**3.4 Interviews**

Throughout the 3 months of collecting data utilizing the observational methods, informal conversations with the teacher took place to engage on a deeper, more personal level. Notes were taken during these informal conversations and on two occasions we engaged in a formal interview process of audio recording my questions and the teacher responses. There was not a structured guide of interview questions for the interviews as I tried to maintain the fidelity of research methods by allowing the teacher to direct the content of the interview and side conversations. Detailed, descriptive questions are "inconsistent with the emergent nature of qualitative research in general and grounded theory methods in particular" [12]. The primary question asked to guide the inquiry focused on her feelings about the inclusive environment.

I encouraged the teacher to elaborate on topics and issues that she initiated and I followed up with more in-depth questions as I sought to more fully understand her


#### **Table 1.**

*Student descriptions.*

<sup>1</sup> Teacher and student names are pseudonyms.

perspectives. The interviews and impromptu conversations allowed the teacher to share her experiences, observations, understandings, and stories in a private and safe environment. The in-depth interviews took place in her classroom at the end of the school day and allowed her the space and time to reflect upon her understandings and experiences. The loosely-structured interview protocol was reviewed and approved by the IRB. Following each interview, I transcribed the responses word for word.

## **3.5 Data analysis**

When I began the analysis, I asked the following questions of the data: What is the main issue or problem? What idea keeps coming up? [14]. To answer my own questions, I wrote sentences or phrases that captured the overall story being told by the teacher. I used grounded theory methodology to analyze the case study, theories emerged from the data rather than being hypothesized prior to data [12]. Data collection, coding, and analysis were occurring simultaneously. The study's purpose was to develop practical theories in the area of the obstacles to an inclusive environment for children with emotional disturbances.

## **3.6 The findings**

Mrs. Bradwell shared in her 22 years of teaching; the education of students with disabilities had changed in the last 15 years. She explained students with intellectual and emotional disabilities previously "were in house, it was in an MH room, not inclusion" [15]. She exclaimed she was "not prepared for things like autism, oppositional defiant disorder or roller coaster emotions, and my education at (university) did not prepare me for any of that. Before, when kids like that were included, it was only gym, special events, etc. but never in the classroom."

After the first few weeks of the school year, and the experience of the extreme behaviors of Joey, Mrs. Bradwell indicated she was provided a teacher support person 3 days a week to help manage and maintain the classroom. She was very frustrated as it seemed other teachers with more training in the areas of special education would have the inclusive classrooms of students with cognitive or learning disabilities. "I seem to get the kids that are more the emotional disturbed, like the ones from abusive homes, mother on drugs when she was pregnant, things like that." Mrs. Bradwell felt educating students with emotional disturbances was a challenge to her and the other typically developing students.

*It is always a battle to get these kids to learn. I do not see inclusion as a great thing if they cannot control themselves and are not able to behave themselves so as to not cause disturbances in the classroom. Our feeling in this building is we do not want to send these emotionally disturbed kids to an ED classroom, because there they do not focus on academics. The problem is you have 25 other kids who pay the price.*

Regarding the view that students might possibly benefit from a separate educational setting, according to Danforth and Smith, segregated programs in the past have served as "dumping grounds" for students who failed to "fit the middle-class ideals of attitude, appearance, and behavioral style" [3]. Regardless, Mrs. Bradwell felt entirely inadequate for the demands of the students with emotional disturbances. Observations and interviews revealed the teacher used positive and loving statements regarding her students, but also overwhelmed with the dynamics of her classroom. In multiple conversations, she shared of the challenges with the students that caused her most concern (see **Table 1**). She stated: "you cannot control what

**245**

*Obstacles to Inclusion: One Early Childhood Inclusive Teacher's Perspective*

comes out of their mouth, like I want to kill you, blow you up, and poke your eyes out, things of that sort. We get no training and I don't know what to do" [15]. She further revealed the teacher support provided 3 days a week was helpful, and she felt more competent at meeting the needs of the students with emotional distur-

Mrs. Bradwell's insecurity at meeting the needs of students with emotional disturbances is not surprising as findings suggest "that although most of these students spend some time in general education classrooms, they are included in such classes less often than students with other disabilities and are likely to have teachers who feel unprepared to work with them" [16]. Because "society, schools and teachers set standards for acceptable behavior and expectations for children and adults" the challenges faced in educating students with emotional disturbances or behavior disorders are great, particularly when those behaviors are characterized by "impul-

sive, antisocial, hostile or aggressive actions directed toward others" [8].

their peers, interacting in negative or disrespectful ways" [3].

When Mrs. Bradwell began the school year, she was immediately faced with outbursts from two different students and antisocial and hostile behaviors from two other students, described in **Table 1**. The needs of these four particular students in addition to the other 22 felt insurmountable to her. She immediately began a referral process for two of the students based on the combination of their academic and social needs. The significance in the referrals for Mrs. Bradwell was not only to obtain the necessary support services to the students, but the needed help she hoped to gain in the classroom. One of the students received an Individual Education Plan (IEP) for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and the other student received an IEP for behavioral interventions which included a diagnosis of Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD), "a psychiatric disorder marked by aggressiveness and a tendency to purposefully bother and irritate others" [8]. The challenge in seeking and obtaining these diagnoses includes a differentiation between children, who demonstrate rational, purposeful, and communicative challenging behaviors and those with aggressive behaviors without a contextual/cultural rationale. However, the most common complaints of teachers about students considered troubling are "they are frequently off-task, not doing their assignments, and not sufficiently engaged in academic work and they do not get along well with

In the observations of the first grade classroom, the four students listed in **Table 1** exhibited many of these behaviors. Within the first hour of arriving, it was clear Joey and Billy were off task, would not begin their morning seat work even with various prompts, praise, or the possibilities of consequences. Mrs. Bradwell would continue to navigate throughout her morning routine and engage students, only to face resistance from students shortly into the lesson. This pattern of off-task, resistance, responding negatively or overtly to the teacher's requests was observed each day. During class story times, the students would be engaged at times, and on other occasions the personal space of other students was invaded by the troubling students; talking out and disengaged behaviors were repeatedly observed. **Table 2** indicates examples of the troubling behaviors for the four particular students during 10 days of observations. There is difficulty in observing and appropriating what is considered an aspect of a behavior disorder or "troubling student" and that is a frustration many teachers and specialists discover, particularly in the diagnostic process. "What is disturbing to one person may be viewed as independent, humorous, appropriate or creative by another" [8]. While observing the four students considered "troubling," it was

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80982*

bances only with aide support.

**4. The "troubling" students**

#### *Obstacles to Inclusion: One Early Childhood Inclusive Teacher's Perspective DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80982*

comes out of their mouth, like I want to kill you, blow you up, and poke your eyes out, things of that sort. We get no training and I don't know what to do" [15]. She further revealed the teacher support provided 3 days a week was helpful, and she felt more competent at meeting the needs of the students with emotional disturbances only with aide support.

Mrs. Bradwell's insecurity at meeting the needs of students with emotional disturbances is not surprising as findings suggest "that although most of these students spend some time in general education classrooms, they are included in such classes less often than students with other disabilities and are likely to have teachers who feel unprepared to work with them" [16]. Because "society, schools and teachers set standards for acceptable behavior and expectations for children and adults" the challenges faced in educating students with emotional disturbances or behavior disorders are great, particularly when those behaviors are characterized by "impulsive, antisocial, hostile or aggressive actions directed toward others" [8].
