they have their own views and definitions of inclusion? Could there

be differences in those perceptions among not only the administration and teachers, but

also among the different types of teachers (general and special education)? How many

different perceptions and definitions of inclusion can be found in one small high school?

Cuba-Rushford Central School is a small middle/high school in the Cuba

Rushford school district in Cuba, NY. Enrolled are approximately 600 students in both

the middle and high school levels. These 600 students are mostly White students, plus

a small percentage of Asian, Black, and Hispanic students. Also, employed by CRCS is

approximately 70 faculty members. These faculty members include the superintendent

of the school district, the middle and high school principals, and full-time and part-time

general education teachers and special education teachers.

By surveying and interviewing a mixture of administration figures, general

education teachers (at both the middle and high school levels), and special education

teacher, I hoped to get a better idea of how a small school like CRCS perceives and

defines inclusion from all levels of the educational system. I believe that it is important

for all faculty members of a school district to be in agreement as to what the true

definition of inclusion is and how deep into the practice of inclusion the school actually

is. There will always be minor differences in definitions and perceptions, but I believe
 Faculty Perceptions 2

that in order for inclusion to truly make a difference, administrators, teachers, and all

other faculty should be in agreement with how much the school is willing to offer.

In the one and a half years I have been employed in the Cuba Rushford School

District, I have already started to notice, with recent information from interviews and

surveys, that there are some discrepancies between how general education teachers

and special education teachers perceive and define inclusion. In two back-to-back

interviews, one with an administrator and one with a special education teacher, I

received two very different views on how inclusive CRCS is believed to be. There are

also some differences between the high school and middle school levels due to the

states higher expectations of students and the fact that students at the high school level

in New York State are required to pass a certain number of state exams in order to

graduate from high school.

As previously stated, I chose to use interviews and anonymous surveys with

faculty members at different levels of employment to obtain a better feeling and

understanding of the thoughts and views of everyone at the school. When handing out

the surveys, I specifically stated that they and their responses would remain anonymous

in the hopes that I would receive more expressive and truthful answers to the questions

brought up on the surveys. When interviewing faculty members, I chose to single out

the superintendent, the high school principal, a general education teacher, and a special

education teacher. I believed that this would give me a good view, along with the

anonymous surveys, of the different perceptions. In the end, it did just that.
 Faculty Perceptions 3

By carrying out and furthering this research, I hope to, one day, bring the Cuba

Rushford School District into a more fully inclusive setting. This would mean the hiring

of more special education teachers, more resources for general education teachers to

turn to, and more willingness from general education teachers to include all types of

students with different levels of severity of their specific disabilities in their classrooms.

CRCS may be a small school in a small town few have heard of, but I believe that

extraordinary changes and improvements can be made in the most unsuspecting of

places.

Conceptual Framework

Inclusive education has been created and based off of the No Child Left Behind

Act and the Least Restrictive Environment principle (LRE) which emerged in the 1960s.

NCLB requires states to determine challenging standards for all students and measure

student progress against these standards (Downing, 2006, pp. 327). While this helps

all students, it can strictly help raise learning expectations for student with multiple

levels of disabilities, from minor to severe. Most teachers and administration will agree

that the only way to do this is to include and support these students in general

education classroom that fit their age group and adapt to their needs (Downing, 2006).

The LRE principle has become state policy and is widely accepted by teachers and

other faculty. It has been represented as a continuum of services ranging from the most

to least restrictive alternative (Taylor, 1988, pp. 15). It idealizes residential, vocational,

and educational services. LRE began when educators vied for a range of special

education places for students with disabilities. By 1976, LRE had become a practice

that allowed students to be educated in an environment that satisfactorily provided

 Faculty Perceptions 4

resources for their needs (Taylor, 1988). This practice could be applied to student who

are placed in a general education classroom, as well as those students who are still

pulled out for specific topics and subjects. As this applies to students on both ends of

the spectrum, the most effective accommodations for different types of students are

those that treat each student with respect. Accommodations that just make everything

easier for a student (and sometimes the teacher as well) only promote the students

dependence on others (Vaughn & Arguelles, 2000).

Studies have been done all over the world to determine different teacher

perceptions of inclusive education. Many have been done in the United States, while

others have been done in other countries as well. Throughout all of these studies, one

would notice that there is an overarching agreement between all school faculty

members, regardless of their position in the school. I believe this agreement was stated

best by Vaughn and Arguelles (2000) when they said that one of the most essential

goals is to help all students recognize that they are important and that they are

members of the school community.

According to Leatherman (2007), teachers perceptions of inclusion are based on

many factors including the abilities and disabilities of the students, and the support from

teachers and other adults in the classroom. Leatherman equates this to Vygotskys

social constructivist theory from 1978. In this theory he states that our knowledge is

shaped or constructed through the social influences and interactions within our

environment (Leatherman, 2007, pp. 595). In other words, the social experiences we

have had shape our reality as we see it (Leatherman, 2007, pp. 609). Many of the

teachers and administration interviewed and surveyed at Cuba-Rushford agree that not
 Faculty Perceptions 5

only do students need to be in school for the academic and educational aspect, but they

are there for the social aspect as well. The adaptations addressed by Vaughn and

Arguelles (2000) include a section on social skills training. This training teaches

students specific social behaviors that are supported in the learning environment, how

they can adapt these behaviors and procedures and make them their own, and allows

them the time and resources to practice them in many different environments.

Jackson, Ryndak, and Billingsly (2000), also found that educators believed the

following to be important pieces of inclusive education: collaboration between general

and special educators, and family involvement. Minondo, Meyer, and Xin (2001) show

that this is where Teaching Assistants (TAs) can come in. They can serve as a liaison

between the general education teachers and the special education teachers, and also

between the school and the community. They provide direct and indirect services to

students and their families. TAs can sit in a general education classroom with a student

with disabilities to help them focus on and understand the material being presented to

them.

Leatherman (2007) also stated that all participants in her study agreed that

inclusive education was positive, but that they all felt they needed more in-service

training in order to be more comfortable with the situation. In talking with some of the

teachers at Cuba-Rushford, I noticed that this was also an overarching trend. The

teachers who believed that we as a school could be doing more to include students with

disabilities into our general education classrooms said that training in these areas would

be very beneficial. General education teachers arent always trained to handle and

successfully teach students with disabilities, while special education teachers arent
 Faculty Perceptions 6

always trained in how to teach a full classroom of students. This is where the gap lies. A

study done in the Swanton school district in Vermont by Schattman and Keating (2000),

showed this point well. The Swanton school district was determined to fully use and

perfect inclusive education in their schools. The believed in shared leadership, not only

among general education and special education teachers, but also among

administrators, parents, and community members. The faculty in this school district

knew that the only way to learn techniques for teaching students with disabilities was to

attend training sessions that would teach these techniques.

Research Question

I decided to research the perceptions of teachers on inclusive education in the

Cuba-Rushford school district when I began to notice that there were discrepancies

between what I had heard that we as a school do and implement, and what I was

actually seeing and hearing from other teachers. I fully believe in the benefits of

inclusive education, as do many other teachers and prior researchers on the topic. My

goal for this research is to hopefully, one day, be able to help strengthen and perfect

Cuba-Rushfords use and implementation of inclusive education in all areas and

curricula. From personal experience, I do know that we use some form of inclusive

education, but from talking with other teachers, both in general and special education, I

have begun to notice that there is way more that the school could be doing, especially in

the area of training teachers in the effective procedures of inclusive education.

My questions for this research were based off one major question: How do

administrators, general education teachers (middle and high school), and special
 Faculty Perceptions 7

education teachers perceive and define inclusive education in Cuba-Rushford? From

this, I hoped to find similarities and differences, if any, in the definition of inclusion and if

teachers and administrators believed the school is fully inclusive. Also, if there need to

be changes made, I wanted to see what administrators and teachers both thought these

changes should include.

Research Methods

In order to gain the information needed for this research, I needed to collect data

from faculty in all major areas in the school. I surveyed and interviewed administrators,

general education teachers in both the middle and high school, and also special

education teachers in both areas. Most of these faculty members are those whom I

have worked closely with in the past and am still in close contact with. I asked the

following questions on the survey:

1. In which area do you work? Circle one.

a. Special Education

b. General Education

c. Other (specify)

2. What do you believe is the definition of Inclusive Education?

3. Do you believe that the Cuba-Rushford School District practices Inclusive

Education (by your definition)?

a. If you said yes, explain why you believe that.

b. If you said no, explain why you believe that.

 Faculty Perceptions 8

4. Should the Cuba-Rushford School District do more in the area of Inclusive

Education, or do you think it is being implemented enough just the way it is?

The interviews I had with specific faculty members also asked the following questions:

1. In what position do you work at CRCS, and for how long?

2. What do you believe is the definition of Inclusive Education?

3. Do you believe that CRCS practices Inclusive Education?

4. Would you be willing to give an example that would illustrate your answer to the
previous question?

5. Do you believe that anything needs to be changed as far as the amount of

Inclusive Education that CRCS implements into the school system?

Along with interviews and surveys, I used correspondence through email and also small

classroom observations. These classroom observations were observations by teachers

other than myself in their own classrooms.

I will be organizing the data I collect by identifying major themes and differences

among the teachers and administrators at Cuba-Rushford. I will present a chart with the

percentages of teachers who have beliefs in four areas: Those who believe Cuba-

Rushford is fully inclusive and doesnt need to change, those who believe Cuba-

Rushford is very close to being fully inclusive, but needs improvement, those who do

not believe Cuba-Rushford is fully inclusive, and needs improvement, and those who do

not believe Cuba-Rushford is fully inclusive, and should stay just the way it is.

My research, when compared with prior research by others, looks very similar.

My research methods are the same as those whom I have collected data from, and their

results seem to be along the same line as mine.

 Faculty Perceptions 9

Validity

I believe that my information and data are valid, but will allow for competing and

discrepant data in the future. Others have different views than myself, and may see

results differently than I.

Preliminary Results

From my research at Cuba-Rushford, I found some trends I thought I would find

going into this. I noticed that teacher and administration definitions of inclusive

education are all very similar. When interviewing the teachers and administration, they

gave very textbook answers to the question What do you believe is the definition of

inclusion? The common thread among all the different definitions can be seen in one

definition of a general education teacher. This teacher stated that inclusive education is

an educational system where all students, regardless of ability or the presence of a

disability, engage in learning together in one classroom.

While all teacher and administration definitions were very similar, their beliefs on

the amount of inclusion being implemented in the school system were, sometimes, quite

different. The following pie chart shows the percentages of teachers in four different

categories: 1. those who believe CRCS is inclusive and needs no change, 2. those who

believe CRCS is inclusive but needs to change, 3. those who believe CRCS is inclusive,

but shouldnt be, and 4. those who believe CRCS is not inclusive and should stay that

way.
 Faculty Perceptions 10

As you can see from the chart, the majority of the faculty believes that Cuba-

Rushford is a fully inclusive setting, but could use some change. Most of the specific

ideas for change came from the teachers, in both general and special education. The

ideas from teachers at Cuba-Rushford are very similar to ideas previously mentioned

and found in the research from prior studies. Teacher training was one of the main

topics of conversation among the surveys. Most of the faculty surveyed believe that

both general education teachers and special education teachers need to be trained in

different areas to help them better their teaching techniques and easily adapt to many

different situations in the classroom.

 Faculty Perceptions 11

One of the teachers who stated that Cuba-Rushford is inclusive and perfect the

way it is, is a middle school teacher. According to a different middle school teacher, the

middle school does more with inclusion than the high school. This person stated that the

middle school is totally inclusive. They also brought up the fact that a lot of the included

students were not in inclusive classrooms in the elementary school. So, even though

the middle school seems to be fully inclusive, they find it hard to include students who

havent had any experience in a general education classroom before.

The teachers who said that Cuba-Rushford is either fully inclusive and shouldnt

be that way, or that Cuba-Rushford is not inclusive at all and should stay that way never

gave an explanation. They just shared their thought and that was it.

Conclusion

In my research, I have come to the conclusion that at Cuba-Rushford, a small

school in western NY, there are different views and perceptions on inclusive education

among the faculty. The views of the administration are different from the views of the

general education teachers in some aspects, while both have different views than the

special education teachers. I believe my research might be helpful to other educators

because they will be able to see what types of views, similar and different, the faculty at

a small school has in regards to inclusive education.

With my research, I would like to be able to make a difference at Cuba-Rushford.

I know that I cannot make a difference in a short amount of time, so it would take baby

steps. I hope to be able to convince the administration that more training for teachers at

different levels might be beneficial in furthering the inclusive process. Also, getting
 Faculty Perceptions 12

teachers together, both special and general education, to talk about what could be done

to make inclusion grow more smoothly would also be a beneficial step closer to

becoming a fully inclusive school at all levels.

References

Downing, J. (2006). On peer support, universal design, and access to the core
curriculum for students with severe disabilities: A personnel preparation
perspective. Research & Perspective for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31(4),
327-330.
 Faculty Perceptions 13

Jackson, L., Ryndak, D. L., & Billingsley, F. (2000). Useful practices in inclusive
education: A preliminary view of what experts in moderate to severe disabilities
are saying. The Association of Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25(3), 129-141.

Leatherman, J. (2007). I just see all children as children: Teachers perceptions about
inclusion. The Qualitative Report, 12(4), 596-611. Retreived November 29, 2009,
from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/000001
9b/80/3e/26/4c.pdf

Minondo, S., Meyer, L. H., & Xin, J. F. (2001). The role and responsibilities of teaching
assistants in inclusive education: Whats appropriate? The Association for
Persons with Severe Handicaps. 26(2), 114-119.

Schattman, R. & Keating, L. (2000). The Swanton school district (Franklin northwest
supervisory union). R. A. Villa & J. S. Thousand (Eds.), Restructuring for caring
and effective education piecing the puzzle together (pp. 453-468). Baltimore:
Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

Taylor, S. J. (1988). Caught in the continuum: A critical analysis of the principle of the
least restrictive environment. The Association for Persons with Severe
Handicaps, 13(1), 41-53.

Vaughn, S. & Arguelles, M. E. (2000). Adaptations in general education classrooms. R.

A. Villa & J. S. Thousand (Eds.), Restructuring for caring and effective education
piecing the puzzle together (pp. 166-185). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes
Publishing.