General Education Teachers' Perceptions of Inclusion for Children with Autism

Background:  In recent years, inclusion has become increasingly common practice for children with special needs (Kasari, Freeman, Bauminger, & Alkin, 1999).  Despite this growing trend, there has been some resistance from general education teachers, especially when students being included have been diagnosed with autism (McGregor & Campbell, 2001).  This issue often is exacerbated in schools located in large, urban districts, which often contend with additional barriers to inclusion related to a lack of resources.  Yet these districts serve a disproportionately large number of children with autism. More information is needed to better understand the beliefs and attitudes of general education teachers in these urban classrooms, as well as to assess their resource needs.

Objectives:  To assess general education teachers’ perceptions and attitudes toward the inclusion of children with autism in their classrooms, their beliefs regarding the child’s educational placement, and specific child, classroom, and school-related factors impacting these attitudes.

 Methods:  A survey including both quantitative and semi-structured components was developed and administered to elementary school teachers in a large, urban district as part of a pilot study.  Teachers answered survey items about individual students presently being included, as well as their perceptions of the success of inclusion in their schools. Eight teachers were administered the survey and offered consultation services. Teachers had an average of 10.25 years (range 1-30) of experience, while teaching experience specifically with students with autism ranged from 0 to 15 years (M=4.75).  On average, teachers had 25.5 students in their classrooms, with between 2 to 4 students with autism included.

Results:  Preliminary survey results indicate some general trends in beliefs about students’ educational placement.  Teachers rated the placement of only 44% students as being “completely appropriate,” with placement for 33% of students was considered as “somewhat appropriate,” and placement for 22% students deemed “somewhat inappropriate.”  When asked specifically if they would suggest a change of placement, teachers reported that they would recommend 33% of students for more restrictive settings, although overall, teachers thought that the majority of students (66%) should remain in their present placements.  Teachers felt their own skills in managing a child with autism were strong, but that the students did not always come in to the classroom prepared for the demands of the general education setting.  Resource needs mentioned by teachers included strategies for promoting socialization between children with autism and their peers, training regarding the implementation of IEP goals, as well as continued support from professional staff (i.e. special education teachers).  Overall, all teachers reported positive attitudes about including children with autism in their classrooms.

Conclusions:  Although these findings represent a small sample of teachers, the information collected provides an in-depth look at the needs of these teachers within the classroom.  Results also indicate the need to explore child ‘readiness,’ prior to entering the general classroom setting.  Overall, teachers were not resistant to having children with autism included in their classroom, but felt they need additional resource to make this process successful.