This causal-comparative, quantitative study compared the perceptions of inclusion of students with disabilities in the mainstream classroom that are held by high school general education teachers and high school special education teachers that teach in inclusive settings. The study determined there is a difference between the perceptions of inclusive education between teachers with different teaching assignments. Special education teachers were clearly more positive than general education teachers about the inclusion of students with disabilities, the influence of students with disabilities on the general education classroom and its students, and the management of behavior in the inclusive classroom. There was no difference in teacher self-efficacy between the two groups. The study involved teachers at six rural high schools located in Northeast Georgia. The Opinions Relative to the Integration of Students with Disabilities developed by Antonak and Larrivee (1995) was used to measure the perceptions of the participants. The results were analyzed with t-tests to identify differences in perceptions of the two groups.

Abstracts of dissertations available on microfilm or as xerographic reproductions.

The Individuals with Disability Education Act (IDEA) states that students with special needs should be educated to the maximum extent possible in the general education setting. Full inclusion practices allow students with special needs to be educated in the general education setting while receiving services for their unique needs. This study aimed to determine if general education teachers held negative perceptions toward full-inclusion practices and students with special needs. Furthermore, the study aimed to discover if there was a correlation between general education teachers' negative perceptions and the implementation of full inclusion practices. Through a Likert scale survey, current K-12 general education teachers across the United States rated 10 perception statements regarding their feelings towards full inclusion and students with special needs. The data indicated that the overall average score for respondents was in the neutral to slightly positive range. For perception statements regarding special needs students specifically, the average overall score fell more in the positive range; however, the average overall scores were negative when viewing perception statements regarding full inclusion practices. General education teachers who teach full inclusion were found to have the most positive perceptions toward full inclusion practices and students with special needs. General education teachers with full inclusion practices on their campuses had the next highest rate of positive perceptions. In contrast, general education teachers who did not work on inclusion campuses or in inclusive classrooms held the most negative perceptions. The data implies that the more exposure teachers have to full inclusion practices and students with special needs, the more positive their perceptions. It can also be assumed that full inclusion practices cannot be successfully implemented while general education teachers hold negative perceptions towards full inclusion and students with special needs.

Author's abstract: The purpose of this study was to examine the experience of Georgia Teachers with administering the Georgia Alternate Assessment (GAA) to elementary students with significant cognitive disabilities and determine how those experiences informed their perception of the Georgia Alternate Assessment. The GAA was designed to assess students with significant cognitive disabilities on grade level standards. The goal of including students with significant cognitive disabilities in standardized testing and statewide accountability systems is to positively impact the curriculum and instruction, and the teaching and learning process for these students. Georgia's special education teachers experience the GAA from within and are in an insightful position to share their perspectives of whether the GAA is meeting this goal. Experiences and perceptions for this study were provided by Georgia teachers who had experienced administering the GAA to elementary students with significant cognitive disabilities. A grounded theory analysis revealed common experiences and perceptions among the participants. Findings from the participants revealed the participants experienced the administration of the GAA as a balancing act in which they had to balance often conflicting aspects of meeting state and federal guidelines and meeting the daily instructional needs of their students with significant cognitive disabilities. Continued analysis revealed that these participants perceived the GAA to be a meaningless tool for teaching and a meaningless measure of assessment for elementary students with significant cognitive disabilities. Finally, continued grounded theory analysis resulted in the emergence of a theory. The participants of this study found the GAA to be an ineffective tool for measuring the teaching and learning of elementary students with significant cognitive disabilities. While not completely abandoning grade level standards, these participants advocated that teaching and high stakes assessment of elementary students with significant cognitive disabilities be based on a curriculum that has a more pivotal impact on their quality of life outcomes. They advocated teaching and assessment of daily living and functional life skills.