Exploring differences in Primary School Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Inclusive Education in Kosovo

ABSTRACT

Grounded in the belief that children educated together learn to live together, inclusive education is a major aspiration, with teachers’ attitudes serving as a pivotal indicator of its successful implementation. Based on their importance, this study aimed to investigate for the first time, factors that shape these attitudes of primary school teachers in Kosovo. The examined factors examined included gender, age, prior experience with students with special needs, and training in inclusion. A total of 204 respondents (49 males and 155 females) completed the ‘TAIS’ questionnaire by Salovitta (2015). Hypotheses were tested using t-test analysis. The results revealed significant differences, albeit small, between teachers who had received training in inclusiveness and those without such training, with the former displaying more favourable attitudes. These findings reaffirm the critical role of teacher training in the successful integration of children with special needs into regular classes. In contrast, the results indicated no significant differences in attitudes based on age, gender, or prior experience with students with special needs. This, essentially, is a positive sign, as it suggests that teachers, regardless of their age, gender, and previous experiences, have a solid foundation on which to build positive attitudes towards inclusion through training.

KEYWORDS:

• Inclusive education
• attitudes
• teachers

Introduction

Each child embodies a unique combination of talents, interests, and characteristics. At times, this combination may be accompanied by shortcomings and needs that can significantly impact their development. Consequently, an ongoing discussion among teachers and psychologists revolves around determining the best approach to educating these children. For many, inclusive education emerges as a viable solution.

Inclusive education is grounded in the belief that, children who are educated together learn to live together, as stated by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO 1994) in the Salamanca Declaration. This approach ensures equal access to regular classes for all children, regardless of differences, through support and accommodations (Alnahdi et al. 2021). Inclusive classrooms actively combat discrimination and contribute to the development of a diverse society (UNESCO 1994). Consequently, it is acknowledged that the demands placed on schools and teachers have become increasingly complex. There is, therefore, a broad consensus on the significance of teachers’ attitudes in the success of inclusive education (Lindner et al. 2023). Nevertheless, the factors that shape and maintain them remain relatively unexplored.

Inclusive education in Kosovo

In Kosovo, inclusion is a nascent endeavour, advancing gradually. The initial steps date back to 1999 when they were integrated into broader educational reforms undertaken by the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (MEST 2010). Notably, the law on Pre-University Education was formulated to establish equitable education opportunities for all, based on the Salamanca Declaration (Zabeli, Gjelaj, and Ewing 2020). During this phase, initiatives such as the transformation of special schools into resource centres and the introduction of the concept of inclusive schools were set in motion. Currently, the education of children with special educational needs in Kosovo takes place in a multi-way system: in special schools – resource centres, attached classes – resource rooms and in regular schools ‘Inclusive’ (MESTI 2022). Presently, there are approximately 3965 students with special needs in regular schools, although the exact number of students with special needs in Kosovo is still uncertain. Meanwhile, there are 291 students in resource centres where 44% of them have multiple impairments (MESTI 2022). While Kosovo’s legal framework concerning children with special needs is well-established on paper, the actual implementation of these laws is in its early stages due to lack of economical and infrastructural support. Identified challenges include early identification of students with special needs, teacher preparation, insufficient personnel and resources, and large classroom sizes (Zabeli, Gjelaj, and Ewing 2020).

Given the scarcity of research, this study fills a gap in the literature by exploring teachers’ attitudes towards inclusiveness in Kosovo for the first time. It aims to understand the factors influencing these attitudes and provide insights into perceptions of inclusion among primary school teachers.

The pivotal role of teachers and their attitudes

Inclusion has reshaped traditional thinking. Today, a child’s individual abilities are no longer the primary criteria for admission to regular education (Saloviita 2020). Instead, the responsibility for adaptation has shifted from them to teachers. A wealth of research reports on teachers’ reluctance in relation to integration in education. In a literature review, De Boer et al. (2011) found that most teachers tend to adopt neutral or even negative attitudes towards inclusion. Similarly, Sari, Çeliköz, and Seçer (2009) reported that teachers often expressed ‘undecided’ views on the integration of exceptional children.

Conversely, numerous studies have reported a spectrum of attitudes among teachers, ranging from slightly positive to very positive. In the systematic review conducted by Lindner et al. (2023) the majority of included studies showed supportive attitudes towards inclusive education. However, teachers’ support for inclusion often seems conditional, with varying descriptions for individual students and occasional recommendations for specific training.

Determinants of teachers’ attitudes in inclusive education

While the relationship between teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education and its successful practice is well established, there is limited knowledge about the factors that shape and maintain these attitudes. Attempts to identify such factors have yielded mixed results. So far, several factors have been recognised, including gender (Saloviita 2020), age (Galaterou and Antoniou 2017), prior experience with children with special needs (Parey 2019), and training in inclusive education (Galaterou and Antoniou 2017). Additionally, teachers’ level of self-efficacy (Savolainen, Malinen, and Schwab 2022), students’ type of disability (Lindner et al. 2023), and teachers’ educational degree (Mukhopadhyay 2014) have been identified as factors. However, this study focuses specifically on the first four factors.

Gender

Gender is a widely studied factor influencing teachers’ attitudes, with varied results. A study by Saloviita (2020) reported that female teachers scored significantly higher on a scale measuring attitudes towards inclusive education compared to male teachers, reflecting more positive attitudes. Agavelyan et al. (2020) found similar results, indicating that female teachers are more open to inclusion while Amka (2020) reported that females demonstrate better affective dimensions towards diversity). While, the systematic review conducted by De Boer et al. (2011) reveals that in two out of three studies examined, it was observed that men generally held more negative attitudes.

Fewer studies suggest a male dominance in attitudes towards inclusion. Two studies, both involving secondary school teachers, found that male exhibited more positive attitudes towards inclusion than female teachers (Bhatnagar and Das 2013; Ernst and Rogers 2009). Nevertheless, a significant portion of the literature did not identify gender differences (Ediyanto et al. 2022; Orakci et al. 2016). In their systematic review, Lindner et al. (2023) found that the majority of the included studies did not detect any gender differences.

Age

Teacher’s age is another variable extensively examined to identify differences in attitudes towards inclusion. In some studies, no correlation has been reported between age and attitudes towards inclusion (Chhabra, Srivastava, and Srivastava 2010). Other studies suggest that younger teachers are three times more likely to report feeling positive about inclusion compared to older teachers (e.g. Galaterou and Antoniou 2017; Saloviita 2020). Similarly, Forlin et al. (2009) found that training in inclusion significantly improved attitudes in new teachers but had a less pronounced impact on older ones. Furthermore, systematic reviews by De Boer et al. (2011) and Lindner et al. (2023) indicate that older teachers tend to be more reluctant to embrace equal education for all.

Training in inclusive education

Training in inclusion consistently correlates with positive attitudes (e.g. Ahsan, Sharma, and Deppeler 2012; Parey 2019). The World Report on Disability by the World Health Organization (World Health Organization 2011) emphasises the significance of teacher training for successful inclusion, fostering competence and attitudes essential for accommodating diverse students. Orakci et al. (2016) did not discover significant variations in teachers’ attitudes based on the presence or lack of prior training in inclusion. Similar findings were reported by Monsen, Ewing and Kwoka (2014) while Gaad and Almotairi (2013) contends that merely enhancing educators’ understanding of inclusion is insufficient to improve attitudes and alleviate stress. It was observed by Costello and Boyle et al. (2013) that as preservice teachers progress in their training over the years, there is a gradual decline in their positive attitudes. The decline may be linked to an increased awareness of the challenges associated with inclusion.

Prior experience with children with special needs

Direct engagement with students with special needs has been linked to attitudes towards inclusion. For example, Parey (2019) documented that teachers exhibited more favourable attitudes when they had interacted with students with disabilities. Similarly, in an examination of the perceptions of special and regular teachers, Almalky and Alwahbi (2023) identified significant disparities between the two groups, where teachers in regular schools often disagreed with the integration of students with disabilities. Nevertheless, it’s worth noting that some studies have reported no discernible differences concerning prior experience (Alnahdi et al. 2021; Mukhopadhyay 2014) or have even indicated more positive attitudes among individuals lacking experience with children with special needs (Boyle, Topping, and Jindal-Snape 2013; De Boer, Pijl, and Minnaert 2011).

Hypothesis

Based on the majority of the reviewed literature four hypotheses have been formulated to guide this study. Firstly, it is hypothesised that female teachers exhibit more favourable attitudes towards inclusion compared to their male counterparts. Secondly, younger teachers demonstrate more receptive attitudes towards inclusion in contrast to their older colleagues. Thirdly, it is predicted that teachers who have received training in inclusion are more likely to hold open attitudes towards it. Lastly, teachers who have prior experience working with children with special needs hold more positive attitudes towards inclusive education.

Method

Participants

204 respondents took part in the study, comprising 49 males and 155 females. Their average age was 37.5 years, with an average teaching experience of 12.5 years. In terms of education, 70% held bachelor’s degrees, while 30% had master’s degrees. Additionally, 59% reported receiving training in inclusive education.

Participants were selected through simple random sampling. Initially, a complete list of all schools in the country was obtained from the MEST official website. Every 50th school on the list was chosen, resulting in 20 schools participating. Half of these included teachers from grades 1 and 3, and the other half from grades 2 and 4. Out of 314 teachers who received the questionnaire, 204 responded, yielding a 65% response rate. Questionnaires were distributed physically at the start of the school day and collected at the end. Participation in the study was voluntary.

Instruments

Data collection utilised two questionnaires. The first gathered demographic details such as gender, age, education, teaching experience, prior encounters with special needs children, and training in inclusive education. Teachers’ attitudes were assessed using the “Teachers’ Attitude Towards Inclusive Education (TAIS)” scale by Saloviita (2015). The scale comprised 10 statements (α = .84). Participants rated each statement on a Likert scale from 1 to 5, with ‘1’ indicating ‘Strongly disagree’ and ‘5’ indicating ‘Strongly agree’. Questions included statements like ‘Education of children with special needs can be effectively developed in regular classes’ and ‘Students with special educational needs should be educated in mainstream classrooms whenever possible’. Six of the ten statements were reverse-coded, including ‘Increasing the teacher’s workload by including children with special needs in their classes should be avoided’. TAIS (Saloviita 2015) was selected for its robust psychometric properties, including high reliability (α = .81–.90), alignment with Salamanca Statement principles, and extensive use in academic research (e.g. Hoadjli and Latreche 2020). Cumulative points from the questionnaire yielded an index reflecting overall attitudes on inclusion, with higher scores indicating more favourable opinions among teachers.

Procedure

The data collection procedure began with demographic questions, followed by the TAIS questionnaire on teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education, each taking about 10 minutes. Data collection lasted two weeks. Collected data was analysed using SPSS. Participants were briefed on the study’s purpose, given clear instructions, assured of anonymity, and encouraged to contact via email for queries.

Results

This study was designed to test four hypotheses: Female teachers have more positive attitudes towards inclusion than male teachers; Younger teachers are more open to inclusion than older teachers; Teachers with prior experience with students with special needs are more receptive to inclusion; and teachers trained in inclusiveness have more positive attitudes towards inclusive education. These hypotheses were tested using mean comparison analysis, t-tests.

Initially, teachers were grouped based on their total points on the TAIS scale into three categories. The ‘opponents’ group scored less than 20 points, comprising 7.5% of teachers. The ‘neutral’ group scored between 21 and 39 points, representing 58% of teachers. The ‘supporters’ group scored over 40 points, making up 30% of the total.

Table 1 displays differences in attitudes towards inclusiveness among teachers who reported attending inclusiveness training compared to those without prior training in inclusive education. As anticipated, the results confirm the fourth hypothesis. Therefore, we observe significant differences, t(198) = 1.9, p = 0.03, between teachers trained in inclusion (M = 36.5, SD = 5.5) and those who were not trained (M = 33.5, SD = 8.7), with more inclusiveness reported among the trained teachers.

Table 1. Differences on inclusive education attitudes among trained and untrained teachers.

	Trained		Untrained
	M	SD	M	SD	t-test
Attitudes on inclusion	36.51	5.53	33.52	8.71	1.9*

* The mean difference is significant at < 0.05.

Contrary to expectations, there were no significant differences in teachers’ attitudes towards inclusiveness between genders t(202) = −.382, p = .70), despite women scoring higher (M = 35.24, SD = 8.19) than men (M = 34.56, SD = 7.61). Similarly, there were no significant differences in attitudes between different age groups t(202) = −.773, p = .44), although younger teachers (22–45 years) had a slightly higher mean (M = 35.63, SD = 7.60) compared to older teachers (45–65 years) (M = 34.34, SD = 7.79). Finally, the results also do not confirm the existence of significant differences t(198) = .028, p = .97 between teachers with prior experience (M = 34.64, SD = 6.86), with students with special needs and those without such experiences (M = 34.59, SD = 8.19).

Discussion

Differences in teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion in Kosovo were examined for the first time in relation to gender, age, training on inclusion, and prior experience with students with special needs. As anticipated, notable differences were identified, albeit of modest magnitude, between teachers who had received training in inclusion and those who had not, in favour of the former. While statistically significant, it is noteworthy that both groups’ scores were classified as neutral, which raises questions about the extent to which training can be conclusively linked to positive attitudes. Yet, these results align with findings in other research (e.g. Ahsan, Sharma, and Deppeler 2012; Parey 2019) and contradict the rest of the literature (e.g. Gaad and Almotairi 2013; Monsen, Ewing and Kwoka, 2014), which did not discover significant variations in teachers’ attitudes based on the presence or lack of prior training in inclusion.

These results can be interpreted in two ways. First, training in inclusion appears to enhance teachers’ knowledge about children with diverse abilities which in turn boosts their sense of competence. Consequently, their attitudes become more positive. Another explanation for these differences could be that teachers with pre-existing positive attitudes towards inclusion are more inclined to pursue further training in this area, rather than the training itself leading to more positive attitudes. Despite concerns about increased awareness of inclusion challenges affecting teachers’ receptiveness, it’s evident that lectures, courses, and modules focusing on inclusive education have a positive impact, fostering a more inclusive educational environment.

Despite initial expectations, results did not support the existence of gender differences in attitudes towards inclusiveness. It appears that male and female teachers share similar attitudes regarding this topic. These findings contribute to the inconsistent literature on gender differences, diverging from studies (e.g, Agavelyan et al. 2020; Saloviita 2020) that suggest female teachers are more tolerant of diversity or highlight male dominance in positive attitudes towards inclusion (Bhatnagar & Das, 2013; Ernst and Rogers 2009). However, they align with most literature that does not emphasise gender differences in this context (e.g. Ediyanto et al. 2022; Orakci et al. 2016).

The lack of gender disparities in this context may stem from the limited number of men in this study and their underrepresentation in education-related fields overall. Nevertheless, the absence of gender distinctions is encouraging for promoting inclusivity, indicating that positive attitudes towards inclusion can be cultivated regardless of gender.

In contrast to a part of the literature suggesting age-related differences in teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion, with younger teachers displaying more positive attitudes (e.g. Galaterou and Antoniou 2017; Lindner et al. 2023; Saloviita 2020) in this study no differences were found. Such results replicate the findings of many other studies (e.g. Chhabra, Srivastava, and Srivastava 2010). It appears that regardless of age and the extent of experience in education, teachers exhibit shared attitudes and willingness to work with children with diverse needs. Lack of age-related distinctions in this context may result from various factors. Younger teachers often benefit from more extensive formal education, enhancing their preparation for inclusive practices, while older teachers draw upon their wealth of experience. In conclusion, the gathered data challenges the idea that teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion are influenced by their direct experience with children with special needs. These findings contribute to the ongoing debate in the literature. While some studies suggest a significant difference due to experience (Almalky and Alwahbi 2023; Parey 2019), others like de Boer, Pijl, and Minnaert (2011) and Boyle et al. (2013) report more positive attitudes among teachers without such experience. However, the results align with Alnahdi et al. (2021) and Mukhopadhyay (2014), who found no discernible differences between teachers with and without prior experience in teaching children with special needs.

One possible explanation for these findings may be the young age of the teachers involved in the study, often correlating with limited overall experience in education, particularly in inclusive practices. It also appears that teachers hold varying and somewhat fragmented perceptions of what constitutes a child with special needs. These factors may contribute to teachers either denying their previous experience with children with special needs or mistakenly believing they have taught such children when they have not. The absence of significant differences between teachers with and without prior experience working with children with disabilities highlights that experience does not impede substantial integration in education. It suggests a shared potential to foster positive attitudes towards inclusivity regardless of past experiences.

Limits and recommendations

Considering the high prevalence of children with special needs and the pivotal role of teachers’ attitudes in achieving successful inclusion in education, this study aimed to explore variations in their attitudes. However, it’s important to recognise both strengths and limitations within the study. One notable limitation is the imbalance in gender representation. Secondly, apart from the examined variables in this study, educational background, teachers’ level of self-efficacy, and resources warrant investigation. Additionally, while training emerged as a significant factor influencing attitudes, further research is needed to delve into its specifics, including delivery mode, length, and content, whether related to treatment or simply understanding the diverse profiles of children with special needs. Therefore, future studies should further explore these aspects to better inform inclusive education practices in Kosovo.

Despite its limitations, this study offers valuable insights. Being the first of its kind in the Kosovo context, it elucidates factors that both promote and hinder inclusiveness. Moreover, the utilisation of simple random sampling bolsters its generalisability across the country with training emerging as the primary variable influencing teachers’ willingness to work with exceptional children.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).