Conference Agenda

This symposium addresses, from somewhat different perspectives, the rise of identity as a shaping feature of not only the discursive politics of education but, increasingly, the spaces of pedagogy and curriculum. The claims to the import of identity are driven by often competing ideological perspectives. Hence, one element has seen the resurgence of nationalisms while another, the emergence of an assumed right to not be offended by others opinions and beliefs. Allied to these twin concerns is the role of the State and its agencies (including education) in facilitating a closure of disagreement. The elision of the respective responsibilities of childhood and adulthood, the emerging primacy of of the post-anthropocene orthodoxy, the State's preference to promote certtain kinds of progressive discourse over more traditional or conservative forms all serve to reduce the import of dissonance to the maintenance of a healthy liberal democracy. None of the presentations intend to deny the significance of myriad progressive views on educational purpose and practice but do wish to lay bare some of the inconsistencies and unintended consequences that might flow from the two easy adoption of liberal nostrums while exposing their significant if attenuated links to regressive forms of educational endeavour.

In this the presenters here will take seriously the post Second World War concern to see education as a critical partner in the maintenance of the social contract and, in turn, a means for securing liberal democracy. They will examine the State’s role with respect to the private spaces of the family and identity preferences.

In all of this, the presenters will explore the necessity of a more public questioning of, what may be considered the increasingly interventionist nostrums of the state/the institutions of educated opinion. Amongst other lenses the presenters will draw upon Arendt, Levinas and Lysgaard to draw a critical eye on the homogenising impulses of so many different features in and of education. Many of these impulses produce forms of self-regulation that may both educationally and politically be counterproductive with respect to liberal democracy.

At the heart of this endeavour is a wish to expose,explore and analyse the myriad contradictions and confusions that have emerged in recent decades with regard to human identity and difference and attempt to offer some suggestions by way of a corrective to what the presenters, in their different ways, consider to be educational and cultural cul de sacs.

The daily contributions of online readers to the Financial Times offer a window into one of the most fracturing features of contemporary educational politics - the impulse to pit generations and communities against each other. 'Baby boomers' have squandered the future'; 'Gen Z are spoiled and mentally fragile...', so the arguments go. With a glance to neither the past nor the future, readers are quite content to pillory and vilify a demographic of which they are not a part as, in some way, morally, intellectually, culturally and/or politically deficient. Sub-group identification has become an increasingly common feature of our social life. Paradoxically, in education this impulse to foreground factional identity is often and increasingly manifest in the claim of a 'Right' not to have one's personal or group identifier subject to what is considered by such persons as an offence in attitude, word or behaviour. A third feature of these tendencies, which prima facie appears to be different but which, I hope to illustrate, has a number of important commonalities in education, is the collapse of the distinction between childhood and adulthood. All three of these cases are connected in that, I will suggest, 1. they gradually dissolve the fabric of the social contract which underpins liberal democracy. 2. they distract and deflect attention from a crucial concern for securing the social contract- class and poverty. Of course economists, such as Minouche Shafik consider that the social contract is secured by the redistribution/targeting of resources though even here she is aware of the centrality of education to facilitating and securing such redistribution. But, education after the post War liberal democratic settlement in Europe was, amongst other things, concerned to promote and secure a legitimate space for dissonance and disagreement. Consequently I will go on to argue that these contradictory impulses to erase the spaces of disagreement and dissolve legitimate difference in kind and responsibility undermines education in support of a social contract in the service of liberal democracy. If we are to maintain the social contract and its attendant liberal democratic consensus we need to refurbish our educational conversation (inc. in the curriculum) so that it reduces the import of identity, allows for the promotion of disagreement and recognises the limits of the State.

Kristiina Brunila & Leena-Maija Rossi (2018) Identity politics, the ethos of vulnerability, and education, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 50:3, 287-298 Minocuhe Shafik, (2022) What We Owe Each Other: A New Social contract, NJ, Princeton. James Conroy (2004) Betwixt and Between: The Liminal Imagination, Education and Democracy, New York and Bern, Peter Lang. James Conroy (2019) Caught in the Middle: Arendt, Childhood and Responsibility, Journal of Philosophy of Education, 54(1)23-42

The existence of the UNCRC is premised upon the inequality or not-sameness of children and adults: protection and provision rights are necessary because of children’s different vulnerability, dependence and needs; participation rights are circumscribed by stipulations regarding their age and maturity. The field of childhood studies challenges the distinctions made between adults and children to test the boundaries of the categories. The radical wing of this important task explores the elimination of age-based discrimination altogether. A case in point is the notion of ‘Childism’ as formulated by Professor John Wall and promoted by the Childism Institute at Rutgers University. Wall’s Childism is a fascinating attempt to engage Ricoeurian phenomenology to establish the absolute equality of adults and children. The argument turns on the idea ghat children are indistinguishable from adults in their relation to the world, and second, adults are the same as children in terms of their vulnerability to harm or being subject to change. In other words, children and adults are indistinguishable from one another in relation to their agency and vulnerability, leading to an assertion of ethical symmetry and reciprocity of responsibility. Losing any meaningful distinction, equality loses the normal presumption of difference and collapses into identity. I propose that this is a faulty and harmful move, which removes warranted discrimination and misrepresents the primordial relation of mother (parent) and child. I suggest that we would be better with Levinas than Ricoeur in understanding the adult-child relation.

Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Duquesne University Press. Ricoeur, (1992). Oneself as another. P Chicago: Chicago University Press. Wall, J. (2010). Ethics in light of childhood. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press

Spanning the sectors from pre-school to universities and lifelong learning, the discourse of ‘the Anthropocene’ and ‘the Post-Anthropocene’ has emerged in recent years across Europe as a powerful driver in the variously-labelled projects for supporting learning for sustainability and the collective educational response to the climate crisis. Originating in post-War scientific assessments of the adverse human impact on the global ecosystem, the Anthropocene has been taken up enthusiastically in areas as varied as the arts and humanities, the life sciences, post-colonial historical enquiry, radical green politics and, increasingly, environmental education, everywhere as a tool for historicising and critiquing anthropocentric human predation. The broad critical vocabulary that it furnishes is now mainstreamed into much learning and teaching in schools and universities as part of the mobilisation of the young in the active creation of sustainable futures. This paper seeks to step back from the normative concepts of the (Post)-Anthropocene in order better to evaluate them and to highlight certain unrecognised perils for education within them. From a detailed inventory of these, the paper spotlights in particular the growing danger of a fatalistic anti-humanism epitomised in the recurrent (Post)-Anthropocene repudiation of human exceptionalism, human privilege, and human transcendence of nature––elements that are repeatedly condemned in this analysis as the root causes of modern humanity’s unconstrained exploitation and destruction of the planetary ecosystem. Questioning what it suggests is the flawed historical reasoning and the defective philosophical, anthropological and theological calculations propelling this argument––including the often highly selective and misleading uses of indigenous epistemologies––the paper concludes by calling for a rehabilitation in our educational institutions of the global humanist heritage of critical reasoning in which the recognition of human primacy is inseparable from its ethical responsibilisation.

Bonneuil, C. (2016). The Shock of the Anthropocene: The Earth, History and Us. London: Verso Green, J. (2021). The Anthropocene Reviewed. London: Dutton Lysgaard, J. L et al. (2019). Dark Pedagogy: Education, Horror and the Anthropocene. New York: Springer Nørreklit, L. & Paulsen. M. (2022). To Love and Be Loved in Return: Toward a Post-Anthropocene Pedagogy and Humanity. In M. Paulsen et al, Pedagogy in the Anthropocene. London: Palgrave, 217-240. Scranton, R. (2015). Learning to Die in the Anthropocene. London: City Lights. Vetlesen, A. J. (2019). Cosmologies of the Anthropocene: Panpsychism, Animism and the Limits of Posthumanism. London: Routledge

After the Second World War, rituals and ritualistic practices were met with distrust and resistance both in society more generally and in education, for good reasons. Later in the twentieth century, advocating ritualistic practices was seen as incompatible with the development of a school for differentiated, pluralistic societies and their homogenizing function was met with skepticism among the foremothers and forefather of progressive, liberal education. Today, the scene is both different and more complex and on the one hand we are witnessing a “return of ritual” in schools (partly fueled by the marketization of education and the desire among private actors in the sphere of education to enhance order and discipline in the classroom) and, on the other, there seems to be an almost sacred focus on the veneration of the individual for which ritualistic, collective practices are counterculture. Drawing on ritual theorist with psychoanalytical and anthropological perspectives, the claim is made that rituals create a subjunctive, an “as if” or “could be” mode of relationality that makes imagined communities and shared worlds possible whilst recognizing the ambiguity and plurality that is always already at play in human relationships. The paper explores the consequences of ritual and the potential of the “subjunctive form” for pedagogical settings, and it is argued that the main obstacle for putting the subjunctive into play is the modern, protestant, concern for sincerity and authenticity – two ways of framing human experience that have been (and still are) dominant in both contemporary culture and modern education but stand in tension with the form of ritual. Hence, in a Europe that seems to be losing its sense of community, this paper explores the possibility to rejuvenate the pedagogical potential of rituals and ritualized practices in and for educational settings.

Anderson, B. (1983/2006). Imagined Communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (Rev. and extended ed.). London: Verso. Arendt, H. (2006). Between past and future: eight exercises in political thought. New York: Penguin Books. Bernstein, B. et al. (1966) ‘Ritual in Education’, in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 251.772, pp. 429–36. Masschelein, J and Simons, M. (2021). Looking after school: a critical analysis of personalisation in education. Leuven: E-ducation, Culture & Society Publishers. Peters, R. S. (1966) Ethics and Education. London: George Allen & Unwin. Seligman, A.B. (2008). Ritual and its consequences: an essay on the limits of sincerity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Participatory research can be methodologically challenging to implement and work with (Gristy, 2015), and when intending to engage adults with intellectual disabilities within participatory research as active participants and co-researchers, additional methodological and ethical tensions arise (Northway, Howarth and Evans, 2015). This particular project explores the experiences of adults with disabilities within an inclusive community outside of formal education, to identify what the core ingredients of an inclusive community are and how policy, education and other provisions can learn from such inclusive community practices. As an unsuspecting product of the research, methodological and ethical components became more significant due to the lack of guidance I could find in the literature about the combination of participation and intellectual disabilities, indicating a significant gap.

Engaging adults with intellectual disabilities in education research is underdeveloped and limited (Wolbring and Lillywhite, 2021); when people with intellectual disabilities have previously been involved with research, it has been predominately including them as research subjects rather than as active participants or co-researchers. As such, my research with adults with intellectual disabilities within a community setting, intends to push through research on, encompassing notions of research for, but prioritising research with (Nind, 2014).

Despite the intention of qualitative research being to hear experiences and learn from what is meaningful to participants (Ary et al., 2018), the researcher still tends to be in control of research decisions. Therefore, qualitative research can still play a role in generating hierarchical barriers between the researcher and the researched (Nind, 2008; Nind and Vinha, 2014). There is a need to develop more inclusive research and thinking about participatory methodologies to ensure education researchers are not reproducing researcher dominance and privilege. When conducting participatory work in education, the vast majority of studies work with children, developing methodologies and frameworks to include those perceived as vulnerable. Whilst a valuable movement, with many lessons learnt on how to diversify education research, this is not comparable to the experiences of people with intellectual disabilities and does these individuals a disservice when methodological frameworks are not developed with them in mind.

The formal ethics process can be inhibiting to the exploratory nature of participatory work, with the need to categorise both research participants and research activities (Northway, Howarth and Evans, 2015; Dierckx et al., 2021). Tensions arose when the ethics procedure asked me to ‘Tick the Box’ if my study involved ‘Adults lacking capacity to consent for themselves’. I felt resistance and shame to be categorising my participants before I could even consult them.

Since this project is ethically nuanced, the approval process took 7 months, which raised questions about the restrictive nature of procedural ethics if one is exploring underrepresented ideas and topics. It is important to reflect on how many projects, like this, have not make it through this process due to restrictions such as time and funding. It could be argued that the process, that intends to protect participants from harm, is subtly and subconsciously perpetuating inequitable treatment, notions of exclusion and rigidities around value and capability. Such considerations align with Iacono and Murray (2003, p.49), where ethical procedures conflict with the ‘need to protect vulnerable participant groups, while ensuring that demands placed on researchers are not so restrictive as to preclude valuable research’.

This research paper presentation explores the value, practicalities and complexities of conducting participatory work with adults with disabilities. Whilst the research intends to contribute to inclusion theory, policy and application, as well as methodological and ethical development and applications of participatory work, this specific presentation explores the methodological and ethical findings alongside presenting a ‘how to’ to navigating such processes.

Due to different challenges associated with the teaching profession, there is an increasing focus on skills that support teachers in dealing with them. In this context, teachers’ intrapersonal and interpersonal mindfulness is considered an important ability to meet the diversity of the students and manage the classroom proactively. The concept of mindfulness refers to the teachers´ ability to shift their attention from the whole classroom to individual student’s needs, while also being aware of their own feelings and bodily sensations (Frank et al., 2016). Research has highlighted the beneficial impact of teachers' mindfulness on their social-emotional competencies, that in turn play a central role on students' wellbeing through student-teacher relationships (Emerson et al., 2017; Grant, 2017). Accordingly, teachers who treat their students with compassion and respect can create an environment that is conducive to students' self-esteem and prosocial behaviour (Cooper, 2016). In this regard, their emotional self-efficacy and relational skills are crucial for developing and maintaining supportive student-teacher relationships (Muris, 2001; Vidmar & Kerman, 2016). Social-emotionally competent teachers model pro-social behaviour and facilitate an environment conducive to social participation among students (Cooper, 2016). Research indicates that students with special educational needs (SEN) experience difficulties in their social participation. Accordingly, this group of students has a significantly lower number of friends, fewer interactions with peers and is more often rejected by their classmates compared to students without disabilities (Avramidis, 2010; Bossaert et al., 2013; De Leeuw et al., 2018; Koster et al., 2010). Among learners with SEN, students with social, emotional or behavioural difficulties (SEBD) are particularly at risk of social exclusion due to behavioural characteristics associated with SEBD. Teachers have reported difficulties in supporting students with SEBD in inclusive settings and apply a limited repertoire of strategies to promote their social participation at school (De Leeuw et al., 2018; De Leeuw et al., 2020). Due to these findings, the aim of the present study was to investigate the correlation between the teachers´ above mentioned abilities (mindfulness and social-emotional competencies) and the social participation of students with SEBD. To gain deeper insights into the current situation in Austrian primary schools on that matter, we collected data on teachers' self-assessments of their mindfulness in teaching, relational competence and emotional self-efficacy and asked them about strategies they apply to promote the social participation of students with SEBD. Therefore, the following research questions were addressed:

1. How do Austrian primary school teachers perceive their mindfulness in teaching, their relational competence, and their emotional self-efficacy?
2. What strategies do they apply to foster the social participation of students with SEBD?
3. To what extent are teachers' self-rated mindfulness in teaching, relational competence, and emotional self-efficacy related to their strategies applied to foster the social participation of students with SEBD?

Refugees with disabilities belong to the group of particularly vulnerable refugees according to the EU Asylum Procedures Directive (2013/32/EU). Nevertheless, numerous problems of access to medical and rehabilitative care and education have been documented (Köbsell, 2019), especially when it comes to the issue of language as the key to social and professional participation. In many European countries, language skills have been made a condition for the granting of residence permits (Van Avermaert, 2009). In Germany, the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees introduced mandatory language courses in 2004, but to date there are no language courses for people with intellectual disabilities or learning difficulties (BT- Drucksache 19/27553).

The study I would like to present discusses educational problems in Language acquisition, for example that we can only rudimentarily identify the causes of learning difficulties in the interplay of trauma- or stress-related learning impairment, limited formal educational experience and low literacy. Addressing the complex field of inclusive language education for people with intellectual disabilities, studies have additionally shown that people with intellectual disabilities are significantly more likely to experience adverse life events, abuse and trauma in childhood compared to the general population (McNally, Taggart & Shevlin, 2021). The educational understanding of trauma applied here defines itself as an "inner-psychic disturbance(s) of the relationship to oneself and to others" (Zimmermann, 2017, p. 94). The psychodynamic interpretation often shows traumatic processes already due to problematic relationship experiences with the primary caregivers, which play a big role in personality development and learning behavior (Pforr, 2009). Following on from this, theories and studies on relationship dynamics in educational settings from psychoanalytic pedagogy and trauma pedagogy (Plutzar, 2016; Zimmermann, 2019) show that due to traumatic experiences, ambivalent object relationships, inner-psychic conflicts and fears interfere with learning. Zimmermann states that the phenomenon of trauma must be taken seriously in the context of all educational relationships and institutions (Zimmermann, 2017, p. 13). Accordingly, learners in inclusive adult education also benefit from teachers' reflexive relational work on the question of learners' autonomy and self-determination and knowledge of affective teaching dynamics. The trauma pedagogical concept "Language teaching as relational work" by Plutzar (2016) then focuses on trauma-sensitive teaching and relational design in language teaching, which should, however, also be methodologically innovative (ibid., p. 121) and promote learner participation.

Participatory and inclusive research with marginalized groups, which presupposes agreed ethical standards (Hauser, 2020), is costly in terms of research practice, also due to the necessity of interpreters joining the research and there are limits to writing-based work with people with low literacy. All this requires special methods for ongoing ethical reflexivity during the research, which I would like to discuss: How can the intersections of participatory-oriented research with refugees with learning disabilities be researched with methods from Depth-hermeneutics and Photovoice and how can this research approach be reflected in terms of research ethics?

Therefore I like to reflect the results of participatory research (2020-2022) in an inclusive German-as-a-second language course in special education. The research used a mix of depth-hermeneutic, interviews and photovoice methods (Wang & Burris, 1997). Depth-hermeneutics, a „critical cultural analysis with a psychoanalytic orientation [attempts to extend] historical-materialist thinking to the psychodynamics of intersubjective relations“(Krüger, 2017; p.47). This way it works as a theoretically founded approach to „reflective practice“ (Schön, 1983). This Approach offered also the possibility of study the subject-logical perception of institutional conditions and (ableist) discrimination in inclusive language learning lessons.

Developmental dyslexia is a specific reading disorder which manifests itself by reading difficulties. These difficulties, such as errors in spelling or decoding letters and words, can impact and subsequently reduce the whole reading process and overall text comprehension (Gabrieli, 2009). Nowadays, a large amount of information is presented in text form, which influences knowledge uptake and further vocabulary expansion (Rello & Ballesteros, 2015). Repeated failures in reading can lead to reduced motivation, problems with behaviour and anxiety in children with dyslexia (Spafford & Grosser, 1996). Early diagnosis and therapy of dyslexia would subsequently improve pupils' adaptation to the school environment, mainly in their social and emotional development (Nilsson Benfatto et al., 2016). Several theories try to explain the neurobiological origin of dyslexia and some of them are closely related to visual perception and eye movements while reading (Jošt, 2011). Eye movements can be measured via eye-tracking. For elementary school, it is crucial to follow an appropriate method for learning how to read. The syllabic method is most commonly used in the Czech environment to learn reading. However, there is a research gap in the field of eye movement processes when reading different types of syllables in the Czech language. The main aim of this paper is to present the results of the eye-tracking study focused on eye movement aspects of dyslexic children during syllables reading in the Czech language environment.

Literacy is a fundamental skill that is necessary for children to develop in order to learn, participate and integrate fully in society. However, the development and promotion of literacy in children with speech, language and communication needs (SLCNs) is particularly challenging (Dockrell, et al., 2017(. Regardless of the variety of needs that this population may have, the opportunities to learn and develop intersect also with issues of equity and literacy (Lafontaine, et al., 2015) allowing better inclusion (Frey & Fishcer, 2018). However, to implement a policy or apply new conceptualizations of literacy in practice, it is necessary to investigate the position, training/knowledge and attitudes of educators and health professionals as relevant agents of change. In Israel, the official voices as the Ministry of Education or the National Israeli Association for Speech, Language and Hearing – have suggested that tailored literacy programs should be built and implemented in every class to enable access to literacy for all SLCNs. Nevertheless, in terms of educators’ and health practitioners’ in the field, who implement policies, this issue is not self-evident. Hence, the goals of the present study were a) to investigate the professionals’ abilities in terms of training and knowledge of both - special educators (SEs) and speech and language therapists (SLTs) – in their work in the field of literacy and b) to study the professionals’ attitudes regarding access to literacy for SLCNs. The current presentation seeks to compare quantitative findings with qualitative findings, in order to focus on areas of convergence and divergence on the aforementioned study goals. While some of the quantitative findings have been published (Zadunaisky-Ehrlich & Yifat, 2022), the focus here will allow us to get a more comprehensive picture and look for internal coherence.

This paper presents findings from a pilot study on equity and inclusion in the mathematics classroom. The pilot study is part of the project: Mathematics education for Inclusion and Equity (MInE) and has been ethically approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority. Moments of inclusion and equity is a concept that we explore and develop during this pilot. By inclusion and equity in mathematics we imply teaching that contributes to student empowerment, and their ability and agency to learn through striving for every student’s opportunity to participate (see Bagger 2017; Roos, 2019).

Aspects of equity and inclusion are core for sustainable learning in mathematics for all students (Atweh, 2011; Skolverket, 2019). At the same time, these values and goals in education is highly challenged both at a classroom level and a national system level in the Nordic countries and Sweden (Frønes et al. 2020). The trend of declining results in mathematics and an increasing proportion of students in need of support in mathematics are connected to if the student's parents are born abroad, gender and disabilities. The lack of equity is seen between groups of students, classes, and schools (Skolinspektionen, 2014; Skolverket, 2017; 2019). Neither research nor governmental reports can give advice on what the teacher need do in each classroom. At the same time, teachers work with this every day and often intuitively with not time to develop a professional language or form ideas of strategies or principles that can support them.

Inclusion and equity in mathematics has furthermore been shown to be complex (Kollosche et al., 2019). We understand these phenomena as deriving from a system and draws on Ainscows (2020) framework for inclusion and equity in education systems in order to understand how these come to be. The system is understood as consisting of “five interrelated factors” (p. 9): School development, equity and inclusion as principles, administration, community involvement and the use of evidence. In addition, we apply the Inclusive Inquiry Approach (IIA) for demarcating and exploring opportunities of moments and inclusion and equity (Messiou & Ainscow, 2020). This means that we have built the study with three focus points; reflections on teaching, learning from difference and development of teaching practices (Messiou & Ainscow, 2020), Following this, inclusion and equity are considered as principles which aims at promoting meaningful participation for all students. This means that we target both classroom level and the system behind which materializes in the classroom.

The study at hand aims at contributing knowledge on prerequisites for moments of equity and inclusion in the mathematics classroom. This also means that we demarcate some of the prerequisites for moments of inclusion and equity as an analytical concept. Questions posed are: What moments of inclusion and equity can a teacher identify in her teaching? What kind of? Following from this: What underlying values and principles is displayed regarding inclusion and equity.

Research topic/aim: The voices of students who do not succeed in school are not often heard, especially not the voices of students with problematic absenteeism (Ekstrand,2015). Listening to different students’ voices helps teachers and school leaders understand that the diversity in school is important in order to organize a school that is as good and meaningful as possible for all students (Fielding, 2001). This paper is based on an ongoing study trying to find factors to promote students ‘ school attendance. Problematic absenteeism in compulsory school can be seen as a contributing factor to students in year nine not achieving the goals for being admitted to a national program at upper secondary school, which in turn can lead to exclusion in adulthood (Andersson, 2017). Based on the Swedish National Agency for Education's publication (Skolverket, 2010) and the Swedish Schools Inspectorate's report (Skolinspektionen, 2016), students' school absenteeism is increasing. Research (Kearney & Grazcyk, 2020; Ekstrand, 2015) also highlights what is called a long-term problematic school absenteeism has also increased all over the world. Indications from school authorities and research show that many students with ASD (autism spectrum disorder) (Carlberg & Granlund, 2019) and students with anxiety (Cabo Dannow et al., 2020; Ingul & Nordahl, 2013) are in the group of students with problematic school absenteeism. Further Ekstrand highlights that there is a lack of qualitative research from students' perspectives, both in terms of promoting attendance and reasons for absence. In order to find ways to promote all students ‘school attendance, it is necessary to understand what makes students want to be in school. There are many different reasons why students want to be in school just as there are many different reasons why they do not want to be there. In this paper the focus therefore is on how to promote school attention. What do children and students in schools think is necessary to want to attend and learn in school. Research (Shochet et al., 2006) highlights the importance of that students have a feeling of belonging to school. When students feel that they belong to school, they also engage in their learning (Marinosson et al., 2014). Kearney and Graczic, (2014) put forward that to promote students school attention teaching has to be qualitative and the school leaders have to be aware of the importance of school culture and the organization has to be flexible.

The purpose of the paper is thus to highlight the students' voices about what they think will contribute to make them want to go to school. The students' voices are an important piece of the puzzle to know how schools can be organized to promote a high attendance, to make all students succeed and achieve their goals. The research questions are:

• What factors emerge as important for young people to want to come to school?
• How can the students' experiences contribute to the development of attendance promotion work in school?

Theoretical framework: The ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) as well as theories of engagement (Appleton, Christensen & Furlong, 2008) are possible approaches. In seeking ways to increase engagement in schools and to understand how to promote school attendance it is pivotal to understand and develop the different systems around the student

Since the 1990s, inclusion has been present in the international discourse as a guiding concept for the development of educational systems (Biewer & Schütz, 2016; Powell 2018; Zahnd, 2017). It first appeared prominently with the Salamanca Declaration (UNESCO 1994). Inclusive education in the sense of international law takes "its starting point from the rights of vulnerable and marginalized people [...], [argues] for their participation in all areas of life [...] and [aims] at a structural change of regular institutions in order to meet the diversity of conditions and needs of all users" (Biewer 2017, 204). Thus, valuating diversity and finding forms of teaching and learning sensible to all forms of diversity without excluding students is at the core of inclusive education.

Although the demand for inclusive education has already been on the international agenda for several decades, its implementation has so far been insufficiently accomplished worldwide (Köpfer, Powell & Zahnd 2021). The (insufficient) implementation can be observed on different levels of the education system, e.g. on the level of legal and educational policy requirements, in the design of schools or also on the level of teaching. This also applies to Switzerland, which has taken up the international demands, but has not implemented inclusive education with the utmost consistency. It is evident that despite prioritizing inclusive solutions, Switzerland still adheres to the separation of mainstream and special schools (Powell 2018). Beyond these fundamental problematics in the educational system, however, fundamental problems also emerge in the implementation of inclusive teaching and thus in the creation of learning spaces that welcome all forms of diversity and enable all students to learn together – inclusive publics schools remain a desiderata in Switzerland (Moser Opitz, 2014).

In the context of this broad problem area, this contribution focuses on first results of my field work as a PhD-student. The presented data was collected in a research project, entitled "Primary schools in the tension between inclusion and educational standards" (Wagner-Willi & Zahnd 2019), which aims to further develop inclusive teaching in Switzerland. The project is founded by the Swiss National Science Foundation and uses – besides other methodical approaches – a participatory research framework. Following the insight that the students perspective is crucial to the development of inclusive education (e.g. Buchner 2018, Florian & Beaton 2018), my dissertation is focusing on the student-perspectives collected in this project. In this context, the question is addressed to what extent the perspectives of the students can be used to identify good practice for (inclusive) teaching. This good practice should on the one hand allow all students to participate in the learning process and on the other hand enable the social inclusion of all students.

Inclusion of students with disabilities in general education settings has gained momentum worldwide since the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994). In the US, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004) was reauthorized and, most recently, amended through the ‘Every Student Succeeds Act’ (ESSA, 2015). Due to these policy changes the number of students with disabilities, defined as those with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs), in general education settings has constantly been increasing. As more and more students with IEPs are being included in general education classrooms, it is important to examine their social participation opportunities and identify if they are at risk of social isolation or exclusion within their classrooms.

The main purpose of the study is to compare the friendship networks of students with and without disabilities (defined as with IEPs). Particular attention is drawn to the question of whether students with IEPs maintain a lower social participation status than their peers. The focus of the social network survey was therefore on assessing students’ friendship networks and whether students with IEPs are nominated less often as friends (Friendship In-degree Centrality) and also, from their perspective, nominate fewer fellow students (Friendship Out-degree Centrality). In general, high in-degree centrality may show popularity (Frostad & Pijl, 2007) of a student whereas high out-degree may show increased social activity within a social network (Borgatti et al., 2018). In-degree is the sum of friendship nominations/ties received by each student and out-degree represents the sum of friendship nominations/ties sent out by each student. Furthermore, it was examined whether the two groups of students (with and without IEPs) differ systematically with regard to possible context variables (e.g. school performance, family background). Subsequently, to predict the friendship In- and Out-degrees of the students, regression models were calculated taking into account the hierarchical data structure.

Based on theory and the current state of research, the following hypotheses are examined:

1) Students with IEPs nominate on average less friends (out-degree) than their peers without IEPs.

2) Students with IEPs are less often nominated as friends (in-degree) compared to their peers without IEPs.

3) Hypotheses 1) and 2) still apply for regression analyses when controlling for confounding variables.

Social participation is a pressing issue in education since the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994) which called for full inclusion of students with disabilities in general education settings (Florian, 2008). Koster et al. (2009) defined social participation as the presence of positive social contact/interaction between students with disabilities and their classmates; acceptance of them by their classmates; social relationships/friendships between them and their classmates, and the students’ perception that they are accepted by their classmates. In the context of this study, the specific focus lies on one key theme related to social participation, which is the friendships of students with disabilities as compared to their peers.

In addressing social participation at the secondary school level, this study is driven by a social network perspective (Scott, 2017) and social capital theory (Putnam, 2001). The term social capital has been used to describe norms and certain resources that emerge from social networks (Ferlander, 2007). Scott (2017) argues that social networks are a particular form of social capital that individuals can employ to enhance their advantages or opportunities. A notion of social capital is that social relationships provide access to resources that can be exchanged, borrowed and leveraged to facilitate achieving goals (Moolenaar, et al., 2012). Therefore, classroom social networks built up through friendship ties or other relational ties may provide or impede access to social capital and social participation (Author et al., 2019).

Provide a clear description of the theme/s the panel discussion will address, referring research question, theoretical framework, methodological approach, and intended purpose of the discussion. Bear in mind that the European/international dimension is vital to the success of your submission.
Length: up to 600 words

National and international research has highlighted that outcomes for adults with disabilities are poor across a range of domains, including access to learning and employment (Kelly and Maître, 2021). Longitudinal data highlights that students with disabilities are less likely to be prepared to progress beyond school into further education, training and employment than their non-disabled peers, and are also less likely to actually progress to post-school options (Lipscomb et al., 2017). In the Irish context, SILC and Census data show that a much smaller percentage of people with disabilities have a third-level qualification compared to working age people without disabilities and this education gap between people with and without disabilities has remained over time (Kelly and Maître, 2021). Previous research has identified the lack of transition support from second level to further education and training or employment as a big issue (Scanlon et al., 2020). Research drawing on Growing Up in Ireland (GUI) data also shows how earlier educational experiences, including engagement, attendance, expectations and attainment, are important in shaping later educational transitions for disabled adults (Carroll et al., 2022).

While a number of studies describe the post-school educational options for students with special educational needs (Scanlon et al., 2020; McAdam et al., 2021), less is known about how many students progress to different settings when they leave school, their reasons for choosing particular paths and their experiences of these paths. Internationally, much of the published literature has focused on mainstream higher and further education (see for example McGuckin et al., 2013 in the Irish context), with less attention on vocational training and rehabilitative services (Duggan and Byrne, 2013).

This study addresses these gaps by capturing a more comprehensive range of pathways taken by young people and centring the student voice to understand how and why they chose these pathways and how they fare once they leave school. The study features two cohorts, one comprising students in their final year at mainstream and special schools and the other recruited from a range of post-school settings.

Across the settings, the key research question is how young people decided on their post-school pathway, or indeed whether it was decided for them. Using a self-determination theory approach, we explore the balance of autonomy, competence and relatedness in young people’s decision-making. The role of key factors like young people’s level of impairment/complexity of need, their school context and their socioeconomic background in this decision-making process is also considered.

Assesing attitudes of students toward their peers with disability can emerge as an important step for the accomplishement of social participation of all indepedently to their difficulties and the implementation of inclusion policy of students with disablities in the general school system (Bossaert et al., 2011).

According to previous research, general school students expressed posistive attitude toward their co-students with disability (Rosenbaum et al, 1986). Especially, students show high score in the affective and behavioural subscales of attitudes and lower score in cognitive domain (Tirosh, Shanin & Reiter, 1997; Vignes et al. 2009). Research (Rosenbaum et al., 1988) showed that girls adopt more positive attitude in all of the three subscales (coginitive, affective, behavioural) in comparison with boys. Furthermore, friendship with a friend with disability exerts a positive role on students' attitudes toward their classmates with disability (Tirosh, Shanin & Reiter, 1997). A person with disability who belongs to the close family environment has a positive effect on the formation of attitudes (Vignes, et al., 2009), a finding that contradicts with other study (Gonçalves & Lemos 2014). Communication in frequent periods with a person with disability leads to positive attitudes (Thomson & Lilly, 1995). Additionally, students who present a severe disbality are more acceptable compared to students with mild disability (Cook & Semel, 1999). Also, place of residence showed to be a discriminated factor of attitudes, where students who stay in urban areas express a higher level of positive attitudes unlike to chlidren who are staying in rural areas (Gash & Coffey, 1995). The same study showed that children in the beggining of adolescence express a higher level of social interest for students with disabilities in contrast with other research (Rosenbaum, Armstrong and King, 1988). Furthermore, a pupil with disabilities who attend a general school positively affects the formation of attitudes (Alnahdi, 2019).

Bullying is a widespread phenomenon, internationally defined as repeated violence against victims with difficulties in defending themselves (Olweus, 1993). Bullying is increasingly seen as the result of a group phenomenon, in which several students are involved (Salmivalli, 2010; Saarento & Salmivalli, 2015). This phenomenon operates according to a discriminatory and exclusionary logic, which hinders the possibility of the emergence of respect for diversity among students.

Respect for diversity is more difficult to work on during the period of adolescence, because of the need for students to be socially accepted and recognized by other peers as one of their own (Ragelienė, 2016; Hernandez & al., 2014). Therefore, bullying rates tend to increase during this period (Salmivalli, 2010), especially its verbal form (insults, mockery, etc., Moody & al., 2020). This need for social acceptance and recognition can be explained by the loss of bearings that students may feel, due to their identity development and the changes of school, teachers, and friends they must deal with during their transition from primary to secondary school. This loss of bearings among students accentuates their tendency of conform to each other to increase their chances of being socially accepted and recognized. Conforming means that students observe each other and gradually adapt their ways of thinking, doing and being to those of their peers (Harkins & al., 2017).

Bullying then becomes a means of compensating for the loss of bearings, by bringing students together around a common goal and making them conform. This gathering reinforces the social cohesion between some students, i.e., the strength that emerges from their interactions and keeps them together as a group (Schachter, 1951), making a social function of bullying emerge (Salmivalli, 2010). Bullying then becomes a driving force for social learning among students, highlighting that they learn through discriminatory logic which is opposed to the aims of an inclusive school.

In conjunction with the increase in primarily verbal bullying in adolescents (Moody & al., 2020), it is interesting to note the emergence of a language specific to adolescents, described as « youth talk » (Singy, 2014). This language is characterized notably by the frequent use of insults, particularly those that operate on the principle of social categorization (racist, homophobic insults, etc.). This specificity raises questions about the limits between normality and violence between students, but also invites further study of the function of bullying, particularly in its verbal form. As Delalande (2003) notes, students lose a lot of energy in subjecting each other to the social norms in place, i.e. to what can or cannot be done at each age (Verhoeven, 2012; Prairat, 2012). Bullying can therefore have an educational function, allowing students to show each other and even learn what is expected of them. This contribution aims to analyse and describe this educational function, with a particular focus on verbal bullying, and the challenges it poses to an inclusive school.

All networks hold a meeting during ECER. All interested are welcome.

All European countries have signed the UNCRPD and, as a result, they are challenged to “develop an inclusive education system at all levels” (Art. 24). Inclusive education reforms and change processes have to be understood as complex phenomena that pertain different levels of historically grown education systems worldwide. Confronted with the same global demands, actors of education systems in European states and regions follow different strategies for this transformation process. The Erasmus+ Project Governance In(clusive) Education aims to foster the dialogue between European countries on educational reforms towards inclusion, change-management strategies, the structure and constellations of actors in the governance systems and their role for an inclusive education reform. Furthermore, it seeks to increase the quality and coherence of governance in inclusive education reforms in European countries. As the Global Education Monitoring Report 2020 shows, delivering inclusive education requires multiple actors to work together. Indeed “Weak collaboration, cooperation and coordination of stakeholders can impede implementation of ambitious laws and policies” (UNESCO, 2020, 90). While many countries have developed legislative frameworks to establish more inclusive education systems, “neither laws nor policies are sufficient, as the implementation record remains weak” (UNESCO, 2020, 57). This leads to the question of which other aspects actors perceive as relevant for the successful implementation of attempts to steer inclusive education reforms. The educational governance perspective as an analytical approach understands steering processes not as linear top-down or bottom-up procedures. Instead, it perceives them as a multidimensional product of actors’ coordination. It allows a comprehensive description and analysis of steering processes and related issues in education systems. Educational Governance therefore “aims to understand these changes by concentrating on the question of how regulation and performance of school systems is achieved, sustained and transformed under the perspective of coordination of action between various social actors in complex multi-level systems” (Altrichter, 2015, 10). As “Achieving inclusion requires a whole-system approach” (UNESCO, 2020, 57), to ensure true innovation and sustainability, all players, agents and stakeholders need to be actively committed and involved, moreover updated on the entirety of ongoing change-processes. The agents and stakeholders in inclusive education reforms are institutions and individuals in education policy and practice - with and without special needs all together - such as school administration, school leaders, teachers, parents, students, as well as tertiary institutions, like training institutions, colleges and universities. The universities are responsible for the qualification and professionalization of many professionals within the future inclusive education system. From a governance perspective, rights and aims, obstacles and challenges, guidance and different control functions of every subsystem and institution involved need to be considered in change processes. The substantial differences between the 4 participating countries (Austria, Germany, Italy, Spain) in terms of the development-stage of inclusive education, the actor constellations in governance and the strategies for the reform-processes are essential. Yet, these differences represent a significant resource due to the possibility of comparing, discussing, exchanging and reflecting upon examples and experiences in the field of inclusive education governance. The research goals are to explore how and why coordination or implementation does or does not work in all levels of the governance system (multi-level-analyses of governance) and to gain knowledge and expertise that can be shared through professionalization of stakeholders on governance of inclusive education. The consortium consists of higher education institutions, representatives from regional school-authorities, communities of practice established in all of the 4 participating countries, comprising all systemically relevant actors e.g. parents, teachers, diversity managers, school supervisors, ministry representatives etc. All are invited to contribute originally and to validate the project outcomes consensually within the countries first and foremost targeting the international comparison.

This Ground Work Case in Albania aims to reveal how adults talking with children can build relationships and support children’s appropriate development through the four phases of Bowlby’s attachment theory (1980).

Phase 1 0–3 months - babies seek proximity from caregiver.

Phase 2 3–6 months - babies demonstrate preference for a caregiver over another

Phase 3 6 months–3 years - babies without trauma are likely to develop fully functional attachments of trust with others, if trauma is experienced beyond their control and beyond the control of the caregiver the child will require healing by taking them back to the time of the trauma through reflection and carefully and slowly exploring the damage and re-layering healthy relationships of trust.

Phase 4 3 years-childhood ends - dependency on the primary caregiver is exchanged for self-determining/managing in making good decisions with good faculty of judgement about personal regulation moving from fear to problem solving in solidarity with others.

If trauma is experienced, which is not the fault of the child or the preferred caregiver, the child can become stuck and unable to develop the mental models required to reach phase 4. This has implications for adults who may have experienced trauma, through no fault of their own, who have not passed through the 4 phases of attachment theory. These adults are expected to support children through the phases of attachment theory, with no working personal mental model or social theories, frameworks or guidelines of what that looks like. A survey of 863 kindergarten-staff with a response rate of 78% revealed i) the curriculum of kindergarten-staff’s qualification did not include Bowlby’s attachment theory in four phases, ii) kindergarten-staff were unaware of attachment theory or how to apply it in practice. Findings reveal the Covid 19 pandemic has caused trauma and there is a history of trauma in Albania caused by war after moving to a market economy and this conflict causing trauma continues between Albania and Kosovo coupled to loss/damage caused by climate change.

Our new contribution to knowledge is A Blueprint for Character Development for Evolution (ABCDE) (Taysum et al, 2020) is recommended to be implemented in further funded research. ABCDE is an incremental model to enable adults and children to evaluate progress through the phases of attachment theory and move from ‘fear’ of the self, the other and the environment to ‘good faculty of judgement required for self-determining homeostasis’ and building security attachment capital. ABCDE builds ‘security attachment capital’ by developing kindergarten-staff culturally responsive self-review of their knowledge of attachment theory and how to apply it through talk. This needs to be coupled to an informed responsible historical and cultural consciousness of the impacts of trauma and the impacts of trauma on the children’s previous generations (ancestors). There are circa 120,000 Roma in Albania and Kostka (2022, p.2) identifies across Europe ‘many Roma families have little or no access to social support and high numbers of children are removed from their parents due to poverty rather than as a last recourse where up to 60% of Roma children are represented in care homes from populations of 10%’. This prevents Albanian diverse communities working together to become self managing of food, energy, fair labour markets and value chains where diverse groups with an identity of ‘Albanian’ and ‘European’ can combat all discrimination including anti-Gypsyism, experienced over generations, and support real and effective equality (European Commission, 2023). Thus security attachment capital needs to be built, starting in Kindergartens and continuing through to lifelong learning as a foundation to implementingThe Council of Europe Strategic Action Plan for Roma and Traveller Inclusion (2020-2025) in Albania.

The special education system in Finnish basic education is currently referred to as Learning and schooling support (Basic Education Act 628/1998 Amendment 642/2010). Since 2011, the three levels of support have been general (Tier 1), intensified (Tier 2) and special (Tier 3) support. The support methods and tools are almost the same at all tier levels; however, the intensity of the provided support increases from one level to the next (Thuneberg et al., 2013). The Finnish 'Education for All' reform was completed in the late 1990s when the responsibility for the education of children with the most severe intellectual disabilities and children in reformatory school was moved from social services to the education system. From a legislative perspective, all comprehensive school pupils are in the same education system. The idea of a ‘least restrictive environment’ has been one of the guiding principles of basic education since 1970; nevertheless, totally inclusive schools are rare in Finland (Jahnukainen, 2015). The Finnish support system is somewhat comprehensive; alongside other support, pupils are entitled to remedial teaching and part-time special education at all tier levels.

Governance of Finnish basic education is decentralised. However, legislation and one national-level core curriculum describe the overall objectives and guidelines of basic education (BEA 628/1998; FNBE, 2016). In line with the core curriculum, municipalities (N = 309) have their own municipal-level curriculums to meet their own local needs and circumstances. Finnish municipalities are very diverse; e.g., the number of inhabitants, the population with immigrant background, age composition and geographic features vary considerably. Regarding school-aged children, the number of pupils in basic education range from under 50 to over 50 000 per municipality. Moreover, the Finnish population is concentrated in Southern Finland.

The fundamental idea of the Finnish education system is that everyone has the right to basic education. According to the BEA (628/1998), pupils are entitled to sufficient support for learning and schooling whenever the need arises. The UN Convention article 3.1. on the Rights of the Child obligates the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children. Finland ratified the Convention in a law in 1991 (60/1991). In 2022 a new section was added to the BEA (163/2022), thus strengthening national regulation of the best interests of the child in education. One of the aims of basic education is also (BEA 628/1998) “to secure adequate equity in education throughout the country”.

Based on official statistics the provision of learning and schooling support varies between the municipalities. For example, at the national level 8.5 percent of pupils in basic education received Tier 3 support in the year 2019 and the municipal level variation was 0 to 16.4 percent (OSF, 2020). In addition, the place of provision of support also varied. For example, the national average of pupils receiving Tier 3 support fully in special classes was 2.3 percent of pupils in basic education and at the municipal level, the range was 0-10 percent (OSF, 2020).

There is an ongoing public debate on the need for legislation to define the learning and schooling support more precisely, in particular the support provided at Tier 2 and Tier 3. One of the objectives is to reduce the variation of the support between municipalities.

In this study, we are aiming to use different types of municipal level data to examine how the principles of learning support and practices used in municipalities reflect the diversity of municipalities in Finland. We also intend to find out if it is possible to describe the criteria for different support levels more precisely based on the results.

This paper reports on a study that examines the knowledge, attitudes and skills of art education teachers and students studying fine arts in relation to disability issues and the extent to which they employ disability art in teaching. The study was conducted in the Republic of Cyprus (hereafter Cyprus) and falls within the theoretical framework of Inclusive Education, and draws ideas from Disability Studies, Disability Studies in Visual Art, and the Disability Arts Movement.

Scholars in Inclusive Education have long argued that for inclusive education to be achieved, it needs to be understood as the provision of quality education, participation and collaboration between students, teachers and the staff involved (Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011). Although inclusive education respects all children’s right in education, this paper focuses on the idea that disability art can be a means to promote the inclusion of children with disabilities, since it can contribute to the removal of attitudinal barriers and stereotypes about disability. For this to be achieved, the national curriculum needs to consider disability art and require that it is part of teaching throughout compulsory schooling. However, according to the literature, national curricula across countries rarely include the work of people with disability in the curriculum (Erevelles, 2005; Symeonidou, 2018). Thus, art education teachers may not be aware of such work. They may also be ignorant of the literature developed in Disability Studies, pointing out that people with disabilities are traditionally seen as having a problem (medical model of disability), but in reality, it’s the society that marginalizes and excludes them with the attitudinal and other barriers it poses to their participation (social model of disability) (Barnes, Oliver & Barton, 2014; Goodley, 2017, 2019).

Cypriot society often operates based on stereotypes in disability issues and ignores the personal identities and experiences of people with disabilities, which are also expressed through arts. Disability Studies and Art are now two scientific disciplines that can be combined and develop positive approaches of disability in the Greek-Cypriot society that still poses stereotypical barriers. Disability Studies, as well as Disability Studies and Art Education, promote social and cultural attitudes of positive disability identity, and question the existing disability stereotypes.

Art Education has longstanding ties to disability research and pedagogy, and recent advancements in Art Education as well as Disability Studies closely align the two fields (Roultstone, Thomas & Watson, 2012). Disability Studies and Art Education, focus on understanding disability in different domains such as society, politics, culture, history and especially personal experience (Connor, Gabel, Gallagher & Morton, 2008). They emphasize the priorities and views of people with disabilities and promote social justice and equality. In addition, Disability Studies and Art Education reject the medical model of disability by understanding disability as a social construction and focus on inclusion in every aspect and especially in education (Connor, Gabel, Gallagher & Morton, 2008). However, Art Education provides a safe environment in which students with and without disabilities can discuss and think about social issues and think of how they can promote inclusive culture and positive identity (Vasey, 1992).

Within this theoretical framework, the issue of including the history and work of people with disabilities in the curriculum becomes central (Erevelles, 2005; Symeonidou, 2018). Research in different countries, including Cyprus, indicates that the national curriculum ignores people with disabilities (Symeonidou and Mavrou, 2020), and the subject of Art Education is no exception. Within this context, the research question of the study was: To what extent can art education teachers and students studying fine arts can understand disability as a complex state of being and as a social construct through disability art?

It is widely recognized that multiple factors are involved in the production of student disadvantage, and that the difficulties which many children face at school are complex, multilayered and intersectional (Thomas & Loxley, 2022). Nonetheless, the current development with more children deemed eligible for special education and psychiatric services also raise questions about the way students with special needs are understood and described. In this presentation, I will focus on educational psychologists (EPs), who play an important role in assessing student eligibility for special education. Currently, EPs spend a considerable amount of time writing psychoeducational reports or what is also often referred to as statutory educational psychology reports (Buck, 2015).
In most countries, EPs have tried to shift from an individualized focus on children with problems to a focus on how systemic and relational understandings of children are expected to improve educational psychological services for children, professionals, and parents (Szulevicz & Tanggaard, 2017; Moen et al., 2018; Kolnes et al., 2021). The main reason behind this shift is that EPs are supposed to help facilitate inclusive learning environments as special education needs expenditures represent an ever-increasing part of school budgeting. It currently seems, however, that the need for educational psychological services has grown substantially over the last years. The consequence of the enhanced need for educational psychological services is that EPs end up spending more time making individual student assessments and writing psychoeducational reports in place of engaging in preventative work and pedagogical counselling (Burns et al., 2020)
Interestingly, the time spent, and the efforts made by EPs in writing the psychoeducational reports do not seem to measure up with the expectations of teachers and parents. Teachers often report low satisfaction with psychoeducational reports, as they are difficult to translate into everyday practice for teachers, and because the readability of the reports often is relatively bad (Burns et al., 2020).
Different studies have investigated teachers’ understandings, preferences and comprehension of psychoeducational reports (Umaña et al., 2019), and although Brenner (2003) and Dobrowski (2020) argue that the recommendation section in a psychoeducational report is the most important section of the whole report, as it offers parents, teachers and others advice and a way forward in relation to the child/student, surprisingly little research has been devoted to the specific recommendations made by EPs in psychoeducational reports (Burns et al., 2020).
This presentation is based on an empirical study in which 111 psychoeducational reports from two different Danish authorities were analyzed. The following questions guided the study: (a) what kinds of recommendations are made in the reports? and (b) what do the recommendations in the psychoeducational reports tell us about EPs’ work, assessment methods and understandings of children. The results are used to discuss what the recommendations in the psychoeducational reports tell us about (a) the status of educational psychology practice and (b) the schools and learning environments that children are part of.
Across the 111 reports and regardless of the length of the recommendation sections, a consistent pattern was identified: the need for clear structure in the learning environment was part of the recommendation section in 107 (98, 2%) of the 109 reports with a recommendation section. Whilst there were slight variations in the specific formulations of the recommendation across the reports, the need for providing structure on a consistent basis was, in other words, a standard recommendation in the reports.
In the presentation, I will analyze what this standardized and maybe even stereotypical recommendation can tell us about 1) EP’s counselling routines, 2) the understanding of children with special needs and 3) the school system.

Societal experiences of the contemporary world population consist of knowledge that evolved from indigenous knowledge that people conserved and transmitted over the decades. This knowledge shapes the way things are done, communication is achieved and relations are built (Bruchac, 2014). The skills, beliefs, values and knowledge of previous generations have been crucial worldwide to managing and sustaining the natural environment as well (Aluko, 2018). However, as Nakata (2002) discusses, colonial circumstances and chaos had a disruptive effect on the development, improvement and transfer of indigenous knowledge especially in developing countries, which kept indigenous knowledge away from formal education and formal curriculum and pushed it to informal education. The emphasis put on the necessity of following a westernized formal education policy did perpetuate the neglect of indigenous knowledge as well (Ogunniyi, 2015). As the focus has been on learning foreign languages, mastering natural sciences and building infrastructure, education systems have questioned the relevance and benefit of indigenous knowledge for education. The practice of indigenous knowledge as a part of informal education, on the other hand, achieves a sense of community, a common language, immediate learning resources and a knowledge transfer system between elderly and younger members of the community. With the increasing focus on sustainable knowledge systems and environments, the importance of indigenous knowledge for formal education systems has resurfaced.

Addressing indigenous knowledge and its integration into formal education and contemporary knowledge is asked for by many (Court & Wijeysuriya, 2015; Wuriga et al., 2020). In addition, access to systems of transfer and practices of indigenous knowledge should available for all memebers of society. As stated in the Sustainable Development Goals, sustainable development of education requires a strategy that adheres to the principles of inclusive education. To ensure inclusive and equitable education (SDG4) and to promote sustainable economic growth (SDG8), the integration of indigenous knowledge into the formal education systems should be achieved following an inclusive strategy.

In this research collaboration, practices of indigenous knowledge transfer with respect to bark cloth production in Uganda and inclusive vocational training in Austria are analysed. The focus of this paper lies on the participation in and exclusion from accessing indigenous knowledge.

This presentation gives some insight into ongoing work on the teaching practice regarding interaction and communication for students with intellectual disabilities in Swedish compulsory schools. The study is a partial result of the Interteach project, which is a national Swedish study carried out at the University of Borås, where we ask teachers about the teaching practice (regarding communication and interaction) encountered by pupils with intellectual disabilities. In a study by Frostlund & Nordgren (2022) it is established that there exists a teaching gap among Swedish compulsory schools for children with intellectual disabilities, i.e the evidence-based programs that are used, AAC, PECS, EIBI and TEACCH (Thunberg, 2007, Bondy & Frost, 2011, Klintwall & Eikeseth, 2014, Fletcher-Campbell, 2003, Mesibov, Shea & Schopler, 2004) differ within the country in regard to the teachers’ CPD and previous education. In addition, the established evidence-based teaching strategies do not always promote interaction and learning for pupils. Partial results of a current quantitative census survey will be presented together with some analyses of the presence of interaction in the teaching practice for pupils with intellectual disabilities in Sweden as a whole. The theoretical starting point for this study is that interaction is necessary in teaching and foundational to pupils’ learning in development of intersubjective understanding (Trevarthen, 1979).

The compulsory school for students with intellectual disabilities, i.e., the special school in Sweden, as well as schools in other Nordic countries are organized according to The Salamanca statement and Framework for Action in Special Needs Education (UNESCO, 1994), which means education should be employed from an inclusive perspective. The Nordic countries as well as many European countries ratified the Salamanca statement in 1994. During recent decades there has been an increasing demand for scientifically validated teaching practices in school due to a general understanding of the school system as problematic and lacking equivalence (Biesta, 2007; Levinsson, 2013; OECD, 2007). There is a lack of studies that focus on specific aspects regarding evidence-based teaching programs regarding communication and interaction för pupils with intellectual disabilities. In the current study the purpose is to investigate the teachers’ experiences regarding in what way interaction is part of their daily teaching of students with intellectual disabilities.

Research questions for the present study were:

1. To what extent do teachers believe that it is important that students with autism and extensive communication difficulties have the opportunity to interact with their surroundings?
2. To what extent do teachers believe that it is important to use communication maps for students with autism who have no communication skills?
3. To what extent do teachers believe that it is important to use talking devices for students with autism without communication skills?
4. Do teachers claim that students at their school work mainly independently on their work station?
5. Do teachers claim that students at their school unit are given the opportunity for daily interaction with other students during teacher-led activities?
6. Do teachers claim that the students at their school unit are given the opportunity for individual interaction in teaching with their teachers every day?
7. Do teachers claim that the students at their school unit are given the opportunity to interaction with adults during the school day?
8. Do the students at the teachers’ school unit get the opportunity for targeted language training with for example a speech therapist one to several times a week?
9. What is the relationship between the attitudes (questions 1-3) and the extent to which the various evidence-based programs are used in Sweden as a whole?
10. What is the relationship between the attitudes (question 1-3) and the extent as to which the students get the possibility to interact?

The importance of diversity in higher education (HE) is increasingly recognized by European and local policymakers, as well as other stakeholders at state and institutional levels. The number of studies in this field is growing, with a search for "diversity in higher education" yielding over 675,000 results.

While there is limited comparative research on diversity in HE, there are numerous European regulations addressing the issue, such as the Paris Declaration of EU Member States from March 2015 and the European Commission's 2017 updated agenda for higher education (Claeys-Kulik et al., 2019). The Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations also emphasize the importance of social well-being in the concept of sustainability. However, despite these political commitments, few European countries have implemented system-level initiatives to improve socio-economic inclusion in HE (Crosier & Sigalas, 2022).

Research on diversity in HE has focused mainly on data collection and less on the experiences, beliefs, and competencies of HE teachers. Literature suggests that attitudes and perceived skills of HE teachers in diverse classrooms are often moderate, negative, or poor. For example, research by Abacioglu et al. found that teachers' perspective-taking abilities and intercultural attitudes are essential for effectively managing diversity in the classroom (Abacioglu et al., 2020; Agirdag et al., 2012; Ajzen, 2005; Emmers et al., 2019).

Similarly, research on students with disabilities in HE by Emmers et al. found that HE teachers have moderately positive views and self-efficacy in providing inclusive education. These findings suggest that policy improvements should focus on empowering HE teachers in diverse classrooms. To do so, an understanding of the current state of affairs and investment in teachers' abilities, knowledge, and attitudes is necessary.

The three proposed contributions each look at one aspect of this. Starting with neurodiversity in the workplace, uncovering the consequences of the digital divide and equal educational opportunities, and continuing with an overview of experiences in inclusive higher education.

This paper approaches the topic of diversity in higher education (HE) through neurodiversity in relation to the HE workforce. Perhaps understandably, the focus for those researching diversity in HE has been upon on students and pedagogies in the sector. However, people leaving a university programme to move into employment do not change overnight with implications for leadership and management of the higher education workforce (O’Dwyer & Thorpe, 2013; Wissell et al., 2022) with particular issues for teachers of vocational education who often occupy a liminal place (Thorpe & Burns, 2016). The term neurodiversity has been used to signal that different ways of thinking, learning, and behaving are better understood as examples of diversity rather than as deficits in contrast with some discourses of special needs, draw on medical models of disability (Baumer & Frueh, 2021). The paper contends that there is a need to pay attention to the experiences, beliefs, and competencies of teachers, lecturers and other employees in HE regarding i) their own diversity and differences including, where applicable, their own neurodivergence (Hoben & Hessen, 2021) and ii) their attitudes towards their neurodivergent colleagues (Wissell et al., 2022). An employee is not the same as a student and insights from one context and set of relationships should not be simplistically transferred to another. Whilst there may be challenges commonly faced by people that are neurodiverse, it is a misguided assumption that these emerge in the same ways in every context whether as a student or an employee. The presentation draws on several research projects, both those explicitly using the neurodiversity paradigm and those adopting specific learning difference/ difficulty perspectives, to argue that the insights offered by the paradigm are a more fruitful way to understand the issues and address differences and diversity in higher education. It also analyses the problematic turn to pedagogical discourses in workforce management and the promotion of pedagogical leadership in the workplace, especially where it is presented as (yet another) leadership style, which deskills employees and removes their agency. The wider implications of the neurodiversity paradigm for theory, practice and policy around inclusion in higher education are explored drawing on the neurodiversity paradigm claim that social dynamics across forms of human diversity are similar, though contexts are not similar. Some limitations and constraints of the paradigm in researching diversity in HE are also considered.

Baumer, N., & Frueh, J. (2021). What is neurodiversity? Harvard Health, November 23. Retrieved from https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/what-is-neurodiversity-202111232645. Hoben, J., & Hesson, J. (2021). Invisible Lives: Using Autoethnography to Explore the Experiences of Academics Living with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development, 33 (1), pp. 37-50. O’Dwyer, A., & Thorpe, A. (2013). Managers’ understandings of supporting teachers with specific learning disabilities: macro and micro understandings in the English Further education sector. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43 (1), 89-105. Thorpe, A., & Burns, E. (2016). Managers’ and teachers’ perspectives of dyslexic teachers in the English and Finnish Further Education workforce: new insights from organisational routines, Oxford Review of Education, 42 (2), pp. 200-213. Wissell, S., Karimi, L., Serry, T., Furlong, L., & Hudson, J. (2022). Leading Diverse Workforces: Perspectives from Managers and Employers about Dyslexic Employees in Australian Workplaces. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(19), 11991. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191911991

Digital marginalization is well-known. Morrisette (1996) called the differential IT access among US households and schools the "digital gap." Theorists and educators have expanded this phrase since then. "Digital poverty" became popular during the COVID-19 pandemic. Digital poverty is "the inability to fully interact with the online world, when, when, and how an individual needs to," according to the Digital Poverty Alliance (2021). 2020's pandemic shocked UK education. Human interaction with learning and teaching resources changed overnight and appears permanent two years later. The fast use of technology to advance education created the biggest revolution in education custom and practice in living memory (Times Education Commission 2022). Before the 2020 pandemic, most UK schools had online platforms where students and teachers could interact and share content (Reimers et al 2022). After the epidemic, certain lesser-known platforms became essential to educational institutions' core offerings (OECD 2021). Accessing new or updated equipment was expected to be difficult for users. UK projects provided IT infrastructure to as many students as possible. Many poor students acquired equipment via philanthropy or school loans (Government Education Statistics Service 2022). Global technology businesses gave the poor special rates and "pay-forward" agreements (Children and Young People Now, 2021). These activities addressed Morrisette's digital gap, but users' proficiency with these services was more important. By following an updated Maslow 1970 hierarchy, this course transforms participants from digital poor to online learning and teaching champions. This lesson highlights how teachers had to change their methods overnight. The student-academic digital gap showed a power shift. Many "have" students (those with IT and digital services) wanted to study faster and deeper than the teachers could. Students had control because they expected a swift and thorough transition and no course content compromise. Late adopters, "have not" students felt burdened by a system that was changing faster than they could adjust (Rogers 2003). Teacher experiences varied. Many employees felt like "have nots" as they were swept into a new work style without the knowledge, skills, or resources to adapt quickly. Lessons varied. "Hands-on experience learning, production or access to real resources and equipment" made practical subjects like Nursing and Fine Art harder. Business and law classes moved online more easily (Birmingham City University 2021). This event will study how the five "C's" of digital teaching and learning—Conversant, Capable, Competent, Comfortable, and Championing—impact digital poverty through a competency-based hierarchy of demands (Gee 2022).

BIRMINGHAM CITY UNIVERSITY (2021) COVID-19: An unequal Impact? Birmingham, UK. BCU CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE NOW, CYPN (2021) Disadvantaged pupils offered free data in bid to tackle digital divide DIGITAL POVERTY ALLIANCE (2021) How we define digital poverty GOVERNMENT EDUCATION STATISTICS SERVICE (2022) Laptops and tablets data, April 2022. MASLOW, A. H. (1970). Motivation and Personality (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row. MORRISETTE, L. (1996) in ROBYLER, M. D. (2003). Integrating educational technology into teaching. Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall. ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT, OECD (2022) REIMERS, F.M, AMAECHI, U, BANERJI, A, WANG, M (2022) Education to Build Back Better. Cham, Switzerland: Springer ROGERS, E. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed). New York: Free. TIMES EDUCATION COMMISSION (2022) Bringing out the Best: How to transform education and unleash the potential of every child. times-education-commission-final-report.pdf (documentcloud.org) accessible at < Internal server error | The Times & The

Higher education (HE) becomes more accessible for a student population with diverse identity characteristics due to the heightened attention in (inter)national legislation, research, and debates (Ainscow, 2020). The growing diversity in the student population begs the question on how to provide quality education for every student in HE: how to design inclusive higher education (IHE) (Rendon, 2006). This is shown in our general definition of IHE as providing high-quality education for every student: giving everyone the opportunity to thrive, realize their capabilities, engage, and contribute to the learning journey of others (Ainscow, 2015), aka full participation (Sturm et al., 2011). To create IHE, HE-teachers play a crucial role (O’Shea, 2016). However, according to Stentiford and Koutsouris (2020) and Shaeffer (2019) the variation in conceptualizations of inclusion that exist impacts HE-teachers unclarity about what inclusive learning environments and inclusive teaching practices are. Furthermore, HE-teachers are unaware about the necessary didactical skills to implement inclusion (Cotàn et al., 2021). To empower HE-teachers in having self-efficacy to teach inclusively, researchers and policy-makers need knowledge on HE-teachers understanding of, and needs for implementing, inclusion. A systematic literature review on HE-teachers’ understanding of inclusion as researched in academic studies between 2011 and 2021 underlines the lack of knowledge on HE-teachers’ understanding of, barriers for, and approaches to inclusivity (Korthals Altes et al., …). Additionally, it concluded that the HE-institution’s structure and policies heavily influences the space HE-teachers have to enact inclusive practices, which makes it important to conduct research in specific contexts. The importance of the (HE-institution) context, was reiterated in a study at one HE-institution in the Netherlands, here HE-teachers’ understanding of inclusion was analyzed through data from a survey, individual interviews, and focus group interviews (Goei et al., 2021). In this presentation we will present the results from these two studies, and a third study on HE-teachers’ and students’ understanding of and experiences with inclusion at four respective HE-institutions in the Netherlands and Flanders. In this last study, we conducted a document analyses on the D&I policies at the HE-institution and spread a survey on experiences with inclusive practices using CIT. CIT focusses on specific incidents (Flanagan, 1954), which lends itself to the subjective, and broad topic of inclusion. The collection of these three studies gives an overview of HE-teachers’ understanding of inclusion in general and of HE-teachers’ understanding of and experiences with inclusion in the specific context of the Netherlands and Flanders.

Ainscow, M. (2015). Towards Self-Improving School Systems: Lessons from a City Challenge. London: Routledge. Ainscow, M. (2020). Promoting inclusion and equity in education: lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587 Cotán, A., Aguirre, A., Morgado, B., & Melero, N. (2021). Methodological Strategies of Faculty Members: Moving toward Inclusive Pedagogy in Higher Education. Sustainability, 13(6), 3031. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063031 Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The Critical incident Technique. Psychological Bulleting, 51(5), 327-358. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0061470. Goei et al. 2021 O’Shea, S., Lysaght, P., Roberts, J., & Harwood, V. (2015). Shifting the blame in higher education – social inclusion and deficit discourses. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(2), 322–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1087388 Rendon 2006 Shaeffer, S. (2019). Inclusive education: a prerequisite for equity and social justice. Asia Pacific Education Review, 20(2), 181-192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-019-09598-w Stentiford, L., & Koutsouris, G. (2020). What are inclusive pedagogies in higher education? A systematic scoping review. Studies in Higher Education, 46(11), 2245–2261. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1716322 Sturm et al. 2011