Special Needs of Students With Disabilities


The institution of education is an indispensable source of improvement within society, as it helps young people shape their new ideas and bring them into reality. It serves to help learners discover and attain their full capacities to then obtain a position warranted by their innate talent. Educational ethics constitute a framework of standards for judging conduct and ensuring the protection of freedom to learn (Litwack, 2003). The two primary principles of educational ethics for teachers include commitment to the students and commitment to the profession. Each student has the potential of becoming a valuable, useful, and respected member of society. The purpose of the code of ethics is to help every student to achieve that goal (Litwack, 2003).

However, in some educational institutions, students with disabilities are being neglected. Some teachers fail to provide the appropriate accommodations and modifications to assist these students. While the reasons for such negligence differ, these actions compromise fairness and undermine the integrity of the profession.

The Assumptions at the Heart of the Dilemma

The major assumptions behind the issue of the failure to accommodate students with disabilities in the classroom can be classified into some major groups: the lack of training and knowledge; the lack of experience; the lack of support, time, and resources to meet the needs of students with disabilities; conscientious objections to the practice.

The lack of training and knowledge comes at the forefront of most researches that is dedicated to the subject of decreased academic performance in students with disabilities. According to Moriarty (2007), various barriers impede teachers’ creation of an encouraging learning environment for all students and make them hesitant to make accommodations and modifications. In particular, the lack of an inclusive mindset and lack of knowledge about pedagogy or limited knowledge of practical strategies that students need, which reflect low willingness reflectors to assist students with disabilities. Many teachers cannot comprehend that such students have special needs and require an individual approach that can be accomplished via modifications and accommodations (Moriarty, 2007). In the instances when they do apply certain techniques and programs to try to help students with disabilities, these tools are often used improperly. These research findings demonstrate that even though inclusive pedagogy is regarded as the key strategy across countries to involve students with disability in general disabilities environment, educators’ beliefs, knowledge, and accessibility of multimodal teaching tools identify inclusivity.

Moreover, the lack of time plays an important part in causing the object of the ethical dilemma. Westwood and Graham (2003) conducted a survey of teachers that found teachers are worried about time constraints, handling the demands of consistently providing modification and additional supervision for a single student, and balancing the time spent on one special needs child with the demands of the other students in the classroom. Therefore, lack of time leads teachers to ignore to meet the needs of students with disabilities.

Another assumption is a lack of inter-professional collaboration promotion between generalist and special education teachers. Fuchs (2010) discovered that general education teachers did not believe that they received sufficient support from other parties, particularly school administration and special education support staff. In general, there were inequalities in the assignment of duties between the two different educator types that led to tensions and power struggles. As a result, generalist teachers often reject the use of administrative resources if they see doing so as unproductive. So, the negative attitudes towards teaching students with disabilities are frequently due to a lack of support from the administration in the areas of collaboration and planning time and shared duties with the special education staff. (Fuchs, 2010).

The last assumption revolves around conscious opposition to inclusivity and the focus on disabled individuals during the classroom (Brandes & Crowson, 2014, Zhang et al., 2010). Historically, the teaching community was not positive about working with students with special needs. Some teachers believe that student with disabilities is not teachable or succeed as much as other students. Personal beliefs of teachers regarding the education of students with disabilities are the important factor that affects their willingness to provide accommodations for students with disabilities in the classroom (Zhang et al., 2010).


  1. Ainscow, M. (1999). Understanding the development of inclusive schools. London, United Kingdom: Falmer.
  2. Akos, P., Cockman, C. R., & Strickland, C. A. (2007). Differentiating classroom guidance. Professional School Counseling, 10(5), 455–463.
  3. Al-Natour, M., Amr, M., Al-Zboon, E., & Alkhamra, H. (2015). Examining collaboration and constrains on collaboration between special and general education teachers in mainstream schools in Jordan. International Journal of Special Education, 30(1), 64-77.
  4. Avramidis, E., & Kalyva, E. (2007). The influence of teaching experience and professional development on Greek teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 22(4), 367-389.
  5. Bandura, A. (1977a). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
  6. Bandura, A. (1997b). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
  7. Bass, B., & Riggio, R. (2006). Transformational Leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  8. Brandes, J., & Crowson, H. (2009). Predicting dispositions toward inclusion of students with disabilities: the role of conservative ideology and discomfort with disability. Social Psychology of Education, 12(2), 271–289. doi:10.1007/s11218-008-9077-8
  9. Broderick, A., Mehta-Parekh, H., & Reed. D. K. (2005). Differentiating instruction for disabled students in inclusive classrooms. Theory and Practice, 44(3), 194-202.
  10. Damianidou, E., & Phtiaka, H. (2018). Implementing inclusion in disabling settings: The role of teachers’ attitudes and practices. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 22(10), 1078-1092.
  11. Dowrick, P. W., Anderson, J., Heyer, K., & Acosta, J. (2005). Postsecondary education across the USA: Experiences of adults with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 22, 41­47.
  12. Drazin, R., Glynn, M. A., & Kazanijan, R. K. (2004). Dynamics of structural change. In M. S. Poole & Van de Ven, A. H. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational change and innovation (pp. 161-189). Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
  13. Forlin, C., & Chambers, D. (2017). Catering for diversity: Including learners with different abilities and needs in regular classrooms. In R. Maclean (Ed.), Life in schools and classrooms: Past, present, future (pp. 555-571). Singapore: Springer.
  14. Fuchs, W. W. (2010). Examining teachers’ perceived barriers associated with inclusion. SRATE Journal, 19(1), 30-35.
  15. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  16. Hamilton-Jones, B., & Vail, C. O. (2013). Preparing special educators for collaboration in the classroom: pre-service teachers’ beliefs and perspectives. International Journal of Special Education, 28(1), 56-68.
  17. Hashim, M., Ghani, M., Ibrahim, S., & Zain, W. (2014). The relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and attitudes towards inclusive education in Pulau Pinang. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 4(7), 24-33.
  18. Hong, B. S. S. (2015). Qualitative analysis of the barriers college students with disabilities experience in higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 56(3), 209-226.
  19. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational researcher, 38(5), 365-379.
  20. Leatherman, J. M. (2007). “I just see children as children:” Teachers’ perceptions about inclusion. The Qualitative Report, 12(4), 594-611.
  21. Lingo, A. S., Barton-Arwood, S. M., & Jolivette, K. (2011). Teachers working together. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(3), 6-13.
  22. Litwack, L. (2003). Ethics for educators. International Journal of Reality Therapy, 13(1), 34-37.
  23. Mojavezi, A., & Tamiz, M. P. (2012). The impact of teacher self-efficacy on the students’ motivation and achievement. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 2(3), 483-491.
  24. Moriarty, M. A. (2007). Inclusive pedagogy: Teaching methodologies to reach diverse learners in science instruction. Equity & Excellence in Education, 40(3), 252-265.
  25. Riehl, C. J. (2000). The principal’s role in creating inclusive schools for diverse students: A review of normative, empirical, and critical literature on the practice of educational administration. Review of Educational Research, 70(1), 55-81.
  26. Royster, O., Reglin, G. L., & Losike-Sedimo, N. (2014). Inclusion professional development model and regular middle school educators. Journal of At-Risk Issues, 18(1), 1-10.
  27. Ruijs, N. M., Peetsma, T. T. (2009). Effects of inclusion on students with and without special educational needs reviewed. Educational Research Review, 4(2), 67-79.
  28. Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), 935-947.
  29. Thoonen, E. E., Sleegers, P. J., Oort, F. J., Peetsma, T. T., & Geijsel, F. P. (2011). How to improve teaching practices: The role of teacher motivation, organizational factors, and leadership practices. Educational administration quarterly, 47(3), 496-536.
  30. Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  31. Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202-248.
  32. Vygotsky L. S. (1997). Interaction between learning and development. In M. Gauvain, & Cole, M. (Eds.), Readings on the development of children (3rd ed., pp. 42-49). New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
  33. Waldron, N. L., McLeskey, J., & Redd, L. (2011). Setting the direction: The role of the principal in developing an effective, inclusive school. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(2), 51-60.
  34. Westwood, P., & Graham, L. (2003). Inclusion of students with special needs: Benefits and obstacles perceived by teachers in New South Wales and South Australia. Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 8(1), 3-15.
  35. Yell, M. L., Rogers, D., & Lodge-Rogers, E. (1998). The legal history of special education: What a long strange trip it’s been. Remedial and Special Education, 19, 219-228.
  36. Zhang, D., Landmark, L., Reber, A., Hsu, H., Kwok, O. M., & Benz, M. (2010). University faculty knowledge, beliefs, and practices in providing reasonable accommodations to students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 31(4), 276-286.
Find out your order's cost