Comparing Inclusive Practices: A Cross-Sectional Study of IDEA=B In the Social Work Classroom

Background and Purpose:
Belonging in higher education classrooms plays an important role in student learning, persistence, and professional development. In social work education, institutional commitments to Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility are increasingly framed as pathways to cultivating belonging (IDEA = B). However, programs lack validated tools that measure how students experience classroom belonging as an outcome of these institutional efforts. This study evaluates the Institutional Belonging in Higher Education Scale–Inside the Classroom (IBHES-I), a newly developed six-item instrument designed to measure social work students’ perceptions of classroom belonging. The study had two primary objectives. First, it sought to assess the psychometric properties of the IBHES-I, including construct validity and internal consistency. Second, it examined whether specific non-inclusive classroom practices are associated with lower levels of perceived classroom belonging.

Methods:
This quantitative psychometric instrumentation study used survey data collected from 372 students enrolled in accredited social work programs across the United States. Participants completed the IBHES-I and additional survey items measuring perceptions of classroom practices related to IDEA implementation. The IBHES-I includes six items designed to capture students’ experiences of belonging within classroom learning environments. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate the scale’s construct validity and factor structure. Model fit was assessed using standard indices, including the Comparative Fit Index, Tucker-Lewis Index, and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation. Internal consistency reliability was examined using Cronbach’s alpha. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine predictive relationships between classroom practices and IBHES-I scores, with particular attention to practices that may undermine inclusive learning environments.

Results:
Confirmatory factor analysis supported a strong single-factor model for the IBHES-I. Model fit indices indicated excellent fit to the data (CFI = .992, TLI = .986, RMSEA = .064). The scale also demonstrated strong internal consistency reliability (α = .938). Regression analyses identified several classroom conditions associated with significantly lower levels of perceived belonging. These included lack of diverse faculty representation, absence of inclusive course content, and inaccessible learning environments. Together, these findings indicate that non-inclusive classroom practices are negatively associated with students’ sense of belonging.

Conclusions and Implications:
The findings provide evidence supporting the reliability and validity of the IBHES-I as a measure of classroom belonging in social work education. The scale offers a practical tool for assessing how classroom environments reflect institutional commitments to IDEA and how these environments shape students’ experiences of belonging. Results also highlight the importance of faculty diversity, accessible learning environments, and inclusive andragogy in supporting student belonging. The IBHES-I may be useful for program assessment, accreditation processes, and research examining the relationship between inclusive educational practices and student outcomes. Future research should continue to examine the scale across diverse institutional contexts and explore its use in program evaluation and institutional climate assessment.