Special Needs Education (SNEd) Professional Development Trainings on Teachers’ Instructional Competence and Inclusive Teaching Practices
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23018152Keywords:
Special Needs Education (SNED), professional development, instructional competence, inclusive teaching practices, communication accessibility, inclusive educationAbstract
This study examined Special Needs Education (SNED) professional development trainings in relation to teachers’ instructional competence and inclusive teaching practices in public elementary schools in the MIMAROPA Region, Philippines. Using a quantitative descriptive-correlational design, the study involved 34 regular or permanent teachers selected through total enumeration of the accessible population. Data were gathered through an expert-validated, pilot-tested researcher-made questionnaire and analyzed using frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, independent-samples t-test, one-way analysis of variance, Pearson product-moment correlation, and simple linear regression at the .05 level of significance. Results showed Very High instructional competence in lesson planning and preparation (M = 3.64, SD = 0.30), instructional delivery (M = 3.56, SD = 0.31), classroom management (M = 3.87, SD = 0.25), and assessment practices (M = 3.59, SD = 0.31). Inclusive teaching practices were Very High in differentiated instruction (M = 3.74, SD = 0.29), inclusive strategies and accommodations (M = 3.62, SD = 0.25), and adaptation of teaching and learning materials (M = 3.48, SD = 0.38), while Filipino Sign Language and other communication strategies were rated High (M = 3.12, SD = 0.38). Instructional competence did not significantly differ by age, sex, teaching experience, or number of SNED-related trainings. A significant positive association was found between instructional competence and inclusive teaching practices (r = .395, p = .021). However, the number of SNED-related trainings did not significantly predict instructional competence (R² = .000, p = .909) or inclusive teaching practices (R² = .071, p = .128). The findings indicate the need to sustain existing strengths while strengthening communication accessibility and emphasizing the quality, relevance, and classroom application of professional learning rather than training frequency alone.
Downloads
References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.
Department of Education. (2009). DepEd Order No. 72, s. 2009: Inclusive education as strategy for increasing participation rate of children. Department of Education, Republic of the Philippines.
Donath, J. L., Lüke, T., Graf, E., Tran, U. S., & Götz, T. (2023). Does professional development effectively support the implementation of inclusive education? A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 35, Article 30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09752-2
Florian, L., & Black-Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 813–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2010.501096
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/135406002100000512
Montalbano, C., Lang, J., Coviello, J. C., McQueston, J. A., Hogan, J. A., Nissley-Tsiopinis, J., Ciotoli, F., & Buglione, F. (2024). Inclusive education virtual professional development: School-based professionals’ knowledge of best practices. Education Sciences, 14(9), 1030. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14091030
National Economic and Development Authority. (2016). AmBisyon Natin 2040. Government of the Philippines.
Sahli Lozano, C., Wüthrich, S., Baumli, N., Sharma, U., Loreman, T., & Forlin, C. (2023). Development and validation of a short form of the Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices Scale (TEIP-SF). Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 23(4), 375–388. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12607
Sahli Lozano, C., Wüthrich, S., Kullmann, H., Knickenberg, M., Sharma, U., Loreman, T., Romano, A., Avramidis, E., Woodcock, S., & Subban, P. (2024). How do attitudes and self-efficacy predict teachers’ intentions to use inclusive practices? A cross-national comparison between Canada, Germany, Greece, Italy, and Switzerland. Exceptionality Education International, 34(1), 17–41. https://doi.org/10.5206/eei.v34i1.16803
Sharma, U., & Sokal, L. (2015). The impact of a teacher education course on pre-service teachers’ beliefs about inclusion: An international comparison. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 15(4), 276–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12043
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.
UNESCO. (2020). Global education monitoring report 2020: Inclusion and education—All means all. UNESCO Publishing.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations.
Wüthrich, S., & Sahli Lozano, C. (2025). The attitudes to inclusion and Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices scales: Psychometric properties across Swiss in-service, pre-service, and special education teachers. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1531782. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1531782
World Health Organization, & World Bank. (2011). World report on disability. World Health Organization.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
