Pre-Service Primary Teachers' Attitudes and Teaching Self-Efficacy for inclusive education: A Systematic Review and meta-analysis

1.1. Global Trends and Policy commitment in inclusive education The number of students diagnosed with learning and behavioral difficulties has increased across countries in recent years (Langager, 2014; Sridevi et al., 2015). However, some studies have reported that learners with disabilities are ignored in the regular classroom settings (Sumayang et al., 2022; Hinds et al., 2022). To address the rights and needs of learners with disabilities, international organizations have placed more attention on promoting inclusive education. According to Unesco (2016), General Comment No. 4 on Article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the visions of the sustainable development goal 4 targets (SGD 4), highlights that all students with disabilities should have access to high-quality and equitable education, and disparities across vulnerable groups must be eliminated. This shows a growing global consensus towards the promotion of inclusive education. To achieve full realization of inclusive education, inclusive education policies alone are insufficient, which requires the complementary of effective implementation at the classroom level. In this regard, primary pre-service teachers are recognized as a key group towards the development of special educational needs (SEN) students, particularly in the aspects of emotional regulation and functional skills acquisition (Garwood & Van Loan, 2019; Stahl, 2021). In addition, the beliefs of elementary pre-service teachers towards inclusive education are more malleable compared to in-service teachers (Metsala & Harkins, 2020) Considering this, this review focuses on pre-service primary teachers as the target population to examine their attitudes and teaching self-efficacy towards SEN students. 1.2. Context overviews: inclusive education worldwide 1.2.1. Inclusive education in Americas Both North and South American countries share commitments to promote inclusive education under international frameworks. Nearly all Latin American countries ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), which fosters the promotion of inclusive education systems where all students learn together (Red Regional Por La Educación Inclusiva, 2019). Similarly, North American have established comprehensive legal framework to protect the rights of leaners with disabilities. For example, Canadian schools are mandated to provide necessary accommodations for learners with disabilities to help them adapt to the general education curriculum (The Council of Canadians with Disabilities, 2013). This highlighted that the rights of students with disabilities are concerned across the Americas. Despite these commitments, the implementation outcomes differ between the two regions. In South America, studies have revealed that pre-service teachers lack adequate training to cater the needs of SEN students, so students are neglected in the mainstream school settings (Vaillant, 2011). This suggests that inclusive education in South America fails to allocate resources for teacher preparation. By contrast, inclusive education systems in North American are considered as successful models because of providing structured training programs for pre-service teachers and catering to students with diverse learning needs under its three-tier response to intervention framework (Christou et al., 2022). Students with disabilities at Tier 1 are categorized as mild cases, who are offered adaptive instructions such as visual cue cards and worksheets with simplified language to help them adapt to regular classroom settings. Students with persistent learning or speech difficulties at Tier 2 are categorized as severe cases, which are provided with emotional regulation training workshops and after-school tutoring lessons. Students with severe types of disabilities or students with intellectual disability at Tier 3 are provided with an individualized education plan (IEP), which outlines the measurable goals and guidance towards parents and teachers (Education Bureau, 2014). This highlights that inclusive education in North America is comprehensive by offering multi-level support for students with disabilities. To conclude, North America demonstrates strong success in practices whereas South America encounters challenges in teacher preparation. 1.2.2 Inclusive education in Asia Many Asian governments have made notable progress in promoting inclusive education by integrating learners with disabilities into mainstream schools and enhancing teacher preparation programs for inclusive practices. Countries such as China and South Korea have introduced SEN training programs for pre-service teachers to improve their self-efficacy to support students with diverse learning needs (Song et al., 2019; Malinen et al., 2013; Ministry of Education, 2020). In South Korea, around 70% of students are placed in the regular schools. It demonstrates that Asian governments have a strong commitment to promote inclusive education and offer equitable learning opportunities for all learners. However, despite successful policy reforms of inclusive education, several barriers hinder the full realisation of inclusive education in many Asian contexts. First, education systems across East Asia are heavily influenced by exam-oriented culture, teachers’ professionalism is often tied to students’ academic performance. This culture makes some teachers perceive students with disabilities as potential barriers to maintain higher academic performance. This results in Chinese teachers who often have negative attitudes towards learners with disabilities and are reluctant to implement inclusive teaching practices in classes (Song et al., 2019; Malinen et al., 2013). Secondly, large class size present practical difficulties for teachers to provide individualized support. For example, the average class size in China is about 37.4 students, and the student-teacher ratios of registered Chinese schools are below the OECD average. Chinese Teachers are responsible to manage two or more additional students per class compared with international counterparts. Such conditions may reduce teachers’ confidence to implement effective teaching strategies to support SEN students in mainstream classrooms. 1.2.3. Integrated education in Hong Kong Hong Kong has adopted a dual-track mode, which means mild SEN students who suffer from temporary learning or adjustment difficulties are given the right to study in the regular classroom settings, while students with intellectual disability are educated in the special school settings (Education Bureau, 2014; Ho & Lam, 2020). According to the Operation Guide on the Whole School Approach to Integrated Education, the Education bureau has designed a Three-Tier Intervention Model with similar functions to the “Response-To-Intervention” strategy to cater for students’ needs (Education Bureau, 2014). However, a study has reported that Hong Kong in-service teachers feel stressed to offer assistance to SEN students as they need to handle too many responsibilities (Dos Santos et al., 2025). For instance, they are required to handle administrative work, participate in professional training programs to understand the characteristics of SEN students, organize meetings with specialists such as educational psychologists to report the current situations of SEN students and gain exposure to teaching practices. Therefore, SEN students in Hong Kong are often neglected by their teachers. 1.3. Define key terms: Teacher’s attitude and self-efficacy towards inclusive education 1.3.1 Teacher’s attitude towards inclusive education Teacher’s attitude is considered a key factor that influences the effectiveness of teaching quality and equitable education for learners with disabilities (Savolainen et al., 2012; Emmers et al., 2020). According to Eagly and Chaiken’s (1993) tripartite model, attitude comprises three components, which are affective, cognitive and behavioral. In the context of inclusive education, the affective component refers to the willingness to care for and support students with special educational needs (SEN) in the mainstream school settings; cognitive component reflects teachers’ knowledge of SEN students; behavioral component focuses on teachers’ reactions towards adopting adaptive strategies for SEN students. Teachers with negative attitudes are considered the barriers towards early identification and intervention for SEN students (Soma et al., 2023). They are reluctant to refer students suspected of having special educational needs (SEN) for formal assessment (Soma et al., 2023). This may increase the risk of SEN students suffering from more severe learning and behavioral problems over time. 1.3.2 Teacher’s self-efficacy towards inclusive education Teacher’s self-efficacy is another key factor that impacts the effectiveness of teaching practices in a classroom setting. In the context of inclusive education, teacher self-efficacy refers to the capability of teachers in implementing adaptive teaching strategies to accommodate the needs of SEN students (Luszczynska & Schwarzerl, 2015). According to social cognitive theory, this has underscored that the levels of self-efficacy can improve or reduce their motivation process (Luszczynska & Schwarzer, 2015). Teachers with higher levels of teaching efficacy implement a variety of teaching strategies to help SEN students regulate their emotions and overcome learning challenges; and cope with student-teacher conflict (Andreou & Rapti, 2010; Martin & Sass, 2010; Boulton, 2014). 1.4 Research gap While numerous empirical studies have examined pre-service teachers’ attitudes and teaching self-efficacy towards inclusive education, most of the journal articles are fragmented and context-specific (Malinen, 2013; Song et al., 2019; Ramberg & Watkins, 2020; Braksiek, 2022; Ismailos et al., 2022; Massé et al., 20

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.