Conference Agenda

Similar to other post-communist countries, the education system of the Czech Republic is moving away from the concept of segregation towards inclusive education (IE). In 2016 the Amendment to the Education Act came into force (Education Act No. 561/2004), which significantly transformed the organizational, financial and content aspects of IE provided in Czech primary schools. While the rights of pupils with special educational needs to IE in common primary schools were significantly strengthened, a number of substantial changes in education were implemented, with teachers taking on most of the burden.

The attitudes of teachers towards IE along with teacher beliefs regarding their own efficacy to implement inclusive practices in the education of diverse students greatly influence the success of IE (Jordan, 2018). In the international context, a number of studies have shown these two constructs as very closely related (Saloviita, 2020). The professional literature points to the importance of validity and reliability in identifying these constructs, for which validated tools have been designed and implemented (Li & Cheung, 2021). In the Czech research context, various questionnaires as well as self-constructed scales have been used without strict specifications with regard to their theoretical foundations and psychometric properties. It may be said that the results from these Czech instruments do not fully reflect the range of issues related to teacher attitudes and self-efficacy in relation to IE. In the international context, standardized validated instruments have been regularly used to measure teacher attitudes and self-efficacy in relation to IE: in the measurement of attitudes the instruments “Attitudes Towards Inclusion” (AIS) as well as “Intention to Teach in Inclusive Classroom” (ITICS) (Sharma & Jacobs, 2016) are typically used, with the tool “Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices” (TEIP) (Sharma et al., 2012) commonly used to determine self-efficacy.

From an epistemological point of view, these three instruments reflect IE in a more holistic way, with an emphasis on socio-cultural perspectives regarding diversity as opposed to, for example, the approach of scales (e.g. Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale) that reflect IE through an emphasis on a medical paradigm (Oliver, 1990). The items of the three instruments under study in the present analysis are formulated in the form of statements. From a psychometric point of view, the original English version of the 8-item AIS questionnaire aims to identify attitudes reflecting beliefs (BI) and feelings (FI) regarding IE. In contrast, the 7-item ITICS questionnaire is aimed at identifying the teacher’s intention to implement inclusive measures, i.e. the tool determines attitudes towards curriculum change strengthening IE (Cch) and the intention to cooperate with experts (Cons). The 18-item TEIP questionnaire focuses on the assessment of the teacher’s own efficacy in relation to the implementation of procedures associated with IE, specifically in the area of: cooperation with experts (EC), management of disruptive student behavior (EMB), and implementation of IE (EII).

The three instruments, especially the TEIP, have been translated into several languages. The psychometric properties of the questionnaires have also been analyzed in a number of validation studies across individual countries and regions. Most of these studies have provided empirical evidence of the validity and reliability of questionnaires, demonstrating that the instruments work well in different socio-cultural contexts. The psychometric properties of the Czech version of the AIS, ITICS and TEIP, however, remain unknown.

In order to dependably and precisely apply in the Czech environment the above-mentioned scales in the identification of the attitudes and self-efficacy of primary school teachers in relation to IE, the aim of this study is to present information on (1) construct validity (factor structure), (2) reliability, and (3) measurement invariance of the Czech versions of the instruments.

In order to guarantee the human right to education in the sense of non-discriminatory and equal participation of all people in an inclusive education system, the assessment of effective individualised support measures is necessary (Art. 24 UNCRPD). Although European states have committed to developing an inclusive school system, they often maintain a well-established special education system based on labelling individual students as having special educational needs (SEN). In these situations, a tension can be observed between the provision of individual support and the potentially stigmatising and discriminatory effects of labelling students as having SEN. For example, the identification of SEN is still associated with a higher risk of exclusion from regular education (European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2020). Studies also point to classist, racist and ableist influences as a factor on the categorisation of SEN (e.g. Zhang & Katsiyannis, 2020, Berhanu 2008, Dyson 2008, Werning et al. 2008). Similarly, educational statistics surveys suggest that the identification of SEN is characterised by high contingency (Desforges & Lindsay, 2010; Klemm, 2018). For example, comparing school laws and regulations in the 16 German states, we counted at least 24 different assessment procedures (Gasterstädt, Kistner & Adl-Amini, 2020). Accordingly, identification and segregation rates, as well as rules governing SEN assessment procedures, vary widely at the state level. Although the SEN assessment procedure can be seen as a central fulcrum for the tension between the provision of individual support und potential discrimination, research in this area is scarce.
The poster will present the research project "InDiVers", which addresses SEN assessment procedures in Germany. The qualitative multilevel research design is based on Grounded Theory (Strauss & Corbin 1990) and Situational Analysis (Clarke, Friese & Washburn, 2018) (see methods section).

The project is informed by the assumption, that in order to change policy and practice towards inclusion and diversity, it is first necessary to understand the mechanisms of exclusion and the labelling processes that underpin them. Therefore, analysing the case of the assessment procedures in the German school system might also lead to a better understanding of exclusionary practices in school systems in other countries with established segregated special education systems. Thus, from a power-critical and anti-discriminatory perspective on diversity, our aim is to question the categorisation of SEN and the exclusions that go along with it, in order to be able to give impulses to address and include diversity in all aspects in the German school system in the next step.

The central questions of InDiVers are how the decision about, and legitimation of inclusion/exclusion are negotiated between different actors and how the underlying order of difference is (re)produced. The project also asks how the need for support for individual students is determined, which diagnostic procedures are used and how pedagogical “others” are constructed in these processes. While these questions are mainly addressed with a focus on individual cases, we also take into account the broader situation of assessment procedures at the level of the local education landscape in which these procedures are embedded. From this angle, we ask how regionally differentiated constellations of actors, e.g. professionals or guardians, cooperate and which positions appear to be particularly powerful. Drawing on the theoretical perspectives of institutional discrimination (Gomolla & Radtke, 2009) and intersectionality (Riegel 2016), the project focuses on power and inequality relations in the structures of the institutions and organisations involved and the professionals working within them.

The poster will present our research design, give an insight into the initial findings, and take a closer look at our strategies for transferring our findings into practice.

Inclusion can be defined as “a process of systemic reform embodying changes and modifications in content, teaching methods, approaches, structures and strategies in education to overcome barriers with a vision serving to provide all students of the relevant age range with an equitable and participatory learning experience and environment that best corresponds to their requirements and preferences” [General Comment 4 adopted by CRPD-UN, 2016§6] (Graham, 2020:24). Inclusive education requires new thinking and practices, changes in the policies, perceptions, values, and principles in terms of schooling, curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment (Vlachou, 2004). Thus, it is inextricably linked to inclusive leadership which presupposes acceptance, respect, listening, clarifying language, being comfortable with diversity and ambiguity (Armstrong et al., 2011; MacRuairc et al., 2013).

Inclusive educational leadership leads to positive outcomes for the achievement of all students in inclusive schools (Donnelly et al., 2016; MacRuairc et al., 2013), “based upon alternative views of the world and the nature and form of schooling that will build that world” (Slee, 2011:25). In fact, committed school-principals introduce and embed through their values, the culture, policies, and practices that promote inclusive education at all levels (Graham, 2020; Lazaridou, 2019; Pregot, 2020). So, their values establish and influence school culture (Carrington, 1999), teachers’ attitudes and beliefs (Hess & Zamir, 2016), and therefore, play an important role in implementing and promoting inclusive education (Irvine et al., 2010). However, there has been little focus on the role of their values in promoting positive attitudes towards the education of disabled students and/or with s.e.n., and inclusive education in general (Hess & Zamir, 2016; Lazaridou, 2019; Pregot, 2020).

Attitudes constitute the readiness for action containing cognitive-emotional-behavioral elements (Bailey, 2004). School-principals’ attitudes shape teachers’ attitudes on various issues, as school-principals are the most basic link between the community and the school. In particular, the promotion of school-principals’ positive attitudes regarding the education of disabled students and/or with s.e.n., towards the whole educational community is essential for the effective education for all students (Bailey, 2004; Hess & Zamir, 2016; Lazaridou, 2019).

Values are conceptions of the desirable which influence one’s selection from available modes, means and ends of action (Begley, 2003). School principals’ values influence their attitudes (Bailey, 2004; Lazaridou, 2012) and by extension their educational practices (Irvine et al., 2010; Pregot, 2020) which shape the culture of the school unit (Carrington, 1999). Therefore, changing educational practices does not only require the acquisition of new skills or knowledge, but also the right values and positive attitudes towards inclusive education (Wakeman et al., 2006).

Both Greek and international research highlights school-principals’ attitudes towards the education of disabled students and/or with s.e.n., as a decisive factor in promoting their education (Bailey, 2004; Hess & Zamir, 2016). However, there is limited research regarding school-principals’ attitudes towards the education of disabled students and/or with s.e.n.. in Greece (Platsidou & Tsiolpidou, 2019). To the best of our knowledge, there is no prior research on the intercorrelations between school-principals’ values and attitudes regarding the inclusion of disabled students and/or with s.e.n. in primary and secondary education.

Considering the above, this paper focuses on the intercorrelations between the values of school-principals and their attitudes towards the education of disabled students and/or with s.e.n. in Greek regular schools. Specifically, it aims to examine the following questions:

1. Do school-principals’ values and attitudes regarding inclusive education show statistically significant differences depending on the demographic and professional information?
2. Can school-principals be classified into groups (clusters) according to their values?
3. Do school-principals’ attitudes regarding inclusive education show statistically significant differences depending on their value profiles?
4. To what extent school-principals’ values predict their attitudes?

Informed by the bioecological model (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006), early childhood education and care (ECEC) institutions are an important space for the development of children where they learn, play and acquire knowledge together with other children. This applies to children from diverse backgrounds and with diverse abilities and needs, including children with disabilities. With the ratification of the United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), many countries committed themselves to the implementation of an inclusive education system. One goal of inclusion is the equal participation of children with disabilities and it is assumed that inclusion in ECEC provides opportunities and benefits for children with and without disabilities (Odom et al., 2011). However, previous studies have shown that in schools as well as in ECEC institutions children with disabilities participate less in different activities and in interactions when compared to their peers without disabilities (Eriksson et al., 2007; Kuutti et al., 2021). What makes it difficult to compare these results is that the definitions of the term participation vary across studies, despite attempts to standardise it (Imms et al., 2015; Koster et al., 2009). The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) defines participation as “involvement in a life situation” (WHO, 2001, S. 10). In addition to that, Imms et al. (2015; 2017) developed the framework “family of participation-related constructs” (fPRC) and describe participation as a construct with two components: attendance and involvement. First studies have applied this framework (e.g. Åström & Almqvist, 2022), but there is still no clear answer to the question how participation can be operationalised in the context of ECEC. Moreover, methodological challenges remain when assessing participation and different understandings have led to various measures (Adair et al., 2018; Coster & Khetani, 2008).

The goal of the present work is to analyse how the participation of children with disabilities is defined and operationalised in the context of inclusive ECEC.

Reading difficulties have a relatively high prevalence among children (e.g., 6.49%, Moll et al., 2014). Due to their persistence, the difficulties are likely to remain throughout life, although in a milder form (Astrom et al., 2007; Psyridou et al., 2020). Given that reading ability is built upon different sub-skills, differentiated diagnostics (Ferrer et al., 2016) and adequate and evidence-based interventions (through long-term, individualized symptom-related training conducted over a more extended period; Ise et al., 2012) are required as early as possible. However, in addition to reading difficulties, comorbid social-emotional difficulties often occur (Hendren et al., 2018). It is for this reason of utmost importance to intervene early in life with a twofold intervention, addressing both reading and social-emotional difficulties (Boyes et al., 2020). In the intervention study within the Lubo-LRS project (University of Cologne, 2022), we aim to strengthen students with reading difficulties in this regard by addressing social-emotional challenges that may accompany their difficulties. Thus, reading training, provided to small groups of students with reading difficulties by project members, is combined with training in social-emotional skills provided to the whole class by the teachers.

As an extension of the intervention study, this poster presents a multiple baseline design of six second graders with reading difficulties. Thus, in addition to the pre-, post- and follow-up assessments, reading skills were measured twice a week using a curriculum-based measurement (CBM). The focus on these six children is particularly valuable because they face various individual circumstances (especially low reading skills, German as a second language, hearing impairment, social-emotional problems). Participants received a small-group reading intervention for seven months. In total, participants received 32 training sessions of respectively 50 minutes. The training was conducted twice a week during the first three months (10/2022 to 01/2023) and once per week in the following months (01/2023 to 05/2023).

The reading training was based on the evidence-based concept “Kieler Leseaufbau” (KLA; Dummer-Smoch & Hackethal, 2021) and associated materials. Since the children usually acquire letter knowledge during their first school year, our intervention focused on repeated reading of syllables, words, sentences, and brief texts. Various games and attractively designed materials were used. Each session was structured similarly: In the beginning, the content of the previous session and homework were repeated. Afterwards, new letters were introduced, writing exercises and reading games based on syllables or words were performed, and after ten sessions, short stories were read. Additionally, parents were encouraged to foster their children’s reading skills at home for five to ten minutes per day using the reading materials associated with the current session.

Both groups of three students received reading training from the same project member and social-emotional skills training with the whole class from their teacher (“Lubo aus dem All”; Hillenbrand et al., 2022). In addition, one of the two groups received a once-per-week small group training regarding social-emotional skills related to particular difficulties in reading (e.g., strengthening self-esteem and emotion regulation strategies).

The single case study illustrates the individual improvements in the students’ reading skills and enables more profound insights into promoting basic reading skills in children with reading difficulties. The following research question is addressed by exploratory analyses:

To what extent can improvement in reading skills be seen among individual students?

In addition, the following sub-questions will be answered:

-) How does reading development proceed individually during reading training?

-) What individual learning progresses in reading skills are evident, and how can differences be explained?

-) To what extent do differential effects of basic reading skills emerge in students who receive additional social-emotional training?

The aim of the paper is to present a part of the dissertation research focusing on the processes in inclusive education. Specifically, it answers through a case study design the research question: What teaching/learning process/activities do Finnish primary school teachers choose to ensure quality inclusive education? What steps in the teaching process lead to quality inclusive education?

The poster presents part of the initial results of a dissertation research on the nature of the primary school teacher in inclusive education. The presented part presents results focusing on teaching processes in Finnish schools, i.e. the notion of teaching/learning activities chosen by the teacher to ensure quality inclusive education. A case study design with observation and interview method with 10 Finnish primary school teachers was chosen for data collection. The results show the modesty of the Finnish teachers in their choice of teaching strategies, with independent work or group work with peer learning predominating, but with the help and cooperation of a number of teaching staff working in the classroom at the same time. Thus, the simplicity of the chosen forms and methods, with a high degree of differentiation and the involvement of a number of other teaching staff, seems to be essential to ensure quality inclusive education.

Inclusive education has been a high priority worldwide in recent decades and teachers need to be able to manage the increasing diversity of pupils and students in practice. Despite increased policy focus, there is often a lack of support for teachers in understanding and developing heterogeneous classrooms in more tangible and meaningful ways. Yet, the right instructional setting promotes opportunities for student learning and school success. It proves crucial to address the learning processes in heterogeneous classrooms, in what methods and teaching forms teachers use and whether they are supported in their work. Teachers often ask for a manual that shows them the exact steps to take in a heterogeneous classroom, but such a manual does not exist on a global scale. There is, however, research examining the relationship between selected teaching strategies and the quality of inclusive education (Forlin, 2010; Mitchell, 2013; Kratochvílová, 2015; Loreman, 2017). However, the aim of this paper is not to provide a search of this research or a detailed description of the educational processes leading to quality inclusive education. The aim is to present these processes in a Finnish primary school setting and to reflect on the development of a unified strategy.