CHAPTER III

DEVELOPMENT AND DESCRIPTION OF THE TOOLS

The present chapter deals with the development and description of the tools used
to collect data. Tools and research instruments are an integral part of carrying a research.
Tools are necessary for the collection of data for any study. Tools used for collecting the
data by any researcher are called “data collecting devices”. The tools help a researcher to
analyze the responses of the respondents on variables used in the research study. There
are many types of tools through which data is collected like tests, questionnaires,
observations, interview, checklists etc. The selection of the tools for collecting the data
primarily depends upon the type of the research and objectives to be achieved.

The objectives were kept in the mind while finalizing the tools for the present
study. The tools employed for this study emerged after an extensive and intensive
search into relevant literature. There were no readymade tools available to observe the
implementation of inclusive education, therefore, the researcher decided to construct
the tools. The researcher used various tools for data collection. The tools were prepared
with maximum appropriateness for the collection of information by keeping the
suggestions of Best (1996), as “the use of particular tools depends upon the type of the
problem, like tools in the carpenter box, each such tool is appropriate in a given
situation and accomplishes a particular purpose”.

The researcher used following tools and techniques for data collection. The
tools were prepared using maximum appropriateness for the collection of information:

● School Information Sheet for Head Teachers

● Questionnaires for Head Teachers

● Interview Schedule for Head Teachers, Teachers, Special Educators Parents

of Children with Special Needs, Children with Special Needs

● Attitude Scale for Head Teachers, Teachers, Special Educators, Parents

● Satisfaction Scale for Head Teachers, Teachers, Special Educators Parents

● Achievement Test for Children with Special Needs

116
Techniques used for the study

● Document Analysis

● Focus Group Discussions

● Semi Structured Interviews

● Questioning

● Observation

The following steps were observed for construction of the tools:

● Collection of large number of questions and statements depicting the present

inclusive program. The negative and positive aspects of inclusive education
from the past research studies and documents were put into consideration.

● Screening of the questions, statements and scaling the statements and

questions into manageable tool.

● Identifying research experts in areas of research, inclusive education and

language for scrutiny of the tools.

● Selecting statements and comments from research experts and incorporating

them in the tools.

● Administering try out for the purpose of testing and analyzing the questions
and statements.

● Determining the reliability and validity of the tools.

● Administering final tools.

The procedures of construction of tools School Information Sheet,

Questionnaires, Interview Schedule, Attitude Scale, Satisfaction Scale and
Achievement Test are presented as follows:

3.1. School Information Sheet

For the development of School information sheet Manuals and Index for
Developing Inclusive Schools developed by National Council of Educational
Research and Training were consulted to obtain elaborate information about

117
inclusive schools. In order to properly plan for the school information sheet
discussions were also held with university professors, professors from colleges of
education, school teachers, and other researchers. The School information sheet was
divided into four parts such as:

● Part-A: General Information about the school: It required general

information, such as Name of the school, location: rural/urban, name of the
village/town, name of the block, district and state/UT.

● Part- B: Information about the Teachers and Students: It sought

information about teachers and students, e.g., number of various categories
of children and teacher-pupil ratio etc.

● Part-C: Infrastructure: It sought information in the form of checklist

about infrastructural facilities, modification and safety measures for
children in schools.

● Part-D: Assistive Devices: It inquired in the form of checklist about

availability of assistive devices and educational materials for different
categories of children with disabilities.

3.1.1 Validation:

Seven experts looked over the draft, which had 65 items. These experts were from
higher education from Panjab University, Guru Nanak Dev University, Lovely
Professional University, as well as research scholars from the Department of
Education at Panjab University in Chandigarh and Punjabi University in Patiala.
Two teachers from special school were also consulted. They were told about the
criteria for judging and asked for their best ideas on each item.

Their criticism, comments, and approval for each item were carefully looked
at, 7 items were changed based on what different experts said. There are 58 items in
the final draft and it is appended as Appendix -I

3.2 Questionnaire

An Open-ended questionnaire was developed to seek information from head

Teachers of schools. Open-ended questionnaire are free-form survey questions that

118
allow respondents to answer in open text format so that they can answer based on
their complete knowledge, feeling, and understanding. On the basis of study of
literature i.e. books and journals, and discussion with experts, head teachers and
teachers, a list of items were prepared for 14 dimensions. This questionnaire was
reviewed internally by five 5 language experts to ensure correctness and ease of
comprehension by the respondents. Depending upon the suggestions received from
the experts, the questionnaire was revised and refined. By observing grammar,
using appropriate and correct words, applying correct and proper order of words in
questions qualitative content validity was established.

● Policy

● Staff Professional Development and Teacher Education

● Resources and Finances

● Beliefs and Concerns

● Infrastructure

● Curriculum

● School Practices

● Participation

● Collaboration and Shared Responsibility

● Supports to Individuals

● Classroom Practices

● Student Achievement

● Post-School Outcomes

● Satisfaction from Stakeholders

Initially, 50 items were framed by the researcher under the fourteen

dimensions stated above. The preliminary draft of 50 items was reviewed by ten
experts, these experts were teachers from various Colleges of Education affiliated
with Panjab University, Guru Nanak Dev University, Lovely Professional
University and the research scholars of Department of Education, Panjab
University, Chandigarh and Punjabi University, Patiala. They were explained the

119
evaluation parameters and were requested to give their valuable suggestions on each
item in terms of its technical and logical accuracy as well as its relevance for the
respective dimension. Their criticism, comments and approval for each item were
thoroughly studied and in light of this, 20 items were rejected from the preliminary
draft of the scale. Moreover modifications were also done in 6 items as suggested
by various experts. Language experts were also consulted to seek their feedback, so
to remove any linguistic ambiguity contained in the items.

Further the draft of 30 questions were obtained after the expert opinion, was
administered on the head teachers, who were not part of the sample to check the
level of complexity and ambiguity of items, if persists. Few items were modified in
terms of language and 5 items were omitted as for these items head teachers were
encountering trouble in understanding. The first draft of 25 items was thus prepared.

3.2.1. Validity of Questionnaire:

● Content Validity: For the present test, a method developed by Lawshe

(1975) was used for determining the content validity of the questionnaire. In
Lawshe method, a rating is given to every question in terms of whether the
knowledge or skills measured by each item is „essential‟, „useful, but not
essential‟, or „not necessary‟ to the performance of what is being measured
(i.e. the construct). The more experts agree to an item as essential the higher
the content validity of that item. Lawshe further developed a formula called
the „Content Validity Ratio‟ that can be calculated for each question. The
average of the CVR across all questions can be taken as a measure of the
overall content validity of the test. The following formula I given by Lawshe
is for calculation of CVR

CVR = (Ne− N/2)/(N/2)

where, Ne = No. of expert rating an item as „essential‟

N = Total no. of experts providing ratings

For the present Questionnaire the value of CVR= 0.8, suggested value of
CVR for 10 raters is 0.62. Thus this questionnaire is valid to apply on the head
teachers for the data collection.

120
3.3 Interview Schedule

An interview schedule or guide is a questionnaire that is designed to guide

interviews, as stated by McMillan and Schumacher (2006). This gives the
researcher a series of preset questions that can be utilized as a suitable tool to
engage the participant and designate the narrative landscape. This gives the
researcher more information to work with. The researcher, keeping in mind the
goals and intentions of the research, drafted a list of interview questions that would
be of assistance in arriving at the conclusions that were meant to be drawn from the
study. The implementation of inclusive education in chosen elementary schools was
the primary focus of the interview's questions and discussion.

In present research, one of the most important strategies was conducting

interviews. The research interview is defined as "a two-person conversation
initiated by the interviewer for the specific purpose of obtaining research-relevant
information and focused by him on content specified by research objectives of
systematic description, prediction, or explanation." The interviewer is the one who
asks the questions during the research interview.

According to Carol (2002), the goal of qualitative interviewing is to gain an

understanding of the meaning-making processes of others. These processes offer
subtly different perspectives on the world based on lived experience that extends into
the past and the future.

Before conducting semi-structured interviews, it is recommended that specific

abilities be developed, according to the available research. According to Mason (2002),
the following competencies are necessary for successfully navigating the social,
intellectual, and practical parts of interviews:

● Taking notes of what people say during interviews, regardless of whether or not
those interviews are being recorded on tape.

121
 ● Remembering what people say and what questions they were asked during a
multi-activity exercise; this enables one to follow up on significant concerns as
soon as they arise.

● Striking a balance between speaking and listening.

● Creating a relationship with the interviewee, expressing interest and attention,

establishing that there is no right or wrong answers, being sensitive to tone of
voice and body language, allowing the interviewee time to respond, and
observing verbal and non-verbal cues about the social situation are all
conducive.

● Encouraging the interviewee to participate by creating a relationship with them,

expressing interest and attention, etc.

● The utilization of checks, props, and prompts as advice for conducting

successful interviews

In order to hone these abilities, the researcher did practice to conduct interviews
and took feedback from supervisor, friends and coworkers. Their input was
tremendously helpful, as did recording interviews on tape and taking notes in order to
remember non-verbal clues that a tape-recording was unable to capture. Both of these
methods were extremely effective. In addition, given that the questions for the
interview had been formulated in English, it was necessary to have them translated into
Punjabi and Hindi which are the local languages in Punjab and Chandigarh
respectively. The researcher validated the content of the Punjabi and Hindi version and
requested that teachers from public schools, assistant professors from degree colleges,
and education college faculty members review the interview questions to ensure that
they are accurate and understandable.

3.3.1 Interview Schedule for the Head Teachers

The initial draft of the interview schedule that was developed for head teachers
contained a total of fifteen different items. The initial draft was distributed to a seven
specialists in the field of education for the purpose of content validation and revision.

122
The validity of the content of the interview schedule was developed by consultation
with renowned scholars who were experts in the field and possessed a wide knowledge
of the subject. The feedback provided by them regarding ambiguity, challenges, and
grammar was taken into consideration, and irrelevant, improper terms, phrases, and
sentences were removed. Before employing the questions in the actual research
interviews, it was decided to carry a tryout in order to determine whether or not the
questions that were going to be asked in the study were straightforward and free of
ambiguity. The tryout was carried out with fifteen head teachers from five schools of
district Hoshiarpur of Punjab and three from schools of Chandigarh, who were not
included in the sample. The tryout was carried out in an unstructured manner to
determine whether the questions that were asked were pertinent, appropriate, and in
accordance with the issue that was being investigated. Also, the point of the try out was
to gather information so that the following questions could be answered:

 Are the questions straightforward to understand?

 Do the questions address the purpose of the research and the goals that it
intends to achieve?

 Does the interview guide have a logical progression of questions to ask?

 How much time do you need to respond to all of the questions?

A tryout was carried out with 18 head teachers in total, who were not included
in the sample, in order to determine any difficulties with the language, clarify any
terminology, and look for any overlapping topics. The items were altered with the help
of the supervisor in response to the comments and suggestions received after the tryout.
The final interview schedule for teachers consists of 9 items.

3.3.1.2 Inter Rater Reliability of Interview Schedule for the Head Teachers

In view of the suggestions of the experts, the items that were accepted by at
least 60% of the experts were retained and others were dropped.

123
Table 3.1.T: Responses of Experts on Items of Interview Schedule for the Head
Teachers
Experts
Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert
Item Total
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
No.
Retained
1. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 100%
Retained
2. 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 6 86%
Retained
3. 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 5 71%
Rejected
4. 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 43%
Retained
5. 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 5 71%
Rejected
6. 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 4 57%
Rejected
7. 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 43%
Retained
8. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 5 71%
Retained
9. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 6 86%
Retained
10. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 6 86%
Rejected
11. 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 4 57%
Retained
12. 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 5 71%
Rejected
13. 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 43%
Rejected
14. 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 3 43%
Retained
15. 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 6 86%

The final draft consists of 9 items, which was prepared by rejecting 6 items, out
of 15 items. The inter rater reliability of the interview schedule is 9/15 X100 = 60%

Table 3.2.T: Items Retained and Rejected as per Experts Opinion on Items of
Interview Schedule for the Head Teachers

Sr. No. Statement Number Total No. of items Remarks

1. 1,2,3,5,8,9,10,12,15 9 Retained

2. 4,6,7,11,13,14 6 Rejected

124
 The final interview schedule for teachers consists of 8 items covering the
following aspects of inclusive education:

● What do you understand by the term inclusive education?

● What kind of orientation / instruction did you receive to ensure right to

education to children with special needs?

● What provisions do you have in your school to help children with special
needs?

● What major initiatives and interventions have been initiated or introduced

since inception of RTE, especially for children with special needs?

● What assessment procedures do you use for evaluation of progress of

children with special needs?

● What activities are conducted by your school for the awareness, education
and socialization of the children with special needs?

● Do you think that regular teachers are adequately trained to meet the needs
of CWSN?

● What are constraints and challenges in the implementation of Inclusive

Education?

● What are your suggestions for proper implementations of inclusive education

so as to meet the requirement of children with special needs?

3.3.2 Interview Schedule for the Teachers

The first draft of the interview schedule that was made for school teachers
contained a total of twelve different items. The initial draft was distributed to seven
specialists in the field of education for the purpose of content validation and
revision. The validity of the content of the interview schedule was developed by
consultation with renowned scholars who were experts in the field and possessed a
wide knowledge of the subject. The feedback provided by them regarding
ambiguity, challenges, and grammar was taken into consideration, and irrelevant,
improper terms, phrases, and sentences were removed. Before employing the
questions in the actual research interviews, it was decided to carry out a tryout in

125
 order to determine whether or not the questions that were going to be asked in the
study were straightforward and free of ambiguity. A tryout was carried out with 25
teachers, who were not included in the sample, in order to determine any difficulties
with the language, clarify any terminology, and look for any overlapping topics.
The items were altered with the help of the supervisor in response to the comments
and suggestions received after the tryout. The final interview schedule for teachers
consists of 9 items.

3.3.2.1 Inter Rater Reliability of Interview Schedule for the Teachers

In view of the suggestions of the experts, the items that were accepted by at
least 60% of the experts were retained and others were dropped.

Table 3.3.T: Responses of Experts on Items of Interview Schedule for the

Teachers

Experts Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert

Total
Item No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Retained
1. 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 5 71%
Rejected
2. 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 4 57%
Retained
3. 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 5 71%
Retained
4. 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 6 86%
Rejected
5. 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 43%
Retained
6. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 100%
Rejected
7. 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 29%
Retained
8. 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 5 71%
Retained
9. 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 6 86%
Retained
10. 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 5 71%
Rejected
11. 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 3 43%
Retained
12. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 5 71%

The final draft consists of 8 items, which was prepared by rejecting 4 items, out
of 12 items. The inter-rater reliability of the interview schedule is 8/12 X100 = 66%.

126
 Table 3.4.T: Items Retained and Rejected as per Experts Opinion on Items of
Interview Schedule for the Teachers

Sr. No. Statement Number Total No. of items Remarks

1. 1,3,4,6,8,9,10,12 8 Retained

2. 2,5,7,11 4 Rejected

The final interview schedule for teachers consists of 8 items covering

following aspects of inclusive education:

● What does inclusion mean to you?

● What are the main barriers in the way of education of children with special
needs?

● What are the enablers of inclusive education?

● What are the difficulties faced by you in teaching children with special
needs? Can you share any specific incident / issue that emerged in your
classroom with respect to CWSN?

● Is the curriculum fit for the inclusion of children with special needs?

● What assessment procedures do you use for evaluation of children with

special needs?

● What is needed in future to include children with special needs in your

school?

● Are there any other comments/suggestion you wish to make regarding

inclusion?

3.3.3 Interview Schedule for the Parents

The first draft of the interview schedule that was produced for the parents
had a total of 14 different items. The initial draft was distributed to seven specialists
in the field of education for the purpose of content validation. The content validity
of the interview schedule was developed in cooperation with renowned scholars
who have the knowledge on the varying aspects of the subject matter. The feedback

127
provided by them regarding ambiguity, challenges, and grammar was taken into
consideration, and irrelevant, improper terms/ phrases, and sentences were removed.
A tryout was carried out with the 30 parents, who were not included in the sample,
in order to determine any difficulties with the language, clarify any terminology,
and look for any overlapping items. The items were altered with the help of the
supervisor in response to the comments and suggestions received after the tryout.
The final interview schedule for teachers consists of 10 items.

3.3.3.1 Inter Rater Reliability of the Interview Schedule for the Parents

In view of the suggestions of the experts, the items that were accepted by at
least 60% of the experts were retained and others were dropped.

Table 3.5.T: Responses of Experts on Items of Interview Schedule for the

Parents

Experts Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert

Total
Item No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Rejected
1. 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 29%
Retained
2. 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 5 71%
Retained
3. 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 6 86%
Retained
4. 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 5 71%
Rejected
5. 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 4 57%
Retained
6. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 100%
Retained
7. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 100%
Retained
8. 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 5 71%
Retained
9. 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 5 71%
Retained
10. 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 6 86%
Rejected
11. 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 43%
Retained
1 0 1 1 1 1 1 6 86%
12.
Rejected
13. 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 3 43%
Retained
14. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 5 71%

128
The final draft consists of 10 items, which was prepared by rejecting 4 items, out of
14 items. The inter rater reliability of the schedule is 10/14 X100 = 72%.

Table 3.6.T: Items Retained and Rejected as per Experts Opinion on Items of
Interview Schedule for the Parents

Sr. No. Statement Number Total No. of items Remarks

1. 2,3,4,6,7,8,9,10,12,14 10 Retained
2. 1,5,11,13 4 Rejected

The final interview schedule for parents consists of 10 items covering the following
aspects of inclusive education:

 Does your child denied enrolment in the school at any stage?

 Do you interact with the teachers in the school? If so, how often? If not why?

 Is your child regular to the school? If no, what are the reasons for being
irregular?

 Do you face difficulties in obtaining any information about your child‟s

performance from the school?

 Is any of you a member of the Parent Teacher Association (PTA)/School

Management Committee (SMC)?

o If so, do you hold any position like president, secretary, treasurer?

o Are your suggestions / inputs accepted by the members?

 Do you get the same rights and respect in the school as parents of non-disabled
students?

 Do you think that teachers are adequately trained to meet the needs of disabled
students?

 Does the school have the policies to meet the needs of students with special
needs?

 Have you witnessed and marked improvement in your child abilities, academic,
behaviour, emotional development, social interaction skills after he/she has
joined the inclusive school?

 In your opinion what things are needed in order to make inclusion to a reality?

129
 3.3.4 Interview Schedule for the Children with Special Needs

The first draft of the interview schedules that were made for the children who
had special needs contained a total of fifteen different questions. The initial draft was
distributed to seven specialists in the field of education for the purpose of content
validation. The content validity of the interview schedule was developed in cooperation
with renowned scholars who have the knowledge on the varying aspects of the subject
matter. The feedback provided by them regarding ambiguity, challenges, and grammar
was taken into consideration, and irrelevant, improper terms/ phrases, and sentences
were removed. A tryout was carried out with the 30 parents, who were not included in
the sample, in order to determine any difficulties with the language, clarify any
terminology, and look for any overlapping items. The items were altered with the help
of the supervisor in response to the comments and suggestions received after the tryout.
The final interview schedule for teachers consists of 10 items.

3.3.4.1 Inter Rater Reliability of Interview Schedule for CWSN

In view of the suggestions of the experts, the items that were accepted by at
least 60% of the experts were retained and others were dropped.

Table 3.7.T: Responses of Experts on Items of Interview Schedule for CWSN

Experts
Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert
Item Total
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
No.
1. 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 Rejected 43%
2. 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 Rejected 43%
3. 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 6 Retained 86%
4. 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 5 Retained 71%
5. 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 4 Rejected 57%
6. 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 4 Rejected 57%
7. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 Retained 100%
8. 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 6 Retained 86%
9. 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 5 Retained 71%
10. 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 Rejected 43%
11. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 5 Retained 71%
12. 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 Rejected 43%
13. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 5 Retained 71%
14. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 6 Retained 86%
15. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 6 Retained 86%

130
 Table 3.8.T: Items Retained and Rejected as per Experts Opinion on Items of
Interview Schedule for CWSN

Sr. No. Statement Number Total No. of items Remarks

1. 3,4,7,8,9,11,13,14,15 9 Retained

2. 1,2,5,6,10,12 6 Rejected

The Final draft consists of 9 items, which was prepared by rejecting 6 items, out
of 15 items. The inter rater reliability of the interview schedule is 9/15 X100 = 60%

The final interview schedule for the Children with Special Needs consists of
9 items covering following aspects of inclusive education:

 How is your relationship with your peers?

 How is the behaviour of your teachers with you?

 What difficulties do you encounter in coming to the school?

 Have you experienced any barriers concerning „physical‟, „architectural‟ and

„examination system‟? If yes, specify

 Do you get individual attention from the teachers?

 Are you encouraged to take part in school activities, sports, games etc.?

 Are you assigned any responsibility by the teachers or the head teacher?

 How often have you been absent from the school and for what reasons?

 What problems do you face in school?

The interview technique was chosen, so that students and staff would be
allowed to convey their thoughts based on their own personal comprehensions in
their own words. In order to acquire information about the inclusive settings from
the point of view of the students as well as all of the participants, interviews were
conducted. This information supplied the researchers with specific data that helped
to expand the understandings of the ideas, attitudes, and thoughts held by the
participants and to conclude the results as per objectives of the study.

131
3.4 Attitude Scale for Inclusive Education

Researcher was unable to find any single standardized scale that could be
used for all the stakeholders to gauge their perspective on inclusive education.
Therefore, the researcher developed her own tool to measure attitude scale to
measure attitude of head teachers, teachers, special educators, parents towards
inclusive education due to the lack of a suitable instrument to measure the attitude
of all the stakeholders towards inclusive education.

3.4.1 Steps of Development Attitude Scale for Inclusive Education

For constructing an attitude scale, the researcher decided to follow Likert‟s

summated ratings method. The following seven steps were put into practice for the
development and standardization of the attitude scale:

 Preparation for Construction of Scale

 Preliminary Draft of the Scale

 Pre-Try Out

 Try Out

 Item Analysis

 Final Draft of Scale

 Norms of the scale

3.4.1.2 Preparation for Construction of Scale

The attitude scale was designed to know the views, opinions, feelings and
beliefs towards inclusive education. For construction of the scale on inclusive
education, literature on inclusion from books, abstracts available on the internet,
Ph.D. thesis were surveyed and scanned. Teachers who were teaching children with
special needs in special schools were consulted and discussion was carried out with
them. After careful exploration and survey of the literature and discussion with
teachers, some statements were collected that were linguistically compiled, some
statements were collected from the experts working in the field of special education;

132
some statements were constructed by investigator, reflecting the attitude towards
inclusive education.

 Target Population

This scale is meant for teachers, parents, head teachers, students without
disabilities etc.

 Type of Test Item

The present inclusive education scale is a five point Likert type scale. Every
item is in the statement form with five response categories, namely: Strongly
Agree (SA), Agree (A), Disagree (D), Strongly Disagree (SD) or Undecided (UD)
for responding. Subject is required to select the most appropriate response.

3.4.1.3 Preliminary Draft of the Scale

After due consultations with teachers and recent literature initially 60

statements for the attitude scale were framed. The statements were scrutinized by
the investigator with the help of the supervisor to eliminate the ambiguity, biasness
and duplication etc. A pool of 60 statements waswere written and edited out of
which 32 were positive and 28 were negative.

3.4.1.4 Pre-Try Out

The preliminary draft was given to twelve experts from universities and
colleges of education, government schools in Punjab and Chandigarh for examining
the scale. These judges were selected from the field of special education and were
dealing with the education of children with special needs (CWSN) in a special or
inclusive setup for their opinion. Their suggestions were seriously studied and
genuine ones were incorporated. Accordingly, out of 60 items, 13 items were
deleted and 14 were modified. So, the second draft consisted of 47 items.

3.4.1.5 Try Out

Before undertaking the work of item analysis, the scale was administered to
a sample of 20 teachers to remove any language difficulties reported by them in
clearly understanding the different items. Ten statements were deleted as those
statements were difficult to understand and respond. So the scale was left with 37
items.

133
3.4.1.6 Item Analysis

The second draft of the inclusive education attitude scale, containing 37

items was administered to 100 teachers. Biserial coefficient of correlation was
calculated for each item with the total scores of the whole test. Results are shown in
the Table 3.9.T

Table 3.9.T: Biserial Coefficient of Correlation of Attitude Scale for

Inclusive Education

Item Coefficient of Item Coefficient of Item Coefficient of Item Coefficient of

No. correlation No. correlation No. correlation No. correlation
1. 0.863 11. 0.856 21. 0.840 31. -0.138*
2. 0.834 12. 0.184* 22. 0.085* 32. 0.749
3. 0.615 13. 0.815 23. 0.810 33. 0.706
4. 0.764 14. 0.743 24. 0.735 34. 0.124*
5. 0.148* 15. 0.751 25. 0.048* 35. 0.738
6. 0.516 16. 0.149* 26. 0.728 36. 0.793
7. 0.753 17. 0.824 27. 0.648 37. 0.818
8. 0.822 18. 0.675 28. 0.036*
9. 0.549 19. 0.756 29. 0.584
10. 0.059* 20. 0.647 30. -0.157*

r = 0.195 at 0.05 level with 98 df

r = 0.254 at 0.01 level with 98 df
Items with a negative coefficient of correlation or an insignificant correlation
were dropped. Total 10 items serial number 5, 10, 12, 16, 22, 25, 28, 30, 31, 34
were dropped.

3.4.1.7 Discriminating Index

To ascertain whether the item differentiates between the high and low group,
t-ratios were worked out item wise. High and low groups were formed by using
Kelly‟s method. The weightage score of each item and for each subject was
summed up. On the basis of total scores, 27% of the top scores formed a high group
and 27% of the bottom scores formed a low group. Their scored response in terms
of weighted score for each item was marked out. Item analysis was carried out by

134
employing the „t‟ test for each of 27 statements for higher and lower groups. Thus
the significance of difference between the means was worked out to find out the
discriminating power of each item, how well each item could distinguish between
individuals having different attitudes. Only those items which showed significant
difference between high and low groups were selected for inclusion in the final
form of the scale. „t‟ values of the 27 statements have been placed in Table 3.6 T

Table 3.10.T:‘t’ Values of the Statements of Attitude Scale for

Inclusive Education

Item No. t -ratio Item No. t -ratio Item No. t -ratio

1. 20.640 10. 15.145 19. 1.74*
2. 20.224 11. 15.264 20. 10.414
3. 11.882 12. 25.560 21. 13.136
4. 17.964 13. 15.143 22. 12.339
5. 11.366 14. 12.838 23. 19.544
6. 15.895 15. 17.912 24. 17.814
7. 17.027 16. 20.308 25. 1.88*
8. 13.516 17. 25.078 26. 21.160
9. 17.982 18. 21.835 27. 20.535
t ratio = 2.01 at 0.05 level with 52 df

t ratio = 2.68 at 0.01 level with 52 df

Items with t ratio value less than 2.61 were dropped; two items with numbers
19, 25 were insignificant. So these two items were dropped.

3.4.1.8 Final Draft of Scale

The final draft consisted of 25 statements. There are 21 positive and 28

negative items. Distribution of items is present in Table 3.11.T

Table 3.11.T: Distribution of Positive and Negative Items of Attitude Scale for
Inclusive Education

Statements Total Number Serial Number

Positive 16 1,2,4,6,7,9,10,11,13,14,16,18,20,22,24,25
Negative 09 3,5,8,12,15,17,19,21,23
Total 25

135
3.4.1.9 Directions for Administration

There is no time limit for the completion of the test. Respondents were asked to
give their true, free and frank opinion and were supposed to put (√ ) before each
statement on one of the five responses viz. Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A),
Disagree (D), Strongly Disagree (SD) or Undecided (UD). No statement should be
left un- attempted

3.4.1.10 Procedure for Scoring

Attitude towards Inclusive Education Scale is self-administering and self-

reporting five point scale. Items of the scale are in statement form requiring
information for each item on any of the five options on a continuum as follows;
Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Disagree (D), Strongly Disagree (SD) or
Undecided (UD). The items are scored in such a manner that if the answer to a
positive items is „Strongly Agree (SA)‟ a score of 5 is given, „Agree‟, a score of 4
is given, for „Undecided‟ option; a score of 3, for „Disagree‟ option; a score of 2,
for „Strongly Disagree (SD)‟ a score of 1 is awarded. On the other hand, in case of
negative items, the above scoring procedure is reversed in the manner that if the
answer to negative items is „Strongly Agree (SA)‟ a score of 1 is given, „Agree‟, a
score of 2 is given, for „Undecided‟ option; a score of 3, for „Disagree‟ option; a
score of 4, for „Strongly Disagree (SD)‟ a score of 5 is awarded.

Table 3.12.T: Distribution of Scores for Positive and Negative Statements of

Attitude Scale for Inclusive Education

Strongly Agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly

(SA) (SA) (UD) (SA) Disagree (DA)
Positive Item 5 4 3 2 1
Negative Item 1 2 3 4 5

The sum of scores on all statements of the scale is considered as the

respondent's total attitude score. The score on the scale can range from 25 to 125.
The higher total score on the scale will reflect a favourable attitude towards

136
Inclusive Education and vice-versa. There is no time limit for giving responses to
all items on the scale.

3.4.1.11 Reliability and Validity of Attitude Scale for Inclusive Education

Reliability: To compute the reliability of scale, the following methods were used:

 Cronbach's Alpha Method: Reliability was determined by Cronbach's

Alpha that comes out to be 0.965 for Cronbach's Alpha.

 Test-Retest Method: To establish test-retest reliability of the scale sample

of 50 males and females teachers was used. A time gap of one month was
placed between testing and retesting stage. The product moment correlation
„r‟ i.e. reliability index, between two testing was 0.94 which is significant at
0.01 level of significance thereby indicating that the scale is fairly reliable to
measure attitude towards inclusive education.

 Split Half Method

Table 3.13.T: Split Half Reliability of Attitude Scale for Inclusive

Education

Method Statements No. of Reliability

Items
Cronbach's Alpha 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 12 0.939
13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25 13 0.928
Spearman-Brown 0.952
Coefficient

3.4.1.12 Validity: To compute the reliability of scale following methods were used:

 Content Validity: Content validity was established by giving the final form
of the scale to ten experts in the field of Special Education. Index of
Suitability (IoS) was worked out. The value of IoS ranged from 0.92 to 1.00
which clearly shows that the content of the scale measures the same traits for
which it was written. Thus, the scale can be said to possess adequate content
validity.

137
  Concurrent Validity: The concurrent validity of Attitude Scale for
Inclusive Education scale was investigated against external criterion of
Teacher Attitude Scale towards Inclusive Education is prepared by Dr.
Vishal Sood and Dr. Arti Anand. Both the scales were administered on a
sample of 50 males and females teachers. The coefficient of correlation was
found between the scores of two scales. The two scales yielded a positive
correlation of 0.475 which is significant at 0.01 level of significance. Hence
concurrent validity of the scale is also established.

3.4.1.11 Norms

Stanine Score Norms: The stanine scores are helpful for to make a
qualitative decision regarding the raw score. When the individual scores are related
to the scores of the entire group for an appropriate comparison, the true value of the
data is revealed, and norm-referenced scores bring this value to the data. Test results
or raw scores on the nine-point scale can be scaled using a stanine (standard nine)
score, which is a quick and accurate method. It is a technique for reducing any test
score to a single digit. For all the following norm tables, the following interpretation
of stanine scores is valid. Stanines one to three indicate a minimal level of the traits'
presence. Stanine numbers four to six indicate a moderate level of the traits'
presence. Stanine seven to nine denote a strong degree of the traits' presence. Norms
were established in terms of Stanine-Scores for the attitude of all the stakeholders
towards inclusive education, specially head teachers, teachers, parents of CWSN,
parents of non CWSN.

Table 3.14.T: Stanine Score Norms of Attitude Scale for

Inclusive Education

Sr. No Stanine Percentile Raw Score Interpretation

Scale
1. 9 P99 121-125 Highly Favourable Attitude
2. 8 P96 115-121
3. 7 P89 106-114 Favourable Attitude
4. 6 P77 99-105
5. 5 P60 91-98 Average Attitude
6. 4 P40 77-90 Unfavourable Attitude
7. 3 P23 54-76
8. 2 P11 46-53
9. 1 P4 25- 46 Highly Unfavourable Attitude

138
3.5 Satisfaction Scale for the Stake Holders

The present scale has been constructed to measure the satisfaction level of head
teachers, teachers, special educators and parents in relation to implementation of
Inclusive Education. For the construction of the scale, literature on inclusive education,
inclusive schools, inclusive learning environment and the best practices in inclusive
education were studied and literature was reviewed. Discussion was also held with
University teachers, educators from the colleges of education, school teachers and
fellow researchers to seek their views to plan appropriately for the satisfaction scale. As
a result of extensive research, researcher found that the following seven indicators are
critical to success in the implementation of inclusive education initiatives. It is helpful
to imagine the seven key indicators that need to be in place to make every school
inclusive school. Each reinforces and is dependent upon the strength of the other. The
characteristics are all equally important because no one factor, in isolation, can bring
about an inclusive school. The seven indicators are as follows:

 Policy, Planning and Leadership

 Philosophy and Attitude
 Training and Professional Development
 Resources (Human and Material) and Finances
 Teaching, Learning, Curriculum and Assessment
 Environment (Physical and Social)
 Collaboration and Community Involvement

3.5.1 Writing of Statements

For framing items for the scale, related literature was studied and statements related
to successful implementation of inclusive education were enlisted. The statements
were framed using following resources.

● Most of the statements were conceived and written by the researcher with
the help of supervisor.
● Some of the statements were taken from previous test and tools.

139
 ● Some statements were formulated in the light of the opinions obtained from
the teachers of the schools, special educators and administrators.
● The researcher also took help from experienced University teachers and
school teachers to write items.

After careful exploration of literature, the statements were scrutinized by the

investigator with the help of the supervisor to eliminate the ambiguity, biasness and
duplication etc. A pool of 70 statements on different dimensions were written and
edited for the first draft of the scale. The number of statements framed in the first
draft of the scale pertaining to each of the seven indicators is as follows:

Table 3.15.T: Distribution of Statements in Indicators of Satisfaction Scale

Sr. No. Indicators No. of

Statements
1. Policy, Planning and Leadership 10
2. Philosophy and Attitude 10
3. Training and Professional Development 10
4. Resources (Human and Material) 10
5. Teaching, Learning, Curriculum and Assessment 10
6. Environment (Physical and Social) 10
7. Collaboration and Community Involvement 10
Total 70

3.5.2 Type of Test Items

Every item is in the statement form and response of every statement will be
either “YES” or “NO” as the researcher want to know whether respondents
are satisfied or not.

3.5.3 Experts’ Opinion on Items of Satisfaction Scale

After selection of the statements, to find out the content validity and suitability
of items with the objectives of scale, a group of experts was selected to rate
the items for its content validity and suitability. The scale was given to the
twenty experts. The experts included Professors, Associate Professors,
Assistant Professors from various Universities and colleges, and experienced
teachers from elementary and special schools. The experts were contacted

140
 personally. After explaining the purpose of the study and the tool, they were
requested to give (+1) if the statement was related to the indicator and (-1) if
the statement was not related to the indicator and (0) in case of uncertainty. In
view of the suggestions of the experts, the statements which were accepted by
at least 60% of the experts were retained and others were dropped. So, the
second draft was prepared. On the basis of this criterion, out of 70 statements,
56 were retained and 14 were rejected according to experts‟ opinion.
3.5.4 Try Out
Before undertaking the work of item analysis, the scale was administered to
a sample of 20 teachers to remove the language difficulty, if any reported by
them in understanding clearly the different statements. Statements were
improved as per their suggestions.
3.5.5 Item Analysis
The second format of the inclusive education attitude scale containing 56
items was administered to 100 teachers. Biserial coefficient of correlation
was calculated for each item with the total scores of the whole test. Results
are shown in the table 3.16.T
Table 3.16.T: Biserial Coefficient of Correlation of Satisfaction Scale
Item Coefficient of Item Coefficient of Item Coefficient of Item Coefficient of
No. Correlation No. Correlation No. Correlation No. Correlation
1 0.568 15 0.536 29 0.627 43 0.714
2 0.519 16 0.264 30 0.734 44 0.643
3 0.651 17 0.153* 31 0.592 45 0.164*
4 0.170* 18 0.084* 32 0.432 46 0.525
5 0.589 19 0.145* 33 0.051* 47 0.648
6 0.613 20 0.088* 34 0.523 48 0.036*
7 0.590 21 0.561 35 0.048* 49 0.665
8 0.087* 22 0.048* 36 0.478 50 0.441
9 0.710 23 0.076* 37 0.032* 51 0.514
10 0.165* 24 0.595 38 0.575 52 0.462
11 0.582 25 0.533 39 0.260 53 0.134*
12 0.698 26 0.686 40 0.743 54 0.517
13 0.548 27 0.532 41 0.651 55 0.742
14 0.015* 28 0.747 42 0.149* 56 0.346
r = 0.195 at 0.05 level with 98 df
r = 0.254 at 0.01 level with 98 df
Items with negative coefficient of correlation and insignificant correlation
were dropped. Total 17 items were dropped.

141
3.5.6 Discriminating Index

To ascertain whether the item differentiate between high and low group, t-
ratios were worked out item wise. High and low groups were formed by using
Kelly‟s method. The weightage score of each item and for each subject was
summed up .On the basis of total scores, 27% top scores formed a high group and
27% bottom scores formed a low group. Their scored response in terms of weighted
score for each item was marked out. Item analysis was carried out by employing
the„t‟ test for each of 39 statements for higher and lower groups. Thus the
significance of difference between the means was worked out to find out the
discriminating power of each item, how well each item could distinguish between
individuals having different attitudes. Only those items which showed significant
difference between high and low groups were selected for inclusion in the final
form of the scale. „t‟ values of the 39 statements have been placed in table 3.17.T

Table 3.17.T: ‘t’ Values of the Statements of Satisfaction Scale

Item No. t -ratio Item No. t -ratio Item No. t -ratio

1 6.265 14 1.63* 27 4.549
2 8.239 15 11.976 28 11.728
3 1.96* 16 1.47* 29 1.32*
4 5.276 17 7.963 30 1.84*
5 18.365 18 1.28* 31 9.539
6 7.350 19 1.26* 32 6.843
7 1.44* 20 8.062 33 1.74*
8 1.78* 21 10.940 34 1.44*
9 7.350 22 1.56* 35 6.150
10 1.21* 23 8.440 36 1.59*
11 9.539 24 9.182 37 1.46*
12 1.23* 25 1.69* 38 10.696
13 8.239 26 1.58* 39 1.55*
t ratio = 2.01 at 0.05 level with 52 df

t ratio = 2.68 at 0.01 level with 52 df

Statements with t ratio value less than 2.01 were dropped; nineteen statements
were insignificant. So these 19 statements were dropped.

142
3.5.7 Final Draft of Satisfaction Scale

The final draft consisted of 20 statements. Distribution of items in seven indicators

is present in table 3.18.T

Table 3.18.T: Final Distribution of Statements in according to Indicators of

Satisfaction Scale

Sr. No. Indicators No. of Statements

1. Policy, Planning and Leadership 4
2. Philosophy and Attitude 1
3. Training and Professional Development 4
4. Resources (Human and Material) 4
5. Teaching, Learning, Curriculum and Assessment 2
6. Environment (Physical and Social) 2
7. Collaboration and Community Involvement 3
20

3.5.8 Directions for Administration

There is no time limit for the completion of the test. Respondents were asked to
give their true, free and frank opinion and were supposed to put (√ ) before each
statement on one of the two responses viz. “Yes” or “No” . No statement should be
left un- attempted

3.5.9 Procedure for Scoring

Satisfaction Scale is self-administering and self-reporting scale. Items of the

scale are in statement form requiring information for each item on any of the two
options “Yes” or “No”. For every “Yes” score of “1”is given and for every “No”
score of “0” is assigned.

3.5.10 Reliability and Validity of Satisfaction Scale

3.5.10.1 Reliability: To compute the reliability of scale following methods were

used:

 Cronbach's Alpha Method: Reliability was determined by Cronbach's

Alpha that comes out to be 0.917 for Cronbach's Alpha.

143
  Test-Retest Method: To establish test-retest reliability of the scale sample
of 70 males and females teachers was used. A time gap of one months was
placed between testing and retesting stage. The product moment correlation
„r‟ i.e. reliability index, between two testing was 0.995 which is significant
at 0.01 level of significance thereby indicating that the scale is fairly reliable
to measure attitude towards inclusive education.

 Split Half Method

Table 3.19.T: Split Half Reliability of Satisfaction Scale

Method Statements No of Items Reliability

Cronbach's Alpha 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10, 10 0.849
11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 10 0.849
Spearman-Brown 0.911
Coefficient

3.5.10.2 Validity: To compute the validity of scale following methods were used:

Content Validity: The statements of the scale are fully adequate and relevant to
measure the attitude towards inclusive education. Content validity was established
by giving the final form of the scale to ten experts in the field of Special Education.
Index of Suitability (IoS) was worked out. The value of IoS ranged from 0.92 to 1
which clearly shows that the content of the scale measures the same traits for which
it was written. Thus, the scale can be said to possess adequate content validity.

3.6 Academic Achievement Test for Children with Special Needs

An achievement test is a test of knowledge or proficiency based on
something learned or taught. The purpose of an achievement test is to determine
student‟s knowledge in a particular subject area. As the investigator could not find
an appropriate standardized achievement test for the selected sample on the selected
pattern, so, it was decided to prepare an achievement test which would be suitable
for the sample of the study.

The academic achievement test was prepared by the investigator to assess

achievement of Children with special needs of elementary schools by following the
guidelines issued by the Punjab School Education Board as per the syllabus and the
pattern of the question papers. The investigator first enlisted all possible areas for

144
getting information about government interventions regarding examination pattern
of CWSN. First of all the official website of Department of School Education was
explored where investigator found the circular regarding Special Exam Related
Facilities for CWSN dated 08/02/2019 in which detailed information regarding the
pattern of question paper and study material link was specified. The investigator
thoroughly went through the study material, questions bank and solved question
papers. After that the researcher took inputs from teachers dealing with the
education of elementary school students studying in government, private and special
schools. To measure the academic achievement of the students‟ two subjects were
chosen- Mathematics and English and content from III- V classes was chosen.

3.6.1 Planning of the Test

In this preliminary stage, when investigator considered in detail what exactly with
an achievement test is to be measured, what are the manifestations of achievement
test and which circumstantial factors could influence the results of the
measurement. It is especially important to define clearly the purpose of the test
because that increases the possibility for achieving high validity. The investigator is
also supposed to make a decision about the test format, which would be most
appropriate for the desired purpose. For that blueprint was prepared.

For the preparation of Achievement Test the following points are also
important

 Objectives of the Test: In the present study, for the purpose of constructing
Achievement Test, objectives were to check the achievement of CWSN studying
in elementary schools of Punjab and Chandigarh.
 Content of the Test: At this stage, the investigator has to determine what content
is to be tested. In the present paper, the test covered the content from the subject
of Mathematics and English.
 Preparation of the Blue-print: Preparation of the blue print helped the investigator
to have an objective based Achievement Test giving due weightage to objectives,
content area and forms of questions. To decide the weightage to be given to different
content areas, objectives and different forms of questions, experts‟ opinions of the
teachers were taken into consideration. The researcher prepared 50 items which were
more than the numbers of items required in the final draft.

145
 Table 3.20.T: Blue Print of Initial Draft of Academic Achievement Test for CWSN

Form of Short Total

Objective Type Test Items
Questions Answers Number
Multiple Circle Fill in True Matching Type of
Choice the Odd the and Types Questions
One Blanks False
Mathematics 10 5 8 ---- ---- 2 25
English 4 4 4 6 4 3 25

3.6.2 Preparation of Test Items

After preparation of blue print, the investigator started preparing test items for
achievement test according to the pattern specified for CWSN. Investigator prepared a
preliminary draft of achievement test comprising of 50 questions for each subject based
on the text-book prescribed by school education board in Punjab and Chandigarh. The
test items included objective type questions (multiple choice, circle the odd one, fill in the
blanks, true/false, matching type) and short answer type. The achievement tests were
subjected to two types of evaluation for standardization i.e. self-evaluation and expert
appraisal. In the self-evaluation, the content portion of the academic achievement tool
was checked about its relevancy to the study. In the expert appraisal, these items were
examined by school teachers and experts whose comments about the content, structure
and language of the items were taken into account and changes were made accordingly.
In this way, the first draft of test was developed.

3.6.3 Experts’ Opinion on Items of Academic Achievement Test of CWSN

After selection of the items, to find out the content validity and suitability of items
with the objectives of achievement test, a group of experts was selected to rate the items
for its content validity and suitability. The achievement test was given to the twelve
experts. The experts included Professors and Assistant Professors and experienced
teachers from Elementary schools. These experts were selected because of their vast
experience. The experts were contacted personally. After explaining the purpose of the
study and the tool, they were requested to give (+1) if the items were relevant and (-1) if
the items were not relevant and (0) in case of uncertainty. In view of the suggestions of
the experts, the items which were accepted by at least 60% of the experts were retained
and others were dropped. So, the second draft was prepared. On the basis of this criterion,
out of 50 items, 28 items were retained and 22 items were rejected.

146
 Table 3.21.T: Responses of Experts on Items of Achievement Test for
Children with Special Needs
Experts Ex Ex Ex Ex Ex Ex Ex Ex Ex Ex Ex Ex
Total
Item No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 8 Retained
2. 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 8 Retained
3. 1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 -1 0 1 0 0 5 Rejected
4. 0 0 0 1 -1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 3 Rejected
5. 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 5 Rejected
6. 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 7 Retained
7. 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 9 Retained
8. 1 0 -1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 Rejected
9. 1 0 -1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 Rejected
10. 1 1 1 -1 0 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 0 4 Rejected
11. 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 6 Rejected
12. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 9 Retained
13. 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 6 Rejected
14. 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 6 Rejected
15. 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 7 Retained
16. 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 7 Retained
17. 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 9 Retained
18. 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 6 Rejected
19. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 10 Retained
20 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 7 Retained
21. 1 0 1 1 1 -1 0 0 1 -1 1 1 5 Rejected
22 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 8 Retained
23. 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 9 Retained
24. 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Retained
25. 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 6 Rejected
26. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 10 Retained
27. 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 10 Retained
28. 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 5 Rejected
29. 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 Rejected
30. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 9 Retained
31. 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 8 Retained
32. 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 9 Retained
33. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 Rejected
34. 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 8 Retained
35. 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 10 Retained
36. 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 5 Rejected
37. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 9 Retained
38. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 10 Retained
39. 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 6 Rejected
40. 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 9 Retained
41. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 10 Retained
42. 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 6 Rejected
43. 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 Rejected
44. 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Retained
45. 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 9 Retained
46. 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 6 Rejected
47. 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 10 Retained
48. 1 0 1 1 1 -1 0 0 1 -1 1 1 5 Rejected
49. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 9 Retained
50. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 Rejected

147
 Table 3.22.T: Items Retained and Rejected as per Experts Opinion on
Academic Achievement Test for Children with Special Needs (CWSN)

Sr. Total No.

Statement Number Remarks
No. of items
1,2,6,7,12,15,16,17,19,20,22,23,24,26,27,30,31,32,34,
1 28 Retained
35,37,38,40,41,44,45,47,49,
3,4,5,8,9,10,11,13,14,18,21,25,28,29,33,36,39,42,43,
2 22 Rejected
46, 48,50

Table 3.23.T: Distribution of Items in the Final Draft of Academic

Achievement Test for CWSN

Objective Type Test Items Short Total

Form of Multiple Circle the Fill in True Matching Answers Number
Questions Choice Odd One the and Types Type of
Blanks False Questions
Mathematics 7 2 4 - - 1 14
English 2 2 2 3 4 1 14
Total 9 4 6 3 4 2 28

Table 3.24.T: Final Blue Print of Academic Achievement Test for CWSN

Total No. of Marks/Questions Total Time/Questions Duration

Subject Questions Marks
Objective Short Objective Short Objective Short
Type Answers Type Answers Type Answers 10 min
Type (2 marks) Type (2 min) Type extra
(4 marks) (4 min)
Mathemat 13 1 26 04 30 26 min 4 min 40 min
ics
English 13 1 26 04 30 26 min 4 min 40 in

3.6.4 Reliability

In the present evaluation, test- retest method of reliability was used. In this
type of reliability the purpose is to find how far the ranks of examinees are stable.
For this, the achievement test was administered to 30 students from IV class of two

148
special schools of Hoshiarpur. The academic achievement tests were administered
to the same group of students after fifteen days. Then, co- efficient of reliability
came out to be 0.79, which was significant at 0.01 level of significance. Thus the
test was considered reliable enough for assessing the academic achievement of
students.

3.6.5 Validity

Content validity of the achievement tests were established by giving

achievement tests to ten experts in the field of special education and elementary
school education. The proposed suggestions were incorporated to the tool, which
made the test valid for the present study.

3.6.6 Usability

When the tool was administered for working out its reliability on thirty
students twice, it was observed that the subjects (CWSN) were not facing any
difficulty in understanding the items. So, the academic achievement tests were
found to be reliable, valid and usable.

3.7 Observations

Observation, as the name suggests, is a way of collecting data through

observing. Observation is a method of data collection that involves watching
behavior, events, or noting physical characteristics of things while they are in their
natural environment. This approach to gathering information is known as a
participatory study because it requires the researcher to fully immerse herself in the
environment in which the respondents are being surveyed while simultaneously
taking notes and/or making recordings. Observation as a method of data collection
can involve activities such as watching, listening to, reading, or touching
phenomena, as well as recording their behavior and characteristics.

There are two distinct ways that observation is used as a research method:
structured and unstructured observation (Pretzlik 1994). Structured observation is a
method of observation that consists of a set of rules that are followed in order to
observe, classify, and make notes on both physical and verbal behavior. In
structured observation, observation schedules are predetermined using taxonomies

149
developed from known theory, and data collection is carried out utilizing particular
variables and in accordance with a schedule that has been predefined. It is a
qualitative research methodology in which an event or series of events are observed
and recorded by an independent researcher while taking place in their natural
setting. The observations are organized such that the process of recording them is
directed by pre-determined categories that have been determined beforehand. The
collection of quantitative data, rather than qualitative information, is the primary
focus of structured observation. The researcher's direct observation of the situation
of interest is the primary strength of the research. This is due to the fact that direct
observation eliminates the discrepancy that is common in surveys between what
people report they do and what they actually do. Researchers who take this
approach are generally only interested in a limited group of behaviors. Therefore,
rather than keeping a record of everything that takes place, the researcher will only
concentrate on very specific behaviors that are of interest to them.

On the other hand, unstructured observation is carried out in a manner that is

open and unrestricted. This means that there are no pre-determined variables or
goals involved in the process. It is used to understand and interpret the behaviors
that are associated with a particular culture. It is grounded in the constructivist
paradigm, which recognizes the significance of context and the mutual contribution
of researcher and 'researched' to the co-construction of knowledge.

In qualitative research, unstructured observation is used far less frequently

than in anthropological and sociological studies, despite the fact that it is an
essential method in both of those fields. The first thing that needs to be brought up
is the fact that the term "unstructured" can be deceiving. Within the framework of
the naturalistic paradigm, observation is not unstructured in the sense that it lacks a
systematic approach or is haphazard. However, it does not follow the approach of
rigidly checking a list of predefined behaviors like structured observation would do.
Instead, it uses a different methodology. Observers who use unstructured methods,
on the other hand, typically enter "the field" without having any preconceived
notions as to the discrete behaviors that they may observe. They might have some
concepts in their heads about what to look for, but as they gather more information
and gain more experience in the specific environment, those concepts might shift. In

150
addition, when conducting unstructured observation, the researcher may take on a
variety of roles, ranging from full participant to full observer, whereas when
conducting structured observation, the goal is always to'stand apart' from the
phenomenon that is the subject of the observation.

"Structured observers" are attempting to maintain their objectivity and not

contaminate the data with their own preconceptions, whereas "unstructured
observers," who carry with them the tenets of the naturalistic paradigm, would
argue that it is impossible to separate the researcher from the
"researched". "Structured observers" are attempting to maintain their objectivity
and not contaminate the data with their own preconceptions. According to
Silverman (1993), who makes an interesting observation, "Unfortunately, we have
all become a little reluctant to use our eyes as well as our ears during observational
work." The manner in which individuals navigate, interact with one another, and
make use of space plays a significant role in the construction of specific social
settings. When it comes to gathering information on such topics, observation is the
most effective method. It is common practice to use observational methods for the
primary purpose of determining whether or not what individuals claim they do
corresponds to what they actually do. However, there are additional reasons to use
unstructured observation, such as the following:

 provides insight into interactions between entities and groups;

 illustrates the whole picture;
 captures context/process;
 informs about the influence of the physical environment.

Observation must be used for evaluation when:

 When you need to grasp how something is currently operating. One way to
evaluate a process or situation in real time is to observe it as it unfolds.

 When collecting information on the behaviors of individuals or the

interactions between different people. Observation gives the opportunities to
either directly watch the actions and interactions of other people or to watch
for the outcomes of those actions and interactions.

151
  When it is necessary to have information about a specific location.
Observing the setting in which an activity, event, or situation takes place can
help one gain a deeper comprehension of the subject being evaluated (be it
an activity, a situation, or an event).

 In situations where obtaining data directly from individuals is not a feasible

option. Observation is a method that requires little participation from the
individuals whose data is required, making it useful in the event that
respondents are unable or unwilling to provide data through the use of
questionnaires or interviews.

According to Leedy and Omrod (2005), the observations in a qualitative

study are designed to be purposefully unstructured and free flowing. This gives the
researcher the ability to be flexible and shift his or her focus from one thing to
another as new events or significant objects become apparent in the setting. In the
present study unstructured observation was done planned with special focus on:

 Infrastructural Facilities with special focus on resource rooms, ramps,

drinking facilities, disable friendly toilets.

 Availability and Usability of Assistive Devices.

 Relationship of the Stake holders (head teacher, teacher, special educators,

parents of CWSN) – how they behave, interact, with each other and CWSN

 School and the class room activities.

 Participation of CWSN in school and class room.

 Teaching Methodologies used by General Teachers and Special Educators.

 Environment (physical, social, psychological) provided to CWSN in school.

 Support provided to CWSN.

3.8 Documentary Analysis

Documents were used to enhance the progress of the study and to give in-depth
understanding of the relevant phenomena. Documents served as the foundation for the
theoretical analysis that made it possible to conceptualize the subject matter and collect

152
more explicit and granular data. According to Yin (1994), documentation is a crucial
data collection technique that can be utilized to support and supplement evidence from
other sources. She cautions that documentation may be selectively or politically biased
in its reporting, but she also points out some of its advantages, like its broad coverage,
accuracy, and lack of intrusion. As a result, documentation typically serves as a reliable
source for data collecting. Historical papers and materials pertaining to national policy
were both a part of investigation. The initial study of the data in the documents was
based on the previous and present special education laws in India. These are open-
access documents that can be obtained from the Ministry of Education's and its
connected departments' official websites. These records were chosen because they are
the primary government records that offer details on the administration of inclusive
education and practice.

3.8.1 Procedure of Document Analysis

Researcher analyzed the documents with the set of objectives in mind like the
nature of inclusive education and the progress of SSA programme in Punjab, which
needed the historical perspectives of inclusive education and many documents were
used to analyze the progress of inclusive education. To analyse the implementation of
inclusive education programme based on SSA/RTE also needed the support of analyses
of documents.

The document analysis in the present study carried out through three phases. They are:

3.8.1.1 Identification and assorting of relevant documents

A lot of documents are available regarding with the planning and implementation
of inclusive education programme. The documents are stacked with Govt. offices,
education offices, education agencies, DIETs, schools and the like. Research was
oriented to identify and assort relevant documents that might be useful for the
present study. Researcher decided to collect documents from, official websites on
education of Govt. of India and Govt. of Punjab. The documents from the areas
like census details, statistical profile of disabled persons in India (2016), The
Rights of persons with disabilities Act, 2016 were collected.

153
3.8.1.2 Collection of Documents

The researcher first collected official documents, copies of Government orders

and materials, published books and articles related to inclusive education,
materials depicting the historical development of inclusive education through
various stages from segregation and all about the inclusive education. The
researcher collected 2011 India census data of disabled persons for different
categories. Utmost care was given to collect the documents based on inclusive
education and its development. The researcher visited special schools, attended
resource teachers meetings and many seminars and workshops to collect
information regarding inclusive education and SSA/RTE.

3.8.1.3 Document Categorization

The collected documents were categorized as official and non-official

documents. Official statistics of the Govt. of India and Govt. of Punjab were also
collected to mark the present status of inclusive education. The official
documents by Govt. of India and Govt. of Punjab were primary sources of this
study. Handbooks, draft papers, articles from newspapers and magazines etc.
were treated as secondary sources. The researcher collected pamphlets, news
papers and magazines to collect the information related to inclusive education.

3.9 Focussed Group Discussions

The purpose of the focus group discussions was to collect information from a group
of people regarding a particular subject or issue. The use of focus groups is widely
recognized as a practical method for investigating people's perspectives on
contentious but non-sensitive issues. They have the ability to generate contributions
from interviewers who might otherwise be unwilling to contribute, and via their
somewhat casual interchanges, they have the ability to uncover insights that might
otherwise not have come to light through the one-on-one conventional interviews.
McMillan and Schumacher (2006) consider the focus group discussion to be a
method for gaining a better knowledge of a problem or for assessing a problem,
respectively. The goal of this type of discussion, which may be done for a new

154
product or idea, is to get feedback from a group of people who were chosen on
purpose, rather than from each person individually.

The methodology of focus groups is a way of collecting qualitative data that

essentially involves engaging a small number of people in an informal group
discussion (or discussions) centered „around a particular topic or set of issues.‟
Focus groups can be conducted in a variety of settings, including in-person, over the
phone, or online. The method of focus group research was chosen because it enables
the collection of data from a significant number of research participants in a
relatively short amount of time. The interaction that takes place within a focus
group gives respondents the opportunity to react to and build upon the replies of
other group members, producing what is known as a „synergistic effect.‟

Within the scope of this investigation, head teachers, general teachers, special
educators and parents of CWSN were asked to participate, and their subsequent
group discussion was recorded, transcribed, and then subjected to the standard
procedures for qualitative data analysis. The researcher carried out seven
discussions with focus groups, which included a 6-8 participants. One set of Focus
Group Discussion was carried between General Teachers, Special Educators,
Parents of CWSN to identify the major barriers in the implementation of Inclusive
Education program and one set was carried between Head Teachers and Special
Educators to identify best practices of inclusive education in elementary schools of
Punjab and Chandigarh.

155