THt lllllllllllllll\Illllllllll‘l ll'lllllll 3 1293 10555 5959 A— ‘—.L_.fi- LIBRARY MichnanSw This is to certify that the thesis entitled Competencies Needed for Teachers of the Mentally Retarded in Saudi Arabia: A Need Assessment Study presented by Abdulla Ibrahim Hamdan has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Doctoral Philosophy degee in Department of Elementary and Special Education Date October 15, l980 0-7 639 rm .“(ffiav ‘\.1. \ $- \ - “‘I"’ *‘\ n” i-r‘ - a ,, . ‘ \JI-HJl'rb, bull},- 7/J7/73 OVERDUE FINES: 25¢ per day per item RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS: Place in book return to remove charge from circulation records COMPETENCIES NEEDED FOR TEACHERS OF THE MENTALLY RETARDED IN SAUDI ARABIA: A NEED ASSESSMENT STUDY BY Abdulla Ibrahim Hamdan A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Elementary and Special Education 1980 ’17 w.- v». 4 . w... ' ///.' ABSTRACT COMPETENCIES NEEDED FOR TEACHERS OF THE MENTALLY RETARDED IN SAUDI ARABIA: A NEED ASSESSMENT STUDY BY Abdulla Ibrahim Hamdan A shortage of human resources in general and educational personnel in particular is one of the most serious obstacles confronting develOpment plans in Saudi Arabia. The purpose of this study was to identify the teaching competen- cies thought to be important for teachers of the mentally retarded in Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, this investigation examined the opinion structure of teachers and administrators presently involved in the education of the mentally retarded in Saudi Arabia regarding the barriers which are thought to be limiting the quality of these programs. The target population for this study consisted of all teachers, building administrators, and administrators at the Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia who were involved in the education of the mentally retarded. The questionnaire utilized in gathering data for this study consisted of three parts. Part I. Personal data regarding subjectS' sex, location of employment, type of work, citizenship, years Of exPerlenCe: age and level of education. .— on Ie.pr- u “Von. - 4.. A. . 4-0... -\~ “°-~— .“ ..‘ e- n ”a " _ . Abdulla Ibrahim Hamdan Part II. In this part, subjects were asked to specify, on a five-point scale, the perceived importance and profes- sional develoPment priorities of forty teaching competency statements which were divided into seven major areas: plan- ning instruction, assessing and evaluating behavior and instruction, conducting instruction, classroom management, facilitating social-emotional maturity, dealing with other professionals, and working with parents. Part III. In this part, reSpondents were asked to indicate, on a five-point scale, their perceptions regarding thirty barrier statements in terms of the effect each barrier may have in limiting the quality of the mentally retarded program outcomes. Out of the 204 questionnaires distributed, 166 were completed and used in this study. The forty competency statements were ranked according to the mean ratings of their perceived importance and per- ceived professional deve10pment priorities. A multivariate analysis of variance test was utilized to determine differen- Ces regarding the perceived importance of the seven major competency areas and differences regarding respondents' needs for Professional development on the various levels 0f the independent variables (sex, location of school, age, educa- tional level, years of experience, type of work, and citizen- Shipi- Differences in perceiving the thirty barrier statements Were tested using a chi-square test of homogeneity. Abdulla Ibrahim Hamdan In addition to findings regarding the distribution andcflassification of respondents according to their indepen- dmfi:variables, the following major findings were reported. 1. In terms of their perceived importance, the seven major areas were ranked as follows: (1) Conducting Instruction; (2) Facilitating Social-Emotional Maturity; (3) Working with Parents; (4) Planning Instruction; (5) Assessing and Evaluating Behavior and Instruction; (6) Classroom Management; and (7) Dealing with Other Professionals. The five competencies perceived as being most important were: (a) Selecting and Operating audio— visual equipment; (b) Breaking tasks into small steps from simple to complez; (c) Choosing instruc- tional methods for specific lessons; (d) Keeping a record of students' assessment to help in knowing students' progress; and (e) Using a multi-sensory approach when teaching. In terms of perceived needs for professional devel— oPment, the seven major areas were ranked as follows: (1) Working with Parents; (2) Planning Instruction; (3) Conducting Instruction; (4) Facilitating Social- Emotional Maturity; (5) Assessing and Evaluating Behavior and Instruction; (6) Classroom Management; and (7) Dealing with Other Professionals. FL: 0 .I-' -“a ‘u-i I'D. 0!! en Abdulla Ibrahim Hamdan The five competencies where the highest need for professional deveIOpment was felt were: (a) Using accepted principals of counseling, interviewing, and guidance in parent conferences; (b) Selecting and Operating audio-visual equipment; (c) Selecting content appropriate to identified goals; (d) For- mulating instructional goals for the year; and (e) Using behavior modification techniques. The most serious barriers Were perceived to be: (a) Lack of teacher aides; (b) Lack of parent understanding and support; (c) Lack of screening devices to identify children with special needs; and (d) Lack of appropriate playgrounds. To my parents, my wife, Monirah, and my lovely son, Majed ii . uv-ou" - ‘I.o..I" 1 ...,- a. o ...v-‘. V' '. ~. - 0,. ‘ ‘- . ' "' ... .J_ 3 ':-~ "an. n ‘ - Q.‘ I... r. ‘5.- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to extend a sincere note of thanks and gratitude to his advisor, Dr. George Gore, and to his doctoral committee members, Dr. James E. Keller, Dr. Janet A. Wessel and Dr. Howard Hickey, for their continuous support, encouragement, and professional guidance. The author also wishes to extend his appreciation to Mr. A. Al-Abdan at the Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia, Dr. Mohammed El-Ghamdi, and Dr. Farouk Abdulsalam at King Abdul Aziz University in Mecca, Dr. A. Al-Sebait, and Mr. Ibrahim Al-Wably at the University of Riyadh, and to all teachers and administrators who made this study possible. Finally, the author wishes to recognize the contribu- tion made by his wife, Monirah, his son, Majed, and his family members who provided the emotional support and encour- agement which helped him a great deal in reaching his goal. iii vu-V . s.... I‘b‘ 4 1‘. LIST OF LIST OF Chapter TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ILLUSTRATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Purpose of the Study. . . . . . . . Research Questions. . . . . . . . . Importance of the Study . . . . . . . Scope of the Study. . . . . . . . . . Limitations of the Study. . . . . . . Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . Organization of the Study . . . . . . II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE. . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . Education of the Handicapped in Saudi Arabia. Preparation of Special Educators. History . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trends. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher Competencies. . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . The Problem of Competency Identification. Competencies of Teachers of the Handicapped . . . . . . . . . Competencies of Teachers of the Mentally Retarded. . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . III. PROCEDURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . P0pu1ation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . Construction and Translation of the Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . Collection of the Data. . . . . . . Procedures Used in Analyzing the Data' iv 0 vi viii 13 13 21 21 26 31 31 31 35 43 51 53 53 S3 54 55 59 60 Chapter IV. PRESENTATION OF THE RESEARCH RESULTS. . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Demographic Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Responses Concerning the Relative Importance of Teaching Competencies. . . . . . . . . . Professional DeveIOpment Priorities . . . . . Perceived Barriers to Quality Special Education Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . V. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations for Possible Implementation . Recommendations for Further Research. . . . . APPENDIX A: COVER LETTER AND ENGLISH VERSION OF QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B: TRANSLATION APPROVAL AND ARABIC VERSION OF QUESTIONNAIRE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX C: OBSERVED FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS REGARDING PERCEIVED IMPORTANCE AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES FOR THE FORTY TEACHING COMPETENCIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX D: CHI-SQUARE TESTS WITH SIGNIFICANT VALUES FOR RESPONDENTS' PERCEPTIONS OF BARRIERS TO QUALITY SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS. . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 64 65 69 83 101 108 108 117 122 124 140 155 162 181 ..-.V‘ i l."‘ . ..y. I ... r. . ~97- N ...-. . A... h an. -. - ¢.'. ~ ..... .4 ‘1 . u ’ ‘lov‘l ~ 1 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. LIST OF TABLES Distribution According to Sex . . . . . . . . Distribution According to Location of School. Distribution According to the Type of Work. . Distribution According to Years of Experience Distribution According to Age . . . . . . . . Distribution According to Educational Level . Rank Order of the Forty Competency Statements by Mean Perceived Importance. . . . . . . . Perceived Importance of the Seven Subscales . Wilk's Multivariate Analysis of Variance of Mean Importance Ratings . . . . . . . . . . Univariate F-Test for Mean Ratings According to Sex, with 1,164 D.F. . . . . . . . . . . Univariate F-Test for Mean Ratings According to Location of School, with 2,157 D.F. . . Rank Order of the Forty Competency Statements by Mean Perceived Professional DeveIOpment Priorities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Multiple Responses Regarding High-Need/Low-Need Professional DeveIOpment Priorities . . . . O Perceived Professional Deve10pment Needs of the Seven Subscales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wilk's Multivariate Analysis of Variance of Professional Development Need Ratings . . . Univariate F-Test for Mean Ratings According to Location of School, with 2,157 D.F. . . vi 65 66 67 68 68 69 70 76 78 79 79 83 89 94 96 97 '.’ w u .9 u .v ' I ‘ ‘. ... LIST OF TABLES--Continued 17. Univariate F-Test for Mean Ratings According to Years of Experience, with 3,162 D.F. . . . . 97 18. Rank Order of Barrier Ratings . . . . . . . . . . 102 vii 10. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Post Hoc Comparison for Subscale "Planning Instruction" by "Location of School." Post Hoc Comparison for Subscale "Conducting Instruction" by "Location of School." Post Hoc Comparison for Subscale "Classroom Management" by "Location of School." Post Hoc Comparison for Subscale "Facilitating Social-Emotional Maturity" by "Location of School." . . . . . . . . . Post Hoc Comparison for Subscale "Working with Parents" by "Location of School." Post Hoc Comparison for Subscale "Dealing with Other Professionals" by "Location of School." Post Hoc Comparison for the Three Levels Under "Location of School" by Subscale "Planning Instruction." . . . . . . . Post Hoc Comparison for the Three Levels Under "Location of School" by Subscale "Conducting Instruction." . . . . . . . Post Hoc Comparison for the Three Levels Under "Location of School" by Subscale "Classroom Management." . . . . . . . Post Hoc Comparison for the Three Levels Under "Location of School" by Subscale "Facilitating Social-Emotional Maturity." viii 80 80 81 82 82 82 98 98 98 99 V‘ a e.— .- ..",_ v “ta. no u 0-0. v. —p. . a... _- .. "' an. t- - I. "-v 1.— -e-‘~ .- h”" 0.. . w-.. R ' \ - __ v ’1' .'~.. O . .. y. . _‘ ». . .-‘ \ ‘ .- ‘4 V “‘ . . a x’ ‘ -__' ~ . ,3 "n e U“.- .\ . .Q. ‘ .‘ ‘ .__ : .-‘ . n . “ 'I. I ‘Q -. .. & .._‘ ‘5. .‘v._‘ , ~_ v: . ~-‘. .h ~ . __ \- __~ .. 'C CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Proper provision of educational services to the handicapped in any given society is a reflection of the respect of human beings and their variances and the nature and degree of advancement possessed by that society. Educa- ting the handicapped is deemed important, for it is a good economic investment, as well as being a humanitarian responsibility. The quality and efficiency of the delivery system of services are believed to be determined by several factors, probably the most important of which is the avail- ability of "qualified personnel." That, by itself, will facilitate the existence of the other important factors such as educational facilities and materials, well-planned curricula, and productive supervision. Therefore, the availability of professionally-prepared personnel must form the first step in planning for and establishing programs for the education of the handicapped. Heller (1968) attributes the difficulties in devel- oping programs for the handicapped to a "critical shortage" of trained personnel. Dunn (1963) considers the availability of "broadly-prepared" educators as a very important factor which will help each exceptional child to realize his/her full potential. Regarding the importance of well-trained personnel to the provision of quality services for the handicapped, Voelker (1967) stated: To a very large degree the worth of the special education programs for the exceptional children depends upon the quality of the teaching staff. Just as it is recognized that superior teachers are needed for regular grade children, so it is essential that highly capable teachers be em- ployed to teach exceptional children if they are to realize their maximum develOpment. If this is to be reached considerable attention must be given to the recruitment, selection, and in- service professional growth of the men and women who will serve as teachers of these boys and girls. (p. 656) Continuous efforts are being made in the United States aimed at the inclusion of all the handicapped in suitable educational settings and the improvement of the quality of human resources responsible for the education of the handicapped. Such action is being taken in response to laws passed by the government, such as P.L. 85-926, P.L. 88- 164, P.L. 94-142 and others. Third-world countries, on the other hand, are still in a stage comparable to that of the United States at the turn of the century. For example, in Saudi Arabia knowledge of the holy Qur'an used to be the only qualification required for someone to be eligible for a teaching position, since the main purpose of education was to help people better perform their ‘ ..-" In \ ”u". .a .. .,--‘ ,a'-‘. _‘ .’-. '1‘! C . ..» P“ ‘ l I" _. .. ~ ' '.<-w‘ ,..\...b- .-. .ap-a . . .- ~.....-- - --a ..u a‘n up:- ue- ... n “‘7. .. .. :_;, .1 . a "v. . u »-.o ., C‘. s“ " ‘e religious obligations. In the 19403 and 19505, completing a three-year preparation program after the sixth grade used to be required to be an elementary school teacher. More recently, in the early 19705, two-year colleges were established to prepare elementary school teachers. As far as special educators are concerned, there is no particular preparation program for teachers of exceptional children. This might be due to the general shortage of teachers, which makes the preparation of regular classroom teachers first priority, or it might be due to the recency of special education in Saudi Arabia and the unavailability of qualified administrative and instructional personnel who are capable of establishing preparation programs. Therefore, the problem confronting those seeking the improvement of special education programs is the absence of qualified personnel, an issue to which this study was addressed. Purpose of the Study In order to identify and validate the competencies needed for teachers of the mentally retarded, three steps are thought to be involved in the process. 1. Teachers in the area of mental retardation should first determine the important knowledge, skills, and competencies needed in the per- formance of their work. Because of teachers' ‘14 t" 9““ .— bl" e" e V‘ n.- .5 r4. .- CU. .- .e' e.“ u-v _. __.. '.- 1‘ ‘vvb I n 9‘ V. ‘0. ~ I us v- “k. ...Q' a . .. .‘ V‘.‘ -.. n. -.. ... ' . ~.n_ . _'~~~ ' \.—- a . -v... ..‘~ _ - ) -~ ‘ . G. v . x. - ‘K . K (I: (1’ t!‘ daily contact with the mentally retarded, their opinions will be the best representation of the needed qualifications. 2. The second step involves observational practice, by visiting schools or classrooms of the mentally retarded to determine the degree to which those skills or competencies thought to be important are put to actual practice with the mentally retarded. 3. Finally, measuring the behavioral changes on the mentally retarded and determining whether or not positive changes have taken place as a result of the application of a skill or competency. Apparently it is not feasible for an investigator in one investigation to collect information in all three steps at once. Several studies, Anttonen (1972), F005 (1972), and Hoeksema (1975), reported findings on the first step only. The purpose of this study was to gather information called for in the first step from teachers and administrators of programs serving the mentally retarded in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The following objectives will help in clarifying the extended purpose of this inquiry: (h I )u ‘. “~. A... 5-. '1 HI To gather basic demographic information regarding teachers and administrators (ministry level and building level) presently involved in the education of the mentally retarded in the six schools for the mentally retarded in Saudi Arabia. To examine the Opinion structure Of teachers and administrators (ministry level and building level) presently involved in the education of the mentally retarded in the six schools for the mentally handicapped in Saudi Arabia regarding the relative importance of selected teaching competencies for teachers of the c Tally retarded. To examine the opinion structure of teachers and administrators (ministry level and building level) presently involved in the education of the mentally retarded in the six schools for the mentally handicapped in Saudi Arabia regarding their professional development needs to be more effective in teaching the mentally retarded. To examine the Opinion structure Of teachers and administrators (ministry level and building level) presently involved in the education of the mentally retarded in the six schools for the mentally handicapped in Saudi Arabia regarding the barriers to quality special education. It! ) To determine whether or not any significant differences occur in the perceptions of the above variables when teachers and administrators are grouped according to variables such as sex, type of position held, educational level, citizenship, regional location of the school, and number of years of experience. To recommend needed procedures for the improve- ment of the quality of special education programs which will result in a better education for the handicapped in Saudi Arabia. Research Questions This study was directed toward answering the following questions: 1. What competencies are perceived to be important by teachers and administrators (ministry and building level) presently working with the mentally retarded in the six schools of Saudi Arabia? What competencies are perceived as being in need for professional development by teachers and administrators (ministry and building level) working with the mentally retarded in the six schools of Saudi Arabia? What barriers are perceived by teachers and administrators (ministry and building level) working with the mentally retarded in the six schools of Saudi Arabia to be limiting the quality of special education programs? 4. What are the differences in the perceptions of teachers and administrators (ministry and building level), when grouped according to sex, type of position, level of education, citizenship, regional location of the school, and years Of experience, regarding the importance of competencies, their need for professional develOpment, and the barriers to quality special education services? Importance of the Study Saudi Arabia is a developing country with a great deal of wealth that, if utilized wisely and efficiently, will help in promoting all community services. As mentioned before, the fate of students and the quality of educational programs are determined, for the most part, by the quality of the administrative personnel, especially the teachers. The urgent need for the establishment of teacher—preparation programs for special education to meet the increasing demand for teachers of the handicapped and to provide on-the-job training for teachers presently involved in the education of the handicapped is unquestionable; rather, it is long overdue. This study, therefore, will lay the foundations for the establishment of such programs, and its importance stems from the following factors: By providing teachers' perceived needs for self-development, the Ministry of Education and colleges of education will be better prepared for the organization and conducting of in-service training for teachers of the mentally retarded, thus becoming acquainted with new develOpments in the field which will make them better teachers. Teachers' and administrators' perceptions of the relative importance of selected teaching compe- tencies to teachers of the mentally retarded will be of great value to teacher-preparation institutions in the establishment Of preparation programs to prepare special education personnel in lieu of the heavy reliance on other countries to meet the obvious personnel shortages. Administrators' and teachers' knowledge Of important competencies needed by successful teachers of the mentally retarded will help them to periodically analyze and assess their levels of competence to know their weak areas so they can develop them. In addition, perceived important competencies can be utilized by administrators as an evaluation instrument to determine the level of competence of new applicants for teaching positions in the area of mental retardation. 4. Knowledge Of barriers to quality special education will serve as a causative diagnosis of the problems confronting the improvement of special education services which will enable those responsible in finding suitable remedies for such problems. Scope of the Study Data used in this study were collected from teachers and administrators presently involved in the education of the mentally retarded in the Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia. This included administrators on the central level working in the Ministry of Education located in Riyadh, the capital city of Saudi Arabia, teachers and building administrators (including support personnel) in the six schools for the mentally re- tarded. There are two schools in each of the three major cities of Riyadh, Jidda, and Dammam; one school for mentally retarded boys and another one for girls. The total number Of those in charge of the program was 204 teachers and adminis- trators divided among the six schools and the Ministry Of Education as follows: 58 teachers and administrators in Riyadh's school for mentally retarded boys, 44 teachers and administrators in Riyadh's school for mentally retarded girls, 32 teachers and administrators in Jidda's school for mentally retarded boys, 27 teachers and administrators in Jidda's school for mentally retarded girls, 19 teachers and .ov .- " ,. .‘-§r av-v‘ .-'9' \ .pv'. DP- ... ..U - I. .- “’ .5 CI u-n " 6-. . ‘ .... "-‘ 7 u . ' v. - - \ - ‘ . . . 'v‘ ."- , . ‘A ‘u._ ‘ e. . ' .r‘_ " ~ n.‘ in ‘e A. ,~- . 'A . 0‘ .~ ‘ ."\ .“ '.‘. - .., .. x ‘u C s 10 administrators in Dammam's school for mentally retarded boys, 18 teachers and administrators in Dammam's school for mentally retarded girls, and 6 central administrators working on the Ministry Of Education. Limitations of the Study Findings from this study should be viewed in the light of the following limitations. 1. It is expected that the majority Of respondents will not be accustomed to field research techniques. Efforts will be made by the writer to explain and clarify to respon- dents the purpose and importance of field research in general and this study in particular. On the other hand, due to the segregated educational system practiced in Saudi Arabia, limited contact and interaction with female respondents will make it difficult to explain the questionnaire to each female respondent; instead, explanations will be communicated to school principals and/or teacher consultants who will assume the responsibility of explaining to individual female respondents. 2. Although all Saudis working with the mentally retarded will be included in this study, the fact that the number Of non-Saudi respondents is greater than three times that of Saudi respondents may affect the generalizability of the results in terms of which competencies are important, needs for professional develOpment and the barriers to quality special education programs. _-.. I '- . w. 0 .5d“ ,u , ‘0’“ . u '7 y .- ~.~b* . u!‘ R . _, Ly ,,, uuv ,— F" u. ..--§b- a .5 .~~o . 11 .No' .u.| ':>:Oe. l b...‘l .\ u ’0‘ _“I:‘1 ""v..\,, v..~- u.“ . .— ,~ . 'ui- h“ . N- . "a -v 1 u . . his . ’4 4 ‘b ll 3. Overprotection and fear of losing their jobs could result in respondents' underestimation in viewing their professional develOpment needs. This might be more so in the case Of non-Saudi respondents. On the other hand, fear of offending the central administration could affect the Objectivity in rating the barrier statements. in 4. Only completed questionnaires will be utilized this investigation. Definition of Terms Competengy statements. Refer to specific skills, behaviors, and knowledge thought to be important for teachers Of the mentally retarded. Perceived need. The respondents' assessment of their needs regarding professional develOpment. Barrier. A program component that could be limiting the quality of the program. Mentally retarded. According to the definition set forth by the Ministry of Education, a mentally retarded child is "one whose IQ is between 50-75." Special Educators Training Institute. A one-year teacher training program located in Cairo, Egypt. Most of the respondents surveyed are graduates of this institute. Competency Based Teacher Education. Refers to teacher education programs where demonstrated competence of teaching skills is the criterion for certification. 12 7. The six schools. Two schools are located in each of three cities, Riyadh, Jidda, and Dammam, and are known as The Mentally Retarded Institution for Boys/Girls. Organization of the Study The first chapter Of this investigation included the introduction, purpose and Objective Of the study, research questions, and the importance of this inquiry, including the scope and perceived limitations. Related literature will be reviewed in the second chapter, beginning with a look into the special education program in Saudi Arabia, its history, and present status. The second section will examine the history and the trends in preparing special educators. The third part will review Competency Based Teacher Education, the problem Of identifying competencies, and those competencies thought to be important for teachers of exceptional children in general, and the ones needed for teachers of the mentally retarded in particular will be explored. Chapter III presents the methodology, the pro- cedures followed in preparing the instrument, subjects, data collection, and data analysis will be described. Chapter IV provides data analysis and the Obtained results. In Chapter V, a discussion, conclusions, recommendations, and summary will be provided. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE Introduction The literature reviewed for this study is divided into three main areas. The first area pertains to the history and present status of special education programs in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In this part, the establish- ment and the continuing develOpment of services for the handicapped are reviewed. Such a review is deemed necessary in order to establish an understanding of the present status of special education in that country. The second area reviews studies regarding the different trends and develop- mental changes that have taken place through the years in the preparation of special educators in the United States. The third area examines Competency Based Teacher Education, and the competencies requisite for teachers of handicapped children in general, and those for teachers of the mentally retarded in particular. Education of the Handicapped in Saudi Arabia Special education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is still in its infancy. As recently as 1958, a group of 13 . D '0‘ ’ '.ou ‘ p .e "‘ v" ' ._ . ... .-p~o A ,. o n--- . . . .— ..._u . . ,- g. ‘D— <>i Ii 5» -. so ~— . " D...'.. .‘ o.... . \ 'kb--.¢- ~.- ~... -- 7’ " v.-- - v .. __“- . >— .. C... c I A ~ - ~14. "'~“ O b . Q ~.‘ "—~ ‘ \ 's~”~_ -\ ‘5?" .5.- . ‘e.. v _ Q..- . ‘ l . -. \ --_. s fl_‘_ ‘4 ‘ ‘r- 'I e“‘ \‘ , u . .. a- _ ‘ l "un. F.- . U 14 volunteers started evening classes in the capital city, Riyadh, to teach some of the visually handicapped using the Braille method. Two years later, in 1960, these evening classes were converted into an institution known as The Light Institute for Teaching and Training the Blind in Riyadh. Other institutes were then established in different cities to serve the visually handicapped. In 1964, special education services were broadened to include the deaf, when two institutes were established in Riyadh to provide educa- tion to deaf boys and girls separately. In 1971, the mentally retarded were finally granted the rights of education and training when two institutes were established in the capital city, Riyadh, to offer services for some of the mentally handicapped (Ministry of Education 1972). In the academic year 1979-1980, there were 26 institutions serving 2334 students (Al-Jazeerah 1979). Services are provided in institutional settings for all student categories, except for some students who live in the cities where the institutions are, and who have families who are willing to drive them to and from the school. Although the goals of special education may differ from one country to another, and from one group to another, the author believes that the most important goal that has to be taken into consideration universally, when planning or implementing services for the handicapped, regardless of the ne- 15 kind or the degree of their handicap, is that of enabling each child to develop to the maximum Of his/her potentiality. The direction of the needed development is usually drawn from each country's political, economic, cultural and religious principles. It is equally important to mention here that regardless of how good they sound or appear, goals have no value unless they are converted into practice. As stated in the Report on Special Education of Handicapped Persons, the goals of special education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are: A. Moral and Religious Education--Train them in performing the duties of the Orthodox Islamic faith, protect them from delinquency and guide their behavior towards moral and religious values that are considered the foundation of their psychological and moral adjustment in an Islamic society. B. Preserving General Health and Physical Fitness-- Protect them from diseases, create health consciousness in them and train them in maintaining their physical fitness, teach them to care for themselves, acquire sound health habits and how to move around easily and recognize the sources of danger. C. Social Adjustment--Guide and train the handicapped (with the help of experts) to take active participation in their community, to contact other people and COOperate with them as equal individuals who abide by the laws Of social conduct and public welfare, help them to reach the point where they can accept and face reality, to adjust to all situations in a way which enables them to satisfy needs and overcome tensions, and to establish relations with the society on the basis of positivity and self-confidence. D. Vocational Adjustment--DevelOp the sane and sound physical and mental skills and potentialities Of the handicapped by steering them to occupations l6 and professions that suit their abilities. This is based on the theory that what is left for a person is more important than what is lost for him. Vocational adjustment Operations cover professional training and create desirable habits in the successful worker such as perseverance, concentration and social response such as obedience and good character. Academic Education--Create an educated handicapped person. Either adopt the general curriculum for those handicapped who enjoy the same mental capacities as sound persons--such as the blind and the paralyzed or prepare special curricula for other groups which provide them with an adequate number of fundamental courses that suit their mental capacities. Public Awakening and Granting the Handicapped Special Facilities--In view of the fact that the problem of the handicapped concerns in the first place all members of the society and affects the competence of a sizable number of the community, the programs of Special Education aim, among other things, at putting science, the efforts of experts and the various media of information in the service of spreading public awareness in order to explain the nature of the problem, provide guidance to parents and get the society acquainted with the capacities and capabilities of handicapped persons, the methods to deal with them and the methods of protection against disability of any kind. This includes easing of the burdens of life for the handicapped and granting them special privileges to facilitate their socio-economic stability, such as passing legislation that govern their employment, granting them reductions in transportation fares, exempting them from paying custom duties, granting extra allowances to those working for the handicapped, creating industries for them that enjoy protection against competition, establishing audio-visual libraries and organizing services of home schooling for the handicapped who have not yet reached school age or are Of Older age. All this is done in line with the modern world renaissance and in accordance with the most modern technical methods applied by advanced countries. (Ministry of Education 1972, pp. 7-9) 17 The conversion Of educational goals into practice is the responsibility of the administrative body which has the authority to make decisions regarding planning and implementing a suitable delivery system, hiring the needed personnel, providing the needed equipment, buildings, materials, etc., constructing curricula that serve the outlined goals and objectives, and supervising the overall program Operation. For a delivery system to be Operated efficiently, well-trained human resources are a must. These resources include teachers, administrators, consultants, directors, and other support personnel. Another important factor is the availability Of sufficient financial resources. In the case of Saudi Arabia, with its huge wealth, financial resources have no significance as a barrier in reaching quality special education. The special education budget for the year 1960-61 was about $25,000, whereas in the year 1976-77 it was increased up to about $27,000,000 (Al-Jazeerah 1979). On the other hand, human resources form a serious Obstacle. Both the quality and the quantity of Saudi teachers in the area of special education are far from sufficient to meet the existing need. This is also true in education in general, especially at the junior high and high school levels. In 1972, teachers of the mentally retarded were rmn-Saudis, from neighboring Arab countries, who had one ,- ,b‘" .A :I‘ f) \I-V- ‘ ,..~...~ O .-p. .0. l4 . -~.,_ . A i b. M (II ; .- "5 '4 n, ‘7‘ n u 1 v- ‘0 .- .m. \. . u‘ -e. " ‘1 k: ’b.‘ s A u “ \- \. ... : ~~ . . . .‘I d \- ‘ t I . _. I - ‘1‘». . >§ It ', LY ~ 4 18 year Of training in special education after high school (UNESCO 1972). According to recent statistics, out of the 711 teachers in special education, 432, or 61%, are Saudis. The majority of them are in the area Of visually handicapped, 404 teachers, or 83%. Twenty-two teachers, or 15%, are teachers of the deaf, and 6 teachers, or 7%, teach in the area of mental retardation (Ministry of Education 1979). As far as the quality Of teacher education is concerned, it may be looked at from two different perspectives. First, some Saudi teachers are trained in occasional train- ing courses, independent of any permanent system, lasting from 2-6 months (UNESCO 1971). Another alternative for training special educators has been to send classroom educators, who have spent a minimum Of two years teaching, to enroll in The Special Educators Training Institute for one year, to be trained in one of three areas, visually handicapped, deaf, or mental retardation. These teachers are enrolled in the institute on a voluntary basis. The Special Education Department at the Ministry of Education seems to be dissatisfied with the outcome of this training program; therefore, scholarships have been stopped, and the administration is seeking other programs available in other Arab countries. However, as of April 1980, rm other alternatives have been found because all Arab o .. .n. -... o v .o , a. a. ,. ..'- . - .... " ~p< . .u- ~.-' 19 countries are in the same situation when it comes to special education. Another solution that the administration is con- sidering is OOOperation with local universities to establish a training program (General Director Of Special Education Programs; personal communication Feb. 1980). Second, non— Saudi teachers are mainly Egyptians who have completed one year of training at the training institute mentioned above. They form a great majority, especially in the areas of the deaf and of mental retardation. The author Of this survey questions the dedication of most of the non—Saudi teachers, a factor which is likely to affect the outcome of their teach- ing one way or another, because it is believed that most non-Saudi personnel came to Saudi Arabia to earn a living more than anything else. The physical facilities of almost all institutions are former villas (UNESCO 1972). The Carnegie-Mellon Institute of Research (1977) reports that the present plant facilities are not sufficient to facilitate services. In most cases institu- tions are founded in leased spaces that were not constructed to serve for educational purposes. Reports indicate that small classes, as well as lack of space for Offices, teachers' lounges, playgrounds and indoor gymnasiums, are considered as having negative effects on program outcomes (UNESCO 1972). The number Of children in need of special education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is still undetermined. During the year 1974-75, out of 865,545 school-age children, , 20 1784 handicapped children were receiving special education services. This is the equivalent of 0.21%. In 1977, out Of 652,474 school—age boys, "only" 1690, or 0.26%, handi- capped boys were served (Nader 1979). In the area of mental retardation, Dunn (1969) estimates the total number of the mentally retarded to be about 12,000 to 16,000. This number is divided into the following categories: EMR boys 3,700 to 5,400 EMR girls 830 to 1,660 TMR 1,200 and SMR 6,250 to 7,500 Dunn's estimates are based on the school-age pOpulation as of 1967-1968. Mikkelsen (1971) estimates the number of mentally retarded in Saudi Arabia to be 25,000. According tO UNESCO (1972), in addition to the number of the total population and its distribution by age groups, the newborn rate, and the mortality rate, the following considerations have to be kept in mind before a realistic estimate of numbers can be obtained: 1. The definition of who is considered mentally retarded; 2. The principle difficulties of the country; and, 3. The characteristics of the po ulation from which the sample is drawn. (p. 26? u... ov-I .. ”.. .vn, ...5 - . --v.. . n-.. .- --.. '._ . . ::\:‘ A ~"‘\.] I_ v. s V. L 21 Preparation of Special Educators Since the voluminous literature on the subject of preparation Of special educators is time consuming to review, this part of the chapter will focus primarily on the historical background of this preparation and the growth trends which have accompanied the continuing changes in preparing special educators in general, and teachers of the mentally retarded in particular. History The emergence of training teachers to work with the handicapped can be traced back to the late 18th and 19th centuries. Outstanding specialists such as Hauys Abbe de L'Epee, Heinicke, Pereira, Elliot, Itard, Seguin and Gallaudet were Offering in-service training in different forms: 1) supervisory on—the-job instruction, 2) short, intensive courses held on the school sites, or 3) live-in apprenticeships in residential schools (Connor 1976). Summer sessions and special courses were the next develOpments to take place in teacher preparation, according to Connor. Preceding the establishment Of special education departments in colleges and universities, professional training used to take place in residential settings. In 1904, Vineland Training School Opened its doors for training teachers of the mentally retarded in a summer training 22 session (Hill 1945). Before that, in 1891, Gallaudet College started training of teachers of the deaf (Craig 1942). Among the first institutions to offer special education courses were the University of Pennsylvania, with a three—course sequence in the "Education of the Mentally Retarded" in 1897, New York University with one course in the "Education Of Defectives" in 1906, and Columbia University, 1908, which offered a course under the title "Psychology and Education of Exceptional Children" (Wallen 1914). Such initiations were in part a response to the large demand on teachers who possessed the needed skills in working with the handicapped, so that enough teachers would be available for public schools, where many types of handicapped students were. According to DeRidder (1950), the increase in the enrollment of handicapped students in public schools was attributed to "increased enforcement of compulsory education laws," and the preference for students to attend community schools rather than going to residential institutions. Much attention was devoted to the quantity of teachers to meet the increasing demand, while some individual concerns were voiced as indications of the need for looking into the qualifications of the special education teachers (Miller 1910, Sickle et a1. 1911, Wallen 1924, Haines 1925, and Darsie 1929). For example, in 1924 Wallen considered the following three requirements to be basic for teachers preparing to work with any handicapped children. These were: (a) 23 preliminary fundamental training equivalent to a two-year professional course in a standard normal school or college; (b) basic technical training, including courses in clinical psychology and psychopathology, or subnormal and abnormal children, and in the clinical examination of exceptional children, including physical, anthrOpometric, and psychological tests, and the working-up of case histories through field investigations. In addition thereto, they should possess (c) specific technical preparation for training the particular type of defective which they expect to teach, including courses in the necessary sensori-motor, industrial arts, specific corrective and remedial training, and adequate observation and practice under competent critic teachers. Special class teachers should have earned from twelve to fifteen semester hours' credit in the basic and the specific technical courses. (p. 110) Frampton (1955) suggested the following five steps that have to be taken into consideration when planning a program or a curriculum to prepare special education teachers. They were: 1. 4. Analysis of both the apparent needs of each type of exceptional child and the existing teaching methods of meeting these needs. An analysis of the special training the teacher needs for work with each type of exceptionality if she is to provide effective service. A series of area curricula and admission standards based on 1 and 2 above. A study of the situations and problems common to all areas, and also of those distinctive of each area. To those horizontal and vertical courses an orienta- tion course should be added. (In (I! e1 I‘D- bv a. g... A .vu ... . -... ‘ u a. ‘.-~. _ i --:-.v.- an 5 I ‘7;- -. _. . A . - ‘ . .. .- .... .’ .._ \ .- d. . ...._. " _ ...‘.‘. ‘. u“. .~ ‘ ...__ _‘ 4 ._ ‘ . h“‘ \. ‘- . . .. _‘- ._ ~v . _.“' ~ . 1° ._ .‘ NAVQ'.‘ ‘\ .- “§ - I n .h“ ;‘ ..‘ ‘ .. u‘.‘ A ‘ v .. _ N . l \' . “ . ‘ ~‘-., a. ., 4., . . ‘., .‘ “~J ‘ 1‘: . -“ . ‘ -C \ ‘-‘ ._ - .. \“‘ ‘ ‘ .‘~ 24 5. The entire program must be in detail and must be submitted for criticism to a large number of experts in general education and also in special education, both teachers and administrators. Frampton also recommended that candidates for preparation programs should have a previous degree and experience with non-handicapped children. In September of 1958, special education in general and the preparation of personnel in particular entered a new era. It was then that P.L. 85-926 was passed, authorizing grants to universities and colleges for training leadership personnel in mental retardation. In 1963, P.L. 88-164 was enacted to include several disability areas in addition to mental retardation. A number of other laws were passed thereafter, the most recent of which was P.L. 94-142 (the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975), with all of them aiming toward the betterment of education of handi- capped children and the expansion of the theoretical and empirical data base Of special education (Burk 1976, Martin 1968). According to Schleir (1931), a growing concern over the quality of special education teachers was evident. Several states had specified the need for special training and certification of teachers in order to educate the - -',-.. ...a u .- -- ‘ ,~-~e-u I)! 25 physically and mentally handicapped. By the year 1952, 32 states had established their certification requirements for teachers and other special education personnel (Goldberg 1952). In 1966, the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) issued a report on "Professional Standards for Personnel in the Education Of Exceptional Children." These standards were meant to apply to institutions of higher education Offering preparation programs for teachers of exceptional children. The report covered areas such as: organization and administration of preparation programs, selection of teacher candidates, faculty, curricula, facilities, and student teachers. As far as the curriculum was concerned, a "common core of knowledge" was deemed important for all those seeking to work with the exceptional children, consist- ing Of courses in areas such as human learning, child develOpment, differential psychology, language develOpment, and skills in psycho-educational procedures and remediation and motor development in children. In the area of special education, the report recommended that general knowledge in relation to characteristics, prevalence, educational pro- cedures, and research of all disability areas be included in every preparation program. On the other hand, it recommended that certification for individual categories include at least the following: n.- o..- .... ~.... ,. u... ‘s. v... 26 a) nature, needs, and problems of children with the exceptionality; b) methods and materials in the education of the particular group of children; c) history, philoSOphy, and research relevant to the particular field and to exceptional children generally; and d) a broad program of laboratory and field experience. (pp. 9—10) Trends As a growing concern developed over the effectiveness of categorical special education and the efficacy Of special classes, Dunn (1968) and Nelson (1971), among other researchers, brought to the scene of teacher preparation several alter— native models, such as resource room teachers, itinerant teachers, clinical teachers, and other specialists to help the regular classroom teachers meet the needs of handicapped students who had been brought back to public schools. Criticizing special classes and their effectiveness, Dunn (1968) called for a special education revolution. He stated: We should try keeping slow-learning children more in the mainstream of education, with special educators serving as diagnostic, clinical, remedia, resource room, itinerant and/or team teachers, consultants, and develOpers of instructional materials. . . . (p. 11) Along With his proposal, Dunn suggested the establishment of "Special Education Diagnostic and Prescription Generating Centers." Slow-learning pupils would be enrolled in SUCh centers, where master teachers of different specializations "perceptual training, remedial education, motor development: 27 etc." who had access to physicians, psychologists, and social workers, would prescribe effective teaching methods to be followed by the classroom teacher. Schwartz (1971) further explained the task of a clinical teacher as being able to 1) diagnose children with varying disabilities which include assessing individual differences regarding maturation, social, academic, and prevocational behaviors, and 2) prescribe and implement individualized instruction, which includes educational analysis, planning, curricula develOpment, and media utilization. McKenzie et a1. (1970) designed a graduate program leading to a Master of Education degree to prepare consulting teachers to assist elementary teachers in the management and education of handicapped children. Consulting teachers differ from resource teachers and clinical teachers in that they have no direct classroom responsibilities; rather, they help the regular classroom teacher in his/her room with diagnosis and apprOpriate remediation to meet the needs of handicapped students. Curriculum components to train such a specialist, according to McKenzie, include the following: 1. Instruction in principles Of behavior modification; 2. Application of these principles to meet the needs of handicapped children in regular classrooms; 3. Precise daily measurement and monitoring of a child's progress to ensure that contingencies, methods, and materials are effective; 4. Procedures for training parents and teachers in the principles and application of behavior modification techniques; 28 5. Research training to increase skills in devising and evaluating education tactics; 6. Development of supplementary materials suited to the particular needs of handicapped learners; 7. Methods of advising elementary school teachers in the management and education of handicapped learners. (p. 138) As far as the training of teachers Of the mentally retarded is concerned, attention was given to the quality of their training as far back as the 19305. The special education subcommittee of the "White House Conference on Child Health and Protection," which was held in 1930, found that a large portion of students preparing to teach excep- tional children were those planning to work with the mentally retarded. The majority of them enrolled in a six-week training course, or less. In its recommendations, the committee suggested that general knowledge in the education of the handicapped children should be included in programs preparing teachers, principals, and supervisors for work in elementary schools. On the other hand, for those pre- paring to teach the mentally retarded, in addition to the completion of the requirements Of regular classroom teachers, the following areas were suggested by the committee: 1. Mental hygiene, 2. Corrective physical training, 3. Speech improvement and correction, 4. Individual testing of mentally handicapped children, 5. Special methods of teaching mentally handicapped children, 6. Observation, participation, and practice teaching in classes for the mentally handicapped. (White House Conference, 1931, pp. 560-7) 29 Olson and Hans (1964) described a similar, yet more elaborate program to prepare teachers Of the mentally retarded. The main components of the program were: 1. a sound general education with an emphasis on courses in the behavioral sciences, depending on each student's interests and previous experiences; 2. early exposure to the field of special education, through volunteer activities with the MR, member- ship in professional organizations, and early exposure to university courses in the area Of mental retardation; 3. instruction in curriculum and teaching methodology; and 4. an Opportunity to observe excellence in teaching. The fourth component was viewed as the most important aspect of any teacher preparation program. According to Olson and Hans, traditional practicum experiences were not sufficient to fulfill such requirements; they encouraged teacher trainers to demonstrate to their students the application of the principles that they taught them. Also, master teachers could be utilized by having the students Observe their teaching and evaluate it jointly with the professors. A more detailed and comprehensive preparation program for teachers of the mentally retarded was presented in the 30 Council for Exceptional Children report "Professional Standards for Personnel in the Education Of Exceptional Children" (CBC 1966). The highlights of the program were: A. (Historical, philoSOphical, and sociocultural foundations; B. Behavioral develOpment, growth, maturation, and learning; C. Measurement and evaluation; D. Instruction, curriculum-methodology; and E. Practicum, observation, demonstration, participation, and student teaching. As mentioned earlier, inadequacies of categorical special education, especially for the mildly handicapped, were an issue of heated debates and numerous studies among specialists--Dunn (1968), Lilly (1971), Hammons (1972), Gallagher (1972), Connor (1964), Johnson (1962), and Blatt (1960). All were expressing their dissatisfaction with the segregation practiced in special education. The result was a return to practices similar to those in the early period of special education, accomplished by placing the mildly handicapped back into public schools and reserving the separate classes and/or buildings for the more severely handicapped. Thus, the emphasis in teacher education programs was altered in order to provide qualified personnel to meet the needs of the handicapped in their new settings. 31 Teacher Competencies Introduction Several factors were thought to be forcing the call for changes in special education teacher education. Among these factors were: 1) the policy of holding schools accountable for providing quality education for all children, 2) legal decisions regarding the inadequacy of evaluation procedures used with culturally different children, and 3) criticism of special education services' quality (Meyen 1976, Anderson et a1. 1976, and Bullock et a1. 1973). One direction which specialists in the field are now following in preparing personnel to work with exceptional children is Competency Based Teacher Education (CBTE). Bullock (1973) states: In response to the accountability movement, concentrated efforts have been made to delineate competencies relevant to teachers of emotionally disturbed and socially maladjusted students, which may become the basis of college/university training programs in this area of specialization. (p. 8) The Problem of Competency Identification A major obstacle in implementing CBTE programs is the identification and validation of competency statements. In this regard, Lilly (1979) indicates that "competency-based training is exciting and rewarding. . . . DevelOpment of competencies sometimes seems like a frustrating, impossible ' I ' u. 3 .o--'; “I ..'. y" u .- “A -,D‘ . 'CV"“I I q-.v¢v|¢' no ' “..A' "O-Lbl 'u..-.‘ ‘ I - ‘ "--..g. - “ :V‘Ouo. ‘4". '-.- , ,‘nqhau .. ‘su \ "U5....‘ ..A I 5h— s. ' I p... *- '~“-- ~ s . .- ~.~ .. 1'14._~_ . .-\ I..."Un_- .l'. '- ~ \_~ '- ' 8 a 3”. a M~. *. '2- up... 'Q . ";- _ S N.- Y-‘ ”‘5. h VI I A v. . In ‘9. I u... . . < 5“ ‘n C)! N‘ ". U, ‘ *1. t ‘0 \ "a 32 task . . ." (p. 25). The literature reviewed reveals different approaches that have been applied to identify and/or validate competencies. Some of these approaches will be analyzed. Reliance on experts' Opinions. Applying this approach, needed competencies are generated by specialists in the field of special education, such as researchers, teacher educators, and leaders in state departments Of education. Examples of such procedures are reported by the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (1976), Newcomer (1978), Cruichshank (1966), and Rosenshine and Furst (1971). According to Shores et a1. (1973), competency statements in the above-mentioned works are more of "broad standards for training"(as in Cruichshank and NASDTEC) or "specific behavior statement" (as in Rosen- shine and Furst). Although he believes that expert opinion is an "apprOpriate starting place" toward the identification of competencies, he states that it "does not constitute sufficient validation." Another approach, which is regarded as an extension of the previous one, is that of weighing competencies generated by experts against the perceptions of practitioners (i.e., teachers of exceptional children, principals, Super- visors, support Personnel, and others) regarding the need for, and the importance of, such competencies in their daily 33 routine with the handicapped. Several investigations have reported the use Of this approach (Mackie et al. 1959, Mackie et a1. 1957, Giguere 1966, Gargiulo 1979, Freeman and Backer 1979, Monaco and Chiapetta 1978, Northcott 1972, Dorward 1963, Dykes 1975, Dziuban and Sullivan 1978, Bullock and Whelan 1971, Hoeksema 1975, Herr, Algozzine, and Heuchert 1975, Anttonen 1972, and Smith 1979). Practitioners against whom competency statements were weighed in these studies included: regular classroom teachers, special education teachers, state department administrators, local education agency administrators, state directors of special education, teacher educators, and school principals. The population studied ranged from graduates of a single institution to national participation, but no cross-cultural studies have been sighted. Although the verification of competency lists which have been develOped by experts against the judgment of practitioners has brought the problem of competency identi- fication one step closer to being resolved, this procedure has its shortcomings. This led Shores et a1. (1973) to state: Before a competency statement is considered valid, 1t should be demonstrated that successful teachers actually engage in the behavior or skill described, that the skill discriminates between successful and unsuccessful teachers, and that it has the desired effect on children's classroom performance. (P- 193) In lieu of asking teachers Of the educable mentally retarded to identify the essential tasks for their work, .- -¢ 34 Rotberg (1973) used an Observational method called "the critical incident technique" to determine those tasks. Observations were carried out by four groups professionally associated with the education of the educable mentally retarded. The groups were composed of 132 teachers, 3 teachers' supervisors, 45 principals of schools with classes for the educable mentally retarded, and 11 student teachers. Participants were oriented in group meetings, or individually, then provided with standard forms to be used for reporting observed behaviors. Coker (1976) reports a similar approach which was used to identify and measure teacher competencies for the Carroll County Project. The first year of the project was spent on literature search, acquiring documents and infor- mation, and visiting sites. The monitoring committee, consisting of three classroom teachers and three regular consultants, cooperatively developed a list Of generic competencies. Following these statements, the committee listed performance criteria for each competency. Then five observational instruments were selected to be used in measuring the identified competencies in classrooms. Out of all the teachers in Carroll County, 63 volunteers to participate in the project. Three of those were selected for observation tasks, and the remaining 60 have agreed to serve as subjects. All phases of the study were then explained h A d. we: - I .u-r-v-q p .- . . ’F “HQ. >- .' U53. ,- - ,.-~'. , _—. “.3 l. ’ A, v.“ I‘ V‘VI n h; 0 ~’ H J. . m;.;.~‘ ~.._ -v. ’(’ '1 ‘1) F4 11‘ (I) 35 to observees in summer workshOps. Explanations included competencies, Observation instruments, and student outcome measures. A series of observations was conducted with the use of the five observational instruments to record observed behaviors. In his concluding remarks Coker states: To design and implement such a certification system based on demonstrated competence will require many years of well-planned studies. . . . Preliminary findings indicate that it is worthy Of investi- gation, as it offers at least a feasible alternate to present systems of establishing credentials. (p. 56) Competencies of Teachers of the Handicapped Prior to the mid-'505, personality traits and personal qualifications were used to characterize good teachers. In 1947, for example, Symonds described a successful teacher as the one who: A. Likes teaching; B. Is personally secure, has self-respect, dignity, and courage; C. Identifies himself with the children; D. Accepts aggression of boys and girls, laziness, (slowness, etc.; E. Is free from anxiety; and F. Is not self-centered or selfish. In 1950, Lord and Kirk had a similar set of personal qualifications which differentiated successful special ,...- -n a... .. Ju ,vho‘ A? d. .u 05 ‘ - - In- ‘9 - ~.b Uhh -. . .. '3': ( i-n...‘ "'-n'- ' ‘ bun--- -v0. 7 n \v' ' . g .— ol . .- . u. u. r a fit a V n . I. . . ~ . l .. O .. z N \- n u n 0. u a v- a n u . . a. z - I I e l . - n e . l I v. I i . . . ‘ I '0 I 1| I . 'o 1 .I - 'i ‘- ‘ K _v .4 ‘ 1‘. .‘ .. .‘- . '._ —‘ s 1 .I ~\‘ '.‘ s 36 education teachers from nonsuccessful ones. Such sets of traits or qualifications were based on an individual effort and Opinion. H. E. Robinson (1955) surveyed the Opinion of 547 teachers, 173 superintendents, and 28 college professors in the State of Texas regarding the basic education of teachers of special education. The ten most desirable "personality traits" and "competencies" in order of impor- tance were: 1. Possessing a sincere regard for and appreciation of children; 2. Possessing an understanding of the nature, and how to nurture the needs of, exceptional children and the wishes of parents; 3. Mastery Of subject matter in the core areas, including remedial reading; 4. Being able to accept slight improvement of children with serious limitations; 5. Being rated as an outstanding teacher with prior eXperience with normal children; 6. Being mature, stable, and wholesomely sound mentally, emotionally, and physically; 7. Master of the use of all available materials and a variety of teaching methods; 8. Being kind, considerate, and cooperative, with initiative in working with everyone interested in exceptional children; 9. Being courteous, mannerly, and tactful in dealing with children and parents; 10. Possessing faith in self and in the potential of children. (pp. 276-7) In 1959, Mackie, Dunn, and Cain reported the general findings from their separate studies Of ten areas of special education. The intent Of the report, entitled "Professional Preparation of Teachers of Exceptional Children," was to "trace the common threads running through the qualifications ...p - D .- .C 37 and preparation of special teachers" (p. 2). The following competencies were reported as being important to teachers of the handicapped: 1. Technical knowledge apprOpriate to the specialized area: - Social and psychological understanding. - Professional literature and research. - Medical factors. - Legislative provisions. 2. DevelOping and adjusting the curriculum and using specialized teaching methods: - Individualize curriculum. - Appropriate teaching methods. - Create favorable classroom environment. - Develop skills needed by the child because of his deviation. - Provide stimulating experiences for intellectual, social growth. - Provide Opportunities for the handicapped to play and work with normal children. 3. Counseling and guiding: - Help pupils with their educational, as well as social, emotional and vocational problems. - Counsel children on their personal attitudes toward their handicaps. 4. Tests and records: - Ability to organize cumulative records of children. - Ability to draw educational interpretations from: 1. medical reports 2. psychological reports 3. reports of social workers - Ability to administer individual IQ tests. - Ability to administer group achievement tests. 5. Working with adults and organizations: - Understanding of the purpose Of local and national agencies concerned with the handicapped. - Ability to work with parents. 6. Administration and organization Of programs: - Ability to contribute to community leadership in establishing an educational program for children in the special area. 7. Teaching in more than one area Of exceptionality: - Knowledge of methods of teaching the mentally retarded and the gifted. 8. Education of normal children: - Knowledge of methods and techniques Of teaching normal children. 38 9. Personal traits, characteristics: - Flexibility, resourcefulness, understanding, and patience. (pp. 18-35, 100-1) In the literature reviewed, several studies were directed toward the investigation Of important teaching competencies of a single category. Some were comparisons between two groups of teachers in two different professional areas, such as elementary and special education teachers (Gargiulo 1979), and regular classroom teachers and teachers of the emotionally disturbed (Dorward 1963), or comparisons with an earlier study (Bullock and Whelan 1971). Some of these studies will be analyzed in this part of the review of literature for two reasons: 1. The trend toward "more generic, support-oriented special education personnel" (Reynolds 1979, p. 6), and 2. The Opinion that "the responsibility of the preparation programs remains to produce teachers who can function maximally in each of the educational settings available to handicapped children and youth" (Connor 1976, p. 392). In 1979, Freeman and Becker conducted a study "to examine the opinion structure" of professionals in the State Of Illinois regarding the relative importance of competencies for teachers of the learning disabled. On the basis of the competency document prepared by the Division for Children 39 with Learning Disabilities, Freeman and Becker develOped a list of 66 competency statements. The re5pondents, consisting of 409 specialists in learning disabilities, were asked to rate each of the competency statements on a five- point scale, with (1) indicating low importance, and (5) indicating high importance. As the findings of the study indicate, the following competencies received the highest rating by the total group: A. Interpreting assessment results to parents and teachers; Planning, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating the remedial programs for the learning disabled child with special emphasis on reading; Selecting appropriate curricular materials and teaching strategies; Assisting the classroom teacher with appropriate suggestions for teaching and behavior management; Establishing effective working relationships and lines of communication with other educators. The following two competencies were reported to receive the lowest rating which was slightly under "average" importance: A. Explaining historical and theoretical positions associated with learning disability; and Designing and implementing research projects and reporting results in publications or presentations. (p. 76) 40 In a study aimed at differentiating between the perceptions of elementary and special education teachers regarding the needed competencies, Gargiulo and Pigge (1979) asked 300 elementary school teachers and 200 special education teachers (both groups were graduates of Bowling Green State University between 1968-1974 who were still teaching in Ohio) to respond to a list of 26 competency statements indicating their needs by selecting one of five response possibilities ranging from "not applicable" to "extensive need." Only slight differences were reported between the two groups as shown below. The five most needed competencies, as ranked according to their degree of need by the two groups, were: Special Education Elementary Teachers Teachers Competency Statement Rank Rank Ability to maintain order in a 1 3 classroom and to assist in the development of self-discipline Ability to motivate student 2 1 achievement via modeling, rein- forcement, provision of success experiences, and appeal to student interests. Ability to encourage and facilitate 3 5 the development of social skills and enhance self-concept. Ability to utilize Observational 4 6 techniques effectively in the classroom. Ability to utilize reading organi- 5 8 zation skills to divide a class into reading groups. (p. 341) 41 Another comparative study was carried out by Bullock and Whelan (1971). They asked 47 teachers of the emotionally disturbed in a mid-western state to rate a list of 88 competency statements according to their perceived importance, using a 4-point scale. The competency list used in this inquiry was develOped and used in an earlier investigation by Mackie et a1. (1957) as part Of the nation-wide survey to determine competencies needed for teachers of exceptional children. In their study, Bullock and Whelan wanted to see how the competencies are rated in comparison to ratings Of the earlier investigation. Findings of the study reported some differences in perception of importance between the two inquiries. Out of the 88 competencies, 12 were rated as being "very important," whereas in Mackie's investigation, 20 items were so rated. Only 5 out Of the 12 competencies were rated "very important" in the earlier study. The following are a rank order of the 12 "very important" competencies: 1. A knowledge or understanding of the advantages of providing experiences in which pupils can be successful. 2. A knowledge or understanding of the education and psychology of various types Of exceptional children. 3. The ability to tolerate antisocial behavior, particularly when it is directed toward authority. 4. A knowledge or understanding of basic human physical and psychological needs. 5. A knowledge or understanding of techniques adaptable to classroom situations for relieving tensions and promoting good mental health. 6. A knowledge or understanding of the advantages of flexibility of school programs and schedules to permit individual develOpment and adjustment. 42 7. The ability to establish "limits" of social con- trol (neither overprotective nor over-restrictive). 8. The ability to develop self-imposed social control within the pupils. 9. The ability to establish and maintain good working relationships with other professional workers, such as social workers and psychological personnel. 10. The ability to teach remedial reading. 11. The ability to avoid identical stereotyped demands of maladjusted pupils. 12. A knowledge or understanding of curriculum and methods of teaching the normal pupil.* (p. 487) Mary Kay Dykes (1975) conducted a study to investigate the competencies needed by teachers of the crippled and other health-impaired children. Participants in this study were state department administrators of COHI** programs, local ed- ucation agency administrators of COHI programs, and teachers of COHI children. Out of 395 nation-wide contacts, 179 com- pleted forms were received; 76 local education agency admin— istrators, 72 teachers, and 31 state department administrators. Respondents were asked to identify the competencies needed by special educators working with COHI children from a list con- taining 155 competency statements. Results of the study indicate that most of the competencies were needed, not only by teachers of the COHI, but by all persons employed to work in COHI programs. More similar competencies were perceived as needed by teachers and state department administrators than by state department administrators and local education agency *Competencies 1, 5, 6, 8, and 11 were also rated "very important" in the Mackie study. **This term is being replaced by POHI (physically and otherwise health-impaired). 43 administrators (pp. 371—3). NO comparison between the perception of teachers and that of local education agency administrators was reported. Competencies Of Teachers of the Mentally Retarded Characteristics, skills, and competencies of teachers of the mentally retarded have been the subject Of many studies throughout the literature dealing with special edu- cation. This part of the review of literature will focus on some of the studies that have been reported dealing with competencies necessary for teachers Of the mentally retarded. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, the concern over the qualities of teachers of the mentally retarded can be traced back to the 19305. Concerns were eXpressed on an individual basis by suggesting a number of courses which were thought to be ideal for preparing outstanding teachers for the mentally retarded. This was also true regarding the qualifications or the characteristics of successful teachers of the mentally retarded. They were a mere reflection of personal opinion. Fields (1953) listed ten qualities which he thought characterized a successful teacher of the mentally retarded: 1. Should see the need for and be in sympathy with the philosophy behind a Special program for the mentally retarded; 2. Should have a well-balanced, emotionally mature personality; 3. Should have a good understanding and acceptance of children; 4. Should be able to create and maintain an effective relationship with others; 5. Should be willing to seek help from all available sources; 44 6. Should have special skill in planning and organizing; 7. Should have good physical health and maintain a good appearance; 8. Should have adequate training; 9. Should gain satisfaction from her/his work; 10. Should be able to guide and counsel children wisely. (pp. 253-256) Similar qualifications and/or characteristics were reported by Wolinsky (1959) and Meisgeir (1965). In a nation-wide investigation, Mackie, Williams, and Dunn (1957) develOped a list of 100 competency statements divided into 7 subcategories: 1. Understanding the mentally retarded child in his place in society; 2. DevelOping a functional curriculum; 3. Understanding and applying appropriate pedagogical procedures; 4. Selecting, develOping, and using apprOpriate instructional materials and equipment; 5. General orientation in special education; 6. Interpersonal relationships; and 7. Administrative and legal information. Teachers participating in this survey were asked to rate the importance of each statement on a scale of 4 levels: very important, important, less important, and not important. They were also asked to indicate their level of competence in each statement by selecting one of three choices: good, fair, or not prepared. Regarding ratings of importance, the teachers rated 36 items "very important," 58 items "important," ot“ p- unu- .u, y .. “n: 9" a vii in ..,.~ \ I‘d“ A . a" ’I u“ 45 and only 6 items "less important." None of the competencies received an average rating of "not important." Regarding their own levels of proficiency, teachers gave the following average ratings to the 100 statements: 61 items "good," 38 items "fair," and only one item was rated "not prepared." The following are the ten most important competencies for ' teachers of the mentally retarded according to Mackie's study: 1. Recognize individual differences in pupils; 2. Help pupils develop acceptable patterns of behavior; 3. Select and use curriculum suitable to level and interest of pupils; 4. Skill in individualizing curriculum; 5. Interpret physical, psychological, and environmental behaviors; . Help pupils develOp self-sufficiency; 7. Provide health education experiences; . Use a wide range of materials and methods in teaching; 9. Remain Objective while retaining sensitivity to pupils' problems; and 10. Understand causes of maladjustment. (pp. 23-37) Anderson (1976) studied the role of teachers of the educable mentally retarded. Thirty-four teachers of the EMR and 30 school principals were selected for the role- defining process. The participants were asked to respond to a role norm inventory consisting of 52 role norm state- ments divided into 4 subdivisions: 1) administration and organization; 2) curriculum and instruction; 3) guidance and evaluation; and 4) school-community relations. Four response categories were used: a) absolutely should not; b) Preferably not; c) preferably should; and d) absolutely must. ‘ 46 Agreements between teachers and principals were reported regarding several role norms. Some of those were: Administration and organization role: Attend all building meetings Open to the entire staff; Use itinerant specialists to teach special class students; Develop and maintain a social case history on each student in his class; Attend conferences pertaining to the EMR child. Curriculum and instruction role: Use behavior modification in teaching each individual child; Use individualized instruction in teaching academic skills; Make supplementary materials for his classroom; Test different teaching methods to determine which are best for each individual EMR child; and Organize a curriculum which provides for repetitions of basic concept. Guidance and evaluation role: Counsel children regarding personal problems; Use play therapy as a guidance for teaching techniques; and Grade students in accordance with standards employed in the regular classroom. A.‘ "A . eye. .I. ' 'A. \ h-I‘ I .'~ ‘ n . ’ . — 5&- . ‘, ‘ 0“- 47 School-community relations role: - Invite parents to visit the special class prior to enrolling the child in the EMR program; and ° Ask parents of EMR children to participate in all regular PTA activities. F005 (1972), in his doctoral dissertation, investi- gated the needed competencies for teachers of the trainable mentally retarded. Participants were 150 teachers Of the TMR who were graduated from the University of Northern Colorado between 1965 and 1971. A list of 92 competency statements was develOped and sent to teachers to indicate the need of each statement on a five-point scale. Competen- cies were divided into nine categories: 1) general; 2) learning, growth, and maturation; 3) measurement, evaluation, and research; 4) instruction, curriculum, and methodology; 5) self, family, and society; 6) community resources and relationships; 7) speech and language skills; 8) vocational preparation; and 9) behavior management. Respondents felt that the competencies listed were generally considerably or extensively needed in their work as teachers Of the TMR. The following are some of the needed skills for teachers of the TMR. Each was rated "5" by at least 75% of the respon- dents: bl (II o r p ...._ H .,‘.' V .e~. . .‘7'5-6 . . 4 .A _ .- ..,‘ . a. ._ ~.. ‘._‘ d - _. . A ‘F 48 1. Help the TMR accept himself as a person of worth, 86.1%. 2. Organize and modify teaching aids and materials for use with TMR, 85.2%. 3. Devise tasks at a level to insure some success for each TMR, 84.2%. 4. Break tasks down into small sequential steps from simple to complex, 78.2%. 5. Build learning on real-life experiences, 76.2%. 6. Use concrete materials and concepts in teaching, 75.3%. 7. Structure experiences to develOp desirable work habits, 75.3%. (PP.83—116) In another doctoral dissertation, Hoeksema (1975) looked into competencies needed by teachers Of the mentally retarded and their needs in respect to self-development or professional develOpment. Subjects were graduates of Michigan State University majoring in mental retardation from the Fall of 1971 through the Spring of 1974. A competency list containing 63 statements was developed to be utilized in the inquiry. The 63 statements were divided among seven subcategories: 1) planning instruction (14 items); 2) assessing and evaluating behavior (6 items); 3) conducting instruction (9 items); 4) classroom management (6 items); 5) facilitating social-emotional maturity (9 items); 6) dealing and relating with other professionals (10 items); and 7) working with parents (9 items). Participants were asked to indicate the importance of each item for teachers of the mentally retarded on a five-point scale, with (1) indicating the least and (5) indicating the greatest importance <3f the item. On the other hand, for rating their .1. 9'. -~oo\o' — .. ..-.-—u\ .u. no" u v4 v ... o I -. ..,. u I ‘- .— n . u 1“ ‘C‘o ‘1 .a "bu. , .. - v... . I “~- ~., A . on. vb: c a. ' v. v) ‘1 u I e. '. p . ‘a‘ ‘ u — v Q.‘ I. .-,~- ~. ‘ ‘1 ~ I V. -‘ I . ‘ ~9- ‘- ~ ~ ‘. "n ‘ — -.. a “‘ i n 49 self-development priorities, the following response options were utilized: no need, low need, moderate need, or high need for professional develOpment. The five most important competencies, as perceived by respondents in Hoeksema's study, were: ° Promoting children's independence; ° Individualizing instruction; - Helping Children accept themselves; . Handling unacceptable behavior; and - Making learning tasks clear to children. And the five least important competencies were: - Conducting large group learning activities; - Operating audio-visual equipment; - Writing behaviorally-stated objectives; - Preparing written lesson plans; and - Administering commercially prepared tests. Regarding teachers' needs for "professional develOpment," the following results were reported: Highest needs felt in the following five competencies: ° Originating new materials; ° Implementing instructional activities which promote the awareness and eXpression of personal values, attitudes, and feelings; ° Helping students become aware of the values, attitudes, and feelings of others; I1- (I) t!) \‘u n... 50 Helping parents to deal with their children at home; and Using a multi-sensory approach for children with sensory deficits. On the other hand, a low need for self-develOpment was expressed regarding the following competencies: Asking for help or ideas from other staff; Operating audio-visual equipment; Following administrative directives; Getting to know other teachers; and Preparing written lesson plans. In an earlier study, Giguere's (1966) emphasis regarding the needed competencies for teachers of the train- able mentally retarded was focussed, to a certain degree, on the same competencies mentioned in the two previous inquiries (i.e., F005 1972, and Hoeksema 1975). According to the findings of Giguere's study, the following major areas were thought to be of prime importance to those working with the TMR: School and society, including historical development, philosophical rationale, and financial-administrative structures of programs for the TMR; Child growth and development, including mental, physical, psychological, and social growth patterns of the TMR; 51 ° Curriculum development and programmed planning to meet the individual needs of TMRs, both education— ally and vocationally; ° Interpersonal relationships, including abilities to counsel TMRs and their parents and to work with other related professionals; ° Abilities in evaluating and interpreting various kinds of medical, psychological, social, and educational records of the TMR. Chapter Summary In order to familiarize the reader with the status of special education programs in Saudi Arabia where the study was carried out, the historical development Of the program was reviewed. Then the present situation was explored, including the type of handicapping conditions served, short— ages Of personnel, the number of exceptional children, and the adequacy of facilities. The absence of a complete explanation Of the status of special education in Saudi Arabia can be attributed to several factors, the most important of which are: the recent development Of the program, the fact that most of the available literature was of an uncritical nature, consisting merely of Official reports, and the scarcity of information in general. The second part of the chapter was devoted to the history Of special educators training in the United States. The major events that took place affecting teacher training 52 were analyzed, including the trends and the different alternative models that were suggested to meet the increasing needs for qualified personnel in the area of special education. The final part of this chapter dealt with Competency Based Teacher Education, the most recent trend being followed in teacher preparation. The problems of identifying and validating teaching competencies and the different approaches that have been utilized for identification were discussed. Then, competencies needed for teachers of exceptional children in general, and those needed for teachers Of the mentally retarded, appearing in recent research, were reviewed. CHAPTER III PROCEDURES Introduction This chapter will describe the methodology utilized in carrying out this investigation. It will include pOpula- tion and subjects studied, the instrument used in collecting the data, its construction and translation, data collection, and the research questions and how they were analyzed. Population The target population for this study consisted of all teachers, building administrators (including support personnel) and administrators on the Ministry of Education. All are presently involved in the education Of the mentally retarded in Saudi Arabia. The total number of the popula- tion was 204. All members of the pOpulation were asked to participate in this inquiry. The pOpulation was divided among three geographical locations: Riyadh, Jidda, and Dammam. In each city there are two schools for the mentally retarded, one for boys and the other for girls. 53 o-’ o... . -u ‘ . b v... -P. 54 Instrumentation The questionnaire used in collecting the data consisted of three parts (see Appendix A). Part I. This part consisted of demographic data concerning the subjects' sex, location of employment, type of work, citizenship, years of experience, age and level of education. Data from this part was utilized as independent variables. Part II. This part of the questionnaire consisted of 40 teaching competencies divided into the following seven subcategories: Planning instruction (7 statements) I Assessing and evaluating behavior and instruction (6 statements) Conducting instruction (8 statements) Classroom management (4 statements) Facilitating social and emotional maturity (4 statements) Dealing with other professionals (6 statements) Working with parents (5 statements) Participants were asked to respond to the second part in two ways. First, on a scale of five points, they were asked to indicate the perceived importance of each competency; a rating of (1) indicated least importance, whereas a rating of (5) indicated most importance. Second, respondents were asked to indicate their needs for professional '\ 1‘. 55 develOpment in each of the competencies using a scale of five points, with (1) indicating the absence of the need for professional develOpment and (5) representing a high need. At the end, the subjects were asked to list the numbers for 5 competencies where the most need for professional develop- ment was felt and the numbers of the 5 competencies where no need for professional develOpment was felt. Part III. This part of the questionnaire aimed at determining the barriers that confront the advancement of special education services for the mentally retarded. It consisted of 30 items, each representing an area that might affect the quality of the program. Respondents were asked to indicate, on a five-point scale, the degree to which they felt each item is thought to be limiting the quality of services. A rating of (1) indicated that the statement was not of great effect as a barrier; on the other hand, a rating of (5) indicated that the statement was viewed as a major Obstacle confronting the development of a quality delivery system. Construction and Translation of the Questionnaire The literature reviewed contained many competency lists that are considered to be needed for teachers of the mentally retarded. Many of the competency lists reviewed were built by experts in the field. Therefore, it was not , ’l' ..y. a.,. .-., ~ ~~ 0. s 56 strange to uncover great similarities among the different lists Of competencies which were thought to be important for teachers of the handicapped in general, or those thought to be important for teachers of one group (mentally retarded, emotionally impaired, learning disabled, etc.). The second part of the questionnaire consisting of 40 competency statements was modified from a list of 63 statements gener- ated by Hoeksema (1975). The process of developing the competency list, as described by Hoeksema, included the following steps: First, a review of the literature relevant to the subject of teacher education in the area of mental retardation, including the efforts of the faculty of special education at Michigan State University, in addition to Hoeksema's own experience in teaching the mentally retarded. At the end Of this phase, a list Of 63 statements was compiled. In the second step he asked his guidance committee, professional colleagues, and doctoral-level students in the area of special education to pass judgment on the list concerning its clarity or confusion, relevancy, and comprehensiveness. Feedback from this step resulted in revision of the list. The third step was a pilot study, followed by minor changes. .a.- a u- i..- h... g.. l d u. I“ -.. ' v 5 tr» I 57 For this study, the 63 statements were carefully examined with the researcher's chairperson to determine the applicability of the instrument. Although the seven sub- categories were adOpted, several statements were deleted. Further modifications were made following suggestions from Dr. Wessel, a member of the writer's guidance committee. The modifications included further elimination of several competencies, the addition of new competencies to the list, and the removal Of some competencies from one subcategory to another. The final list consisted of 36 behaviorally-stated statements divided among 7 subcategories. The third part of the questionnaire concerning the barrier statements was developed by the writer as a result of discussions with the members of the guidance committee and the reviewing of literature pertaining to the quality of delivery systems and characteristics Of good special education programs. Translating the questionnaire into Arabic was accomplished in three sequential stages. The first was by the investigator. Then, the second stage involved two faculty members of the Department of Arabic Language at King Abdul Aziz University, who were asked to translate the Arabic version back into English to verify the translation. The final stage involved another two faculty members in charge of the Educational and Psychological Research Center who had 58 previous eXperience in translating instruments. Their participation resulted in parenthesizing the Arabic meaning of two English terms (feedback and props) due to the un- familiarity Of teachers with such terms, and they made the following changes concerning three competency statements: (1) "choosing or developing instructional materials to content to be taught" was broken up into two statements: "choosing instructional materials to content to be taught," and "developing instructional materials to content to be taught." (2) "choosing or develOping instructional methods for specific lessons" was broken up into two statements: "choosing instructional methods for specific lessons," and "developing instructional methods for specific lessons." (3) "preparing lesson plans based on assessed students' needs and methods to be used in teaching" was broken up into two statements: "preparing lesson plans based on assessed students' needs," and 59 "preparing lesson plans based on methods to be used in teaching." And, they added the following statement to the category "Working with the Parents": "helping parents deal with their children at home." This was due to the fact that some children attend the school during the day only, which was in contrast to the understanding held by the writer in which he thought services were Offered in institutional settings. After these alterations were made, the final list Of competencies consisted Of 40 statements. A document approving the translation of the instrument was Obtained from the Educational and Psychological Research Center (Appendix B). Collection of the Data The population studied in this investigation included all teachers and administrators working with the mentally re- tarded. This included teachers and administrators in the six schools plus administrators on the central level at the Minis- try of Education. Questionnaires were distributed on February 20th and collected back on the 28th of April, 1980. To assure anonymity of respondents and to assure delivery, questionnaires were handed in person to each male respondent and to the school principals or the teacher consultants of the schools for mentally retarded girls. In the schools for boys, individual and/or group sessions were held when necessary to eXplain and clarify the questionnaires to the respondents; whereas, in o" "n- '0‘. ~.. a u-r .,,. w:- r- 1.- v v — (A. . . . A (1.. \y. 60 the schools for the girls, meetings were held only with school principals and/or teacher consultants to whom explanations and clarification regarding the research instrument were communi- cated. The investigator made himself available to participants through periodic visits to the schools to answer any questions they might have regarding the questionnaire. All of the 204 questionnaires distributed were then collected. However, 38 questionnaires (18.7 percent) were discarded because of incom- pleted items, leaving a total of 166 (81.3 percent) completed questionnaires used in this study. Several governmental and international agencies were contacted to gather the material on which the review of literature was based; i.e., the data concerning special education programs in Saudi Arabia including University of Riyadh, King Abdul Aziz University, Ministry of Education, United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Procedures Used in Analyzing the Data This investigation sought the answer to a number of questions. The statistical procedures utilized in answering each of the research questions will be reported in this section. Research Question I What is the relative importance of the forty competencies as perceived by teachers and administrators (ministry and building level) presently working with the mentally retarded in the six schools of Saudi Arabia? TO answer this question, the responses from Step 1 of the second part of the questionnaire were tabulated. 61 Means, standard deviations, and percentages for each of the forty statements were stated for both teachers and adminis- trators. Competencies were rank-ordered according to their perceived importance. Research Question II In what competencies do teachers and administrators presently working with the mentally retarded in the six schools of Saudi Arabia feel a need for professional development? To answer this question, the data from Step 2 of the second part of the questionnaire were reported in table form. Included were the means, standard deviations, and percentages for the forty statements as perceived by teachers and administrators regarding their needs for professional development. Competencies were ranked in the order of perceived need. Research Question III What barriers are perceived by teachers and administrators working with the mentally retarded in the six schools of Saudi Arabia to be limiting the quality of the special education program? To answer this question, information from the third part of the questionnaire was presented in table form indi- cating the means, standard deviations, and the percentages for each barrier statement as perceived by respondents. The thirty barrier statements were rank-ordered according to their effect in limiting the quality of the program. 62 Research Question IV What are the differences in perception of teachers and administrators, when grouped according to sex, type of position, level of education, citizenship, regional location of school, and years of experience, regarding the importance of the teaching competencies for teachers of the mentally retarded? To determine the differences in perceptions for various levels of the independent variables, a Multivariate Analysis of Variance Test was used. Means and standard deviations for the seven subscales of specific teaching competencies were computed and considered as dependent variables. Post hoc comparisons were utilized to locate statistically significant differences (Finn 1974). Research Question V What are the differences in the perception of teachers and administrators, when grouped according to sex, type of position, level of education, citizenship, regional location of the school, and years of experience, regarding their professional development priorities? The same statistical procedures used to answer Research Question IV were utilized in answering this question. Research Question VI What are the differences in the perception of teachers and administrators, when grouped according to sex, type of position, level of education, citizenship, regional location of the school, and years of experience, regarding the barriers limiting the quality of special education programs for the mentally retarded? ..-I .. obi ,.u- .. O.’ I». 63 This question was answered by using a chi square test of homogeneity to determine prOportionate differences between the responses to the third part of the questionnaire when respondents are grouped according to the several independent variables (Galfo and Miller 1974). Analysis of the data for this study was accomplished through the utilization of the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) model at the Michigan State University Computer Center. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION OF THE RESEARCH RESULTS Introduction This chapter reports the findings reached in this exploratory investigation. The chapter is divided into four sections. The first section looks into the demographic data of the respondents: how they were distributed among the variables of sex, citizenship, location of the school, type of position, years of experience, age, and level of education. In the second section, ratings of the importance of teaching competencies are presented. These ratings provide data to answer Research Question I. Also in this section, the results of comparing the perceptions of the respondents when they were grouped according to the independent variables will answer Research Question IV. The data for answering Research Questionslfl and V are presented in the third section of this chapter. Respondents' priorities in regard to professional development have been rank ordered. Furthermore, differences between the several groups Of respondents are reported. The fourth and final section reports the results from the third part of the instrument, thus answering Research Questions III 64 65 and VI pertaining to the perceptions of the subjects regarding barriers that are affecting the quality Of the special education program for the mentally retarded. Demographic Data The total number of subjects who responded to the questionnaire for this study was 166, or 81.3 percent of the 204 contacted. Answers to the first part of the questionnaire were analyzed and yielded the following information. As can be seen in Table 1, the majority of teachers and administrators surveyed were males. TABLE l.--Distribution According to Sex Sex N % Male 99 59.6 Female 67 40.4 Total 166 100 Since the study included all those working with the mentally retarded, respondents were asked to indicate the school in which they worked. A quick comparison indicates that the two schools located in the capital city of Riyadh had more teachers and administrators than the other four schools of Jidda and Dammam combined. Table 2 presents the 66 number of teachers and administrators responding to the questionnaire from each of the six schools. TABLE 2.-—Distribution According to Location of School Location of School N % Riyadh School for Boys 50 30.1 Riyadh School for Girls 32 19.3 Jidda School for Boys 27 16.3 Jidda School for Girls 20 12.0 Dammam School for Boys 16 9.6 Dammam School for Girls 15 9.0 Ministry of Education personnel 6 3.6 Total 166 99.9* *Less than 100% because of rounding errors. Table 3 presents the distribution of respondents according to the work they are responsible for doing. As shown, a little more than two-thirds of the respondents were teachers, whereas there were only six in charge of planning and supervising the program, all of whom are males. Most Of the respondents were non-citizens, mainly Egyptians. The number of Saudis among the respondents was only 34, or 20.5 percent, while a staggering 79.5 percent, 67 TABLE 3.--Distribution According to the Type of Work Type Of Work N % Teachers 113 68.1 *Building Administrators 47 28.3 **Ministry Administrators 6 3.6 Total 166 100.0 *This category included social workers, psychologists, teacher consultants, school princi- pals, and nurses. **Ministry administrators are those working on the central level at the Ministry of Education. 132, were non-Saudis. Most of the administrative positions were held by Saudis, whereas the instructional and supportive positions were held by the non-Saudis. The distribution of subjects according to years of experience is presented in Table 4. Over half of the respon- dents, 53.6 percent, fell in the 1-5 years of experience category. Approximately 20 percent had more than 10 years of experience. The remaining 25.9 percent had between 6 to 10 years of experience. As can be noted from Table 5, the majority of respondents were between the ages of 21 and 40 years old. When comparisons were made between Saudis and non-Saudis regarding their ages, it was evident that Saudis were in general younger than their counterparts. 68 TABLE 4.--Distribution According to Years Of Experience Experience N % 5 years or less 89 53.6 6-10 years 43 25.9 11-15 years 20 12.0 More than 15 years 14 8.4 Total 166 99.9* *Less than 100% because of rounding errors. TABLE 5.-—Distribution According to Age Age N % 20 years old or less 2 1.2 21-30 years Old 48 28.9 31-40 years old 76 45.8 41—50 years old 39 23.5 More than 50 years Old 1 0.6 Total 166 100.0 A look at the educational level of subjects partici- pating in this study (Table 6) revealed that the most common certificate held was a special education diploma. Possession of this diploma indicates that they have gone through a 69 six-month to one-year training in the field of special education after they had completed the requirements for a high school level teachers education institute and had taught at regular schools for a minimum of two years. Holders of bachelor's degrees were the second largest group, 31, or 19.1 percent, most of whom were working as supportive personnel. Four subjects were holders of an elementary or middle school level diploma. They were not included in Table 6. TABLE 6.--Distribution According to Educational Level Educational Level ‘ N % High school diploma 22 13.6 Vocational high school 11 6.8 Teaching certificate high school level 16 9.9 Special education teaching certificate 76 46.9 Bachelor's degree ' 31 19.1 Master's degree 6 3.7 Total 162 100.0 Responses Concerning the Relative Importance of Teaching Competencies In this section, the answers to Research Questions I and IV will be drawn from the respondents' ratings regarding the perceived importance of teaching competencies. The 70 first question was: What is the relative importance of the forty teaching competencies as perceived by teachers and administrators presently working with the mentally retarded in the six schools of Saudi Arabia? To answer this question, the perceptions Of the 166 respondents regarding the relative importance of the 40 specific teaching competencies were tabulated in rank order according to the mean (Table 7). The Observed frequency distribution for the 40 statements is presented in Appendix C. TABLE 7.--Rank Order of the Forty Competency Statements by Mean Perceived Importance Item Standard NO. Competency Statement Mean Deviation 20 Selecting and operating audio- visual equipment. . . . . . . . 4.572 0.716 16 Breaking tasks into small steps from simple to complex. . . . . 4.536 0.853 6 Choosing instructional methods for specific lessons. . . . . . 4.518 0.761 13 Keeping a record of student assessment to help in knowing student's progress. . . 4.500 0.769 19 Using multi-sensory approach when teaching . . . . . . . . 4.446 0.905 7 Developing instructional methods for specific lessons. . . . . . 4.428 0.841 14 Preparing lesson plans based on assessed student needs . . . 4.416 0.715 37 Obtaining information about the child from parents. . . . . . . 4.416 0.825 71 TABLE 7--Continued Item Standard No. Competency Statement Mean Deviation 33 Working with teacher aides and other support personnel . . . . 4.410 0.810 29 Promote children's independence and help them become self- directed. . . . . . . . . . . . 4.349 0.887 23 Arranging the physical props in the classroom to facilitate learning. . . . . . . . . . . . 4.349 0.866 17 Using behavior modification techniques. . . . . . . . . . . 4.277 0.857 26 Provide instructional activities that promote appropriate personal and social interaction . . . . . . . . . . 4.235 0.873 39 Using accepted principles of counseling, interviewing, and guidance in parent conferences . . . . . . . . . . 4.217 0.915 8 Verify program content by using informal tests for assessing student's status. . . . . . . . 4.211 0.933 28 Provide instructional activities for students to help each other . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.187 0.806 40 Helping parents deal with their children at home. . . . . . . . 4.187 1.153 34 Handling administrators' Observa- tions of your teaching. . . . . 4.175 0.934 4 Choosing instructional material to content to be taught . . . . 4.157 1.038 5 DevelOping instructional material to content to be taught . . . . 4.145 0.968 72 TABLE 7--Continued Item Standard NO. Competency Statement Mean Deviation 15 Preparing lesson plans based on methods to be used in teaching 4.096 1.028 38 Responding to parents in ways which lead to support of school program. . . . . . . . . 4.090 0.984 21 Modifying and adOpting learning tasks to meet each child's needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.078 0.881 22 Consistent classroom rules and procedures. . . . . . . . . . . 4.078 1.021 32 Getting to know other teachers. . 4.054 0.961 12 Reassessment Of students during and after the instructional unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.048 1.072 3 Organizing the content. . . . . 3.976 0.966 35 Following administrative directives. . . . . . . . . . . 3.964 1.026 18 Providing continuous feedback to students during instruction 3.928 1.012 30 Asking for help or ideas from other staff . . . . . . . . . . 3.831 1.042 24 Determining what is rewarding for each child. . . . . . . . . 3.825 0.985 11 Carrying out preassessment acti- vities to determine student readiness for specific learning content. . . . . . . . 3.813 1.115 1 Formulating instructional goals for the year. . . . . . . . . . 3.795 1.053 2 Selecting content apprOpriate to identified goals . . . . . . 3.777 1.092 73 TABLE 7--Continued Standard Deviation Item Mean No. Competency Statement 27 36 Using the results from teachers' administered tests to modify instructional plans for students. . . . . . . . . . . Help students become aware of the needs of others . . . . . Dealing with parents' criticisms 3.741 3.729 3.681 0.966 1.047 1.176 10 Interpreting data from formal tests administered by diagnos- ticians in develOping instructional plans for children. . . . . . . . . . . . 3.566 1.130 25 Administering rewards or punish- ments to change pupils' behavior. . . . . . . . . . . . 3.536 1.324 31 Seeking help for students from agencies outside the school . . 3.223 1.208 As shown in Table 7, the rating of the forty compe- tencies ranged from a mean rating of 4.572, which was given to "selecting and operating audio-visual equipment," to a mean rating of 3.223 that was assigned to "seeking help for students from agencies outside the school." Four of the ten highest rated competencies fell in the "conducting instruc- tion" subscale; on the other hand, among the ten lowest rated competencies there were five statements that fell in the subscales "planning instruction" and "assessing and evaluating This could be viewed as an indica- behavior and instruction." tion that the prime responsibility of teachers of the mentally 1 74 retarded has to do with the instructional part of the program rather than the planning and assessment phases of it. Mean ratings for the seven subscales in terms of their importance ranged from 4.29 to 3.94. In descending order of their perceived importance, the seven subscales were: _ Adminis-_ Teachers X trators X Conducting instruction 4.2 4.3 Facilitating social-emotional maturity 4.0 4.2 Working with parents 3.9 4.3 Planning instruction 4.0 4.2 Assessing and evaluating behavior and instruction 3.9 3.9 Classroom management 3.9 4.0 Dealing with other professionals 3.8 4.0 Research Question IV asked: What are the differences in perception of teachers and administrators, when grouped according to sex, type of position, level of education, citizenship, regional location of school, and years of exper- ience, regarding the importance of the teaching competencies for teachers of the mentally retarded? For the purpose of answering this question, the mean ratings and standard deviations regarding the perceived importance of teaching competencies were computed for each of the following seven subscales: planning instruction (PI), assessing and evaluating behavior and instruction (AE), conducting 75 instruction (CI), classroom management (CM), facilitating social-emotional maturity (FS), dealing with other professionals (DP), and working with parents (WP). These means and standard deviations of the seven subscales are presented in Table 8 for each of the subgroups created by the demographic items. A Multivariate Analysis of Variance Test was used to determine if respondents, when grouped according to independent variables, differed in perceiving the relative importance of the seven subscales of teaching competencies. Results of the tests showed no significant differences, at the .05 level, among the respondents when grouped according to the variables of type of work, citizenship, years of experience, age, and level of education (Table 9). There- fore, no further analyses were done, and it was concluded that the null hypothesis could not be rejected. On the other hand, analysis of the mean importance ratings given by respondents to the seven subscales were found to be significantly different when respondents were grouped according to sex and location of the schools (Table 9). A univariate F-test was then used to determine the subsca1e(s) on which significant differences did occur. Results are shown in Table 10 for the differences of ratings according to sex and Table 11 for the differences of ratings according to location of school. 76 mmv. hum.v wmb. wmm.m own. onw.v mam. mmm.m Ham. mmm.v mob. ova.v moo. mmo.v 93 .n mam. wmo.¢ Hem. mwm.m How. Nam.m mmv. moh.m mmm. omo.¢ Hmv. moo.v Ham. 5mm.m mo .0 mom. HNN.v owe. mno.¢ mun. mmm.v mam. mmm.m vom. mmH.v omm. omN.v 0N0. o¢0.v mm .m mum. voo.¢ mam. omm.m mew. mmw.m mvv. ¢Vh.m ovo. ova.v who. 0mm.m Now. vmm.m :0 .v mom. mmm.v mam. ovm.v mmm. onm.¢ mmg. moo.¢ va. mum.v mav. mom.v mom. vwm.v H0 .m mum. vmm.m 0mm. hum.m who. bam.m mmm. Oho.¢ pom. 5mm.m vow. hmo.¢ mhm. va.m mm .N vvv. hvm.¢ ooo. omo.v omm. ho~.v mmm. mow.m mvm. mvm.v Hum. mo~.v mom. oao.v Hm .H mm m cm m 8 m cm (ml 8 m om m mm m 33QO w>wumuumwcfiaca mcflnomoa Edafimo moose npmmflm wHMEom mam: xuoz mo mama aoosom mo coaumooq xwm mmamomnsm cm>om wnu mo mocmuuomEH ©m>fimouwmll.m mqmda 77 oumoamwuuoo mcwnomwu coaumoscm anacomm wDMUHMfiuuoo onwaommu can .Hoosom amen HMGOflumoo> .manmfio Hoonom nmwm mmmuomp Hmumwa can Hoawgowm II M II N Hm>ma Hoosom nmfis H "who me>wH Hmcoflumosome omm. oem.e ssh. Hmm.m How. msH.e eHm. Hem.m can. omo.e mme. HHH.e owe. mma.e was. mmo.e emo. HH~.e as .s mmm. mac.e com. omm.m ome. mmo.e Nee. mam.m mme. omm.m 0mm. mem.m mam. omm.m mmm. Ham.m omm. moo.e mm .o mme. 5mm.e ewe. «mo.e awe. moa.e «mm. soa.e «we. oma.e mmm. mmH.e com. moa.e sow. moa.e eam. mmH.e mm .m smm. Hmo.e «mm. mem.m mms. emm.m mas. mms.m mam. mam.m mam. emm.m ems. mam.m mmo. mam.m eem. «mo.e so .e mom. moe.e Hmm. asfl.e mmm. smm.e mam. m-.e mme. oo~.e mee. mm~.e mme. Hmm.e pom. em~.e com. moe.e Ho .m «we. mom.m mmm. mom.m mmm. MHo.e mme. msa.e see. oom.m Hum. mmo.e oem. emm.m mom. ssm.m one. omm.m me .~ mam. moo.e moo. smo.e eme. so~.e mme. mm~.e mam. ema.e mem. «ma.e emm. smo.e emm. omo.e sme. mam.e Hm .H am (m. cm (LtMII cm x mm m mm .m cm “(Mir am m cm m cm m1: mamom m N H ma uw>o mHuHH oanm Wmmma Ho m macsmmucoz macsmm unsm «Hm>wq Hmcowumoocm mocmfluomxm mo mummy mwsmcwufiuwo Umscflucoollm mqmfia 78 TABLE 9.--Wi1k's Multivariate Analysis of Variance of Mean Importance Ratings Approx. 'Hypothesis Error Source of Variance F. D.F. D.F. P. Type of work (teaching, administration) 1.99378 7.00 158.00 .05911 Citizenship (Saudis, non-Saudis) .58193 7.00 158.00 .76993 Years of experience (5 years or less, 6-10, 11-15, and more than 15 years of experience) .61561 21.00 448.50 .90816 Age (20 years old or less, 21-30, 31- 40, 41-50, and more than 50 years old 1.21092 28.00 560.28 .21174 Level of education 1.46791 14.00 306.00 .1216? Sex 2.14503 7.00 158.00 .04195* Location of school 6.20260 14.00 302.00 .00001* *Significant at the .05 level. As shown in Table 10, statistically significant differences between the ratings of males and females occurred on the subscales relating to planning instruction and facilitating social-emotional maturity. Although females' mean ratings of 4.26 and 4.25 given to the two subscales, respectively, were statistically different from equivalent values for the males, the ratings of both groups (males and females) of the two subscales approximate a mean of 4.0 and 79 TABLE 10.--Univariate F-Test for Mean Ratings According to Sex, with 1,164 D.F. j ~— Source of Hypothesis Error Variance Mean Sq. Mean Sq. F. P. Subscale 1 (PI) 2.62735 .30193 8.70189 .00364* Subscale 2 (AE) .37006 .29849 1.23980 .26714 Subscale 3 (CI) .58234 .22394 2.60043 .10876 Subscale 4 (CM) .01292 .40222 .03211 .85801 Subscale 5 (FS) 1.75537 .33895 5.17878 .02416* Subscale 6 (DP) .50701 .30237 1.67680 .19717 Subscale 7 (WP) .08932 .48778 .18311 .66928 *Significant at the .05 level. TABLE 11.--Univariate F-Test for Mean Ratings According to Location of School, with 2,157 D.F. Source of Hypothesis Error Variance Mean Sq. Mean Sq. F. P. Subscale 1 (PI) 2.31227 .29613 7.80826 .00059* Subscale 2 (AR) .60750 .30534 1.98961 .14018 Subscale 3 (CI) 1.54153 .21224 7.26313 .00096* Subscale 4 (CM) 4.02138 .34989 11.49338 .00002* Subscale 5 (FS) 2.55410 .31748 8.04487 .00047* Subscale 6 (DP) 1.09294 .29056 3.76149 .02537* Subscale 7 (WP) 6.57132 .41054 16.00644 .00001* *Significant at the .05 level. 80 thus no practical importance can be attached to the differences. Therefore, such small differences will have no effect on the construction of a teacher preparation program. Since there were three different school locations, a series of post hoc comparisons were conducted for each of the six subscales where significant differences occurred (Table 11) to determine the group that differed from others in perceiving the importance of the teaching competencies. Contrasts between the three different groups are presented in figure form for subscales regarding planning instruction, conducting instruction, classroom management, facilitating social-emotional maturity, dealing with other professionals, and working with parents. Riyadh 2 4.2456 Jidda 2 3.8632 Dammam 2 4.2074 I significantly differenth Lsignificantly different*] J not significantly different _ *Significant at the .05 level. Fig. 1. Post hoc comparison for subscale "planning instruction" by "location of school." Riyadh 2 4.3750 Jidda 2 4.0691 Dammam x 4.3710 _ significantly different*l [significantly different*|J not significantly,different 7 *Significant at the .05 level. Fig. 2. Post hoc comparison for subscale "conducting instruction" by "location of school." 81 As shown in Figures 1 and 2, the average ratings assigned by Jidda to subscales regarding "planning instruc- tion" and "conducting instruction" were significantly lower than the ratings assigned to the same subscales by Riyadh and Dammam. Riyadh R 4.1402 Jidda x 3.7447 Dammam 2 3.6290 significantlydifferent*J 'not significantly different I significantly different* *Significant at the .05 level. Fig. 3. Post hoc comparison for subscale "classroom management" by "location of school." Comparison of the three groups' perceptions regarding subscale "classroom management" revealed that greater ratings were given by Riyadh to the competencies under the subscale than those given by Jidda and Dammam (Figure 3). Some differences were found among the three groups when their responses were compared regarding subscale 5, "facilitating social and emotional maturity," and subscale 7, "working with parents." In both cases, significantly higher ratings were given by Riyadh and Dammam than those given by Jidda (Figures 4 and 5). The results shown in Figure 6 indicated that signi— ficant differences occurred between the ratings assigned by Riyadh and those assigned by Jidda, whereas no significant differences were proven between the ratings by Dammam and 82 Riyadh 2 4.1982 Jidda x 3.8351 Dammam 2 4.2823 [significantly different*l [significantly different*_ not significantly different *Significant at the .05 level. Fig. 4. Post hoc comparison for subscale "facilitating social—emotional maturity" by "location of school." Riyadh 2 4.2951 Jidda R 3.6596 Dammam R 4.2710 significantly different*l Lsignificantly differentfij not significantly different *Significant at the .05 level. Fig. 5. Post hoc comparison for subscale "working with parents" by "location of school." Riyadh 2 4.0366 Jidda x 3.7695 Dammam x 3.8925 Vsignificantly different*]! not significantly different_ not significantly different *Significant at the .05 level. Fig. 6. Post hoc comparison for subscale "dealing with other professionals" by "location of school." Riyadh or Dammam and Jidda regarding subscale 6, "dealing with other professionals." The conclusion reached regarding Research Question IV was that there were significant differences among the ratings given by respondents to some of the seven subscales when they were grouped according to variables of sex and location of school. Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected. 83 Professional Development Priorities In this section, responses regarding professional development priorities are analyzed in order to answer Research Questions II and V. Research Question II asked: In what competencies do teachers and administrators presently working with the mentally retarded in the six schools of Saudi Arabia feel a need for professional development? To answer this question, the perceptions of the 166 respondents regarding their need for professional development on the 40 competency statements were tabulated in rank order according to the mean (Table 12). The observed frequency distributions for the 40 teaching competencies are presented in Appendix C. TABLE 12.-—Rank Order of the Forty Competency Statements by Mean Perceived Professional DevelOpment Priorities Item No. Competency Statement Mean S.D. 39 Using accepted principles of counseling, interviewing and guidance in parent conferences . . . . . . . . . . . 3.873 1.166 20 Selecting and operating audio- visual equipment. . . . . . . . . 3.777 1.368 2 Selecting content apprOpriate to identified goals . . . . . . . 3.434 1.337 1 Formulating instructional goals for the year. . . . . . . . . . . 3.386 1.378 17 Using behavior modification techniques. . . . . . . . . . . . 3.325 1.367 40 Helping parents deal with their children at home. . . . . . . . . 3.325 1.372 84 TABLE 12--Continued Item NO. Competency Statement Mean 26 10 38 19 28 29 Developing instructional mater- ials to content to be taught. Provide instructional activities that promote appropriate personal and social inter- action. . . . . . . . . . . . Verify program content by using informal tests for assessing students' status. . . . . . . Interpreting data from formal tests administered by diagnosticians in developing instructional plans for students. . . . . . . . . . . Using the results from teachers' administered tests to modify instructional plans for students. . . . . . . . . . . Choosing instructional methods for specific lessons. . . . . Choosing instructional materials for content to be taught. . . Responding to parents in ways which lead to support of school program. . . . . . . . DevelOping instructional methods for specific lessons. . . . . Using multi-sensory approach when teaching . . . . . . . . Provide instructional activities for students to help each other 0 O O O O O O O O I I 0 Promote children's independence and help them become self- directed. . . . . . . . . . . 3.277 3.277 3.253 3.199 3.193 3.157 3.108 3.096 3.090 3.090 3.084 3.084 1.229 1.234 1.239 1.318 1.279 1.293 1.401 1.182 1.311 1.452 1.162 1.325 85 TABLE 12--Continued Item No. Competency Statement Mean S.D. 37 Obtaining information about the child from parents. . . . . . . 3.078 1.284 16 Breaking tasks into small steps from simple to complex. . . . . . 3.036 1.405 13 Keeping a record of student assessment to help in knowing student's progress. . . 3.024 1.489 3 Organizing the content . . . . . . 2.982 1.291 18 Providing continuous feedback to students during instruction. . 2.958 1.193 21 Modifying and adOpting learning tasks to meet each child's needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.940 1.292 27 Help students become aware of the needs of others . . . . . . . 2.928 1.110 14 Preparing lesson plans based on assessed needs . . . . . . 2.910 1.334 12 Reassessment of students during and after the instructional unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.837 1.203 31 Seeking help for students from agencies outside the school . . 2.783 1.371 36 Dealing with parents' criticisms . 2.771 1.224 15 Preparing lesson plans based on methods to be used in teaching. 2.753 1.203 11 Carrying out preassessment activities to determine student readiness for specific learning content . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.699 1.253 24 Determining what is rewarding for each child. . . . . . . . . 2.681 1.236 86 TABLE 12--Continued Item No. Competency Statement Mean S.D. 33 Working with teacher aides and other support personnel . . . . . 2.572 1.304 30 Asking for help or ideas from other staff . . . . . . . . . . . 2.536 1.263 23 Arranging the physical props in the classroom to facilitate learning. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.530 1.404 22 Consistent classroom rules and procedures. . . . . . . . . . . . 2.494 1.338 25 Administering rewards or punishment to change pupil's behavior. . . . 2.295 1.271 35 Following administrative directives 1.885 1.034 34 Handling administrators' observa- tions of your teaching. . . . . . 1.880 0.990 32 Getting to know other teachers . . . 1.759 0.916 The average ratings concerning professional develop- ment needs ranged from 3.873 to 1.759. Twenty-one of the forty competency statements received an average rating of 3.00 or more. The ratings of another sixteen statements averaged from 2.99 to 2.00, and only three statements were giyen an average rating below 2.00. Since the literature pertaining to the training of special educators in Saudi Arabia has revealed a lack of any kind of teacher preparation Programs (pre-service and/or in-service), it was eXpected, tilerefore, that respondents would show higher needs for PrOfessional development than what was reported in Table 12. 87 ‘Among the highest rated competencies in terms of professional development priorities, there were three statements that received low ratings regarding their importance to teachers of the mentally retarded: "Selecting content apprOpriate to identified goals"; "Formulating instructional goals for the year"; and "Interpreting data from formal tests administered by diagnosticians." One competency statement, "selecting and Operating audio-visual equipment," was rated high both in terms of perceived impor- tance and in terms of professional development priorities. Mean ratings for the seven subscales regarding professional need priorities ranged from 3.23 to 2.23. In descending order according to perceived professional need priorities, the seven subscales were: __ Adminis:_ Teachers X trators X Working with parents 3.1 3.4 Planning instruction 3.0 3.5 Conducting instruction 3.0 3.2 Facilitating social-emotional maturity 2.9 3.3 Assessing and evaluating behavior and instruction 2.9 3.2 Classroom management 2.3 2.7 Dealing with other professionals 2.3 2.7 It will be recalled that the subjects were asked to :Lndicate the five competencies where the highest needs for 88 professional develOpment were felt and the five competencies where no needs were felt. Their responses are presented in table form, and were ordered according to the frequency with which each statement was selected (Table 13). It should be noted that the first column presented the highest needs, and the second column presented the no needs responses. The results did not indicate strong agreement among the subjects regarding either of the two questions. The five competency statements that were repeated the most regarding the first question (i.e., highest need) were: "Selecting and operating audio-visual equipment"; "Using accepted principles of counseling in parent conferences"; "Helping parents deal with their children at home": "Provide instructional activities that promote apprOpriate personal and social interaction"; "Interpreting data from formal tests administered by diagnosticians." The above five competencies were also found to be among the top-rated ten competencies shown in Table 12. On the other hand, responses to the second question concerning the com— petencies where no needs for professional develOpment were felt revealed the following statements: "Getting to know other teachers"; "Handling administrators' observations of your teaching"; "Following administrative directives"; "Administering rewards or punishment to change pupils' behavior"; "Consistent classroom rules and procedures." 89 The above five statements are found near the end of Table 13, but they are not the last five competencies in that table since responses regarding the no needs category were not in exact reverse order of the responses to the highest needs category. These same statements were the lowest-rated five competencies shown in Table 12. Therefore, it can be conclu- ded that subjects' responses regarding their professional develOpment priorities were consistent. TABLE l3.--Multiple Responses Regarding High-Need/Low-Need Professional Development Priorities High Need Low Need Item Competency No. of No. of No. Statement Responses 9% Responses % 20 Selecting and Operating audio-visual equipment . . . . . . . 83 50.3 4 2.4 39 Using accepted princi- ples of counseling, interviewing and guidance in parent conferences . . . . . . 69 41.8 3 1.8 40 Helping parents deal with their children at home . . . . . . . . 53 32.1 8 4.8 26 Provide instructional activities that pro- mote apprOpriate personal and social interaction . . . . . . 39 23.6 4 2.4 10 Interpreting data from formal tests adminis- tered by diagnosti- cians in develOping instructional plans for students. . . . . . 37 22.4 9 5.5 90 TABLE l3--Continued High Need Item No. Competency Statement N0. of Responses % Low Need No. of Responses % 2 Selecting content apprOpriate to identified goals. . . 17 Using behavior modifica- tion techniques . . . . 19 Using multi-sensory approach when teaching. . . . . . . . 28 Provide instructional activities for stu- dents to help each other . . . . . . . . . 9 Using the results from teachers' administered tests to modify instructional plans for students. . . . . . 31 Seeking help for students from agencies outside the school. . . . . . . 1 Formulating instruc- tional goals for the year. . . . . . . 38 Responding to parents in ways which lead to support of school program . . . . . . . . 29 Promote children's inde- pendence and help them become self-directed. . 37 Obtaining information about the child from parents. . . . . . 35 33 31 28 28 27 24 21 19 21.2 20.0 18.8 17.0 17.0 16.4 14.5 12.7 12.7 11.5 14 11 24 24 18 14.5 14.5 10.9 91 TABLE 13--Continued Item No. High Need Competency Statement N0. of Responses % Low Need N0. of Responses % 27 33 16 36 14 13 Help students become aware of the needs of others . . . . . . . Working with teacher aides and other support personnel . . . Breaking tasks into small steps from simple to complex . . . Verify program content by using informal tests for assessing students' status. . . . Dealing with parents' criticisms. . . . . . . DevelOping instructional materials to content to be taught. . . . . . Preparing lesson plans based on assessed needs . . . . . . . . . Choosing instructional materials for content to be taught. . . . . . Choosing instructional methods for specific lessons . . . . . . . . Developing instructional methods for specific lessons . . . . . . . . Keeping a record of student assessment to help in knowing student's progress. . . 19 17 16 16 16 16 15 14 14 14 13 11.5 10.3 9.7 7.9 11 18 19 15 17 20 14 20 10.9 11.5 10.3 12.1 12.1 92 TABLE 13-—Continued High Need Item Competency No. of No. Statement Responses % Low Need NO. Responses % 23 Arranging the physical prOps in the class- room to facilitate learning. . . . . . . . 13 15 Preparing lesson plans based on methods to be used in teaching . . 12 30 Asking for help or ideas from other staff. . . . ll 21 Modifying and adopting learning tasks to meet each child's needs . . . . . . . . . ll 18 Providing continuous feedback to students during instruction. . . 10 ll Carrying out preassess- ment activities to determine student readiness for specific learning content. . . . 10 3 Organizing the content. . 9 22 Consistent classroom rules and procedures. . 9 24 Determining what is re- warding for each child 5 25 Administering rewards or punishment to change pupil's behavior. . . . 5 12 Reassessment of students during and after the instructional unit. . . 4 3.0 36 21 28 12 35 21 41 20 61 17 21.8 12.7 17.0 21.2 12.7 24.8 12.1 37.0 10.3 93 TABLE 13--Continued High Need Low Need Item Competency No. of No. of No. Statement Responses 9% Responses % 34 Handling administrators' observations of your teaching. . . . . . . . 4 2.4 67 40.6 32 Getting to know other teachers. . . . . . . . 2 1.2 82 49.7 35 Following administra- tive directives . . . . 2 1.2 67 40.6 Total 825 500 825 500 Responses regarding perceived needs for professional develOpment were analyzed to answer Research Question V which asked: What are the differences in the perceptions of teachers and administrators, when grouped according to sex, type of position, level of education, citizenship, regional location of the school, and years of experience, regarding their professional development priorities? Means and standard deviations of perceived needs for professional develOpment were computed for each group of respondents on each of the seven subscales (Table 14). Multivariate analysis of variance tests were used to determine significant differences among the responses of each group on the seven subscales. Results revealed significant differences only when subjects were grouped according to "location of school" and "years of experience" (Table 15). 94 mam. HHv.m mam. mvH.m own. 55¢.m Mbo. mma.m Hmw. QNH.m mbm. moo.m omm. mmm.m m3 .h mvm. mvm.N mwm. 05H.N who. th.N vmm. mmO.N omh. mMN.N mmm. Obw.H mnm. fihv.N ma .0 0mm. HHm.m mob. hum.m mmm. Hm¢.m 0mm. maw.m mmm. omo.m mmm. mmo.m 0mm. MNH.m mm .m hmo.H hmb.m cam. mmm.N bmm. mm®.N vMF. Hmo.N mhm. mam.N 0mm. Nom.N mnm. mmo.N 20 .v 5mm. mmN.m mam. NHo.m mmm. Nmm.m mmm. va.m 0mm. mmm.m Hum. mmm.m mob. 5mm.m H0 .m wvm. mmN.m Hmh. HHO.N omh. vom.m own. mva.m Hmm. mvm.m mmm. mmm.N vmh. Ohd.m m< .N 0mm. 5mm.m mam. mNo.m ooh. th.m mmm. Nov.m Hem. vow.N mvo.H th.N mvw. omv.m Hm .H on lxr om m 8 m cm m mm m cm N mm m 33QO m>wumuumwcwscx .1mcflnomoe EMEEmo woven spuwwm mamamm mamz.ll. IIIIIIIIIIILFIIIIIIIIF xuoz mo mafia Hoonom mo cofiumooa mmamomnsm cm>mm on» NO mpmmz ucmfimon>ma Hmcoflmmwmoum pm>wwoummul.ea mamme xmm 5 9 oumoHMfluHmo mcfinomou cowumonoo Hmwowmm moonmmp Hmummfi can Honnomm u M II N Hm>ma Hoosom noes oumowuwuuoo mcwnomou can .Hoosom noes HmcoHumoo> .maonflp Hoonom swam u H “mum mHm>wH Hmcowwmoame ovm. ovm.m mmb. moa.m mmh. oaa.m vmm. mmm.m moo. one.m hmm. bmo.m mmw. hma.m hmm. mmm.m mmh. Ham.m m3 .5 0mm. eav.m 0N0. Hmm.m mow. hwa.m 00H.H mom.~ can. mmm.m 5mm. Hom.m mmo. hma.m om5. hHN.N moo. emm.m mm .m Hum. th.m 0mm. mmo.m Nmm. ooo.m vom.a mmo.m Hmm. ooo.m mmh. mmo.m mam. mma.m hum. vm0.m unb. mhm.m mm .m mmo.noam.~ mum. eoe.m mvm. emv.m heN.H mmh.m mmouuoom.m mmm. mem.m hmm. mom.m mum. mmv.~ mvm. Hmm.~ :0 .e new. mma.m new. m¢H.m 0mm. Nao.m mmH.H omo.m eon. oom.m mmm. mmm.m New. mao.m ohm. ooo.m Hmm. me~.m HO .m mmm. mvH.m mmw. vmm.m mmm. Hmo.m moa.a eov.m own. Hmh.m Hmm. hma.m can. mmm.m mom. oao.m Hmm. bma.m mm .N mmm. mmm.m mmm. mea.m moo.a moo.m mom.H mvm.m mom. hmo.m mvo.a wmv.m mum. mho.m oem. mva.m heo.H emv.m Hm .H mm m Gm x Om x Om x Om x mm M Om M 0m .MII Gm M mflmom m H ma uo>o mHIHH cane mmwa Ho m mwpammucoz mapsmm Insm 8Hm>oq HMGOwumonpm oozwwummxm mo mummy mwsmcmufluflo meCfiDGOOIIeH mamme 96 TABLE lS.--Wi1k's Multivariate Analysis of Variance of Professional DevelOpment Need Ratings W Source of Approx. Hypothesis Error Variance Value F. D.F. D.F. P. Location of school .63328 5.69898 14.00 300.00 .00001* Years of experience .77350 1.99244 21.00 464.00 .00582* *Significant at the .05 level. Univariate F—tests were used to find out the subscale(s) which contributed to the significant differences among groups. Results showed significant differences on four of the seven subscales, planning instruction, conducting instruction, classroom management, and facilitating social-emotional maturity, when subjects' responses were compared according to the "location of school" (Table 16). When responses were compared according to the "years of experience," results indicated significant differences on only one of the seven subscales, working with parents (Table 17). 97 TABLE 16.--Univariate F-Test for Mean Ratings According to Location of School, with 2,157 D.F. P Source of Hypothesis Error Variance Mean Sq. Mean Sq. F. Subscale 1 (PI) 11.38712 .78875 14.43696 .00001* Subscale 2 (AE) 2.12124 .69607 3.04743 .05030 Subscale 3 (CI) 6.24975 .68345 9.14446 .00018* Subscale 4 (CM) 6.09012 .83900 7.25882 .00097* Subscale 5 (FS) 4.35049 .67623 6.43346 .00206* Subscale 6 (DP) .52683 .45843 1.14920 .31954 Subscale 7 (WP) 1.50766 .66002 2.28425 .10523 *Significant at the .05 level. TABLE 17.--Univariate F-Test for Mean Ratings According to Years of Experience, with 3,162 D.F. Source of Hypothesis Error Variance Mean Sq. Mean Sq. F. P. Subscale 1 (PI) 1.98349 .92457 2.14533 .09658 Subscale 2 (AE) 1.23058 .71882 1.71195 .16663 Subscale 3 (CI) .48640 .57870 .64109 .58963 Subscale 4 (CM) .80292 .94269 .85173 .46756 Subscale 5 (FS) .11401 .74214 .15362 .92724 Subscale 6 (DP) .68833 .51114 1.34666 .26118 Subscale 7 (WP) 1.96735 .65802 2.98980 .03271* *Significant at the .05 level. 98 Since there were more than two levels under the groups "location of school“ and "years of experience," post hoc comparisons were used to determine the leve1(s) that differed from the other(s) for each of the subscales where significant differences existed. Results are presented in figure form. Riyadh x 3.1916 Jidda x 3.9362 Dammam 2 4.1060 [significantly different*! [not significantly differentj significantly different* *Significant at the .05 level. Fig. 7. Post hoc comparison for the three levels under "location of school" by subscale "planning instruction." Riyadh 2 2.8338 Jidda x 3.1941 Dammam x 3.5524 [not significantly differentj[not significantly differentJ significantly different* *Significant at the .05 level. Fig. 8. Post hoc comparison for the three levels under "location of school" by subscale "conducting instruction." Riyadh x 2.6159 Jidda 2 2.0319 Dammam x 2.6855 significantlydifferent*J [significantly differentjj not significantly different *Significant at the .05 level. Fig. 9. Post hoc comparison for the three levels under "location of school" by subscale "classroom management." 99 Riyadh 2 3.0305 Jidda R 2.8138 Dammam 2 3.4919 [not significantlydifferentJ [gsignificantly different*]l significantly different* _ *Significant at the .05 level. Fig. 10. Post hoc comparison for the three levels under "location of school" by subscale "facilitating social- emotional maturity." Respondents from the Riyadh schools for the mentally retarded indicated a lower need for professional development than the respondents from the Jidda and the Dammam schools in the area of "planning instruction." When compared in the area of "conducting instruction," results revealed significant differences between respondents from the Riyadh schools and the Dammam schools, with the Riyadh schools indicating a lower need for professional development. The respondents from the Jidda schools show no significant differences from either of the other two schools. In the area of "classroom manage- ment," respondents from the Jidda schools indicated a significantly lower need for professional develOpment than the respondents from the Riyadh and the Dammam schools. In the area of "facilitating social-emotional maturity," respon- dents from the Riyadh and the Jidda schools indicated a significantly lower need for professional develOpment than the respondents from the Dammam schools (Figures 7-10). It can be concluded, therefore, that teachers and administrators 100 from the Dammam schools for the mentally retarded tended to show a higher need for professional develOpment than those from the schools of Jidda and Riyadh in four of the seven subscales. A post hoc comparison between the four categories of "years of experience" regarding the needs for professional develOpment in the area of "working with parents" indicated significant differences between those whose experience ranged from 6-10 years and those whose experienced ranged from 11-15 years, with the former indicating a lower need for profession- al development. All other comparisons were not significant. This leads to the rejection of the null hypothesis, since significant differences were shown in the responses regarding the needs for professional develOpment when subjects were grouped according to the "location of school" and "years of experience." On the other hand, no significant differences were shown when subjects were grouped according to "sex," "type of work," "citizenship," "age," or "educational level," which indicates that there were no relationships between those five independent variables and the ratings of competen- cies regarding professional develOpment needs. 101 Perceived Barriers to Quality Special Education Program In this section, Research Questions III and VI will be answered using the data collected from the third part of the questionnaire dealing with barriers that may affect the quality of the program. Research Question III asked: What barriers are perceived by teachers and administrators working with the mentally retarded in the six schools of Saudi Arabia to be limiting the quality of the special education program? To answer this question, ratings of each of the thirty barrier statements are presented in table form in rank order using mean and standard deviation values to indicate their serious- ness in limiting the quality of the program (Table 18). The following cut-off points were selected to indicate the seriousness of barriers. 4.49-3.50 Serious barrier 3.49-2.50 Moderate barrier 2.49-1.50 Not serious barrier As shown in Table 18, mean ratings for barrier statements ranged from 4.325 to 1.886, representing the most serious barrier, "lack of teacher aides," and the least serious barrier, "lack of teacher consultants," respectively. Out of the thirty barrier statements, thirteen were considered to be seriously limiting the quality of the program, another thirteen statements were viewed as moderately affecting the 102 TABLE 18.--Rank Order of Barrier Ratings Barrier Statement Mean S.D. Serious Barriers Lack of teacher aides (1,4). . . . . . . . 4.325 .896 Lack of parents' understanding and support of needed services. 4.259 1.009 Lack of screening devices to identify children with special needs . . . . 4.133 .944 Lack of apprOpriate playgrounds. . . . 3.952 1.306 Not enough sharing in decision making between teachers and principals (1,4) 3.928 1.253 Lack of sufficient educational equipment (4) . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.795 1.291 Lack of apprOpriate workshops. . . . . 3.777 1.276 Not enough sharing in decision making between principals and administrators (l). . . . . . . . . . . 3.777 1.281 Lack of communication meetings between teachers and parents (4). . . 3.717 1.220 Lack of organized tranSportation to and from schools . . . . . . . . . . 3.620 1.282 Lack of sufficient books (curriculum) (4) 3.554 1.433 No guidelines have been provided to meet individual needs at building level (4). . . . . . . . . 3.554 1.070 Lack of appropriate medical facilities (4) 3.500 1.430 103 TABLE 18--Continued Barrier Statement Mean S.D. Moderate Barriers Lack of communication meetings between teachers and administrators (4) . . . 3.494 1.334 Lack of in-service programs to provide teachers and administrators with needed professional develOpment in the field (2,4,5,6). . . . . . . . 3.476 1.205 Lack of sufficient educational games (4) 3.446 1.390 [The restrictiveness of central program guidelines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.446 1.248 Lack of good living facilities . . . . . 3.434 1.479 Lack of swimming pools (4) . . . . . . . 3.422 1.519 Not enough sharing in decision making between teachers and administrators (4) 3.392 1.306 Lack of appropriate classrooms (4) . . . 3.380 1.463 Lack of communication meetings between teachers (4). . . . . . . . . 3.295 1.217 Lack of communication meetings between teachers and support personnel (4). . 3.265 1.217 Lack of teacher preparation programs for special education (2,3,4,5,6) . . 3.169 1.365 Lack of financial rewards for overtime work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.163 1.487 Lack of blackboards (1,2,4). . . . . . . 2.620 1.382 104 TABLE 18--C0ntinued Barrier Statement Mean S.D. Not Barriers Lack of specialized physicians . . . . . . 2.060 1.215 Lack of social workers (1,3) . . . . . . . 2.012 .966 Lack of school psychologists (1,4) . . . . 1.916 1.092 Lack of teacher consultants (6). . . . . . 1.886 1.047 1--Chi-square tests revealed significant differences between proportions of Males and Females. 2--Chi-square tests revealed significant differences among proportions of Educational Level. 3--Chi-square tests revealed significant differences among prOportions of Years of Experience. 4--Chi-square tests revealed significant differences among prOportions of Location of Schools. 5--Chi-square tests revealed significant differences between prOportions of Saudis and Non-Saudis. 6—-Chi-square tests revealed significant differences between prOportions of Teachers and Administrators. 105 quality of the program, and only four statements were rated as having no serious effect on limiting program quality. Three out of the thirteen "serious barriers" dealt with physical facilities: lack of playgrounds, lack of workshOps, and lack of medical facilities. This could be attributed to the fact that all school buildings were constructed for residential purposes rather than educational facilities. All four statements that fell in the "not serious barrier" category dealt with lack of support personnel. Research Question VI asked: What are the differences in the perception of teachers and administrators when grouped according to sex, type of position, level of education, citizenship, regional location of the school, and years of experience regarding the barriers limiting the quality of special education programs for the mentally retarded? To answer this question, a Chi-Square Test of Homogeneity was used to determine if there were significant differences in the prOportions of responses when subjects were grouped according to the independent variables. As shown in Table 18, subscripts were used to identify barrier statements for which chi-square tests have yielded significant differences. Contingency tables for statements with significant relation- ships are presented in Appendix D. Differences in the proportions of males and females were significant in six barrier statements; two of those were: 106 "Not enough sharing in decision making between principals and administrators." "Not enough sharing in decision making between teachers and principals." Both statements were viewed as being serious barriers, yet the ratings given by females were higher than those given by males. This trend can be attributed to the fact that, under the segregated educational system that exists in Saudi Arabia, female principals have no access to ministry administrators except through telephone communication, which is not the case for male principals. Proportions for Saudis and non-Saudis were signifi- cantly different for two barrier statements: "Lack of teacher preparation programs for special education." "Lack of in-service programs for teachers and administrators in special education." Both barrier statements were considered to be serious barriers by Saudi respondents, where non-Saudis, on the other hand, rated them as being low-moderate to moderate barriers. The availability of teacher preparation and in—service programs in Egypt, where most of the non-Saudis are from, could be a contributing factor for this trend. As was the case in rating the relative importance of the teaching competencies and the ratings regarding profes- sional develOpment priorities, when subjects were grouped according to the location of schools, significant differences 107 in proportions were shown for nineteen barrier statements. They were marked in Table 18 using the number (4) to identify them. Among them were the following statements: "Lack of communication meetings between teachers and support personnel." "Lack of apprOpriate classrooms." "Lack of sufficient books (curriculum)." Seventy-two, or 43.4 percent, of the respondents gave a rating of "4" or "5" to the first statement; out of those, 41, or 57 percent, were from Riyadh schools compared to 16, or 22.2 percent, and 15, or 20.8 percent, representing Dammam and Jidda schools, respectively. The second statement was given the ratings of "4" or "5" by 80, or 48.2 percent, of the respondents; 49, or 61.25 percent, were from Riyadh schools; 20, or 25 percent, from Dammam schools; and 11, or 13.75 percent, were from Jidda schools. The same trend (Rantinued to exist for the third barrier statement, where out (Df the 86, or 51.8 percent, who assigned a rating of "4" or "5" to the statement, there were 51, or 59.3 percent, from Riyadh schools, whereas the number of respondents from Dammam and Jidda schools were 22, or 25.6 percent, and 13, or 15.1 percent, respectively. The null hypothesis was rejected, since significant differences were found among the proportions of responses regarding the barrier statements when subjects were grouped according to the independent variables. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS In this chapter, a summary Of the study is presented including an outline overview Of the major findings. Recom- mendations for possible action, as well as for further research, are made, and conclusions are drawn based on the findings of this survey. Mai-“x A shortage Of human resources in general and educa- tional personnel in particular is one Of the most serious <1bstacles confronting develOpment plans in Saudi Arabia. This study attempted to identify the teaching competencies thought ‘tO be important for teachers Of the mentally retarded in Saudi Arabia. It was the writer's belief that such an attempt ‘will furnish needed foundations for establishing teacher pre- paration programs and for organizing in-service training for teachers of the mentally retarded. Furthermore, this investi— gation examined the Opinion structure of teachers and administrators presently involved in the education of the mentally retarded in Saudi Arabia regarding the barriers which are thought to be limiting the quality of these programs. 108 109 The target pOpulation for this study consisted of all teachers, building administrators, and administrators of the Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia who were involved in the education of the mentally retarded. Questionnaires were distributed by the writer. Verbal as well as written instructions were used to explain and clarify the procedures to be followed in responding to the instrument. The questionnaire utilized in gathering data for this survey research consisted Of three parts. Part I. Personal data regarding subjects' sex, location of employment, type Of work, citizenship, years Of experience, age and level of education. Part II. In this part, subjects were asked to specify, <3n.a five-point scale, the perceived importance and profes- sional develOpment priorities of forty teaching competency statements which were divided into seven major areas: planning instruction (7 statements), assessing and evaluating behavior and instruction (6 statements), conducting instruction (8 statements), classroom management (4 statements), facili- tating social-emotional maturity (4 statements), dealing with Other professionals (6 statements), and working with parents (5 statements). Part III. In this part, respondents were asked to indicate, on a five-point scale, their perceptions regarding thirty barrier statements in terms Of the effect each barrier 110 may have in limiting the quality of the mentally retarded program outcomes. The original version Of the instrument was written in English. Translating the questionnaire into the Arabic language was accomplished first by the writer, then through the assistance of two faculty members of the Department of Arabic Language and the Educational and Psychological Research Center at King Abdul Aziz University, Mecca, Saudi Arabia, who translated the Arabic version back into English to verify the translation. All of the two hundred and four questionnaires that were distributed were returned. However, thirty-eight \ -5 t..._..,i-.- 31,...“ W1 31,..11,.,1..~_° meJWJWPLee-J‘vsuw‘dfiog" -'\ WWJJQHJwa-a‘w‘wow‘ 133’.)th- -Y L eeJJngngl “silt. W u.".J) 91,1...)91 ‘L."..,_ f‘JM‘ _q ulna—L) WA...“ 1.15).“ Ja:.a_o.J UyJJw—H c.3L 1.14 .. (SJ-e 3...».stng M9311»)! ~,L.,.';.'>| —H O ing-vJJ-J 941.1443...) 3‘— 4)“ wJ-L? J35 glues)" ,L—A'é‘ —)\‘ U“ _:.:JJ-3~J) .5.an W) uJ-Ul-nhrthaNJJ-J‘ 5.4....) Ha... J)... Ewa‘)! In: 911‘ AJI sldlLrlquagdl :Wfim-‘wfwa‘ U" ‘J-r-J) Gal—___QJJ_HaJ[ UJJ ‘LEEUUJJI 6.!» 4|»! -(5 a)! Mo WU. aw: 3..____a.,.t...n ._,.1. aways.“ 81.3. 41.3.5.1-[0 ~LJ_._.~_L—"~o SJ...» ”3‘ UleJéJ) 4.5,)... .41 ooooooooooooooooooWJ‘ 0"” W‘ 00000000 dJ—Ln—J‘ LJ—{J—‘LLJv—p-jl-u‘ f‘m‘ ....‘Y oooooooooooooooooooooooo (WU’ 146 vw‘w‘yw wafisI .144»! —H #1,le ‘L_'._‘.I U (4 #l—‘ub-J‘ Lara...“ W‘ my min 15141 _ 4 Him J5.” JALuMJ 3.454% J'L‘J‘ -yy h,3} LJJ Va—«JQ. “LA. 45% ) Ml w-tr UL 4.1-21 ( 5:“ My.) 0.0000000000000000...WJAEJ‘ W M 3.4_.L_;..o.Jl ( Ans...“ ) 5...th 4.45.: _\’g L—f— 4L5J$J \ - “Lag-)1! UJLaLY! CA...“ J..*.___._. -41- 4.__st...: .,..J" 1 5.4.4.54 .. '- \u:L1:L4...._J" \ 4.4.5.: .41 HWYIJ WI yum.“ 3.45.4: u-L‘ u:L,>L.,_._"..>\ 9.15.3945.“ U3..)U=JI 2349!...» -yv Cr fl}?! 45L“: V2.1! W! 4414:.“ p.41; —YA ga——-.-JI ”.54... agjuu\ ”-55.3!in H.444“) ,JLAM‘Q 4...: 23.431.54.51 5...... _\'q u H UJJ JLAJJ3\ UJJ ;Q.J_._:'.'SH W| ConLHLJ‘ .._, Wham Q: 54%)“) 54.5....th .411. -r. ¢L___.~.§.4J‘ mummy BASL-uo-J‘ 5“”: _\"‘ Q; ~J4.4J\ ”454,535 .41 Mfl‘J‘rJJA—J‘ 954.91....» to J44.“ -m- (8‘ 00.00.0000... Ll “‘5.*J‘ 147 .JJ__.> ”Jun—H oLbN... Q4 34%!“ .41 : WWW?! CJ4L~J~; L1...» JakaJ-J‘J ’L-p?‘ glam! W‘ ...\'" “JUN JJ» ”.7! 040L434...- UJ‘ draw.“ _\-'v u—--" 5543-"- “va ”-5“ @HJW‘ -\"A «5} :J-IJ tour—H (.44 ‘I_..',.‘.\ gnu!) . 5.1.1.3.!” . 0.4.2.3! 0000.00.6‘009’00000 ‘L.___._..YL... ’Lj—L“ f——9—’L-L‘2‘ can .J—aLnLJ‘ v.5 'Lp?‘ 3.3.9....» .1. .4 - 4.4.11”: L 148 : 9L._..._4..L..' ‘J_.___.?-J||.LDUJ —;Q|JLHJ\Mu-5JAQJ‘QA_L,,J;UJ16.>L>J1 f...____5J.H J)» 5Ju4 8‘.‘ firm) 9.4.1.11 £3.11 mew‘fl: 4a.: 1.—_..:i_).J|.,CI....';.>Y!‘..I.s“,.1.5=._j..5.,(\)warn“)! 515.31.: C441?L..»IU.S.~L54J\ .LaJt “hawk. J4; WW! fUJYIJ ting»?! 3’25 94: J4, (o) o ¢|JL‘..4.J1¢L-Lu UJWJJJ—“J #1 LT“ M.MMMMM 4444444 4-4-4-4-44-4 149 :1 U'J‘L'LJ 4I4.....s‘1\..1 '5..1J4.J\ 54....LJ W191»!!! 5.4.. .\ 5.).JQIJ14.»J..L..J1W.L.;.J1 WUWI _\' a 4.“.le 6W1 P.L.... -r LWJL 4\J...J| W1 4|)..Jl )1...» -5 LMJ4: 41,...» Wt 41,...” $01.: -0 meJWJMBWwWJw‘JJbJW‘ -'1 meJWJuLfiw‘WJ-‘J‘ dJl’Jvad -Y 5.31.4.1 W1 12.13;.“ J.4....J QyJJ-LJ‘ 4.....L..J| 1.1...“ £31.: 4.1 04 mm w\L LJJ .. 54.. 4.4aLJwJ4J144343LbJ1JW\_H Q #“u-J-‘J 9414...! 3 J-J‘ avg-*5 .1315 243113-31 JLa-‘b‘ --1\' L? “4.)“! Jay) W1 ijLHJVNJaJI 9......J F12...» J4... but»?! --\r .11 kn “41.4-56.4-1—1‘ :w..*~_..gJJ.l-J1UJ ‘J-r-H --.>‘ 9L___...‘,.L..J1 v.1: 5L...U.J4.Jl 3.!» 414.51..” .11 km (.44... Q. owl 3.1—.44... 5,... ‘1).1UJIwJ4Jl 5:)...41 oooooooooooooooooong1uJ1kjrmv-J1 00000000 JJLJ|$A~WJL~1P1N1_\Y oooooooooooooooooooooooo(ff-414‘)” 150 Vw‘U'JJ’U" waJfS1f-a1w1—11 4 4.41 ”.41 A hwa—Lo-H 6...};1 W1 ”.5. 5......La...ll 4.1..413J1 L.,.:.....: J1J..4.5.: _n :4 Jun $494.4» 4.4.4: LJ_....¢>.ILJ1 d.>14 $14.43.“) 3.44:.)Y1 k31......)1 _\'\' 141.1 U- 5...)... 551.251. 4.L5. ) J.._5.J\ 55......” L} ”A; -31 ( CJ1 00. Much) 0.4400600000066000...WJJ-"a—H W 5...t.-...M ( 5L5Ls..n ) 5.L:y\ 4.4.: -yg ‘4— ALBJSJ UW1JJ—1-u Mgw1j91y1 '31.).543441 _Y° . L,.s1..<>.:..>)11 UJLDJLLYI €44.11 J...‘____....L _ 4....cl...: Ur.“ 5.....1...J _. " |L-:L.laL.:.‘.J\ 44.5.: .41 H.495!) ”.44.“ $14.41 5...... VJ. 4.91...» c.1554”! 95.3115.“ 54.1.... _\'v (F 4.25.5“ 4.sl.....". U4.“ 444.441-414.41 ”4.5.: -u 05—...“ M44 c0 cal—“34‘ 52-59315” wa3 JLAH‘ 44:: @334...“ 54...: .41 V44 :1th «r15 41.4.4" Y1 U.14“- LanL—I—H C)", 541.4445“) 3.4-91.44.45.511 4...”: .1”. (1.; U4...“ UJ..4J_44.JI -ry MF‘thJw“ 6.451...» :4 M1 ....\"T' Lift-.0411: 04L...>Y\ ”51.4)!“ ) wJLma-J1 (tJ1000OOOOOOOOOO U— “‘é-‘J1 151 J).__.> J.4..JI .Lbfi. 0. 5.3L...“ _r£ O i T' ‘ ‘ 0.5“ if)“, 131' .5) O i V V \ 3 .JLJY‘ éwJ-‘U‘ (IL-.43! —\"o o 2 r w ‘ L... .J.L.4:..l|_, sLfl) -)4L5;.5) 4.5..“ -n u——-“ .543; 3&1qu “-5“ C‘VJW‘ -\'A o 2 r w ) .5; L. 40;.) c.L.-.J.._)) f... .L___.:J‘.H ‘54)... “ML. 5.L.n.'...il _\'q u...) 5......)5. 5.1.1.4le . 9......“ o i Y Y ) I; .JQL. ‘LLLJI HJLM.) C" J.L.n.'..1) U. mg) 54.)... _£. a i r Y ) L: #J) ._,.5 HEW’ L,2.“ .4)...th WW)... J) ,4...) c:1... u...“ -IJL..." L AI-AAWJxJ‘ L,.)) 5.)...) 9...)... .1.) .55... 5.5.L.J) 5..L_5.)) (.9)wa (.th .45) LHJWJw) J) J..." —) —Y —\' —2 —O U__.J) Cu»! .1.) 44."... 54.)...) 5..L5.)) 0.-)wa. .145! .425) L____.._..5._..J4.J) J) J.4...) -) -\' 4 -z —o 152 ...; ”9L5.“ rr-Lb-lJ IM‘ “ft-H din; UL.“ JJ‘Y‘ .091.le WI J14... youw\ .HuJSJ wgdfibwgu| riJJ1JJ>BJL|J 8.391 fir” a.___au! . waywu ”fir.“ wwsw‘ w‘uq; 69"" fqu cl... Lu; Hug! uuuwowuguwuh “14.11319waqu 0 0‘)! I“ 153 L.:— 4&4—3' 7‘ :31“ Htf - J 00000000. WJ'M LS”L—————n~°—‘ U;L_ A'Z}‘L_§,———._-a‘ -—~._.a L; nildf 49-? '6; -:J-' °-——--?_)-°—-‘ V wg'lf—Lo...b W‘ m! MAJ ‘LJ’Yl f5.) J3): (“3.54 ucL LI ffl MMM 44444 4444-4 14 154 WJ|JYIJ WJAth .31.»)! CMJ" ,6); {3.3.5 -1 ,JoL__'xJ\ r>-.--‘-=-"~J‘ m,» U; 4111: W‘ WJJn-J‘J WJ‘Jy‘ 9L)“ 0.» cJJJ-J J‘féé 1L... Mona?“ J1 . Jug.“ J1). 9.3.; -A :Wyg Mu; .g “Jgth -1 W x ALMJ‘HJJxJWJJaJ|_+ u" .. .. ' -- n u 0 . .. ‘t—‘g'J—‘J 9‘ ‘ ' .. JJ-‘J f“ —‘ \L 14] 3......) ,JJ I QLJJJ‘ ooooo 6J‘Jy‘ g! Jn—J‘ 513194;)an w LanJl 'o.>L:.| "f4; -—H 2H r‘J-r-J‘ oooooo OJ‘JH‘J“JJAJ‘ ._.‘ oooo “JJ.A_J‘J",..¢____~' J44.“ —H A J54...“ L,_Jl_, _; 6J__.._‘>1 L5,“); L51JSJI_ —\£ .m -H -\Y -\/'\ APPENDIX C OBSERVED FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS REGARDING PERCEIVED IMPORTANCE AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES FOR THE FORTY TEACHING COMPETENCIES APPENDIX C--Observed Frequency Distributions Regarding Perceived Importance and Professional DevelOpment Priorities for the Forty Teaching Competencies Importance Professional DevelOpment Needs 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1. Formulating instructional goals for the year. N 5 9 55 43 54 23 24 29 46 44 % 3.0 5.4 33.1 25.9 32.5 13.9 14.5 17.5 27.7 26.5 2. Selecting content apprOpriate to identified goals. N 5 15 46 46 54 18 24 41 34 49 % 3.0 9.0 27.7 27.7 32.5 10.8 14.5 24.7 20.5 29.5 3. Organizing the content. N 3 9 34 63 57 24 4O 44 31 27 % 1.8 5.4 20.5 38.0 34.3 14.5 24.1 26.5 18.7 16.3 4. Choosing instructional materials to content to be taught. N 4 8 3O 40 84 32 24 38 38 34 % 2.4 4.8 18.1 24.1 50.6 19.3 14.5 22.9 22.9 20.5 5. DevelOping instructional materials to content to be taught. N 3 6 31 50 76 16 25 57 33 35 % 1.8 3.6 18.7 30.1 45.8 9.6 1541 34.3 19.9 21.1 6. Choosing instructional methods for specific lessons. N 2 3 6 51. 104 18 42 33 42 31 % 1.2 1.8 3.6 30.7 62.7 10.8 25.3 19.1 25.3 18.7 155 156 APPENDIX C--Continued Importance rofessional DevelOpment Needs 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 7. DevelOping instructional methods for specific lessons. N 2 5 ll 50 98 22 37 43 32 32 % 1.2 3.0 6.6 32.1 59.0 13.3 22.3 25.9 19.3 19.3 8. Verify program content by using informal tests for assessing student's status. N 3 4 28 51 80 17 27 52 37 33 % 1.8 2.4 16.9 30.7 48.2 10.2 16.3 31.3 22.3 19.9 9. Using the results from teachers' administered tests to modify instructional plans for students. N 4 9 53 60 40 16 38 46 30 36 % 2.4 5.4 31.9 36.1 24.1. 9.6 22.9 27.7 18.1 22.7 10. Interpreting data from formal tests administered by diagnosticians in develOping instructional plans for students. N 8 20 49 48 41 18 38 41 31 38 % 4.8 12.0 29.5 28.9 24.7 10.8 22.9 24.7 18.7 22.9 11. Carrying out preassessment activities to determine student readiness for specific learning content. N 9 11 34 60 52 30 53 39 25 19 8 5.4 6.6 20.5 36.1 31.3 18.1 31.9 23.5 15.1 11.4 12. Reassessment of students during and after the instructional unit. N 9 4 25 60 68 28 37 49 38 14 % 5.4 2.4 15.1 36.1 41.0 16.9 22.3 29.5 22.9 8.4 157 APPENDIX C—-Continued Importance rofessional Development Needs 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 13. Keeping a record of student assessment to help in knowing student's progress. N 2 1 13 46 104 38 29 28 33 38 % 1.2 0.6 '7.8 27.7 62.7 22.9 17.5 16.9 19.9 22.9 14. Preparing lesson plans based on assessed needs. N 0 2 16 59 89 31 36 42 31 26 % 0 1.2 9.6 35.5 53.6 18.7 21.7 25.3 18.7 15.7 15. Preparing lesson plans based on methods to be used in teaching. N 4 6 38 40 78 27 49 43 32 15 % 2.4 3.6 22.9 24.1 47.0 16.3 29.5 25.9 19.3 9.0 16. Breaking tasks into small steps from simple to complex. N 4 2 8 39 113 30 35 35 31 35 % 2.4 1.2 14.8 23.5 68.1 18.1 21.1 21.1 18.7 21.1 17. Using behavior modification techniques. N 1 5 23 55 82 19 34 32 36 45 % 0.6 3.0 13.9 33.1 49.4 11.4 20.5 19.3 21.7 27.1 18. Providing continuous feedback to students during instruction. N 3 12 37 56 58 22 36 54 35 19 % 1.8 7.2 22.3 33.7 34.9 13.3 21.7 32.5 21.1 11.4 158 APPENDIX C--Continued Professional DevelOpment :- I Importance Needs 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 S 19. Using multi-sensory approach when teaching. N 2 5 20 29 110 30 36 30 29 41 8 1.2 3.0 12.0 17.5 66.3 18.1 21.7 18.1 17.5 24.7 20. Selecting and Operating audio-visual equipment. N l 0 16 35 114 19 9 36 28 74 % 0.6 0 9.6 21.1 68.7 11.4. 5.4 21.7 16.9 44.6 21. Modifying and adOpting learning tasks to meet each child's needs. N 3 2 34 67 60 29 32 49 32 24 % 1.8 1.2 20.5 40.4 36.1 17.5 19.3 29.5 19.3 14.5 22. Consistent classroom rules and procedures. N 5 6 32 51 72 51 41 32 25 17 % 3.0 3.6 19.3 30.7 43.4 30.7 24.7 19.3 15.1 10.2 23. Arranging the physical props in the classroom to facilitate learning. N l 2 31 36 96 49 46 32 12 27 % 0.6 1.2 18.7 21.7 57.8 29.5 27.7 19.3 ‘7.2 16.3 24. Determining what is rewarding for each child. N 3 15 34 70 44 34 42 50 23 17 % 1.8 9.0 20.5 42.2 26.5 20.5 25.3 30.1 13.9 10.2 159 APPENDIX C--Continued V Importance rofessional DevelOpment Needs l 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 25. Administering rewards or punishment to change pupils' behavior. N 14 25 42 28 57 62 35 39 18 12 % 8.4 15.1 25.3 16.9 34.3 37.3 21.1 23.5 10.8 7.2 26. Provide instructional activities that promote appropriate personal and social interaction. N 2 6 18 65 75 14 30 55 30 37 % 1.2 3.6 10.8 39.2 45.2 8.4 18.1 33.1 18.1 22.3 27. Help students become aware of the needs of others. N 5 13 50 52 46 14 51 49 37 15 % 3.0 7.8 30.1 31.3 27.7 8.4 30.7 29.5 22.3 9.0 28. Provide instructional activities for students to help each other. N l 4 23 73 65 16 34 59 34 23 % 0.6 2.4 13.9 44.0 39.2 9.6 20.5 35.5 20.5 13.9 29. Promote children's independence and help them become self-directed. N 3 1 25 43 94 24 39 38 35 3o %- 1.8 ,0.6. 15.1 25.9 56.6 14.5 23.5 22.9 21.1 18.1 30. Asking for help or ideas from other staff. N 5 .12 40 58 51 37 60 29 23 17 % 3.0 7.2 24.1 34.9 30.7 22.3 36.1 17.5 13.9 10.2 160 APPENDIX C--Continued Importance Professional DevelOpment Needs l 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 31. Seeking help for student from agencies outside the school. N 17 30 43 51 25 34 45 40 17 30 % 10.2 18.1 25.9 30.7 15.1 20.5 27.1 24.1 10.2 18.1 32. Getting to know other teachers. N 3 9 27 64 63 77 65 15 5 4 % 1.8 5.4 16.3 38.6 38.0 46.4 39.2 9.0 3.0 2.4 33. Working with teacher aides and other support personnel. N 2 2 16 52 94 38 55 35 16 22 % 1.2 1.2 9.6 31.3 56.6 22.9 33.1 21.1 9.6 13.3 34. Handling administrators' observation of your teaching. N 4 l 33 52 76 75 50 30 8 3 % 2.4 0.6 19.9 31.3 45.8 45.2 30.1 18.1 4.8 1.8 35. Following administrative directives. N 5 9 33 59 60 80 49 21 13 3 % 3.0 5.4 19.9 35.5 36.1 48.2 29.5 12.7 7.8 1.8 36. Dealing with parents' criticisms. N 10 17 38 52 49 35 31 48 41 11 % 6.0 10.2 22.9 31.3 29.5 21.1 18.7 28.9 24.7 6.6 161 APPENDIX C--Continued Importance Professional Development Needs 1 2 3 4 5 l 2 3 4 5 37. Obtaining information about the child from parents. N l 4 18 45 95 19 45 34 40 28 % 0.6 2.4 10.8 27.1 59.0 11.4 27.1 20.5 24.1 16.9 38. Responding to parents in ways which lead to support of school program. N 5 4 31 57 69 16 37 51 39 23 % 3.0 2.4 18.7 34.3 41.6 9.6 22.3 30.7 23.5 13.9 39. Using accepted principles of counseling, interviewing, and guidance in parent conferences. N 1 8 25 52 80 4 23 31 40 68 % 0.6 4.8 15.1 31.3 48.2 2.4 13.9 18.7 24.1 41.0 40. Helping parents deal with their children at home. N 7 12 19 33 95 22 26 39 34 45 % 4.2 7.2 11.4 19.9 57.2 13.3 15.7 23.5 20.5 27.1 APPENDIX D CHI-SQUARE TESTS WITH SIGNIFICANT VALUES FOR RESPONDENTS' PERCEPTIONS OF BARRIERS TO QUALITY SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS APPENDIX D--Chi-Square Tests with Significant Values for Respondents' Perceptions of Barriers to Quality Special Education Programs Barrier Seriousness Least Most l 2 3 4 5 Total 1. Lack of sufficient books (curriculum). Riyadh schools N 11 4 16 16 35 82 Row % 13.4 4.9 19.5 19.5 42.7 Jidda schools N 8 12 14 4 9 47 Row % 17.0 25.5 29.8 8.5 19.1 Dammam schools N l 4 4 5 17 31 Row % 3.2 12.9 12.9 16.1 54.8 Riyadh schools Mean Jidda schools Mean Dammam schools Mean 3.73 Chi-square = 28.78 2.87 Degrees of freedom = 12 4.06 Significant at .0042 2. Lack of blackboards. Riyadh schools N 24 10 20 13 15 82 Row % 29.3 12.2 24.4 15.9 18.3 Jidda schools N 15 l6 l4 2 O 47 Row % 31.9 34.0 29.8 4.3 0 162 163 APPENDIX D--Continued Barrier Seriousness Least Most l 2 3 4 5 Total Dammam schools N 9 1 8 6 7 31 Row % 29.0 3.2 25.8 19.4 22.6 Riyadh schools Mean = 2.81 Chi-square = 28.65 Jidda schools Mean = 2.06 Degrees of freedom = 12 Dammam schools Mean = 3.03 Significant at .0044 High school diploma N 5 9 l7 7 11 49 Row % 10.2 18.4 34.7 14.3 22.4 Special ed. teaching certificate N 32 12 21 9 2 76 Row % 42.1 15.8 27.6 11.8 2.6 B.A. & M.A. degrees N 12 7 4 6 8 37 Row 8 32.4 18.9 10.8 16.2 21.6 High school Chi-square = 41.61 diploma Mean = 3.20 Degrees of freedom = 20 Special ed. Significant at .0031 teaching certif. Mean = 2.17 B.A. & M.A. Mean = 2.76 164 APPENDIX D--Continued ============================================================== Barrier Seriousness Least Most l 2 3 4 5 Total 44:13.92 N 29 20 34 11 5 99 Row % 29.3 20.2 34.3 11.1 5.1 Females N 21 9 9 ll 17 67 Row % 31.3 13.4 13.4 16.4 25.4 Males Mean = 2.22 Chi-square = 21.15 Females Mean = 2.91 Degrees of freedom = 4 Significant at .0003 3. Lack of sufficient educational games. Riyadh schools N 9 6 16 26 25 82 Row % 11.0 7.3 19.5 31.7 30.5 Jidda schools N 8 14 11 6 8 47 Row % 17.0 29.8 23.4 12.8 17.0 Dammam schools N 2 4 6 3 16 31 Row % 6.5 12.9 19.4 9.7 51.6 Riyadh schools Mean Jidda schools Mean Dammam schools Mean 3.62 Chi-square = 32.29 2.83 Degrees of freedom = 12 3.87 Significant at .0012 165 APPENDIX D--Continued W Barrier Seriousness Least Most l 2 3 4 5 Total 4. Lack of sufficient educational equipment. Riyadh schools N 4 3 14 22 39 82 Row % 4.9 3.7 17.1 26.8 47.6 Jidda schools N 5 13 11 5 13 47 Row % 10.6 27.7 23.4 10.6 27.7 Dammam schools N 2 0 7 7 15 31 Row % 6.5 0 22.6 22.6 48.4 Riyadh schools Mean = 4.08 Chi-square = 38.21 Jidda schools Mean = 4.06 Degrees of freedom = 12 Dammam schools Mean = 4.06 Significant at .0001 5. Lack of apprOpriate classrooms. Riyadh schools N 17 2 14 19 30 82 Row % 20.7 2.4 17.1 23.2 36.6 Jidda schools N 8 ll 17 8 3 47 Row % 17.0 23.4 36.2 17.0 6.4 Dammam schools N 4 l 6 4 16 Row 8 12.9 3.2 19.4 12.9 51.6 166 APPENDIX D--Continued Barrier Seriousness Least Most 1 2 3 4 5 Total 3.52 Chi-square = 42.22 2.72 Degrees of freedom = 12 3.87 Significant at .0000 Riyadh schools Mean Jidda schools Mean Dammam schools Mean 9. Lack of swimming pools. Riyadh schools N 22 13 15 14 18 82 Row % 26.8 15.9 18.3 17.1 22.0 Jidda schools N 6 6 4 7 24 Row % 12.8 12.8 8.5 14.9 51.1 Dammam schools N 2 0 8 6 15 Row % 6.5 0 25.8 19.4 48.4 Riyadh schools Mean Jidda schools Mean Dammam schools Mean 2.91 Chi-square = 28.95 3.78 Degrees of freedom = 12 4.03 Significant at .0040 10. Lack of apprOpriate medical facilities. Riyadh schools N 13 7 9 20 33 82 Row % 15.9 8.5 11.0 24.4 40.2 Jidda schools N 5 14 15 5 8 47 Row % 10.6 29.8 31.9 10.6 17.8 167 APPENDIX D-—Continued W Barrier Seriousness Least Most l 2 3 4 5 Total Dammam schools N 2 2 6 4 17 31 Row % 6.5 6.5 19.4 12.9 54.8 Riyadh schools Mean = 3.64 Chi-square = 39.71 Jidda schools Mean = 3.93 Degrees of freedom = 12 Dammam schools Mean = 4.03 Significant at .0001 11. Lack of teacher aides. Riyadh schools N l l 8 51 21 82 Row % 1.2 1.2 9.8 62.2 25.6 Jidda schools N 1 l l 8 36 47 Row % 2.1 2.1 2.1 17.0 76.6 Dammam schools N 3 1 0 3 24 31 Row % 9.7 3.2 0 9.7 77.4 Riyadh schools Mean = 4.09 Chi-square = 57.03 Jidda schools Mean = 4.64 Degrees of freedom = 12 Dammam schools Mean = 4.42 Significant at .0000 Males N 4 l 8 45 41 99 Row % 4.0 1.0 8.1 45.5 41.4 168 APPENDIX D--Continued Barrier Seriousness Least Most 1 2 3 4 5 Total Females N 1 2 1 20 43 67 Row % 1.5 3.0 1.5 29.9 64.2 Males Mean = 4.19 Chi-square = 11.50 Females Mean = 4.52 Degrees of freedom = 4 Significant at .0215 12. Lack of social workers. 243124 N 29 39 Row % 29.3 39.4 Females N 24 37 Row % 35.8 55.2 Males Mean = 2.15 Females Mean = 1.80 5 years experience and less N 28 43 Row % 31.5 48.3 6—10 years N 17 12 Row % 39.5 27.9 3.0 4.5 1.5 Chi-square = 13.83 Degrees of freedom = 4 Significant at .0078 12 5 1 89 13.5 5.6 1.1 10 3 1 43 23.3 7.0 2.3 7M3 169 APPENDIX D--Continued Barrier Seriousness Least Most l 2 3 4 5 Total 11-15 years N 6 ll 2 0 1 20 Row % 30.0 55.0 10.0 0 5.0 More than 15 years N 2 10 0 0 2 14 Row % 14.3 71.4 0 0 14.3 5 years and Chi-square = 21.80 less Mean = 1.96 Degrees of freedom = 12 6-10 years Mean = 2.05 Significant at .0398 11-15 years Mean = 1.95 More than 15 years Mean = 2.29 13. Lack of school psychologists. Riyadh schools N 31 29 17 1 4 82 Row % 37.8 35.4 20.7 1.2 4.9 Jidda schools N 29 5 7 5 1 47 Row % 61.7 10.6 14.9 10.6 2.1 Dammam schools N 17 8 5 0 1 31 Row % 54.8 25.8 16.1 0 3.2 Riyadh schools Mean Jidda schools Mean Dammam schools Mean 1.75 Chi-square = 28.75 1.80 Degrees of freedom = 12 1.71 Significant at .0046 170 APPENDIX D--C0ntinued Barrier Seriousness Least Most 1 2 3 4 5 Total 14. Lack of teacher consultants. Teachers N 56 41 10 2 4 113 Row % 49.6 36.3 8.8 1.8 3.5 Administrators N 19 13 15 3 3 53 Row % 35.8 24.5 28.3 5.6 5.6 Teachers Mean = 1.73 Chi-square = 20.32 Administrators Mean = 2.77 Degrees of freedom = 8 Significant at .0092 15. Lack of specialized physicians. High school diploma N 17 18 6 3 5 49 Row % 34.7 36.7 12.2 6.1 10.2 Special ed. teaching certificate N 33 23 9 6 5 76 Row % 43.4 30.3 11.8 7.9 6.6 B.A. & M.A. degrees N 18 9 7 0 3 37 Row % 48.6 24.3 18.9 0 8.1 171 APPENDIX D--Continued Barrier Seriousness Least Most 1 2 3 4 5 Total High school Chi-square = 45.07 diploma Mean = 2.20 Degrees of freedom = 20 Special ed. Significant at .0011 teaching certif. Mean = 2.04 B.A. & M.A. Mean = 1.94 18. Lack of teacher preparation education. High school diploma N 3 l7 ROW’% 6.1 34.7 Special ed. teaching certificate N 11 24 programs for special 12 2 15 49 24.5 4.0 30.6 21 5 15 76 27.6 6.6 19.7 9 2 18 37 24.3 5.4 48.6 Chi—square = 36.71 Degrees of freedom = 20 Significant at .0127 Row % 14.5 31.6 B.A. & M.A. degrees N 0 8 Row % 0 21.6 High school diploma Mean = 3.18 Special ed. teaching certif. Mean = 2.85 B.A. & M.A. Mean = 3.56 Saudis N l 0 Row % 2.9 0 0 3 30 34 172 APPENDIX D--Continued Barrier Seriousness Least Most l 2 3 4 5 Total Non-Saudis N 14 49 43 8 18 132 Row % 10.6 37.1 32.6 6.1 13.6 ._ L Saudis Mean = 4.79 Chi—square = 77.80 H Non-Saudis Mean = 2.75 Degrees of freedom = 4 ‘ Significant at .0000 Riyadh schools N 13 24 25 5 15 82 Row % 15.9 29.3 30.5 6.1 18.3 Jidda schools N 2 18 13 3 11 47 Row'% 4.3 38.3 27.7 6.4 23.4 Dammam schools N 0 7 4 3 17 31 ROW’% 0 22.6 12.9 9.7 54.8 Riyadh schools Mean = 2.81 Chi-square = 33.11 Jidda schools Mean = 3.06 Degrees of freedom = 12 'Dammam schools Mean = 3.97 Significant at .0009 5 years egperience and less N 7 26 19 7 30 89 Row % 7.9 29.2 21.3 7.9 33.7 173 APPENDIX D--C0ntinued Barrier Seriousness u Least Most l 2 3 4 5 Total 6-10 years N 3 9 l6 1 14 43 Row % '7.0 20.9 37.2 2.3 32.6 .a 11-15 years t N 5 10 2 1 2 20 1. Row % 25.0 50.0 10.0 5.0 10.0 More than 15 years N 0 4 6 2 2 14 Row % 0 28.6 42.9 14.3 14.3 5 years and Chi-square = 24.64 less Mean = 3.30 Degrees of freedom = 12 6-10 years Mean = 3.32 Significant at .0166 11-15 years Mean = 2.25 More than 15 years Mean = 3.14 Teachers N 13 40 29 9 22 113 Row % 11.5 35.4 25.7 8.0 19.5 Administrators N 2 9 l4 2 26 53 Row % 3.7 17.0 26.4 3.7 49.0 Teachers Mean = 2.88 Chi-square = 22.33 Administrators Mean = 3.77 Degrees of freedom = 8 Significant at .0043 174 APPENDIX D--Continued Barrier Seriousness Least Most Total 19. Lack of in-service programs to provide needed professional develOpment for teachers of exceptional children. Teachers N 6 25 39 22 21 113 Row % 5.3 22.1 34.5 19.5 18.6 Administrators N 2 4 12 10 25 53 Row % 3.7 7.5 22.6 18.8 47.1 Teachers Mean = 3.24 Chi-square = 21.62 Administrators Mean = 3.98 Degrees of freedom = 8 Significant at .0057 Riyadh schools N 5 19 21 21 16 82 Row % 6.1 ,23.2 25.6 25.6 19.5 Jidda schools N 1 7 23 5 ll 47 Row % 2.1 14.9 48.9 10.6 23.4 Dammam schools N 2 3 7 5 14 31 Row % 6.5 9.7 22.6 16.1 45.2 Riyadh schools Mean = 3.29 Chi-square = 29.67 Jidda schools Mean = 3.38 Degrees of freedom = 12 Dammam schools Mean = 3.83 Significant at .0031 175 APPENDIX D--Continued Barrier Seriousness Least Most 1 2 3 4 5 Total High school diploma N 3 9 11 12 14 49 Row % 6.1 18.4 22.4 24.5 28.5 Special ed. teaching certificate N 4 17 29 12 14 76 Row % 5.3 22.4 38.2 15.8 18.4 B.A. & M.A. degrees N l 2 10 7 17 37 Row % 2.7 5.4 27.0 18.9 45.9 High school Chi—square 40.57 diploma Mean = 3.51 Degrees of freedom 20 Special ed. Significant at .0042 teaching certif. Mean = 3.19 B.A. & M.A. Mean = 4.11 Saudis N 0 0 1 7 26 34 Row % 0 O 2.9 20.6 76.5 Non-Saudis N 8 29 50 25 20 132 Row % 6.1 22 37.9 18.9 15.2 Saudis Mean = 4.73 Chi-square 56.99 Non-Saudis Mean = 3.15 Degrees of freedom 4 Significant at .0000 176 APPENDIX D—-Continued Barrier Seriousness Least Most 1 2 3 4 5 Total 20. Lack of communication meetings between teachers. Riyadh schools N 3 6 24 31 18 82 FF Row % 3.7 7.3 29.3 37.8 22.0 1 Jidda schools 1. N 7 18 15 4 3 47 Row % 14.9 38.3 31.9 8.5 6.4 Dammam schools N 5 3 6 8 9 31 Row % 16.1 9.7 19.4 25.8 29.0 Riyadh schools Mean = 3.67 Chi-square = 44.94 Jidda schools Mean = 2.53 Degrees of freedom = 12 Dammam schools Mean = 3.42 Significant at .0000 21. Lack of communication meetings between teachers and support personnel. Riyadh schools N Row % Jidda schools N Row % 6.1 8.5 13 15.9 12 25.5 23 26 15 82 28.0 31.7 18.3 16 11 4 47 34.0 23.4 8.5 177 APPENDIX D--Continued a Barrier Seriousness Least Most 1 2 3 4 5 Total Dammam schools N 7 2 6 7 9 31 Row % 22.6 6.5 19.4 22.6 29.0 Riyadh schools Mean = 3.40 Chi-square = 21.57 Jidda schools Mean = 2.78 Degrees of freedom = 12 Dammam schools Mean = 3.29 Significant at .0426 22. Lack of communication meetings between teachers and administrators. Riyadh schools N Row % Jidda schools N Row % Dammam schools N Row % Riyadh schools Jidda schools Dammam schools 12 14.6 5 10.6 Mean Mean Mean 4 4.9 11 23.4 3.55 3.08 3.90 18 23 25 82 22.0 28.0 30.5 12 13 6 47 25.5 27.7 12.8 2 9 14 31 6.5 29.0 45.2 Chi-square = 21.74 Degrees of freedom = 12 Significant at .0405 178 APPENDIX D--C0ntinued Barrier Seriousness Least Most l 2 3 4 5 Total 23. Lack of communication meetings between teachers and parents. Riyadh schools N 8 7 17 24 26 82 Row % 9.8 8.5 20.7 29.3 31.7 Jidda schools N 2 5 16 18 6 47 Row % 4.3 10.6 34.0 38.3 12.8 Dammam schools N 2 1 6 2 20 31 ROW’% 6.5 3.2 19.4 6.5 64.5 Riyadh schools Mean Jidda schools Mean Dammam schools Mean 3.64 Chi-square = 31.93 3.44 Degrees of freedom = 12 4.19 Significant at .0014 26. Not enough sharing in decision making between principals and administrators. Males Row % 8.1 16.2 23.2 20.2 32.3 Females Row % 4.5 7.5 9.0 26.9 52.2 179 APPENDIX D--C0ntinued Barrier Seriousness Least Most l 2 3 4 5 Total Males Mean = 3.52 Chi-square = 12.54 Females Mean = 2.58 Degrees of freedom = 4 Significant at .0138 27. Not enough sharing in decision making between teachers and administrators. Riyadh schools N 6 5 35 18 18 82 Row % 7.3 6.1 42.7 22.0 22.0 Jidda schools N 10 7 ll 5 14 47 Row % 21.3 14.9 23.4 10.6 29.8 Dammam schools N 2 8 5 5 11 31 Row'% 6.5 25.8 16.1 16.1 35.5 Riyadh schools Mean = 3.45 Chi-square = 28.54 Jidda schools Mean = 3.12 Degrees of freedom = 12 Dammam schools Mean = 3.48 Significant at .0046 28. Not enough sharing in decision making between teachers and principals. Riyadh schools N 5 9 22 19 27 82 Row % 6.1 11.0 26.8 23.2 32.9 180 APPENDIX D--Continued Barrier Seriousness Least Most 1 2 3 4 5 Total Jidda schools N 4 3 6 3 31 47 Row % 8.5 6.4 12.8 6.4 66.0 Dammam schools N 1 0 8 3 19 31 Row % 3.2 0 25.8 9.7 61.3 Riyadh schools Mean 3.66 Chi-square = 24.25 Jidda schools Dammam schools Females Males Females Row % Row % 6 7 6.1 7.1 4 6 6.0 9.0 Mean = 3.72 Mean = 4.22 Degrees of freedom = 12 Significant at .0188 32 17 37 99 32.3 17.2 37.4 5 8 44 67 7.5 11.9 65.7 Chi-square = 18.54 Degrees of freedom = 4 Significant at .0010 BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, R. D. "Role and the Teacher of Educable Mentally Retarded Elementary Children." The Journal of Special Education 10 (1976):383-391. Anderson, R. M.; Dietrich, W. L.; and Greer, J. G. "Toward a Non-Categorical Approach: Suggested Course Work for Teachers of the Retarded." Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded (Feb. l976):73—76. Anttonen, J. E. "Competencies Requisite for Teachers of Educable Mentally Retarded as Perceived by Building Principals, Teacher Trainers, Special Class Teachers." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oregon, 1972. Blatt, G. "Some Persistently Recurring Assumptions Concerning the Mentally Subnormal." Training School Bulletin, v. 57, 1960, pp. 48-59. Bullock, L. M.; Dykes, M. K.; and Kelly, T. J. Competencies Needed for Teaching Emotionally Disturbed and Socially Maladjusted Children and Youth; Implications for Staff Development. Gainesville, Florida: Florida Educational Research and Development Council, 1973. Bullock, L. M., and Whelan, R. J. "Competencies Needed by Teachers of the Emotionally Disturbed and Socially Maladjusted: A Comparison." Exceptional Children 37 (1971):485-489. Burk, P. J. "Personnel Preparation: Historical Perspective." Exceptional Children 43, N. 3 (l976):l44-147. Carnegie-Mellon Institute of Research. Mental Education Project for the Handicapped: Academic and Administra- tive Report. Prepared by CMIR, 4400 Fifth Ave., Pittsburgh, Pa., 1975. Coker, H. "Identifying and Measuring Teacher Competencies: The Carroll County Project." Journal of Teacher Education XXVII, N. l (1976):54—56. 181 182 Connor, F. P. "Excellence in Special Education." Exceptional Children 30 (l964):206-209. . "The Past is Prologue: Teacher Preparation in Special Education." Exceptional Children (April 1976): 366-378. Council for Exceptional Children. Professional Standards for Personnel in the Education of Exceptional Children, 1966. Craig, S. B. "Fifty Years of Training Teachers of the Deaf." School and Society 56 (1942):301-303. Cruichshank, W. M., ed. The Teacher of Brain—Injured Children. Syracuse, N. Y.: Syracuse University Press, 1966. Darsie, M. L. "Training Teachers for Work with Atypical Children." Journal of Juvenile Research (July 1929): 231-235. DeRidder, L. M. "Education for Teachers of Handicapped Children." The Elementary School Journal (May 1950): 521-529. Dorward, Barbara. "A Comparison of the Competencies for Regular Classroom Teachers and Teachers of the Emotionally Disturbed Children." Exceptional Children (October 1963):67-73. Dunn, L. M. "Special Education for the Mildly Retarded—- Is Much of It Justifiable?" Exceptional Children (September l968):5-22. . Report on Special Education for Mentally Retarded. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Department of Special Education, Ministry of Education, 1969. Dunn, L. M., ed. Exceptional Children in the Schools. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1963. Dykes, M. K. "Competency Needs of Special Educators of Crippled and Other Health-Impaired Children." The Journal of Special Education 9, N. 4 (1975): 367-374. Dziubun, C. D., and Sullivan, T. J. Teaching Competencies: An Investigation of Emphasis. PHI DELTA KAPPAN, February 1, 1978, pp. 422-424. 183 Fields, H. "Who Makes the Best Teacher of Mentally Retarded Children?" American Journal of Mental Deficiency 58, N. 2 (1953):251-267. Finn, Jeremy D. A General Model for Multivariate Analysis. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1974. Foos, A. B. "A Survey of Competencies of Teachers of the Trainable Mentally Retarded." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Northern Colorado, 1972. Frampton, M. E., and Gall, E. D., eds. Special Education for the Exceptional. Volume I: Introduction and Problems. Boston: Porter Sargent Publishers, 1955. Freeman, M. A., and Becker, R. L. "Competencies for Professionals in LD: An Analysis of Teacher Perceptions." Learning Disability Quarterly 2 (Winter 1979):70-78. Galfo, Armand J., and Miller, E. Interpreting Educational Research. 2nd ed. Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, 1974. Gallagher, J. J. "The Special Education Contract for Mildly Handicapped Children." Exceptional Children (March l972):527-535. Gargiulo, R. M., and Pigge, F. L. "Perceived Competencies of Elementary and Special Education Teachers." Journal of Educational Research 72, N. 2 (August 1979):339-343. General Director of Special Education Programs, Saudi Arabia. Personal communication, Feb. 1980. Giguere, Betty L. D. "Suggested Elements of a College Curriculum for the Preparation of Teachers of the TMR Based on a Study of the Professional Requirements of These Teachers." Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1966. Goldberg, L. L. Guide for Further DevelOpment of Special Programs at Teachers College, Columbia University. New York: Columbia University, 1952. Haines, T. H. "State Laws Relating to Special Classes and Schools for Mentally Handicapped Children in the Public Schools." Mental Hygiene, July 1925, pp. 529—555. Hammons, G. W. "Educating the Mildly Retarded: A Review." Exceptional Children (March 1972):565-570. 184 Heller, H. W. "Training of Professional Personnel." Exceptional Children (March l968):539—543. Herr, D. E.; Algozzine, R. F.; and Heuchert, C. M. "Competencies of Teachers of the Mildly Handicapped." The Journal of Special Education 10, N. 1 (1976): 97-106. Hill, H. F. "Vineland Summer School for Teachers of Backward and Mentally Deficient Children." The TrainingySchool Bulletin 42 (1945):41-49. Hoeksema, T. B. "The Development of Teaching Competencies: A Study of the Mentally Retarded." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1975. Johnson, G. 0. "Special Education for the Mentally Retarded--A Paradox." Exceptional Children 29 (l962):62-69. Lilly, M. S. "A Training Based Model for Special Education." Exceptional Children (Summer 197l):745-749. . "Competency Based Training." Teacher Education and Special Education 2, N. 3 (Spring 1979): 20-25. Lord, F. E., and Kirk, S. A. "The Education of Teachers of Special Classes." In the 49th Year Book of the National Society for the Study of Education. Part II. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1980. Mackie, R. P.; Dunn, L. M.; and Cain, L. F. "Professional Preparation for Teachers of Exceptional Children: An Overview." Bulletin No. 6. Washington, D. C.: USGPO, USOE, 1959. Mackie, R. P.; Williams, H. M.; and Dunn, L. M. "Teachers of Children Who Are Mentally Retarded." Bulletin No. 3. Washington, D. C.: USGPO, USOE, 1957. Martin, E. W. "Breakthrough for the Handicapped: Legislative History." Exceptional Children 34 (l968):493-503. McKenzie, H. S. et a1. "Training Consulting Teachers to Assist Elementary Teachers in Management and Education of Handicapped Children." Exceptional Children (October l970):137-143. 185 Meisgeir, C. "The Identification of Successful Teachers of Mentally or Physically Handicapped Children." Exceppional Children 32 (December 1965):229-235. Meyen, E. L. Competency Based Teacher Education: An Overview. CEC, ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 122 472, 1976. Mikkelsen, N. E. Treatment of the Mentally Retarded Children. Assignment report. WHO Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean, EMRO/7l/982, August 1971. Miller, C. A. "What Kind of Qualifications and Training Should the Teacher of the Special Class Have?" Journal of the Proceedings and Addresses of the National Education Association of the United States XLVII (1910):1061-1065. Ministry of Education. Report on Special Education of Handicapped Persons, 1972. . Develgpment of Education in Saudi Schools. Part four. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Center for Informational Statistics and Educational Documenta- tion, Ministry of Education, February 1979. Monaco, T. M., and Chiapetta, E. L. "Identifying Competencies for Mainstream Teachers Through the Perceptions of State Directors of Special Education." Education 99, N. 1 (Fall 1978):59—63. Nader, A. H. Special Education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 158 547, 1979. National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification. Standards and State Approval pf TeachepiEducation. 6th ed. Printed by the "NASDTEC," 1976. Nelson, C. C., and Schmidt, L. J. "The Question of the Efficacy of Special Classes." Exceptional Children 37 (l97l):38l-384. Newcomer, P. L. "Competencies for Professionals in Learning Disabilities." Learning Disability Quarterly 1 (Spring 1978):69-77. 186 Northcott, Winifred H. "Competencies Needed by Teachers of Hearing-Impaired Infants--Birth to Three Years of Age—-and Their Parents." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1971. Olson, J. L., and Hans, R. H. "One Approach to Preparing Teachers of the Mentally Retarded." The High School Journal (December 1964):191-197. "Report on Special Education." Al-Jazeerah Daily Newspaper, Al-Jazeeral Press and Printing Establishment, 10 December 1979. Reynolds, M. C. "Categorical vs. Noncategorical Teacher Training." Teacher Education and Special Education 2, N. 3 (Spring l979):5-8. Robinson, H. E. "Some Basic Needs for the Education of Teachers and Personnel for Special Education." In Special Education for the Exceptional. Edited by M. E. Frampton et a1. Boston: Porter Sargent Publishers, 1955. Rosenshine, B., and Furst, N. "Research on Teacher Performance Criteria." In Research in Teacher Education--A Symposium. Edited by B. O. Smith. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1971. Rotberg, J. M. "Defining the Task of Teachers of the Educable Mentally Retarded." Educational Training of the Mentally Retarded 3, N. 3 (October 1968): 146-149. Schleir, L. M. Problems in the Training of Certain Special Class Teachers. New York: Bureau of Publication, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1931. Schwartz, L. "A Clinical Teacher Model for Interrelated Areas of Special Education." Exceptional Children (April 1971):565-571. Shores, R. E.; Cegelka; and Nelson, C. M. "Competency Based Special Education Teacher Training." Exceptional Children (November 1973):192-l96. Sickle, V. et a1. "Provision for Exceptional Children." United States Bureau of Education Bulletin No. 14, 1911. 187 Smith, M. J. "The DevelOpment and Study of Competencies Needed by Teachers of Students with Autistic Characteristics." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1979. Symonds, M. "Personality of the Teacher." Journal of Educational Research XL (May 1947):654. UNESCO. Study of the Present Situation of Special Education, March 1971. . Saudi Arabia Education of the Mentally Retarded. Serial No. 2756/RMO. RD/EDV Paris, September 1972. Voelker, P. H. "Administration and Supervision of Special Education Programs." In Education of Exceptional Children and Youth. Edited by W. M. Cruichshank and G. 0. Johnson. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1967. Wallen, J. E. W. The Mental Health of the School Child. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1914. . The Education of Handicapped Children. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1924. White House Conference on Child Health and Protection. Section III: Education and Training: Special Education, the Handicapped and the Gifted. New York: The Century Co., 1931. Wolinsky, G. F. "Theoretical and Practical Aspects of a Teacher Education Program for Teachers of the Trainable Child." American Journal of Mental Deficiency 63 (May 1959):948-953. MIC HIGAN STATE UNIV. LI BRQRIES IIII|IIIIIIIIIIIISIILIIIIIIIIIIJIIIISIIIIIIIEIILIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII