Teachers’ Preparedness Towards Mathematics Instruction and Strategies Used in Inclusive Classroom Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsis.V1.I3.142Keywords:
Inclusive Education, Inclusive Strategies, Mathematics Instruction, Professional Development, Teacher Preparedness, Universal Design for LearningAbstract
This study examined teachers’ preparedness during mathematics instruction and the implementation of strategies in inclusive classrooms among selected public secondary schools in the Division of La Union during School Year 2018–2019. Grounded in the Universal Design for Learning framework and Vygotsky’s Social Constructivist Theory, the study employed a quantitative descriptive-correlational design using stratified and simple random sampling. Data were collected through a self-made questionnaire that demonstrated good content validity and high reliability and were analyzed using mean, standard deviation, and Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient. Teachers demonstrated a very high overall level of preparedness (M = 4.35, SD = .542) in terms of training, skills, knowledge, and resources. The overall implementation of inclusive classroom strategies was high (M = 4.13, SD = .575), with peer tutoring rated very high and visual support, flexible seating, and step-by-step scaffolding rated high. Significant relationships were found between all dimensions of teacher preparedness and the four inclusive classroom strategies, indicating that preparedness was associated with strategy implementation. The study concluded that teacher preparedness is important in supporting responsive and inclusive mathematics instruction. Continuous professional development, supportive school environments, capacity-building activities, and instructional strategies responsive to individual learner needs were recommended. The study aligns with SDG 4 – Quality Education by supporting inclusive and equitable educational opportunities for learners with diverse needs. It contributes to educational and institutional sustainability by providing evidence that may inform sustained professional development, inclusive instructional practices, and school support for learner diversity.
References
Almeqdad, Q. I., Alodat, A. M., Alquraan, M. F., Mohaidat, M. A., & Al-Makhzoomy, A. K. (2023). The effectiveness of universal design for learning: A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2218191. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2218191 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2218191
Bray, A., Devitt, A., Banks, J., Sánchez Fuentes, S., Sandoval, M., Riviou, K., Byrne, D., Flood, M., Reale, J., & Terrenzio, S. (2024). What next for Universal Design for Learning? A systematic literature review of technology in UDL implementations at second level. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(1), 113–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13328 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13328
CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org
Craig, S. L., Smith, S. J., & Frey, B. B. (2024). Universal design for learning: Connecting teacher implementation to student outcomes. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 28(11), 2458-2474. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2022.2113459 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2022.2113459
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dignath, C., Rimm-Kaufman, S., van Ewijk, R., & Kunter, M. (2022). Teachers' beliefs about inclusive education and insights on what contributes to those beliefs: A meta-analytical study. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 2609–2660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09695-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09695-0
Gardesten, M. (2023). How co-teaching may contribute to inclusion in mathematics education: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences, 13(7), 677. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070677 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070677
Gervasoni, A., & Peter-Koop, A. (2020). Inclusive mathematics education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 32(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-020-00315-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-020-00315-0
Guillemot, F., Lacroix, F., & Nocus, I. (2022). Teachers' attitude towards inclusive education from 2000 to 2020: An extended meta-analysis. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 3, 100175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2022.100175 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2022.100175
Kielblock, S., & Woodcock, S. (2023). Who’s included and who’s not? An analysis of instruments that measure teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, 103922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103922 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103922
King-Sears, M. E., Stefanidis, A., Evmenova, A. S., Rao, K., Mergen, R. L., Owen, L. S., & Strimel, M. M. (2023). Achievement of learners receiving UDL instruction: A meta-analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, 103956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103956 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103956
Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
Plantin Ewe, L., & Galvin, T. (2023). Universal Design for Learning across formal school structures in Europe—A systematic review. Education Sciences, 13(9), 867. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13090867 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13090867
Root, J. R., Jimenez, B., & Saunders, A. (2022). Leveraging the UDL framework to plan grade-aligned mathematics in inclusive settings. Inclusive Practices, 1(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/2732474521990028 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2732474521990028
Rusconi, L., & Squillaci, M. (2023). Effects of a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) training course on the development teachers' competences: A systematic review. Education Sciences, 13(5), 466. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050466 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050466
Subban, P., Woodcock, S., Sharma, U., & May, F. (2022). Student experiences of inclusive education in secondary schools: A systematic review of the literature. Teaching and Teacher Education, 119, 103853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103853 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103853
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Woodcock, S., Sharma, U., Subban, P., & Hitches, E. (2022). Teacher self-efficacy and inclusive education practices: Rethinking teachers' engagement with inclusive practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 117, 103802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103802 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103802
Wray, E., Sharma, U., & Subban, P. (2022). Factors influencing teacher self-efficacy for inclusive education: A systematic literature review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 117, 103800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103800 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103800
Yada, A., Leskinen, M., Savolainen, H., & Schwab, S. (2022). Meta-analysis of the relationship between teachers' self-efficacy and attitudes toward inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 109, 103521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103521 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103521
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Imelda M. Monis (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication. All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License. This license permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and the journal, a link to the license is provided, and any changes made are indicated.
