PRESCHOOL EDUCATION STUDENTS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS INCLUSION IN PRESCHOOL EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT

(1)

Darija Skubic, Alenka Vidrih

Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana

PRESCHOOL EDUCATION STUDENTS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS INCLUSION IN PRESCHOOL EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT

Summary: The purpose of the current study was to investigate the attitudes of preschool education students regarding inclusive teaching/inclusive practices. As a research instrument a questionnaire with 17 statements, referred to education, practices and policies of inclusion was developed. 118 students of the preschool education study programme at the Faculty of Education in Ljubljana participated in the study. There were 3 different groups of students: 25 students of the 2^nd year of preschool education, who haven’t attended to the course Inclusive Education yet, 33 students of the 3^rd year of preschool education, who have already attended to the subject Inclusive Education and 60 graduates from various study programmes (Faculty of Art, Faculty of Social Studies, Faculty of Social Work, Faculty of Education, Faculty of The- ology etc.) and only some of them have attended to the course on inclusive education and are now training to be a preschool teacher (one-year training). The results provide the specific information about preschool education students’ attitudes towards inclusion. All findings were discussed in terms of preschool teacher education programme and several recommendations were developed to demonstrate the student the potential of transforming children disability into ability.

Key words: preschool teacher, preschool educational context, inclusion, attitude

Introduction

Accepting inclusion is a necessary first step for early childhood professionals to ac- commodate children with disabilities in their classrooms (Bruns & Mogharreban, 2009).

More, teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion can go a long way toward determining the success or failure of inclusive placements (Coombs- Richardson & Mead, 2001). Adequate train-

ing would most likely have an influence on the attitudes toward inclusion (Crane-Mitchel

& Hedge, 2007). For example, it has been re- ported that teachers who had more courses on special education had more positive attitude toward inclusion (Buell et al., 1999; Clough

& Nutbrown, 2004; Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2000; Seery, Davis, & Johnson, 2000; Secer, 2010). Conversely, negative attitudes can re-

UDC 376.1-056.26:373.2

(2)

sult from a lack of knowledge (Crane-Mitch- el & Hedge, 2007). Therefore, we strongly believe that we should especially focus on creating more positive teacher attitudes for inclusion to facilitate inclusive practices for young children with disabilities.

Inclusion in education

Inclusive education is a process of strengthening the capacity of the education system to reach out to all learners and can thus be understood as a key strategy to achieve education for all children. As an overall princi- ple, it should guide all education policies and practices, starting from the fact that education is a basic human right and the foundation for a more just and equal society. The major im- petus for inclusive education was given at the World Conference on Special Needs Educa- tion: Access and Quality, held in Salamanca in 1994. More than 300 participants represent- ing 92 governments and 25 international or- ganizations considered the fundamental policy shifts required to promote the approach of inclusive education, thereby enabling schools to serve all children, particularly those with special educational needs (2009). Inclusion is thus seen as a process of addressing and responding to the diversity of needs of all children, youth and adults through increasing participation in learning, cultures and communities, and reducing and eliminating ex-

clusion within and from education (Booth, 1996). It involves changes and modifications in content, approaches, structures and strategies, with a common vision that covers all children of the appropriate age range and a conviction that is the responsibility of the regular system to educate all children (UNESCO, 1994).

There are several justifications this kind of attitude. First, there is an educational justi- fication: the requirement for inclusive schools to educate all children together means that they have to develop ways of teaching that respond to individual differences and that therefore benefit all children. Second, there is a social justification: inclusive schools are able to change attitudes toward diversity by educating all children together, and form the basis for a just and non-discriminatory society. Thirdly, there is an economic justifica- tion: it is less costly to establish and maintain schools that educate all children together than to set up a complex system of different types of schools specialising in different groups of children (2009).

An overview of the legal frameworks re- lated to inclusive education appears in Table 1.

(3)

Table 1: Legal frameworks in support of inclusion 1948–2007 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights

1960 Convention against Discrimination in Education

1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

1979 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimi- nation against Women

1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child

1990 International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families

1999 Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour

2005 Convention on the Protection and Promotion of Diversity in Cultural Expressions

2006 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples To make the inclusion in education

work creating an inclusive curriculum is necessary that addresses the child’s cognitive, emotional, social and creative development.

It is based on the four pillars of education for the 21^st century – learning to know, to do, to be and to live together (Delors et al., 1996). It has an instrumental role to play in fostering tolerance and promoting human rights, and is a powerful tool for transcending cultural, religious, gender and other differences. An inclusive curriculum takes gender, cultural identity and language background into consideration.

It involves breaking negative stereotypes in teacher’s attitudes and expectations. Multilin- gual approaches in education, in which lan-

guage is recognized as an integral part of student’s cultural identity, can act as a source of inclusion (2009).

Teacher educators should be constant- ly investigating new developments in teacher education and inclusive education, and reflecting on how to adapt appropriate new ide- as to improve their own teacher education curriculum.

Key personnel issues therefore include:

• selecting suitably experienced, knowledgeable and creative personnel for curriculum development teams/departments;

(4)

• creating curriculum development teams/departments comprising diverse membership (men, women, with or without disabilities, from different linguistic and other back- grounds, and from rural and urban contexts);

• reviewing the composition and per- formance of curriculum development teams/departments on a regular basis, and actively searching for personnel to fill any identified skills/

experience gaps; and

• ensuring there is an education programme for curriculum developers, addressing inclusive education (with exposure visits to inclusive education settings, not just learning through theory); and inclusive/participatory teaching and learning methods.

Key process issues include:

• ensuring that curriculum development teams understand the impor- tance and relevance of seeking stake- holders views with regard to teaching and teacher education, and have the necessary skills for facilitating such consultations;

• developing accessible mechanisms through which stakeholder views can be heard (e.g. through representative advisory panels or focus groups); and

• monitoring of teacher education curriculum developers by the govern- ment/ministry of education to ensure that they are seeking, respecting and using stakeholder perspectives in their work (Kaplan, Lewis, 2013).

Inclusion in preschool education

A condition for inclusion and social participation in preschool learning and peer communities is the teacher’s values, attitudes and competencies, which should actively re- flect such awareness, and in the case of peer interaction, also trust children’s ability to solve social challenges, and respect the need for peer independence in designing their own activities (Corsaro, 2005; Janson, 2007).

Preschool education is an internation- ally embraced programme approach, with a strong ethical, humanistic and egalitarian val- ue base. Inclusion is also, in general, in ac- cordance with what behavioural and educational science demonstrates as positive conditions for promoting development, learning and social participation. In the specific case of developmental and functional differences, however, research and practice also point to potential barriers to achieving such goals.

Barriers can be removed, through overcom- ing challenges for inclusive education, in-

(5)

cluding (Vargas-Barón, E., & Janson, U., with Mufel, N., 2009):

• understanding how barriers to participation are created in the interplay between environmental conditions (perceptually, physically and social- ly) and specific differences or disabilities;

• providing in-service training and special educational support to inclusive preschool personnel;

• encouraging preschool and school teachers an leaders to build strong community relations for promoting inclusion throughout the community;

• adapting physical environments, educational materials, toys and play equipment;

• planning activities, individually and for groups, to provide special support within the context of general and col- lective preschool activities;

• cooperating closely with parents of special needs children in order to learn about each child’s strengths, abilities, interests, and personality;

• communicating and cooperating with all other parents to create a positive social atmosphere and a demys-

tified attitude toward functional differences;

• cooperating with early intervention specialists (occupational therapists, physiotherapists, psychologists, special educators, speech and language therapists) to adapt the physical envi- ronment, create optimal activity conditions, and select and construct education and play equipment, and

• building co-responsibility among preschool personnel for all children rather than assigning a specific child as a „task” for only one staff member.

Research

Aim of the research

Teachers’ beliefs and attitudes as well as their intentions need to be taken into ac- count in any attempt at education reform, be- cause this components of teachers’ cognition correlate directly with their classroom practices (Park, Lee, Oliver, 2006). Craft, Gardner, and Claxton (2008) envisage the teacher „as a reflective practitioner – one who considers actions and intentions by reflecting both in and on practice”. Thus, this research aspires to highlight the role that preschool teachers in- tentionally play (or should play) in the fostering of children’s creative thinking within the preschool – education framework.

(6)

Methods

Sample of participants

• 118 students of preschool education at the Faculty of Education, Univer- sity of Ljubljana: 25 students of the 2^nd year of preschool education (=

group A), who haven’t attended to the course Inclusive Education yet, 33 students of the 3^rd year of preschool education (= group B), who have already attended to the subject Inclusive Education and 60 graduates from various study programmes (= group C) (Faculty of Art, Facul- ty of Social Studies, Faculty of So- cial Work, Faculty of Education, Fac- ulty of Theology etc.) and only some of them have attended to the course on inclusive education and are now training to be a preschool teacher (one-year training).

• educational level – secondary school (49,15%), academic higher education or university diploma (50,85%)

Variables

• 17 - independant variables (attitudes toward children’s creativity) were observed by the Likert scale (1 - strongly disagree, 2 - disagree, 3 - neutral, e.g. I don’t know, I don’t

want to answer, 4 - agree, 5 - strongly agree)

The independent variables are:

A1: Policy-makers and teacher trainers need to understand inclusive education.

A2: To understand inclusive education means to understand that inclusive education is an issue that cuts across all aspects of education, at all levels.

A3: To understand inclusive education means to recognise the crucial

‘twin-track’ approach to inclusive education, e.g. teachers (and those who train and employ them) need to embrace inclusive beliefs and practices that generally support all learners and make education a welcoming and positive experience for all; and they need to be sufficiently confident and skilled to meet the specific learning needs of students with disabilities.

A4: To understand inclusive education means to understand that inclusive education does not just happen in isolation within the education sector; inter-sectoral links can play a particularly important role in ensuring the inclusion of children in early years education (for ex. links with the health sector).

(7)

A5: Inclusive education should be integrated into all teacher training.

A6: The development of a human rights culture and the nurturing of critical thinking skills are vital if inclusion is to become a reality.

A7: To ensure that every child has a teacher who is trained on inclusive education and acknowledges their responsibility to be inclusive, there needs to be 1) a review and revision of teacher training courses, curricula and materials, and 2) the advocacy to encourage teacher training institutions and ministries to undertake such changes.

A8: Teacher training must bring together theory and practice, especially around inclusive education.

A9: Mentoring of inexperienced teachers by other teachers, peer-to-peer support, and regular follow-up training events are needed.

A10: People with disabilities should be involved in teacher training and other aspects of education planning and management.

A11: Ministries of Education should seek the contribution of people with disabilities during policy discussions (at all levels) about teach-

er training structures, curricula, etc.

(as well as during discussions about other education issues).

A12: Local education authorities and schools should be enabling people with disabilities to be actively involved in school life, management committees and parent-teacher associations, so that serving teachers (and trainee teachers doing practicum) are meeting and working with (and can ask questions to) people with disabilities regularly and for different purposes.

A13: The teaching workforce needs to be diverse and representative.

A14: Striving for a diverse teaching staff that represents male and female sections of the community, with and without disabilities, and from the ethnic, linguistic and religious groups found in the community is important.

A15: Enabling children to learn with a teacher with disabilities should help the children to grow up with a more positive attitude towards disability and the role that people with disabilities can and should play in their community.

(8)

A16: The donor support for fundamental improvements to teacher training is important.

A17: Donors need to research the most effective approaches to training, supporting and managing teachers to include all children in different contexts, e.g. including piloting innovative projects, rigorously monitoring and evaluating all initiatives,

adapting and transferring successful pilots.

• 1 dependant variable (educational level)

Data processing

Data analysis was done with the routines in SPSS, e.g. frequencies.

Results and discussion

Table 2: Attitudes of preschool education students of 2nd year towards inclusion

Attitude 1 2 3 4 5

f f% f f% f f% f f% f f%

A1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 100

A2 0 0 0 0 2 8,0 6 24,0 17 68,0

A3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16,0 21 84,0

A4 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 36,0 16 64,0

A5 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16,0 21 84,0

A6 0 0 1 4,0 0 0 10 40,0 14 56,0

A7 0 0 0 0 2 8,0 8 32,0 15 60,0

A8 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 20,0 20 80,0

A9 0 0 0 0 2 8,0 9 36,0 14 56,0

A10 0 0 0 0 5 20,0 10 40,0 10 40,0

A11 0 0 1 4,0 2 8,0 8 32,0 14 56,0

A12 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16,0 21 84,0

A13 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16,0 21 84,0

A14 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 37,5 15 62,5

A15 0 0 4 16,0 4 16,0 10 40,0 7 28,0

A16 1 4,0 1 4,0 2 8,0 9 36,0 12 48,0

A17 1 4,0 2 8,0 1 4,0 9 36,0 12 48,0

(9)

Table 3: Attitudes of preschool education students of 3^rdyear towards inclusion

Attitude 1 2 3 4 5

A1 0 0 0 0 1 3,03 6 18,18 26 78,78

A2 0 0 2 6,06 1 3,03 14 42,42 16 48,48

A3 0 0 0 0 3 9,09 11 33,33 19 57,57

A4 0 0 1 3,03 2 6,06 7 21,21 23 69,69

A5 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12,12 29 87,87

A6 0 0 0 0 2 6,06 19 57,57 12 36,36

A7 0 0 0 0 2 6,06 16 48,48 15 45,45

A8 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 21,21 26 78,78

A9 0 0 0 0 1 3,03 10 30,30 22 66,66

A10 0 0 0 0 9 27,27 16 48,48 8 24,24

A11 0 0 2 6,06 6 18,18 16 48,48 9 27,27

A12 0 0 0 0 3 9,09 10 30,30 20 60,60

A13 0 0 0 0 3 9,09 5 15,15 25 75,75

A14 0 0 1 3,03 4 12,12 12 36,36 16 48,48

A15 0 0 4 12,12 4 12,12 16 48,48 9 27,27

A16 0 0 2 6,06 3 9,09 18 54,54 10 30,30

A17 0 0 3 9,09 5 15,15 14 42,42 11 33,33

Table 4: Attitudes of graduates (who are training to be a preschool teacher) towards inclusion

Attitude 1 2 3 4 5

A1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6,67 56 93,33

A2 0 0 1 1,67 1 1,67 8 13,33 50 83,33

A3 0 0 2 3,39 1 1,69 14 23,73 42 71,19

A4 0 0 1 1,67 1 1,67 18 30 40 66,66

A5 0 0 2 3,33 0 0 13 21,67 45 75,0

A6 0 0 1 1,69 1 1,69 22 37,29 35 59,33

A7 0 0 0 0 2 3,45 18 31,03 38 65,52

A8 0 0 0 0 1 1,67 4 6,66 55 91,67

A9 0 0 0 0 2 3,33 11 18,33 47 78,34

A10 0 0 0 0 2 3,33 26 43,33 32 53,34

A11 0 0 0 0 9 15,0 19 31,66 32 53,34

A12 0 0 1 1,67 0 0 14 23,33 45 75,0

A13 0 0 1 1,67 1 1,67 11 18,33 47 78,33

A14 0 0 1 1,82 5 9,09 17 30,9 32 58,19

A15 0 0 3 5,08 5 8,47 25 42,37 26 44,07

A16 3 5,0 7 11,67 7 11,67 20 33,33 23 38,33 A17 1 1,67 6 10,0 13 21,66 16 26,67 24 40,0

(10)

Item 1: Policy makers’ and teachers’

understanding of inclusion

A1: 100,0% of respondents of group A, 78,78%

of respondents of group B and 93,33% of respondents of group C strongly agree that policy-makers and teacher trainers need to understand inclusive education.

of respondents of group B and 83,83% of respondents of group C strongly agree that to understand inclusive education means to understand that inclusive education is an issue that cuts across all aspects of education, at all levels.

of respondents of group B and 71,19% of respondents of group C strongly agree that to understand inclusive education means to recognise the crucial ‘twin- track’ approach to inclusive education, e.g.

teachers (and those who train and employ them) need to embrace inclusive beliefs and practices that generally support all learners and make education a welcoming and positive experience for all; and they need to be sufficiently confident and skilled to meet the specific learning needs of students with disabilities.

of respondents of group B and 66,66% of respondents of group C strongly agree that to understand inclusive education means

to understand that inclusive education does not just happen in isolation within the education sector; inter-sectoral links can play a particularly important role in ensuring the inclusion of children in early years education (for ex. links with the health sector).

Item 2: Inclusion of inclusive education to all teacher’s training

of respondents of group B and 75,0% of respondents of group C strongly agree that inclusive education should be integrated into all teacher training.

A6: 56,0% of respondents of group, 36,36%

of respondents of group B and 59,33% of respondents of group C strongly agree that the development of a human rights culture and the nurturing of critical thinking skills are vital if inclusion is to become a reality.

of respondents of group B and 65,52% of respondents of group C strongly agree that to ensure that every child has a teacher who is trained on inclusive education and acknowledges their responsibility to be inclusive, there needs to be 1) a review and revision of teacher training courses, curricula and materials, and 2) the advocacy to encourage teacher training institutions and ministries to undertake such changes.

(11)

Item 3: Theory and praxis in inclusive education

of respondents of group B and 91,97% of respondents of group C strongly agree that teacher training must bring together theory and practice, especially around inclusive education.

of respondents of group B and 78,34% of respondents of group C strongly agree that mentoring of inexperienced teachers by other teachers, peer-to-peer support, and regular follow-up training events are needed.

Item 4: Students with special needs A10: 40,0% of respondents of group A, 24,24%

of respondents of group B and 53,34% of respondents of group C strongly agree that people with disabilities should be involved in teacher training and other aspects of education planning and management.

of respondents of group B and 53,34% of respondents of group C strongly agree that ministries of Education should seek the contribution of people with disabilities during policy discussions (at all levels) about teacher training structures, curricula, etc. (as well as during discussions about other education issues).

A12: 84,0% of respondents of group A, 60,60% of respondents of group B and 75,0% of respondents of group C strongly agree that local education authorities and schools should be enabling people with disabilities to be actively involved in school life, management committees and parent-teacher associations, so that serving teachers (and trainee teachers doing practicum) are meeting and working with (and can ask questions to) people with disabilities regularly and for different purposes.

Item 5: Variety of teachers

of respondents of group B and 78,33% of respondents of group C strongly agree that the teaching workforce needs to be diverse and representative.

of respondents of group B and 58,19% of respondents of group C strongly agree that striving for a diverse teaching staff that represents male and female sections of the community, with and without disabilities, and from the ethnic, linguistic and religious groups found in the community is important.

of respondents of group B and 44,07% of respondents of group C strongly agree that enabling children to learn with a teacher

(12)

with disabilities should help the children to grow up with a more positive attitude towards disability and the role that people with disabilities can and should play in their community.

Item 6: Donations

of respondents of group B and 38,33% of respondents of group C strongly agree that the donor support for fundamental improvements to teacher training is important.

of respondents of group B and 40,0% of respondents of group C strongly agree that donors need to research the most effective approaches to training, supporting and managing teachers to include all children in different contexts, e.g. including piloting innovative projects, rigorously monitoring and evaluating all initiatives, adapting and transferring successful pilots.

Summary of strong agreement is shown in Table 4 and Figure 1.

Table 5: Percent of answer „5 Strongly agree” for attitudes A1 to A17 for analysed groups (A, B, C) and test of difference in proportions for group differences.

Atti-

tude group

A group

B group

C t

(A-B) p

(A-B) t (C-B) P

(C-B) t

(A-C) p (A-C) A1 100 79 93 2,98 0,00 1,86 0,07 2,07 0,04 A2 68 48 83 1,53 0,13 3,51 0,00 -1,46 0,15

A3 84 58 71 2,34 0,02 1,31 0,19 1,37 0,18

A4 64 70 67 -0,46 0,65 -0,30 0,76 -0,23 0,82

A5 84 88 75 -0,42 0,68 -1,61 0,11 0,98 0,33 A6 56 36 59 1,51 0,14 2,19 0,03 -0,28 0,78 A7 60 45 66 1,11 0,27 1,89 0,06 -0,48 0,63

A8 80 79 92 0,11 0,91 1,62 0,11 -1,33 0,19 A9 56 67 78 -0,83 0,41 1,19 0,24 -1,98 0,05

A10 40 24 53 1,28 0,21 2,95 0,00 -1,14 0,26

A11 56 27 53 2,28 0,03 2,59 0,01 0,22 0,82

A12 84 61 75 2,08 0,04 1,41 0,16 0,98 0,33

A13 84 76 78 0,79 0,43 0,28 0,78 0,63 0,53

A14 63 48 58 1,08 0,29 0,90 0,37 0,37 0,71

A15 28 27 44 0,06 0,95 1,67 0,10 -1,46 0,15

A16 48 30 38 1,38 0,17 0,79 0,43 0,82 0,41

A17 48 33 40 1,13 0,26 0,64 0,52 0,68 0,50

(13)

Figure 1: Percent of answer „5 Strongly agree” for attitudes A1 to A17 for analysed groups (A, B, C)

The results have shown that there was no substantial difference between attitudes of respondents with higher educational level (C - university diploma) and attitudes of respondents with lower educational level (A – second year students). However, we have to point out that in 5 attitudes (A2 - to understand inclusive education means to understand that inclusive education is an issue that cuts across all aspects of education, at all levels; A8 - teacher training must bring together theory and practice, especially around inclusive education; A9 - mentoring of inexperienced teachers by other teachers, peer-to- peer support, and regular follow-up training

events are needed; A10 - people with disabilities should be involved in teacher training and other aspects of education planning and management and A15 - enabling children to learn with a teacher with disabilities should help the children to grow up with a more positive attitude towards disability and the role that people with disabilities can and should play in their community) respondents with higher educational level (university diploma) were more positive about than respondents with lower educational level (secondary school).

We also believe that these resultants can be at- tributed not only to the educational level, but also to professional experiences.

(14)

Conclusion

Understanding and responding to diversity in education should not be an option- al learning objective for a minority of student teachers, e.g. those who perhaps have an ex- isting interest in inclusive education, special needs, disability or other marginalized groups.

Instead, inclusive education needs to be recognized as an essential learning objective for all student teachers, regardless of which level they will teach at or which subject(s) they will teach (Kaplan, Lewis, 2013).

Like Sucuoḡlu et al. (2013) we believe that the teachers need more training on in in-

clusive practices. Furthermore, the research- ers suggested additional research investigating the quality of teacher training programs and licensure requirements. On the other hand, simply providing information to teachers is not sufficient enough for them to work with children with diverse abilities. Hundert (2007) drew attention to the type of the teacher training program about inclusive practices and emphasized that the method used to teach new skills and knowledge should be considered and easy-to use intervention that can be incorporated into daily instruction and routines that do not require much effort should be provided in teacher training programs.

References

• Booth, T. (1996). A Perspectives on Inclusion from England. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26 (1), 87-99.

• Bruns, A. D. & Mogharreberan, C. C. (2009). The gap between beliefs and practices: Early childhood practitioners’ perception about inclusion. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 21 (3), 229–241.

• Buell, M. J., Hallam, R., Gamel-McCormick, M., & Scheer, S. (1999). A survey of general and special education teachers’ perceptions and in service needs concerning inclusion. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 46 (2), 143–156.

• Clough, P. & Nutbrown, C. (2004). Special educational needs and inclusion: Multiple perspectives of preschool educators in the UK. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 2, 191–210.

• Coombs-Richardson, R. & Mead, J. (2001). Supporting general educators inclusive practices.

Teacher Education and Special Education, 24 (4), 383-390.

• Corsaro, W. A. (2005). The Sociology of Childhood, 2^nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press.

(15)

• Craft, A., Gardner, H., & Claxton, G. (Eds.) (2008). Creativity, wisdom, and trusteeship: explor- ing the role of education. Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CA, London.

• Crane-Mitchel, L. & Hedge, A. V. (2007). Belief and practices of in-service preschool teachers in inclusive settings: Implications for personnel preparation. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 28, 353–366.

• Delors, J. et al. (1996). Learning: the Treasure Within. Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century. Paris, UNESCO.

• Hundert, J. P. (2007). Training classroom and resource preschool teachers to develop inclusive intervention for children with disabilities: generalization to new intervention targets. Journal of Positive Behaviour Interventions, 9 (3), 159–173.

• Janson, U. (2007). Preschool Cultures and the Inclusion of Children With Disabilities, Japanese Journal of Special Education. 44, 405–422.

• Kaplan, I., Lewis, I. (2013). Promoting Inclusive Teacher Education Curriculum, Bangkok, UN- ESCO. Retrieved July 18, 2014. from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002210/221035e.

pdf

• Lewis, I., Bagree, S. (2013). Teachers for All: Inclusive Teaching for Children with Disabilities. Re- trieved July 20, 2014. from: www.unicef.org/disabilities/.../IDDC_teacher_education_...

• Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2000). The inclusive classroom: Strategies for effective instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merill.

• Park, S., Lee, S.-Y., Oliver, J. S., & Cramond, B. (2006). Changes in Corean science teachers’

perceptions of creativity and science teaching after participating in an overseas professional development program. Journal of Science Teacher Education 17 (1), 37–64.

• Policy Guidelines on Inclusion in Education (2009). Paris, UNESCO. Retrieved July 25, 2014.

from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0017/001778/177849e.pdf

• Secer, Z. (2010). An analysis of effects of in-service teacher training on Turkish preschool teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion. International Journal of Early Years Education, 18 (1), 43–53.

• Seery, M. E, Davis, P. M., & Johnson, L. J. (2000). Seeing eye-to-eye: Are parents and professionals in agreement about the benefits of preschool inclusion? Remedial and Special Education, 21 (5), 268–278.

(16)

• Sucuoḡlu, S., Bakkaloḡlu, H., Karasu, F. I., Demir, S., Akalm, S. (2013). Inclusive Preschool Teachers: Their Attitudes and Knowledge about Inclusion. International Journal of Early Child- hood Special Education (INT-JECSE, 5 (2), 107-128. Retrieved August 1, 2014. from: http://

www.int-jecse.net/files/ASA7592MO3G737O1.pdf

• UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca World Conference on Special Needs Education: Access and Quality. UNESCO and the Ministry of Education, Spain, Paris, UNESCO.

• Vargas-Barón, E., & Janson, U., with Mufel, N. (2009). Early Childhood Intervention, Special Education and Inclusion: A Focus on Belarus. UNICEF, Regional Office for CEE/CIS. Retrieved September 1, 2014. from: http://www.unicef.org/ceecis/Belarus_English.pdf