The integration of learners with special needs into mainstream classrooms remains a critical and complex issue in the field of education. Among the most discussed and researched topics in recent years are the concepts of inclusion and integration, which have sparked considerable debate and inquiry (Downs, 2001). Despite extensive research, significant gaps persist, particularly in terms of pre-service teachers' preparedness to effectively manage inclusive classrooms.

One of the main hurdles in implementing inclusive education is the educators’ lack of comprehension of inclusive education principles. This deficiency often results in ineffective communication and collaboration between special education instructors and general education teachers, further complicating the inclusion process. Research suggests this challenge is due to the insufficient preparedness of pre-service teachers, who are expected to educate students with special needs in inclusive settings. The readiness of these teachers is crucial, as their ability to implement inclusive practices directly influences the success of students with special educational needs (SEN) (Di Gennaro et al., 2014).

Internationally, there has been a strong emphasis on ensuring that pre-service teacher education programs are designed to equip future educators with the necessary knowledge and skills for inclusive education. Di Gennaro et al. (2014) emphasize the importance of preparing pre-service teachers to plan, manage, and promote classroom engagement that meets the diverse needs of all learners. Similarly, Dally and Dempsey (2015) highlight that while many programs provide foundational knowledge on disabilities, diagnosis, management, and rehabilitation, a significant gap remains in addressing whether general education instructors feel adequately prepared to meet the needs of students with SEN.

In the Philippines, inclusive education is currently governed by Department of Education Order No. 72, series of 2012. 2009, which outlines the framework for inclusive education in primary education. However, this policy has faced criticism for being outdated and lacking consistency in its approach to integrating learners with SEN into general education (Philippine Department of Education, 2009). The ongoing review of the Special Education Act, as outlined in Philippine Senate Bill 3002, aims to address these issues; however, progress has been slow, and challenges in meeting the required standards persist (Philippine Senate, 2023). The gap between policy and practice is particularly evident in pre-service teacher training programs, where inclusive education often receives insufficient focus.

In our locality, these challenges are particularly pronounced. Pre-service teachers are expected to be well-prepared to manage the complexities of inclusive classrooms. However, the institution continues to struggle with aligning its training programs with the demands of inclusive education. Literature suggests the need for stronger collaboration between general and special education faculties, as well as a more robust integration of inclusive education policies into teacher preparation programs (Kauffman et al., 2005).

Therefore, this study assessed the readiness of pre-service teachers in one private school in Cotabato Province to effectively educate learners with special educational needs (SEN) in inclusive classrooms, focusing on key variables such as knowledge of inclusion, educational preparation, attitudes toward SEN, instructional competence, behavior management, and assessment skills. The research employed a mixed-method approach, combining surveys and interviews. Hence, this study aimed to fill that gap by providing a comprehensive analysis of the current state of pre-service teacher preparedness and offering recommendations to enhance the institution’s training programs, ultimately aiming to meet the demands of inclusive education better.

This study employed a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design to comprehensively address the research questions. The initial phase involved collecting and analyzing quantitative data through surveys or structured self-assessments, focusing on the level of readiness of pre-service teachers in managing learners with special educational needs (SENs) in inclusive classrooms. This qualitative phase aimed to explore in greater depth the pre-service teachers' self-assessments and their perceived readiness. The analysis conducted for the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) utilized thematic analysis, a qualitative research method used to identify and analyze patterns within the data. The study selected 125 pre-service teachers (PSTs) enrolled in Bachelor’s programs in Elementary and Secondary Education. These respondents had actively engaged in the survey, forming the core group of respondents for the research. To gain deeper insights into their readiness, a subset of approximately 10 participants was selected for focus group discussions (FGD). This approach ensures a comprehensive evaluation of pre-service teachers’ preparedness to effectively teach learners with special needs. Participants in the survey were pre-service teachers enrolled in teacher education programs, selected based on specific inclusion criteria. According to Creswell (2014), universal sampling ensures that the entire population is represented, thus providing a comprehensive overview of the group’s readiness to teach learners with special educational needs. On the other hand, Patton (2015) claimed that purposive sampling was applied, selecting participants for the focus group discussions (FGDs) based on specific criteria relevant to the study. To ensure the study underwent the appropriate procedure, the researchers asked permission and approval from the school authorities and target respondents to comply the ethical standards in research. The quantitative phase involved analyzing survey data using descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics, including mean, median, and standard deviation, are employed to provide a concise summary of the survey data. In the qualitative phase, thematic analysis was used to analyze data from focus group discussions (FGDs). This process involved coding the data, categorizing responses, and identifying overarching themes to reflect participants’ perspectives and experiences. The analysis adhered to Braun and Clarke’s (2006) framework, which involved familiarizing oneself with the data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing them, defining and naming them, and writing up the results. The findings from both quantitative and qualitative phases were integrated to provide a comprehensive understanding of pre-service teachers’ readiness. This integration correlated statistical trends with qualitative insights, thereby enhancing the overall interpretation of the data.

In the quantitative phase, the findings suggest that pre-service teachers are generally well-prepared to engage in inclusive education, particularly in terms of knowledge, attitudes, and assessment. Nonetheless, gaps remain in domains requiring practical experience, such as behavior management and educational preparation. These findings align with conclusions by Florian (2012), who emphasized the importance of transforming teacher education to blend theoretical grounding with immersive learning opportunities. While the overall readiness among pre-service teachers is commendable, with particular strengths in “knowledge of inclusion” and positive “attitudes towards learners with SENs,” areas such as “educational preparation’ and “instructional competence” may benefit from further professional development. These findings provide valuable insights for guiding future training and support programs, ensuring that all pre-service teachers are fully equipped to succeed in inclusive educational environments. On the other hand, the results of the thematic analysis revealed recurring patterns that reflect the perceptions, experiences, and needs of pre-service teachers about inclusive education. Through the focus group discussions, participants expressed varying degrees of understanding and readiness to teach learners with special educational needs (SEN). The themes that emerged from the data provide insight into both the strengths and the challenges within their current teacher preparation programs. Three dominant themes were identified: Emerging Awareness of Inclusion, Inadequate Practical Exposure and Training, and Desire for Interdisciplinary Support and Resources. Each theme is presented with supporting narratives and excerpts that illustrate the participants lived experiences and professional expectations as future educators in inclusive settings. When triangulated, both quantitative and qualitative findings suggest that pre-service teachers in this study hold positive attitudes and foundational knowledge of inclusion, supported by modest instructional and assessment competencies. However, their readiness is challenged by insufficient exposure to inclusive classrooms and limited applied training.

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. DOI: 10.1080/08856250210129056 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications. Dally, K., & Dempsey, I. (2015). Pre-service teachers' attitudes towards students with special educational needs: The influence of inclusive education training. Journal of Special Education, 49(2), 121-129. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466914557795 Di Gennaro, D., Latham, R., & Eger, J. (2014). Teacher preparation for inclusive education: An analysis of program effectiveness. Educational Research and Review, 9(8), 241-258. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2014.1835 Downs, J. (2001). Inclusive education: Challenges and strategies. Journal of Educational Research, 94(3), 146-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670109598712 Florian, L., & Black-Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 813-828. DOI: 10.1080/01411926.2010.501096 Kauffman, J. M., Hallahan, D. P., & Pullen, P. C. (2005). Special education: Foundations and best practices. Pearson Education. Logroño, O. C., & Gongora, J. T. (2023). Readiness of regular teachers for the inclusion of learners with special education needs. East Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(11), 4459-4472. https://doi.org/10.55927/eajmr.v2i11.5149 Loreman, T. (2010). Essential inclusive education-related outcomes for Alberta preservice teachers. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 56(2). O’Toole, C., & Burke, N. (2013). Ready, willing and able? Attitudes and concerns in relation to inclusion amongst a cohort of Irish pre-service teachers. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(3), 239-253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.768451 Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage Publications. Philippine Department of Education. (2009). Department of Education Order No. 72, s. 2009: Guidelines on the implementation of inclusive education. Retrieved from https://www.deped.gov.ph/ Philippine Senate. (2023). Special Education Act (Senate Bill 3002). Retrieved from https://www.senate.gov.ph/ Rodriguez, K. F. R., & Abocejo, F. T. (2018). Competence vis-à-vis performance of special education pre-service teachers. European Academic Research, 6(7), 3474-3498. Sharma, U., Forlin, C., & Loreman, T. (2008). Impact of training on pre-service teachers’ attitudes and concerns about inclusive education and sentiments about persons with disabilities. Disability and Society, 13(7), 773–785. doi:10.1080/09687590802469271 Sharma, U., Loreman, T., & Forlin, C. (2012). Measuring teacher efficacy to implement inclusive practices. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(1), 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1471-3802.2011.01200.X Subban, P., & Sharma, U. (2006). Primary school teachers' perceptions of inclusive education in Victoria, Australia. International Journal of Special Education, 21(1), 42-52.