Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T18:05:08.586Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Use of a Peer-Tutoring Program to Promote Positive Integration Attitudes and Outcomes for Children in Special (Support) Units

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2015

Yola Center  and
Robyn Beaman
Yola Center
Affiliation:
Macquarie University
Robyn Beaman
Affiliation:
Macquarie University
Get access

Abstract

A small group of Year 4 students, selected from a regular primary school to which a support unit for physically disabled children was attached, were trained to work as peer tutors with three of the unit children. Their attitudes towards disabled children in general and their interactions with specific disabled children were measured at three different times during the school year; prior to the peer-tutoring intervention, immediately on termination of the intervention and three months after the intervention had ceased. In addition, all non-disabled Year 4 children from the same regular school who had experienced different levels of academic, social and physical exposure to the unit children were assessed on the same attitudinal measures. Results were compared with a control group of Year 4 students from a neighbouring school of similar socio-economic status, with no support unit on site, to see whether general attitudes towards disability were affected by exposure to disabled students. This indicated that, while the measured attitudes of peer tutors did not appear to change over the three occasions, observations of interactions suggested both a trend for increased positie socialisation immediately after the intervention and a corresponding decrease three months after termination, which was not exhibited by other Year 4 students. There were no differences in general attitude measures among the four different Year 4 classes, suggesting that measured attitudes towards disability do not appear to change as a result of differential exposure to disabled students. However, as there was some evidence that changes in interactions by a small group of target students were not paralleled by corresponding changes in measured attitudes towards disability, it is suggested that both procedures should be used to gauge the effectiveness of integration programs.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Educational and Developmental Psychologist , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , November 1991 , pp. 8 - 16
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Psychological Society 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allport, G.W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA.: Addison.Google Scholar
Bagley, M.T. & Greene, J.F. (1981). Peer Attitude Towards the Handicapped Scale. Austin, T.X.: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
Center, Y., Ward, J., Parmenter, T., & Nash, R. (1985). Principals’ attitudes towards the integration of disabled children into regular schools. The Exceptional Child, 32, (3) 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Center, Y., & Ward, J. (1987). Teachers’ attitudes towards the integration of disabled children into regular schools. The Exceptional Child, 34, (1) 41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Center, Y., Ferguson, C., Ward, J., Conway, R., & Linfoot, K. (In Press). The integration of children with physical and intellectual disabilities into support classes attached to regular schools. The Exceptional Child, Monograph No. 2.Google Scholar
Clunies-Ross, G., & Thomas, M. (1986). The use of the peer attitudes towards the handicapped scale in Australia: Grade differences in the scores of primary school students. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Developmental Disabilities 12, 257–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clunies-Ross, G., & O’Meara, K. (1989). Changingattitudes towards disability. Australian Psychologist 24 (2), 273–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, D.A., Vandercook, T., & Rynders, J. (1988). Comparison of two peer interaction programs: Children with and without severe disabilities. American Educational Research Journal, 25(3), 415–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, J. (1980) Changing attitudes toward handicapped persons: A review and analysis of research. Exceptional Children, 46, 505–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esposito, B.G., & Reed, T.M. (1986). The effects of contact with handicapped persons on young children’s attitudes. Exceptional Children, 53, 224–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, B.F. (1954). Attitude measurement. In: Lindzey, G. (Ed.), Handbook of Social Psychology (Vol 1.) Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Home, M.D. (1985). Attitudes Towards Handicapped Students: Professional, Peer and Parent Teachers. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Howell, K.W., Kaplan, J.S. and O’Connell, C.Y. (1979). Evaluating Exceptional Children. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Hudson, A., & Clunies-Ross, G. (1984). A study of the integration of children with intellectual handicaps into regular schools. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 10, 165–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, M., & Yates, R. (1988). A study of students with severe disabilities into a local primary school in NSW. Selected Proceedings from the Bicentennial Conference, Australia Association of Special Education, Inc., NSW Chapter, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Madden, N.A., & Slavin, R.E. (1983). Mainstreaming students with mild handicaps: Academic and social outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 53, 519–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, S., Birnbrauer, J.S., & Swerissen, H. (1987). The effect of an integration programme on teacher and student attitudes to mentally handicapped children. Australian Psychologist, 22, 313–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pieterse, M., & Center, Y. (1984). The integration of eight Down’s syndrome children into regular schools. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Learning Disabilities, 10, 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravaud, J.F., Beaufils, B., & Paicheler, H. (1987). Stereotyping and intergroup perceptions of disabled and non-disabled children: A new perspective. The Exceptional Child, 34 (2), 93–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, D. (1985). The determinants of teachers’ attitudes to integrating the intellectually handicapped. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 55 (3), 257–263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Topping, K. (1988). The Peer-Tutoring Handbook: Promoting Co-operative Learning. London: Croom-Helm.Google Scholar
Turnell, R., & Flavell, R. (1989). Wheelchairs in the playground. Special Education Journal No 1. Department of Education, N.S.W. Australia.Google Scholar
Turnell, R., & Flavell, R. (1991). Peer attitudes towards students with disabilities. Part 2. Special Education Journal, No. 2. Department of Educatipn, N.S.W. Australian Association of Special Education, Inc. Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Towfighty-Hooshyar, N., & Zingle, H.W. (1984). Regular class students’ attitudes toward integrated multiple handicapped peers. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 88(6), 630–637.Google Scholar
Voeltz, L.M. (1980). Children’s attitudes towards handicapped peers. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 84(5), 455–64.Google Scholar