Lecturers’ Attitudes and Readiness toward Teaching Students with Intellectual Disabilities in Higher Education Institutions in Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Inclusive education plays a vital role in promoting equitable learning opportunities, particularly for students with intellectual disabilities in higher education institutions. The attitudes and readiness of lecturers to adopt inclusive teaching practices are crucial to the successful implementation of inclusive policies and pedagogies. Guided by the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), this study investigates how lecturers’ attitudes, perceived social expectations, and perceived behavioural control influence their readiness to teach students with intellectual disabilities in Nigerian higher education institutions. Methods: The study adopted a descriptive survey design, involving 270 lecturers selected through accidental sampling from various higher education institutions across Nigeria. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire designed to assess lecturers' attitudes, institutional expectations, and perceived control over inclusive teaching practices. Descriptive statistics, such as the mean and standard deviation, were used to analyze the data, while independent t-tests were employed to test the hypotheses at a 0.05 level of significance. Results: The findings revealed that lecturers demonstrate a moderate to high level of readiness to implement inclusive teaching. Respondents reported willingness to participate in training, adopt inclusive strategies, and manage mixed-ability classrooms. Attitudes toward inclusion were largely positive. However, challenges were noted in areas such as adapting instructional materials and using assistive technologies, indicating limitations in perceived behavioural control. Conclusions: The study affirms the relevance of the Theory of Planned Behaviour in explaining lecturers' readiness for inclusive teaching. Addressing capacity gaps through targeted training and institutional support is essential for advancing inclusive education and achieving Sustainable Development Goal 4.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".