Teacher education has an essential role in shaping incoming teachers' positive attitudes towards inclusive education and the skills and knowledge to support the learning of different learners. Research has shown that teacher attitudes and self-efficacy are important factors in implementing inclusive education (Avramidis & Norwich, 2002). Teachers who are more confident in their abilities also tend to have more positive attitudes towards inclusion (Savolainen et al., 2012; Weisel & Dror, 2006). Thus teachers' interpretations and understanding of their roles play a critical role in implementing inclusion in the inclusive classroom. Research has indicated that the roles of teachers should be examined more closely against the background of their attitudes towards inclusive education in order to develop more effective initial as well as continuing teacher education for inclusion programmes (Engelbrecht &  Savolainen, 2018). Quality teaching is related to the quality of teacher training, and research is adamantly looking into ways that teacher training can assist in preparing teachers for a highly diverse yet inclusive educational reality (e.g. Peebles & Mendaglio, 2014; Sharma & Nuttal, 2016). After redesigning the preservice teacher education course "Differentiation of learning" in Tallinn University with more emphasis on hands-on experience (action research and reflection), a positive attitude towards inclusion and its effectiveness increased and heightened willingness to include special needs students into the regular classroom was reported (Poom-Valickis & Ulla, 2019). The main aim of the course “Differentiation on learning” is to support future teachers with knowledge and skills that help them develop strategies to provide quality educational opportunities for each learner in their classrooms. Furthermore, a cross-sectional pilot study in 2021 revealed a specific pattern of student self-efficacy profiles in the preservice teachers’ cohort (n=133). From the latter 40,6% could be described as self-efficient and positive towards inclusion; 26,3% as positive towards inclusion, yet lower in self-efficacy; 16,5% as self-efficient yet negative towards inclusion; and 16,5% both, negative towards and low in self-efficacy for inclusion. These results shed more light on the more individual efficacy profiles and suggest a less than linear relationship between positive attitudes and self-efficacy in the inclusive setting.

Previous research has shown that the more teachers believed they could implement inclusive practices on a concrete and pragmatic level, the more positive their attitudes were towards inclusion. However, at the same time, we also know that only positive attitudes are not enough as teachers teaching strategies are influenced by contextual issues. The teaching in overcrowded classrooms, not having much training on inclusive teaching and support strategies, little if any professional support led teachers to fall back on the traditional medical-deficit model approach (Engelbrecht & Savolainen, 2018). These contextual realities could also explain the contradiction between the teachers' positive attitudes towards inclusive education and the lack of confidence in its implementation. Thus in the second year, we would like to collect additional data, analyze the profiles in more detail and assess their change during the course. In particular, we would like to find answers to the following research questions: 

1) What kind of student teachers self-efficacy and attitudes profiles reveal at the beginning and the end of the course?

2) How do these profiles change over the course?

3) What background data and learning experience characteristics predict the most impactful changes in positive attitudes and self-efficacy during the course?

The current study looks into preservice teacher profiles in the 2021/2022 cohort of Tallinn University teacher training (n= 117). The following data collection instruments will be used to allow more in-depth inferences about the possible role of the "Differentiation of learning" course in preservice teachers' attitudes and self-efficacy. For data collection about preservice teachers attitudes about the inclusive settings, the Teachers Attitudes Towards Inclusion (Monsen, Ewing & Boyle, 2015) will be used. The instrument Teacher Efficacy in Inclusive Practice (Sharma, Loreman & Forlin, 2012) will be used for efficacy. Additionally, background data about participants' teaching experience, additional training in inclusive education topics, and personal experience with people with special educational needs will be collected. At the end of the course, their learning experience will be mapped. Students will answer two questions: What helped shape attitudes towards inclusion and why? What helped them be more prepared towards the inclusive educational reality and why? Data collection for the second cohort takes place in February and May 2022. K-means clustering will be used for generating student profiles. Logistic regression analysis will be used to assess whether any background or learning experience factors predict the increase or decrease in self-efficacy and positive attitudes towards inclusion. Thematic coding will be used for qualitative data.

The cross-sectional pilot study from 2021 sheds more light on individual efficacy profiles, suggesting a less than linear relationship between positive attitudes and self-efficacy in the inclusive setting. The current study takes a novel approach by looking at different attitudinal factors and their combination to inclusive education self-efficacy profiles. Such an in-depth look can reveal more crucial information about different aspects of teachers' sometimes contradictory attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs in inclusive education. From the previous research (Engelbrecht & Savolainen, 2018) we know that student teachers' attitudes and self-efficacy within the implementation of inclusive education are multi-faceted, non-linear and connected to their work and learning experiences. Thus available contextual support to teachers and students and levels of policy implementation influence how teachers beliefs and attitudes actualize in the classroom context and how inclusive education policy is realized within school communities.

Avramidis, E., Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers' attitudes towards integration / inclusion: a review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17(2), 129-147. Engelbrecht, P.; Savolainen, H. (2018). A mixed-methods approach to developing an understanding of teachers’ attitudes and their enactment of inclusive education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 33(5), 660-676. Monsen, J.J., Ewing, D.L., Boyle, J. (2015). Psychometric Properties of the Revised Teachers’ Attitude Towards Inclusion Scale. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 3, 64-71. Peebles, J.L., Mandaglio, S. (2014). The impact of direct experience on preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for teaching in inclusive classrooms. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18(12), 1321-1336. Poom-Valickis, K., Ulla, T. (2020). Õpetajakoolituse võimalused toetada tulevaste õpetajate valmisolekut kaasava hariduse rakendamiseks. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri, 8(1), 72-99. Savolainen, H., Engelbrecht, P., Nel, M., Malinen, O-P. (2012). Understanding teachers’ attitudes and self-efficacy in inclusive education: implications for pre- service and in-service teacher education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 27(1): 51-68. Sharma, U., Loreman, T., Forlin, C. (2012). Measuring teaher efficacy to implement inclusive practices. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(1), 12-21. Sharma, U., Nuttal, A. (2016). The impact of training on pre-service teacher attitudes, concerns, and efficacy towards inlcusion. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 44(2), 142-155. Weisel, A., Dror, O. (2006). School climate, sense of efficacy and Israeli teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion of students with special needs. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 1(2), 157-174.