Professional Dispositions and Inclusive Competences of School Teachers

An inclusion teacher is supposed to possess a range of personal and professional characteristics. The analysis of these characteristics, however, should not be limited to respective competencies alone. It should explore them in relation to the inclusion teacher’s professional dispositions. Ours is the first study to provide evidence-based insights into the nature of relationship between teachers’ professional dispositions and their inclusion competencies. The evidence was collected through two self-designed tools: a situational professional test of inclusion competencies and a questionnaire of professional dispositions. The sample included 758 practicing teachers. The results indicate that professional dispositions are not determinants but rather drivers for the formation and development of teachers’ inclusion competencies. Moreover, it is the focus on the student with disabilities rather than the organization of inclusive education that acts as a link between the inclusion component of professional dispositions and inclusion competencies.

Introduction

Personal and professional characteristics of teachers have come to the forefront in both theoretical and applied research [3; 8]. A special focus, in this regard, is given to the analysis of values and meanings underlying teachers’ professional activity [2]. Thus, it is expedient to explore the relationship between professional dispositions and competencies of inclusion teachers.

The first research into the professional and personal development of teachers appeared in the 1980s. It was led by L. G. Katz and J. D. Raths, who highlighted the relationship between the teachers’ dispositions and the development of their professional competencies [14].

First, this approach is in line with the modern understanding of the phenomenological nature of professional disposition. It is seen as a certain personal meaningful basis for building a strategy to achieve professional goals. According to I. V. Abakumova and N. A. Savchenko, professional disposition interacts with the motive of actual activity, while preserving its own stable meaning capable of generating additional specific intents. Therefore, professional dispositions as such can ‘influence professionally-oriented training and, likely, future professional activity, as a mediated mechanism that shapes a professional strategy’ [1, p. 30]. On the one hand, professional dispositions as a set of a teacher’s values, commitments and professional and ethical norms influence the teacher’s interaction with other stakeholders in education. They also have an impact on learning, motivation and development of students. On the other hand, professional dispositions correlate with teachers’ professional development [17]. Hence, professional dispositions comprise one of the criterion aspects of qualification assessment of future teachers [21].

Secondly, the approach proposed by Katz and Raths emphasizes that teachers’ dispositions should be explored along with the development of their professional competencies. This approach fits in with the current perspectives on the inseparable nature of teachers’ professional competences and the fundamental meanings of teaching. Y. V. Senko and M. N. Frolovskaya aptly argue that, ‘the limitations of professional competence reveal themselves as soon as we touch upon the sphere of meanings of teachers’ professional activity’ [9, p. 128]. This perspective highlights the importance of dispositions for effective teaching. From this standpoint, it is reasonable to consider the development of professional dispositions that support competency in the educational process as an essential content-focused and goal-oriented aspect of teacher training [25; 26]. Specifically, it is desirable to encourage self-reflection on common professional dispositions [23]. The optimization of dispositions in working teachers will enhance their performance [22; 26] and help overcome the limitations of professional mobility [20], etc.

Moreover, as inclusion has become increasingly prevalent in education at regional, national, and international levels [7; 10; 11], professional dispositions of teachers must be examined in their relation to the specific type of professional competencies—inclusion competencies. These competencies are instrumental in solving professional tasks unique to the inclusive education of children with disabilities [12; 15]. Inclusion competencies manifest themselves randomly, depending on the stage of the teacher’s professional career [18], their professional background [19], the level of school education, and the subject area [27; 28]. Integral inclusion competencies include a teacher’s readiness to holistically approach the organization of inclusive education, ability to create individualized educational paths for students with disabilities, proficiency in providing them with individual and group support, and capacity to organize psychological and educational support tailored to the needs of students with disabilities. Additionally, these competencies encompass knowledge about the educational content and tools pertinent to working with students with disabilities [4].

 While there have been empirical studies on the professional dispositions and competencies of special education teachers in inclusive settings [13], no comparable research has been conducted on teachers working at general education schools. Although inclusion competencies of general education teachers have been assessed, namely, their professional beliefs about students with special educational needs [24], a thorough investigation into their professional dispositions and competencies is still non-existent.

As a result, there is a significant gap in the theoretical and practical understanding of the relationship between professional dispositions of general education teachers and their competences in inclusive education. This paper aims to bridge this gap by providing evidence-based insights. The study is guided by the hypothesis that professional dispositions of general education teachers mediate the formation and development of their inclusion competencies.

Methodology and sample profile

The study involved 758 teachers from general education organizations across seven federal districts of Russia, including 234 primary school teachers, 411 secondary school teachers, and 113 teachers of supplementary education, aged 19 to 70 years (mean age: 43.94±12.46). The sample predominantly consisted of teachers with more than 20 years of professional experience (44.20%). Besides, it included young professionals with up to 5 years of experience (21.24%) and teachers with 5 to 20 years of experience (34.56%). Among the respondents, 407 educators (53.69%) reported having experience working in inclusive settings.

The sample was predominantly female (92.22%), reflecting the gender composition of the teaching workforce in Russia[1].

Our self-designed situational professional test [6] was used to assess the level of inclusion competencies of teachers. According to the results of testing, the sample of teachers was divided into groups with low (224 people), medium (366 people) and high (168 people) level of inclusion competencies.

Professional dispositions of teachers were identified using another self-designed tool—a questionnaire with 5 scales that define dispositions in relation to oneself as a professional (‘self-awareness’), readiness to interact with colleagues (‘cooperation’), dispositions in relation to the subject taught (‘teaching’), dispositions in relation to students (‘students’) and dispositions in relation to inclusive education (‘inclusion’) [5].

Statistical analysis of the obtained data was carried out using Statistica ver. 8 and Jamovi ver. 2.3.18. The data were processed using comparative, correlation, and correspondence analysis. The distribution testing of variables did not reveal normal distribution. Hence, the criteria and procedures of statistical analysis were based on nonparametric statistics.

Results and discussion

The analysis of the graphical representation of professional dispositions distribution across teacher groups with varying levels of inclusion competence (Fig. 1) revealed a significant trend. Teachers with high and medium levels of inclusion competence displayed a markedly skewed distribution towards higher disposition scores. Conversely, the group with low competence showed a more uniform distribution supported by statistical calculations of asymmetry and kurtosis indicators (Table 1).

Fig. 1. Distribution of professional disposition indicators in groups of teachers with different levels of inclusion competences

Furthermore, the low competence group exhibited the smallest distribution shifts from the center for all disposition indicators. Additionally, close to zero excess kurtosis in this group indicated the most uniform distribution. However, this group also displayed the highest standard deviation, highlighting considerable heterogeneity of assessed dispositions. The intensity of data scattering decreases across all the groups, while the heterogeneity of assessments for dispositions towards inclusive education increases. Furthermore, this indicator also showed the lowest median and mean values.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of professional disposition indicators in groups of teachers with different levels of inclusion competencies 

The group of teachers with low inclusion competence exhibited the least pronounced professional dispositions. This finding aligns with the results of a Kruskal-Wallis H-test (see Table 2), which revealed statistically significant differences across all five professional disposition subscales (see Table 2).

 Table 2. Kruskal-Wallis H-test values

Further pairwise comparisons using the Dwass-Steel-Critchlow-Fligner test indicated no significant differences between the medium and high competence groups for any disposition indicator. However, both the medium and high competence groups displayed significantly higher disposition scores compared to the low competence group. 

Correlation analysis using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient revealed a strong relationship between the indicators of inclusion competencies and professional dispositions (see Table 3).

Notably, the correlations strong in absolute value are only those between the cooperation-related dispositions and competencies in the organization of psychological and educational support for students with disabilities, their inclusive education and individualized educational paths. While the remaining correlations are statistically significant at 0.1%, they are still very weak in absolute values.

Table 3. Correlation matrix between the indicators of inclusion competences and professional dispositions

Correspondence analysis, employed in the final stage of the study, explored the co-occurrence of high level of inclusion competence and pronounced professional disposition across teachers with different social and professional characteristics (Fig. 2).

The analysis identified two significant dimensions explaining a cumulative 84.32% of the total inertia, which indicates a highly informative model. Additionally, the chi-square test confirmed satisfactory relationships within the model (χ² = 115.249, df = 90, p = .0379).

Fig. 2. Correspondence map between inclusion competences, professional dispositions and social and professional characteristics of teachers

The first dimension (horizontal axis), accounting for 68.96% of the total inertia, positioned inclusion competencies at one extreme and professional dispositions at the other. Interestingly, social and professional characteristics gravitated more towards professional dispositions, suggesting a stronger connection with the practical aspects of teaching. Notably, inclusion competencies were more pronounced among secondary school teachers. Conversely, primary and supplementary education teachers displayed stronger professional dispositions but lower levels of inclusion competence.

The second dimension (vertical axis), explaining 15.36% of the inertia, contrasted ‘direct interaction with students with disabilities’ at the upper pole with a focus on the ‘formal basis for inclusion’ (knowledge of regulations, program development) at the lower pole. This essentially reveals a dichotomy between ‘student-centered’ and ‘process-centered’ approaches to inclusion. Furthermore, the ‘student-centered’ orientation aligned with the professional disposition of valuing inclusion. This was more evident in teachers with prior experience in inclusive settings. Conversely, teachers lacking such experience, particularly those in supplementary education, displayed a stronger emphasis on developing competencies related to supporting inclusive education. Notably, teaching experience exhibited a weaker association with these dimensions. While teachers with extensive experience (>15 years) showed a link with self-centered professional dispositions, those with 6–10 years of experience focused more on the subject they teach, students, and cooperation with other professionals. Young professionals, on the other hand, demonstrated higher levels of both inclusion competencies and relevant knowledge.

Our findings suggest that already at their average level, inclusion competences facilitate a qualitative shift in professional dispositions. This suggests that professional dispositions may be a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for developing inclusion competence. Indeed, other factors of a teacher’s professional development—organizational, methodological, and psychological— also play a crucial role [16]. However, fostering a teacher’s role as an inclusion educator cannot be achieved without cultivating their professional dispositions. These dispositions shape teachers’ understanding of their professional identity and the nature of inclusive education. 

Conclusion

This study delves into the relationship between professional dispositions and inclusion competencies of general education teachers, revealing a multifaceted and nuanced interplay. The findings challenge the notion of professional dispositions as sole determinants of inclusion competence development. Instead, they emerge as the foundation and core semantic components that shape a teacher’s professional orientation and goal setting, ultimately serving as crucial drivers for competence development.

A key insight is the identified connection between the ‘inclusion component’ of professional dispositions and a teacher’s inclusion competence. This manifests primarily in a focus on the student with disabilities. However, the organization of inclusive education per se to facilitate a student’s successful integration within the school environment was given less priority.

The study found an asymmetry in the relationship between the inclusion component and other aspects of professional dispositions. The findings suggest that teachers do not associate personal value of inclusion with other fundamental elements of their job. Further empirical exploration to verify this assumption presents a promising avenue for future research.

The significance of this study extends beyond the immediate findings. It contributes theoretically by deepening our understanding of the mechanisms and regularities that govern professional and personal development of inclusive education teachers. From a practical standpoint, the results illuminate the need for a differentiated approach in supporting this development. By acknowledging the multifaceted nature of the relationship between dispositions and competencies, targeted interventions can be designed to address specific areas where teachers require the most support.

1. Abakumova I.V., Savchenko N.A. Professional'nye dispozicii kak komponent lichnostnogo stanovlenija [Professional Dispositions as a component of personal formation]. Rossijskij psihologicheskij zhurnal = Russian psychological journal, 2008. Vol. 5(1), pp. 23–32. DOI:10.21702/rpj.2008.1.2 (In Russ.).
2. Ansimova N.P., Ledovskaya T.V., Solynin N.E. Cennostno-smyslovaja osnova pedagogicheskoj dejatel'nosti: sravnitel'nyj analiz otnoshenija pedagogov i uchashhihsja pedagogicheskih klassov [The value foundations of pedagogical activity: a comparative analysis of the position of teachers and pedagogical class pupils]. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, 2022. Vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 37–51. DOI:10.17759/pse.2022270104 (In Russ.).
3. Dyshlyuk I.S. Problemy professional'no-lichnostnogo razvitija uchitelja v sovremennyh social'nyh uslovijah [Problems of professional and personal development of a teacher in modern social conditions]. Mir nauki. Pedagogika I Psihologiia = World of science. Pedagogy and psychology, Vol. 8(6), p. 77. (In Russ.).
4. Kantor V.Z., Zarin A., Kruglova Yu.A., Proekt Yu.L. Pedagog inklyuzivnoi obrazovatel'noi organizatsii: kompetentnostnaya model' v kontekste vuzovskikh programm professional'noi podgotovki [Teacher of inclusive educational organization: competence model in the context of university professional training programs]. Obrazovanie i samorazvitie = Education and Self-development, 2021, no. 16(3), pp. 281–301. DOI:10.26907/esd.16.3.25 (In Russ.).
5. Kantor V.Z., Proekt Yu.L., Antropov A.P., Kondrakova I.E. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie kak sfera formirovanija inkljuzivnyh dispozicij uchitelja [Pedagogical education as an area to form teacher inclusive dispositions]. Obrazovanie I nauka = The Education and Science Journal, 2023. Vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 12–44. DOI:17853/1994-5639-2023-10-12-44 (In Russ.).
6. Kantor V.Z., Proekt Yu.L., Litovchenko O.V., Zalautdinova S.E. Situacionnyj professional'nyj test kak instrument diagnostiki urovnja sformirovannosti inkljuzivnyh professional'nyh kompetencij pedagogov [Situational professional test as a tool for diagnosing the level of formation of inclusive professional competencies of teachers]. In: Ovchinnikova (Ed.). Psihologo-pedagogicheskoe soprovozhdenie obrazovatel'nogo processa obuchajushhihsja raznogo vozrasta: monografija [Psychological and pedagogical support of the educational process of students of different ages: monograph]. Saint-Petersburg, 2022, pp. 178–201 (In Russ.).
7. Konnova O.V., Romanova I.V., Khokhlova V.V., Velichko D.I. Istoki i razvitie inkljuzivnogo obrazovanija [The origins and development of inclusive education]. Mezhdunarodny'j nauchno-issledovatel'skij zhurnal = International Research Journal, 2024, no. 1(139). URL: https://research-journal.org/archive/1-139-2024-january/10.23670/IRJ.2024.139.59 (Accessed 11.05.2024). DOI:10.23670/IRJ.2024.139.59 (In Russ.).
8. Mitina L.M. Lichnostno-professional’noe razvitie pedagoga: sovremennoe osmyslenie i innovatsionnaya praktika [Personal and professional development of a teacher: modern understanding and innovative practice]. Vestnik prakticheskoi psikhologii obrazovaniya = Bulletin of Practical Psychology of Education, 2022. Vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 9–19. DOI:10.17759/bppe.2022190201 (In Russ.).
9. Senko Yu.V., Frolovskaya M.N. Pedagogika ponimanija: uchebnoe posobie dlja slushatelej sistemy dopolnitel'nogo professional'nogo pedagogicheskogo obrazovanija [Pedagogy of understanding: a textbook for students of the system of additional professional pedagogical education]. Moscow: Drofa, 2007 (In Russ.).
10. Alekhina S. Historical and Policy Perspective of the Current State of Inclusive General Education for Children with Disabilities in the Russian Federation. In Makoelle T.M., Kozlova M., Iarskaia-Smirnova E. (Eds.). Inclusive Education in the Russian Federation: Scoping International and Local Relevance. Chapter 2. Cham: Springer, 2024, pp. 11–28.
11. Bešić E., Holzinger A., Kopp-Sixt S., Krammer M. (Hrsg.) Inklusive Bildung – regionale, nationale und internationale Forschung und Entwicklungslinien [Inclusive education – regional, national and international research and development lines]. Graz-Wien: Leykam: PÄDAGOGIK, 2023. DOI:10.56560/isbn.978-3-7011-0518-2
12. Chakravartya D., Shindeb G. Inclusive Teaching Competency Model and its Applicability on Elementary School Teachers of Pune District in India. Asian Journal of Inclusive Education, 2022. Vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 91–112. DOI:59595/ajie.10.2.6
13. Hong B., Ivy W.F., Schulte D.P. Dispositions for Special Educators: Cultivating High-Quality Traits for Working with Students with Special Needs. The International Journal of Learning: Annual Review, 2009. Vol. 16(1), pp. 75–90. DOI:10.18848/1447-9494/CGP/v16i01/45084
14. Katz L., Raths J. Dispositions as goals for teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 1985. Vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 301–307. DOI:10.1016/0742-051X(85)90018-6
15. Kuyini A.B., Alhassan M.A., Mangope B., Major T.E. Norwegian teachers: competencies perceived as important for inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 2023, pp. 1–18. DOI:1080/13603116.2023.2245478
16. Makhambetova Z.T., Magauova A.S. Professional competences in the context of inclusive education: A model design. European Journal of Educational Research, 2023. Vol. 12(1), pp. 201–211. DOI:10.12973/eu-jer.12.1.201
17. Martin C.S., White B.L., Burkett C., Curcio R. Development and Evolution of Teacher Dispositions Framework and Assessment. In: Clemm von Hohenberg S. (Ed.). Dispositional Development and Assessment in Teacher Preparation Programs. IGI Global, 2022, pp. 245–261. DOI:10.4018/978-1-6684-4089-6.ch013
18. Mavuso M.F. Exploring Senior Phase teachers’ competencies in supporting learners with specific learning difficulties: Implications for inclusive education. African Journal of Disability, 2022. Vol. 11(0), Art. 901. DOI:4102/ajod.v11i0.901
19. Montederamos G.A., Cañon I.M. Teacher’s Professional Background and Competence in Inclusive Education. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Perspectives, 2022. Vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 21–26.
20. Persson M., Dannefjord P. Teachers' professional dispositions: Foundations for the immobile mobility in the diversified Swedish school market. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 2022. Vol. 6, Iss. 1, Art. 100366. DOI:1016/j.ssaho.2022.100366
21. Saltis M.N., Giancaterino B., Pierce C. Professional Dispositions of Teacher Candidates: Measuring Dispositions at a Large Teacher Preparation University to Meet National Standards. The Teacher Educator, 2021. Vol. 56(2), pp. 117–131. DOI:1080/08878730.2020.1817217
22. Strom K., Margolis J., Polat N. Teacher Professional Dispositions: Much Assemblage Required. Teachers College Record, 2019. Vol. 121(11), pp. 1–28. DOI:1177/016146811912101104
23. te Poel K. Die Reflexion berufsfeldbezogener habitueller Dispositionen angehender Lehrpersonen: Materialien zu einem Mehr-Schritt-Reflexionsverfahren zwischen rekonstruktiver Kasuistik und Selbstreflexion [The reflection of professional-related habitual dispositions of prospective teachers: Materials for a multi-step reflection process between reconstructive casuistry and self-reflection]. Die Materialwerkstatt: Zeitschrift für Konzepte und Arbeitsmaterialien für Lehrer* innenbildung und Unterricht = The Material Workshop: Journal for concepts and working materials for teacher training and teaching, 2023. Vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 34–48. DOI:11576/dimawe-6632
24. Vantieghem W., Roose I., Goosen K., Schelfhout W., Van Avermaet P. Education for all in action: Measuring teachers’ competences for inclusive education. PLoS ONE, 2023. Vol. 18(11), Art. 0291033. DOI:1371/journal.pone.0291033
25. Wiesman J. Instilling Biblical Dispositions in Faith-Based Teacher Education Programs. International Christian Community of Teacher Educators Journal, 2023. Vol. 18(1), p. 4. DOI:55221/1932-7846.1304
26. Wolff D. Exploring Professional Dispositions with Preservice Teachers Assignment Description. Open Educational Resources – Teaching and Learning, 2023, no. 2. URL: https://digitalcommons.pittstate.edu/oer-teaching/2 (Accessed 14.04.2024).
27. Xue R., Chai H., Zhu D., Li R., Fu W. Inclusive Education Competency of Primary and Secondary Physical Education Teachers and Its Influencing Factors. Clinical Case Reports International, 2022. Vol. 6, p. 1413. DOI:10.25107/2638-4558.1413
28. Žero A. Inclusive Education in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Exploring English language teachers’ competencies. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2022. Vol. 10(2), pp. 284–309. DOI:1515/eujal-2022-0016