Attitudes are a complex collection of beliefs, feelings values and depositions which characterize the way we think or feel about certain people or situations. People’s attitude s is a product of life experience including the relationship we build with people around us. For an example a person’s attitude towards one disabled might be shaped by their personal experience of knowing another disabled person. Change in the general public attitudes which underline just how prevalent negative attitudes are. Aside from general public disabled people identified local authority / government staff as a group whose attitudes would like to see change for the better following closely by health and social care.
As long as negative attitudes persist full rightful acceptance of people with disabilities is unlikely recognizing that the disabled are still exposed to and oppressed by prejudice and discrimination may be the first step in reducing prejudice. Societal attitudes might influence social policy and legislation. Negative public attitude can be a formidable barrier to the success of a particular policies because the public significantly influences how much important is given to an issue. The situation is not helped by the fact that disabled people are underrepresented in the public sector, particularly in the strategic management positions. They are under-represented were decisions about policy and service provisions are taken.
Attitudes can be thought of as internal individual process, they link each other to a social world of other people, activities and issues, including people who actively engaged in helping form or change attitudes. Thus, attitudes are part of a framework by which we interpret our social environment. Gender, age and a range of factors can influence attitudes. Gender differences in attitudes may be because of gender based response biases rather than because of disability biases. It may be becoming more socially appropriate for the public and for employers, teachers etc , to espouse positive global attitudes towards disability. However, specific attitudes, if investigated may be found to be more negative. Genesi (2007) refers to evidence in the educational field that while on a philosophical level teachers agreed with inclusion programs for children with disabilities, when it comes down to their practical use in the classroom they expressed reservations this may be part of social desirably effect.
The fact that the social desirability of responding in particular ways to disability of responding in particular ways to disability issues may be on the increase must be borne in mind when designing surveys and interpreting results. There is a general consensus that complete justice to the children with special needs seeking inclusivity by this system can be done if only teachers who are involved in the mainstream education are also aware of specialist knowledge and possess the skills required to cater to at least to a minimum set of special needs.
Although educators specializing in particular special needs would be considered as best equipped to help the children with certain special needs, a cooperative approach with colleagues is vital in a school setting to ensure the best interest s of the children in question. An inclusive school without the adequate facilities in terms with technology equipment incentives and inadequate specially trained teachers cannot rise up to the challenge of presenting fair knowledge distribution to all. Hence a universal design that includes physical, curricular and pedagogical changes must be evolved so that children with different learning styles can cope without adaptation. At the school level the learning needs of all children can be addressed only if a specific focus is placed on those children who are vulnerable to marginalization and exclusion. Classroom instruction must be planned and be well organized so that it meets each child’s need and helps in their well-being.