Self-Concept and Its Relationship Relating to Young People with Intellectual Disability - Research Proposal Example

Research Title: Self-concept and its relationship with some variables relating to young people with intellectual disability in inclusion mainstream schools Name: Course: Date: Lecturer: Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 1.0 Introduction 3 1.1 Background Information 3 1.2 Significance of the study 4 1.3 Research Objective 4 1.4 Research Questions 4 2.0 Theoretical Framework 5 2.1 Defining Intellectual disability 5 2.2 Mainstreaming education 6 2.3 Benefits of mainstream schools 6 2.4 Disadvantages of mainstream schools 7 2.5 Inclusion of student with Intellectual disability in mainstream schools 9 2.6 Defining self concept 10 2.7 Methods of measuring self concept 11 3.0 Methodology 13 3.1 Measures 13 3.2 Research Population and Sample 14 3.3 Data collection procedure 14 3.4 Data processing 14 References 15 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Background Information Bandura (1993) indicates that the inclusion of student with intellectual disabilities in the regular mainstream schools is an issue that has generated debate in the education systems across the world. Inclusion has emerged as a main issue of government policies in Australia. There has been a special focus on social, education and moral issue of students with intellectual disability. Inclusion of intellectually disabled student in the mainstream schools can have an impact, either positive or negative on the student development, social interaction as well as academic performance. Studies have established that this kind of integration greatly affects the student self concept, eventually influencing their performance, either at academic or social level. There are few studies that have examined the factors that influence self-concept in young people and none have studied self concept in the young people attending inclusion mainstream schools. Bandura (1993) indicates that self concept greatly influences how an individual will cope with life stresses and concludes that there is a link between academic achievement and self concept. One of the key barriers to examination of self concept among the young people and more so persons with intellectual disability is lack of tools which are designed for use by this segment of population. Two methods have been adopted in measuring self concept in this group, using scales that are designed for the general population and modification of the existing scales. The first strategy must be interrogated unless it is clearly shown that the same issues in the general population are relevant to both populations. The second strategy has some problems too. It has been suggested that even with the modification, the cognitive demands of the piece of task at hand far exceeded the abstraction and blanket generalization of abilities of persons with intellectual disability. Semi structured interviews have been used as alternatives to standardized measures (Katz and Mirenda 2002). 1.2 Significance of the study Understanding how the student with intellectual disability in the inclusion mainstream schools feel about themselves is an important aspect as it helps in helping them have quality life in school as well as at home. The study examines the relationship between self concepts and various factors that influence it in young people with intellectual disability in inclusion mainstream schools. The information gathered as well as the knowledge acquired will be important in influencing policy change as well as programs which are aimed at improving the quality of life for the young people with intellectual disability. The study hypothesizes that the young people with intellectual disability in inclusion mainstream school will progress in a relatively similar manner as the other students although they will have a slower cognitive development. 1.3 Research Objective The study aims at establishing the relationship between self concept and a host of variables to young people with intellectual disability in inclusion mainstream schools. 1.4 Research Questions (i)What are the factors that influence self concept in student with intellectual disability in inclusion mainstream schools? (ii) Does the social environment in the inclusion mainstream school affect the self concept of the student with intellectual disability? (iii) How does the family and significant others affect the self concept of an intellectually disabled student? 2.0 Theoretical Framework This section contains the available information on the area of self concept in the young people with intellectual disability and identifies the gaps which exist as far as knowledge is concerned. 2.1 Defining Intellectual disability Wehmeyer et al., (2008) defines intellectually disability as a type of disability which is characterized by deficiency in terms of intellectual functioning and resulting to need for extra support to help the person who has this kind of disability perform activities which a typical person would be involved in. The perception of this disability has changed over time warranting an examination of the disability in a context of how it has come to be understood by the general population (Carroll, 1993). World Health Organization (WHO) describes intellectual disability as a limitation in human functioning. Human functioning is taken to mean all life activities which one would typically engage in. When there is a limitation in the functioning, the individual will not perform the tasks as expected of a typical person. Intellectual disability was previously known as mental retardation but over the time the term has been discarded adopting a more sensitive term (Wehmeyer et al., 2008). The term was mostly used in the twentieth century but was seen as offensive hence search for a term which will not offend those suffering from this condition. Intellectually, disability is divided into two categories, the syndromic intellectual disability where there is intellectual disability as well as other medical and behavioral signs and the non syndromic disability where the deficit appears and there are no other abnormalities (Wehmeyer et al., 2008; WHO, 2001). 2.2 Mainstreaming education Mainstream schools apply the concept of integration, where the students with special needs are included in the regular classes in specific durations based on their skills. This involves combining the regular education classes with the special education lessons (Suomi et al., 2003). Schools which have this programme believe that those students with special needs who cannot function in a regular classroom environment need to be in a special education environment. The proponents of mainstream schools suggest that educating children with intellectual disabilities alongside those who are not disabled helps in fostering tolerance and understanding. It also helps in preparing the students of all abilities for the environment or world beyond schooling. After school people interact with others who are from diverse backgrounds. It only serves better to allow the students to understand people who may be different from them, being tolerant to diversity (Block, 1999). 2.3 Benefits of mainstream schools There is a general belief that combining the disabled student with their non disabled peer helps in accessing the general curriculum for those who are disabled. Studies have shown that there are benefits of mainstreaming education. Students with disabilities who attend mainstream schools have a higher achievement (Suomi et al., 2003). The United States National Research Center on Learning Disabilities in a certain study observed that graduation rates for the students with intellectual disabilities increased by more than 14% when the mainstreaming programme was adopted in the education system (Suomi et al., 2003). Even for those who were combined with the non disabled peers for some duration indicated some level of improvement. Level of self esteem was also noted to be higher in these students in comparison to the period when they were in a different system. Through this inclusion the intellectually disabled students showed more confidence and displayed qualities which helped them raise their self concept. Most of the students who were included in the study reported that they felt more confident when they are in a mainstream school than when they are put in a special education setting. (Block, 1999) Overall the intellectually disabled students felt that they were equal to their counterparts and should not be treated in a different manner from their peers. When it comes to social skills, studies have shown that inclusion practice helps the intellectually disabled students to learn social skills through observing their non disabled peers. Through observation they are able to gain and understand of the environment that surrounds them as well as the world in general. They become part and parcel of the community around them (Suomi et al., 2003).When the non disabled children interact with same age children with intellectual disability it is believed that they also come to accept them, do not view them as different, an aspect that is important in nurturing tolerance and acceptance in a community. Mainstreaming open line of communication between those who are disabled and non disabled students, all the student become more sensitive of the fact that there is a need to treat their peers as equal and offer assistance when required. 2.4 Disadvantages of mainstream schools Although several benefits have been identified with mainstreaming education, some scholars hold the view that the system has some disadvantages. There are situations where the mainstreamed student may need much attention from the teacher (Block 1999). In such a situation the teacher will be forced to dedicate more time to the intellectually disabled student at the expense of the others in the class. This may be a source of conflict between the teacher and the administration and also among the students (Suomi et al.,2003) A situation where an aide would be required to assist the special child means that there will be added cost to the parent as well as to the institution (Block, 1999). There is a feeling that the general teachers are not well equipped in terms of training and skills when it comes into handling the students with intellectual disability. Although it might offer some benefits to put the student in a mainstream classroom, he or she will be at a disadvantage when it comes to areas where special handling is required (Block 1999) (Suomi et al., 2003). Although the teachers can be trained through special sessions, they might not be in a position to offer assistance as it would be offered by the professionals who are trained in handling the students with intellectual disability. When the modifications are not made to accommodate the needs of the special students, they may perceive themselves as a bother, withdraw, something that will lead to regression of the student eventually leading to poor performance academically. When compared with those who are fully integrated, the intellectually disabled students who are only mainstreamed for specific classes or times may feel that they are different from others and that is why they have to keep on switching classes. They may feel socially rejected by their peer; they also become easy target of bullying, since they are perceived as different. They may also feel embarrassed since they receive additional services compared to others especially when there is an aide to help the student in different situation (Block 1999). Studies have shown that some intellectually disabled students feel comfortable when they are learning or working in an environment where all are at the same level and get the same kind of assistance from the teacher. (Suomi et al.,2003). With mainstreaming as a policy, school may be forced to provide special education to the children with needs without any additional funding. Given that the cost for training a special child is high compared to those without disability, schools will grapple with the issues of funding leading to either neglect of needs of the intellectually disabled students. This means that the kind of education they will get will not meet the required standard. The schools may be forced to channel funds meant for other affairs for this additional need ,when this is done there might be conflicts as those who are denied service demand what is rightfully theirs (Block 1999). Studies recommend that careful attention should be taken when combining the students with intellectual disabilities with others. Self concept of these students may be affected when mainstreaming is not done in the right way, especially when the teachers who are supposed to handle such classes are not well equipped for such roles. 2.5 Inclusion of student with Intellectual disability in mainstream schools The Inclusion of the students with intellectual disabilities (or any other form of disability for that matter) in the educational mainstream is not a new concept neither is it an Australian phenomenon. The international treaties and agreements confirm that students with disabilities have a right to be educated in mainstream schools and in addition to that the Australian laws vehemently support it (Burnstein et al., 2004). The Australia’s Disability Discrimination Act of 1992 as well as the Standards for Education (2005) are two legal frameworks that are putting pressure on schools as they try to focus on the rights of students and their inclusion in the mainstream learning institutions. The legal frameworks are emphasizing on the application of the reasonable accommodations in this process. Accommodations are measures that the teaching professionals as well as institutions make in relation as far as the learning environments and activities, teaching and assessments that enable learners to participate and access fully in achieving curriculum objectives. Inclusive practice describes any and all efforts made by a school and its community to make students and their parents feel welcome. Inclusive practice implies that if participation becomes an issue for any student, whether arising from disability, gender, behavior, poverty, culture, refugee status or any other reason, then the desirable approach is not to establish special programs for the newly identified individual or group need, but to expand mainstream thinking, structures and practices so that all students are accommodated. Inclusion involves change in attitude or mindset on how society, school as well as students work in harmony in allowing everybody in the school community to achieve the learning outcomes. For the intellectually disabled, inclusion needs a paradigm shift about disability, interdependence and difference. Inclusion practice means that a student who would have been in a special school has a right to be in the company of peers and siblings at the school of choice. This practice need school vision and leadership to emphasize on the sense of communities and stress on the importance of relationships. 2.6 Defining self concept In terms of the developmental framework, young people self-concept is not static construct but a fluid make up which influenced by several factors such as social interactions both with adults and peers. It is also affected by the successes and failures levels in academic and social endeavors and is currently seen as both hierarchically structured and multidimensional. Self concept is conceptualized as a theory an individual holds about themselves as person. It is described as an experience, the functioning being as an individual interacts with the world. Self concept refers to how an individual thinks about himself or herself. It is based on self perception or basically how one evaluates his or her experiences. This includes an individual belief about the relationship or interaction with others (Bandura, 1989) (Heiman and Margalit,1998). 2.7 Methods of measuring self concept Burns (1979) asserts that self concept is always measured through self report; he identifies four methods that are commonly used. One of the methods is by use of rating scales, which Burns describes as the most widely used instrument. He observes that most of the published tools take this shape. This instrument is composed of a series of statement which the respondent is supposed to express the degree of agreement or disagreement. The five or seven point Likert scale are commonly used. The responses given are summed to come up with a score for a given scale or a measure of the global self concept. A checklist is another instrument that is used in measuring self concept. This tool involves the respondent checking all those adjectives which he or she believes apply on them. The adjectives are normally assigned to different categories such as rational or empirical. The respondent choice will finally be tabulated to form a self concept assessment. This kind of instrument provides qualitative information which has been described as interesting but at the same time has two shortcomings. One of the weaknesses is that the responses are dichotomous, that is based on either yes or no answer, the respondent is not given a room where he or she can indicate the level or degree of agreement as is the case in rating scale. The categorization of the adjective is usually done by an external party, who in most cases does not know the exact meaning they have on the person who is supposed to respond. “Q-sorts is another type of self concept measurement tool that has been extensively used in research but it is rarely used by practicing psychologists on the premise that it is time consuming and needs a high level of commitment on the client side. This technique involves the respondent picking or sorting cars which have described him or her correctly. These cards are piled in a predefined numbers from the most to the least like me cards. In a normal situation, one hundred or more cards would be used and a pile can have only a predetermined number of cards. The results of this exercise can be evaluated using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Free response is a method of assessment where the respondents complete partial statements. For example, I feel bad when … This method is rarely used but has been favored by many psychologists due to its open ended nature (Rogers et al., 1978) (Burns, 1982). Measuring self-concept in young people with Intellectual Disability has been a challenge and research with this group shows unclear results. Some studies show have that young people with intellectual disability have a lower self-concept while others have suggested that it is the same and even in some occasions higher than in typically developing young people (Heiman & Margalit, 2005) (Glenn & Cunningham, 2001). The varying results may emerge due to various reasons which include the composition of the population as well as the carrying life experiences of those involved in the study. Challenges in measurement might also have contributed to dearth of clarity in some of these studies. Research studies which embark on use of self concept measuring tool that are suitable for this group ,might find that the population show a self concept which is well comparable with those who are typically developing. In a review of the methodological issues which require consideration when assessing the people with intellectual disability, Finlay and Lyons (2001), assert that use of questionnaires which have been created for typically developing populations are not always suitable for the populations with intellectual disability as they may not be in a position to understand the tests and also provide acceptable responses. Finlay and Lyons (2001), recommend that there are issues which need to be addressed as far as these tools are concerned. They point out on the content phrasing, the format of the response and the psychometric properties of the test. According to them, the content ought to be worded in an appropriate manner taking into consideration the development level to ensure that they are understood by the participants. The phrasing should be in an affirmative form rather than in a negative way (Montgomery, 1994). 3.0 Methodology 3.1 Measures The study will utilize data from the direct assessment, the specific items for self concept construct will include aggregate variables of the student self concept scale. Academic self concept will include the student performance in the classroom, participation and overall performance. Self concept will measure how the young person interacts with his or her environment including those whom relates with both at school as well as at the family level. Overall self concept will be the unified self concept obtained from the rating scale. Time invariant variables will also be included in the study to identify whether or not the young person characteristics had an impact on self concept. The predictor variables include age, which will be recorded in number of years, ethnicity which will be divided into four groups, Hispanic, Asian, African and Caucasians. Gender will either be recorded as either male or female. Also details of socio economic and residence will also be included as variables. 3.2 Research Population and Sample The study will focus on all the young people who are intellectually challenged attending inclusion mainstream schools. The population will contain both male and female students. 3.3 Data collection procedure To get the information a scale of alternative appraisals, Self concept scale by Cambra and Silverstone will be used. The scale has 23 statements which are connected to three parameters, academic, social and physical dimension of the self concept construct. Reliability and validity of the tools which will be used will be tested to ensure that the results which will be obtained meet the required criteria. 3.4 Data processing After the data is collected it will be presented in graphical representation where means of the individual score on self concept will be indicated. Graphical representation showing percentages of the acquired schools on an individual as well as general concept will be indicated. References Brahm, N. (1981). "The assessment of self concepts of educational achievement by a criterion referenced approach." (ERIC Document Reproduction Service Burns, R. B. (1979). "The self-concept in theory, measurement, development and behaviour." London: Longman. Cates, J. (1991) Self-concept in hearing and prelingual, profoundly deaf students, American Annals of the Deaf, 136, 352-359. Fitts, W. H. (1991). "Tennessee Self Concept Scale, Manual." Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services. Cambra, C. (2002) Acceptance of deaf students in regular classrooms, American Annals of the Deaf, 147 Glenn, S. & Cunningham, C. (2001). Evaluation of self by young people with Down syndrome. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, Burns, R. B. (1982) Self-concept development and education. London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Heiman, T. & Margalit, M. (1998). Loneliness, depression, and social skills among students with mild mental retardation in different educational settings. Journal of Special Education, 23(4), 154-160. Bandura, A. (1989) Regulation of cognitive processes through perceived self-efficacy', Developmental Psychology, 25, 729-735. Wehmeyer ML, Buntix WHE, Lachapelle Y, Luckasson RA, Verdugo MA, Borthwick-Duffy S, et al. (2008). The intellectual disability construct and its relation to human functioning. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Burnstein, N., Sears, S., Wilcoxen, A., Cabello, B., Spagna, M. (2004) Moving Toward Inclusive Practices, Remedial and Special Education, 25, 104-116. Cambra, C., Silvestre, N. (2003) Students with special educational needs in the inclusive classroom: social integration and self-concept, European Journal of Special Needs Education, 18, 197-208. World Health Organization. (2001) International classification of functioning, disability, and health (ICF). Geneva: Carroll JB. 1993. Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press. Katz, J., Mirenda, P. (2002) including students with developmental disabilities in education classrooms: Social benefits, International Journal of Special Education, 17, 25-35. Rogers, C. M., Smith, M. D., Coleman, J. M. (1978) Social comparison in the classroom: The relationship between academic achievement and self-concept, Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 50-57 Montgomery, M. S. (1994) Self-concept and children with learning disabilities: observer–child concordance across six context-dependent domains, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 254-263. Block, M. E. (1999). Are children with disabilities receiving appropriate physical education?. Teaching Exceptional Children Suomi, J., Collier D., & Brown L. (2003). Factors affecting the social experiences of students in elementary physical education classes. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 22(2), 186 Read More