Supporting Teacher Professionalism for Inclusive Education: Integrating Cognitive, Emotional, and Contextual Dimensions
This study examined how cognitive, affective, and sociocultural factors shape teachers’ readiness for inclusive education, focusing on the interplay between attitudes, emotional concerns, and self-efficacy. A survey of 149 elementary school teachers from diverse communities employed three validated instruments to assess these constructs. Overall, teachers expressed moderately positive attitudes toward inclusion and relatively high levels of self-efficacy, yet emotional concerns were consistently present. Importantly, correlational analyses revealed that emotional concerns fully mediated the relationship between attitudes and self-efficacy, underscoring the central role of affective dimensions in shaping teachers’ professional confidence. Teachers with prior training or direct experience with students with disabilities reported lower emotional concerns, suggesting the value of practice-based professional learning opportunities. Sociocultural differences also emerged, with differences across communities, pointing to the influence of communal norms on emotional readiness for inclusion. These findings highlight the need to reconceptualize teacher professionalism in inclusive education as integrating cognitive, emotional, and contextual dimensions. Implications include designing professional development programs that combine knowledge, practice, and emotional preparedness, alongside culturally responsive approaches tailored to minority communities.
Authors
- Fathi Mohsen Shamma (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8999-6083)
- Michal Nissim (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5780-665X)
Institutions
- David Yellin College of Education (IL)
- The Arab Academic College for Education in Israel (IL)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Education Sciences
- Published
- 2025-10-04
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15101317
- Citations
- 3
- Primary Topic
- Early Childhood Education and Development
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 26.78