Content uploaded by Wendy Symes
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Wendy Symes
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Inclusive education for pupils with autistic spectrum disorders in
secondary mainstream schools: teacher attitudes, experience and
knowledge
Cite as: Humphrey, N. & Symes, W. (under review). Inclusive education for pupils
with autistic spectrum disorders in secondary mainstream schools: teacher
attitudes, experience and knowledge. International Journal of Inclusive
Education.
Neil Humphrey and Wendy Symes
School of Education
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester
M13 9PL
Email: neil.humphrey@manchester.ac.uk
Tel: 0161 275 3404
Fax: 0161 275 3548
2
Abstract
The aim of the current study was to examine the experience, attitudes and
knowledge of school staff in relation to inclusive education for pupils with ASDs in
secondary mainstream schools. 53 participants from 11 secondary schools in
the north-west of England completed a survey that covered socio-demographic
information and teaching experience, perceptions of inclusion within their school,
experience and knowledge of ASDs, influences on integration of pupils with
ASDs, ability to cope with behaviours associated with ASDs, and benefits and
problems associated with integration of pupils with ASD in mainstream schools.
We found more positive responses than have been reported in previous studies,
indicating that attitudes towards inclusion of this particular group of learners may
be changing over time. Our analysis also showed that senior managers and
SENCOs reported greater self-efficacy in teaching pupils with ASD and in coping
with behaviours associated with ASD than did subject teachers. Finally,
respondents reported social inclusion as both a potential benefit and challenge
for pupils with ASD. The implications of these findings for future training and
practice are discussed.
Keywords: autistic spectrum disorders; inclusive education; teacher attitudes
3
Introduction
Children and young people with autistic spectrum disorders (ASDs) experience
difficulties in communication, interaction and imagination (Wing, 2007). In line
with educational policy both in England and internationally (e.g. Department for
Education and Employment, 1997; United Nations Educational, 1994), increasing
numbers of such pupils are being educated in mainstream settings (Dybvik,
2004; Keen & Ward, 2004). However, schools have struggled to keep pace with
these developments. Indeed, Humphrey and Lewis (2008) describe this as one of
the most complex and poorly understood areas of education. Pupils with ASDs
are viewed as more difficult to effectively include than pupils with other special
educational needs (SEN) (House of Commons Education and Skills Committee,
2006) and research indicates that they are more likely to be excluded from
school than most other groups of learners (Barnard, Prior, & Potter, 2000;
Department for Education and Skills, 2006; National Autistic Society, 2003).
Teachers play a key role in the successful inclusion of pupils with ASDs (Burack,
Root, & Zigler, 1997; Emam & Farrell, 2009; McGregor & Campbell, 2001).
However, whilst all pupils may benefit academically and socially from positive
relationships with their teachers (Robertson, Chamberlain, & Kasari, 2003) those
with ASDs can present a challenge in this regard. Teachers of pupils with ASDs
report tensions when dealing with the difficulties these pupils have in social and
emotional understanding, and these tensions can determine the quality of
4
teacher-pupil interactions (Emam & Farrell, 2009). The disinterest in interaction
and behavioural problems sometimes displayed by learners with ASDs can make
it less likely for teachers to report having a positive relationship with them
(Robertson, Chamberlain, & Kasari, 2003). Natof and Romanczyk (2009) warn
against generalising from what is appropriate for typically developing pupils to
those with ASDs. They argue, for example, that certain aspects of the pupil-
teacher relationship may not be relevant to this group of learners. Indeed, these
authors found that the level of teacher attention received had almost no impact
on the academic performance of pupils with ASDs.
Even if the pupil-teacher relationship does not have an impact on the academic
inclusion of pupils with ASDs, it has been found to determine the degree to which
they are socially included. Robertson, Chamberlain & Kasari (2003) found that
the more negative relationship teachers had with such pupils, the less socially
accepted they were by their peers. This is particularly worrying as the difficulties
in social interaction experienced by pupils with ASDs already put them at risk of
negative social outcomes. They are up to three times more likely to be bullied,
are less likely to receive social support and are more likely to be rejected than
their peers (Symes & Humphrey, 2010). Pupils with ASD are also more likely to
spend more of their break and lunchtimes alone, and engage less in co-operative
interaction with other children than those with other or no SEN (Humphrey &
Symes, under review).
5
A way to minimise these negative social outcomes then, might be to ensure
teachers have appropriate training to successfully include pupils with ASDs
within their classrooms (McGregor & Campbell, 2001; Rose, 2001; Simpson, de
Boer-Ott, & Smith-Myles, 2003). Parents of pupils with ASD identify teacher
training as the single most enabling factor in providing for their children in the
mainstream setting (Jindal-Snape, Douglas, Topping, Kerr, & Smith, 2005).
Similarly, Jordan & Jones(1997) claim that staff training should be a key part of
this provision if schools are to meet the needs of pupils with ASD and policies
should be in place to ensure it is received (Centre for Studies on Inclusive
Education, 2002).
It is proposed that teaching pupils with ASDs may require specific approaches
that are not familiar to mainstream teachers (Leach & Duffy, 2009). However,
whilst teachers believe that learning these skills would make a positive difference
to their classroom practice (Lian et al., 2008) many currently lack the training to
adequately support such pupils (Dybvik, 2004; McGregor & Campbell, 2001;
Robertson, Chamberlain, & Kasari, 2003) and feel unable to meet their needs
(Sinzc, 2004). Indeed, teaching practices and strategies for pupils with ASDs
have been identified as a key ‘gap’ in the knowledge base for SEN provision
(Humphrey & Parkinson, 2006). Furthermore, which strategies are used can vary
with the age of the pupil, the classroom setting and the pupil being included
(Hess, Morrier, Heflin, & Ivey, 2008). Therefore it is important to provide teachers
with as many strategies as possible. Teacher training not only ensures that pupils
6
are more included in lessons, it can also make teachers feel more confident in
dealing with pupils with ASD (Glashan, Mackay, & Grieve, 2004), whilst a lack of
training has been linked to heightened teacher anxiety (Sinz, 2004). Evaluation of
teacher training programmes for teachers working with pupils with ASDs have
found that training can result in increased awareness of ASDs (Leblanc,
Richardson, & Burns, 2009) alongside a significant improvement in the
classroom behaviour of pupils with ASD and reduced teacher stress (Probst &
Leppert, 2008). In terms of SEN more generally, training can also result in
teachers having a more positive attitude towards inclusion (Avramidis, Bayliss, &
Burden, 2000; Horrocks, White, & Roberts, 2008; Huang & Wheeler, 2007). This
is important as positive attitudes toward inclusion are cited as a second important
prerequiste to successful inclusion of pupils with ASDs (McGregor & Campbell,
2001). Direct experience of inclusion can also raise positive attitudes (Avramidis,
Bayliss, & Burden, 2000), particularly with pupils with ASDs (McGregor &
Campbell, 2001). However, many teachers still feel that additional support from a
teaching assistant (TA) is important (Rose, 2001), not only for the pupil with ASD,
but for their peers as well (Sincz 2004).
However, whilst teacher training and attitude towards inclusion are important, it is
also vital to consider the wider-school context. Indeed, there is a call to move
away from focusing upon pupil deficits towards a whole-school approach of
reviewing practices and learning styles (Rose, 2001). Similarly, research
stresses the importance of a whole-school approach to inclusion (Centre for
7
Studies on Inclusive Education, 2002). In relation to including pupils with ASDs it
is argued that positive outcomes cannot be achieved by just a few members of
staff, rather: “Schools need to buy in wholesale to inclusion if it is to work.
Inclusion cannot rely on the interest, commitment and enthusiasm of one or two
individuals. Without a shift in the whole organisation’s attitude and approach it
will fail children with autism and Asperger syndrome” (Barnard, Prior, & Potter,
2000, p. 12). This whole-school inclusion requires all staff to have a clear and
shared understanding of the aims and expectation of inclusion within their school
(Eldara, Talmora, & Wolf-Zukermana, 2010; Huang & Wheeler, 2007), and these
must be supported by senior management (Horrocks, White, & Roberts, 2008).
The current study: a rationale
Inclusive education for pupils with ASD is one of the most complex and poorly
understood areas of education (Humphrey & Lewis, 2008). In particular, there
have been calls for further research into effective teaching strategies and
approaches for this group of learners (Humphrey & Parkinson, 2006). However,
the practice of inclusion is not simply about the application of particular
pedagogical methods – it is underpinned by staff attitudes, knowledge and
experience. This is a particularly important consideration in relation to pupils with
ASD, who are considered amongst the most difficult to effectively ‘include’ in
mainstream settings (House of Commons Education and Skills Committee,
2006). However, with the exception of a small handful of papers (e.g. McGregor
8
& Campbell, 2001), this aspect of inclusion remains somewhat underexplored in
ASD research. In light of this, the aim of the current study was to examine the
attitudes, experience and knowledge of school staff in relation to inclusive
education for pupils with ASDs in secondary mainstream schools. Specifically,
we were interested in:
(i) staff perceptions of overall levels of inclusion within their schools,
(ii) their experience and knowledge of working with pupils with ASDs,
(iii) perceived ability to cope with key behaviours associated with ASDs,
(iv) their beliefs about different influences on integration of pupils with ASD,
(v) the relationship between (i), (iii) and (iv), and
(vi) any differences between school senior managers (including special
educational needs co-ordinators – SENCOs) and subject teachers in
relation to the above
Although the study was primarily designed to add to the knowledge base in this
rather impoverished area of research, we were also mindful of the potential
practical applications of our findings. Identifying behaviours that teachers find
difficult to cope with, for example, can help focus teacher training. This is
important as teachers feel they benefit most from training abut specific strategies
to deal with specific behaviours (Marks et al., 2003). Thus, addressing the aims
and objectives outlined above could add to both theoretical and practical
knowledge about inclusive education for pupils with ASD.
9
All of the data reported in this article were collected during the execution of a
larger project on inclusive education for pupils with ASD funded by the Economic
and Social Research Council (grant reference RES-061-25-0054).
10
Method
Design
The study utilised a cross-sectional survey design, incorporating both open and
closed response formats.
Participants
53 participants (21 male, 32 female) from 11 mainstream secondary schools
across the North-West of England took part in the study. 11 of the questionnaires
were completed by members of senior management, 10 by SENCOS and 32 by
English, maths or science teachers1. Of them, 8 teachers were under 30 years
old, 19 were between 31-40 years old, 10 were between 41-50 years old and the
remaining 16 were over 50.
Materials
All participants completed a 58 item questionnaire (see Appendix 1), which
covered: (i) socio-demographic information and teaching experience [5 items], (ii)
perceptions of inclusion within their school [28 items], (iii) experience and
knowledge of ASDs [4 items], (iv) influence on integration of pupils with ASDs [7
items], (v) ability to cope with behaviours associated with ASDs [10 items], and
(vi) benefits and problems associated with integration of pupils with ASD in
mainstream schools. With the exception of section (ii), which was drawn from
1 In the interests of brevity and to increase the statistical power of our analysis, the SENCO
responses were combined with those of the senior management into one group (SM) to allow
comparison with subject teachers (ST).
11
the Manchester Inclusion Standard (Fox & Messiou, 2004), items in the survey
were adapted from McGregor and Campbell’s (2001) study.
One key adaptation of note relates to section (v). After consultation with the
project steering group of the wider study (which comprised a SENCO, an
Educational Psychologist, a Professor of SEN and a representative from the
National Autistic Society), it was decided that the 10 behaviours originally listed
by McGregor and Campbell (2001) were not representative of pupils with ASD in
contemporary mainstream secondary school settings2, so all but one of the
original items (‘high-levels of anxiety’) were replaced with new items developed
by the group.
Procedure
The SENCO at each school completed a questionnaire, and was asked to
choose an English, maths and science teacher, and a member of senior
management to also fill one in. Respondents were asked to complete the
questionnaires independently and return it to the researchers in the envelope
provided.
Ethical considerations
Informed consent was sought at two levels (school leadership and participant),
and all other standard ethical considerations in educational and psychological
2 The original survey was designed for use with teachers in specialist as well as mainstream
settings, making some of the items in this section inappropriate and/or invalid.
12
research (e.g. anonymity and right to withdraw) (British Educational Research
Association, 2004; British Psychological Society, 2004) were followed.
Respondents were asked to complete the questionnaire at a time convenient to
them to minimise any disruption to their working day.
13
Results
Quantitative data
Perceptions of inclusion within school
The items in this section utilized a Likert 1-4 scale response format, and were
combined to produce a total ‘school inclusion’ score with a possible range of 28-
112 (with higher scores indicating higher levels of inclusion). The mean school
inclusion score for the overall sample was 86.1, indicating a relatively high
degree of inclusion. The mean inclusion score for the SM group was 88.9 and
for the ST group was 84.3 – although this difference was not statistically
significant (p>.05).
Experience and knowledge of ASD
Items in this section followed a binary forced choice (e.g. yes/no) response
format. Overall, 38 respondents felt they had the skills to teach a child with an
ASD, whilst 14 did not. 19 (90.5%) in the SM group felt they had the skills to
teacher a child with an ASD, whilst 2 (9.5%) did not. 19 (61.3%) teachers felt
they had the skills to teach a child with an ASD, and 12 (38.7%) did not. A Chi-
Square test revealed that this difference between groups was statistically
significant [χ2 (1) = 5.420, p<.05], indicating that senior managers and SENCOs
14
were more likely to feel they had the skills to teach a child with an ASD than
subject teachers.
50 of the respondents had experience of teaching a child with an ASD, whilst 3
did not. 1 (4.8%) of the SM group had never taught a child with an ASD, whilst
the remaining 20 (95.2%) had. 2 (6.3%) in the ST group had never taught a child
with an ASD, but 30 (93.8%) had. A Chi-Square test revealed that there was no
significant difference in the experience of the two groups (p>.05).
Overall, 46 (86.8%) of respondents felt they would be likely or very likely to
attend training about ASD if it was available. The SM group were slightly more
likely to attend, with 90% saying they would be likely or very likely to attend,
compared with 81% of the ST group, but this difference was not statistically
significant (p>.05).
Respondents were asked to rank the ASD ‘triad of impairments’ (socialisation,
communication and imagination) in the order they anticipated would cause the
most difficulties for their practice. Based on these rankings, a score for each
impairment was generated to indicate which was viewed as the most
problematic. Overall, communication was found to be the most problematic
impairment, whilst imagination was considered to be the least problematic. The
same results were obtained when exploring the SM and ST responses
separately.
15
Ability to cope with behaviours associated with ASD
The items in this section utilized a Likert 1-5 scale response format, and were
combined to create a total ‘coping’ score, ranging from 10 to 50 (with higher
scores indicating greater difficulty in coping). The overall mean score for the 10
items regarding the ability to cope with behaviours displayed by pupils with ASD
was 22.3 (SD = 5.79), suggesting that overall respondents felt they could cope
with the behaviours (this mean relates to an item average of 2.23 on a range of
1-5). The SM scored a mean overall score of 20.1 (SD = 5.92), whilst the ST
mean score was 23.7 (SD = 5.32). This difference was statistically significant [t
(50) = -2.317, p<.05], indicating that senior managers and SENCOs found it
easier to cope with behaviours associated with ASD than subject teachers.
The overall, SM and teacher mean scores for each item are displayed in the
graph below:
Figure 1. Respondents’ ability to cope with behaviours associated with
ASD.
<< Figure 1 here >>
16
Overall, respondents found ‘displaying inappropriate emotions’ the most difficult
behaviour to cope with, whilst ‘need for routine’ was seen as the easiest. Both
groups of respondents found the ‘displaying inappropriate emotions’ behaviour
the most difficult to cope with. SM found ‘lack of eye contact’ the easiest
behaviour to cope with, whilst ST found the ‘need for rigid routine’ easiest. The
SM consistently found the listed behaviours easier to cope with than the teachers
did. A series of t-test showed that these differences were significant for
‘rigid/literal thinking’ [t (50) = -2.369, p<.05], ‘lack of social understanding’ [t (50)
= -2.186, p<.05], ‘lack of eye contact’ [t (50) = -2.325, p<.05] and ‘poor turn taking
skills’ [t (50) = -2.549, p<.05].
Influences on integration of pupils with ASDs
The items in this section utilized a Likert 1-5 scale response format, and were
combined to create a total ‘influences on integration’ score ranging from 7 to 35
(following Low’s (2007) taxonomy, lower scores were interpreted as representing
more ‘moderate’ views on integration, and higher scores as representing more
‘universalist’ views3). The overall mean score for ‘influence on integration’ items
was 19.7 (SD = 4.36), indicating a mixed-to-moderate viewpoint. The overall
mean score for the SM group was 20.1 (SD = 5.24) and for the ST group it was
19.5 (SD = 3.75). This marginal difference was not statistically significant [t (51) =
3 The moderate view of inclusion suggests that integration depends upon a range of factors and
is not appropriate for all children; the universalist view suggests that there should be no such
‘conditions’ placed upon a child’s right to be educated in his/her local mainstream school.
17
.546, p>.05]. The overall, SM and ST mean responses to each item are displayed
in the graph below:
Figure 2. Teachers’ views of influences on integration of pupils with ASD.
<< figure 2 here >>
In general, SM had higher item scores (indicating more universalist views) than
ST. However, a series of t-tests revealed that there were no significant
differences between the SM and ST mean scores for these items (all p>.05),
suggesting that senior managers/SENCOs and subject teachers have similar
attitudes towards the successful integration of children with ASDs.
Relationship between perceptions of inclusion within school, ability to cope with
ASD behaviours and influences on integration of pupils with ASD
The relationship between total scores for these three sections of the
questionnaire were examined using a Pearson’s correlation. The total coping
score was positively correlated with total influences on integration score, and
negatively correlated with the total school inclusion score, but these relationships
were not statistically significant (p>.05). The total school inclusion score was
negatively correlated with total successful integration score, and this correlation
was statistically significant (r= -.272, p<0.5). This indicates that participants with
18
more moderate views on integration were more likely to feel that there were high
levels of inclusion within their school.
Qualitative data
Due to overlap in responses, the qualitative responses from SM and ST are
presented together.
What benefits do you think a child with ASD may gain if integrated into a
mainstream school?
Respondents overwhelming cited social inclusion, including developing social
skills, learning to interact with peers and making friends, as the key benefits to a
child with ASD integrated into mainstream school (n=23, e.g. ‘they would be able
to develop appropriate social skills’). Developing coping strategies that can be
used in wider society (n=6, e.g. ‘preparation for life…experience of practicing
coping skills’) was also seen as a benefit, as was access to a range of subjects
(n=6, e.g. ‘a greater range of subjects’). Other benefits included avoiding stigma
associated with attending a special school (n=3, e.g. ‘less stigma within home
and community’) and learning to accept pupils who are different from themselves
(n=3, e.g. ‘gives them a better understanding of pupils without ASD’).
19
What problems do you think a child with ASD may encounter if integrated into a
mainstream school?
In contrast to responses to the question above, social inclusion was identified as
a problem pupils with ASD would encounter; this included bullying, isolation and
difficulty making friends (n=24, e.g. ‘isolation, especially at social times’). Lack of
awareness from peers (n=10, e.g. ‘encountering other students who don’t
understand ASD and problems associated with this’) and staff (n=9, e.g. ‘staff not
understanding needs’) were also cited as problems pupils with ASDs might
encounter. Stress was seen as another problem (n=7, e.g. ‘may feel
overwhelmed’), as was difficulty coping with changes in routine (n=6, e.g.
‘struggle to cope with changing routines’).
What benefits do you think a pupil in mainstream schools may gain when a child
with ASD is integrated into mainstream school?
Respondents felt that the key benefits mainstream pupils would gain from a child
with ASD integrated into mainstream was increased understanding and tolerance
of people different to themselves (n= 25, e.g. ‘understanding that people are
individuals, everyone is different and that all should be valued’), and the chance
to experience a wider society (n=6, e.g. ‘experience of more society, not just
‘mainstream’ or ‘normal’ ability pupils’). It would also lead to an increased
understanding of ASD (n=6, e.g. ‘a greater understanding of children with ASDs’)
20
and help them develop social skills to interact with people different from
themselves (n=2, e.g. ‘learn to interact with peers who think or react differently’).
What problems do you think pupils in mainstream schools may encounter when a
child with ASDs is integrated into mainstream school?
The major problem peers may experience were identified as frustration and
difficulty accepting why a pupil with ASD is treated differently, such as why
certain behaviours go unpunished (n=15, e.g. ‘difficulties understanding why
different rules and expectations apply. This could be seen as unfair’). It was also
felt that a number of pupils may feel uncomfortable when confronted by
inappropriate and aggressive behaviour from a pupil with ASD (n=10, e.g. ‘some
children may feel uncomfortable when faced with aggressive behaviour’). There
were concerns that pupils with ASD may disrupt the learning of mainstream
peers (n=7, e.g. ‘possibility of disturbance within lessons if regimes are not kept’),
and that pupils may experience difficulties trying to understand the behaviour of
pupils with ASD (n=5, e.g. ‘they may struggle to understand why the ASD child
behaves in a certain way’). Finally, respondents felt that if appropriate support
was not available in the classroom, the presence of a pupil with ASD might result
in reduced attention from the teacher for the other pupils (n=3, e.g. ‘if proper
support isn’t available, pupils may have a lack of attention directed towards
them…they need a lot of person power’).
21
Discussion
Our survey revealed several interesting patterns and trends which may prove
useful in thinking about future teacher training needs and issues around inclusive
education for students with ASD more generally. We begin this discussion
section with a brief overview of our main findings. Firstly, respondents reported
relatively high levels of inclusion within their schools – this gives a clear
indication that they felt they were operating in an environment that should be
conducive to the integration of learners with ASD. However, subject teachers
reported significantly lower self-efficacy in relation to having the skills necessary
to teach such students than did senior managers and SENCOs. This difference
did not appear to be related to having had direct experience of teaching students
with ASD though, with over 90% of both groups having taught at least one such
student. On the whole, around 4 in every 5 respondents reported that they would
attend further training on ASD if this were made available – indicating a strong
willingness to develop their knowledge and expertise. In terms of ability to cope
with certain behaviours associated with ASD, the sample as a whole responded
positively, but subject teachers reported significantly lower coping than senior
managers and SENCOs. More specifically, they felt less able to cope with
students’ rigid and/or literal thinking, lack of social understanding, lack of eye
contact, and poor turn-taking skills. Taking the sample as a whole, the
behaviours that were viewed as the most problematic were inappropriate
emotional displays, heightened anxiety, and poor turn-taking skills. With regard
22
to influences on integration, the sample presented a mixed-to-moderate
viewpoint, and this was directly related to their views of inclusion within their
school, with more moderate views being associated with more positive views of
school inclusion. Finally, respondents reported a range of potential benefits and
challenge of inclusion for both students with ASD and their peers. Perhaps most
significantly, social inclusion was seen as both a potential benefit and a potential
problem.
The finding that on average respondents felt able to cope with behaviours
associated with ASD is contrary to much of the previous literature in this area
(e.g. Dybvik, 2004; Sinz, 2004). This could perhaps be due to the fact that nearly
all of them had experience of working with pupils with ASDs, which previous
studies have linked to more confidence in the classroom (Glashan, Mackay, &
Grieve, 2004; McGregor & Campbell, 2001). However, another explanation for
the findings might be that the list of ‘ASD behaviours’ did not include behaviours
with which respondents did have difficulty coping. It may have perhaps been
advantageous to have allowed space for participants to generate their own
behaviours. These findings may also have arisen as a result of the sampling
criteria - SENCOs were asked to select participants to complete the
questionnaire and it is possible those members of senior management or
teachers who were regarded as better able to cope with pupils with ASDs were
selected. Random selection of participants may have been more appropriate, but
this is not always feasible in relatively small-scale educational research.
23
Differences in which behaviours the SENCOs/SM and teachers found easier or
more difficult to cope with suggests that training may need to be differentiated for
different school personnel. This concurs with findings from (Hess, Morrier, Heflin,
& Ivey, 2008), who found that strategies for working with pupils with ASDs can
vary within the same educational setting. However, the finding that ‘displaying
inappropriate emotions’ was found as the most difficult behaviour to cope with by
both groups suggests that this is an area where training could be usefully
targeted. Training is not only important to help teachers cope with this behaviour,
but also because previous research has suggested that problems dealing with
challenging behaviour can lead to less positive teacher-pupils relationships – this
in turn can result in pupils being more likely to be socially excluded by their peers
(Robertson, Chamberlain, & Kasari, 2003).
SENCOs/SM demonstrated greater levels of self-efficacy in teaching pupils with
ASD and also reported higher coping levels in relation to ‘ASD behaviours’ than
did teachers. This may suggest that knowledge, expertise and strategies of
SENCOs/SM are not being filtered through to subject teachers. This is
particularly concerning given that a key part of the SENCOs role is providing
professional guidance to those working with pupils with SEN (Abbott, 2007).
Findings from McCabe (2008) offer a possible explanation for this difference in
coping skills. They found that the effectiveness of teacher training was facilitated
by positive relationships between senior and newer members of staff. Schools
24
may therefore need to build on these relationships to ensure knowledge and
strategies for effective teaching of pupils with ASDs are passed on.
SENCOs/SM were more likely to agree that pupils with ASD should be integrated
into mainstream schools where possible than teachers (see Figure 2). This could
be because they felt they had the skills to teach and cope with a pupil with ASD,
echoing findings from other studies (e.g. Avramidis, Bayliss, & Burden, 2000;
Horrocks, White, & Roberts, 2008; Huang & Wheeler, 2007). This notion is
supported by the finding (in preliminary analyses – not reported in this article)
that ‘ASD behaviour’ scores could account for some of the variance in the level of
agreement with the statement. It is also perhaps an unsurprising finding given the
SENCOs responsibility to promote inclusion of all pupils within their school
(Abbott, 2007).
Teachers felt that the severity of a pupils ASD was an important factor in the
successful integration of pupils with ASD, more so than SENCOs/SM (see Figure
2). This may again be a result of the fact that SENCOs/SM felt better able to
cope with pupils with ASDs. Teachers regarded teaching assistants (TAs) as
crucial to the successful inclusion of pupils with ASDs, and this resonates with
previous research (Rose, 2001). Alston & Kilham (2004), for example, found that
teachers felt TAs as ensured consistency for pupils with ASD across different
lessons and teachers. The finding that SENCOs/SM do not feel that TAs are so
important is concerning as they are responsible for the recruitment and
25
deployment of TAs – it is possible that teachers are not getting the support they
need as senior staff do not see the importance of TA provision.
Social inclusion was seen as both a benefit and a challenge for pupils with ASD
included in mainstream schools, mirroring current discourse. Advocates of
inclusion argue that it provides pupils with ASDs the opportunities to develop
their social skills through interaction with non-disabled peers (Kasari &
Rotheram-Fuller, 2007). Peer relationships are coming to be regarded as a key
part of the inclusion of pupils with ASDs, exemplified by Ochs, Kremer-Sadlick,
Solomon & Sirota (2001) who argued that, ‘the practice of inclusion rests
primarily on unaffected schoolmates rather than teachers’ (p.399). At present,
however, research suggests that the social outcomes of pupils with ASDs in
mainstream schools can be very negative. They are, for example, up to three
times more likely to be bullied and report receiving less social support than pupils
with other or no SEN (Humphrey & Symes, 2010). A possible explanation for
these negative social outcomes may come from the concerns raised by some
participants in this study - that students without difficulties can become frustrated
by, and not understand the differential treatment of pupils with ASDs.
Substantiating this proposition, Hemmingsson, Borell & Gustavsson (2003) found
that peers were likely to be jealous of, and to social exclude pupils, with physical
disabilities if they felt they were being treated differently. In these cases, TAs
could minimise this negative impact, by including other peers in the differentiated
26
activities. This again gives further sway to the argument that TAs may be crucial
to the successful inclusion of pupils with ASDs.
Conclusion
The aim of the current study was to examine the attitudes, experience and
knowledge of school staff in relation to inclusive education for pupils with ASDs in
secondary mainstream schools. At a general level, we found more positive
responses than have been reported in previous studies, indicating that attitudes
towards inclusion of this particular group of learners may be changing over time
(for instance, the research by McGregor and Campbell (2001), upon which much
of our survey was based, was conducted a decade ago). We also found that
senior managers and SENCOs reported greater self-efficacy in teaching pupils
with ASD and in coping with behaviours associated with ASD. Both groups
reported inappropriate emotional displays as the most problematic behaviour to
deal with in school – which of course has implications for future staff training
needs. Finally, respondents reported social inclusion as both a potential benefit
and challenge for pupils with ASD. This suggests a more complex route to
effective inclusion than either the universalist (e.g. Ainscow, 2007) or moderate
(e.g. Low, 2007) writers currently suggest.
27
References
Abbott, L. (2007). Northern Ireland Special Educational Needs Coordinators creating
inclusive environments: an epic struggle. European Journal of Special Needs
Education 22 (4), 391 - 407.
Alston, J., & Kilham, C. (2004). Adaptive education for students with special needs in the
inclusive classroom. Australian Journal of Early Childhood 29 (3), 24-33.
Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P., & Burden, R. (2000). A survey into mainstream teachers'
attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the
ordinary school in one Local Education Authority. Educational Psychology: An
International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology 20 (2), 191 - 211.
Barnard, J., Prior, A., & Potter, D. (2000). Autism and Inclusion: Is it working? London:
National Autistic Society.
British Educational Research Association. (2004). Revised Ethical Guidelines for
Educational Research. Southwell, Notts: BERA.
British Psychological Society. (2004). Code of Conduct, Ethical Principles and
Guidelines. Leicester: BPS.
Burack, J., Root, R., & Zigler, E. (1997). Inclusive education for students with autism:
reviewing ideological, empirical and community considerations. . In D. E. Cohen
& F. Volkmar (Eds.), Handbook of Autism and Developmental Disorders.
Chichester: Wiley.
Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education. (2002). Index for Inclusion: developing
learning and participation in schools. Retrieved 11th June, 2010, from
http://www.csie.org.uk/publications/inclusion-index-explained.shtml
Department for Education and Employment. (1997). Excellence for all children: meeting
special educational needs. Nottingham: DfEE.
Department for Education and Skills. (2006). Permanent and fixed period exclusions
from schools and exclusions appeals in England 2004/05. Nottingham: DfES
Publications.
Dybvik, A. C. (2004). Autism and the Inclusion Mandate: what happens when children
with severe disabilities like autism are taught in regular classrooms? Daniel
knows. Education Next 4 (1), 43-51.
Eldara, E., Talmora, R., & Wolf-Zukermana, T. (2010). Successes and difficulties in the
individual inclusion of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in the
eyes of their coordinators. International Journal of Inclusive Education 14 (1),
97-114.
Emam, M. M., & Farrell, P. (2009). Tensions experienced by teachers and their views of
support for pupils with autism spectrum disorders in mainstream schools.
European Journal of Special Needs Education 24 (4), 407-422.
Glashan, L., Mackay, G., & Grieve, A. (2004). Teachers' experience of support in the
mainstream education of pupils with autism. Improving Schools 7 (1), 49-60.
Hemmingsson, H., Borell, L., & Gustavsson, A. (2003). Participation in School: School
Assistants Creating Opportunities and Obstacles for Pupils with Disabilities.
Occupation, Participation and Health 23 (3), 88-98.
28
Hess, K., Morrier, M., Heflin, L., & Ivey, M. (2008). Autism Treatment Survey: Services
Received by Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders in Public School
Classrooms. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 38 (5), 961-971.
Horrocks, J. L., White, G., & Roberts, L. (2008). Principals’ attitudes regarding inclusion
of children with autism in Pennsylvania public schools. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders 38, 1462-1473.
House of Commons Education and Skills Committee. (2006). Special Educational Needs:
Third Report of Session 2005-06. London: The Stationary Office Limited.
Huang, A. X., & Wheeler, J. J. (2007). Including children with autism in general
education in China. Childhood Education 83, 356-359.
Humphrey, N., & Lewis, S. (2008). `Make me normal': the views and experiences of
pupils on the autistic spectrum in mainstream secondary schools. Autism: An
International Journal of Research and Practice 12 (1), 23-47.
Humphrey, N., & Parkinson, G. (2006). Research on interventions for children and young
people on the autistic spectrum: a critical perspective. Journal of Research in
Special Educational Needs 6 (2), 76-86.
Humphrey, N., & Symes, W. (2010). Perceptions of social support and experience of
bullying among pupils with autistic spectrum disorders in mainstream secondary
schools. European Journal of Special Needs Education 25 (1), 77 - 91.
Humphrey, N., & Symes, W. (under review). Peer interaction patterns among adolescents
with autistic spectrum disorders (ASDS) in mainstream secondary schools.
Autism: An International Journal of Research and Practice.
Jindal-Snape, D., Douglas, W., Topping, K. J., Kerr, C., & Smith, E. F. (2005). Effective
education for children with autistic spectrum disorder: Perceptions of parents and
professionals. International Journal of Special Education 20 (1), 77-87.
Jordan, R., & Jones, G. (1997). Educational provision for children with autism in
Scotland. Interchange No. 46. Edinburgh: Scottish Office Education and Industry
Department.
Kasari, C., & Rotheram-Fuller, E. (2007). Peer relationships of children with autism. In
E. Hollander & E. Anagnostou (Eds.), Clinical Manual for the Treatment of
Autism: American Psychiatric Publishing Inc.
Keen, D., & Ward, S. (2004). Autistic spectrum disorder: a child population profile.
Autism 8 (1), 39-48.
Leach, D., & Duffy, M. L. (2009). Supporting students With autism spectrum disorders in
inclusive settings. Intervention in School and Clinic 45 (1), 31-37.
Leblanc, L., Richardson, W., & Burns, K. A. (2009). Autism Spectrum Disorder and the
Inclusive Classroom. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of
the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 166-179.
Lian, W. B., Ying, S. H. K., Tean, S. C. H., Lin, D. C. K., Lian, Y. C., & Yun, H. L.
(2008). Pre-school teachers' knowledge, attitudes and practices on childhood
developmental and behavioural disorders in Singapore. Journal of Paediatrics
and Child Health 44 (4), 187-194.
Marks, S. U., Shaw-Hegwer, J., Schrader, C., Longaker, T., Peters, I., Powers, F., &
Levine, M. (2003). Instructional management tips for teachers of students with
Autism Spectrum Disorder. Teaching Exceptional Children 35 (4), 50-55.
29
McCabe, H. (2008). Effective Teacher Training at the Autism Institute in the People's
Republic of China. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the
Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 103-117.
McGregor, E., & Campbell, E. (2001). The attitudes of teachers in Scotland to the
integration of children with autism into mainstream schools. Autism 5 (2), 189-
208.
National Autistic Society. (2003). Autism and education: the ongoing battle. London:
NAS.
Natof, T. H., & Romanczyk, R. G. (2009). Teaching students with ASD: Does teacher
enthusiasm make a difference? Behavioral Interventions 24 (1), 55-72.
Ochs, E., Kremer-Sadlik, T., Solomon, O., & Sirota, K. G. (2001). Inclusion as social
practice: Views of children with autism. Social Development 10 (3), 399-419.
Probst, P., & Leppert, T. (2008). Brief Report: Outcomes of a Teacher Training Program
for Autism Spectrum Disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
38 (9), 1791-1796.
Robertson, K., Chamberlain, B., & Kasari, C. (2003). General education teachers’
relationships with included students with autism. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders 33 (2), 123-130.
Rose, R. (2001). Primary school teacher perceptions of the conditions required to include
pupils with special educational needs. Educational Review 53 (2), 147 - 156.
Simpson, R. L., de Boer-Ott, S. R., & Smith-Myles, B. (2003). Inclusion of learners with
autism spectrum disorders in general education settings. Topics in Language
Disorders 23 (2), 116-133.
Sinz, C. T. (2004). Viewpoints and attitudes of teachers (K-5) who have students with
Asperger's disorder. University of Wisconsin Stout, Menomonie.
Symes, W., & Humphrey, N. (2010). Peer-group indicators of social inclusion among
pupils with autistic spectrum disorders (ASD) in mainstream secondary schools: a
comparative study. School Psychology International 30 (4).
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation. (1994). The Salamanca
Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Spain:
Ministry of Education and Science.
Wing, L. (2007). Children with autistic spectrum disorders. In R. Cigman (Ed.), Included
of Excluded? The Challenge of Mainstream For Some SEN Children (pp. 23-33).
London: Routledge.