Child Study Team Attitudes Toward Inclusion

The inclusion of students with disabilities has been the focus of both quantitative and qualitative research for more than fifty years. Despite extensive evidence demonstrating positive outcomes for learners with and without disabilities, including improved academic achievement, social skills development, and improved school culture, inclusion rates in New Jersey have remained largely unchanged. Students with disabilities continue to be educated in segregated settings at disproportionate rates. The purpose of this quantitative study was to learn about the attitudes toward the inclusion of students with mild to moderate disabilities held by Child Study Team (CST) members. The CST is composed of a school psychologist, school social worker, and learning disabilities teacher/consultant. This multidisciplinary team is responsible for the identification, evaluation, eligibility determinations, and the creation of the IEP. This study utilized the Attitudes Towards Teaching All Students (ATTAS-mm) survey instrument by Jess L. Gregory and Lori A. Noto, which was designed to measure attitudes toward the inclusion of students with mild to moderate disabilities. Data from 211 CST members working in public schools in New Jersey was collected on eleven demographic questions and nine attitudinal statements. This data was analyzed with the Stata statistical software program. Variables were summarized by descriptive statistics, including measures of central tendency, standard deviations, score ranges, and frequency distributions. The results from this study suggest that CST members hold neutral to negative attitudes toward the inclusion of students with mild to moderate disabilities and toward the effectiveness of instruction in the general education classroom as compared with the special education classroom. Statistical analysis indicated there were no significant differences in attitudes toward the inclusion of students with mild to moderate disabilities based on CST members’ professional roles or the grade level of their caseloads. Implications for practice and policy include procedures and tools to support IEP teams in Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) discussions, professional preparation that mandates coursework in special education, improvements to school district websites, and expanded professional development programs focused on transforming attitudes toward the inclusion of students with disabilities. Areas for future research include qualitative inquiry into CST members’ decision-making practices and inclusive philosophies, detailed examination of the IEP meeting process, and research involving the caregivers of students with disabilities.