For verification of this paper, please visit on http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/resonance.php#8

We live in the world of diversities and individual differences. Such diversities and differences are part and parcel of our life. Inclusive education refers to a model wherein students with special needs spend most or all of their time with non-special (general education) needs students. Inclusion is a concept that sees children with diverse abilities as full time participants in and as members of their neighbourhood schools and communities (Hanees, Jazeel, and Saravanakumar, 2013). Inclusive Education is a milestone in the path of redesigning the national school curriculum (Jazeel, 2018). It is an important issue for establishing equity and equality in education and is a kind of ‘zero rejection’ policy where no one student is refuted or neglected by the school at any ground (Jana & Tarini Halder, 2018). Inclusive education means that all students attend and are welcomed by their neighbourhood schools in age-appropriate, regular classes and are supported to learn, contribute and participate in all aspects of school life. It is about how we develop and design our schools, classrooms, programs and activities so that all students learn and participate together. Neighbourhood schools are the heart of communities and culture (Jazeel, 2017). Advani and Chadha (2002) states that, “Inclusive education aims to provide a favourable setting for achieving equal opportunity and full participation for all thus bringing children with special needs well within the purview of mainstream education. Success of Inclusive education depends on various factors, in which teacher is the most significant factor. In this context, teachers can play big role in implementing inclusion in education in schools. The attitudes of teachers are important to find out how they can work for inclusion as a new approach in education. Positive role and attitude of the teachers is essential to reach this realistic goal. For becoming a competent and successful inclusive teacher, it is necessary to have required knowledge, skills and positive attitude. Attitude is concerned to know the feelings and reactions of the teachers towards of inclusive education and its different aspects.

Singh et al. (2020) discovered teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education among their different demographic variables i.e. Mode of service, Gender, Locality and revealed that attitude of teachers towards inclusive education was moderate to a favourable level. Pre-service and urban teachers had a more positive/favourable attitude towards inclusive education than the attitude of In-service and rural teachers, respectively. In contrast, there was no significant difference between the attitude of male and female teachers towards inclusive education. Gandhi et al. (2020) examined the attitude of primary school teachers towards inclusive education from government and private schools on the basis gender and locale of schools. The study was conducted on a sample of 100 primary school teachers from the district Fatehabad of the state Haryana. The statistical analysis was done by making use of the mean, S.D. and t-test and revealed that there was significant difference between private and government primary school teachers’ attitude towards inclusive education. Private teachers’ attitude towards inclusive education was more positive as compared to their government primary teachers. No significant difference was found in the attitudes of primary school teachers towards inclusive education for both the schools with respect to gender and locale of schools. Sharma, (2019) conducted study on attitude of teachers towards inclusive education by their age, gender, qualifications, training, disability and teaching experience. Teachers are found generally positive towards inclusive education. In a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5(highly positive), the overall attitude of teachers is 3.32. Looking attitude by gender, male teachers are found slightly positive towards inclusive education than female ones. Similarly, younger teachers are found positive than older teachers. Trained and experienced teachers are also found positive than untrained and inexperienced ones. In addition, teachers with some disability are found to have more positive attitude than other group of teachers. Khan & Basak, (2018) investigated the attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of their gender, stream, category, qualification, teaching experience and their residential area. 118 high school teachers as sample were randomly selected from 10 high schools in Purba Bardhaman district, West Bengal, India. The result revealed that there were no difference in attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender, stream, category, educational qualification, teaching experience and their residential area. Jazeel, (2018) Conducted study is to find out the attitude of teachers towards Inclusive Education in Akkaraipattu Education Zone and revealed that most teachers have favourable attitude towards inclusive education. There are significant differences in the attitude teachers towards inclusive education based on gender, locale of the school and type of school. Galaterou & Antoniou, (2017) investigated teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education in relation to demographics (gender and age) and their occupational stress levels. The research involved 208 primary and secondary school teachers, working in urban and suburban areas of five prefectures of Greece. Teachers’ gender, age and occupational stress served as independent variables. Teachers demonstrated marginally positive attitudes towards inclusion, which were correlated with their age. Specifically, younger teachers expressed more positive attitudes than their older colleagues. However, no differences were detected between men and women. Furthermore, relatively high levels of stress were observed, while the specific stressors were detected. Finally, teachers’ attitudes were partly correlated to occupational stress, as less positive attitudes towards inclusive education were associated with increased levels of stress. Jana & Tarini Halder, (2018) conducted study to find out the level of attitude of secondary school teachers towards inclusive education and to compare in terms of gender, and teaching experience. For finding the attitude towards inclusive education a survey based descriptive research were conducted on conveniently selected 242 secondary teachers from 26 randomly selected schools under WBBSE and WBCHSE in the geographical area of Paschim Medinipur district of West Bengal. The researcher finds out that there is alacuna in favorable attitude towards inclusive education and teachers with <10 years of teaching experiences have greater favorable attitude than the teachers with ≥10 years of teaching experiences. So, teaching experience is not an influencing factor for making favorable attitude towards inclusion. The researcher also finds out that female and male secondary teachers don't differ in their attitude towards inclusion. Chavhan, (2013) studied student teachers attitude towards inclusive education and to compare their attitude on the basis gender, caste and locality and researcher found that there is significant difference in Attitude towards Inclusive Education. The female student teachers have favorable attitude towards inclusive education than male student teachers. The student teachers’ caste and locality does not have any influence on attitude towards inclusive education. Mohanty, (2017) conducted study to study the attitudinal dispositions of elementary school teachers towards inclusive education with reference to gender, teaching experience and locality. The data was collected from the 120 elementary school teachers of Choudwar block and Cuttack city of Odisha. The sample was selected through stratified random sampling technique. A self-developed five-point attitude scale was used for collection of data. The findings of the study revealed that, gender, teaching experience and locality were the factors for developing differential attitudes among the teachers as there were significant differences in the mean attitude scores of elementary school teachers towards various aspects of inclusive education with reference to gender, teaching experience and locality.

Descriptive Research Method was used.

Population in the present study is teacher’s teaching in elementary school of three districts i.e. Amritsar, Gurdaspur and Tarn Taran of Punjab state affiliated to Punjab School Education Board, Mohali. In these three districts there were 8 to 11 educational blocks existing (8 in Tarn Taran, 9 in Amritsar and 11 in Gurdaspur).  From each block 3 to 5   elementary schools were randomly selected keeping in mind representation of all types of communities existing in the districts. Total 75 schools were selected at second stage of sampling process. On an average, from each school three teachers were selected purposefully. 

Table 1: Sample Structure of Schools and Teachers

	Amritsar	Gurdaspur	Tarn Taran	Total
School	25	25	25	75
Teachers	79	64	59	202

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Table 2: Dimension Wise Comparison of The Attitude of Teachers towards Inclusive Education on the Basis of Gender

Dimension	Gender	N	Mean	SD	SEM	SED	t
Teacher	Male	84	36.44	6.216	.678	.817	1.49 NS
	Female	118	37.66	5.350	.492	.838
Teaching Learning Process	Male	84	26.23	4.621	.504	.668	.88 NS
	Female	118	25.64	4.721	.435	.666
Administrator	Male	84	26.95	3.318	.362	.519	3.74**
	Female	118	25.01	3.849	.354	.507
Psychological Aspects	Male	84	31.79	3.803	.415	.507	1.66 NS
	Female	118	32.63	3.358	.309	.517
Society and Social Aspects	Male	84	46.05	4.618	.504	.670	.22 NS
	Female	118	46.19	4.747	.437	.667
Evaluation	Male	84	17.86	2.542	.277	.357	1.35 NS
	Female	118	17.37	2.477	.228	.359
Attitude towards Inclusive education	Male	84	185.38	14.057	1.534	2.138	.47NS
	Female	118	184.37	15.597	1.436	2.101

** p≤0.01, NS= Not Significant at 0.05 level.

Table 2 shows that t- value for gender is 1.49 which is not significant at.05 level. It means that male and female teachers do not differ on dimension ‘Teacher’ of attitude towards inclusive education. On basis of this null hypothesis “There is no significant difference in the attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender” is accepted. It may be concluded that there was no significant difference in the dimension ‘Teacher’ of attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender.

Table 2 shows that t- value for gender is.88 which is not significant at.05 level. It means that male and female teachers do not differ on dimension ‘Teaching Learning Process’ of attitude towards inclusive education. On basis of this null hypothesis “There is no significant difference in the attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender” is accepted. It may be concluded that there was no significant difference in the dimension ‘Teaching Learning Process’ of attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender.

Table 2 shows that t- value for gender is 3.743 which is significant at.01 level. It means that male and female teachers differ on dimension ‘Administrator’ of attitude towards inclusive education. On basis of this null hypothesis “There is no significant difference in the attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender” is rejected. Further the mean score of males is higher than mean score of females. It may be concluded that male teachers had more favorable attitude towards dimension ‘Administrator’ of inclusive education than female teachers.

Table 2 shows that t- value for gender is 1.66 which is not significant at.05 level. It means that male and female teachers do not differ on dimension ‘Psychological Aspects’ of attitude towards inclusive education. On basis of this null hypothesis “There is no significant difference in the attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender” is accepted. It may be concluded that there was no significant difference in the dimension ‘Psychological Aspects’ of attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender.

Table 2 shows that t- value for gender is.22 which is not significant at.05 level. It means that male and female teachers do not differ on dimension ‘Society and Social Aspects’ of attitude towards inclusive education. On basis of this null hypothesis “There is no significant difference in the attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender” is accepted. It may be concluded that there was no significant difference in the dimension ‘Society and Social Aspects’ of attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender.

Table 2 shows that t- value for gender is 1.355 which is not significant at.05 level. It means that male and female teachers do not differ on dimension ‘Evaluation’ of attitude towards inclusive education. On basis of this is the null hypothesis “There is no significant difference in the attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender” is accepted. It may be concluded that there was no significant difference in the dimension ‘Evaluation’ of attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender.

Table 2 shows that t- value for gender is.47 which is not significant at.05 level. It means that male and female teachers do not differ on Attitude towards inclusive education. On basis of this is the null hypothesis “There is no significant difference in the attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender” is accepted. It may be concluded that there was no significant difference in attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender.

The next finding of the present research was that the there was no significant difference in the dimension teacher and teaching learning process of attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender. On the other hand Male teachers had more favourable attitude towards dimension administrator of inclusive education than female teachers. Further, there was no significant difference in the dimension psychological aspects, society and social aspects, evaluation of attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender. There was no significant difference in attitude of teachers towards inclusive education on the basis of gender. Smitha and Sujatha (2010) found that the teachers have unfavourable attitude towards Inclusive Education for them. The male teachers possessed more unfavourable attitude than the female teachers towards Inclusive Education for the disabled. The male teachers have more favourable attitude than the female teachers towards the curricular aspect of Inclusive Education for the disabled. It is hoped that that teachers will acquire knowledge and develop favourable attitude for the disabled in the future. Dhull and Chaudhary (2011) conducted study on two groups of visually challenged male and female adolescents from Haryana and Delhi. Significant difference was not found in the adjustment level of partially visually challenged male and female adolescents. Chavhan (2013) found that the female student teachers have Favourable attitude towards inclusive education than male student teachers. The student teachers caste and locality does not have any influence on attitude towards inclusive education. Syed and Surieyah (2020) found that male and female primary school teachers don’t differ significantly in their attitude towards inclusive education. Syed and Surieyah (2020) revealed teachers from both genders believe that inclusive education provide students with opportunities for mutual communication which makes them to understand and accept individual diversity. Sarris et al. (2018) showed that school teachers generally are in favour of including students with disabilities or special needs, although their perceptions differ significantly based on some demographic factors.  

The gender of a teacher and their attitudes to inclusion was identified in research as being a significant factor contributing to how teachers perceive inclusion (Alquraini; 2012; Priyadarshini & Thangarajathi, 2016; Sandhu, 2017; Vaz, et al., 2015). Male teachers were mostly more negative towards inclusion than female teachers, yet research does not indicate whether these results reflect the attitudes towards the concept of inclusion or the actual reality of inclusive practice (Priyadarshini & Thangarajathi, 2016; Sandhu, 2017; Vaz, et al., 2015). Vaz et al (2015) reported that females hold more positive attitudes towards inclusion due to their greater tolerance and conative attitude, yet also indicated the research did not differentiate between male and female teacher attitudes towards the practice of inclusion compared to contemplating the idea of inclusion. Analysis and comparison between differing perceptions related to the theoretical and practical application of inclusion and how these individually contribute to teacher attitudes should be investigated further.

Research revealed cultural circumstances influence how gender correlates with teacher attitudes towards inclusion, as seen in the research conducted by Alquraini (2012). Alquraini (2012) examined both male and female general classroom and special education teacher’s perspectives towards inclusion of students with severe intellectual disabilities. From the 161 male and 139 female participants, male teachers were more positive towards 8 inclusion. This data is contradictory to other research (Monsen, Ewing & Kwoka, 2015; Priyadarshini & Thangarajathi, 2016; Sandhu, 2017; Vaz, et al., 2015), yet Alquraini (2012) theorised the results reflect the differences between cultural and religious contexts as this data is consistent with other studies conducted in Saudi Arabia (Al-Ahmadi, 2009, as cited in Alquarini, 2012). However, there is no indication of the ratio between female special education and regular classroom teachers in this study, and as females in Saudi Arabia receive their education separate from males and in specific subjects either relating to perceived wifely duties or certain occupations available to women, perhaps very few female participatory teachers received training in inclusive practices, therefore influencing the overall results.

1. Alquraini, T. (2012). Factors Related to Teachers' Attitudes towards the Inclusive Education of Students with Severe Intellectual Disabilities in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(3), 232-254. 2. Chavhan, R. (2013). Student Teachers ’ Attitude towards Inclusive Education. Scholarly Research Journal for Interdisciplinary Studies, 1(5), 1221–1226. www.srjis.com 3. Galaterou, J., & Antoniou, A. S. (2017). Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education: The role of job stressors and demographic parameters. International Journal of Special Education, 32(4), 643–658. 4. Gandhi, A., Rani, K., & Rani, G. (2020). Attitude of Primary School Teachers towards Inclusive Education : Variation by Gender , Locale. Wutan Huatan Jisuan Jishu Journal, XVI(1), 78–89. 5. Jana, S., & Tarini Halder. (2018). Teacher Attitude towards Inclusive Education in the District of Paschim Medinipur, West Bengal. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT), 6(1), 1012–1020. www.joics.org 6. Jazeel, A. M. (2018). Attitude of Teachers towards Inclusive Education in Akkaraipattu Education Zone. Journal of Social Welfare and Management, 10(1), 5–9. 7. Jazeel. (2017) A Study on Awareness of Inclusive Education among Parents of Special Need Children. Journal of Scoical Welfare and Management. 2017;09(01). 8. Jazeel, A. M., Hanees, A., & Saravanakumar, A. (2013). Influence of Selected Factors on Awareness of Inclusive Education for Differently Abled Persons among Sri Lankan Teachers. Education Perspectives : Journal of Research and Development Ministry of Education, Sri Lanka, 2(2), 31–39. 9. Khan, A., & Basak, U. (2018). Attitude of Teachers Towards Inclusive Education : A Study In Purba Bardhaman District , West Bengal . Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research (JETIR), 5(8), 303–308. www.jetir.org 10. Mohanty, S. P., & Nanda, N. (2017). Inclusive Practices in Elementary Education: What Do the Heads of Schools Perceive? 12, 15. https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.12.4.13548 11. Priyadarshini, S., & Thangarajathi, S. (2016). Effect of selected variables on regular school teacher’s attitude towards inclusive education. Journal on Educational Psychology, 10(3), 28-38. 12. Sharma, P. (2019). Teachers’ Attitude Towards Inclusive Education in Nepal. Interdisciplinary Research in Education, 4(2), 173–189. https://doi.org/10.3126/ire.v4i2.27933 13. Singh, S., Kumar, S., & Singh, R. K. (2020). A Study of Attitude of Teachers towards Inclusive Education. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 9(1), 189–197. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v9i1.3511 14. Syed I. and Surieyah A. (2020) A Study on Attitude of Mainstream Primary School Teachers’ Towards Inclusive Education. The Communications.27 (01)14-32. 15. Sandhu, R. (2017). A study of attitude of secondary school teachers toward inclusive education. Indian Journal of Health & Wellbeing, 8(6), 422-426. 16. Smitha, N. R., & Acharya, S. (2010). Attitude of teachers towards Inclusive Education for the Disabled. Edutacks 10(3) 42-45. 17. Saravanakumar, AR. Educational Psychology, Sara Book Publication: Ahmedabad. 2015. ISBN: 978-1- 73033-043-8. 18. Vaz, S., Wilson, N., Falkmer, M., Sim, A., Scott, M., Cordier, R., & Falkmer, T. (2015). Factors Associated with Primary School Teachers’ Attitudes Towards the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities. Plos One, 10(8), 1-12.