Cogent Education

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/oaed20

Variables affecting the attitudes of teachers’

towards inclusive education in Kosovo

Donika Koliqi & Naser Zabeli

To cite this article: Donika Koliqi & Naser Zabeli (2022) Variables affecting the attitudes
of teachers’ towards inclusive education in Kosovo, Cogent Education, 9:1, 2143629, DOI:
10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access

article is distributed under a Creative
Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.

Published online: 11 Nov 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 862

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oaed20
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

INTERNATIONAL & COMPARATIVE EDUCATION | RESEARCH ARTICLE

Variables affecting the attitudes of teachers’
towards inclusive education in Kosovo
Donika Koliqi1 and Naser Zabeli1*

Received: 04 August 2022

Abstract: Inclusive education is a priority and a challenge for education systems.
Accepted: 31 October 2022 The success of the inclusive practices’ implementation depends on the attitudes of
*Corresponding author: Naser Zabeli, teachers’ towards inclusive education. This research reflects the current state of
Faculty of Education, University of pre-university teachers’ attitudes towards the inclusion in Kosovo, as well as it
Prishtina, Kosovo
E-mail: [email protected] examines the relationship between teachers’ attitudes and selected background
Reviewing editor:
variables and self-efficacy. The research conducted a quantitative design and
Anatoly Oleksiyenko, The Education included 499 teachers from 40 schools in Kosovo. The instruments that were used
University of Hong Kong, Faculty of
Education and Human to collect the data are Teachers’ Attitudes towards Inclusion Scale (TAIS) and
Development, Hong Kong
Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices (TEIP). Data were analyzed using descriptive
Additional information is available at statistics and inferential statistical tests. Results show positive attitudes of teachers’
the end of the article
towards inclusive education. Secondary level teachers have more positive attitudes
towards inclusion than those from primary ones. Correlation results found
a negative relationship between teachers’ and educational qualification and
experience of teachers with students with special needs. The factors that predict
teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion are self-efficacy for inclusive practices, pro­
fessional qualification and work experience with children with special needs. The

ABOUT THE AUTHORS PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

Donika Koliqi is a PhD candidate in Education One of the trends of contemporary education in
Sciences, at the Faculty of Education, University the last three decades is inclusive education,
of Prishtina “Hasan Prishtina”, Kosovo. She is an respectively, the inclusion of children with special
assistant professor in the subject of inclusive needs in schools. Different studies have con­
education in all programs of Faculty of cluded that the successful implementation of
Education in Prishtina. Her research interest inclusive practices depends on the attitudes of
focuses on Inclusive Education and Teaching teachers, as well as the factors that influence
and Learning Theory. She has a doctoral thesis their attitudes. However, no research has been
focused on the field of inclusive education and carried out in Kosovo that identifies the factors
has also published scientific papers in the same which can have an effect on teachers’ attitudes
field. towards inclusiveness. Consequently, this study
Naser Zabeli is Professor in Inclusive aimed to identify teachers’ attitudes and the
Education and Effective Teaching and Learning factors that predicted them. Teachers have posi­
in the Department of Pedagogy at the tive attitudes towards inclusive education, and
Department of Pedagogy at the Faculty of three variables have been identified that can
Education, University of Prishtina in Kosovo. His predict their attitudes, including educational
research interests are in inclusive education and qualification, self-efficacy, and experience with
contemporary teaching. children with special needs. Based on these
empirical results, representatives at the central
and local level should focus educational policies
on restructuring the teacher study programs, on
the organization of inclusive training and appro­
priate support, so that teachers possess the
knowledge and skills to implement good inclusive
practices.

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons
Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.

Page 1 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

findings highlight the need to develop teaching skills and provide systematic sup­
port for teachers, while placing them as a priority in education agendas to ensure
the success of inclusion.

Subjects: Education Studies; Inclusion and Special Educational Needs; International &
Comparative Education

Keywords: inclusive education; teachers’ attitudes; background variables; self-efficacity

1. Introduction
An issue which has followed the educational system historically is the fact that children with
special needs have been denied the basic right to education in regular public institutions, as their
families take care of them or they are sent in special schools. Although education is considered an
important fundamental right for all people without exception (Mezquita-Hoyos et al., 2018),
however when it comes to children with special educational needs, society has consistently
focused on their disabilities rather than on their potential (UNESCO, 1994). Inclusive education is
an educational philosophy that has managed to change the education organization of children
with special needs while integrating them in regular schools (Van Mieghem et al., 2018). According
to Opertti et al. (2014), “entails the openness, willingness and competencies to understand,
embrace, and support the diversity of learners’ profiles, circumstances, needs, styles, and expecta­
tions as a powerful source for democratizing and enhancing learning opportunities, processes, and
outcomes” (149). This shift as a global movement for three decades (Amor et al., 2018), has been
developed internationally based on four core ideas: (i) Under the influence of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations Headquarters, 2006) education is considered as
a fundamental right of every human being; (ii) The Salamanca Declaration and Framework for
Action UNESCO (1994) promoted and supported the education of children with special needs in
regular schools; (iii) The World Education Forum in Dakar (UNESCO, 2000), education focused on all
marginalized groups; (iv) Currently, inclusion has managed to be set as a priority agenda in the
reform of education systems, claiming to provide conditions for ensuring quality education for all
children (Opertti et al., 2014). Moreover, the European Union recommends and promotes as a
common value the education of all children from an early age, providing them with equal
opportunities for active participation in society, which increases “understanding of the European
identity” (Official Journal of the European Union, 2018, p. 5). All these documents have affected
the development of the inclusion process. Therefore, it is expected that all education systems
should be reformed ensuring access, participation and achievement of all students (Ainscow &
Sandill, 2010).

Inclusion has been claimed as a program which helps regular schools decide, accept and adapt
to children’s diversity (Rapp & Corral-Granados, 2021). According to UNESCO (2015) it still remains
a challenge of education systems and it is undeniable that they are still far from achieving
inclusion. Although in many countries education policies have been reformed regarding inclusion,
there are still schools that cannot guarantee the inclusion of all children with special needs in
regular classes (Peters et al., 2005), pra ende ballafaqohen me vështirësi të ndryshme (Mónico
et al., 2018). The inclusive environment can improve or obstruct the learning process of the child
with special needs, therefore this environment must offer a sense of security, belonging, pride as
well as favorable conditions for learning (Bucholz & Sheffler, 2009). Creating such a learning
environment is a complex process that includes the development of policies which ensure inclu­
siveness, awareness and inclusive attitudes, cooperation between key factors, human and financial
resources, appropriate infrastructure, as well as professional development of staff (Shevlin et al.,
2009). Molina Roldán and others (2021) have added that from these environments the children
benefit, such as the formation of attitudes, cognitive and social development.

Page 2 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

The most important dimension for the development of inclusive schools are the attitudes of
factors in educational settings and their approach to diversity (Ainscow & Sandill, 2010). Attitudes
include the beliefs, views, feelings of the individual towards a person, object, phenomenon, etc.
(Alkhateeb et al., 2015), and consist of three components: cognitive, affective and conative
(Majoko, 2017). The affective component represents the emotional aspect, respectively positive,
negative or neutral feelings towards an object. The conative component includes the action
towards an object, and the cognitive component includes the evaluation of an object based on
beliefs and convictions about it (Judd et al., 1991). The teachers’ role in the implementation of
inclusive education has been assessed as the most important aspect, with the probability that if
they are negative they can be an obstacle to successfully achieve being part of such a school.
Cultivating positive teacher attitudes (Urton et al., 2014), while overcoming “negative” attitudes,
and raising teacher awareness remain one of the essential requirements for achieving full inclu­
sion (UNESCO, 2009).

Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education have been researched over the years (Avramidis
& Norwich, 2002; Barnes & Gaines, 2017; Czyż, 2018; Dorji et al., 2019; Gyimah et al., 2009;
Saloviita, 2018). According to the findings, teachers’ attitudes can be positive (Avramidis &
Norwich, 2002; Barnes & Gaines, 2017), neutral (Czyż, 2018; Ross-Hill, 2009) and negative
(Mukhopadhyay, 2014). Being so, they depend on numerous indicators (Avramidis & Norwich,
2002). Based on research, Avramidis and Norwich (2002) have identified three main groups of
factors that can influence teachers’ attitudes: factors related to the teacher himself; child-related
factors and also environmental factors. Current research focuses on factors that are related to
teachers: gender, age, educational qualification, teaching experience, teaching experience with
a student with special needs, and previous training on inclusive education.

Factors that affect teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education are demographic ones
(Majoko, 2017; Parasuram, 2006). The research results of Butakor et al. (2018) have shown that
older teachers have more negative attitudes towards inclusive education, compared to those who
are younger. According to research female teachers have more positive attitudes towards inclusive
education than male teachers (Boyle et al., 2013; Butakor et al., 2018; Gyimah et al., 2009;
Tsakiridou & Polyzopoulou, 2014). Teacher training programs have been assessed as an important
indicator of teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education. Research has shown that teachers
with a master’s degree have more positive attitudes than those with a bachelor’s degree
(Tsakiridou & Polyzopoulou, 2014), but there is research which concluded that teachers with
a bachelor’s degree were more positive towards this specific group of children than those with
a master’s degree (Dorji et al., 2019). The results of research conducted with teachers from
Chhabra et al. (2010), and Majoko (2017) show that teachers who have attended training on
inclusive education have more positive attitudes as they are also more emotionally attached to
children with special needs. The research of Tsakiridou and Polyzopoulou (2014) found that
secondary school teachers were more negative in terms of attitudes towards inclusive education,
compared to preschool and primary school teachers. Previous studies also show that it should be
considered longer contact of teachers with children known to be with special needs and the
opportunity of working with children with special needs because these aspects make them more
experienced inferring them to be more positive towards inclusive education (Boyle et al., 2013;
Dorji et al., 2019; Parasuram, 2006). Referring to teachers’ confidence in their abilities according to
Sharma et al. (2012) is of great importance for the success of inclusion. In the research of Weisel
and Dror (2006) self-efficacy was the key factor influencing teachers’ attitudes. Similarly, in the
research of Savolainen et al. (2012), it has been found a positive correlation between the highest
level of self-efficacy and their attitudes towards inclusive education, while there has been detected
a weak correlation between them in the research of Saloviita (2018).

Teachers’ positive attitude towards inclusion influences the acceptance, adaptation and the
change of teaching approach according to the needs and interests of each child in the classroom
(Weisel & Dror, 2006). Therefore, attitudes studies can provide policymakers with information on

Page 3 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

the factors that implicate teachers’ attitudes, concerns, and needs, taking inclusive practices to the
next level.

1.1. Inclusive education in Kosovo

Special education in Kosovo started in 1950, organized in four special schools at the pre-university
level, with a small number of students with special needs (Ministry of Education, Science and
Technology,,2010). Later in 1991, there were four special schools and four attached classes part of
the main schools, with 400 students with special needs and 60 employees (Aliu et al., 2003). By
1999, the education system in Kosovo was facing difficulties including special education (Ministry
of Education, Science and Technology, 2010). After 1999, the education system was reformed,
including the education of children with special needs, from segregated to inclusive. Extensive
support was provided by international agencies including UNICEF, Save the Children and the
Finnish Support for the Development of Special Education in Kosovo (FSDEK), which assisted in
drafting documents, provided training, introduced comprehensive good practices and provided
didactic materials (Behluli & Zabeli, 2014). The main documents that ensure the right to inclusive
education are based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations Headquarters,
2006) and the Salamanca Declaration (UNESCO, 1994) as noted further, they are as follows: Law
no. 04/L-032 on pre-university education of the Republic of Kosovo that promotes inclusion in
education regardless of differences (Official Gazette of the Republic of Kosova, 2011); Kosovo
Curriculum Framework (revised), (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, 2016); Strategic
Plan for the organization of inclusive education of children with special educational needs in pre-
university education in Kosovo 2010–2015 (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, 2010);
Strategic Plan for Education of Kosovo 2011–2016 (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology,
2011); Strategic Education Plan in Kosovo 2017–2021 (Ministry of Education, Science and
Technology, 2011); The Individual Education Plan (IEP) (Ministry of Education, Science and
Technology, 2017); National Strategy for the Rights of People with Disabilities in the Republic of
Kosovo 2013–2023 (Official Gazette of the Republic of Kosova, 2013). As a whole, it is crucial
mentioning that all of these documents are based on democratic values and ensure equality,
access, inclusion and quality in education.

As an educational philosophy, inclusion is relatively new in Kosovo that aims “to include all
children regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, disability or any other difference in the nearest
regular school” (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, 2014, p. 4). There are several
ways to realize the education of children with special educational needs in pre-university educa­
tion: in resource centers, special schools, in attached classes, in resource rooms and in regular
classrooms within public schools (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, 2015). There have
been findings that the number of children with special needs attending education in resource
centers and special schools is 349, while in regular schools 3903 (Ministry of Education, Science
and Technology, 2020).

The Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST, 2017) has worked for the realization of
inclusive education by establishing laws and educational policies, however the education system in
Kosovo has still got many difficulties in completing the concept of inclusion in educational institu­
tions (Save the Children, 2017). One of the challenges is the mindset of understanding the concept
of “child disability” from a medical perspective, and not from a social or field perspective (UNICEF,
2017). Generally, in Kosovo, the level of awareness and implementation of inclusive education is
low (Zabeli et al., 2021). Inclusive culture in educational institutions continues to be prejudicial,
which in fact affects expectations, process, quality and achievements. In this context, low aware­
ness and attitudes towards inclusion, especially of teachers, have slowed down the process of
achieving inclusion in practice. One of the main barriers faced by the inclusive process in Kosovo is
the attitudes of teachers.

Inclusion as a current and challenging topic for the pre-university education system in Kosovo
has been little studied. One of the researches at the national level is the qualitative one of Zabeli

Page 4 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

et al. (2021), regarding the perceptions based on the experience of teachers. The research found
that teachers have general knowledge about inclusion but not specific information according to
special needs; have the belief that inclusion has a positive effect on children with special needs
from a social point of view, but not on a cognitive one. The other qualitative research is the one of
Zabeli and Gjelaj (2020) with 10 preschool educators, eight of whom showed positive attitudes
towards inclusion and a positive impact on the overall development of the child with special needs,
while two of them were skeptical about academic achievement. No quantitative studies have been
undertaken to provide a more comprehensive picture of attitudes towards inclusive education.
Meanwhile, no national study has identified the factors that may shape their attitudes.

This scientific paper aims to explore the Kosovar context in relation to inclusive education. The
two main goals of the current study are identifying the attitudes of teachers and exploring the
factors that influence their formation, providing data on overcoming rejection attitudes and
achieving a successful inclusion in the Kosovo education system.

1.2. The aim of the study

The aims of this study were to examine (a) General teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive educa­
tion; (b) Association between teachers’ selected background variables and attitudes toward inclu­
sive education; (c) Relationship between self-efficacy and teachers’ attitudes about inclusive
education. The study addresses a current topic and the focus of numerous and important research
regarding the development of the pre-university education system, according to the contemporary
concept of inclusive education. Research on inclusive education in Kosovo is minimal, especially on
teachers’ attitudes and the factors that influence their formation. The findings of the current
research provide opportunities to generate more detailed information on teachers’ attitudes,
identify difficulties and address their needs, developing the process of inclusive practices. The
key research questions were:

(1) What are teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education in Kosovo?

(2) Is there a relationship between teachers’ selected background variables and attitudes
towards inclusive education?
(3) Is there a relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and attitudes towards inclusive
education?

2. Method

2.1. Research design

The research conducted a quantitative design, through a survey questionnaire. This design is used
in case the research problem is the identification of factors that affect a certain result and
measured by survey wich “provides a quantitative or numeric description of trends, attitudes, or
opinions of a population by studying a sample of that population” (Creswell, 1994, p. 17).

2.2. Participants
Participants in the study were 738 in-service teachers. Teachers were from grade levels 1 to 12,
from public schools in Kosovo. Total 40 schools from six regional districts were selected randomly.
The number of teachers was 738, and 499 of them responded to the questionnaires (see Table 1).

2.3. Data collection instruments

The survey questionnaire was used to collect data, and it was divided into three parts. The first part
gathered background information about the teachers. The second part of survey include the “The
Teacher Attitude towards Inclusive Education Scale” (TAIS) scale (Saloviita, 2015) to measured
teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education. The reliability of TAIS scale in other studies has
changed from Cronbach’s α = .81 to α = .90 regardless of the samples they have had (Saloviita,
2015). This scale consists of 10 statements, which are measured by 5 points of the Likert scale (1—

Page 5 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

strongly disagree, 2—disagree, 3—I am neutral, 4—agree and 5—completely agree). The scale
includes four factors: “inclusion as value, expected outcomes, child rights and teacher workload”
(Saloviita, 2018, p. 6). TAIS scale results were interpreted using values: 1 in 1.79 represents
“strongly disagree”; 1.80–2.59 represents “disagree”; 2.60–3.39 represents “neutral”; 3.40–4.19
represents “agree”; 4.20–5.00 represents “completely agree”.

The third part of the survey has used the Teacher Efficacy Inclusive Practices (TEIP) scale
(Sharma et al., 2012), to measure a relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and attitudes
towards inclusive education. The reliability Cronbach’s alpha of the TEIP scale was 0.93 (Sharma
et al., 2012). This scale has 18 items, with a 6-point Likert scale from “strongly disagree” to
“completely agree” and include three main domains: efficacy in managing behavior, efficacy in
inclusive instruction, and efficacy in collaboration. The questionnaire was translated into Albanian
language. The TAIS scale reached the alpha coefficient a = .534. To achieve acceptable reliability,
three items were removed, wich reliability coefficient reached a = .70 (see Table 2). Level of
reliability of the TEIP scale reached a = .941 which indicates an excellent reliability of the scale
(see Table 2).

2.4. Data collection procedure

The researchers obtained permission from principals of the schools to conduct the research. The
principals provided the e-mail addresses of the teachers. The cover letter has included information
for the research and the ethical part. The questionnaire was worked out in Google Form format,
attached to the e-mail and sent to the teachers, which was completed on a voluntary basis by
them.

2.5. Analyzing of data

Statistical analysis was performed through the SPSS Statistics program (Version 26). Data were
analysed using Cronbach’s alpha, descriptive statistics, t-tests, Cohen’ d, analysis of variance
(ANOVA) and Correlation procedures. The Cronbach’s alpha is used to measure the reliability of
the instrument and its scales. Descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentage, mean, standard
deviation) were used to describe the data (attitudes, gender, age, educational qualification,
teaching experience, teaching experience with children with special needs, previous training on
inclusive education). Inferential statistical t-test was used to analyze the differences between
males and females in relation to attitudes towards inclusion (gender). Another inferential statis­
tical test, analysis of variance (ANOVA), was used to compare the results of three and more than
two gropus (age, city, educational qualification, educational level of work, teaching experience,
teaching experience with children with special needs, previous training on inclusive education).
Pearson’s correlation was used to determine the correlation between self-efficacy and teachers’
attitudes, and to determine correlation between teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education
with educational qualification, teaching experience, teaching experience with children with special
needs, previous training on inclusive education. The multiple linear regression was used to predict
the value of the dependent variable, through independent variables.

3. Results

3.1. Level of teacher’ attitudes towards inclusive education

Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education were measured through the TAIS scale. The results
of the research showed that teachers (N = 499) “agree” with inclusive education (see Table 4), so
they have positive attitudes M = 3.55, SD = 0.58 (see, Table 3).

Descriptive analyses were used to describe and to compare the average between the items and
to summarize the data. Descriptive statistics of teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education
based on the TAIS scale are presented in Table 4.

Page 6 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the respondents

Variables No. of respondts Percentage (%)
Gender
Female 384 77.0
Male 114 22.8
Total 498 99.8
Age
24–29 109 20.6
30–35 91 18.2
36–41 101 20.2
42–47 82 16.4
48–53 63 12.6
54 and above 58 11.6
Total 498 99.8
Main regions
Prishtina 155 31.1
Mitrovica 42 8.4
Peja 111 22.2
Prizren 54 10.8
Ferizaj 40 8.0
Gjilan 32 6.4
Gjakova 59 59
Total 493 98.8
Educational qualifications
Bchelor’s degree 219 43.9
Master’s degree 267 53.5
Doctorate/PhD 10 2.0
Total 496 99.4
Educational level of work
Preschool 0–5 55 11.0
Preparatory class 5–6 17 3.4
Primary 131 26.3
Middle school 87 17.4
Secondary school 194 38.9
Middle and secondary school 15 3.0
Total 499 100
Work experience
1–5 years 151 30.3
6–10 years 93 18.6
11–15 years 89 17.8
16–20 years 70 14.0
21–25 years 54 10.8
26 years and above 42 8.4
Total 499 100

(Continued)

Page 7 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

Table 1. (Continued)

Variables No. of respondts Percentage (%)

Experience with children with
special needs
Never 145 29.1
1–2 weeks 23 4.6
1–2 months 13 2.6
1 semester 38 7.6
1 year 77 15.4
2 years 52 10.4
3 years 36 7.2
4 years and more 113 22.6
Total 497 99.6
Training for inclusive education
None 127 25.5
One training 174 34.9
Two trainings 59 11.8
Three trainings 32 6.4
More than three trainings 107 21.4
Total 499 100
Source: Field Data, 2020.

Table 2. Level of reliability of the scales

Constructs Cronbach’s alpha
TAIS a = .700
TEIP a = .914
Source. Field Data, 2020.

Table 3. Attitudes of teachers’ towards inclusive education

Descriptive statistics N Mean Std. deviation
TAIS 499 3.55 0.58
Valid N 499
Source. Field Data, 2020.

According to the responses, the items “A child with special educational needs should be
transferred to a special education classroom in order not to violate his/her rights” were on average
(M = 3.12, SD = 1.08), and “The best result is achieved if each child with special educational needs is
placed in a special education classroom that best suits him/her” (M = 3.33, SD = 1.10) which
achieved the lower average. The statements “Integrated children with special educational needs
create extra work for teachers in mainstream classrooms” (M = 4.23 SD = .66), and “The learning of
children with special educational needs can be effectively supported in mainstream classrooms as
well” achieved the higher average (M = 3.63, SD = .87).

3.2. Level of teachers’ self-efficacy towards inclusive practices

Teachers’ self-efficacy towards inclusive practices was measured through the TEIP scale. The
results showed high self-efficacy of teachers (N = 499) (M = 5.11, SD = 0.51) (see Table 5).

Page 8 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

Table 4. Descriptive statistics on the attitudes towards inclusive education

Descriptive statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
deviation
Children with special educational needs learn best in 497 1.00 6.00 3.4125 1.13809
their own special education classes where they have
specially trained teachers
It is the right of a child with special educational needs 498 1.00 6.00 3.3695 1.04623
to be placed in a special education classroom
Teachers’ workload should not be increased by 496 1.00 5.00 3.3407 1.07254
compelling them to accept children with special
educational needs in their classrooms
The best result is achieved if each child with special 499 1.00 5.00 3.3307 1.10534
educational needs is placed in a special education
classroom that best suits him/her
Integrated children with special educational needs 499 1.00 5.00 4.2385 .66860
create extra work for teachers in mainstream
classrooms
A child with special educational needs should be 498 1.00 5.00 3.1245 1.08796
transferred to a special education classroom in order
not to violate his/her rights
The learning of children with special educational 498 1.00 7.00 3.6386 .87778
needs can be effectively supported in mainstream
classrooms as well
Valid N (listwise) 497
Source. Field Data, 2020.

3.3. Analysis of demographic variables data

Based on the TAIS scale there were no significant differences t (−1.663) = 496 with p = 0.097 in the
attitudes of female teachers (N = 381) (M = 24.22, SD = 4.22) and male (N = 114) (M = 24.97,
SD = 4.22) towards inclusive education. Significant differences were not identified in teaching
attitudes by age (N = 498) (M = 46.68, F (2,646) and p = 0.023). Average teachers depending on
age reached: 24–29 (N = 103) (M = 23.19, SD = 4.30), 30–35 years old (N = 91) (M = 25.21,
SD = 4.39), 36–41 years old (N = 101) (M = 24.79, SD = 4.45), age 42–47 (N = 82) (M = 24.59,
SD = 3.96), age 48–53 (N = 63) (M = 24.17, SD = 3.45), 54 and over (N = 58) (M = 24.50, SD = 4.30).
Also, no significant differences were found in the attitudes of teachers depending on the seven
main regions (N = 492) (M = 31.31, F (1,787) and p = 0.100. 155 (M = 23.90; SD = 4.39), Mitrovica
(N = 42) (24.54; SD = 4.20), Peja (N = 111) (M = 25.02, SD = 4.32), Ferizaj (N = 54) (M = 25.62,
SD = 3.46), Gjilan (N = 40) (M = 23.77, SD = 4.22), Prizren (N = 32) (M = 23.87, SD = 4.52), Gjakova
(N = 59) (M = 24.52; SD = 3.71). The results did not show any difference between teaching
qualifications and their attitudes (N = 495) F (138) and p = 0.871. For the three main levels, the
averages reached: Bachelor (N = 219) (M = 24.34, SD = 4.10); Master (N = 267) (M = 24.45,
SD = 4.37); PhD (N = 10) (M = 25.00, SD = 3.77).

There was a statistically significant difference between educational level of work groups as
determined by one-way ANOVA (F = 5, 706 Sig. < .000). A Tukey post hoc test revealed that
secondary school teachers had slightly more positive attitudes (N = 194) (M = 25.31, SD = 4.03),
than primary school teachers (N = 131) (M = 23.25, SD = 4.11) with p = 0.00. However, there was no
statistically significant difference between the other groups.

No significant differences were identified in the attitudes of teachers depending on the

number of trainings on inclusive education (N = 498) (M = 10,515, F = .591 and p = 0.670).
Teachers who attended: one training (N = 174) (M = 24.32, SD = 24.67), two trainings (N = 59),
(M = 24.67, SD = 4.00), three trainings (N = 32) (M = 23.65, SD = 4.61), more than three trainings
(N = 107) (M = 24.19, SD = 4.23) and no training (N = 127) (M = 24.47, SD = 4.57). Also, no

Page 9 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

Table 5. Participants’ level of self-efficacy towards attitudes for inclusive practices

Descriptive statistics
N Mean Std. deviation
TAIS 499 5.11 0.51
Valid N 499
Source. Field Data, 2020.

significant differences were identified between teachers with professional work experience
(N = 498), (M = 17.61, F = .983, P = 0.427). The average experience as a teacher was 1–5 years
(N = 151), M = 23.90 SD = 4.49; 6–10 years (N = 93) M = 24.51 SD = 4.47; 11–15 years (N = 89)
M = 24.93 SD = 3.87; 16–20 years (N = 70) M = 24.91 SD = 3.91; 21–25 years (N = 42) (M = 24.38,
SD = 4.62). Similarly, no significant differences were found in the attitudes of teachers in terms of
experience working with children with special needs, with average: (N = 145) (M = 24.44,
SD = 3.90); 1–2 weeks (N = 23) (M = 23.30, SD = 4.39); 1–2 months (N = 13) (M = 24.30,
SD = 3.83); one semester (N = 38) (M = 23.42, SD = 4.18); 1 year (N = 77) M = 24.71 SD = 3.89;
2 years (N = 52) (M = 24.42, SD = 4.33); 3 years (N = 36) M = 24.00, SD = 3.84; 4 years and more
(N = 113) (M = 23.51, SD = 4.72).

Table 6 presents the analysis of Chi-square test between dependent and independent variables.
The results indicate that teachers’ age, educational level of work, main regions, trainings for
inclusive education, work with children with special needs, and self-efficacity are statistically
significant variables to change the teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education. Whereas
gender and work experience are not statistically significant variables (see Table 6).

3.4 The multiplate Pearson’s correlation between teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive
education and background variables
The multiplate Pearson’s correlation was run to determine the relationship between teachers’
attitudes towards inclusive education, age, educational qualification, teaching experience, teach­
ing experience with children with special needs and previous training on inclusive education.

Coefficient between educational qualification and attitudes towards inclusive education is small
negative relationship r = –0.130. There is a statistically significant small negative relationship
between educational qualification of teachers and their attitudes towards inclusive education
(r = –0.130, N = 495, p = 0.004). As well, there is a statistically significant small negative correlation
between teaching experience with children with special needs and they attitudes towards inclusive
education (r = −0.142, N = 497, p = 0.001).According on results there were no statistically
significant association between teachers’ attitude towards inclusive education with age
(r = 0.052, N = 498, p = 0.248), between training on inclusive education and teachers’ attitude
towards inclusive education (r = −0.045, N = 499, p = 0.313), between teachers’ attitude towards
inclusive education with teaching experience (r = 0.039, N = 499, p = 0.387).

Between educational qualification and teaching experience with children with special needs
(r = 0.043, N = 493, p = 0.336). The coefficient between age and educational qualification is a small
negative relationship (r = −0.133), because the correlation coefficient is less than 0. Based on these
results, there is statistically significant small negative relationship between teachers’ age and
educational qualification (r = −0.133, N = 494, p = 0.003). Pearson’s correlation coefficient between
age and training on inclusive education is negligible linear association (r = 0.201). Based on these
results, there is a statistically significant negligible linear association between (r = 0.201, N = 498,
p = 0.000). Between age and teaching experience, there is a high linear association (r = 0.741).
Based on these results, there is a statistically significant strong linear association between
(r = 0.741, N = 498, p = 0.000). Coefficient between age and teaching experience with children

Page 10 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

Table 6. Chi-square test between dependent and independent variables

Independet variables Dependent Asymptotic significance
(2-sided)
Gender Attitudes .072
Age Attitudes .001
Educational level of work Attitudes .009
Main regions Attitudes .015
Work experience Attitudes .089
Trainings on inclusive education Attitudes .048
Work with children with special Attitudes .033
needs
Self-efficacity Attitudes .011

Table 7. Relationship between self-efficacy of teachers’ and their attitudes towards inclusive
education
Variables Self-efficacy Attitude
Self-efficacy Pearson’s Correlation 1 0.71
Sig.(2-tailed) .112
Attitude Pearson’s Correlation 0.71 1
Sig.(2-tailed) .112
Source. Computed from the Field Data, 2020.
Note. p < 0.05 means there is a statistically significant relationship.

Table 8. The multiple linear regression model and the data. ANOVAa
ANOVAa
Model Sum of df Mean F Sigb
Suqare Square
1 Regression 491.623 9 54.625 3.189 .001
Residual 8154.591 476 17.131
Total 8656.214 485
a
Dependent Variable: Attitudes TAIS.
b
Predictors: (constant), gender, age, educational level of work, main regions, work experience, trainings on inclusive
education, work with children with special needs, self-efficacity.

with special needs is negligible linear association (r = 0.131). Based on these results, there is
a statistically significant negligible linear association between (r = 0.131, N = 496, p = 0.004).

Pearson’s coefficient between educational qualification and training on inclusive education is

small negative relationship (r = −0.227). There is a statistically significant small negative relation­
ship between teachers’ educational qualification and training on inclusive education (r = −0.227,
N = 495, p = 0.000). Coefficient between educational qualification and teaching experience is small
negative relationship (r = −0.096). There is statistically significant small negative relationship
between teachers’ educational qualification and teaching experience (r = −0.096, N = 495,
p = 0.033). Between training on inclusive education and teaching experience, there is negligible
linear association (r = 0.226). Based on these results, there is a statistically significant negligible
linear association (r = 0.226, N = 499, p = 0.000). Coefficient between training on inclusive

Page 11 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

Table 9. Predicting the value of the dependent variable. coefficientsa

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) 22.363 2.316 9.654 .000
Gender .322 .483 .032 .666 .506
Age .082 .171 .032 .480 .632
Educational .040 .169 .013 .234 .815
level of work
Education -.936 .413 -.118 -2.264 .024
qualification
Main Regions 0.43 .093 .021 .436 .643
Work .096 .174 .037 .553 .580
experience
Trainings on -.257 .135 -.090 -1.908 .057
inclusive
education
Work with -.227 .072 -.147 -3.177 .002
children with
special needs
Self-efficacity .791 .371 .096 2.133 .033
a
Dependent Variable: Attitudes TAIS.

education and teaching experience with children with special needs is linear association
(r = 0.122). Based on these results, there is a statistically significant negligible linear association
(r = 0.122, N = 497, p = 0.006). Pearson coefficient between teaching experience and teaching
experience with children with special needs is linear association (r = 0.125). Based on these results,
there is a statistically significant negligible linear association (r = 0.125, N = 497, p = 0.005).

3.5. The correlation between self-efficacy of teachers’ and their attitudes towards inclusive
education
The Pearson’s correlation was run to determine the relationship between attitude and self-efficacy.
Correlation coefficient of attitudes and self-efficacy by itself is good correlation (r = 1.0). Coefficient
between self-efficacy and teachers’ attitudes is a medium–strong linear association (r = 0.71).
Based on these results, there is no statistically significant relationship between teachers’ self-
efficacy and their attitudes towards inclusive education (r = .71, N = 499, p = 0 .007; see Table 7).

3.6. The multiple linear regression

The multiple regression is used to predict the value of the dependent variable, through indepen­
dent variables. The results show that the independent variables predict significantly the value of
the dependent variable (F (3.189), p < 0.01) (see Table 8).

According to the results teacher’s education qualification (p = 0.024), work with children with
special needs (p = 0.002), and self-efficacy (p = 0.033) adequately predict the value of their
attitudes’ regarding inclusive education. The other independent variables, gender, age, trainings
on inclusive education do not predict the value of teachers’ attitudes (see Table 9).

4. Discussion and conclusion

This study has analyzed teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education and the factors that
influence the formation of their attitudes. In general, Kosovar teachers have reflected positive
attitudes towards inclusive education. Whereas, among the eight factors, the only variable that

Page 12 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

has shown significant differences in teachers’ attitudes is the educational level of work. Moreover,
teachers’ education qualification, experience work with children with special needs, and self-
efficacy predict the value of their attitudes. Therefore, the current study has identified some new
insights regarding inclusive education.

Teachers in the current research have positive attitudes towards inclusive education, namely
they “agree” with this practice. This finding corresponds with the findings of other studies (Barnes
& Gaines, 2017; Zabeli & Gjelaj, 2020). However, according to the Official Gazette of the Republic of
Kosova (2013), teachers in Kosovo have low level awareness for inclusive practices. Moreover, the
teachers in the research conducted by Zabeli and Gjelaj (2020) have expressed that they do not
have the professional competences and the necessary support to address the demands of the
inclusive class. Although the teachers were not ready to work in the inclusive classroom, they were
asked to implement it (Adewumi & Mosito, 2019). It is likely that teachers in Kosovo, since the
beginning of the implementation of this practice, have not been prepared and continue to lack
adequate competencies. In addition, teachers are challenged by the high number of students in
the classroom, the lack of training on inclusion and the lack of human support (Engelbrecht &
Savolainen, 2017; Zabeli & Gjelaj, 2020). According to Boyle et al. (2015), if teachers believe that
they do not have professional skills and do not have enough resources, this can hinder the
achievement of the goal of inclusion. It is recommended that policymakers prioritize the develop­
ment of inclusive policies, while school management should identify and continuously support the
teachers’ needs to achieve the full inclusion of children with special educational needs.

Concerning background variables in the research, there were no differences identified in the
attitudes of teachers according to their gender, similar to the research findings of Chhabra et al.
(2010). In general, female teachers have more positive attitudes than male teachers (Tsakiridou &
Polyzopoulou, 2014; Butakor et al., 2018). Moreover, in the study of (Hadjikakou & Mnasonos,
2012), female teachers felt more prepared to work in inclusive classes and according to them,
with a little commitment, they can include all types of children’s disabilities. The findings of the
current research did not show a positive relationship between the attitudes of teachers depending
on age. However, research has shown that teachers between the ages of 20 to 30 have more
positive attitudes towards inclusion, compared to those who are older than 40–50 years (Boyle
et al., 2013). It is likely that this result derives from the completion of studies recently and from
their enthusiasm in the first steps of practicing the profession as a teacher.

The findings of the current research did not show significant differences in the attitudes of
teachers depending on the attended training on inclusive education, and negative correlation
between them. These findings are similar to the results of other research (Ahmmed et al., 2012);
however, according to Van Mieghem et al. (2018) the continuous professional development of
teachers based on successful practices and experiences influences their attitudes. Educational
qualification is a crucial factor in teachers’ attitudes (Tsakiridou & Polyzopoulou, 2014); however,
the results show no differences and even no correlation between them. But, they can predict the
teachers’ attitude, and through education programs they may have more information and are
more prepared for inclusive classroom. Mónico et al. (2018) point out that if teachers have the
knowledge and skills to work in the classroom with inclusive pedagogy, in all likelihood they will
hold more positive attitudes towards it. Therefore, it is important that teacher education institu­
tions design programs that provide knowledge and develop skills in applying methodology that
responds to the diversity of students with special needs.

The research results did not identify differences between teachers with different levels of
professional qualification. However, programs that prepare teachers are important for the forma­
tion of attitudes and preparation as inclusive teachers (Kraska & Boyle, 2014). It can be concluded
that the higher the educational level of the teachers, the more positive are their attitudes towards
inclusive education.

Page 13 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

Regarding teachers’ education level work differences were identified between the attitudes of
teachers, respectively, teachers of secondary school level had slightly more positive attitudes,
compared to their primary-level counterparts. Barnes and Gaines (2017) also found that teachers
from secondary school have a more positive attitude than their counterparts who work with
children from other educational levels.

According to Marshall et al. (2002), and Parasuram (2006), international studies show that less
experienced teachers have more positive attitudes towards inclusion than those who are part of
the educational system much longer. On the other hand, the current research found no differences
between the attitudes of teachers with reference to work experience, and also no association
between them. This may be due to the lack of experience of teachers’ in inclusive classrooms and
the lack of support during this process, as this relatively new practice is still in the early stages of
implementation in regular schools in Kosovo. The attitude of the teacher’ towards children with
special needs can be formed under the influence of the experience the teacher has with them.
Therefore, an influential factor in teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion is their work and contact
with children with special needs (Dorji et al., 2019; Saloviita, 2018). However, the research findings
are not in line with other studies, and also a small negative correlation between teaching
experience with children with special needs and the attitude towards inclusive education. In the
research of Yeo et al. (2016), negative attitudes of teachers were associated with stress caused by
challenges and difficulties in adapting to individual needs, while positive attitudes were related to
skills of working with students and new information that the teacher has reached working with
them. As well, in this study teachers’ experience work with children with special needs can predict
their attitudes, because they can get to know children, understand that they can achieve and with
a little dedication can help their development.

In the current research, the teachers had high self-efficacy, but in terms of the correlation
between self-efficacy and teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion, research has found a weak corre­
lation. Similarly, the research of Saloviita (2018) did not find a positive correlation between them,
while the research of Savolainen et al. (2012) found a positive correlation between the highest
level of self-efficacy and their attitudes towards inclusive education. Regarding the results tea­
chers have high self-efficacy for inclusive practices but have indifferent attitudes to inclusive
education. One of the reasons may be the extra work of teachers’ in inclusive classrooms and
classroom management, as well their skepticism in the academic achievements of children with
special needs. On the other side, results show that teachers’ self-efficacy can predict their
attitudes. If teachers can successfully face difficulties in inclusive classrooms, their self-efficacy
increases and their attitudes can be more positive.

Other findings of the research were also the correlations between demographic variables. Small
negative correlations were found between teachers’age and educational qualification, educational
qualification and training on inclusive education, teachers’ educational qualification and teaching
experience. Negligible linear relationship between was between age and training on inclusive
education, age and teaching experience with children with special needs, and training on inclusive
education, training on inclusive education and teaching experience, training on inclusive education
and teaching experience with children with special needs, teaching experience and teaching
experience with children with special. Only between age and teaching experience was strong
relationship. The results did not show a strong correlation between the variables; however, they
are an important part of shaping teachers’ attitudes.

All these data illuminate the real challenge of achieving the inclusive agenda in Kosovo. It must
first be understood that the equal and quality inclusion of children with special needs “is key to the
formation of human capital and their participation in social and economic life” (WHO & The World
Bank, 2011, p. 226). Inclusive education as a social construct and right of each child, should not be
left to spontaneity or individual initiatives, but should be mandatory, not only legally but also in
practice. In this context, Engelbrecht and Savolainen (2017) concluded that developing inclusive

Page 14 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

education requires a dynamic and collaborative approach between policymakers, school manage­
ment and teachers. In order to develop inclusive policies in practice, the policymakers should put
as a priority in their agenda the development of educational policies that ensure the advancement
of inclusive practices. The research findings will help managers of the institution in teachers’
preparation programs how to evaluate the current programs and make the improvements that are
necessary. Also, programs should provide practical information on how to approach different
individual needs, ensuring the success of all children. Moreover, school institutions, in addition
to access to children, must provide training for inclusiveness and the provision of human and
physical resources for teachers. The trainings should offer programs that expand the theoretical
knowledge of teachers on the philosophy and main components of inclusiveness, but also to
develop inclusive pedagogical skills, to be competent for the optimal development of children with
special needs, and to meet the needs of their special education. Furthermore, teachers must
possess the skills to use Universal Design for Learning, which responds to the diversity of all
children in the classroom.

These circumstances are those which will raise the awareness of teachers to a higher level about
their vital role towards inclusive quality education. At this matter lies the importance of research
exploring attitudes and how teachers value their position in the process and what they need to
achieve successful inclusion.

4.1. Future study

Recommendations for future researchers are (a) exploring the attitudes of school principals,
students, student parents, supportive and special teachers; (b) identification of child and environ­
mental factors; (c) researching the problem from a qualitative point of view.

4.2. Limitations
This study has some limitations as listed further: (a) the relatively small sample size in the survey;
(b) research focus specifically on teaching attitudes in service; (c) quantitative research has limited
the exploration of perceptions and experience through qualitative research, interview.

Funding Koliqi & Naser Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9:

The author(s) received no financial support for the 2143629.
research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
Author details Adewumi, T. M., & Mosito, C. (2019). Experiences of tea­
Donika Koliqi1 chers in implementing inclusion of learners with
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7509-1136 special education needs in selected fort Beaufort
Naser Zabeli1 district primary schools, South Africa. Cogent
E-mail: [email protected] Education, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0174-3848 2019.1703446
1
Faculty of Education, University of Prishtina “Hasan Ahmmed, M., Sharma, U., & Deppeler, J. (2012). Variables
Prishtina”, Pristina, Kosovo. affecting teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive edu­
cation in Bangladesh. Journal of Research in Special
Author’s Contribution Educational Needs, 12(3), 132–140. https://doi.org/10.
All authors have been actively involved in the whole pro­ 1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01226.x
cess of conducting the research and each of them has Ainscow, M., & Sandill, A. (2010). Developing inclusive
contributed to the preparation of the final product. education systems: The role of organisational cul­
Therefore, all authors are responsible for the content of tures and leadship. International Journal of Inclusive
this manuscript. Education, 14(4), 401–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/
136031108025049034
Disclosure statement Aliu, F., Bajrami, V., Cërmjani, M., Kadriu, L., Kuitunen, M.,
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). Leskinen, M., Pesamaa, T., Zabeli, N., & Zogu, A.
(2003). . Special Education in Kosovo (Kosovo: Finnish
Availability of Data and Material Support to the Development of Edcation Sector in
The data sets used and analyzed during the current study Kosovo).
are available from the corresponding author on reason­ Alkhateeb, J. M., Hadidi, M. S., & Alkhateeb, A. J. (2015).
able request. Inclusion of children with developmental disabilities
in Arab countries: A review of the research literature
Citation information from 1990 to 2014. Research in Developmental
Cite this article as: Variables affecting the attitudes of Disabilities, 49-50, 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
teachers’ towards inclusive education in Kosovo, Donika ridd.2015.11.005

Page 15 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

Amor, M. A., Hagiwara, M., Shogren, A. K., Thompson, R. J., Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(3),
Verdugo, Á. M., Burke, M. K., & Aguayo, V. (2018). 366–379. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.366
International perspectives and trends in research on Kraska J and Boyle C. (2014). Attitudes of preschool and
inclusive education: A systematic review. primary school pre-service teachers towards inclu­
International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(12), sive education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher
1277–1295. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018. Education, 42(3), 228–246. 10.1080/1359866X.2014.
1445304 926307
Avramidis, E., & Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers’ attitudes Majoko, T. (2017). Inclusion in early childhood education:
towards integration/inclusion: A review of the litera­ A Zimbabwean perspective. International Journal of
ture. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17 Inclusive Education, 21(12), 1210–1227. https://doi.
(2), 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/ org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1335354
08856250210129056 Marshall, J., Ralph, S., & Palmer, S. (2002). I wasn’t trained
Barnes, M., & Gaines, T. (2017). Perceptions and attitudes to work with them’: Mainstream teachers’ attitudes
about inclusion: Findings across all grade levels and to children with speech and language difficulties.
years of teaching experience. Cogent Education, 4. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 6(3),
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1313561 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Behluli, L., & Zabeli, N. (2014). The index for inclusion – 136031101100672084
facts and opinions. Save the Children. Mezquita-Hoyos, Y. N., Sanchez-Monroy, M. H., Morales-
Boyle, C., Anderson, J., & Allen, K. (2015). Inclusive edu­ Martinez, G. E., Lopez-Ramirez, E. O., & Reyna-
cation in pre-schools: Predictors of pre-service tea­ Gonzalez, M. R. (2018). Regular and special education
cher attitudes in Australia. Teachers and Teaching Mexican teachers’ attitudes toward school inclusion
Theory and Practice, 21(8), 1–16. https://doi.org/10. and disability. European Journal of Educational
1080/13540602.2015.1005867 Research, 7(3), 421–430. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-
Boyle, C., Topping, K., & Jindal-Snape, D. (2013). Teachers’ jer.7.3.421
attitudes towards inclusion in high schools. Teachers Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (MEST).
and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 19(5), 527–542. (2010). Strategic plan for the organization of inclusive
https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.827361 education of children with special educational needs
Bucholz, J., & Sheffler, J. (2009). Creating a warm inclusive in pre-university education in Kosovo 2010-2015.
classroom environment: planning for all children to http://www.downsyndromekosova.org/wp-content
feel welcome. Journal for Inclusive Education, 2(4), 1– /uploads/2014/07/Plani-Strategjik-per-Organizimin
14 https://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol/ -e-Arsimit-Gjithperfshires1.pdf
iss4/4. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (MEST).
Butakor, P. K., Ampadu, E., & Suleiman, S. J. (2018). (2011). The strategic plan of education in Kosovo
Analysis of Ghanaian teachers’ attitudes toward 2011-2016. http://www.herdata.org/public/PSAK_
inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive 2011-2016.pdf
Education, 24(11), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/ Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (MEST).
13603116.2018.1512661 (2014). Inclusive education. Everyone’s right. https://
Chhabra, S., Srivastava, R., & Srivastava, I. (2010). masht.rks-gov.net/uploads/2015/06/arsimimi-06-06-
Inclusive education in Botswana: The perceptions of 2014-3.pdf
school teachers. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (MEST).
20(4), 219–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/ (2015). Organization of the education of children with
2F1044207309344690 special needs in Kosovo. https://masht.rks-gov.net/
Creswell, W. J. (1994). Research design: Qualitative & uploads/2015/06/organizimi-i-arsimit-t-f-mij-ve-me-
quantitative approaches. Sage Publications. nevoja-t-veanta-n-kosove-3.pdf
Czyż, A. (2018). An analysis of polish teachers attitudes Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (MEST).
towards inclusive education. Future Human Image, (2016). Kosovo Curriculum Framework (revised).
10(10), 4–19. https://doi.org/10.29202/fhi/10/1 http://masht.rks-gov.net/uploads/2017/03/korniza-
Dorji, R., Bailey, J., Paterson, D., Graham, L., & Miller, J. kurrikulare-finale.pdf
(2019). Bhutanese teachers’ attitudes towards inclu­ Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (MEST).
sive education. International Journal of Inclusive (2017). The Individual Education Plan (IEP) and the
Education, 1(20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116. guide for drawing up the individual education plan for
2018.1563645 children with special educational needs. https://
Engelbrecht, P., & Savolainen, H. (2017). A mixed- kosovo.savethechildren.net/sites/kosovo.savethechil
methods approach to developing an understanding dren.net/files/library/Plani%20Individual%20i%
of teachers’ attitudes and their enactment of inclu­ 20Arsimit%20dhe%20Udhezuesi%20per%20harti
sive education. European Journal of Special Needs min%20e%20tij.pdf
Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (MEST).
2017.1410327 (2020). Organization of the support system in educa­
Gyimah, E. K., Sugden, D., & Pearson, S. (2009). Inclusion tional institutions. http://arsimigjitheperfshires.rks-
of children with special educational needs in main­ gov.net/ëp-content/uploads/2020/05/Organizimi-i-sis
stream schools in Ghana: Influence of teachers’ and temit-mb%C3%ABshtet%C3%ABs-n%C3%AB-
children’s characteristics. International Journal of Institucionet-edukativo-arsimore.pdf
Inclusive Education, 1(8), 787–804. https://doi.org/10. Mónico, P., Mensah, A. K., Grünke, M., Garcia, T.,
1080/13603110802110313 Fernández, E., & Rodríguez, C. (2018). Teacher
Hadjikakou, K., & Mnasonos, M. (2012). Investigating the knowledge and attitudes towards inclusion: A
attitudes of head teachers of Cypriot primary schools cross-cultural study in Ghana, Germany and Spain.
towards inclusion. Journal of Research in Special International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(5),
Educational Needs, 12(2. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 527–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.
1471-3802.2010.01195.x 1471526
Judd, C. M., Ryan, C. S., & Park, B. (1991). Accuracy in the Mukhopadhyay, S. (2014). Botswana primary schools
judgment of in-group and out-group varibiality. teachers’ perception of inclusion of learners with

Page 16 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

special educational needs. Journal of Research in Shevlin, M., Kearns, H., Ranaghan, M., Twomey, M.,
Special Educational Needs, 14(1), 33–42. https://doi. Smith, R., & Winter, E. (2009). Creating inclusive
org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2012.01269.x learning environments in Irish schools: Teacher per­
Official Gazette of the Republic of Kosova. (2011). Law spectives. The National Council for Special Education.
No. 04/L-032 for Pre-University Education in the http://ncse.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Creating_
Republic of Kosovo. Prishtina. http://masht.rks-gov. inclusive_learning_environments.pdf
net/uploads/2015/06/1-ligji-per-arsimin- Tsakiridou, H., & Polyzopoulou, K. (2014). Greek teachers’
parauniversitar.pdf attitudes toward the inclusion of students with spe­
Official Gazette of the Republic of Kosova. (2013). cial educational needs. American Journal of
National strategy for the rights of persons with dis­ Educational Research, 2(4), 208–218. https://doi.org/
abilities in the Republic of Kosovo 2013-2023. 10.12691/education-2-4-6
Official Journal of the European Union. (2018). UNESCO. (1994). The Salamanca statement and frame­
Information and notices - C 195. In Official journal of work for action on special needs education.
the European union European Union. Retieved Salamanca: World Conference on Special Needs
fromhttps://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/ Education: Access and Quality.
PDF/?uri=OJ:C:2018:195:FULL&from UNESCO. (2000). The dakar framework for action. educa­
Opertti, R., Walker, Z., & Zhang, Y. (2014). Inclusive edu­ tion for all: Meeting our collective commitments.
cation: From targeting groups and schools to UNESCO. (2009). Embracing diversity: Toolkit for creating
achieving quality education as the core of EFA. In inclusive, learning-friendly environments.
L. Florian. (Ed.) The SAGE handbook of special educa­ UNESCO. (2015). Education 2030. Incheon declaration and
tion ((2nd).,Vol. 1,Pp. 149–169) SAGE. Retrived framework for action for the implementation of sus­
fromhttps://repository.nie.edu.sg/bitstream/10497/ tainable development goal 4.
17344/4/BC-IEF-2014-149.pdf UNICEF. (2017). Situation analysis. Children with
Parasuram, K. (2006). Variables that affect teachers’ Disabilities in Kosovo. https://www.unicef.org/koso
attitudes towards disability and inclusive education
voprogramme/media/216/file/KOS-SITAN-ENG.pdf
in Mumbai, India. Disability and Society, 21(3),
United Nations Headquarters. (2006). Convention on the
231–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/
rights of persons with disabilities.
09687590600617352
Urton, K., Wilbert, J., & Hennemann, T. (2014). Attitudes
Peters, S., Johnstone, C., & Ferguson, P. (2005). A disability
towards inclusion and self-efficacy of principals
rights in education model for evaluating inclusive
and teachers. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary
education. International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 9(2), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/ Journal, 12(2), 151–168. file:///C:/Users/Admin/
1360311042000320464 Downloads/Urtonetal.-2014-
Rapp, A. C., & Corral-Granados, A. (2021). Understanding Attitudestowardsinclusionandself-efficacyofp.pdf
inclusive education – A theoretical contribution from van Mieghem, A., Verschueren, K., Petry, K., & Struyf, E.
system theory and the constructionist perspective. (2018). An analysis of research on inclusive educa­
International Journal of Inclusive Education. , 1–17. tion: A systematic search and meta review.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1946725 International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(6),
Ross-Hill, R. (2009). Teacher attitude towards inclusion 675–689. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.
practices and special needs students. Journal of 1482012
Research in Special Educational Needs, 9(3), 188–198. Weisel, A., & Dror, O. (2006). School climate, sense of
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2009.01135.x efficacy and Israeli teachers’ attitudes toward
Saloviita, T. (2015). Measuring pre-service teachers’ atti­ inclusion of students with special needs.
tudes towards inclusive education: Psychometric Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 1(2),
properties of the TAIS scale. Teaching and Teacher 157–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/
Education, 52, 66–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate. 2F1746197906064677
2015.09.003 WHO, & The World Bank. (2011). World Report on
Saloviita, T. (2018). Attitudes of teachers towards inclu­ Disability. https://www.who.int/disabilities/world_
sive education in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of report/2011/report.pdf
Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/ Yeo, L. S., Chong, W. H., Neihart, M. F., & Huan, V. S. (2016).
00313831.2018.1541819 Teachers’ experience with inclusive education in
Save the Children. (2017). Financing inclusive education for Singapore. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(1),
children with disabilities in Kosovo. https://resourcecen 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2014.
tre.savethechildren.net/pdf/Financing-CWD-ENG.pdf/ 934781
Savolainen, H., Engelbrecht, P., Nel, M., & Malinen, P. Zabeli, N., & Gjelaj, M. (2020). Preschool teacher’s aware­
(2012). Understanding teachers’ attitudes and self- ness, attitudes and challenges towards inclusive
efficacy in inclusive education: Implications for pre- early childhood education: A qualitative study.
service and in-service teacher education. European Cogent Education, 7(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Journal of Special Needs Education, 27(1), 51–68. 2331186X.2020.1791560
https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2011.613603 Zabeli, N., Shehu, B. P., & Anderson, A. J. (2021). The
Sharma, U., Loreman, T., & Forlin, C. (2012). Measuring tea­ understanding of inclusive education in Kosovo: legal
cher efficacy to implement inclusive practices. Journal and empirical argumentation. Center for Educational
of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(1), 12–21. Policy Studies Journal, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.26529/
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01200.x cepsj.692

Page 17 of 18
Koliqi & Zabeli, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2143629
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions
You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Cogent Education (ISSN: 2331-186X) is published by Cogent OA, part of Taylor & Francis Group.
Publishing with Cogent OA ensures:
• Immediate, universal access to your article on publication
• High visibility and discoverability via the Cogent OA website as well as Taylor & Francis Online
• Download and citation statistics for your article
• Rapid online publication
• Input from, and dialog with, expert editors and editorial boards
• Retention of full copyright of your article
• Guaranteed legacy preservation of your article
• Discounts and waivers for authors in developing regions
Submit your manuscript to a Cogent OA journal at www.CogentOA.com

Page 18 of 18