Practicing Teachers’ Attributions for the Behaviour of Students With Learning Disabilities and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and learning disabilities (LD) are being taught within the regular education classroom than ever before even though children with these disorders often require additional educational supports. Therefore, it is critical that teachers understand the challenges experienced by these students, as well as feel efficacious when it comes to teaching and supporting them. Attribution theory is a widely used theoretical framework by which to explain teachers’ cognitions. We surveyed 151 practicing teachers and asked them to respond to items related to attributions for students’ behaviour and their teaching self-efficacy. First, we examined teachers’ perceptions of the primary cause of the difficulties experienced by students qualitatively. We open-coded responses and three major themes emerged: biology/genetics, the environment, and skill deficits. These themes differed somewhat depending on whether the student had ADHD or LD. Second, we examined the relationship between teachers’ attributions for student behaviours and their sense of teaching self-efficacy quantitatively. For students with ADHD, controllable attributions predicted teachers’ self-efficacy (β = .30, p = .005). For students with LD, controllable and internal attributions predicted teacher self-efficacy (β = .34, p = .001, β = .24, p = .009, respectively). Third, we examined the results of both analyses simultaneously to determine areas of convergence and divergence with respect to attribution theory. The results have implications for both teachers and students (e.g., attributional interventions designed to foster a sense of self-efficacy), as well as provide directions for future research and teacher training. Keywords: ADHD, LD, practicing teachers, attributions, self-efficacy, mixed-methods Le nombre d’élèves atteints du trouble du déficit de l'attention avec ou sans hyperactivité (TDAH) ou des troubles d’apprentissage (TA) sont intégrés plus que jamais aux classes ordinaires, même si les enfants affectés par ce type de difficultés ont souvent besoin d’un soutien éducationnel supplémentaire. Il est donc critique que les enseignants comprennent les défis que vivent ces élèves et que les enseignants se sentent efficaces dans l’enseignement et l’appui qu’ils leur apportent. La théorie attributive est un cadre théorique dont l’emploi est répandu pour expliquer les cognitions des enseignants. Au cours d’une enquête auprès de 151 enseignants en exercice, nous les avons interrogés au sujet des attributions relatives au comportement des élèves et de leur sentiment d’efficacité personnelle en enseignement. Nous avons d’abord étudié, qualitativement, les perceptions des enseignants quant à la première cause des difficultés que vivent les élèves. Trois thèmes majeurs se sont dégagés des réponses aux questions ouvertes : la biologie/la génétique, l’environnement et des lacunes sur le plan des habiletés. Ces thèmes variaient quelque peu selon que l’élève était atteint du TDAH ou des TA. Deuxièmement, nous avons étudié, quantitativement, le rapport entre les attributions des enseignants relatives au comportement des élèves et leur sentiment d’efficacité personnelle en enseignement. Par rapport aux élèves atteints du TDAH, les attributions contrôlables étaient prédictives du sentiment d’efficacité personnelle chez les enseignants (β = .30, p = .005). Relativement aux élèves atteints des TA, les attributions contrôlables et internes étaient prédictives du sentiment d’efficacité personnelle chez les enseignants (β = .34, p = .001, β = .24, p = .009, respectivement). En troisième lieu, nous avons étudié les résultats des deux analyses simultanément afin de déterminer les points de convergence et de divergence par rapport à la théorie attributive. Les résultats ont des retombées tant pour les enseignants que les élèves (par ex. des interventions attributionnelles conçues pour favoriser un sentiment d’efficacité personnelle) et ils proposent de nouvelles orientations en matière de recherche et formation des enseignants. Mots clés : TDAH, TA, enseignants en exercice, attributions, efficacité personnelle, méthodes mixtes
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".