Typescript (photocopy). / Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries

Thesis (M.A.(Applied))--Victoria University of Wellington, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.Ed.)--University of Hong Kong, 1990. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 110-115). Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2006. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 264-278).

Thesis (M. Phil.)--University of Hong Kong, 1973. / Mimeographed.

No description available.

The study was designed to determine regular classroom teachers' attitudes toward the integration of educable mentally retarded students into the regular classroom curriculum.The sample for the study consisted of 110 regular classroom teachers at the junior high school level in the Richmond Community School System, Richmond, Indiana and the Fayette County School System, Connersville, Indiana. One hundred and forty-five opinionnaires were presented to the junior high school teachers by the building principals and 110 were returned, which yielded a total return of 75.86 percent.The returned opinionnaire statements were data analyzed individually by the Ball State Computer Center. The individual item alaysis did not yield discriminating results. Thirteen of the original eighteen statements were found to be measuring one general attitude which the investigator determined to be acceptance of educable mentally retarded studentsin general terms. These thirteen items yielded a reliability coefficient of .8967.Five of the opinionnaire statements were rejected because they were weaker than the total scale and most likely were measuring something unique and different from the major scale. These five statements were not used in the second analysis.A combined view of the thirteen statement responses demonstrated that 11.3 percent of all teacher responses were in strong agreement with the statements, which indicates that only 11.3 percent of all responses show positive acceptive attitudes toward educable mentally retarded students. On the other hand, 24.6 percent of the statement responses were in strong disagreement, which expressed a generally negative attitude toward accepting educable mentally retarded students into the regular classroom. There was a nearly even number of statements in which teachers were in mild agreement (31.6 percent) and mild disagreement (32.5 percent).A t test analysis was done to determine if there was attitudinal differences between a group of regular classroom teachers who had working experience with educable mentally retarded students and a group of regular classroom teachers who did not have experience working with educable mentally retarded students. There was evidence from the study which indicated that regular classroom teachers who had working experience with educable mentally retarded students were more accepting of the retarded student’s integration into the classroom.The null hypothesis stating that there would be no significant difference between the attitudes of teachers who had previously worked with educable mentally retarded students and teachers who had not worked with educable mentally retarded students could not be accepted.

The purposes of the study were to: present a historical orientation to educational opportunities provided for the mentally retarded; describe the circumstances that have led to litigation; present accounts of court cases dealing with the educational rights of the retarded; and provide school administrators with a concise and accurate body of information concerning educational rights of the mentally retarded. The study was completed by means of a search of related scholarly literature, state and federal statutes and constitutions, and recent litigation involving the educational rights of the mentally retarded.In the public schools, the principle of equal rights has rarely been considered applicable to the mentally retarded. While the legislative branch of government has taken the initiative in providing tax-supported education for normal children, the mentally retarded have been compelled to secure educational equality through the judicial system.Although the issue of equal access to public education for the mentally retarded has been definitively resolved by the courts, dissatisfaction with the quality of educational programsfor the retarded and the methods used to determine special class placement has continued to create legal problems for school administrators. The requirements for education of the mentally retarded have been changing rapidly and school administrators have had difficulty keeping pace with these changes. Federal courts have found many administrative policies concerning special education for the retarded to be in violation of the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.Recent litigation involving special education for the retarded has focused on: the right of the mentally retarded student to receive an education in the least restrictive setting; the right of parents to participate in all decisions concerning assignments of their children to classes for the mentally retarded; the right of the minority group student to have his academic potential evaluated on the basis of IQ tests which reflect his cultural background; and the right of the mentally retarded student to periodic reassessment of his ability.Numerous court decisions have established the responsibility of the public school system to provide education to the handicapped as well as normal children. A major problem currently facing special educators has been finding ways to continue special services for the retarded without imposing stigma.

Thesis (Dip.App.Psych.)--University of Adelaide, Dept. of Psychology, 1978.