Measuring concerns about integrated education in India

By U. Sharma, I. Desai. 2003

128 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b7874b8264b0faa9ea2386eaed8e5fa60ce5e08a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Measuring pre-service teachers' attitudes towards inclusive education: Psychometric properties of the TAIS scale (2015, unknown): “…2011 SACIE-R 15 preservice α = .74 3 factors Larrivee & Cook, 1979 ORM 30 teachers α = .89 5 factors Moberg, 1997, 2003 PIE 19-20 preservice α = .86 4 factors Sharma & Desai, 2002 CIES 21 teachers & principals α = .91 4 factors Stoiber et al., 1998 MTAI-SF 12 teachers & parents α = .80 3…”
Canadian In-Service Teachers' Concerns, Efficacy, and Attitudes about Inclusive Teaching. (2014, methodology): “The scale was found to have an alpha coefficient of 0.91 (Sharma & Desai, 2002) and has been used by researchers across different contexts (e.g., Bradshaw & Mundia, 2006; Chhabra et al., 2010).”
The Influence of an Inclusive Education Course on Attitude Change of Pre‐service Secondary Teachers in Hong Kong (2007, methodology): “Part 4: Concerns about Inclusive Education Scale (CIES) The third scale was the CIES (Sharma & Desai, 2002) which consisted of 21 items that measured participant’s degree of concern about implementing inclusive education.”
In-service teachers’ attitudes, concerns, efficacy and intentions to teach in inclusive classrooms: an international comparison of Australian and Italian teachers (2018, background): “Part 2 consisted of the Concerns about Inclusive Education Scale (CIES) (Sharma and Desai 2002).”
Demographic differences in changing pre‐service teachers’ attitudes, sentiments and concerns about inclusive education (2009, methodology): “Reliability using Cronbach’s α demonstrated excellent reliability for the ATIES (α = 0.885) and for the CIES (α = 0.949) with moderate reliability for the IPD (α = 0.683).”
The impact of training on pre-service teacher attitudes, concerns, and efficacy towards inclusion (2016, methodology): “Factor analysis of the CIES using an Indian sample was conducted by Sharma and Desai (2002) and revealed four factors: (1) Concern about resources, (2) Concern about acceptance, (3) Concern about academic standards, and (4) Concern about workload.”
Inclusive Education in Botswana: The Perceptions of School Teachers (2010, background): “The third section, as developed by Sharma and Desai (2002), explored teachers’ concerns regarding the inclusion of students with disabilities into mainstream settings.”
The Sentiments, Attitudes, and Concerns about Inclusive Education Revised (SACIE-R) Scale for Measuring Pre-Service Teachers' Perceptions about Inclusion. (2011, methodology): “…up-skill teachers and to better prepare new and practicing teachers for catering to the needs of an increasingly diverse student population (Chong, Forlin, & Au, 2007; Florian 2009; Forlin, Loreman, Sharma, & Earle, 2009; Loreman, Forlin, & Sharma, 2007; Sharma & Desai, 2002 Sharma et al., 2008).”
The development of an instrument for measuring pre-service teachers' sentiments, attitudes, and concerns about inclusive education (2007, methodology): “…institutions using a modified version of the Interactions with People with Disabilities scale (Forlin, Jobling & Carroll, 2001; Gething, 1991, 1994), the Concerns about Inclusive Education Scale (Sharma & Desai, 2002), and the Attitudes Toward Inclusive Education Scale (Wilczenski, 1992, 1995).”
Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education: a critical review of published questionnaires (2018, methodology): “Likewise, the CIE (Sharma & Desai, 2002) gathers information about teachers’ concerns about classroom management, declining academic standards, and the extra input required of teachers.”