Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs · Volume •• · Number •• · 2012
doi: 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01226.x
Variables affecting teachers’ attitudes towards
inclusive education in Bangladesh
Masud Ahmmed, Umesh Sharma and Joanne Deppeler
Monash University, Australia
Key words: Inclusive education, attitudes, demographic variables, school support, primary teachers,
Bangladesh.
Inclusive education is a worldwide reform strategy
intended to include students with different abilities
in mainstream regular schools. Evidence from pre-
vious research shows that success in implementing
effective inclusive teaching practices in the school
is contingent on teachers’ positive attitudes towards
inclusive education. This study was conducted in the
context of primary education in Bangladesh aiming
to examine variables influencing teachers’ attitudes
towards inclusion of students with disabilities in
regular classrooms. Data for the study was col-
lected from 738 teachers working in 293 govern-
ment primary schools in Bangladesh. The results
indicated that perceived school support for inclu-
sive teaching practices and a range of demographic
variables including previous success in teaching
students with disabilities and contact with a student
with a disability were associated with more positive
attitudes of the teachers towards the inclusive
education. The results are discussed with possible
implications for educators, policy-makers and inter-
national organisations working on the implementa-
tion of inclusive education.
Introduction
Inclusive education (IE) is a worldwide reform strategy
intended to include students with different abilities in
mainstream regular schools. School curriculum, teaching
methods, organisation and resources need to be adapted to
ensure that all learners, irrespective of their ability, can
successfully participate in the regular classrooms (Mittler,
1995). Even though inclusive education means the inclu-
sion of all children regardless of their physical, intellectual,
social, emotional, linguistic or other conditions to the main-
stream regular classrooms (UNESCO, 1994), in this study,
inclusive education will refer only to the inclusion of stu-
dents with disabilities in regular classrooms.
The philosophy of educating students with disabilities in
regular schools is a relatively new concept within the edu-
cation system in Bangladesh. Like many other countries,
Bangladesh is a signatory to several international decla-
rations dedicated to education for all children in regular
schools, including The Salamanca Statement and the
© 2012 The Authors. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs © 2012 NASEN. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and
350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
••–••
jrs3_1226 1..9
Framework for Action on Special Needs Education 1994;
The Dakar Framework for Action 2000 and The UN Con-
vention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2006.
At the national level, the Government of Bangladesh has
also enacted a number of policies to ensure the education
of all students including those with disabilities. The key
policies include Education Policy 2000, Education Policy
2010 and Persons with Disability Welfare Act 2001. The
Education Policy 2010 articulated that in order to establish
equity in education for all learners, facilities need to be
provided for all children including children with disabilities
(Ministry of Education, 2010). This policy emphasises
quality primary education with equal opportunity for all
children. The policy further accentuates on providing train-
ing for teachers to teach children with different types of
disabilities in the regular classrooms. However, Bangladesh
has made little progress in providing education to students
with disabilities in regular schools (Asian Development
Bank, 2008; Inclusion International, 2009; UNESCO,
2010) despite having such policy initiatives.
Evidence from past research suggests that success in imple-
menting effective inclusive education is contingent on
teachers’ positive attitudes towards inclusive education
(Avramidis and Kalyva, 2007; Brownell and Pajares, 1999;
Cook, 2001; Jordan, Schwartz and McGhie-Richmond,
2009; Rakap and Kaczmarek, 2010; Romi and Leyser,
2006). The importance of teachers’ positive attitudes for the
success of inclusive education practices at the classroom
level has been widely reported by a number of researchers
(e.g., Avramidis and Norwich, 2002; Brownlee and
Carrington, 2000; Cologon, 2011; Sharma, Moore and
Sonawane, 2009; Wilczenski, 1992). Highlighting the sig-
nificance of teachers’ positive attitude, a group of research-
ers (e.g., Leyser and Tappendorf, 2001; Ross-Hill, 2009)
cautioned that inclusive education cannot be implemented
unless the primary stakeholders support the idea. Hence,
teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education need to be
explored in order to gain valuable insight into the dynamics
of the inclusive classroom for shifting the inclusion para-
digm from the policy domain to classroom practices (Fives
and Buehl, 2008; Pajares, 1992).
To facilitate a better understanding of teachers’ attitudes
towards inclusive education, it is essential to understand the
1
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, •• ••–••
concept of attitudes. Ajzen (2005) maintains that ‘an atti-
tude is a disposition to respond favourably or unfavourably
to an object, person, institution, or event’ (p. 3). Attitudes
are composed of three components, namely affective, cog-
nitive and behavioural (Shank, 2002), referring respectively
to the individual’s feelings or emotional reactions to the
initial stimulus, individual’s information and knowledge
about an object or idea and the individual’s predisposition
to act (Boer, Pijl and Minnaert, 2011).
Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion of children with dis-
abilities in their classrooms may be influenced by a myriad
of demographic variables (Avramidis, Bayliss and Burden,
2000; Chhabra, Srivastava and Srivastava, 2010; Forlin,
Loreman and Sharma et al., 2009; Van Reusen, Shoho and
Barker, 2001). There are mixed findings in relation to some
of the demographic variables (Brady and Woolfson, 2008).
For example, while Sharma, Forlin and Loreman (2008)
and Avissar, Reiter and Leyser (2003) found that younger
teachers had more positive attitudes than older teachers,
Avramidis et al. (2000) reported that age was not related to
the attitudes of the teachers. With regard to gender, the
evidence appears inconsistent. Some studies reported
that female teachers have more positive attitudes than
male teachers (Aksamit, Morris and Leunberger, 1987;
Eichinger, Rizzo and Sirotnik, 1991), although Jobe and
Rust (1996) noted that male teachers have more positive
attitudes. Other researchers (e.g., Leyser, Kapperman and
Keller, 1994; Parasuram, 2006) found no significant rela-
tionship between gender and teacher attitudes. The length
of teaching experience is identified as an important variable
in shaping teacher attitudes towards inclusive educa-
tion (Avramidis and Kalyva, 2007). Cornoldi, Terreni and
Scruggs et al. (1998) reported that teachers with fewer years
of teaching experience were more positive towards inclu-
sion than the teachers with more years of experience. On the
other hand, Avramidis et al. (2000) did not find any such
relationship in their study.
Some other variables have been found to have a more con-
sistent relationship to the attitudes of teachers. For example,
training in special education (Avramidis and Kalyva, 2007;
Koutrouba, Vamvakari and Steliou, 2006), exposure to
teach children with disabilities (Avramidis and Kalyva,
2007; Idol, 2006; Rakap and Kaczmarek, 2010) and higher
educational qualifications (Parasuram, 2006; Yuker, 1988)
correlate positively with teachers’ attitudes towards inclu-
sive education.
Research in relation to some other variables, for example,
previous success in teaching children with disabilities and
perceived school support for inclusive teaching practices has
been very limited, even though a number of researchers (Cox
and Washington, 2008; Sharma and Chow, 2008) conceptua-
lised that these variables could enhance positive attitude
of the teachers to support inclusive teaching practices. With
regard to previous success in teaching children with disabili-
ties, Brownell and Pajares (1999) postulate that teachers who
report success in teaching students with disabilities may be
more willing to include these students in their classrooms
2 © 2012 The Authors. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs © 2012 NASEN
than teachers who feel less successful. Furthermore, a
number of studies (e.g., Brownell and Pajares, 1999; Podell
and Tournaki, 2007; Shaughnessy, 2004; Soodak, Podell and
Lehman, 1998; Tournaki, 2003) have recommended school
support for inclusive teaching practices as an important
variable for successful implementation of inclusive educa-
tion practices in schools. However, research on how these
variables could influence attitudes of teachers in developing
countries including Bangladesh is limited.
Context of the study
Bangladesh, a republic of Southern Asia, is a densely popu-
lated country. It has a literacy rate of 47.9% (The World
Factbook, 2011). It is among the 15 largest recipients in
the world in respect of aid to achieve education for all
(UNESCO, 2008). The Bangladesh government, supported
by donor agencies, has invested considerable amounts of
money and efforts in order to educate all children in
schools. One example is the Second Primary Education
Development Programme (PEDP-II), where US$1.8 billion
has been invested (World Bank, 2008). Because of the
national efforts and international cooperation, Bangladesh
has made substantial progress in gender equity with an
increased percentage of girl students attending primary
schools (88.4%) (UNESCO, 2010; World Bank, 2008).
However, there are still a number of challenges to meeting
the goals and aspirations of inclusive education, such as
addressing the issue of meeting the learning needs of
children with disabilities in regular classrooms (Anis
and Ahmmed, 2009; Asian Development Bank, 2008;
UNESCO, 2010). There are about 1.6 million school-aged
children with disabilities in Bangladesh, but only 4% are
enrolled in education programmes (National Forum of
Organizations Working with the Disabled [NFOWD],
2009).
Although most of the international research studies exa-
mined the relationship between teachers’ attitudes towards
inclusive education and background variables such as
gender, age, teaching experience, educational qualification,
training and contact with a person with a disability, research
on how variables like perceived school support for inclu-
sive teaching practices and previous success in teaching
children with a disability would influence teachers’ atti-
tudes is almost non-existent. Since all education and cer-
tainly inclusive education is context specific (Ainscow and
Cesar, 2006), and researchers (e.g., Gaad and Khan, 2007;
Tournaki and Podell, 2005) have suggested that past
success in teaching children with disabilities and adequate
school support to implement inclusive teaching practices
may influence teachers’ attitudes, this research will speci-
fically answer the following research questions within the
Bangladesh context:
Is there a significant relationship between
(1) demographic variables (gender, age, educational
qualification and length of teaching experience),
(2) contact variables (contact with a student with a
disability in the classroom, acquaintance with a
person with a disability outside the classrooms),

(3) training variable (previous training on inclusive
education),
(4) success variable (past success in teaching students
with disabilities) and
(5) perceived support variable (perceived school support
for inclusive teaching practices)
and teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion of children with
disabilities in their regular classrooms?
Method
Participants
The participants of the study were 738 teachers, and were
selected from a total of 293 government primary schools
of four sub-districts under Dhaka division in Bangladesh.
Bangladesh is divided into several regional divisions. Each
division is subdivided into several districts. Each district is
subdivided into several sub-districts. In each sub-district,
primary schools are clustered under the sub-district’s
education administration. With regard to location all sub-
districts under a division are categorised into three groups:
urban sub-districts (located in a metropolitan city), semi-
urban sub-districts (located in a district town) and rural
sub-districts (located in the countryside). In order to select
the participants for this study, a four stage cluster sampling
method was used. At the first stage, out of seven regional
divisions, Dhaka, the central division was purposefully
selected. At the second stage, four sub-districts out of 102
were randomly selected. The numbers of sub-districts
selected were roughly representative of the distribution of
schools in the three groups (urban, semi-urban and rural).
At the third stage, all 293 government primary schools
within these four sub-districts were selected. At the fourth
stage, all 1387 teachers working within these schools were
invited to participate in this study. A total of 1387 survey
packages were sent to the participants, and 738 completed
survey questionnaires were returned to the researchers. The
survey questionnaire return rate was 53.20%. Out of 738, 30
questionnaires were discarded because of large amount of
missing data. A total of 708 responses were used for final
analysis.
Procedure
Prior permission for collecting data was obtained from
the Directorate of Primary Education, Bangladesh. Survey
packages containing survey questionnaire, explanatory
statement and pre-paid return envelope were sent to the
education office of selected sub-districts. The education
office then sent survey packages to the principals of the
respective primary schools. The principal of each school
distributed survey packages to all the teachers of his/her
respective school. In the explanatory statement, the partici-
pants were informed that their participation in this study
was fully voluntary and anonymous; they had the option of
declining participation by not completing the survey ques-
tionnaire. They were also informed that the data would be
used for academic purpose. The teachers who participated
sent the completed questionnaires directly to their respec-
tive sub-district’s education office in the sealed envelope.
© 2012 The Authors. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs © 2012 NASEN
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, •• ••–••
The researcher collected completed questionnaires from the
education office of each of four sub-districts.
Instruments
A three-part survey questionnaire was used to collect data
from the participants. The first part of the survey gathered
demographic information about the teachers (e.g., gender,
age, educational qualification, teaching experience, contact
with a student with a disability, previous training on in-
clusive education, past success in teaching student with a
disability).
The second part of the survey was used to determine the
teachers’ attitudes towards the inclusion of children with
disabilities in the regular classrooms. The attitude measure-
ment instrument used was the modified version of School
Principals’ Attitudes toward Inclusion (SPATI) (Bailey,
2004). The final version of the scale had 24 items, out of
which 15 items were worded negatively and nine were
worded positively. Bailey (2004) reported a reliability coef-
ficient of 0.92 with 639 respondents. The reliability of
SPATI scale was recalculated for this study, and it was
found to 0.79 (alpha coefficient). A reliability coefficient of
0.70 or above is generally considered acceptable (Gable and
Wolf, 1993). Three items regarding principal and teacher
aides were removed from this scale, because the items were
not appropriate for the context of the current study. The
modified version of the scale used in this study had 21 items
out of which 14 were negatively worded, and seven were
positively worded. Respondents were asked to respond
using a 5-point Likert type scale with anchors Strongly
Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (5). A higher score on the
scale was suggestive of more positive attitudes towards
inclusion. An example of a statement is ‘Students with
disabilities benefit academically from inclusion’.
The third part of the survey was used to measure perceived
school support available to teachers for inclusive teach-
ing practices. The perceived school support measurement
instrument used in this study was Perceived School Support
for Inclusive Education scale (PSSIE). PSSIE scale was
specifically designed for this study. Since the support to
teach in inclusive classroom has been identified as an
important prerequisite that could significantly affect the
willingness of teachers to include or not to include students
with disabilities in their classrooms, designing a scale that
could systematically tap into the multifaceted aspects of this
variable was considered important for this study. Instead of
asking a single question, a series of questions was asked to
get an in-depth picture of perceived school support for
inclusive teaching practices.
The items of the PSSIE scale were generated based on a
review of the literature (e.g., Coskun, Tosun and Macaro-
glu, 2009; Shaughnessy, 2004; Villa, Thousand and Nevin
et al., 1996; Yssel, Engelbrecht and Oswald et al., 2007).
While developing this scale, the researchers considered the
existing discourse on inclusive education and the context of
primary schools in Bangladesh. This instrument consisted
of eight items relating to school support for inclusive
3
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, •• ••–••

teaching practices. An example of an item is ‘I receive
necessary support from the principal to implement inclusive
education at the classroom level’. Participants were asked to
respond on a 5-point Likert type scale ranging from ‘none at
all’ (1) to ‘a great deal’ (5). The higher mean on the scale
suggested that the participant felt he or she received more
support to teach in an inclusive classroom compared to
another participant whose score is lower. Alpha coefficient
was calculated to determine the reliability of PSSIE scale.
It was found to be 0.86 which is well above what is recom-
mended for a scale of this nature (Gable and Wolf, 1993).
Content validation of the three-part survey instrument
A panel of twelve Bangladeshi experts working in the field
of disability and education were asked to review this three-
part survey questionnaire. The purpose of this exercise was
to establish the content validity of the survey questionnaire
in the context of Bangladesh. The panel, as a group, was
asked to review the survey questionnaire and offer com-
ments in regard to the following:
• any word or statement that is not valid for Bangladesh
• if the directions of the survey instrument were clear
• if they have any suggestion to improve the survey
instrument
Based on their recommendation, a few items in the survey
were reworded.
Data analysis
Linear Multiple Regression, One-way between-groups
analysis of variance (ANOVA), Pearson product–moment
correlation coefficients and Independent-Samples T-test
were used to analyse the data.
Results
Demographics of the participants
Out of 708 participants, the majority (66.6%, n = 429) were
female. The age range of the teachers who participated in
this study was 27 to 59 years. The mean age of the partici-
pants was 39.34 years. The highest educational qualification
of 29.8% (n = 211) of the participants was ‘below Bachelor
degree’, of 43.2% (n = 306) was ‘Bachelor degree’ and of
27% (n = 191) was ‘Master degree or above’. Years of
teaching experience varied from 3 months to 40 years with
a mean of 14.96 years. A considerable number of the par-
ticipants (49.2%, n = 348) reported having contact with a
student with a disability in the classroom (Table 1).
Relationships between attitudes and demographic
variables (gender, age, educational qualification and
length of teaching experience)
An independent-samples t-test was conducted to check
whether there was a statistically significant difference in
mean scores of attitudes with regard to the gender of the
participants. The result indicated a statistically significant
difference in mean attitudes scores for males (M = 56.48,
SD = 9.06) and females (M = 54.46, SD = 9.68), t (706) =
2.78, P = 0.006 (two-tailed). The magnitude of the differ-
ences in the means was small (Eta squared = 0.01).
Pearson product–moment correlation coefficient was
conducted to ensure if participants’ age was significantly

Table 1: Demographic variables and attitude mean score

Background variables Numbers Percentage Total mean of attitude score
Gender
Female 429 60.6 54.46
Male 279 39.4 56.48
Educational qualification
Below bachelor 211 29.8 55.77
Bachelor 306 43.2 55.91
Masters or above 191 27 53.64
Acquaintance with a person with disability
No 150 21.2 53.81
Yes 558 78.8 55.64
Contact with a student with disability in the classroom
No 360 50.8 53.66
Yes 348 49.2 56.91
Past success in teaching students with disabilities
Low 153 21.6 51.44
Average 514 72.6 55.92
Higher 41 5.8 61.20
Previous training on IE
None 335 47.3 55.09
One module 332 46.9 55.20
Two or more modules 41 5.8 57.07

4 © 2012 The Authors. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs © 2012 NASEN

associated with their attitudes towards inclusion of children
with disabilities in the regular classrooms. The results
revealed a non-significant association.
One-way between-groups ANOVA was employed to deter-
mine if significant differences existed between participants’
attitudes based on their degree of educational qualification.
The participants were divided into three groups according
to their higher degree of qualification: (Group 1: Below
bachelor degree qualification; Group 2: Bachelor degree
qualification; Group 3: Masters or above degree qualifica-
tion). The result showed a statistically significant difference
in attitude scores for the three groups: F (2, 705) = 3.8, P =
0.02. Despite reaching statistical significance, the actual
difference in mean scores between the groups was quite
small. The effect size, calculated using Eta squared was
0.01. Post hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indi-
cated that the mean score for Group 2 (M = 55.91, SD =
9.13) was significantly different from Group 3 (M = 53.64,
SD = 9.65). Group 1 did not differ significantly from either
Group 2 or 3.
In order to examine if the length of teaching experience of
the participants was significantly associated with their atti-
tudes towards inclusion of children with disabilities in the
regular classrooms, Pearson product–moment correlation
coefficient was employed. The results revealed a non-
significant association.
Relationships between attitudes and contact variables
In order to examine the relationship between participants’
contact with a student with a disability in the classrooms,
acquaintance with a person with a disability outside
the classrooms and their attitudes towards inclusion,
Independent-Samples t-tests were employed. The results
showed a significant difference [t (706) = -4.62, P = 0.001)]
in attitude scores for the teachers who had contact with
a student with a disability in the classroom (M = 56.91,
SD = 8.79) and who did not have such exposure (M = 53.66,
SD = 9.87). The magnitude of the differences (M difference
= -3.24) was significant (Eta squared = 0.03). The results
also revealed a significant difference [t (706) = 2.10, P =
0.03] in attitude scores for the teachers who had acquain-
tance with a person with a disability outside classrooms
(M = 55.64, SD = 9.57) and who did not have such acquain-
tance (M = 53.81, SD = 9.03). However, the magnitude
of the differences in the means was very small (Eta
squared = 0.006).
Relationship between attitudes and training variable
The relationship between previous training on inclusive
education and teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion of
children with disabilities was investigated using Pearson
product–moment correlation coefficient. The result showed
that there was no significant correlation between previous
training on inclusive education and teachers’ attitudes
towards inclusion (r = 0.03, n = 708, P = 0.386).
Relationship between attitudes and success variable
Pearson product–moment correlation coefficients was
employed to determine the relationship between past
© 2012 The Authors. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs © 2012 NASEN
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, •• ••–••
success in teaching students with disabilities and their atti-
tudes towards inclusion of children with disabilities in their
classrooms. The results revealed a significant positive
correlation between these two variables (r = 0.247, n = 708,
P < 0.005) suggesting a high level of past success was
related with their positive attitudes towards inclusion.
Relationships between attitudes and perceived school
support variable
The relationship between perceived school support for
inclusive teaching practices and teachers’ attitude towards
inclusion of children with disabilities in their classrooms
was determined by employing Pearson product–moment
correlation coefficient. A significant positive correlation
was found between these two variables (r = 0.278, n = 708,
P < 0.005), with high levels of perceived support associated
with teachers’ positive attitudes towards inclusion.
Predicting teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion
In order to determine the contribution of each of the inde-
pendent variables (e.g., gender, age, educational qualifi-
cation, teaching experience, contact with a student with
disability in the classroom, acquaintance with a person with
disability, previous training on inclusive education, past
success in teaching students with disabilities and perceived
school support) in predicting participants’ attitudes a linear
multiple regression statistical technique was utilised (see
Table 2). The result shows that perceived school support
(P = 0.000), past success in teaching student with disabilities
(P = 0.000), contact with a student with a disability in the
classroom (P = 0.008), gender (P = 0.001) and educational
qualification of the participants (P = 0.008) contributed
significantly to the prediction of teachers’ attitudes towards
inclusion of children with disabilities in their classrooms.
The summary of the Regression analysis (see Table 3) indi-
cated that the model has reached statistical significance
(P-value is <0.005) (Pallant, 2007). The values of R Square
and Adjusted R Square were 0.16 and 0.15, respectively,
which indicated that about 16% of the variance on attitudes
Table 2: Results of regression analysis
Predictor variable Beta Sig.(P-value)
Perceived school support 0.220 0.000
Past success in teaching student 0.201 0.000
with disabilities
Contact with a student with disability 0.097 0.008
in the classroom
Gender of the participants -0.116 0.001
Educational qualification -0.106 0.007
Table 3: Regression model’s summary
R Square Adjusted R Square Sig.
0.157 0.146 0.000
5
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, •• ••–••
Figure 1: Significant predictor variables in relation to teacher attitudes towards inclusion
Gender
t (706) = 2.78, P = 0.006
B = −0.116, P = 0.001
Educational qualification
F (2, 705) = 3.8, P = 0.02
B = −0.106, P = 0.007
Contact with a student with
a disability
t (706) = −4.62, P = 0.001
B = 0.097, P = 0.008
Past success in teaching students
with disabilities
r = 0.247
B = 0.201, P = 0.000
Perceived school support
r = 0.278
B = 0.220, P = 0.000
was due to the variables Perceived school support and a
number of demographic variables (e.g., past success in
teaching student with disabilities, contact with a student
with a disability in the classroom, gender and Educational
qualification of the participants).
Discussion
This paper examined the impact of several demographic,
contact and training variables of teachers on their attitudes
towards inclusion of students with disabilities in regular
classrooms in government primary schools in Bangladesh.
The results revealed that teachers’ gender, highest educa-
tional qualification, past contact with a student with dis-
ability in the classroom, past success in teaching a student
with a disability and perceived school support for inclusive
teaching practices are significant predictors of teachers’
attitudes (see Figure 1).
Among all the independent variables, perceived school
support for inclusive teaching practices and previous
success in teaching students with disabilities were found to
be the most significant variables. The results clearly imply
that the more school support for inclusive teaching practices
the teachers perceived that they received, the more positive
they felt about including children with disabilities in their
classrooms. This finding is in line with the past research (e.g.,
Avramidis and Norwich, 2002; Gaad and Khan, 2007; Horne
and Timmons, 2009; Koutrouba et al., 2006), which shows
that school support is necessary for inclusive teaching prac-
tices. Regarding school support, Morley, Bailey and Tan
et al. (2005) argue that despite an extensive amount of
research on teachers’ attitudes, there is still a lack of know-
ledge of school support variable on teachers’ attitudes
towards inclusion. Therefore, this finding has unveiled
6 © 2012 The Authors. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs © 2012 NASEN
Teachers’ attitudes
towards inclusion of
children with
disabilities in their
regular classrooms
Adjusted R square
= 0.146
the importance and impact of school support for inclusive
teaching practices on teachers’ positive attitudes towards the
inclusion of children with disabilities in the regular govern-
ment primary school in Bangladesh, which may benefit the
inclusive education reform strategy in the country and also in
other developing countries with similar issues. Stakeholders
interested in the implementation of inclusive education
reform should ensure that teachers get adequate supports to
teach students with disabilities. This support, in Bangladesh
context, could mean teachers receiving support from col-
leagues and their school administrators as well as from
parents of the students with and without disabilities. It could
also mean that teachers are provided with necessary teach-
ing materials to include students with disabilities in their
classrooms.
The results reveal that teachers’ previous success in teach-
ing students with disabilities is an important variable to
be considered to promote inclusion of children with dis-
abilities in the regular government primary schools in
Bangladesh. This result coincides with the viewpoints of a
number of researchers (e.g., Avramidis et al., 2000; Camp-
bell, Gilmore and Cuskelly, 2003; Cox and Washington,
2008; Kalyva, Gojkovic and Tsakiris, 2007; Sharma and
Chow, 2008) that past success in teaching children with
disabilities is associated with more positive attitudes
towards inclusion. Teachers, both in-service and pre-
service, should not only be teaching students with disabili-
ties, they also need to feel a sense of success in teaching
such students for them to feel positive about inclusion. One
strategy that universities as well as school administrators
could find useful in this regard is to place pre-service and
in-service teachers in classrooms of those teachers who are
successful in teaching students with disabilities.

The results also show that in the government primary
schools in Bangladesh, the attitude of the male teachers
towards inclusion of children with disabilities is slightly
more positive (M = 56.48) than the attitudes of their female
colleagues (M = 54.46). Referring to a number of studies
(e.g., Hadjikakou and Mnasonos, in press; Parasuram,
2006), Park and Chitiyo (2011) concluded that there had
been inconsistent results regarding gender differences
in teachers’ attitudes towards students with disabilities,
though a large number of studies showed higher levels of
positive attitudes in females compared with males. Consid-
ering the results about gender variable in this study are in
opposite direction compared to the past research, an
in-depth investigation is needed for better understanding of
these results within Bangladesh context.
The result showed a statistically significant relationship
between the educational qualification of the teachers and
their attitudes towards inclusion. Interestingly, teachers
with a Master’s degree or above qualification have lower
attitudes (M = 53.59) compared to the teachers with a below
Bachelor’s (M = 55.77) and Bachelor’s (M = 55.91) degree
qualifications. This finding is quite contradictory with the
results of Parasuram (2006) where it was found that teach-
ers with a Master’s degree had more positive attitudes than
the teachers with Bachelor and below Bachelor degrees.
This result may be explained by the fact that at Masters
level, there is hardly any information about inclusive edu-
cation is being covered in universities in Bangladesh, and
thus the participant’s attitudes are a reflection of their lack
of knowledge about teaching in such classrooms. It could
also be because of other reasons that we could not explore
in this study. An in-depth study examining curriculum of
different teacher training programmes as well as interviews
with participants may shed better light on these results.
The result also found that the teachers who had contact
with a student with a disability in the classroom held more
positive attitudes towards inclusion of children with dis-
abilities in their classes than those who did not have such
exposure. This finding is supported by previous studies,
which reported that contact with a person with a disability
and such experience was associated with a more positive
attitude towards inclusion (Hadjikakou and Mnasonos,
in press; Parasuram, 2006; Sharma et al., 2008). Teacher
training programmes related to inclusive education may use
this contact strategy to improve teachers’ attitudes towards
inclusive education.
To conclude, this research provides preliminary evidence
that perceived school support for inclusive teaching prac-
tices in the form of cooperation from the peer colleagues,
school administrators, parents of the students and supply
of teaching resources make significant impact on teachers’
attitudes towards inclusion of children with disabilities
in the regular classrooms. The other variables found to be
statistically significant to influence teachers’ attitudes are
previous success in teaching students with disabilities,
contact with a student with a disability in the classroom
and educational qualification. Even though male teachers’
© 2012 The Authors. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs © 2012 NASEN
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, •• ••–••
attitude towards inclusion of children with disabilities was
found slightly higher than their female colleagues, this vari-
able requires further investigation for an in-depth under-
standing. Similarly, further in-depth research is warranted
to explore the influence of educational qualifications
on teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion of children with
disabilities as higher degree of educational qualifications
negatively correlate with teachers’ attitudes in Bangladesh.
It is recommended that the educational administrators may
consider these findings in order to promote inclusive edu-
cation in the primary schools in Bangladesh. Teacher train-
ing providers also may consider the findings while planning
teacher training programmes related to inclusive education.
Address for correspondence
Masud Ahmmed,
Faculty of Education,
Room 116,
Building 5,
Monash University,
Vic 3800,
Australia.
Email: masud.ahmmed@monash.edu
References
Ainscow, M. & Cesar, M. (2006) ‘Inclusive education ten
years after Salamanca: setting the agenda.’ European
Journal of Psychology of Education, 21 (3), pp. 231–8.
Ajzen, I. (2005) Attitudes, Personality and Behavior.
Berkshire, England: Open University Press.
Aksamit, D., Morris, M. & Leunberger, J. (1987)
‘Preperation of student services, professionals and
faculty for serving learning disabled college students.’
Journal of College Student Personnel, 28, pp. 53–9.
Anis, F. & Ahmmed, M. (2009) Paradigm Shift:
Exclusion to Inclusion. (1st edn). Dhaka, Bangladesh:
Bandhon Publications.
Asian Development Bank (2008) Education sector in
Bangladesh: what worked well and why under the
sector-wide approach? <http://www.adb.org/
Documents/Evaluation/SAPE/sape-ban-edu/
SAPE-BAN-2008-82.pdf> (accessed 3 March 2010).
Avissar, G., Reiter, S. & Leyser, Y. (2003) ‘Principals’
views and practices regarding inclusion: the case of
Israeli elementary school principals.’ European
Journal of Special Needs Education, 18 (3),
pp. 355–69.
Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P. & Burden, R. (2000) ‘Student
teachers’ attitudes towards the inclusion of children
with special educational needs in the ordinary school.’
Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, pp. 277–93.
Avramidis, E. & Kalyva, E. (2007) ‘The influence of
teaching experience and professional development on
Greek teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion.’ European
Journal of Special Needs Education, 22 (4),
pp. 367–89.
7
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, •• ••–••
Avramidis, E. & Norwich, B. (2002) ‘Teachers’ attitudes
towards integration/inclusion: a review of the
literature.’ European Journal of Special Needs
Education, 17 (2), pp. 129–47.
Bailey, J. (2004) ‘The validation of a scale to measure
school principals’ attitudes toward the inclusion of
students with disabilities in regular schools.’
Australasian Psychologist, 39 (1), pp. 76–87.
Boer, A. D., Pijl, S. J. & Minnaert, A. (2011) ‘Regular
primary schoolteachers’ attitudes towards inclusive
education: a review of the literature.’ International
Journal of Inclusive Education, 15 (3),
pp. 331–53.
Brady, K. & Woolfson, L. (2008) ‘What teacher factors
influence their attributions for children’s difficulties
in learning?’ The British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 78, pp. 527–44.
Brownell, M. T. & Pajares, F. (1999) ‘Teacher efficacy
and perceived success in mainstreaming students with
learning and behaviour problems.’ Teacher Education
and Special Education, 22 (3), pp. 154–64.
Brownlee, J. & Carrington, S. (2000) ‘Opportunities for
authentic experience and reflection: a teaching
programme designed to change attitudes towards
disability for pre-service teachers.’ Support for
Learning, 15 (3), pp. 99–105.
Campbell, J., Gilmore, L. & Cuskelly, M. (2003)
‘Changing student teachers’ attitudes towards
disability and inclusion.’ Journal of Intellectual &
Developmental Disability, 28 (4), pp. 369–79.
Chhabra, S., Srivastava, R. & Srivastava, I. (2010)
‘Inclusive education in Botswana: the perception of
school teachers.’ Journal of Disability Policy Studies,
20 (4), pp. 219–28.
Cologon, K. (2011) ‘Confidence in their own ability:
postgraduate early childhood students examining their
attitudes towards inclusive education.’ International
Journal of Inclusive Education, iFirst Article,
pp. 1–19. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2010.548106.
Cook, B. G. (2001) ‘A comparison of teachers’ attitudes
toward their included students with mild and severe
disabilities.’ The Journal of Special Education, 34 (4),
pp. 203–13.
Cornoldi, C., Terreni, A., Scruggs, T. & Mastropieri, M.
(1998) ‘Teacher attitudes in Italy after twenty years
of inclusion.’ Remedial and Special Education, 19,
pp. 115–35.
Coskun, Y. D., Tosun, U. & Macaroglu, E. (2009)
‘Classroom teachers styles of using and development
materials of inclusive education.’ Procedia – Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 1 (1), pp. 2758–62. <http://
www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/18770428/1>
(accessed 4 August 2010).
Cox, P. E. & Washington, J. (2008) ‘A consideration of
the influences that predict middle school principal
attitudes.’ Academic Leadership, 6 (1), pp. 1–7.
<http://www.academicleadership.org/pdf/ALJ_
ISSN1533-7812_6_1_203.pdf> (accessed 15
November 2010).
8 © 2012 The Authors. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs © 2012 NASEN
Eichinger, J., Rizzo, T. & Sirotnik, B. (1991) ‘Changing
attitudes toward people with disabilities.’ Teacher
Education and Special Education, 14, pp. 221–7.
Fives, H. & Buehl, M. M. (2008) ‘What do teachers
believe? Developing a framework for examining
beliefs about teachers’ knowledge and ability.’
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33,
pp. 134–76.
Forlin, C., Loreman, T., Sharma, U. & Earle, C. (2009)
‘Demographic differences in changing pre-service
teachers’ attitudes, sentiments and concerns about
inclusive education.’ International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 13 (2), pp. 195–209.
Gaad, E. & Khan, L. (2007) ‘Primary mainstream
teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion of students with
special educational needs in the private sector: a
perspective from Dubai.’ International Journal of
Special Education, 22 (2), pp. 95–109.
Gable, R. K. & Wolf, M. B. (1993) Instrument
Development in the Affective Domain: Measuring
Attitudes and Values in Corporate and School
Settings. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hadjikakou, K. & Mnasonos, M. (in press) ‘Investigating
the attitudes of head teachers of Cypriot primary
schools towards inclusion.’ Journal of Research in
Special Educational Needs, 12 (2). doi: 10.1111/
j.1471-3802.2010.01195.x.
Horne, P. E. & Timmons, V. (2009) ‘Making it work:
teachers’ perspectives on inclusion.’ International
Journal of Inclusive Education, 13 (3), pp. 273–86.
Idol, L. (2006) ‘Toward inclusion of special education
students in general education.’ Remedial and Special
Education, 27 (2), pp. 77–94.
Inclusion International (2009) Better education for all:
when we’re included too, a global report. Salamanca,
Spain: University of Salamanca.
Jobe, D. & Rust, J. O. (1996) ‘Teacher attitudes toward
inclusion of students with disabilities into regular
classrooms.’ Education, 117 (1), pp. 148–54.
Jordan, A., Schwartz, E. & McGhie-Richmond, D.
(2009) ‘Preparing teachers for inclusive classrooms.’
Teaching and Teacher Education, 25 (4),
pp. 535–42.
Kalyva, E., Gojkovic, D. & Tsakiris, V. (2007) ‘Serbian
teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion.’ International
Journal of Special Education, 22 (3), pp. 30–5.
Koutrouba, K., Vamvakari, M. & Steliou, M. (2006)
‘Factors correlated with teachers’ attitudes towards the
inclusion of students with special educational needs in
Cyprus.’ European Journal of Special Needs
Education, 21 (1), pp. 381–94.
Leyser, Y., Kapperman, G. & Keller, R. (1994) ‘Teacher
attitudes toward mainstreaming: a cross-cultural study
in six nations.’ European Journal of Special Needs
Education, 9 (1), pp. 1–15.
Leyser, Y. & Tappendorf, K. (2001) ‘Are attitudes and
practices regarding mainstreaming changing? A case
of teachers in two rural school districts.’ Education,
121 (4), pp. 751–61.

Ministry of Education (2010) ‘National Education Policy
2010.’ <http://www.moedu.gov.bd/index.php?
option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=122&
Itemid=426> (accessed 29 July 2011).
Mittler, P. (1995) ‘Special needs education: an
international perspective.’ British Journal of Special
Education, 22 (2), pp. 105–8.
Morley, D., Bailey, R., Tan, J. & Cooke, B. (2005)
‘Inclusive physical education: teachers’ views of
including pupils with special educational needs and/or
disabilities in physical education.’ European Physical
Education Review, 11, pp. 84–107.
National Forum of Organizations Working with the
Disabled [NFOWD] (2009) State of the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities in Bangladesh, 2009. <http://
www.nfowd.com/Publications.html> (accessed 18
March 2010).
Pajares, F. (1992) ‘Teachers’ beliefs and educational
research: cleaning up a messy construct.’ Review of
Educational Research, 62, pp. 307–22.
Pallant, J. (2007) SPSS Survival Manual. (3rd edn).
Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
Parasuram, K. (2006) ‘Variables that affect teachers’
attitudes towards disability and inclusive education
in Mumbai, India.’ Disability and Society, 21 (3),
pp. 231–42.
Park, M. & Chitiyo, M. (2011) ‘An examination of
teacher attitudes towards children with autism.’
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs,
11 (1), pp. 70–8.
Podell, D. M. & Tournaki, N. (2007) ‘General and special
educators’ predictions of student success as a function
of learner characteristics and teacher experience.’
Teacher Education and Special Education, 30 (4),
pp. 249–63.
Rakap, S. & Kaczmarek, L. (2010) ‘Teachers’ attitudes
towards inclusion in Turkey.’ European Journal of
Special Needs Education, 25 (1), pp. 59–75.
Romi, S. & Leyser, Y. (2006) ‘Exploring inclusion
preservice training needs: a study of variables
associated with attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs.’
European Journal of Special Needs Education,
21 (1), pp. 85–105.
Ross-Hill, R. (2009) ‘Teacher attitude towards inclusion
practices and special needs students.’ Journal of
Research in Special Educational Needs, 9 (3),
pp. 188–98.
Shank, M. D. (2002) Sport Marketing: A Strategic
Perspective. (2nd edn). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Sharma, U. & Chow, S. W. E. (2008) ‘The attitudes of
Hong Kong primary school principals toward
integrated education.’ Asia-Pacific Education Review,
9 (3), pp. 380–91.
Sharma, U., Forlin, C. & Loreman, T. (2008) ‘Impact
on training on pre-service teachers’ attitudes and
concerns about inclusive education and sentiments
about persons with disabilities.’ Disability & Society,
23 (7), pp. 73–85.
© 2012 The Authors. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs © 2012 NASEN
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, •• ••–••
Sharma, U., Moore, D. & Sonawane, S. (2009) ‘Attitudes
and concerns of pre-service teachers regarding
inclusion of students with disabilities into regular
schools in Pune, India.’ Asia-Pacific Journal of
Teacher Education, 37 (3), pp. 319–31.
Shaughnessy, M. F. (2004) ‘An interview with Anita
Woolfolk: the educational psychology of teacher
efficacy.’ Educational Psychology Review, 16 (2),
pp. 153–75.
Soodak, L. C., Podell, D. M. & Lehman, L. R. (1998)
‘Teacher, student, and school attributes as predictors
of teachers’ responses to inclusion.’ The Journal of
Special Education, 31 (4), pp. 480–97.
The World Factbook (2011) South Asia: Bangladesh.
<http://.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-
factbook/geos/bg.html> (accessed 8 August 2011).
Tournaki, N. (2003) ‘Effect of student characteristics
on teachers’ prediction of student success.’
The Journal of Educational Research, 96 (5),
pp. 310–9.
Tournaki, N. & Podell, D. M. (2005) ‘The impact of
student characteristics and teacher efficacy on
teachers’ predictions of student success.’ Teaching
and Teacher Education, 21 (3), pp. 299–314.
UNESCO (1994) The Salamanca Statement and
Framework for Action, Adopted by the World
Conference on Special Needs Education: Access
and Equity. Paris, France: UNESCO.
UNESCO (2008) Education for All by 2015 Will We
Make It? . Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO (2010) Reaching the Marginalized.
<http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001865/
186525e.pdf> (accessed 6 August 2010).
Van Reusen, A. K., Shoho, A. R. & Barker, K. S. (2001)
‘High school teacher attitudes towards inclusion.’
The High School Journal, 84 (2), pp. 7–17.
Villa, R. A., Thousand, J. S., Nevin, A. I. & Malgeri, C.
(1996) ‘Instilling collaboration for inclusive
schooling as a way of doing business in public
education.’ Remedial and Special Education, 17,
pp. 169–81.
Wilczenski, F. L. (1992) ‘Measuring attitudes toward
inclusive education.’ Psychology in the Schools, 29,
pp. 306–12.
World Bank (2008) Education for All in Bangladesh.
Where Does Bangladesh Stand in Achieving the EFA
Goals by 2015? Bangladesh Development Series,
Paper No. 24. Dhaka, Bangladesh: The World Bank
office.
Yssel, N., Engelbrecht, P., Oswald, M., Eloff, I. & Swart,
E. (2007) ‘Views of inclusion: a comparative study of
parents’ perceptions in South Africa and the United
States.’ Remedial and Special Education, 28 (6),
pp. 356–65.
Yuker, H. E. (1988) ‘The effects of contact on attitudes
toward disabled persons: some empirical
generalizations.’ In H. E. Yuker (ed.), Attitudes toward
Persons with Disabilities, pp. 262–27. New York:
Springer Publishing Company.
9