Abstract
To truly understand physical educators' concerns about inclusion their voices must be heard, but little research has been done in Portugal. For this reason, a semi-structured interview in a focus group was held with young physical educators aiming to identify the perceptions and challenges with respect to inclusion in their physical education (PE) classes. Findings of the present research suggest that these PE teachers advocated for inclusion and pointed out advantages for students with and without disabilities, although they raised some challenges that could be an obstacle to effectiveness, including the lack of specific training and experience in inclusive PE and type and severity of the student's impairment. These results emphasize the need for specific preparation of Portuguese PE teachers in inclusive PE not only during the university curricula but also during their professional careers.
Since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), there has been a continual cultural shift toward the inclusion of individuals with disabilities into general society (e.g., World Programme of Action, United Nations, 1982; Standard Rules on Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities, United Nations, 1993; Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, United Nations, 2006). The right to inclusive education was initially stated in the Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action (UNESCO, 1994), which emphasized that schools need to change and adapt to diversity. Because of these international agreements, governments ought to eliminate legislative barriers to inclusive education.
This is clearly evident in Portuguese Public Law 319/91, recently changed to Public Law 3/2008, which promotes the equality of opportunity and encourages improvements in teaching quality, promoting and encouraging democratic school inclusion of all children and young people. According to this law, students with special needs should not only receive their education in a mainstream school but also fully join their peers in the curriculum and in school life. They should generally take part in mainstream classes rather than being isolated in separate units, although separate provision can occasionally be necessary for specific purposes. In 1997, 75% of the students with special education needs in Portugal received their education in general schools (Costa & Rodrigues, 1999), while in 2001 this percentage increased up to 93%. Recent data (Ministry of Education and Science, 2014) indicated that 98% of all students with disabilities now attend regular schools; these figures put Portugal in the group of European countries with the highest rate of inclusive education of students with disabilities (Campos, Ferreira, & Block, 2014b). Portuguese mainstream schools are now supported by a national network of Information and Communication Technology Resources Centers for Special Education, which assesses pupils' needs for assistive technology and by a network of Resource Centers for Inclusion (RCI). These Centers, which in the past were special schools, provide specialized support through partnerships with mainstream schools. The transformation of the special schools into RCIs has become an essential tool for the implementation of Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, s.d.). As seen, efforts by the Portuguese government and advocates for children with disabilities have resulted in the inclusion of the majority of students with disabilities.
At the same time, higher education in Europe is facing a substantial transformation, called “the Bologna process,” which promotes the advancement of European institutions to the top of the world's higher education markets. Hence, faculty members teaching in physical education teacher education (PETE) programs have systematically reviewed their curricula in reference to the ultimate programmatic goal of preparing competent physical education (PE) teachers who will be able to teach all students within a contemporary school environment (Block, Hutzler, Barak, & Klavina, 2013). Some higher education institutions include in their study plans curricular units related to the teaching of pupils with special educational needs or other diversities. However, the best way to describe the formative situation in the country is that training to work in inclusive settings with these students is done at the post-graduate level. Perhaps this justifies the difficulty and concern that many regular teachers express, because they increasingly have in their classes students with special educational needs (European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, s.d.).
General physical education (GPE) is a subject where inclusion can play a vital role. As a result, inclusion in GPE has become an area of international interest (Block & Obrusnikova, 2007). The inclusion of students with disabilities in GPE is influenced by many factors, but teachers' favorable attitudes are one factor for successful inclusion (Conatser, Block, & Lepore, 2000; Hodge, Davis, Woodard, & Sherrill, 2002; Sherrill, 2004; de Boer, Pijlb & Minnaert, 2011). According to Block and Obrusnikova (2007), a key to achieving positive results in inclusion is the teacher's attitude in promoting positive social interactions and developing cooperative activities of, as well as promoting positive attitudes in pupils without disabilities.
The literature points out several factors that can affect teacher's attitudes and behavior regarding teaching of students with disabilities in GPE (e.g., Rizzo & Kirkendall, 1995; Avramidis & Norwich, 2002; Block & Obrusnikova, 2007; Tsakiridou & Polyzopoulou, 2014). Variables related to students with a disability, such as type and severity of disability, can influence teachers' attitudes. For example, students with mild disabilities are viewed more favorably compared to students with more severe disabilities (e.g. Rizzo & Vispoel, 1991). There are also teacher-related variables, including perceived competence and perception of experience in teaching students with disabilities as well as academic coursework in special education or inclusive PE. Attitudes of GPE teachers are more likely to be favorable toward working with students with disabilities if teachers have higher academic training in APE as well as more experience teaching students with disabilities (Kowalski & Rizzo, 1996) Conatser, Block, & Lepore, 2000) Avramidis & Norwich, 2002) Combs, Elliot, & Whipple, 2010; Tsakiridou & Polyzopoulou, 2014). According to Folsom-Meek, Nearing, Groteluschen, and Krampf (1999), experience with individuals with disabilities is an important factor in the development of attitudes. Avramidis and Norwich (2002) noted that teachers who accept responsibility for teaching a wide diversity of students (recognizing the importance of the development of students) and who feel confident in their management skills and education as a result of their practice can easily implement inclusive programs.
As seen, research shows that factors such as disability type and perceived teaching competence influence attitudes, and the specific teaching training of physical educators is also a critical factor in both predicting attitudes and perceived competence. Although there are many quantitative studies related to teachers' attitudes toward inclusion, there are limited international qualitative data on teachers' perceptions of inclusive PE (e.g., Hodge, et al., 2002) Morley, Bailey, Tan, & Cooke, 2005) Sato, Hodge, Murata, & Maeda, 2007; Horne & Timmons, 2009) Combs, et al., 2010) Qi & Ha, 2012). Portuguese researchers have tried to ascertain GPE teachers' perceptions about inclusion, although findings remain inconclusive as there are no published articles with standard surveys (e.g., Campos, Ferreira, & Block, 2014a). Although current legislation in Portugal recognizes the importance of inclusion of students with disabilities, schools and teachers may not be ready for this new challenge. According to Rodrigues (2003), in some cases students with disabilities do not participate in GPE classes because of the teacher's insecurity. In the Portuguese educational system there is no adapted physical educator, so PE teachers must accommodate students with disabilities in the class (Campos, et al, 2014a). Thus, it is important to acknowledge the challenges toward inclusion of different types of abilities in the PE class.
There is very little information about GPE teachers' opinions and perceptions about inclusive PE in Portugal, even though inclusion is now commonplace. The basis of the present study is the need to listen to Portuguese teachers' perceptions about inclusion and to understand their points of view about PE classes.
Method
Participants
Participants were five GPE elementary and middle school teachers from different school districts, four men and one woman, ages 25 to 32 years (M age = 27.6 yr.). All had completed an undergraduate program in physical education with at least one APE course (one semester). The GPE teachers held a degree in physical education and on average had taught PE for 3.8 yr. They all taught students with various special needs (e.g., autism, physical disabilities, Down syndrome) in elementary and middle schools.
Measures
Data collected consisted of a focus group semi-structured interview. The prompt of the focus group provided the grounds for collaborative discussion among the participants. A script of interview questions (focus questions listed below) was developed and contained the thematic topics to be addressed throughout the session, as well as some key issues, i.e., the interview guide questions were inductively generated and reflected thinking, feeling, and knowing questions (van Manen, 1997, in Morphy & Goodwin, 2012). Ethics review board approval was obtained, and informants were invited to voluntarily take part in the present research, with the goal of obtaining teachers' opinions about inclusion in PE. A draft interview was conducted by interviewing two PE teachers to organize the semi-structured format. Focus questions were:
What do you think about the inclusion of students with disabilities in mainstream education? Do you find inclusion advantageous or disadvantageous?
How do you define your attitudes and beliefs toward inclusion in PE classes?
What factors or variables can you indicate as contributing to the improvement of attitudes and consequently your behavior toward inclusion?
Procedure
The strategy used was homogeneous sampling (Patton, 2015), which brings together people of similar backgrounds and experiences. The inclusion criteria were young PE teachers who finished their PETE in the last five years as well as professionals who had worked with students with disabilities in a PE context. The final sample comprised five participants because two participants did not appear at the interview.
All participants were seated around a table arranged in a U shape with the researcher sitting in the middle of the U facing the participants. Two voice recorders and digital cameras were used to capture the discussion as well as gestures made by participants. For this analysis, each participant was given an individual identification code and a pseudonym to enable correct transcription of the verbatim audio for each interview, while guaranteeing anonymity. The interviews were transcribed including descriptions of non-verbal reactions of the interviewees, and afterwards analyzed and classified according to thematic topics defined.
Analysis
To establish trustworthiness and validity, the researchers used a triangulation method. According to Patton (2015) rigorous methods are imperative for the credibility of a qualitative study. Hence, different strategies were used such as peer review/debriefing (i.e., first and second author worked independently at first and later converged in analyzing and interpretation the data), member check (i.e., after the verbatim transcription, we asked the participants to confirm or correct the reconstruction of their statements), and rich and thick description through verbatim transcription of the all interviews (Creswel, 2007) in order to bring plausibility to the data.
Content analysis was used. According to Patton (2015), the most important instrument of content analysis is coding, the process of breaking down and reducing text into manageable units of analysis. The semiotic analysis yielded several recurring themes. To isolate the emerging thematic statements, a line-by-line analysis was conducted, and phrases that were conceptually similar were gathered together in categorization units.
Results and Discussion
The main purpose of this exploratory study was to listen to physical educators' voices, acceding to their opinions, values, and challenges toward inclusion in GPE classes. Three themes were gleaned from the data: (1) attitudes and beliefs toward inclusion, (2) teachers' challenges and concerns, and (3) key factors for inclusive PE. Each theme will be discussed in detail with several direct quotes to support it.
Attitudes and Beliefs Toward Inclusion
Participants were asked to talk about their opinions regarding the placement of individuals with and without disabilities in inclusive PE classes. Teachers held favorable attitudes, and there was a sense of predisposition to inclusion. Generally, respondents expressed several advantages for all persons involved, considering that inclusive PE improves social acceptance and social competence for both students with and without disabilities. Mr. J. said that “Being with peers is absolutely advantageous to them [students with disabilities].” All the interviewers shared that opinion.
“I think it is more valuable to be with peers considered as normal. Being integrated is extremely beneficial, even in the sense of mutual support that can occur between students, creating strong friendships for life.” (Mr. M.)
The testimony of Ms. A. revealed a concern; as one teacher stated, an “… ability to adapt to the barriers that each student has, being able to help them overcome their difficulties and shortcomings. If we introduce an exercise to a student, we should be concerned about explaining in a way that he can understand, and thus accomplish it.” Mr. S. added that it is their responsibility to “… know how to receive and welcome the student the best way possible and include him in the class completely.”
All five teachers agreed that inclusive settings in GPE develop experiences of enormous benefits for students with and without disabilities in terms of social acceptance, and in regard to peers without disabilities, allows “… giving a student responsibility for a peer with disabilities, to help and to guide him along the class activities” (Ms. A.). Mr. P. in this regard recalled that the interaction between students “… prepare them for life in terms of education and sensitivity to the future… exploring… their most human and social features.” This was also evident from Mr. J.'s statement that being included “… is extremely beneficial, particularly in terms of mutual support between students… and will enable all students to learn to work together.” On the other hand, isolation and exclusion will result in lack of self-confidence regarding the student's situation:
“He himself will question it [exclusion], as might peers, by creating habits or thoughts and discriminatory attitudes, that can isolate him from the group, and this may be too complex for the child both at the present and in the future.” (Mr. S.)
Mr. M. stated, “It prepares them for life in terms of education, in their future sensitivity to people who have more difficulties at all levels, not only with respect to disability but the level of poverty… it develops their more human and social side of life.”
Although inclusion was viewed as positive for students with and without disabilities, opinions were divided in terms of advantages to the educator. Regarding teaching students with disabilities in general schools, on one hand some teachers consider that inclusive PE is also positive for teachers, as Mr. P. recalled “… because the teacher will be able to learn from the child and their differences.”
“… to the teacher it can also be an advantage. By dealing with a child with disability, you will gain experience for subsequent years, you find yourself better prepared, and know how to deal more effectively with these students. When you have a child with a disability for a whole year, you'll be able to learn regarding the differences she presents, and you'll grow with this situation. So, next year, if this situation repeats, you'll already know how to handle it, knowing how she reacts to certain stimuli, and so it is beneficial, and it is clear that the class will become more productive for all involved.” (Mr. S.)
On the other hand, some participants argued that inclusion can only mean more work and will require additional time to plan the lesson. “There is no advantage, for the teacher there is no advantage [in inclusion],” Ms. A. shared, based on the additional work required when planning lessons.
Generally, teachers have a positive view regarding the placement of children with and without disabilities, expressing the opinion that both are not affected by inclusive classes with respect to their overall development (Scruggs & Mastropieri, 1996). Overall, present research findings support these assumptions, as it seems that teachers began to develop a greater sensitivity to inclusion, meeting the most recent guidelines of inclusive school settings established at a national level. Another factor that appears to contribute to this trend is related to the academic university curriculum, nowadays more appropriate to this reality and conveniently structured to train PE teachers. Participants in the present study are of a young age, which means they have received training on topics related with APE during their academic preparation.
Teachers' Challenges and Concerns
We labeled the next theme as teachers' challenges and concerns since all participants shared some worries about inclusive PE. The most common constraints discussed were type and level of disability and lack of specific training in APE. Although participants advocated inclusive PE settings, they pointed out some challenges that significantly influence effective inclusion in their classes. Regarding student-related variables, type and severity of disability were mentioned; and concerning teacher-related variables the lack of specific training in APE and the experience in teaching students with disabilities emerged as relevant.
When asked to identify the differences between the type of disability in the matter of including students with disabilities in PE classes, participants said that they had more favorable attitudes toward students with hearing impairment, followed by intellectual disabilities, physical disabilities, and visual impairment, respectively. The reasons they pointed out are related with practical implications in PE tasks; example comments about this include: “… because the student observes peers doing the exercise, and does it after, easily overcoming the obstacle of the lack of hearing” (Mr. P.). The opinions on this subject were consensual and showed that the strategy of demonstration not only overcomes the hearing barrier but also emerged as a “… way to monitor the time…” and “… so that all students understand easily what is asked of them” (Mr. J.).
Mr. S. argued that “… the physical disability turns out to be more complicated [than hearing impairment], because the student always ends up being dependent on others to perform the exercises.” Ms. A. shared this opinion, though Mr. J. said, “we always have the ability to make changes in the games and adapt them to the demands of the students. There are even a number of games targeted to students with physical disabilities, which we teachers easily introduce in the classroom.”
Participants noted that visual impairment was the most difficult disability to accommodate in PE classes; in Mr. J.'s words, “visual impairment also seems to me as the most complex.” However, Mr. S. argued that “we always have the opportunity with the blind students to ask a peer to hold hands so that he can help and direct the blind student through the exercises.” Nevertheless, Mr. P. maintained his opinion, saying, “throughout the activities there are always stimuli that can only be apprehended through sight, and it becomes very problematic that a student cannot see the class as a whole. He will always be restricted and limited in his physical life experience in the classroom.” Ms. A. recalled “The student will always be conditioned and limited in his physical experiences…” Moreover, “… blind children do not yet have autonomy and responsibility that allows them to face the class as a 20-year blind person.”
The characteristics of a student with hearing impairment allows the typical dynamic of a PE class, to the extent that any constraints can be overcome by adopting one of the most common strategies used by teachers: demonstration, observation, and imitation. In contrast, the specificities of the visual disability imposes various difficulties on the normal development of the class, demanding changes both in the classroom functioning and in the teaching-learning process implemented by the teacher. These assumptions are clear, seeming to direct us unequivocally to the way that different conditions of disability are listed as challenges within the PE classes. Teachers stated that “if we think about the types of disabilities that we have ahead of us, and if we assess them according to severity, it is logical that a hearing impairment comes across as less limiting. No doubt that I send to the last position the visual impairment” (Mr. P.).
It is a challenge to effectively include students with visual impairments because it is very important that stereotypical barriers or fear of liability must not exclude students with visual impairments from participating in physical education activities (Tutt, Lieberman, & Brasher, 2012). Practical and possible solutions to diminishing those negative feelings about this condition can be peer tutoring and awareness programs in PE classes. For example, Wiskochil, Lieberman, Houston-Wilson, and Petersen (2007), considered that skilled peer tutors can be a resource to assist with games, fitness, and other activities for the visually impaired when needed. Another example is in a class with sighted peers; the entire class should learn sports without sight, providing sighted peers the opportunity to improve their disability awareness and their knowledge about the sports that students with visual impairment can participate in (Foley, Tindall, Lieberman, & Kim, 2007).
PE teachers clearly indicated hearing impairment as less disruptive to a student's learning ability, followed by other disabilities, which are more demanding when it comes to adjustments in the course of the lesson. The present findings are consistent with previous research carried out by Rizzo and Vispoel (1991), Kowalski and Rizzo (1996), and Block and Obrusnikova (2007), suggesting that the type of disability is an important variable affecting teacher's beliefs regarding inclusion in PE classes.
Participants reported that another barrier encountered in PE classes is the severity of disability, e.g., “the degree of the disability he has.” (Mr. S.) and “it also depends on the severity of the disability” (Mr. P.). In relation to how the severity of disability affected their classes, respondents pointed out that “… being with a child who has a severe disability, we cannot do anything with him,” otherwise the teacher will be “… with him or with the class. If I pay attention to him, the class will lose concentration and the outcome will be poorer. If we pay more attention to the class, students with disabilities will be isolated from the class” (Ms. A.). “I think that at least one assistant is essential for most severe cases, e.g., autism” (Mr. J.).
“.students with physical disabilities may not have the ability to do a task without a teacher's supervision… We need an assistant who is devoted only to students with severe physical difficulties. Therefore, as we are just one PE teacher, it is not possible to include and integrate a student with these characteristics as desired. It is a very complex situation for any of us.” (Mr. P.)
Those comments reveal an obvious difficulty of PE teachers in dealing with students with severe physical disabilities. There is substantial evidence to support those feelings; for instance, Hodge, et al. (2002) also stated that teachers' beliefs often are more favorable in teaching students with mild disabilities compared to teaching students with severe disabilities.
Another variable assumed to be related to teachers' attitudes toward inclusion is specific training in APE. Teachers need specific knowledge and skills that promote pedagogical and educational practice. The training course fosters the development of new attitudes and approaches, solidifying changes to negative attitudes toward the inclusion of individuals with disabilities in general education. Although all the participants indicated they get training in an academic context, they did not have specific training in the professional context. The participants' worries were, in part, influenced by the lack of knowledge, showing some reluctance in including the students with disabilities in a proper way. A few comments that support this view include: “… There always arise specific situations where if we had more preparation, more training in the area, we would respond better” (Mr. J.) and that “… academic background appears to be a crucial factor in teacher's competence…” (Mr. P.). The educators continued, emphasizing that “… there are times when you do not know if the response to the situation concerning the child with disabilities was the most appropriate …,” and “… those are issues that arise due to lack of specific training” (Mr. S.). One participant summarized this emergent need by stating that “Of course if I had more training in the area, I would be able to improve my performance as a teacher” (Ms. A.).
Findings suggest that one of the teachers' major concerns is that the lack of specific knowledge about teaching students with disabilities makes teaching more difficult in an inclusive setting. As seen, participants mentioned the need for improved pedagogical competency, claiming the lack of coursework as an obstacle to include them properly. Several articles in the literature have described the importance of academic preparation and specific training in APE (Rizzo & Vispoel, 1991, 1992) Block & Rizzo, 1995) Kowalski & Rizzo, 1996) Horne & Timmons, 2009; Combs, Elliot, & Whipple, 2010; Tsakiridou & Polyzopoulou, 2014). According to Combs, et al. (2010), teachers who participate in inclusive education activities throughout their academic training are more likely to have positive opinions about inclusive education. Obrusnikova (2008) found evidence that specific training in APE was a significant predictor of teachers' positive beliefs regarding inclusion in PE classes and positively correlated with their perceived competence. Casebolt and Hodge (2010) also interviewed five PE teachers who felt unprepared, claiming the need for more professional training to develop the skills needed to feel competent in teaching students with disabilities. Avramidis and Norwich (2002) indicated that academic preparation combined with teaching experience with children with disabilities contributes significantly to favorable attitudes regarding inclusive settings. A study carried out in Latvia also revealed that PE teachers did not feel properly trained to work with students with disabilities (Klavina, Block, & Larins, 2007). Teachers also echoed these ideas in a UK study (Morley, et al., 2005), as it seems that experience is necessary although not sufficient for feelings of confidence and perceived competence. Experiences of training opportunities were limited, and the exposure to different abilities can lead some to feel uncertain and inadequately prepared.
Key Factors For Inclusive PE
“Don't tell me there is a problem, tell me there is a solution.”
After identifying the challenges encountered by teachers in an inclusive PE class, participants were asked to talk about strategies and ways to overcome those challenges and constraints. All of them were in agreement that the best solution was having an additional PE teacher with the students with disabilities; i.e., ideally classes with students with disabilities should have two PE teachers. Several comments supported this notion, such as “… the ideal situation would be teaching with the support of a teacher with specific training in the area.” (Mr. P.) or “under these conditions [two PE teachers], we would be facing a perfect educational system” (Mr. S.). Participants stated that having an APE teacher to assist the children with disabilities in their lessons and to help them would be the best solution. Likewise, “… if there are teacher assistants and special education teachers for other subjects, there should also be an APE teacher for PE classes” (Mr. M.). Ms. A. stated that “if we had the support of a PE teacher with some training and experience in the area it would be perfect.” “I think the idea of having the support of a fellow expert is even more imperative when we have a severe disability in the class” (Mr. J.). This means that according to the interviewees, having teacher assistants to help them in an inclusive environment would make teaching easier, although in Portugal, as in most European countries, formally there are no adapted physical education professionals.
One hands-on solution presented was peer tutoring, e.g., “… working in pairs. We could put a reliable student to work with the peer with disabilities to help and guide him through activities in the PE class.” Mr. J. recalled, “if we delegate some responsibility for certain students, they also will consider themselves more important and conscientious..” Ms. A. also added that “there is more involvement by students in the class.” Peer tutoring seems to be well developed and is a highly successful element of support in PE classes, as confirmed in several research studies (e.g., Lieberman, Dunn, van der Mars, & McCubbin, 2000; Klavina & Block, 2008). For example, Klavina and Block (2008) studied the effect of peer tutoring on interaction behaviors in inclusive physical education with three elementary students with severe and moderate disabilities and nine peer tutors. Findings indicated that instructional and physical interaction behaviors between students increased. Although social interaction remained low, the activity engagement time increased for all students. Lieberman, et al. (2000) analyzed the effects of trained peer tutors on the physical activity of deaf students, and they found an increase in moderate to vigorous physical activity in both the deaf students and the peer tutors in an inclusive physical education class. Both studies are in line with the findings presented: as noted before by all participants in our study, peer tutoring seems to be a practical and easy solution to implement inclusion in PE classes.
Findings also suggest that PE teachers are likely to be receptive to the idea of improving their skills, as a possible solution to effectively include students with disabilities. They made numerous comments that supported the need for a specific training program. This can be understood and complemented by the respondents' statements: “… if our knowledge had more depth, we would be able to take best results of the intervention, and thus improve and enhance the effectiveness of our class” (Mr. P.); “The Ministry of Education itself could promote training workshops targeted to the area” (Mr. J.). It appears that it might be necessary and crucial to develop specific training opportunities for PE teachers in order to give them pedagogical tools to implement in their classes. Latvian teachers share the same concerns (Klavina, et al., 2007). Also, Morley, et al. (2005) reported that continuing professional development was seen by some of the teachers as the key factor to increase formal and informal training opportunities for students with disabilities. According to Combs, et al. (2010), explicit strategies for improving attitudes toward students with disabilities should increase the successful assimilation of students into GPE.
As seen, there has been a plethora of research supporting the importance of specific training in APE (e.g., Combs, et al., 2010) Tsakiridou & Polyzopoulou, 2014), and it appears to be obvious that it might be necessary and crucial to develop specific training opportunities for PE teachers to give them pedagogical tools to implement in their classes. It is also crucial to rethink the preparation of future PE teachers and the need to learn about different disabilities and how to adapt PE activities to various disabilities.
According to data from the current study, teaching experience with students with disabilities also seems to manifest itself as a decisive element in the formation and development of inclusive attitudes among PE teachers. It is “… day-to-day, through our experience that we learn a lot of things. When we are alone with certain kids, that's where we experiment, and I think that's where we also grow a little bit and that brings a lot of experience to the area” (Mr. P.), which indicates that respondents with experience with students with disabilities have more positive attitudes to the inclusive concept.
As one of our respondents said, “… an experience with a children with disabilities will certainly promote strategies and means to act more gainful in the teaching-learning process” (Mr. J.). Mr. S. added that “As experience is a process that happens gradually, I think five years from now I will have more experience, and I will have developed safer and more effective strategies that allow me to include more quality students with disabilities in my classes.” These findings were somewhat similar with results described in other studies (e.g., Block & Rizzo, 1995; Conatser, et al., 2000). Overall, teachers who have professional experience with students with disabilities overcome many unfounded preconceptions concerning students with disabilities, presenting a more favorable and positive attitude about their inclusion in PE classes, and they also perceived themselves as more competent in teaching in inclusive settings. Also, Leyser, et al. (1994) identified the most experienced teachers as being the most enthusiastic and advocates of inclusive principles. Results from the present study are in line with those reported by Combs, et al. (2010); Vispoel and Rizzo (1991, 1992); Leyser, et al. (1994); Block and Rizzo (1995); and Conatser, et al. (2000). Recent findings (Casebolt & Hodge, 2010) suggested that teachers with more experience have more confidence and a better understanding of teaching students with disabilities compared to less experienced colleague, corroborating present findings. They also found that teachers' self-efficacy in teaching students with disabilities was largely dependent on their experiences teaching students with disabilities, their knowledge, the student's disability type and severity, and resources and space for devising appropriate activities. Present findings also seem to link specific preparation in APE to self-efficacy and positive experiences in including students with disabilities in their PE classes.
One of the specific strands highlighted in the Background Note on Inclusive Education of the action plan of the Task Force on Inclusive Education (UNICEF, UNESCO, 2012) is investing in teacher training for disability-inclusive education:
“Advocacy for the adoption […] that all teacher training efforts include a module on disability-inclusive education. Overburdening teachers is not the aim of Inclusive Education for children with disabilities, and therefore transformative efforts must be integrated into existing change agendas in teacher education and across education systems broadly. Preparation and orientation of educational staff for inclusion should happen through teacher training which, besides the child-centered pedagogy, will also address attitudes towards children with disabilities.”
According to Qi and Ha (2012), the more teachers foster potential facilitating factors and deal with potential inhibiting factors in their inclusive teaching practices, the stronger are their intentions to include and to teach students with disabilities, conducive to inclusive behaviors.
It is crucial that PE teachers' daily challenges and opinions about inclusion be acknowledged. Therefore, the present study used a qualitative approach to obtain young Portuguese teachers' opinions regarding inclusion in PE classes and to explore how attitudes and attributes can contribute to implementation of inclusion in educational contexts. The findings suggest that PE teachers advocate for inclusion in PE classes, although there arise some challenges that can be an obstacle to its effectiveness.
Regarding the students, the teacher's concerns are related to type and severity of the disability. Another challenge voiced by participants was the lack of specific training in APE. They reinforced the importance of teaching experience with students with disabilities as it appears to influence teachers' perceived competence in dealing with students with different abilities. Present findings raise certain critical issues, especially concerning the need of specific training in APE, not only at an academic level but particularly at the professional level.
Therefore, the present study is noteworthy as it explores teachers' ideas and concerns about inclusion in PE classes. It also provides important information for a successful inclusion and provides some insight into the physical educators' experiences and attitudes regarding inclusion in PE. Further qualitative studies are needed to assess teachers' attitudes towards inclusion in order to evaluate how powerful PE can be regarding the inclusion of students with disabilities in Portugal.
The Portuguese education system has been trying to achieve inclusion since the mid-1990s; however, schools are moving slowly. It is important to acknowledge that it takes too long to get there, because of a considerable amount of restraints some of the participants described in the present study. GPE can enhance inclusive education. Using a metaphor of a car, we need to go faster, and there are different additives to improve efficiency to achieve inclusion, particularly in PE classes: (a) the teacher can use peer tutoring as a hands-on solution; (b) implementing awareness programs also seems to be a good strategy to enhance attitudes; (c) at the school level, administrators could include another PE teacher in classes with students with disabilities; and (d) specific training in APE, for that matter universities and the Ministry of Education, must promote workshops in APE. Although the ideal situation should have all these “additives,” in the real situation the different stakeholders should embrace the strategies that are on their range to make inclusive education become a reality at the GPE level.