Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Adapting Measures of Inclusion to Finnish Higher Education Teacher Educators' Context: Investigation of Validity and Reliability

Year 2025, Volume: 14 Issue: 1, 59 - 77, 30.04.2025

Erkko Sointu , Virpi Vellonen , Kwok Ng , Aino äikäs , Leena Holopainen , Theresa Hoang

Abstract

Inclusive education requires staff commitment to the principles of inclusion, and teacher training is crucial to fulfilling its goals. However, research on higher education teacher educators' inclusive dispositions is lacking, particularly in the Finnish or Nordic context. To redress this situation, psychometrically sound research instruments are warranted. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the reliability and factorial validity of two inclusion scales, namely Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices (TEIP) scale and the Sentiments, Attitudes, and Concerns about Inclusive Education Revised (SACIE-R) scale, with a sample of Finnish teacher educators. Teacher educators (N = 229) from 13 higher education institutions were recruited to complete an online survey on the TEIP and the SACIE-R. Data were analyzed using McDonald's omega and several confirmatory factor analyses, and both measures displayed adequate reliability. Results indicated that TEIP had both three-factor and second-order factor models, and SACIE-R, a two-factor structure. This suggests that TEIP and SACIE-R provide adequate means to measure perceptions of inclusive education, particularly in the higher education context, and thus form a useful basis for the development of training programs to promote inclusive education.

Keywords

Inclusive education teacher educators TEIP SACIE-R validity reliability

Ethical Statement

No ethical statement was required. The study strictly followed EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR; 2016/679), national Data Protection Act (1050/2018), and national ethical principles of research with human participants (Kohonen, Kuula-Luumi, & Spoof, 2019).

Supporting Institution

Ministry of Education and Culture (MoEC); University of Jyväskylä (JYU) and the National collaboration group for teacher education and research (KOPTUKE)

Project Number

MoEC, 2021–2022, grant no: OKM/90/523/2020; JYU & KOPTUKE 2021–2022, grant no: 648/02.03.01/2021.

Thanks

We would like to acknowledge the collaborators and partners in the Strengthening Finnish Teacher Educators’ Special Educational Skills and Digital Guidance Skills (HOHTO) and Research for Pedagogical Renewal of Teacher Education (OPUT) projects. Also, we sincerely thank the teacher educators who responded to the survey, and the funders. The HOHTO project was funded by the Ministry of Education and Culture (2021–2022; grant n:o OKM/90/523/2020), and the OPUT project received funding from the University of Jyväskylä designated for research on teacher education (National collaboration group for teacher education and research; KOPTUKE; 2021–2022; grant n:o 648/02.03.01/2021).

References

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2018). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.
  • Ainscow, M., Booth, T., & Dyson, A. (2004). Understanding and developing inclusive practices in schools: A collaborative action research network. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 8(2), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360311032000158015
  • Ahmmed, M., Sharma, U., & Deppler, J. (2014). Variables affecting teachers' intentions to include students with disabilities in regular primary schools in Bangladesh. Disability & Society, 29(2), 317–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.796878
  • Ahsan, M. T., Sharma, U., & Deppeler, J. M. (2012). Exploring pre-service teachers' perceived teaching-efficacy, attitudes and concerns about inclusive education in Bangladesh. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 8(2), 1–20. http://www.wholeschooling.net/Journal_of_Whole_Schooling/articles/8-2%20Ahsan%20et%20al.pdf
  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
  • Alnahdi, G. (2019). The Arabic version of the teacher efficacy for inclusive practices (TEIP-AR) scale: A construct validity study. Cogent Education, 6(1) 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1618516
  • Alnahdi, G. H., & Schwab, S. (2021). Special education major or attitudes to predict teachers' self-efficacy for teaching in inclusive education. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(2263). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.680909
  • Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers' sense of efficacy and student achievement. Longman.
  • Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P., & Burden, R. (2000). Student teachers' attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the ordinary school. Teacher and Teacher Education, 16(3), 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(99)00062-1
  • Avramidis, E., & Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers' attitudes towards integration/inclusion: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17(2), 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250210129056
  • Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3
  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246. Booth, T., & Ainscow, M. (2023). Definitions of inclusion in education from the Index for Inclusion. Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education http://www.csie.org.uk/resources/inclusion-index-explained.shtml
  • Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
  • Chao, C. N. G., Forlin, C., & Ho, F. C. (2016). Improving teaching self-efficacy for teachers in inclusive classrooms in Hong Kong. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20(11), 1142–1154. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2016.1155663
  • Chichekian, T., & Shore, B. M. (2016). Preservice and practicing teachers' self-efficacy for inquiry-based instruction. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1236872. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1236872
  • Collins, A., Azmat, F., & Rentschler, R. (2019). 'Bringing everyone on the same journey': Revisiting inclusion in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 44(8), 1475–1487. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1450852
  • Crispel, O., & Kasperski, R. (2019). The impact of teacher training in special education on the implementation of inclusion in mainstream classrooms. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 25(9), 1079–1090. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1600590
  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300–314. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487105285962
  • DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale Development. (2nd Ed.). Sage Publications.
  • Dixon, F. A., Yssel, N., McConnell, J. M., & Hardin, T. (2014). Differentiated instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37(2):111–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214529042
  • Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12046
  • European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education. (2011). Teacher education for inclusion across Europe – Challenges and opportunities. https://www.european-agency.org/sites/default/files/te4i-synthesis-report-en.pdf
  • Emam, M., & Al-Mahdy, Y. (2019). Teachers' efficacy for inclusive practices in the Sultanate of Oman: Effect of gender and teaching experience. School Psychology International, 41(2), 170–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034319895062
  • Engelbrecht, P. (2013). Teacher education for inclusion: International perspectives. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(2), 115–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778110
  • Evans, J., & Lunt, I. (2002). Inclusive education: Are there limits? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250110098980
  • Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 466–491. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466
  • Florian, L. (2008). Inclusion: Special or inclusive education—future trends. British Journal of Special Education, 35(4), 202–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8578.2008.00402.x
  • Florian, L., & Camedda, D. (2020). Enhancing teacher education for inclusion. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(1), 4–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1707579
  • Forlin, C., Earle, C., Loreman, T., & Sharma, U. (2011). The Sentiments, Attitudes, and Concerns about Inclusive Education Revised (SACIE-R) scale for measuring pre-service teachers' perceptions about inclusion. Exceptionality Education International 21(3), 50–65. https://doi.org/10.5206/eei.v21i3.7682
  • Geisinger, K. F. (1994). Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 304–312. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.304
  • Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach's alpha for estimating reliability. But... Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629
  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  • Kohonen, I., Kuula-Luumi, A., & Spoof, S.-K. (Eds.). (2019). The ethical principles of research with human participants and ethical review in the human sciences in Finland. Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK).
  • Li, C. H. (2016). Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 936-949. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7
  • Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Trigwell, K., Nevgi, A., & Ashwin, P. (2006). How approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context. Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600680539
  • Loreman, T., Earle, C., Sharma, U., & Forlin, C. (2007). The development of an instrument for measuring pre-service teachers' sentiments, attitudes, and concerns about inclusive education. International Journal of Special Education, 22(2), 151–160.
  • Loreman, T., Sharma, U., & Forlin, C. (2013). Do preservice teachers feel ready to teach in inclusive classrooms? A four country study of teaching self-efficacy. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(1), 27–44. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2013v38n1.10
  • Malinen, O., Savolainen, H., & Xu, J. (2012). Beijing in-service teachers' self-efficacy and attitudes towards inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(4), 526–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.12.004
  • Malinen, O., Savolainen, H., Engelbrecht, P., Xu, J., Nel, M., Nel, N., & Tlale, D. (2013a). Exploring teacher self-efficacy for inclusive practices in three diverse countries. Teaching and Teacher Education, 33, 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.02.004
  • Malinen, O., Savolainen, H., & Xu, J. (2013b). Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy for inclusive practices among mainland Chinese pre-service teachers. Journal of International Special Needs Education, 16(2), 82–93. https://doi.org/10.9782/2159-4341-16.2.82
  • Malinen, O., & Savolainen, H. (2016). The effect of perceived school climate and teacher efficacy in behavior management on job satisfaction and burnout: A longitudinal study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 144–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.08.012
  • Márquez, C., & Melero-Aguilar, N. (2022). What are their thoughts about inclusion? Beliefs of faculty members about inclusive education. Higher Education, 83(4), 829–844. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00706-7
  • Mateu, D., Franco-Ochoa, J., Valero-Moreno, S., & Prado Gascó, V. (2020). Attitudes, sentiments, and concerns about inclusive education of teachers and teaching students in Spain. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00521
  • McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2019). Mplus user's guide (8th ed.). Muthén & Muthén.
  • Nieminen, J. H. (2022). Assessment for inclusion: Rethinking inclusive assessment in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.2021395
  • Nieminen, J. H., & Pesonen, H. V. (2022). Politicising inclusive learning environments: How to foster belonging and challenge ableism? Higher Education Research & Development, 41(6), 2020–2033. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1945547
  • Perera, H. N., Calkins, C., & Part, R. (2019). Teacher self-efficacy profiles: Determinants, outcomes, and generalizability across teaching level. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 58, 186–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.02.006
  • Pesonen, H. V., Nieminen, J. H., Vincent, J., Waltz, M., Lahdelma, M., Syurina, E. V., & Fabri, M. (2023). A socio-political approach on autistic students' sense of belonging in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(4) 739–757. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1852205
  • Pivarč, J. (2024). The Czech version of the Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practice (TEIP) scale: validation and psychometric analysis of the instrument with primary school teachers. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2024.2371873
  • Sahli Lozano, C., Wüthrich, S., Baumli, N., Sharma, U., Loreman, T., & Forlin, C. (2023). Development and validation of a short form of the Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices Scale (TEIP‐SF). Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 23(4), 375-388. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12607
  • Sapon-Shevin, M. (2003). Inclusion: A matter of social justice. Educational Leadership, 61(2), 25–28.
  • Savolainen, H., Engelbrecht, P., Nel, M., & Malinen, O. (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. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2011.613603
  • Savolainen, H., Malinen, O-P., & Schwab, S. (2022). Teacher efficacy predicts teachers' attitudes towards inclusion: A longitudinal cross-lagged analysis. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 26(9), 958–972. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1752826
  • Selenius, H., & Ginner Hau, H. (2023). A scoping review on the psychometric properties of the teacher efficacy for inclusive practices (TEIP) scale. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2023.2185811
  • Sharma, U., Forlin, C., & Loreman, T. (2008). Impact of training on pre-service teachers' attitudes and concerns about inclusive education and sentiments about persons with disabilities. Disability & Society, 23(7), 773–785. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590802469271
  • Sharma, U., Loreman, T., & Forlin, C. (2012). Measuring teacher efficacy to implement inclusive practices. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(1), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01200.x
  • Sharma U., Shaukat S., & Furlonger, B. (2015). Attitudes and self-efficacy of pre-service teachers towards inclusion in Pakistan. Journal of Research in Special Education Needs, 15(2), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12071
  • Sharma, U., Sokal, L.,Wang, M., & Loreman, T. (2021). Measuring the use of inclusive practices among pre-service educators: A multi-national study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 107, 103506, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103506
  • Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 1059–1069. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.11.001 Sokal, L., & Sharma, U. (2014). Canadian in-service teachers' concerns, efficacy, and attitudes about inclusive teaching. Exceptionality Education International, 23(1), 59–71.
  • Song, J., Sharma, U., & Choi, H. (2019). Impact of teacher education on pre-service regular school teachers' attitudes, intentions, concerns and self-efficacy about inclusive education in South Korea. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 102901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102901
  • Stentiford, L., & Koutsouris, G. (2020). What are inclusive pedagogies in higher education? A systematic scoping review. Studies in Higher Education, 46(11), 2245–2261. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1716322 Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. C. (1980). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors [Paper presentation]. Annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA, United States.
  • Takala, M., Pihlaja, P., & Viljamaa, E. (2022). 'Yes it's good, but horizontal ellipsis': Student teachers' inclusion narratives. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2022.2115133 Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk-Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783–805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
  • Tucker, L., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291170
  • Varcoe, L., & Boyle, C. (2014). Pre-service primary teachers' attitudes towards inclusive education. Educational Psychology, 34(3), 323–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.785061
  • Vogiatzi, X.-A., Charitaki, G., & Kourkoutas, E. (2021). Assessing psychometric properties of the sentiments, attitudes and concerns about inclusive education scale in a Greek-speaking sample of in-service teachers. Technology, Knowledge, and Learning, 28, 207–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09554-x
  • Woodcock, S., Hemmings, B., & Kay, R. (2012). Does study of an inclusive education subject influence pre-service teachers' concerns and self-efficacy about inclusion? Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(6), 1–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2012v37n6.5
  • Wray, E., Sharma, U., & Subban, P. (2022). Factors influencing teacher self-efficacy for inclusive education: A systematic literature review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 117, 103800, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103800
  • Yada, A., Björn, P. M., Savolainen, P., Kyttälä, M., Aro, M., & Savolainen, H. (2021). Preservice teachers' self-efficacy in implementing inclusive practices and resilience in Finland. Teaching and Teacher Education, 105, 103398. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103398
  • Yada, A., Leskinen, M., Savolainen, H., & Schwab, S. (2022). Meta-analysis of the relationship between teachers' self-efficacy and attitudes toward inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 109, 103521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103521
  • Yada, A., & Savolainen, H. (2017). Japanese in-service teachers' attitudes toward inclusive education and self-efficacy for inclusive practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 64, 222–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.02.005
  • Yan, Z., & Sin, K. (2014). Inclusive education: Teachers' intentions and behavior analysed from the viewpoint of the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18(1), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2012.757811
There are 73 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Higher Education Studies (Other)
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Erkko Sointu 0000-0003-4001-7264

Virpi Vellonen 0000-0002-3115-9749

Kwok Ng 0000-0002-5461-7706

Aino äikäs 0000-0003-4674-0533

Leena Holopainen 0000-0003-2026-3759

Theresa Hoang 0000-0002-4114-1868

Project Number MoEC, 2021–2022, grant no: OKM/90/523/2020; JYU & KOPTUKE 2021–2022, grant no: 648/02.03.01/2021.
Publication Date April 30, 2025
Submission Date February 19, 2025
Acceptance Date April 24, 2025
Published in Issue Year 2025 Volume: 14 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Sointu, E., Vellonen, V., Ng, K., äikäs, A., et al. (2025). Adapting Measures of Inclusion to Finnish Higher Education Teacher Educators’ Context: Investigation of Validity and Reliability. Journal of Teacher Education and Educators, 14(1), 59-77.