Conference Agenda

Understanding how teachers perceive students with disability is essential to their inclusion and education, particularly with the rising debate between special and inclusive education (Florian, 2019). It was the recognition of the inequality and unfairness of systems that segregated students because of their differences that led to questions about the practice of special education (Vislie, 2003). Saudi Arabia is a signatory to international initiatives aimed at improving education for all and so in the drive towards Vision 2030 Saudi Arabia has embarked on a series of initiatives aimed at improving education. With the international drive towards inclusion, Saudi Arabia is now turning its attention to placing students with disabilities in mainstream schools. While this practice is to be welcomed, successfully including students with disabilities is not straightforward.

The Saudi context is one that is underpinned by Islamic values and Arabic tradition. Thus, this paper is part of my PhD thesis and will provide a snapshot from Muslim teachers involved in inclusive schools. Looking at this phenomenon from an Islamic perspective offered a unique opportunity to explore how these aspects intersect on the ground. This is an important omission, because as this study will argue, the Islamic cultural context found across the Middle East brings a unique and dynamic understanding of inclusive education. This is not to suggest that there is a homogenous approach to inclusion across the Middle East region; rather, each country in this geographical region implements inclusion in ways which consider local and national contexts, and this can result in different practices being adopted (Gaad, 2011). We know from the literature that the Middle East is not alone in this phenomenon, as differences in implementation exist globally (Carrington et al., 2015; Yada & Alnahdi, 2021). Studies of Islam and disability are quite limited, with a notable exception of Bhatty et al. (2009), who synthesise the historical, legal, sociological and theological literature relating to disability. Al-Aoufi, Al-Zyoud & Shahminan (2012) contend that within Islam, concern for the disadvantaged demonstrates a commitment to inclusion, and they cite acts undertaken by the Prophet to include those who were sick or disabled. Their paper also considers the right to education of those with disabilities, and argues that this right is clearly upheld in the Quran. Analysing text from the Quran, they conclude that:

- ‘Individuals have a right to be treated equally: everyone is equally important, whether disabled or not disabled.

- Individuals have a right to be educated regardless of disability.

- Individuals have a right to be included within society and to have an effective, valuable role within it.'

Al-Aoufi, Al-Zyoud & Shahminan (2012:211)

However, there has been little debate about the concept of inclusion in Saudi Arabia and the Middle East in general (Gaad, 2011). As countries implement inclusion based on international declarations, the additional lens of the Islamic faith within Middle Eastern countries is of importance not only to this study but to the field in general, and it brings an added dimension to the topic. Indeed, recently there has been a call to pay more attention to the Islamic perspective when fostering inclusive education, as the principles of inclusive education are seen to align with Islamic values (Ibrahim & Ismail, 2018; Abu‐Alghayth, Catania, Semon et al. 2022). This study is an attempt to tease out how Islamic principles influence teachers as they seek to understand and work with young people with disabilities when providing an appropriate education so that future work with staff can use these as a starting point for the implementation of inclusive education.

School inclusion pursues the normative goal of identifying and overcoming barriers that disadvantage, discriminate, and marginalize and replacing them with means that (can) enable full participation of all students (Ainscow, 2008). School systems in German-speaking contexts with their multi-tracked structure, their hierarchizing and selective functions are often problematized in this context and contrasted with more inclusive programming. This contrast has been reconstructed in various studies conducted in the German-speaking context in recent years (a.o. Rabenstein et al., 2013; Sturm & Wagner-Willi, 2015; Wagener, 2020). These studies identify achievement rankings as a central difference dimension of teachers' teaching practices in multi-tracked school systems: "These differences are ascribed to the students individually, in a hierarchical way (better/worse), accompanied by discrimination and a lack of learning opportunities, mostly for the 'weak(er)' students" (Sturm, 2019, p. 657 f.). At the same time, exploratory studies that comparing the construction of differences in schools in single-track systems and ones following multiple tracks suggest that teachers' practices and their construction processes differ according "to the formal school-based context in which they work" (ibid., p. 656; Sturm & Wagener, 2023, under review). For example, group discussions conducted with teachers in Norway, the USA and Germany showed that “German teachers only refer to the students’ achievement, which they understand as a result of the giftedness of the child, measured in IQ” whereas teachers in Norway and the United States explained lower “academic achievement of students in terms of the need to adapt their teaching approaches” (Sturm, 2019, p. 666). Since these results concern single cases and cannot be generalized to single-track and multi-track school systems overall, it is the central concern of the PhD researcher to systematically compare the constructions of achievement (or student differences) between school systems that differ in basic structure (integrative/selective) in order to find out whether and to what extent teachers’ practices differ. The project provides a comparison of teaching practices situated in a single-track school system, specifically that of Canada, and in a multi-track school system, specifically that of Germany. Canada – in Germany discussed as the “North Star” of inclusion (Hinz, 2006) – was the first country to enshrine rights for people with physical and mental impairments in 1985 as part of its Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (see CCD press release, 2012, online). In educational discourses, it is particularly characterized by its approach to societal heterogeneity and diversity. For example, Canada has enshrined multiculturalism nationally in law since 1988 (cf. Canadian Multiculturalism Act, 1985), which protects the rights of all marginalized population groups and aims to preserve and strengthen Canada's cultural diversity (Polat, 2019). The following research questions are formulated to address the multi-level comparison described here: How is achievement constructed and dealt with in the teaching practices of social studies classes in single versus multi-tracked school systems? Which forms of enabling and hindering academic and social participation of students in the classroom are reconstructable? In order to begin articulating an explanation for the similarities and differences in teaching practices, this study investigates the question of the significance and relevance of structural and legal frameworks in everyday school practice and curriculum. For this purpose, the second empirical part of the work will include curricuuma analyses as well as analyses of the respective school laws. In comparing teaching practices, data (principally audio/visual) have been collected at two secondary schools in British Columbia. Similarly data have been collected at a secondary school in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany, while data collection at two other types of schools is still pending.

As professionals engaged in learning environments continue to adopt inclusive approaches, it is important that we recognise how theories frame “inclusion” and our approaches to “inclusive practice”. In this paper we will share the learning from a doctoral research that identified “the power to include” when exploring i) Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in relation to (ii) Career Guidance, within (iii) the philosophy of inclusive education. This innovative research paradigm enabled a deeper and meaningful consideration as to what “Inclusion” means for career guidance practice; as once again we seek to identify the interlinked factors that might necessitate careful attention if guidance is to take its place in the broader inclusion agenda and adopt a more sustainable inclusive approach as defined by the UN SDG’s (United Nations Department of Global Communications, 2015).

Career guidance theory originated at a time when work was predominantly male and industrialised (Arthur & McMahon, 2018) – a time when the medical model of disability was prevalent. Frank Parsons, a lawyer, and social activist identified the significance of a more scientific approach for decision making around learning and career choices; he observed the many inter-linked factors that required careful attention and understanding when choosing career paths (Jones, 1994). However, little has been considered in terms of inclusion in educational guidance; while there has been considerable change in relation to learning, learning outcomes and the workplace for learners themselves (Mann, Denis, Schleicher, Ekhtiari, Forsyth, Liu, & Chambers, 2020).

The medical model of disability once separated learners with disabilities from their peers, seeking to “fix” the problem while the social model demanded that education change the focus from the person to the learning environment. Universal Design (UD), based on 7 principles is primarily focused on designing for inclusion; and while “inclusion” is framed by the experience of people with disabilities, the objective is to design for the widest diversity of people possible. Such a philosophy demands adaptability and flexibility and a consideration of all who want to engage (Storey et al, 1998). Universal Design for Learning (UDL) – UD applied in the learning environment also demands change; responding to the diversity of learners in our classrooms (Bowe, 2000; Rose & Meyers, 2006). Philosophies and practices based on UD and UDL approaches take a very contemporary and proactive approach, embracing notions of democracy, diversity, belonging and empathy.

The research design also adopted such values together with an unlikely combination of a bioecological (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), UD and UDL approaches, while continuously seeking to empower (Freire, 1996). The “inclusion as process” approach (Quirke, Mc Guckin, & McCarthy, 2022), a reflective research method that seeks to take both an ethical and inclusive approach to educational research enabled a reframing and re-understanding of the central issue - the definition and understanding of the term “inclusion”. This resulted in an understanding of “inclusion” in relation to guidance and an elevated view of “inclusion” itself. As inclusive practices continue to develop, we ask, is there a bigger challenge emerging – the role and “knowing” of each professional and expert?

It is important that the wider diversity of professionals engaged in contemporary education, each consider their approach to inclusion – particularly if there is to be a more sustainable approach for inclusion across education – an approach aligned with the UN SDG’s. In 2001, Herr credited career guidance as a contributor to the equality agenda at the time; can guidance, perhaps again, contribute to a renewed focus on inclusion for the ever-changing set of demands faced today as change takes hold across education.

If being a teacher and attending to the diversity and heterogeneity of students in the classroom, giving appropriate help to all students, is a complex task even more so in the case of multi-grade classrooms of rural schools (Abós et al., 2021). In these schools, teaching pupils of different chronological ages, interests and characteristics together in the same classroom represents a challenge for teachers to give an adequate attention to all of them, enhancing the inclusive and pedagogical value of the multi-grade classroom. A type of school that must be valued for the active methodologies applied and the inclusive work that is promoted and carried out. Nevertheless, in many aspects rural schools still remain invisible in favor of the urban graded school (Abós et al., 2020) despite the fact that it represents 30% of all schools worldwide (Little, 2006). Moreover, there is a lack of initial and continuous teacher training that takes into account the particularities of rural schools (Abós et al., 2021; García-Prieto, 2015), which hinders teaching in multigrade classrooms. There, to respond to the heterogeneity of all students, it is necessary that teachers implement active-participative, democratic and globalized strategies of specific multigrade didactics (Bustos, 2007) and to develop specific competencies for working in rural contexts. The methodology used must be supported by teaching materials that go along the same lines and also take multigrade into account in their creation or use by adapting the teaching response to the diversity of students in the multigrade classroom (Boix & Bustos, 2014). The scarcity of existence of specific didactic resources for multigrade teaching and learning, as well as the lack of knowledge about how these resources should be (Brown, 2010; Msimanga, 2019), is a problem reported in international research (Carrete-Marín & Domingo-Peñafiel, 2022; Coladarci, 2007; Fargas-Malet & Bagley, 2021). In addition, different studies highlight the inadequacy of existing resources (Juvane, 2005) and those used in schools, as well as teachers' difficulties in developing them, despite their importance for the success of work in the multigrade classroom (Boix & Bustos, 2014). In view of this, it is necessary to see how teachers face this challenge today and show what materials teachers are using in the classroom and how, what aspects they take into account to select or design them and what their needs are in this respect. In addition, it is relevant to analyze what teachers think and what they actually do, to see if it goes accordingly.

The first results of a research project in the Spanish context are thus presented, the central questions of which are as follows: What kind of teaching materials do teachers use in multigrade classrooms? What elements do they take into account to select them to promote inclusive work in the multigrade classroom? What are the rural school teachers’ beliefs and actions about the selection, use, creation and adaptation of materials to face the teaching-learning process in the multigrade classrooms?

Based on these questions, the goals of the study were: (1) to analyze the type of resources used by teachers and their use in relation to the planning and methodology used in the multigrade classroom by teachers; (2) detect criteria for the elaboration and selection of didactic materials in rural schools, so that they are pedagogically meaningful and take into account multigrading.

This research is also a response to the scarcity of research on the subject, despite the need for it as reflected in various studies. This study is therefore of particular importance because it is unique on the subject and provides relevant results to take into account.