Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods - Essay Example

?Qualitative and Quantitative Research methods in inclusion of special needs in room Research purpose and the information sought vary from one study to another in accordance with the use of qualitative and quantitative approaches. Experimental methodologies try to validate their research using various quantitative measures expressed in terms of numerical data. Qualitative methods reveal that words can be effective as numbers with research designs that are flexible instead of using the standard experimental format since qualitative research methods are valid techniques for carrying out research. Both quantitative and qualitative research techniques have a common ground since they are concerned with reliability and their study designs as well as approaches are similar. The paper critically evaluates three research papers on inclusion of special needs students in classrooms and reflects research methods used in these studies. In addition, the paper evaluates document review and observation as data collection methods used in the studies. Introduction Research adopts two key approaches that include qualitative and quantitative methods that have different data collection ways according to each technique. Qualitative research is often considered exploratory and is useful in getting a deeper understanding of issues of interest as well as exploring nuances associated with the current problem. On the other hand, quantitative research is definite in its point because it tries to compute problems and comprehend the way to prevent them by looking for the scheme of results in a large population. Quantitative research involves collection and conversion of data into numerical form in order to make statistical calculation and draw conclusions. Qualitative research is associated with social constructivism paradigm that emphasises socially constructed reality since it involves inductive and deductive means that develop theory for a pattern of meaning based on collected data. Qualitative data collection and analysis allows great flexibility compared to quantitative research since data is collected in textual form based on observation and interaction with participants. Moreover, data collection in qualitative research can be carried in several stages as opposed to one stage collection of data in quantitative research. Qualitative research uses methods that give participants a degree of freedom instead of forcing the participants to select pre-determined responses because this technique allows them the atmosphere to express themselves. This indicates that qualitative research technique adopts a less formal and less rigid approach compared to the approach used in quantitative research. Although, qualitative research involves a small number of participants and high degree of flexibility, the approach is not “less scientific “compared to quantitative research that involves more subjects and is often carried in a rigid manner. Pragmatic or mixed methods approach to science involves the use of methods that appear suited for research problem since they have the freedom to use any techniques associated with qualitative or quantitative research. Any single approach regardless of whether it is qualitative or quantitative, has its limitations hence the different approaches complement one another. Mixing different approaches has advantages since it allows use of various sources of data from different researchers and different perspectives for enabling interpretation of results, as well as multiple techniques for studying research problem because qualitative and quantitative methods are utilised simultaneously (Alzheimer Europe, 2012). This paper evaluates three research articles that demonstrate their findings through research strategies, even though they use different data collection methods. One of the study articles uses observation, while another one uses document reviews and the last one uses a rating scale. Background of the articles’ critique begins by evaluating the various data collection methods used in the articles in carrying out their studies. Strategies of data collection Document review Document review is means of collecting data through review of existing documents, which may be hard copy or electronic and that include reports, performance ratings as well as funding proposals among others (Evaluation Briefs, 2009). Purpose of use Document review is useful, in gathering background information, determining if implementation of a program reflects program plans and when a researcher needs information to help him or her develop other data collection tools for evaluation. Reviewing documents helps understand the history and operation of a program that is under study and the way in which it operates. Moreover, reviewing documents reveals the difference between formal statements regarding the purpose of a program and the actual implementation of the program. As well, reviewing documents in order to understand the program and organization being evaluated helps in formulating questionnaires or even developing an observation guide (Evaluation Briefs, 2009). Conducting document review This data collection method involves assessing existing documents, securing access to the documents identified and ensuring confidentiality. After securing access to the documents that answer the evaluation questions, researchers compile the documents; moreover, researchers have to understand how and why the documents were generated. Moreover, conducting document review involves determining the accuracy of the document by comparing documents that contain related information and checking the documents against data collected. Finally after everything has been accounted for, researchers summarise information from the documents reviewed using a data collection form that helps in compiling and analysing the findings (Evaluation Briefs, 2009). Advantages According to Evaluation Briefs (2009), document review offers a various advantages 1. Relatively inexpensive 2. A good source of background information 3. Offers a close look at a program that is otherwise unobservable directly 4. The method can bring up issues that are not considered by other means Disadvantages According to Evaluation Briefs (2009), document review offers a various disadvantages 1. Information can be inapplicable, unavailable, disorganised or even out of date 2. The technique could be biased as a result of selective survival of information 3. Information could be incomplete 4. As well, the technique can be time consuming since it involves collecting, reviewing and analysing many documents. Observation Observation being a data collection method in research it entails more than mere looking and listening since it is selective and human beings are good at selectively paying attention to what is considered useful to them. Observation in research harnesses this ability because systematic observation involves careful planning of what is to be observed; moreover, in order to make the observations public, what is observed has to be recorded to allow the information to be analysed and interpreted. Role and purpose of observation Systematic observation in quantitative research is often associated with observation carried out from the perspective of quantitative research whose purpose is to offer reliable and quantifiable data. This often includes some formal and structured observation instruments because observation technique used identifies variables to be evaluated perhaps through a behavioural checklist. Observation provides qualitative data and owing to the direct nature of qualitative research, observation of participants within qualitative research is often unstructured. Structured observation is carried out by individuals who believe it is possible to quantify behaviours, while unstructured observation is carried out by those who operate from interpretive perspective that focuses on understanding the meanings participants draw from observations (University of Strathclyde, 2013). Advantages According to University of Strathclyde (2013), observation is useful as a source of data in primary research because; 1. Observation offers direct access to phenomena under consideration 2. Observations take many forms from unstructured approaches to tightly structured and standardised procedures 3. Observation involves recording, which provides permanent record for the behaviour allowing extra analysis and comparison with time 4. Observation easily complements other approaches , which enhances quality of evidence available for researchers Disadvantages However, observations are limited in what they can offer a researcher regarding their feelings, motivations or attitudes that underpin people behaviour. According to University of Strathclyde (2013), observation has various limitations that include; 1. The process being time consuming as well as resource intensive 2. Fundamental weakness of this technique is that it is vulnerable to observer bias, which undermines reliability and validity of data gathered 3. Another weakness of observation is observer effect, since the presence of an observer influences behaviour of those observed. Investigation of research articles Inclusion as an educational approach provides students with special needs education within normal classrooms, which offer less restrictive education environment to them, by providing necessary full time or part time services. Fear, arrogance and pride in able-bodied people have resulted in placement of people with disabilities into physically segregating conditions, which mentally segregates the disabled by constructing a distinction that discourages interaction (Anderson, 2006; Dudley-Marling, 2001). Though creation of special schools and classes for people with disabilities is promoted as an act of humanitarianism that intends to serve and protect, this effort reinforces distinction since it enables general education teachers to disavow responsibility toward disabled individuals (Forlin, Douglas and Hattie, 1996). The terminology used with regard to educating students with special education needs has changed with time from mainstreaming through integration to inclusion (Anderson, 2003). Though each term slightly altered and broadened the concept all of them retained an unintended bias; for instance, speaking of inclusion brings to attention the differences of those individuals that resulted in their exclusion (Education Bureau, 2008; Forlin, 2007). Nevertheless, individuals with special needs have the right to benefit from educational services that meet their needs in the best way like other individuals. As a natural outcome of the fact that these people’s needs are different; hence, the environment where the individual needs are met varies with the main environment being special education schools, special classrooms and regular classrooms (Hunt and Goetz, 1997). Inclusion education approach for student with special needs in regular classes offers a least restrictive educational environment for the students since it offers disabled students support services within the same classroom as the other students of their age (Education Bureau, 2010; Pivik,McComas and LaFlamme, 2002). This section discusses three research articles with similar subject with focus on research methods used in the studies. Therefore, focus of the evaluation includes the benefits and limitations of the research methods on articles whose subject is inclusion of special needs students in classroom and various factors that come into play. The critique also evaluates the various articles in the study by the way they present their findings throughout the course of the studies. Research Article no. 1: A Comparative Study of the Attitude, Concern, and Interaction Levels of Elementary School Teachers and Teacher Candidates towards Inclusive Education In this article, the author uses a rating scale in collecting data by first designing the demographic features of participants then designing a scale for attitudes regarding inclusive education. Moreover, in the study, Gokdere (2012) incorporates a scale for interactions with disabled people as well as a scale for concerns regarding inclusive education scale; as well, the researcher used document review to collect extra information on the study. In the study, the researcher included 68 teachers 38 of whom were females and 30 male. Based on the definition of inclusion of disabled student into normal classroom within the article, it is clear students with special needs can attain their education while meeting their special needs. However, few teachers are willing to accept inclusive students in their classes while other teachers point out that school administration places inclusion students without getting ideas from teachers (GOKDERE, 2012). This indicates that many teachers feel that they have little input in the placement decisions regarding inclusion and that inclusion was forced upon them. Moreover, inclusion concerns to the teachers included having to deal with workload, class size and grading. This point out that general education teachers are not adequately trained to work with students that have special needs since they question their ability to attend equally to all students within the classroom. Moreover, elementary and secondary teachers who taught together with special educators raise concerns related to adequacy of planning time, the level of administrative support, teacher willingness and availability of resources (Anderson, 2006). The two main tasks of quantitative research include making sure that attributes under study are in fact quantitative, which necessitate the need for procedures that measure the magnitude of the attributes. The shortcoming of the rating scale is that its first assumptions are essential preconditions for further analyses and the process of measurement is mostly ignored in research. In behavioural studies, the Likert-type scales are employed to measure people attitudes; however, the rationale of choosing a certain form of scaling is rarely considered. The frequent classifications of measurement in rating scale include four different degrees of measurement that include nominal, ordinal, interval and ratio that in return influence statistical techniques applied. Nominal scale involves a system of classification in categories, while ordinal scale involves ranking; however, interval and the ratio scales involve rating the difference between two variables in search of meaning. Interval and ratio scales are the only rating scales that scholars can validate their use through arithmetic mean as computation of average. The researcher by employing tested scales ensures validity and reliability; although, it does not warranty that data produced is well suited for later procedures like the statistical techniques used. In constructing rating scales, various issues have to be considered like the number of categories, decision of whether even or odd numbers should be chosen, selection of descriptive adjectives as well as the procedures that account for rating bias. The problems with likert-type scales in social research are categorical because they consist of fixed responses although researchers consider them as though they are an interval scale. The problems are even more pronounced when a researcher assigns label to individual categories. Likert-type scales allow a limited number of responses, which make it virtually impracticable to recognize outliers by use of inter-quartile range. If respondents sloppily fill out the rating scale, there would be no outliers detected if reserved coding is never used; even worse, the common used internal measure of consistency indicate high levels of reliability desired by researchers. Therefore, the scale level as well as the research design impedes application of the various outlier detection methodologies available. The main problem with rating scales is that the method is an inaccurate and tedious means of data collection (Treiblmaier and Filzmoser, 2009). Ordinal measurement results in various limitations in subsequent analyses because it only allows use of statistical techniques that never rely on arithmetic mean. Moreover, labels chosen by researcher tend to influence response from subjects and information may be lost due to the limited resolution of categories; as well, by constraining the range, the researcher influences response behaviour. Nevertheless, rating scale has various advantages because the method can measure behaviours that are not easily measured by other methods, the method requires minimum training; moreover, the method is easy to design with consistent descriptors. However, the key problem with this method is that it remains highly subjective with rate and bias errors being the common problem. Moreover, in rating the research may rate based on previous interactions or even emotion instead of the objective basis. As well, some terms make the rating scale ambiguous as the term “sometimes” may have different interpretation to different people making the method unreliable (Treiblmaier and Filzmoser, 2009). In the study, the researcher used a small number of participants together with attitude rating scale for teachers that carry out their functions in classes that have disabled students. Although the findings of the study are in line with those carried out by other researchers, the use of rating scale as a means of collecting data has various benefits as well as limitations associated with it. For instance, the response alternatives can influence interpretation of questions because studies show that vague questions are interpreted differently in accordance with the frequency of response alternatives. Moreover, some questions in the rating scale can be biased because of implicit assumption; as well, forced-choice rating scale can bias results because it eliminates undecided people or even those that have no opinion. Developing attitudinal scale faces various problems that include aspects of a situation to be included in seeking to measure attitude, the procedures to be adopted in combining different aspects to achieve the overall picture and the way to ensure that a scale really measures what is necessary to measure (Kumar, 2005). Use of multiple items in rating scale to measure a single element increases reliability and validity of the measure instead of using a rating scale that uses single item stem in measure. The advantages of multiple-item rating scale as opposed to the single-item rating scales include the fact that multiple-item scales offer scores that are more reliable and produce more variability useful to researchers in making fine distinctions among respondents. The drawback of this means of collecting data is that developing a good rating scale takes plenty of time and expertise and involves extensive validation before its use in a research study. Another drawback to rating scale is the fact that participants rating multiple items using same rating scale tend to form a response set that can result in errors in responses. Moreover, respondents may be compelled by the response set to offer answers that are socially acceptable (Johnson, and Christensen, 2012). The study findings revealed that the number of teachers with low knowledge was high compared to others. This serves to show extend of concern within the inclusion approach of disabled students in the usual classroom because knowledge level and confidence level remain huge issues in the study. The limitation of the rating scale as data collection in the study pertain measurement process and although the choice of rating scale problem of extreme response, the choices do not fully eliminate the problem (Treiblmaier and Filzmoser, 2009). Research article no.2: Investigating Teachers’ Approval and Disapproval Behaviours towards Academic and Social Behaviours of Students with and without Special Needs In this study, the researchers employ observation in the carrying out their study of approval or disapproval behaviours toward academic and social mainstreaming of students with disability. The study group for the research included 43 teachers working in elementary schools with students that have special needs in their classes. In addition, ten observers documented both academic and communal approval and disapproval behaviours of the 43 teachers by use of teacher observation forms. The results indicated that teachers used disapproval behaviours more than approval behaviours since they used academic approval and disapproval compared to social approval and disapproval, acknowledged, and responded to behaviours of students with disability more than other peers are (Sazak-Pinar and Guner-Yildiz, 2013). Direct observation is an essential quantitative procedure where the observer openly records the occurrence as well as the concentration of certain behaviours by mapping what constitutes a scene and actions in a certain scene. Observers often carry out most observation as a means of collecting data although various observation studies never strictly require human data collector. Data collected through observation do not inherently require any interaction between observer and the subjects. Many direct observation studies are easy to conduct with human observers because humans are often cheap and comprehensive compared to video and audio recording and offer an opportunity to carry out a form of interview in direct observation. However, participant observation being inherently a qualitative as well as an interactive occurrence is rather unstructured. Participant observation is associated with exploratory and explanation of research objectives, casual explanations, rules and norms that inspire the observable behaviours. Data generated in this method is often free flowing and its analysis is always interpretive compared to the direct observation. This feature of participant observation entails the method’s greatest power and a source of critique that surrounds participant observation. Being a member in participant observation means that information gathered in certain techniques is exclusive to the individual gathering the data. One reason for carrying out participant observation is that various social features are discernible by insiders only because only specific people able to get inside. Carrying out participant observation opens up areas of inquiry to gather wide range of data; however, only individuals accorded privileges of being participants can observe certain sorts of events. To reduce the problem of reactivity because people tend to alter their behaviour in the presence of outsiders, the researcher used participant observers who fit into the scene properly to a point that they can be ignored. Participant observation has various benefits like identification of behaviours that may be unreported or missed due to limitations of procedural memory because unconscious behaviours are easy to miss in focus groups and surveys. Moreover, participant observation reduces biasness in report because without an understanding of the social scene, an individual may end up collecting data that reflect his point of view instead of the social reality of the people within the social scene. Participant observation enables integration of observed behaviour into physical context because participant observation allows an individual to see and experience the setting as well as the behaviour in interaction. Moreover, participant observation enables a researcher to observe the behaviour he is interested in as it happens because participant observation puts an individual in direct contact with the phenomena under study in a way that is unrivalled by other forms of data collection. The value of participant observation lies in its ability to offer insights that would be difficult to attain through other means of research. Participant observation has been useful in exploring fresh research topics, culture or even behaviour because it offers sheer volume of insight and information. The potential drawbacks of participant observation include the fact that the method is potentially and unpredictably time consuming because a researcher may have to engage in the field before learning much of what is necessary to address the research objectives. Data collected in this method is highly practitioner-sensitive, making them difficult to compare with results of others sue to biasness. Moreover, the audience of the study may lack respect for the study because of the flexible nature of participant observation, which cause data users to dismiss the method as unscientific. Participant observation in the study is crucial in data collection since it is a universal method and common feature of qualitative research in various disciplines. Qualitative research in diverse areas like education and medical research draws on insights gained from use of participant observation in order to gain great understanding of phenomena from participant’s point of view. Recording the participant observation is useful in analysing and deducing findings from the analysis because observation involves systematic use of information. Use of participants’ observation serves a critical role in the study since information collected in this manner is essential in scientific analysis like any other information from formal research techniques like questionnaires and other formal elicitation techniques. Research article no.3: Classplacement and competenceattainmentamongstudents with specialeducationalneed In the article the researcher discusses his analyses of data that emerges from longitudinal study of 494 young people with special education needs over six years period. The analysis aims at the achievements of the students during their time in upper secondary education and consider if placement of the students in special or ordinary mainstreaming is beneficial (Cigman, 2007; Salend, 1998). The results indicate students that receive special support in ordinary classes achieved academic qualifications more often compared to students in special classes. In the study, the researcher pursues his analysis by considering the influence of other variables like assessment of functional level, family stability and gender. The research conclude that the relationship between attainment in ordinary classroom does not change even when variables are accounted for and the researchers advocates that the findings offer support for inclusion of learners having special education needs in ordinary mainstream classes (Myklebust, 2006). In the study, students admit that intellectual disability in integrated classrooms rarely enjoy high levels of acceptance; however, in spite of this fact disabled students learn advanced social competence skills compared to students within special classrooms. The conclusion of the study shows that full integration into regular classrooms academically benefits students with intellectual disabilities; nevertheless, the study sample is rather small. The research has various limitations that include lack of empirical research and small sample size; nevertheless, the research balances the limitation with the experimental approach. Longitudinal data is considered the best approach for studying processes as well as outcomes; for instance, the approach allows the researcher determine the important activities and transitions more precisely compared to retrospective registration. Besides, results from retrospective registration are easy to compromise since varying abilities of the respondents to keep in mind details. By use of longitudinal data collected prospectively makes it possible to register the exact time various problematic conditions appeared and the form of support every student requires in special education at the time. The approach is preferable in studies that involve studying intra-individual changes and analysing indirect causal mechanisms. The use of combined resources from the ministry of church, education and research as well as the research council of Norway made it possible for the researcher to study students with special educational needs in a period of six years. Information was obtained regarding these students once or twice a year and teachers in the schools completed questionnaires in addition to interviewing parents and the students themselves. In addition, the study included telephone interviews to the 494 with a response rate of 65%, which is rather a good one compared to other such studies (Markussen, 2004). The study has been able to observe the progress of students who need special education through the education system. Because of the transitions, toward the end of the third year 24% of students were on schedule, while 31% were behind schedule and approximately 45% dropped out of upper secondary education schooling. Problems in transition constitute a common phenomenon that affects students with special education needs because only 58.5% of the students who enrolled to upper secondary school graduated. Competent attainment is often influenced by particular problems that students with special education needs experience (Freeman and Alkin, 2000). From this study, it is clear that inclusive education brings access to the classroom although it does not guarantee that students with disability are welcome as equal members of the classroom family. However, placing disabled students in regular classroom environment is not the main point it is merely a means to an end because inclusion never refers to physical space but rather to conditions or states of being. Hence, the concept implies a sense of acceptance and meaning since it involves altering schools to make them more responsive to needs of all students (Voltz, Brazil and Ford, 2001). In addition, the concept involves helping teachers to accept the responsibility for educating all students within their school and preparing the teachers to educate students currently excluded from their school (Mittler, 2000). One contribution to the problem in inclusive education is viewing disabled students through eyes of charity or even pity, whose inclination is seeing the limitations caused disability and attribute them to the person. In fact, many people assume disabled people’s essential need is assistance from others without considering the possibility that disabled people have the ability to offer those who are not disabled. This perception points out that the non-disabled people are the haves, the cans, the advantaged while those disabled ones are the have-nots, the can’t s and the disadvantaged. Hence, the need for people to acknowledge that all people need help since no one is independent although the myth of making it alone distances people from help they need and deserve. Within a supportive environment, everyone has responsibilities and plays significant role in supporting others because each member is essential and a worthwhile member (Casale-Giannola, 2012; Miles and Singal, 2010). Advantages of longitudinal studies include the fact that they economise on subjects and subjects serve their own control; as well, these studies can offer information regarding individual change. However, this method has its challenges that include observations being never independent, which result in dependency on data and the analysis models for this approach are not well developed specifically for sophisticated models. The approach also faces the difficulty of using software, the method being computationally intensive, time-varying covariates, unbalanced designs, attrition and missing data. Longitudinal studies never conform to rules of true experiments since subject attributes are randomly assigned; hence, these studies are subject to problems of quasi-experimental research designs. Moreover, a threat to internal validity of these studies and of particular concern is historical effect of what may appear to be mature normative may be a result of time-limited secular trends. Because the conventional designs offer a special case of pretest-posttest design, other validity threats in the method include effects of testing, instrumentation, selection and statistical regression. In addition, longitudinal studies share certain limitations associated with generalization; for instance, concern in this case involve data collected in one sample being generalised to another to the extent of findings have cross-sectional validity; however, despite the raised concerns, longitudinal data remains essential (Schaie and Hertzog,1982). The study indicates inclusive classrooms motivate active-learning and multiple-learning modalities that accommodate student-learning preferences like hands-on activities that support lesson objectives (Green and Casale-Giannola, 2011). Nevertheless, the approach has several weaknesses too; for instance, teachers lack necessary strategies since academic and special education teachers lack strategies and resources required to support students with disability in an inclusive classroom (Kamens, Loprete and Slostad, 2003). In addition, students with special education needs lack necessary skills like the basic skills of reading, writing and mathematics crucial to function within content instruction area (Worrell, 2008).Another challenge to inclusive classrooms is that teachers lack necessary awareness regarding special education because they are unaware of special education laws, needs and student classification (Gore, 2010; Mastropieri and Scruggs, 2001). Conclusion The paper draws consideration to the various approaches of research that are employed in the various studies under study and their different ways of data collection. Various research methods that include participant observation, scale rating and document review have been discussed in the paper by highlighting their advantages and disadvantages. The final section of the paper explores the various studies in the paper regarding their data collection methods and their result on inclusive classroom education. Although the various methods have their pros and cons, the methods provided the various researchers relevant and useful results in their studies. References Alzheimer Europe. 2012. The four main approaches: Types of research.[Online]Available at: http://www.alzheimer-europe.org/Research/Understanding-dementia-research/Types-of-research/The-four-main-approaches[Accessed 04/10/2013] Anderson, D. W, 2003, 'Special Education as Reconciliation' in Journal of Education and Christian Belief, 7:1. Anderson, DW 2006, 'Inclusion and Interdependence: Students with Special Needs in the Regular Classroom', Journal Of Education & Christian Belief, 10, 1, pp. 43-59, Avramidis, E., Erkekliss, 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, 277-293. Carpenter, L. B., &Dyal, A., 2007, Secondary inclusion: Strategies for implementing the consultative teacher model. Education, 127(3), 344–350. Casale-Giannola, D 2012, 'COMPARING INCLUSION IN THE SECONDARY VOCATIONAL AND ACADEMIC CLASSROOMS: STRENGTHS, NEEDS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS', American Secondary Education, 40, 2, pp. 26-42. Chadd, J., &Drage, K., 2006, No Child Left Behind: Implications for career and technical education.Career and Technical Education Research, 31(2), 79–99. Changpinit, S., Greaves, D., &Frydenberg, E., 2007, Attitudes, knowledge, concerns and coping strategies regarding inclusive education in a community of Thai educators. Paper presented at the 1st International Conference on Educational Reform, Thailand. Cigman, R. (Ed.)., 2007, Included or excluded? The challenge of the mainstream for some SEN children.New York: Routledge. Dieker, L., 2007, Demystifying secondary inclusion: Powerful school-wide & classroom strategies. Port Chester, NY: Dude Publishing. Dudley-Marling, C, 2001, 'Reconceptualizing learning disabilities by reconceptualizing education' in Denti, L. &Tefft-Cousin, R (eds.) New Ways of Looking at Leaming Disabilities: Connections to Classroom Practice (Denver: Love Publishing Co. Education Bureau, 2008, Catering for student difference: Indicators for inclusion. [Online]Available at:http://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/edu-system/special/overview/indicators-082008_e.pdf[Accessed 04/10/2013] Evaluation Briefs.2009. Data collection for Evaluation: Document Review.[Online]Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/evaluation/pdf/brief18.pdf[Accessed 04/10/2013] Ferguson, D, 2008, International trends in inclusive education: The continuing challenge to teach one and everyone. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 23, 109-120. Forlin, C., 2007, Inclusive educational practices: A way forward for Hong Kong. Chinese Education and Society, 40(4), 63_75. Forlin, C., Douglas, G. & Hattie, J., 1996, Inclusive practices: How accepting are teachers? International Journal of Disability.Development and education, 43, 119-133. Freeman, S. F. N. &Alkin, M. C., 2000, ‘Academic and social attainments of Childrenwith mental retardation in general education and special education settings’, Remedial and Special Education, 21 (1), 3-18. GOKDERE, M 2012, 'A Comparative Study of the Attitude, Concern, and Interaction Levels of Elementary School Teachers and Teacher Candidates towards Inclusive Education', Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12, 4, pp. 2800-2806. Gore, M. C., 2010, Inclusion strategies for secondary classrooms: Keys for struggling learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Green, L. S., &Casale-Giannola, D., 2011, 40 active learning strategies for the inclusive classroom, grades K–5. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Hannu, S., Petra, E., Mirna, N., & Olli-Pekka, M., 2012, Understanding teachers’ attitudes and self-efficacy in inclusive education: Implications for pre-service and in-service teacher education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 27 (1), 51-68. Harrop, A., &Swinson, J., 2000, Natural rates of approval and disapproval in British infant, junior and secondary classrooms.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 473-483. Hill, R. R., 2009, Teacher attitude towards inclusion practices and special needs students. Journal of Research in special Educational Needs, 9 (3), 188-198. Hunt, p. & Goetz, L, 1997, ‘Research on inclusive educational programs, practices and outcomes for students with severe disabilities’, The journal of Special education, 31 (1), 3-29. Janney, R. F., Snell, M. E., Beers, M. K. &Raynes, M., 1995, Integrating children with moderate and severe disabilities into general education classes.Journal of Exceptional Children, 61, 425-439. Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. B. (2012).Educational research: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches.Thousand Oaks, Calif, SAGE Publications. Kamens, M. W., Loprete, S. J., &Slostad, F. A., 2003, Inclusive classrooms: What practicing teachers want to know.Action in Teacher Education, 25(1), 20–26. Karten, T., 2009, Inclusion strategies that work for adolescent learners!Thousand Oaks,CA: Corwin. Kozik, P. L., Cooney, B. Vinciguerra, S., Gradel, K., & Black, J.,2009, American Secondary Education, 13(1), 77–91. Kumar, R. 2005. Research methodology: a step-by-step guide for beginners. London, SAGE. Landrum, T. J., & Kauffman, J. M., 2006, Behavioral approaches to classroom management.In C. M. Evertson, & C. S.Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice and contemporary issues, (pp 3–15). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Lindsay, G., 2003, ‘Inclusive education: a critical perspective’, British Journal of Special Education, 30 (1), 3-12. Markussen, E., 2004, 'Special education: does it help? A study of special education in Norwegian upper secondary schools", European Journal of Special Needs Education, 19(1), 33^8. Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E., 2001, Promoting inclusion in secondary classrooms.Learner Disability Quarterly, 24(4), 265–274. Megan, S., &MacPhail, A., 2006, Irish Physical educator’s attitude toward teaching students with special needs.European Physical Education review, 12 (1), 75-97. Miles, S., &Singal, N., 2010, The education for all and inclusive education debate: conflict, contradiction or opportunity? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14 (1), 1-15. Mittler, R, 2000, Working toward Inclusive Education: Social Contexts. London, David Fulton Publishers. Myklebust, J 2006, 'Class placement and competence attainment among students with special educational needs', British Journal Of Special Education, 33, 2, pp. 76-81. Office for Standards in Education, 2000, Evaluating educational inclusion: Guidance for inspectors and schools (London: HMI). Office for Standards in Education, 2004, Special educational needs and disability: Towards inclusive schools. London: Author. Pivik, J,,McComas, J. &LaFlamme, M., 2002, 'Barriers and Facilitators to Inclusive Education' in Exceptional Children, 69:1. Salend, S., J., 1998, Effective mainstreaming: Creating inclusive classrooms. New Jersey: Merill. Sands, D. J., Kozleski, E. B. & French, N. K., 2000, Inclusive Education for the 21st Century (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Sazak-Pinar, E, &Guner-Yildiz, N 2013, 'Investigating Teachers' Approval and Disapproval Behaviors towards Academic and Social Behaviors of Students with and without Special Needs', Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13, 1, pp. 551-556. Sullivan, JF 1998, 'MEETING THE INDIVIDUAL NEEDS OF ALL LEARNERS IN THE INCLUSION CLASSROOM', Justice Professional, 11, 1/2, p. 175. University of Strathclyde. (2013). Observation: origins and history. [Online] Available at: http://www.strath.ac.uk/aer/materials/3datacollection/unit5/whatisobservation/ [Accessed 05/10/2013] Van kraayenoord, C., E., 2007, School and classroom practices in inclusive education in Australia. Voltz, D. L, Brazil, M. & Ford, A., 2001, 'What matters most in inclusive education: A practical guide for moving forward' in Intervention in School and Clinic, 37:1 Worrell, J. L., 2008, How secondary schools can avoid the seven deadly school “sins” of inclusion.American Secondary Education, 36(2), 43–56. Yuen, M., & Westwood, P., 2001, Integrating students with special needs in Hong Kong secondary schools: Teachers’ attitudes and their possible relationship to guidance training. International Journal of Special Education, 16(2), 69_84. Treiblmaier, H., & Filzmoser, P. 2009, Benefits from Using Continuous Rating Scales in Online Survey Research. Accessed 8 October 2013 < http://www.statistik.tuwien.ac.at/forschung/SM/SM-2009-4complete.pdf> Schaie, K. W., & Hertzog, C.1982, Longitudinal methods. Handbook of developmental psychology, 91-115. Accessed 8 October 2013 Read More