Conference Agenda

The induction phase is crucial for teachers' professional growth. A key approach to help support new teachers to enter the profession is mentoring, which supports teachers to cope with the complexity of their work. Today, mentoring is seen not just as a transfer of knowledge but as a dynamic process of peer learning and dialogue. This open workshop aims to reframe how mentoring is used and explored in contemporary teacher professional learning and development. The workshop is based on the "Ecosystems of Teacher Induction and Mentoring in Europe (TIME)" project, launched in 2021 under the EERA Network 1 activities (Professional Learning and Development).

The workshop is a get-together for European educationalists interested in induction and mentoring, promoting networking and collaboration between researchers, and paving the way for future projects. This includes joint publications, symposia, meetings and the application for research funding for collaborative projects across Europe.

If professional learning and development for teachers is of particular interest to you, especially at the beginning of your career, you are warmly welcome to join us!

Research on teachers’ soft skills is an interesting and important field of research that has attracted the interest of experts in recent years (Vasanthakumari, 2019). An important soft skill that teachers should have been collaboration, which is one of the social skills. Collaboration refers to the action that is jointly planned (Vangrieken et al., 2015). A more recent definition of collaboration refers to the process of exchange in which individuals share information, material, or knowledge (Bush & Grotjohann, 2020). Through collaboration, teachers can observe and rethink everything that is done, change strategies, and aim to improve themselves, the students, and the school in general (Giakoumi & Theofilidis, 2012).

In the international arena, surveys focus on secondary school teachers and students (Onabamiro et al., 2014). In Greece, studies on social skills are limited. The present research investigates the skill of collaboration adopted by general and special education teachers, its contribution to the educational process, but also in the development of their own, as well as the ways of cultivating it. The research questions posed were:

- How do general and special education teachers conceptualize the soft skill of collaboration?

- In what ways does a general and special education teacher develop the skill of collaboration?

- How is the contribution of collaboration skills to the educational process assessed?

- How is the contribution of collaboration skills to the development and progression of general and special education teachers assessed?

The education of children with severe multiple disabilities represents a significant challenge in inclusive education across many countries (cf. Agran et al., 2020; Kleinert, 2020; Cologon, 2022). Despite the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, these children are often educated separately. The general school system frequently faces various obstacles, prompting Slee's question, "Who is in and who is out?" (Slee, 2013, 905).

While inclusive education is a central goal of Swedish school legislation, several pupils are outside the general education system. Currently, approximately 0.5 percent of all Swedish children attend compulsory school for pupils with severe intellectual disabilities. They follow a separate curriculum covering five areas: aesthetics, communication, physical coordination, everyday activities, and perception of reality. Many of these children rely on comprehensive aids, particularly in communication and mobility. Nursing assistance and care are essential in this context, often with a perceived tension in their relationship to curricular content. Overcoming the dichotomy between care and education is crucial in this regard (Östlund, 2015). The existence of different professions in educational practice must also be considered, such as special education teachers and teaching assistants in the classroom, the latter characterized by an intermediate position between the teacher and the pupils (Östlund et al., 2021). Additionally, the children are supported by habilitation and therapeutic professionals such as occupational and speech therapists.

The purpose of the presented project is to ensure the right to education for students with severe intellectual disabilities, often combined with neurodevelopmental and physical disabilities. The goal is to enhance students' opportunities for education, personality development, participation, and autonomy. The overarching research question is how the various professional groups involved can develop collaboration that benefits the students' education. This question has not been addressed in a Swedish context before, and the project may also provide new impulses for collaboration regarding other target groups in education, mainly within Sweden. Given the focus on the specific target group of children with severe intellectual disabilities, this research is also relevant to an international audience, highlighting the need for collaboration in an interdisciplinary educational context.

The study's theoretical foundation is based on a collaboration model that integrates horizontal and vertical forms of cooperation (Axelsson & Bihari Axelsson, 2013). All forms of collaboration occur within a social context where various domains interact and mutually influence one another. This can be elucidated through Bronfenbrenner's (1979) ecological approach, where the individual – in our case, the pupil – is placed at the center. Surrounding the pupil is a microsystem comprising, among other elements, family, and school, which, in turn, interacts within a mesosystem and is connected to a broader exosystem (social services, legislation, etc.) and an overarching macrosystem (attitudes, culture, etc.). This theoretical approach can be correlated with neo-institutional perspectives involving the four analysis levels of the political domain, professional domain, administrative domain, and the users' domain (Danermark & Kullberg, 1999). In our research, a clear understanding of the collaborative nature and collaboration factors and integration of systems-theoretical and neo-institutional perspectives contribute to a deeper understanding of the processes in education. These theoretical approaches assist in comprehending the interaction among various professionals and their relationship with pupils.

The presentation explores the education of multilingual students with special educational needs in Norway. It questions how the teaching is characterized and organised, considering the Education Act’s requirement for individually adapted teaching. The presentation highlights the importance of culturally responsive perspectives, recognizing students’ languages and backgrounds as resources, and discuss further the challenges in identifying factors that define good special education and the need for coherence between special and regular education for positive learning outcomes (Festøy & Haug, 2017). In a complementary understanding of teaching, the quality of the regular teaching procedures greatly influences both the need for extra measures, and also the value of these same accommodations (Haug, 2017, p. 386). The theoretical perspectives are drawn from multicultural pedagogy and special education. The research question I seek to answer is: “How does the organisation of multilingual students in special education affect the inclusion process?”

Identifying factors for effective special education remains challenging, leading to exploration of its pedagogic signature. Disagreements persist in literature regarding distinctions between special and regular education. The signature comprises three levels: surface structure, deep structure, and implicit structure (Haug, 2015). A culturally responsive perspective, recognizing students’ languages and cultures as resources, is central across all levels (Remøy & Skrefsrud, 2024).

Despite some adaptations, much of the teaching lacks sufficient adjustment, particularly in regular classes where their linguistic and cultural backgrounds are often overlooked. The premises for adapted teaching are minimally fulfilled, suggesting schools may lack awareness of the potential scope for action within their organisation. There is minimal difference between the content of adapted teaching, special education, and regular provisions. Special education methods often mirror regular teaching, leading to fragmented routines and lack of cohesion for students. Segregation from regular teaching for special education and language instruction can hinder both academic and social inclusion. Students can be excluded on several levels through active exclusion from the teaching in the regular class, but also through exclusion in the teaching that is part of the education offered (Nes, 2017).

The findings show that the school leaders care about the education as a whole and wish to build on the linguistic and cultural experiences that the students bring with them. Thus they base the school’s practice on a culturally sensitive pedagogy, in which adapted teaching also involves being aware of and using the linguistic and cultural accomplishments of the pupils (Ladson-Billings, 1995; Remøy & Skrefsrud, 2024). Although, however, the pupils’ experiences are highly valued, the language does not appear to function as a tool in the teaching, but instead is reduced to a transition ritual with a compensatory value. This is reflected in the various ways of organizing the education.Even though the administrations at the case-schools were mindful of the role of the first language in their education and claimed that they were very concerned about taking into account the culture and language the pupils brought with them to school, we see the gap between good intentions and what is actually possible to do on a daily basis at school (Remøy & Skrefsrud, 2024).
The lacking realisation in practice of the intentions weakens the long-term perspective that Paris (2012) speaks of as being necessary to anchor the culturally sensitive pedagogy in the school’s systems. This implementation depends on continuity and integration in the way school is conceived (Gay, 2013; Paris, 2012). However, when these intentions are not translated into practice, and the L1 is only used sporadically, the education of these pupils becomes random and can hardly be thought of as qualifying the multilingual pupils to participate in society (Remøy & Skrefsrud, 2024).

Building national states after World War 2, both Austria and Germany reorganised their school systems and established separated school types for students with(out) disabilities. The CPRD (2009), ratified by Germany and Austria, intends to establish a common understanding of inclusive education in order to guarantee the right to inclusive education for all. The SDG 4 (2015) proclaims a wide understanding of inclusive education considering all students in all diemensions of heterogneity and aiming to institutional changes adapting mainstream learning environment for all and closing special schools.

Unless there are no fundamental systematic change towards one common inclusive education system within the last 15 years in both countries (Klemm, 2022). Both Austria and Germany still operate with assessments producing a school-specific disability category referred to as special education needs (SEN). The SEN labels are clustered by eight to nine different categories of disabilites, impairments, or handicaps in both countries. Compared to Germany, a medical-psychiatric orientated diagnosis is mandatory for the SEN assignment in Austria (Schwab et al., 2015). This claim poses a fundamental dilemma for the Austrian and German school systems that still differentiates between separate organizations of mainstream and special schools.

The decentralized organization of the education systems leads to different implementation ideas and very different progress in inclusive education depending on the federal state. Bremen (GER) relies on an inclusive school system with individual support centers (Senate Bremen, 2014), Lower Saxony relies on a cautious introduction of inclusive education by initially only phasing out the special school for learning since the 2013/14 school year (Nds. KM, 2012). All other forms of special schools still persit any reformation. In the German context, data shows an increasing trend towards diagnosing pupils with an SEN label and placing them in special schools instead of a mainstream schools (Kultusministerkonferenz, 2021). In comparison, Austrian data show a stagnating trend of SEN labels but a slightly increase of placing them in a special school instead of mainstream schools (Statistik Austria, 2023). Austria implemented so-called inclusive model regions in 2013, which tried to build best practice examples but were never implemented comprehensively (Feyerer, 2016). In Vienna special schools were opened for all students regardless SEN label or not.

All this reorganisation effects educators´ work and professionalisation in (pre-service) teacher training, which is already highly differentiated regarding the regular subject teachers and SEN categories (Buchner & Proyer, 2021; Sansour & Bernhard, 2018). There are mainstream school teachers, special needs teachers, school assistants. Based on the different pedagogical professions operating in the field of special and inclusive education, multiprofessional cooperation became a central issue for implementing inclusive eduction after the ratification of the CPRD (Lütje-Klose & Urban, 2014). Researchers promote multi-professional cooperation and collaboration as the central keys to providing inclusive education in mainstream schools for all pupils (Hollenbach-Biele & Vogt 2016; Massenkeil & Rothland, 2016). Multi-professional collaboration comprises a "diffusely used concept" (Fabel-Lamla & Gräsel, 2023, 3) in school eduction research, but describes the cooperation of different groups of actors in inclusive settings and distinguishes between various forms of cooperative collaboration (Prengel, 2020; Serke & Streese, 2022).

Nevertheless, the SEN label still determines the staff resourcing, which implies that the special educator has the responsability for the SEN student and multi-professional collaboratiaon is only possible to a limited extend. This leads to the following research questions: What demands and challenges hinder the multi-professional collaboration to implement inclusive education from a transnational viewpoint? The paper aims to describe the demands and challenges of multiprofessional cooperation in two central European school systems with similar stuctures, which still persists and strenghthen the separation into mainstream and special schools.

As the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) suggests, “inclusion involves 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” (UN 2016, p. 4). Yet, a “sign of absence of clear guidance on how teachers should behave in order to create an inclusive environment for all students” has been reported (OECD, 2020, p. 216) calling for clear guidance on how to create an inclusive environment for all students that is informed by research.

The International Forum on inclusion and equity in education that took place in Colombia, in 2019 reinforced the role of “educational leaders, families, teachers and students” in “build[ing] a climate of trust, fair treatment and non-discrimination” (UNESCO, 2019, p. 15). Inclusive education as a process involving the entire school was previously supported by Ainscow and Miles (2008) who conceptualised schools as organisations with “internal complexities” that constrain inclusive education (p. 26), reinforced by Mr Álvaro Marchesi, “meet[ing] the needs of each and every student…is not just a matter of teachers, but … a process involving the entire school” (UNESCO, 2019, p. 12). Therefore, it is suggested that inclusive education can be promoted when “increasing the capacity of local neighbourhood mainstream schools to support the participation and learning of an increasingly diverse range of learners” (Ainscow, 2020, p. 125), which is also supported by UN (2016) and UNESCO (2017). It is important to promote inclusive school communities in which “every learner matters and matters equally” (UNESCO, 2017, p. 12). This includes working together to further foster the participation of students with disabilities “in learning experiences and the learning environment with their same-aged peers” (Graham, 2020, p. xxi), whilst enhancing the autonomy of local schools in becoming “leaders of change” (Bills & Howard, 2021, p. 13).

In addition to advocating for a systemic lens, the CRPD also supported the potential lens of architecture as an approach to advance inclusive education, through removing architectural barriers. UN (2016) called on States parties to ensure “accessibility” of “any future education infrastructures” including safe and accessible school transport, toilet facilities and recreational school spaces (p. 8). Within the policy context, the role of school spaces and environments in students’ inclusive education were further raised by UNESCO (2019, 2020), with research studies beginning to emerge to explore the role of architecture in inclusive education. This presentation shares a case study exploring the role of architecture in inclusive education whilst informing a whole school approach to promoting inclusive education.

The following research questions guided this case study:

• What role does architecture, inclusive of physical, social and semantic space, play in students’ inclusive education?
• What do school community members perceive to be the enabling and/or challenging arrangements to students’ inclusive education?

This proposal is based on the initial findings from a small-scale exploratory study carried out in England to support migrant children with special educational needs (SEN). This study built upon the outcomes of a workshop conducted at ECER in 2019 and a subsequent literature review of migrant children with SEN in Europe (Jørgensen et al., 2020) and project report (Jørgensen et al., 2021). The present study aims to develop these by exploring the information needed to support migrant children with SEN. The study concentrates on English school settings and explores how best to collect it from the perspectives of a range of key professionals working in the field of SEN. The findings are explored ecologically as it is argued that this framework provides practitioners with a way to understand these needs and the context from which they arise. This research has recently used by a leading international charity. The next phase of this work is to work alongside this body to look at information needs from the perspective of parents and carers with the intention of creating an information gathering tool for schools in Europe and elsewhere.

Migrant children constitute approximately 4% of the under-15 population in Europe (Janta & Harte, 2017) and an average of 4.4% of all European children have an official identification of Special Educational Needs (SEN)(European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2018). In England 16.6% of children have been identified with some form of SEN (Office for National Statistics, 2022) highlighting differing national approaches to identification and assessment (Jørgensen et al., 2020). Across the UK, it is estimated that 6% of children under the age of 18 were born abroad (Fernández-Reino, 2022). However, both in the UK and internationally, little data exists on children who are both migrants and have SEN. This intersection between migration and SEN is an under-explored area in educational research, as well as in school practice. Migrant children with SEN are a highly heterogeneous group of children, due to their differing family and cultural backgrounds, social and community networks, experiences of school systems, type of SEN and reasons for migration (Jørgensen et al., 2020, 2021). They may experience particular and/or additional challenges when arriving in the educational system in the receiving country, especially if their schooling has been disrupted due to migration. These difficulties can be further augmented by a lack of common language and if there is paucity of information accompanying the children (Oliver & Singal, 2017). This highlights the importance of context in relation to the country of origin, the receiving country, and any potential journey between the two.

Context is an important theme within the work of Bronfenbrenner (2005) and its educational derivatives i.e., Anderson et al. (2014) who argue that children should be understood holistically through the different environments - or ‘ecologies’ - in which they are raised. For children who are migrants, these ecologies shift in line with the children’s immersion in differing cultures and school systems, which may vary significantly in relation to identification and understanding of SEN and degrees of inclusion. For practitioners, understanding the complex ecologies of migrant children who also have a special educational need are thus key to supporting them in schools and more broadly.

Building upon the review and the subsequent project report, this study aims to the questions:

• What would be the best methodological approach to collect better data and facilitating better understanding of migrant children with SEN?
• What information do practitioners need in order to respond to the needs of migrant children with SEN?

In Portugal, the annual official data on pupils of immigrant origin, published by the Directorate-General for Education and Science Statistics of the Ministry of Education and Science (DGEEC/MEC), specifically refers to citizenship status (Cândido and Seabra 2019; Seabra and Cândido 2020). However, this data overlooks pupils of immigrant origin who have Portuguese citizenship or those who have acquired the host country’s citizenship (children of immigrants). Given Portugal’s favourable nationality policies promoting immigrant naturalization, it is apparent that the official data underestimates pupils with an immigrant background.

Grouping a large proportion of pupils with and without an immigrant background under the category ‘nationals’ hinders the identification of long-term educational integration and the comparison of inequalities in educational opportunities for immigrants and their children, relative to their native peers. This approach fails to provide insights into the effectiveness of school systems in supporting the growth and development of immigrant pupils (OECD 2019). Consequently, a comprehensive understanding of the reality of migration in Portuguese schools becomes challenging, potentially leading to a positively or negatively biased portrayal and contributing to the formulation of inefficient public policies.

Furthermore, official statistics have scarce information on academic performance, only displaying grade transition rates by national origin (i.e. citizenship). These are limited indicators of academic performance because they only give a snapshot of performance at a particular moment in time.

In this article, we intend to overcome the abovementioned problems using the recently available student-level microdata provided by DGEEC/MEC. This microdata has variables containing information on the student and parents’ countries of birth, enabling us to accurately identify pupils with an immigrant background, as well as to look at students’ school path by creating a proxy variable on the number of times each student has repeated a grade in the past. This constitutes an approximation to a longitudinal analysis of inequalities concerning the degree of system-level social and ethnic selectivity.

Our goals are as follows:

1. Given the paucity of studies of national scope encompassing pupils with an immigrant background, this article’s analysis is guided by two primary objectives. First, we aim to go beyond the limitations of citizenship classification and understand the advantages of employing a more comprehensive classification scheme. To achieve this, we compare enrolment and academic performance using categories based on citizenship (national/foreign) and those based on their parents’ country of birth (immigrant origin/native).
2. Acknowledging that research in Portugal is limited to and primarily concentrated with children of immigrants as a whole (Mateus 2022), our objective is to examine migrant heterogeneity by analytically deconstructing the assumed homogeneity within this category. In doing so, we introduce subcategories related to generational status (first and second generations), type of ancestry (parentage of mixed origin versus single origin) and national origins.
3. Considering that the national origins groups are categorised according to student citizenship in the official statistics, we aim to compare how enrolment and academic achievement between and within national origins vary according to the criteria chosen to delimit the group (student citizenship or parents’ countries of birth). We also aim to compare the academic achievement of national origins by generational status and type of ancestry.

Lastly, since socioeconomic contexts also explain differences in academic performance, we use “student’s socio-economic index” to explore whether the gaps we identified in these comparisons persist.

This explorative literature review aims to examine the aspirations of youth in situations of migration in Europe as reported by recent empirical studies. Although issues of migration have come to occupy an important place in European policy and public debates (Eberl et al 2018; Goubin , Ruelens & Nicaise 2022), an overview is still lacking at the intersection of youth, migration and futures. How newcomer youth perceive their future in society and the futures to which they aspire have consequences for the strategies they adopt in studies, choice of career path and integration. Extended periods in limbo and uncertain futures can in the longer term affect their faith in institutions, their understanding of democracy and the extent and manner of their civic engagement.

The ways we understand, perceive, conceptualise and represent the future play a fundamental role, both in human societies and in individual lives. Futures are closely linked to power and agency. Clearer understanding of constraints and options could inform more responsible policy or enable marginalised groups to act more effectively, based on their capacity to ‘read the world’ (Valladares 2021). While social elites mobilise considerable resources in shaping futures the capacity to imagine alternative futures (Rubin & Kaivo-Oja 1999; Amsler & Facer 2017) can also open pathways to empowerment for groups in situations of disadvantage.

Migrant youth face disadvantages that are equal to or worse than other marginalised groups, making access to education a challenge. Basic needs such as food, housing and healthcare must be met before educational needs are addressed. Other barriers include language acquisition, trauma, interrupted education due to exile and unrecognised previous qualifications (Gateley 2015). Nevertheless, studies in various contexts suggest that young refugees show strong resilience, positive future expectations and high motivation at school, which Lynnebakke and Pastoor (Lynnebakke & Pastoor 2020) examine within the concept of educational resilience— ‘the heightened likelihood of educational success despite personal vulnerabilities and adversities brought about by environmental conditions and experiences’. Lynnebakke and Pastoor understand both resilience and outcomes as produced in continuous interaction between individuals and features of their environment. This apparent paradox between positive future expectations and challenging circumstances has been theoretically explained in diverse manners, including ‘immigrant optimism’, ‘dual frame of reference’, ‘blocked opportunities’, ‘information deficit’ or ‘ethnic capital’ (Lynnebakke & Pastoor 2020).

The vision young people have of their possible positions in society, in relation to what careers and employment possibilities will exist in the future, influences their motivation to invest in upper secondary education and to pursue career paths that require post-secondary qualifications (Facer 2011). Teachers are often not well prepared to teach diverse classrooms, but formal education is important for newcomer youth, particularly in the case of refugees (Alesina, Carlana, Ferrara & Pinotti 2018). Furthermore, research suggests that teacher expectations have a significant impact on educational achievement (Papageorge, Gershenson & Kang 2020).

For students from disadvantaged groups, education and employment aspirations may represent prospects for their families and communities to escape hardships and historical constraints (Webb 2021). Nevertheless, Goring et al. (Goring, Kelly, Carbajo, Brown & 2023) caution that framing young people’s perceptions of their future as limited to aspirational trajectories of education and employment does not do justice to the complexity of how youth see themselves in the world today. They argue that this framing rather corresponds to a reduction of human life to value in economic production systems. This literature review will therefore cover both research on education and employment, as well as studies that deal with other topics.

Every year in Poland more and more school students are being diagnosed with disabilities, e.g. dyslexia, autism spectrum disorder, ADHD, etc. which results in the growing need to meet their diverse special educational needs (SEN). The changes in the situation of Polish SEN school students started in the late 1970s. Since then the public awareness of SEN students has been slowly growing and they have been granted support at school and in specialised centers. Unfortunately, the support granted by the law is not enough: at schools and universities, SEN students have no freedom of choice of the educational materials (i.e. textbooks/coursebooks) or teaching methods that would be the most suitable for them. The real change in the situation of SEN school students in Poland dates back to 2009 and the introduction of the new core curriculum (Regulation of the Ministry of National Education 2008). Since 2017, in theory, all school students have to be diagnosed in their first years at school so as to be given a chance of early professional support if needed (Pawlak-Kindler 2016).

SEN school students group is not homogeneous and consists of, i.e., mentally disabled, physically disabled ones, those with IQ lower than average, those with disabilities related to senses (sight, hearing, etc.), with speech problems, those different because of their language, increasing numbers of children with experience of exile and migration (Górak-Sosnowska, Markowska-Manista 2023), as well as gifted and talented ones (Zawadzka-Bartnik 2010, Bogdanowicz & Adryjanek 2005, Lewis & Doorlag 1987, Selikowitz 2012, Brzezińska 2014). In our research, we concentrate on two groups: children with a certificate of SEN on the example of dyslexics and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) ones and students without a certificate of SEN on the example of central auditory processing disorders (CAPD). Children from the certificate of SEN group are diagnosed and then given some institutional help, whereas the CAPD is not diagnosed and not given any support in Poland.

In our presentation, we will concentrate on our (scientific) protest (manifesto) against the indirect unequal treatment of some school students of different ages in the present Polish school system. Our research interest is related to research-based solidarity with and the fight for children human rights to sustainable and equal access to proper educational conditions (especially didactic materials and teaching methods and strategies) of school students with SEN who attend public schools in Poland. However, the problem is that the Polish educational system is based on the theory of integration, not inclusion, despite the fact that the issue of inclusive education is one of the priorities of contemporary educational policy. Integration can easily be done and manifested but inclusion is something those in need have to fight for (Zawadzka-Bartnik 2010). Usually, the fight is based only on passive resistance but with the help of our research findings, it can be materialise in the form of recommendations and implementation of inclusive approaches..

Our research questions were as follows:

- how big and diverse is the group of SEN school students who attend public schools in Poland?

- what kind of challenges are addressed by the representatives of SEN students and researchers dealing with this issue?

- what strategies and actions can be implemented to support them in looking for solutions of their problems?

Equity and inclusion have emerged as central pillars of the 2030 Agenda, highlighting the persistent unequal distribution of resources and opportunities (UNESCO, 2020). In response, many European governments are actively working to enhance the capacity of their education systems, striving to reach every learner and guarantee their full and effective participation, accessibility, attendance, and academic achievement. However, schools and education systems across Europe grapple with the formidable challenge of fostering an inclusive culture, establishing inclusive structures, and implementing inclusive practices (Booth & Ainscow, 2016). Notably, significant variations exist among European countries concerning the extent and quality of inclusion efforts.

Most often, the discussion around inclusion has centred on how teachers can promote inclusion of students with disabilities <…>. However, little is known about how students in inclusive classes perceive acceleration, despite the critical role that students play in the social inclusion of exceptional peers (Dare & Nowicki, 2018, p. 243).

In this presentation, we aim to share our research findings concerning the perspectives of students in Lithuanian comprehensive schools on the culture of inclusive education and the existing support systems. This presentation is part of a larger national research project (www.nsa.smm.lt/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/PPP_modelio_ekspertinis_vertinimas_2021m..pdf).

Although many Eastern European countries, including Lithuania, have made progress in shifting their focus from a disability perspective to a needs-based education approach for students with diverse educational needs (Law on Education, 2011, article 2/2415), it remains apparent that inclusive education demands an even more adaptable and responsive system to cater to the diverse and often complex needs of individual learners (Booth, Ainscow, 2016; European Agency, 2011; Alisauskiene & Harju-Luukainen, 2021).Formos viršus To enhance the processes of inclusion in school development, extensive research is underway across various countries. Research advocate for actively listening to the voices of students, asserting that incorporating their perspectives not only leads to more insightful educational research and practice but also fosters richer and more authentic results, ultimately boosting student engagement (Mansfield, Welton, Halx, 2012; Spörer et al, 2020). A crucial aspect of fostering inclusive schools involves establishing a secure, accepting, collaborative, and stimulating community. Inclusive education involves establishing learning environments that prioritize equitable treatment for all students, ensuring they feel valued and supported across diverse learning situations. According to Booth and Ainscow (2016), it is imperative that all students in the school have the opportunity to contribute to identifying barriers and resources. Students themselves should have a central role in informing thinking, policies and practices in education. While aligned with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the views of students are often notably absent from crucial discussions that directly impact them (Messiou, 2019). Hence, our aim was to reveal the perspectives of Lithuanian students concerning inclusive education and the corresponding support systems.

In 2018, Roger Slee offered the following proposition: Inclusive education isn’t dead, it just smells funny. His urgent message it that, after -and despite- many years of developing inclusive policies and practises, under its veil of benevolence the concept of inclusion in fact runs the risk of masking exclusionary practises, creating barriers to participation. This study explores the experiences of 17 students in upper-secondary vocational education and training (VET) in Norway, identified as vulnerable to exclusion, on their participation in the learning community throughout their educational careers. The study builds on a sociocultural framework that understands participation in social practises as learning (Säljö, 2016; Wenger, 1998). Florian, Black-Hawkins, and Rouse (2017) state that students’ opportunities to participate depend on pedagogical responses to diversity. Equitable and inclusive practises therefore aspire to support students’ participation through actively combatting barriers to participation (Florian, Black-Hawkins, and Rouse (2017).

The Nordic countries are strongly committed to socially just education with the aim to create inclusive societies that sustain democracy (Nevøy et al., 2014). In Norway, the inclusive notion of a School for All has been central to educational policies for decades. A main principle is that schools must develop inclusive learning communities that promote health, well-being and learning for all (Ministry of Education, 2017). Historically, the Norwegian educational system has been built on the principles of providing equal access and participation for all, independent of background. This has in the past few years been increasingly challenged by neo-liberal tendencies characterised by standardisation and market-orientated competition, with an emphasis on learning outcomes as a quality indicator (Thuen & Volckmar, 2020). Consequently, inequality in Norwegian society increases (Knudsen, 2021), and after a yearly decrease of young people aged 15-29 not in education, employment, or training, this tendency has been changing since 2015. Norwegian statistics currently show a clear increase within the last few years (Statistics Norway), reflecting overall European statistics (Eurostat, 2023). Since the 1970s, a social policy goal of the European Union has been to implement strategies to break the cycle of disadvantage and inequality (Bruin et al., 2023). Still, following Ainscow (2020), many young people leave upper-secondary education without qualifications, leaving them vulnerable to exclusion from the labour market and citizenship. In this European context, Norway has a comparatively high level of young people without upper-secondary qualification, primarily former students in VET (Ministry of Education, 2019).

Within an educational system based on inclusive values, the question of how did we get here? bears to mind. With reference to Allan (2009), the young people’s experiences embody an expertise that requires to be acknowledged as such. Hence, the study explores the following research question: What are VET-students’ experiences on participation in the learning community throughout their educational careers in Norway?

Worldwide, there is a common-sense acceptance that young people should have equal access and voice to their educational needs. In Norway recent and alarming findings in the “Children and Young people strategy 21” (Norwegian Research Council 2021), concludes that young people contribute too little in the research decisions that concerns them. These findings are considered when the research council now focuses on new research centres and grants for more inclusive research, underlining the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in education, research, and the field as well as listening to the voices of children and youth in vulnerable life situation to solve the challenges in the field. These changes are also implemented from the first of August in Norway through a new education Act, where students will have ensured the right to actively express their opinions and be listened in all matters that concern them, and schools accordingly will have the duty to facilitate students’ empowerment (Education Act, 2023, § 10-2). However, the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment found that empowering students through for instance teaching methods in class may be more effective for some students than for others, creating inequality (OECD, 2012). Nonetheless, its operationalisation can become a key aspect for professional development and improving students’ school experiences (Weinberger & Libman, 2018). The act of empowerment is defined as bringing into a state of belief one's capacity to act effectively, emphasising the critical importance of effective relationships between teachers and students; thus empowerment is the ability to influence one’s environment, but it is complex and multidimensional and can affect students differently according to their background (Broom, 2015; Duhon-Haynes, 1996; Freire, 1970). To enact policy demands of empowerment, more research should address its complex, multidimensional characteristics. Therefore, in our study we ask how vocational teachers empower young people in their school environment through “Equality Literacy Framework” (EQL).

In this study we draw on Stuart’s et al. (2021) EQL, a practice and research framework to study all the factors that contribute to empowering learning environments. The framework is rooted in a bio-ecological, systemic view and captures relationships between the individual student and the different contexts at micro and macro level. The EQL Framework considers the concept of equity in relation to equitable chance of success (Chapman and West-Burnham, 2010). This framework is used for both the young people and educators to understand what influences the students in their learning, and what can be done to improve the learning environment for the disadvantaged students. Some commentators point out that it is the education system itself that has quit children, pushed children out and not been fit for young people (Fine, 2018).

At the same time, schools and teachers can pull in young people through for instance relations that are empowering and liberating. With inspiration from Freire, and the Pedagogy of the oppressed, we explore how teachers empower young people in the school and through a critical and dialogue-based relationship. According to Freire (1970), liberating pedagogy aims at empowerment. Belief in and regard for the individual's worth and integrity stems from a humanistic vision of humankind, which values equality, love, hope, mutual respect, and the desire to improve (Freire, 1970). Empowerment is linked to the recognition of the two dimensions of dialogue: reflection and action, which are mutually dependent on each other. For Freire, increasing awareness is the process of engaging individuals in discussion to examine and analyse reality based on such life-like topics.This critical attitude will be able to free the individual and his inherent resources and powers (Lindvig & Mousavi, 2017).

The following paper investigates the question “what are the experiences of four children with a rare developmental disability (DD) attending mainstream primary schools in the Southwest of England, UK?” A critical realist approach is adopted to help understand how the children navigate their experiences of having a disability within a school setting. Critical realism helps acknowledge the different levels of influence that includes physical, medical, social cultural and historical factors of influence (Bhaskar and Danermark, 2006). The research questions the concept of ‘inclusion’ whilst exploring how settings, staff and children negotiate support within the mainstream education system.

In the UK, school staff roles and responsibilities have shifted towards teaching assistants increasingly being used to work directly with children with disabilities (Ravalier et al., 2021). Literature indicates that working closely with a teaching assistant may prevent children from accessing direct teaching from a qualified teacher (Vincett, Cremin & Thomas, 2005). Furthermore, challenges exist in differences in status and training between teachers and teaching assistant roles.

Children attending mainstream primary education have a range of different needs and backgrounds. Therefore, there are various opportunities for children to develop supportive peer roles and helpful attitudes towards children with differences. When there is a child with disabilities in the class, children may develop empathy and patience (Anderson et al., 2011), be more tolerant of differences, to celebrate differences, and most importantly, learn that all children are different, and therefore learn at different paces. Typically developing peers notice that their friendships with children with disabilities are different. Children with disabilities may have difficulties finding similar interests or similar social competence levels; they require a lot of patience, understanding and trust (Woodgate et al., 2020).

Inclusion flourishes when there is a sense of belonging and participation, but social participation relies on relationships, interactions with others, staff and peer perceptions of children with special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEN/D) and acceptance from peers (Bossaert et al., 2013). The increasingly difficult and undefinable inclusion agenda has resulted in children with disabilities attending primary schools with varying levels of success. School staff continue to conflate inclusion with integration, by focussing on the placement of children being inside the classroom or outside the classroom. Hodkinson (2012) refers to the ‘symbiotically intertwined’ absence and presence of inclusion where teachers have the power to decide who could be included and when.

Research has examined the absence of friendships and peer interactions for children with SEN/D in mainstream education (Lyons et al., 2016) and children with differences report feeling lonely and excluded (Woodgate et al., 2020). Opportunities to interact with others can sometimes be inhibited by a constant adult support, and work outside of the classroom which physically takes place away from the rest of the children (Radford et al., 2015). On the other hand, staff can play a significant part in facilitating interactions between peers.

This study examines the experiences of children with DD through the exploration of social involvement as a primary school pupil, as well as relational participation through connections with peers, teaching assistants (TAs) and teachers in different spaces, both inside and outside of the classroom.

For the past six years, I have led a partnership between a teacher education college and a school serving at-risk youth where student-teachers are trained. The current participatory action research focused on examining the pupils' expressions of negativism - a source of tension for teachers of at-risk adolescents – as well as on teacher responsiveness to negativism (Reed, 2017).

Grounding the study in Vygotskian theory (Vygotsky, 1987, p. 127), I adopted the perspective that the negativism of at-risk youth could be a sign of a gateway to learning and development. Instead of referring to it as hostile, anxious, isolating, and disruptive behavior and generally pessimistic outlook, it could be understood as a way of distinguishing their particular identities and finding their own kind of agency. In this theoretical perspective, responsiveness to negativism relates to the ability of teachers to appropriately recognize, understand, and address the needs of these pupils by fostering a supportive learning environment tailored to their unique needs. This presentation will describe and analyze three consecutive sessions that took place during my year-long action research study, in which student-teachers, cooperating teachers, and pupils were invited to engage with the phenomenon of negativism and recognize its positive developmental prospects. Through collaborative, participatory inquiry, I sought to unlock the transformative potential of negativism and promote developmental learning progress.

As an action researcher, I elicited and documented a “double stimulation” intervention. The construct of the double stimulation with the pedagogical goal of enhancing 1) Understanding the connection between negativism and responsiveness; 2) Presenting the concept of “porcupine children” as a psychological tool serving as the first stimulus for all research participants; 3) Inviting the pupils to participate in these sessions. Analysis revealed that the pupils responded by interpreting the metaphoric concept of porcupine children by providing examples of negativism from their lives. It became evident that these pupils identified with it and could link it to their expressions of negativity; 4) Additionally, teachers joined in, filling the neutral stimulus (“porcupine children”) with meaning, transforming it into a new mediating sign, Over the course of the discourse, behaviors characterizing negativism among pupils were located and explicated alongside a spectrum of effective responses by educators to learners at risk, according to the perceptions of student-teachers and the cooperating teachers. 5) I expanded my understanding of the relevance of responsiveness in teacher education. The pupils voiced the need for firm relational boundaries alongside empathic acceptance. In voicing lived experiences, the study facilitated the student-teachers and the teachers' listening and understanding. Bridging multiple voices alleviated tensions, promoting the internalization of context-sensitive practice. Ultimately, it spotlighted the zone of proximal development within this activity system as a collective meaning-making forwarded enhanced conception and application towards impactful and meaningful education.

In my study, the concept of responsiveness was based on data depicting the point of view of the pupils and student-teachers through an exchange maintaining horizontal relationships. Additionally, this study provided a glimpse into the practical meaning of responding to negativism, breaking it down into implementable components, which can be identified, described, comprehended, dialogued about, conceptualized, expanded, and adopted in a practical fashion.

Normally, teacher responses have a broad range. The span of responses can vary between violent and containing empowering, empathic, and encouraging reactions, and student-teachers and teachers need an in-depth examination of this range (Edwards, 2010). In this study, it seemed that the participating pupils seek certain responses within a specific spectrum – that, on the one hand, maintains clear boundaries and, on the other, accepts them as they are.

From an international perspective, national school systems have been significantly affected by several global trends since the end of the 20th century. One has been the powerful movement towards an inclusive school for all, represented by the Declaration of Salamanca in 1994, and accelerated by the UN-Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2006. It is written that “all children should learn together, wherever possible, regardless of any difficulties or differences they may have. Inclusive schools must recognize and respond to the diverse needs of their students, accommodating both different styles and rates of learning and ensuring quality education to all through appropriate curricula, organizational arrangements, teaching strategies, resource use and partnerships with their communities” (UNESCO, 1994, p. 11).

With the ratification of the Salamanca-Declaration and the UN-CRPD, states and federal states (in Germany) are obliged to provide an inclusive school system in which pupils with and without impairments or disabilities are taught in joint schools and classes. Although educational contexts vary greatly from country to country, similar regulations must be implemented internationally. The “fuzzy concept of inclusion” (Artiles & Dyson, 2005) has to be included and transferred into practice in different historically developed education systems. In the chain of international guidelines, national and finally local implementation (Abrahamsen & Aas, 2019), national and regional educational stakeholders have to interpret regulations, which leads to many variations of inclusive education not just internationally, but also in a national and regional frame (Badstieber & Moldenhauer, 2016).

A central stakeholder, especially in the local implementation, are special educational needs teachers (SEN-teachers), who support pupils and teachers in mainstream schools with their specific expertise. However, due to different definitions of inclusion and the importance of national and local contexts, it is not determined how inclusive schooling, and the roles of SEN-teachers look like. Accordingly, it is hardly possible to clarify what these highly specialized teachers should be educated for in terms of inclusive schooling for all pupils. Due to their important role in the implementation of school inclusion, the study presented focuses on the training and role of special education teachers in particular.

In line with the purpose of the study our research questions are:

1. How do the (inclusive) school system contexts and histories of inclusion of the three countries differ from each other?

2. How is “special educational needs” defined and operationalized?

3. What role do SEN-teachers play in the implementation of school inclusion?

4. How are SEN-teachers educated for those roles and tasks?

From a national perspective, international comparisons give the opportunity to take a look at alternative regulations and implementations. Furthermore, comparative approaches enable important contextual factors to be identified and social and political constructions - such as "inclusive school" and "special needs" - to be scrutinized (Biermann & Powell, 2014). From a German perspective, Nordic countries in particular serve as "main sources of innovation" (ibid., p. 683). The comparison made in this article between Germany, Sweden and Norway is intended to provide an impetus to look beyond national borders and open our eyes to alternative approaches of implementation strategies as well as SEN-teachers´ roles and education.

A corpus of research considering the social impact of Special Educational Needs (SEN) identification on diagnosis and has shown mixed effects. Qualitative research highlights the benefits of SEN identification due to the alleviation of stigma, and access to support (Ingesson, 2007; Glazzard, 2010; Leitão et al., 2017), while quantitative research, shows a negative impact on academic self-concept (Polychroni, Koukoura, & Anagnostou, 2006; Knight, 2021). Scant research has been conducted which investigates the impact of SEN on academic outcomes, which also considers categories of SEN (i.e., ADHD) (Parsons & Platt, 2017). We aimed to understand i) what factors contribute to being identified with SEN, ii) the educational attainment of those with SEN (overall, and specific diagnoses, and iii) to explore the timing of SEN diagnosis on attainment.

At a time of global unrest and in the aftermath of the pandemic in what has been described as ‘an altered world’ [1], the challenges facing European nations and beyond in ensuring quality education for all seem insurmountable. A vehicle by which this can be achieved is inclusive education. However, how inclusive education is understood globally is highly contested and it is regarded as being socio-culturally and historically situated [2,3]. It is argued that the theory and practice of inclusive education lacks a tight conceptual focus, leading to ambivalence and confusion in its enactment [2] - ‘an enigma of ‘wicked proportions” [4]. In a critical systematic review of global inclusive education [5], an extensive range of understandings of what inclusive education constitutes emerge. For some, the problem is seen as residing within the contradictory interests and intentions within public policy [4]. Others position it in relation to paradigmatic wars [6,7]. It has even been argued that it is a redundant concept, Honkasita and Koutsokenis [3] making a case for the term ‘inclusion in education’ on the basis that the former is in danger of becoming an ‘empty signifier’.

Slee [8] highlights attempts to silence inclusive education through the colonisation of its language, arguing that the ‘structures and cultures of schooling reinforce privilege and exacerbate disadvantage’ (p.11). Rix [9] attests that the quest for certainty has led to the creation of bounded systems with the function and position of individuals proscribed by the system. Whilst many perceive exclusion and inclusion as dichotomous, Hansen [10] makes the case that inclusion can only be understood in relation to its ‘other’ – exclusion: ‘inclusion presupposes exclusion’ (p. 94). Mowat [7] builds on this argument to postulate that ‘inclusion and exclusion lie on a continuum with fluid and not static boundaries that are experienced differentially and contextually’ (p.39). It therefore follows that the imperative is to seek to understand the nature of these boundaries, the underlying philosophical and political ideologies and who and what determines them.

Commitments to inclusive education have been articulated in policy across the UK and Ireland, in the context of increasingly inclusive rhetoric in education policy globally over recent years. Knight, et al. [11] identify significant divergence in the articulation and portrayal of inclusive education policy within and across the four nations that constitute the United Kingdom. Within the context of educational reform, they raise issues around the enactment and implementation of policy from a practitioner perspective and comparability for researchers across the nations, particularly pertaining to issues of equity and injustice.

Building on a critical policy analysis of the articulation and portrayal of inclusive education policy across the four nations that constitute the United Kingdom [11], within each of which education is a devolved function of government, the paper seeks to understand how England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Ireland articulate and portray their inclusive education policies and the political and ideological motivations and priorities that are apparent within these policies. The paper explores the commonalities and differences, challenges and tensions in public policy and its enactment across the five nations through a critical analysis of policy and reviews of policy, relating this to current research in the field. It constitutes:

Critical analysis of policy based around the questions of:

• How do the 5 nations articulate and portray their inclusive education policies?
• How are differing political and ideological motivations and priorities signposted and acknowledged in inclusive education policy in the 5 nations?

Examination of policy into practice (including reviews of current systems)

Identification of challenges and next steps.

The project Transnational Service Learning in the Context of Higher Education (THE) is a collaboration between the Faculty of Human Resources German Jordanian University in Madaba (Jordan) and the Faculty of Education, Universität Hamburg (UHH), Germany. Participants of each university (students, scientific assistants and professors) reflect on possibilities of inclusion in context of migration, flight and disability and focus on the technique of service learning during two 10-day stays in Amman and Hamburg and framing digitally held seminars. The DAAD-funded project started in March 2023 and was completed in December 2023 with the publication of a joint booklet.

The following questions were discussed: 1. How is inclusion due to refugee-migration and disability implemented in Jordan and Germany and what is the significance of in this field active NGOs? 2. To what extent can the service learning method be used to incorporate student engagement into curriculum planning in Higher Education?

The aim of the project is mutual understanding and perspective-taking as a starting point for reflecting on inclusion-promoting action-oriented measures in NGOs on the same topic.

Both Jordan and Germany are considered immigration countries that have taken in many people with refugee experience. While immigration to Germany in recent years has mainly been dominated by people from Ukraine, Russia, Afghanistan, Syria and Sudan, Jordan has taken in a large number of people with refugee experience from Syria and Iraq due to its geographical proximity. At the same time, around 50% of Jordan's population has Palestinian roots.

Those facts make clear that migration-related inclusion, even with regard to disability is from high relevance in both countries, what clarify, that students need to be sensitized intercultural and transcultural accordingly, for example through exchange projects such as THE.

Theoretical framework

Inclusive Education (IE) is both a recognized field in educational sciences and a key concept in global educational policies (Hernández-Torrano et al., 2022). It emerged as a critique of special education's reliance on medical deficit-based views, challenging the perception that any "deficits" or "pathologies" reside within individual students (Fulcher, 1989, p. 27). This approach individualises disability, framing individuals as "abnormal" or "tragic victims," aligning with medical perspectives (Qu, 2022, p. 1012). In contrast, IE, celebrating student diversity, attributes challenges to schools failing to meet students' needs (Andrews et al., 2021, p. 1510). Despite countries endorsing IE principles, policies often reflect a medical deficit-oriented stance, evident in practices like tying school funding to the number of students classified under specific psycho-medical deficit categories (Meijer & Watkins, 2019).

IE clashes with neoliberal reforms prioritising cost-efficiency. Influenced by international organisations, countries establish non-state schools, promote standardised tests, and school rankings (Bacon & Pomponio, 2023), turning schools into profit-driven entities. This shift, linked to exclusion, deepens educational disparities, transforming parental choice into a financial transaction, notably in wealthier countries (Slee, 2019, p. 916). The conflict between IE's goals and neoliberal emphasis on academic success creates tension in education (Andrews et al., 2021, p. 1518).

Recent reform towards inclusive education in Slovakia

The School Act (National Council of the Slovak Republic, 2008) incorporated the term “inclusive education” in a 2021 amendment, defining it as shared education and training based on equality and respect for individual needs. However, this inclusion appears more declarative than practical. A more substantial step towards IE occurred in the 2023 amendment (National Council of the Slovak Republic, 2023). This revision not only replaced "integration" with "inclusive education" but also introduced a nuanced three-tiered system of “support measures”: (1) “universal” (no diagnosis needed), (2) “targeted” (requires a diagnostic process by a school staff member or a counselling and prevention institution), and (3) “specialised” support measures (requires a diagnostic process by a counselling and prevention institution). This significant shift aimed to depart from the medical deficit model tied to students with special educational needs (SEN) towards providing comprehensive support. The amendment notably broadened the definition of SEN, now encompassing students without specific deficit labels, enabling them to receive support (universal and targeted support measures) based on the judgment of school staff, provided the school has the requisite financial resources. The Act on Financing Schools also introduced a new "allowance for support measures," distributing a lump sum to all schools based on total student numbers. Before, support staff allocation relied solely on external SEN diagnoses by counselling and prevention institutions.

Research questions and objectives

Utilising critical policy analysis (CPA), the analysis centres on the primary research question: What non-inclusive (or exclusionary) discourses manifest in Slovakia's current educational policies? This way, the main objective of the study is to highlight that, despite some progress of the country towards IE ideals by establishing the system of support measures in 2023, the policy documents related to the reform are still rooted in deficit (medical) discourse, expertocratic (professionalism) discourse, and neo-liberal (market) discourse.

This presentation is a conceptual and empirical examination of the tensions that inform the development of curriculum policy for students with disability. The role of the curriculum in the education of children with disabilities has been an area of interest for scholars operating within the theoretical framework of Inclusive Education and Disability Studies (Erevelles, 2005; Duke et al., 2016), who have identified a number of issues that need to be considered. A recurring dilemma countries face is the decision to develop a common curriculum for all children that will be part of inclusive education policies, or maintain a parallel curriculum for children with disabilities, usually referred to as special curriculum. Although special curricula have been criticized for acting as ‘diet curricula’ for children with disabilities and informing Individual Education Plans (IEPs) that act as another form of curriculum that excludes children instead of including them (Eilers, 2023), special curricula are in place in many countries. At the same time, countries following a common curriculum do not necessarily safeguard equal opportunities for all children (Graham et al., 2020). In addition, countries are recipients of external forces suggesting the need for inclusive education and common curricula, and internal forces that consider this path difficult or even impossible to follow. European and international bodies call for inclusive education for all children and for children with disabilities in particular (e.g. Article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, UN, 2006 and SDG 4 on inclusive and equitable education, UN, 2015). Countries are expected to provide equal opportunities and quality education for all, while at the same time special education systems run parallel to mainstream systems for years. Developing common curricula that truly serve all children may be extremely difficult in such contexts. The colonial mindset, which is prevalent in some countries, acts as a barrier for the development of curricula that include. These countries tend to seek advice from other countries which they consider more developed, without considering the critique of their systems which is recorded in the literature (Duke et al., 2016).

It has been argued that ableist thinking guides policy developments in different areas (Campbell 2001). Ableist thinking guides curricula that aim to serve primarily children without disabilities because they are considered essential for the national economy. In this context, there is a shared understanding that the role of education is to prepare children for high-stakes exams, which at the same time act as pillars of evaluation of the education system that is in place. Children with disabilities and children who belong in other vulnerable groups are often judged as incompetent and therefore, eligible for other ‘less demanding’ curricula. Ableist thinking also influences the content of the curriculum and the process of its implementation. Many countries establish a rigid link between children’s age and content. In such curricula, differentiation can be a stated national priority, but cannot be implemented. Children with disabilities are then characterised as ‘unable to follow the curriculum’ and they are excluded to receive specialist support in special settings. Last but not least, decisions around the implementation of the curriculum are taken by special education professionals and this is justified by the prevalent view that general teachers do not have the knowledge and skills to educate children with disabilities (Florian, 2015)

In light of these tensions, our study was concerned with the ways curriculum policies in Australia and Cyprus disables children with disabilities despite the proclamations of inclusion. Using a comparative analysis, this presentation maps these tensions in the curriculum policy documents and proposes a critical understanding of what constitutes inclusive curriculum.

The New Middle School-Reform can be considered as the most ambitioned education policy in the last decade in Austria. In order to dissolve the institutionalized sorting of students between the upper track of Austrian secondary education, manifesting in grammar schools (‘Allgemeine Höhere Schulen’), and the lower track, the modern general school (‘Hauptschule’), this policy aimed to create a new school type; the new middle school. Thus, former modern general schools were thought to be transformed in new middle schools (NMS) – but grammar schools remained as choice, including an own curriculum. However, new middle schools as "new school for all" (BZLS, 2015, p. 22; authors’ translation) were supposed to cater for all students, regardless to their levels of academic abilities. Thus, NMS were thought to become a space of education in which all students are educated ‘under one roof’ (BMUKK, 2011, p. 3) - in an individualized, differentiated way (BMUKK, 2011). Accordingly, the newly introduced New Middle School Curriculum frequently referred to the principles of flexible differentiation, individualization and inclusion (BMUKK, 2012). Furthermore, this new curriculum foresaw teachers to reduce learning barriers to participation by teaching students with certified special educational needs (SEN) according to the didactic objectives of the NMS curriculum.

In our paper, we combine space theory with an ableism-critical perspective. In particular, we refer to a relational understanding of space, as it was developed by various authors of spatial sociology (e.g. Massey, 2005; Löw, 2001). The term ‘relational’ refers to the interrelatedness of materiality and sociality in the production of space. Accordingly, space is socially constituted and constructed by subjects - in relation to material conditions (Löw 2006). Studies of ableism focus on the significance of ability for social orders - as well as the associated processes of inclusion and exclusion (Campbell, 2009; Wolbring, 2012). For example, notions of normality are linked to specific expectations of ability, which go hand in hand with practices of belonging, participation, the distribution of resources and other forms of de/privileging (Campbell, 2009). In specific, these notions of ability-based normalcy create the dichotomy dis/ability and the associated 'great divide' (Campbell, 2003). Next to this binary structure, ableist orders are characterized by a fundamental hierarchy by which subjects are categorised and sorted (Buchner, 2022).

In our presentation we employ this theoretical framework for what has been termed a ‘small scale policy analysis’ (Thomson et al., 2010) – in relation to the Austrian New Middle School Policy and Inclusion. Doing so, we ask to what extent teaching practices produce educational spaces that enable all students in an individualized way - or whether rather traditional practices of ‘doing ability’ continue to shape the educational spaces under the surface of the new school form NMS. As we argue, educational practices always go hand in hand with an ability-related placing and synthesizing, producing what has been termed as ‘ability-space-regimes’ (Buchner, 2021). Following this line of thoughts, it can be reconstructed who is placed where on the basis of which ability expectation(s) and what qualities the specific arrangements of subjects, things and educational practices exhibit. Do such practices create spaces of a more just ablement or of exclusion? Consequently, teaching settings can be interrogated concerning to what extent ability grouping and the homogenizing placements that go with it, are avoided – as aimed for by the NMS-policy.

“In many areas of public life—including education—the UK [is] a federal state and in key respects had been for many years” (Furlong and Lunt, 2016, p.251). This paper sets out to demonstrate the differing policy approaches taken to the education and schooling practices of children with additional needs in the four home nations of the United Kingdom (UK). This is particularly timely given the upcoming UK general election.

Each of the four home nations of the UK – England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales - have devolved power over education policy. There are, and have been, even prior to devolution, differences in policy in all aspects of education in the four nations (Booth, 1996; Furlong and Lunt, 2016; Knight et al. 2023). Examples of policy divergence include: the prevalence of grammar schools in Northern Ireland; the lack of publication of school performance data in Wales; different qualifications in Scotland; approaches to school autonomy in England. The concept of and policy around additional needs is of a particular interest as two of the home nations have policies to encompass “additional learning needs” (Wales) and “additional support needs” (Scotland).

In this paper the term “pupils with Additional Needs” is used, in recognition of the different policy approaches to certain pupils taken in each of the home nations, but also to move discussion beyond a focus on children with special educational needs (SEN). “Additional needs” was used in the 2005 ‘Every Child Matters’ initiative in England (DSCF, 2009) to cover those who are protected by statutory education/care services and those on the edge of these services; this overlaps with the Scottish term “additional support needs” and Welsh term “additional learning needs”, and, in NI only, the term “additional educational needs”, used for those who may face additional barriers to education and learning, beyond SEN. This paper’s definition – pupils in each of the four nations of the UK who have educational needs beyond that of “normal/typical” children, which means additional educational provision is made for them.

This paper will set out differences and similarities in policy, examining the legislation and statutory guidance of the different policies. It will report on a pilot which seeks to present how concepts such as “disability”; “additional needs”; “special educational needs” and “vulnerable children” are framed in the different parties manifestoes produced and publicised for the upcoming UK general election (expected by end of 2024).

It will also describe a project under development to make use of data collection in each of the four home nations to describe the characteristics of this group of children and patterns in who they are and where they go to school. The first stage of the project will be to map what data are collected and collated by the departments of education in each of the jurisdictions.

This will result in a comparison of the different policies and data and the impact these might have on the numbers of children labelled as having additional needs. Such analysis will afford unique opportunities to compare and contrast the impact of different policies on the inclusion and education of children with additional needs, beyond SEN. It will draw attention to the need to recognise (and critique) the assumption that English policy is synonymous with UK policy (Furlong and Lunt, 2016; Raffe et al 1999), and will help reposition the other home nations to a more central role in policy debate and research (Power, 2016). It will also be a model for ways of exploring other federal policy variation in international contexts.

For some people, life goes on without much happening, while for others, major life-changing events occur during their lifetime. Having an extensive visual impairment or becoming blind as an adult is an example of an event that often changes the fundamentals of life. Based on lifeworld phenomenological theory and philosophy, this new life situation can be said to mean that the world changes if the body changes, since the world is experienced via our lived body (Merleau-Ponty, 2012). Visual perception is central to our perceptual relationship with the world and it is essential to develop in-depth knowledge of how other senses can come into play. This is also about learning to deal with a new life situation. The question is therefore central to educational theory.

The purpose of this study is to use lifeworld phenomenological theory to understand what it means to have a severe visual impairment or become blind and how people learn to deal with this new life-situation. In addition, the study aims to develop a practice-based theory of changed life-situation and learning. It is about fundamentally understanding the existential situation of experiencing and learning to live in a changed lifeworld.

The empirical material on which the theory development is based consists of an empirical study where the aim was to study and clarify pedagogical processes with a focus on the learning of people with visual impairment. The theoretical work is also based on a previously conducted study (Berndtsson, 2001). As a theoretical basis, lifeworld phenomenological theory is used, focusing on human existence. The concept of lifeworld as developed by Heidegger (2013), Merleau-Ponty (2012) and Schutz (1962) is central as it offers an openness to the fact that the world can be experienced differently for different people and differently from time to time. The lifeworld here offers an openness to studying changes in life and thereby focusing on central pedagogical issues. As the study concerns changing relationships between life and the world, the lived body (Merleau-Ponty, 1912) is also a central starting point, not least because of how perception links the body and the world. Other theoretical starting points are lived space and lived time, intersubjectivity and social world, and horizon as both openness and limitation (van Peursen, 1977). The main focus of the study is the everyday lifeworld (Schütz, 1962), a world where people, through their actions and behaviors, shape a world together with others. Everyday activities are also central as the body, according to Schütz, can be seen as the tool that changes the world. In vision rehabilitation, other tools also come into play, such as the white cane, which needs to be learned to be used in order to get around in the new, changed world, which in itself includes existence, identity and the social world (Berndtsson, 2018). The study has also developed its own concepts such as existential body, perceptual body, social body and the body of activity.

The focus of this presentation is the developed practice-based theory. The starting point is the lifeworld changed by visual impairment and how this situation appears to the participants in the study. In many cases, the change can be described as a break in life as it is no longer possible to engage and act in the world in the same way as before. In accordance with the philosophy of Merleau-Ponty (2012), the break can also be seen as a gap between life and the world. In this context, learning is seen as that which through experience and action is able to reconnect life and the world in its different dimensions (Bengtsson & Berndtsson, 2015).

This presentation discusses the potential of inclusion from a theoretical perspective of collective processes of Bildung, with a focus on its transformative and ideology-critical aspects. It is reflected upon the findings of the doctoral dissertation, which investigated nine group discussions in the founding initiatives of inclusive schools. The presentation aims to answer the question of how a common vision of inclusion is created. Given that we are all involved in hegemonic relations, it is important to consider how these relations intersect with hegemonic ideas, both implicitly and explicitly. Throughout the research, the concept of critique, particularly in relation to ideology, became a central focus. Therefore, the criticism is not only directed towards the inadequate implementation of inclusion but also towards the norm itself, without completely rejecting it.

Inclusion is an increasingly popular term, but it remains a code without a concrete meaning (Boger et al. 2021). Even the CRPD only describes its purpose and objectives, rather than offering a definition. A first common basis can be the understanding of Inclusion as an active process of anti- or non-discrimination, which entails a broad understanding of inclusion as unifying sexism, racism, ableism and classism-critical theory (Boger 2017; Calloni 2005). This already hints at the intimate and contradictory interweaving of the concept of inclusion (or anti-discrimination) with its counter-concept of exclusion (or discrimination) (ibid; Lanwer 2015; Wocken 2021). The concepts form a dialectical unity of opposites that denote relationships, dependent on and interwoven with social practice, in its past and present, in which social actors can act and realize what is possible in opposition. The issue of social inclusion and exclusion is closely tied to social power relations. Therefore, the practice of critique is crucial. Exclusion criteria can reveal how societies are organized, the ideologies they pursue, and the power structures that individuals ultimately navigate (Moser, 2018, p. 8). Inclusion cannot be seen as an achievable moral – and therefore harmless – demand that can be incorporated into the current hegemony. That would be a 'passive revolution' (Gramsci 2012), a restoration of fragile power relations in order to stabilize them. Instead, more interesting are the challenges to established knowledge systems and power structures that are specific to inclusion.

Based on the thesis that building social consensus does not work as a top-down-strategy (Moser/Egger 2017: 15), this study focuses on group practices of creating visions of inclusion. By using the German concept of Bildung it is possible to research and explain the inconclusive, open, and teleologically indeterminate processes of individual transformations in perspectives and attitudes (Buttigieg, Calleja 2021, S. 3; Koller 2018 & 2020). The text proposes an approach to collective processes of Bildung regarding inclusion/exclusion by linking it to the philosophy of praxis (Gramsci 2012) and a critical theory of ideology. The aim is to present collective Bildung or changes to inclusion as a radical questioning rather than a harmonious process (as Bildung was for Humboldt). I aim to examine the potential of these processes for ideology-critique in an analytical and transgressive sense. This involves targeting the inner (self-) contradictions without directly opposing the new, as it arises from criticisms (Jaeggi 2019; Gramsci 2012; Rehmann 2020).

It is essential to comprehend inclusion as a political project that aims to change social practice towards decolonization and overcome social exclusion (Jantzen 2019). The objective of this presentation is to offer an understanding of inclusion as a theoretical and practical dialectic, which will serve as an emancipatory and transformative critique. Although the contradiction and dialectic of the terms may never be resolved, their relationship can change, as can their effectiveness and meaning.

In this conceptual paper, we argue that the Ethics of Care (EoC) is a compelling theoretical framework that could serve as a powerful underpinning for fostering Relational Inclusivity (RI), shaping educational environments that prioritize empathy, mutual support, and a genuine concern for the well-being of all individual students involved.

The EoC has been defined as a philosophical framework that shifts contemporary moral and ethical narratives around the concept of care (Gilligan, 1982). EoC asserts that humans depend on each other for positive liberty, highlighting our inherent interdependence. Dependency, viewed negatively in modern societies, is resized as an inherent aspect of being alive. Rather than viewing humans as independent individuals, EoC sees them as relational entities shaped by each one's networks of care, whether they involve living beings or structural conditions (Camps, 2021).

From this standpoint, care becomes central and is defined as a proactive activity encompassing everything we do to sustain, continue, and repair our "world" – our bodies, identities, and environment – to sustain life optimally (Tronto, 1993). Care becomes a transformative element in relationships, shaping how we perceive the world and understand our commitment and responsibility to others.

In EoC relationships take center stage, and caring emerges as the preferred way to relate to each other. A robust caring network, encompassing relationships and structural conditions, becomes crucial for navigating dependencies and ensuring well-being. Consequently, care becomes a fundamental principle that should guide education, emphasizing the importance of fostering supportive and empathetic caring networks (Vázquez-Verdera, 2009).

In the context of education, the EoC challenges the traditional rational decision-making approach based on rules and laws, and proposes a subjective and particular decision-making perspective that encompasses the specific affective relationship and the unique situation of the person. In the former, rights and responsibilities are defined by others; in the latter, it is a matter of taking responsibility for oneself in the relationship with others. It involves changing the view of "something has to be done" to "I have to do something" (Busquets-Surribas, 2019; Vázquez-Verdera, 2009).

Relational inclusivity (RI), within the context of the EoC, refers to the idea that education should extend beyond individual student-centered purposes to encompass the quality of relationships and the interconnectedness of students within a community or society (Mamas et al., 2024; Mamas & Trautman, 2023). Therefore, RI, as informed by the EoC, transcends the mere acknowledgment of diversity. It goes beyond surface-level inclusivity efforts and delves into the cultivation of meaningful connections and relationships of care within the educational community. This involves acknowledging, recognizing and valuing the diverse backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives of students, educators and stakeholders, nurturing positive and supportive connections while actively working to create an environment where everyone feels seen, heard, and understood.

RI involves both "caring for," which is a direct and personal response based on the caregiver's relationship, and "caring about," a more indirect response related to broader and abstract concepts or distant situations. The EoC education framework emphasizes both but prioritizes "caring for" over "caring about", recognizing the centrality of subjective experiences and moving away from purely theoretical perspectives (Noddings, 2001). RI extends beyond the traditional EoC focus on the teacher-student relationship, particularly influenced by Nel Noddings. Instead, RI innovatively promotes primarily fostering "caring for" dynamics among peers.

In this symposium we further the use of an agential realism perspective to critically examine how prevailing research perspectives might inadvertently perpetuate stereotypical representations of individuals (both children and adults) that are conceptualised as disadvantaged or marginalised in a range of ways such those with disabilities, as passive and tragic figures and invertedly create and cement new subjectifying discourses (e.g. the fallen behind generation). We shed light on potential shifts in the perception of vulnerabilities and their impact on institutionalised education and care from the perspective of those who may have been, remain, or have become (even more) vulnerable. Rather than affixing the label of "vulnerability" to a particular subpopulation or seeing vulnerability (solely) as an inherent characteristic in individuals, we follow Luna (2019), who proposes a contextual understanding of vulnerability. She develops an understanding that the vulnerabilities might be subject to change if situational contexts change, such as that an individual is no longer or even more susceptible to vulnerability. Crises, as in our case, the COVID-19 crisis, can serve as an excellent example of unravelling the multilayeredness and potential cascading effects of vulnerability itself and the diversity among those being perceived as vulnerable. As indicated in this symposium's umbrella text, individual dispositions of becoming vulnerable have to be seen in relation to contextual factors. We also look at the importance of research methods and how co-research with people about their own experiences of life can challenge narrow definitions of identity.

In the symposium we take a comparative perspective by investigating the situation in three Eurpoean countries (Austria, Germany and the UK) as well as Canada and Australia.

The first paper brings ideas from the Austrian project "Cov_Enable: Reimagining Vulnerabilities in times of crisis" (FWF Project P 34641) that is disentangling how (new) discourses and practice (formations) in the contexts of (inclusive) education and (supported) living are impacting children, youth, and adults labeled as vulnerable. They show how disabled persons are revealed be consistently engaged in “acts of world-building” or “performative affordances” within their daily lives.

The second paper the project "Impediments and enablers to schooling of non/privileged students during the COVID-19 pandemic – a comparison between Canada and Germany", funded by the German government, we compare how students from non/privileged milieus experienced school and out-of-school (including family) life during the different phases of the pandemic, as well as the school and classroom ways of dealing with them. This paper shows the importance of context on a nuanced understanding of vulnerability.

The third paper looks at the ways that children whether or not from marginalised groups such as SEND (special educational needs and disability) are cast as vulnerable and at risk when it comes to their perceived increasing use of social media. We suggest methodology matters. Our co-research activity-based method that aims to recruit children as co-researchers into their digital lives finds that children use apps in balanced and sophisticated ways.

Our papers together suggest that a shift in perspective taking would enable us to better address the interplay within the child/dis/ability-vulnerability nexus, with the chance of offering more nuanced and empowering narratives.

Over the past decade, discourses on disabled and marginalized groups have been intertwined in a complex manner and contradictory. These groups are portrayed as lacking agency amid global crises like pandemics, climate change, economic instability, and conflict (Ito, 2014; Bressanelli & Natali, 2023; Jørgensen et al, 2023; Henig & Knight, 2023). Concurrently, they're sometimes seen as straining welfare systems. In the project "Cov_Enable: Reimagining Vulnerabilities in times of crisis" (FWF Project P 34641), we focus on the traveling nature of the concept of vulnerability within the life course domains of inclusive education and supported housing in context of dis/ability (Koenig, Mandl & Reisenbauer, under review). This study highlights the critical role of perspective in shaping narratives and the implicit choices in research. Previously, we examined vulnerability as a complex, layered phenomenon (Luna, 2019), challenging traditional views of inherent vulnerability as individual traits residing in individuals. This presentation aims to discuss two transformative perspectives that have altered our methodological approach. Firstly, we explore agential realism and Posthumanist perspectives (Naraian & Amrhein, 2022), enriching our understanding of vulnerability. These concepts, particularly 'agential cuts' and the apparatus of knowing in agential realism (Barad, 2014), are well suited to explore how our research perspectives potentially reaffirm stereotypical representations of individuals with disabilities as passive and tragic figures. Secondly, and as a countering perspective we draw upon the work of Dokumaci (2023), whose research portrays people with disabilities neither as victims nor as drains on resources but rather as active participants in their own lives. Engaged in “activist affordances,” which extend beyond “activism in the traditional sense,” disabled persons are revealed be consistently engaged in “acts of world-building” or “performative affordances” within their daily lives as they negotiate and overcome barriers (Dokumanci, 2023, p. 5). These perspectives, as argued and demonstrated through case study analysis from our project, offer a nuanced, interconnected view of vulnerability. They pave the way for research approaches that are responsive, ethical, and attuned to the realities and agencies of individuals with disabilities. This approach underscores the concept of 'response-ability' in research, highlighting the need to respect and acknowledge the complexities of the subjects and contexts studied whilst emphasizing our duty as researchers to acknowledge and respect the complexities of the subjects and contexts we study. Such a perspective aligns with the conference's theme by recognizing the role of memory and hope in shaping future educational landscapes (Sharpe, 2013).

Barad, Karen. 2014. ‘Diffracting Diffraction: Cutting Together-Apart’. Parallax 20 (3): 168–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/13534645.2014.927623. Dokumaci, A. (2023). Activist Affordances: How Disabled People Improvise More Habitable Worlds. Duke University Press. Ito, A. (2014). Disability, natural disasters, conflict, humanitarian emergencies: The work of the United Nations. In Crises, conflict and disability (pp. 19-24). Routledge. Bressanelli, E. and Natali, D. (2023) Tested by the Polycrisis: Reforming or Transforming the EU? Politics and Governance, 11(4), 246–251. Jørgensen, S. P. et al. (2023) Evolution of the polycrisis: Anthropocene traps that challenge global sustainability. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 379. Henig, D. and Knight. D.M. (2023) Polycrisis Prompts for an emerging worldview, Anthropology Today, 39(2), 3-6. Koenig, O., Mandl, S. and Reisenbauer, S. (2024) Reconfiguring Vulnerability and Dis/ability: An Agential Realist Exploration to Disentangle Vulnerability Effects in Covid-19 Response. Submitted to Disability & Society Luna, F. (2019). Identifying and evaluating layers of vulnerability–a way forward. developing world bioethics, 19(2), 86-95. Naraian, Srikala, and Bettina Amrhein. 2022. ‘Learning to Read “Inclusion” Divergently: Enacting a Transnational Approach to Inclusive Education’. International Journal of Inclusive Education 26 (14): 1327–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1807624. Sharpe, B. (2013) Three Horizones. The Patterning of Hope. Triarchy Press

This paper investigates the experiences students and teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic in non-privileged areas of Canada and Germany. While the group of students, who experienced the pandemic during their transition from childhood to young adolescent, which is a vulnerable phase, their teachers were confronted with students with these ‘new experiences’ and not able to rely on their teaching and schooling routines and cultures to deal with these. In the project “Impediments and enablers to schooling of non-/privileged students during the COVID-19 pandemic – a comparison between Canada and Germany”, funded by the German government, we compare how students from non-/privileged milieus experienced school and out-of-school (including family) life during the different phases of the pandemic, as well as the school and classroom ways of dealing with them. Additionally their teachers’ experiences and their efforts to reach and accommodate their students will be investigated in. The context of schooling differs between Germany and Canada – not only during the pandemic (for example Sturm 2019). While Germany has tracked school systems, that distinguish vocational and academic tracks, Canadas provinces have only one track. The pandemic context also differs, since schools in Germany were closed for almost a year while Canadian schools only closed for two months. In the paper two comparisons will be focused: the experiences of non-privileged students on schooling who live in Canada and Germany and the students’ experiences in relation to the one of their teachers. This will be done based on group interviews that were conducted with four students in their schools and interviews with their teachers. The comparison shows that non-privileged students from Germany were experiencing exclusion from educational resources much more than their peers in Canada. They were not included in day-to-day options in remote exchange with teachers and peers, due to the lack of devices and internet access. In contrast to their Canadian peers the German students were offered less support, like reducing academic expectations and offering personal support in working on tasks. The Canadian teachers were provided with digital technology to stay in touch with their students, while this was not provided in all school settings in Germany. Where it was not provided, teachers had a hard time to stay in touch with their students.

Sturm, T. (2019). Constructing and addressing differences in inclusive schooling–comparing cases from Germany, Norway and the United States. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(6), 656-669.

Debates about children’s digital engagement is dominated by dichotomous discourses of digital risk, focusing on dangers to children particularly the most vulnerable (El Asam and Katz, 2018) and digital promise, which views digital technology as a force for positive change. Children are rarely directly consulted about how they use digital tools and what they see as the value of their digital experiences (Livingstone, 2014). This rigorous UK study took place with 34 Y5/10yr pupils in two schools in North East England (one rural, one urban multi-ethnic) and included a number of children with SEND (special educational needs and disabilities). Children were invited to take part as co-researchers in an individual activity-oriented interview. The activity involved placing a set of cards (apps, people, and emotions) on a game board representing their networks and interactions. Open-ended conversations explored children’s practices, purposes, experiences, contexts and values in relation to digitally mediated interactions. This research explored the following questions: • What do children value in their digital lives? • How do gender, dis/ability, cultural and social identities, and contexts, impact on children’s digital experiences? A mixed-methods approach was adopted with data collected of the activity in three ways: a video-recording children’s hands and conversation; still images taken of completed relational diagrams; and recorded conversations were transcribed. This research builds upon the Australian Research Council funded ‘How Do You Connect’ project investigates children’s digital lives to better understand and evidence how young children’s digital skills and how they build their social media networks (Neumann et al 2022). Discussions with the children evidenced how they use apps to stay connected with family and friends, locally and globally, often sharing fun and laughter; how gaming allows them to immerse themselves in, and create their own, digital worlds; how they use apps to direct their learning in hobbies and interests and how they ‘do school’ and ‘do family’. Children’s self-regulation and knowledge how to keep safe (Livingstone, 2014), and the relationship between their online and offline activity, was also evident. This research challenges a narrow conceptualisation of children including those with SEND as vulnerable, and a digital risk/digital promise binary. We find multi-layered ecologies (McHale et al 2009) in which children are embedded such that they are active in their own lives and the creation of their own identities. We discuss the importance of methods with children as co-researchers into their own lives rather than objects of study.

El Asam, A, and Katz, A. (2018). Vulnerable Young People and Their Experience of Online Risks. Human-Computer Interaction. 33. 1-24. 10.1080 Livingstone, S. (2014). Developing social media literacy: How children learn to interpret risky opportunities on social network sites. Communications, 39, 283-303. Mchale, S. M., Dotterer, A. & Kim, J.-Y. (2009). An ecological perspective on the media and youth development. American Behavioral Scientist, 52, 1186-1203. Neumann, M., Park, E., Soong,H, Nichols, S. and Selim, N. (2022) Exploring the social media networks of primary school children Education 3-13 International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education

The diagnosis of a serious illness in children and adolescents not only poses great challenges for the patients and their parents, but is also an important issue for schools and educators. Serious and long-term illnesses represent developmental tasks for pupils that deviate from their usual life routine, which - if not successfully overcome - can be accompanied by further emotional and social challenges. There has been a discussion about further training for teaching during illness since the 1970s. There is a consensus that teachers need additional pedagogical and didactic skills in this field, but there is still no curricular or state-recognised training or further education in German-speaking countries. With regard to adequate schooling in the sense of pedagogy during illness, it can therefore be stated that there is a lack of clarification of (political, financial, scientific and pedagogical) responsibilities as well as a lack of systematisation and evaluation of pedagogical action. In addition, there is a lack of interconnection between practical expertise and scientific knowledge in this area, which is all the more problematic as it is of great relevance, especially in stressful situations such as illness, that pupils receive appropriate educational support in a timely manner. The illness-specific educational support requirements lead to special demands on teachers.

The focus is on questions of professionalisation in the face of the great heterogeneity of sick pupils and special schools as inclusive places of education. The contribution focusses on vulnerability as a heterogeneity dimension using the example of illness and how to deal with it in terms of inclusive education.

This symposium will present findings from projects that deal with pedagogy in the case of illness. One project aims to establish the first international network of Swiss universities in the field of "pedagogy during illness" and "hospital schools" - initially with Germany and Austria - and subsequently with the UK. A sustainable transnational network between universities (science) and hospital schools (practice) has been established in the D-A-CH network (Germany, Austria, Switzerland), in which empirical analyses of the requirements and practical professional goals of hospital schools have been carried out. These empirical analyses will result in the form of a curriculum for a Master's degree course in Hospital School Pedagogy anchored in Switzerland, which will contribute to the professionalisation of teachers at hospital schools and to the further development of pedagogy in the event of illness. In this regard, specific pedagogical aspects that need to be taken into account in pedagogy during illness will be analysed and presented at the symposium.

Another project is investigating the use of digital educational technology for children and young people with chronic illnesses. The question of whether and in what way telepresence systems, such as the AV1 avatar, can enable pupils with chronic illnesses to be included in everyday school life and what opportunities but also hurdles need to be taken into account for educators is being investigated. To this end, an interview study was conducted and presented and discussed at the symposium.

Overarching, the contributions deal with the question of the professionalisation of how teachers deal with sick pupils both in special schools and in mainstream schools in terms of inclusive education. This research question is addressed methodologically in the individual contributions, both empirically and quantitatively.

Remedial schools are conceptualised as inclusive places of education in which, however, pedagogical antinomies with regard to school inclusion cannot be resolved. The antinomies exist, for example, in the temporary school on the one hand and the breakdown of relationships on the other. The character of the sanatorium school as a transitional place, as well as a separative and at the same time inclusive temporary place, is worked out. After inclusion in the hospital school, re-inclusion after a stay in a hospital school can be a major challenge for everyone involved (Tougas et al. 2019). At the centre is the heterogeneity dimension of vulnerability, which is addressed using the example of illness in pupils. Using the hermeneutic approach in educational science, texts on inclusive pedagogy and pedagogy in the case of illness are critically analysed and antinomies in the field of discourse are identified and contrasted. The article is intended as an introduction and framing of the topic and contributions to the symposium.

Piegsda, F .; Link, P . C .; Rossmanith, S .; Kötzel, A . (2020): Eine Schule für besondere Lebenslagen aufZeit . Schulische Zentren für Pädagogik bei Krankheit im Kontext von Transitions- und Inklusionsprozessen . Zeitschrift für Heilpädagogik, 71 (2), S . 58–71 Tougas, A .-M .; Rassy, J .; Frenette-Bergeron, É .; Marcil, K . (2019). «Lost in Transition»: A Systematic Mixed Studies Review of Problems and Needs Associated with School Reintegration After Psychia-tric Hospitalization . School Mental Health, 11(4), S . 629–649 .

In terms of inclusive education, teachers of all school types need additional pedagogical-didactic competences in the heterogeneity dimension of illness. The main aim of the Movetia-funded project is to develop a curriculum for a MAS (Master of Advanced Studies) in Pedagogy in Illness and Hospital School Pedagogy in order to professionalise teachers who work in transition, with chronically ill children and young people and in special schools. The sub-goals for achieving this are, firstly, an analysis of the current situation in order to systematically analyse existing continuing education programmes in the field of pedagogy in illness. The method of choice here is document analysis due to the heterogeneity of the data material. Secondly, a questionnaire will be used to survey the needs of teachers at special schools and teachers involved in the transition of pupils. Thirdly, on the basis of this data, selected expert interviews are conducted and analysed with regard to conditions for success and needs for action and presented to the practice partners. This three-step process and the associated triangulation of the document analysis, data from the quantitative and qualitative field survey and the expert interviews are intended to form the scientifically sound basis for the development of the cross-location curriculum for D-A-CH, which has been evaluated by practitioners. This paper will present the research project as a whole and the initial results.

Langnickel, R., Markowetz, R., Hövel, D. C., Link, P.-C., Falkenstörfer, S., Hoanzl, M., Elbracht, S., & Gingelmaier, S. (2023). Projektvorstellung "Pädagogik bei Krankheit und Spitalschulpädagogik" (Pb-KuS). Sonderpädagogische Förderung heute., 68 (4), 430–434. https://doi.org/10.3262/SZ2304430

In Austria, around 200,000 children and young people suffer from a chronic illness and can only participate in school lessons to a limited extent or not at all due to medical treatment or hospitalisation. The resulting social isolation can have serious and long-lasting consequences for young patients (Kirkpatrick 2020). To counteract this, digital education technologies such as telepresence robots are being used in everyday school life. The small robots enable patients to attend school virtually, meet friends and take part in lessons. This technology acts as a proxy for the patient at school and is controlled by the patient via a tablet. The telepresence systems are intended to help facilitate the social integration of children and adolescents with chronic illnesses so that they can participate in school life despite their illness (Zillner et al., 2022). As part of a qualitative interview study (n= 28) with affected pupils, parents, teachers and classmates, participation with a telepresence system at school was investigated. The study focussed in particular on factors that promote and hinder social inclusion. The data was analysed using qualitative content analysis according to Kuckartz. In this article, the results of the study are presented and put up for discussion. Categories such as attitude, usage behaviour and interaction in the classroom with a telepresence system are discussed. These aspects are discussed in the context of a sense of belonging and social integration in the school environment. The aim is to identify opportunities and barriers to facilitate teachers' use of telepresence systems and to strengthen social inclusion.

Kirkpatrick, K. (2020). Adolescents With Chronical Medical Conditions and High School Completion: The Importance of Perceived School Belonging. Continuity in Education, 1(1), pp. 50-63. Kuckartz, U. & Rädiker, S. (2023). Qualitative Content Analysis: Methods, Practice and Software. SAGE Publications. Zillner, C., Turner, A., Rockenbauer, G., Röhsner, M., & Pletschko, T. (2022). Use of Telepresence System to Enhance School Participation in Pediatric Patients with Chronic Illnesses Involving the CNS: Zeitschrift für Neuropsychologie, 33 (4), 227 - 234.

Major global developments, such as climate change, migration, rising inequalities and demographic shifts, have contributed to the significant diversification of communities and classrooms (Cerna et al., 2021; International Organization for Migration, 2020; OECD, 2016, 2019). The increasing diversity has important implications for education systems, and policy efforts have, in many national contexts, begun to focus on “closing the gap”, in terms of academic outcomes, between students from majority and minority backgrounds (Howard, 2019). The UN’s Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 calls on the education community to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”. Learning environments play an important role in realizing the SDG 4 goals. However, little is known regarding equitable and inclusive learning environments and how these environments can manifest and link to educational outcomes in contemporary education.

This symposium explores how, and to what extent, learning environments can contribute to creating more equitable and inclusive education futures for learners in formal education settings. Researchers from Australia, Ireland, the Netherlands and China draw on a range of theories and methodological approaches to interrogate how physical, psycho-social and pedagogical contexts in which learning occurs can support students to achieve their full educational potential and develop a sense of belonging and self-worth irrespective of their personal and social circumstances (Cerna et al. 2021). Our symposium will provide a preview of a selection of papers which will be part of a Special Issue to be published in the Learning Environments Research Journal in the last quarter of 2024.

The first paper focuses on physical school spaces. It offers critical insights into how inclusion was prioritised from the outset in the design of vertical secondary schools, a new type of school in Australia. The authors combine capability and salutogenic theories in their conceptualisation of ‘inclusion and thriving’ to explore the diverse experiences of students. Challenges and trade-offs in achieving inclusive facilities for all are illuminated, providing valuable insights for future educational infrastructure development.

The second paper explores ‘wellbeing’, a complex and contested concept which has gained growing attention in education and research in recent years. Using a participatory art-informed photovoice methodological approach, the author explores students’ perspectives and experiences of wellbeing, and of their schools’ wellbeing-related supports in Ireland.

The third paper describes and discusses a university-wide teaching and learning initiative, developed in the Netherlands, which aims to create a more inclusive learning climate for all students. The ‘Mixed Classroom’ model, which was designed to enhance teachers’ and students’ diversity literacy and to stimulate meaningful interactions within classrooms, will be described and experiences with its implementation discussed.

The fourth paper focuses on inclusive pedagogies and, specifically, teachers’ conceptions and skills regarding differentiated instructions in China. The authors of the study used a variety of quantitative tools as well as in-depth interviews to explore the relationships between student teachers’ conceptions of diversity, equity and inclusion, their behavioral intentions, and pedagogical practices. Drawing on their findings they make recommendations for strengthening teacher professional development for more inclusive pedagogical spaces.

Following the four paper presentations, the lead editor of the special issue will discuss and interrogate theoretical perspectives and research findings to illustrate important areas for consideration, challenges and opportunities regarding the conceptualisation and realisation of safe, inclusive and equitable learning environments. Core strands of the learning environments literature as well as the most widely used learning environment measurement tools will be reviewed (Fraser, 2023) to identify and critically discuss how equity issues have been positioned and conceptualised in this body of work so far, and how these conceptualisations may benefit from further development and expansion in the future.

Schools that remain unchanged for decades influence whether generations of young people feel included and can access educational entitlements. Physical spaces communicate who was imagined as inhabiting the spaces as learners and what kind of pedagogic choices and meaningful learning would happen. Attending to how inclusion was prioritised from the outset in the design of new vertical secondary schools can inform future builds. So too can attending to the lived experiences of students to understand how these inclusive aspirations were and were not yet being achieved. For individuals and groups, particularly those identifying as a marginalised or minority group, living with disability, identifying as gender nonconforming, or someone from a non-majority cultural or religious background, infrastructure that may be largely considered ‘inclusive’ for most, may also be experienced as exclusionary for those who do not fit within the assumptions about what inclusive facilities require. To attend to diverse experiences, inclusion is uniquely conceptualised in this study as combining capability and salutogenic theories. Capability acknowledges that an individual’s right to choose a life they value is more likely to be achieved when people can be, feel, and do things to achieve those valued aspirations with the resources in their environment (Sen, 1985). The salutogenic potential of school environments (Antonovsky, 1996, Franz 2019) including ease of navigation within the built environment (comprehensibility), full participation (manageability), and links to purposeful life choices (meaningfulness) informed the data analysis. Vertical schools, a new type of school in Australia, provide the context for this study. These multi-storey schools in urban settings occupy significantly smaller areas of land than traditional ‘horizontal’ schools. They differ sufficiently from traditional schools to require and enable new ways of thinking. Aspirations for inclusion that were designed into three vertical high schools from the outset are outlined alongside data from over 200 Year 8 students about their experiences as learners in these environments. Student annotated maps were analysed alongside architect and educational leader interviews in a qualitative thematic process. Particular attention was paid to data from students whose experience was not the same as others. Inclusive environments were evident when they were authentic, made sense and were easy to manage. Aspects where students had to work harder to manage the learning or themselves in the environment resulted in students making trade-offs between competing aspects of wellbeing and inclusion, a challenge in achieving SDG4a, where facilities need to be inclusive for all.

Antonovsky, A. (1996). The salutogenic model as a theory to guide health promotion. Health promotion international, 11(1), 11-18. Franz, J. (2019). Designing ‘Space’for Student Wellbeing as Flourishing. School spaces for student wellbeing and learning: Insights from research and practice, 261-279. Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency and freedom: The Dewey lectures 1984. The Journal of philosophy, 82(4), 169-221.

Wellbeing is a multifaceted, complex and contested concept (Svane et al., 2019) that has gained increased attention and become more visible in education and research in recent years. With a greater focus on young persons’ wellbeing in Ireland (NCCA, 2021), this study supports efforts to nurture wellbeing in school by deepening our understanding of the multiple perspectives held by students regarding wellbeing. The participatory art-informed approach to this study aims to gain insights into the students’ perspectives and experiences of wellbeing, and into how young people perceive that their school supports their wellbeing. Photovoice is used as a reflective tool for students to explore what supports their wellbeing in their school context and as a tool for collaboration with teachers and other stakeholders. The participatory approach in itself aims to foster wellbeing, relationships and connectedness. Consistent with one of the overarching purposes of arts-informed research, it is an explicit intention of this study to reach audiences such as parents, students, and management boards. First-year student wellbeing was explored using photos and narratives from 43 student participants. The data was analysed using thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006). The participatory study design aimed to strengthen student voice and agency throughout the research process; a Children’s Research Advisory Group (CRAG) was involved in each step of the research process including with presenting findings which informed their own school-improvement plan and wellbeing programme. Six students volunteered for the CRAG. The research explores the potential power of images to access young people’s emotional stories and experiences of wellbeing, agency and belonging in school and will support professional development of teachers both at individual and whole-school level. This study demonstrates the significant and rich insights young people can provide when given voice. It highlights the impact relationships and connectedness have on student wellbeing and suggests areas for development that reflect student wellbeing in its complexity. The research concludes with recommendations regarding approaches that can assist schools in amplifying student voice, engendering greater agency, and contributing to decision making for an improved school environment.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design, Cambridge, Harvard University Press. Byrne, D., Carthy, A. & Mc Gilloway, S. (2020). A review of the role of school-related factors in the promotion of student social and emotional wellbeing at post-primary level. Irish Educational Studies, 39, 439-455. DES (2018). Wellbeing policy Statement and Framework for Practice 2018-2023. Dublin: DES. Graham, A., Powell, M. A. & Truscott, J. (2016). Facilitating Student Well-Being: Relationships Do Matter. Educational Research, 58, 366-383. Lundy, L. (2007). "Voice" is not enough: conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. British Educational Research Journal, 33, 927-942. NCCA (2021). Junior Cycle Wellbeing Guidelines 2021, Dublin, NCCA. Smyth, E. & Darmody, (2021). Risk and protective factors in adolescent behaviour: The role of family, school and neighbourhood characteristics in (mis)behaviour among young people. ESRI Research Series. Dublin: ESRI. Svane, D., Evans, N. & Carter, M. (2019). Wicked wellbeing: Examining the disconnect between the rhetoric and reality of wellbeing interventions in schools. Australian Journal of Education, 63, 209-231. Wang, C. & Burris, M. (1997). Photovoice: Concept, Methodology, and Use for Participatory Needs Assessment. Health Education & Behavior, 24, 369-387.

Educational systems, including higher education, are not yet level playing fields (Taylor et al., 2020; UNESCO, 2020). Also, within the Dutch context, higher education is characterized by inequality in terms of access, study success and belonging. Students with minority identities drop out more often, study longer, have lower levels participation, and experience lower levels of belonging (Wekker et al., 2016; Waldring et al. 2020). They are underserved in the current education systems. It is urgent to make education more equitable. However, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion approaches often focus on minority students. They aim to support them in closing gaps in terms of academic skills, and intend to familiarize them with the dominant university norms and codes (Essed, 2008). Inclusive education involves institutional transformation towards inclusive excellence, which is based on learning environments and pedagogies that are attuned to the varying needs, talents, and worldviews of every student, and brings out academic excellence in every student. But building on diversity this way requires deep levels of awareness of teachers and institutions. It can be quite abstract to translate into practical teaching interventions (see also Salazar et al., 2010). It is not easy to establish inclusive classroom environments, especially in polarized times like these. Students in our universities do not always feel safe to express themselves, and sometimes experience microaggressions or racism in class (Waldring et al., 2020; Slootman et al., 2023). Teachers often feel unequipped to manage heated discussions (Müftügil-Yalcin et al., 2023). The VU Mixed Classroom Educational Model provides a way to enhance an equitable learning environment that fosters inclusive excellence. Teachers in Higher Education can establish an inclusive learning environment by building on different perspectives and talents in the classroom. This can be a challenging process. In this article, we offer practical guidance by offering a vision, strategies, and examples of learning activities for various (online/offline, larger/smaller) classroom settings. We also explain the process of development and implementation. The model, developed at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, unpacks three phases in classroom dynamics that lead towards an end goal: creating inclusive learning environments to educate future academics and professionals who are capable of building on differences between themselves and others, using different perspectives in resolving complex problems.

Essed, P. (2008). Cloning cultural homogeneity while talking diversity: Old wine in new bottles in Dutch organizations. Transforming Anthropology, 11(1), 2–12. https://doi.org/10.1525/tran.2002.11.1.2 Müftügil-Yalcin S, Brodsky NW, Slootman M, Das A, Ramdas S. Managing “Hot Moments” in Diverse Classrooms for Inclusive and Equitable Campuses. Education Sciences. 2023; 13(8):777. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13080777 Salazar M. C., Norton A. S., & Tuitt F. A. (2010). Weaving promising practices for inclusive excellence into the higher education classroom. To improve the Academy, 28(1), 208–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-4822.2010.tb00604.x Slootman, M., Korthals Altes, T., Domagała-Zyśk, E., Rodríguez-Ardura, I., & Stanojev, I. (2023). A handbook of e-inclusion. Building capacity for inclusive higher education in digital environment. Published Online. Accessible from https://einclusion.net/project-outputs/handbook-for-inclusive-digital-education/ Taylor, M., Turk, J. M., Chessman, H. M., & Espinosa, L. L. (2020). Race and ethnicity in higher education: 2020 supplement. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. http://www.equityinhighered.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/REHE-2020-final.pdf UNESCO. (2020). Global Education Monitoring Report 2020: Inclusion and education: All means all. Paris, UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373718 Waldring, I., Labeab, A., van den Hee, M., Crul, M., & Slootman, M. (2020). Belonging@VU. Amsterdam: VU Wekker, G., Slootman, M. W., Icaza, R., Jansen, H., & Vazquez, R. (2016). Let’s do diversity. Report of the University of Amsterdam Diversity Commission. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.

In recent decades, there has been a global commitment to diversifying the teaching profession, to integrating diverse perspectives into curricula, and to establishing comprehensive diversity and equity plans (Keane et al., 2022). This trend is particularly pertinent due to the increasing diversity of student populations worldwide, including in relation to age, sexual orientation, physical and mental ability, socio-economic status, and political perspectives (Cerna et al., 2021). China, for instance, has witnessed a marked increase in student diversity, highlighting the prevalent issue of educational inequity. Teachers are central to addressing equity challenges, necessitating a paradigm shift in teacher training programs (Florian & Camedda, 2020). However, many student teachers are insufficiently prepared to teach diverse student populations, primarily due to limited understanding and commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) (e.g., Chubbuck, 2007). Even those with positive DEI orientations often exhibit gaps between their conceptions, intentions, and actual practices (Lee, 2011). Additionally, teachers tend to rely on traditional teaching strategies rather than active and experiential approaches suitable for diverse classrooms (Mills & Ballantyne, 2016). Notably, teachers often lack proficiency in differentiated instruction, a crucial skill for addressing DEI issues and fostering equitable learning environments (Maulana et al., 2023). To bridge these gaps, student teachers must develop a cohesive repertoire of DEI conceptions, behavioral intentions, and practices. However, the current research on the interrelationships between these teacher factors is insufficient (Mills & Ballantyne, 2016). It remains unclear how these factors can be nurtured in a consistent and mutually reinforcing manner, and how teacher education programmes can facilitate cost-effective training and comprehensive professional development. This study investigates the connection between student teachers' diversity conceptions and their differentiated instruction practices in secondary education. It employs various instruments, including the Munroe Multicultural Attitude Scale Questionnaire (MASQUE), to assess conceptions towards diversity and inclusion. The My Teacher Questionnaire was used to evaluate differentiated instruction skills from students' perspectives (Maulana & Helms-Lorenz, 2016). In-depth interviews elicited student teachers' reflections on their teacher education experiences. The sample includes 192 student teachers and 1201 students from various Chinese teacher education programs. Multilevel SEM modeling explored associations between these teacher factors. Content analysis identified patterns in teacher education components influential for these teacher factors and teachers' recommendations for enhancement. This study contributes to addressing educational inequity by emphasizing the alignment of teachers' conceptions with effective differentiated instruction to promote equitable learning environments, offering insights for reimagining teacher education programs.

Cerna, L., Mezzanotte, C., Rutigliano, A., Brussino, O., Santiago, P., Borgonovi, F., & Guthrie, C. (2021). Promoting inclusive education for diverse societies: A conceptual framework. Chubbuck, S. M. (2007). Socially just teaching and the complementarity of Ignatian pedagogy and critical pedagogy. Christian Higher Education, 6(3), 239-265. Florian, L., & Camedda, D. (2020). Enhancing teacher education for inclusion. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(1), 4-8. Keane, E., Heinz, M., & Mc Daid, R. (Eds.). (2022). Diversifying the Teaching Profession: Dimensions, Dilemmas and Directions for the Future. Taylor & Francis. Lee, Y. A. (2011). What Does Teaching for Social Justice Mean to Teacher Candidates?. Professional Educator, 35(2), n2. Maulana, R., & Helms-Lorenz, M. (2016). Observations and student perceptions of the quality of preservice teachers’ teaching behaviour: Construct representation and predictive quality. Learning Environments Research, 19(3), 335–357. Maulana, R., Helms-Lorenz, M., Moorer, P., Smale-Jacobse, A., & Feng, X. (2023). Differentiated Instruction in Teaching from the International Perspective: Methodological and empirical insights. University of Groningen Press. Mills, C., & Ballantyne, J. (2016). Social justice and teacher education: A systematic review of empirical work in the field. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(4), 263-276.

National policies present rights, duties, and measures for policy action through messages framed by particular concepts. Research has shown how understandings of policy conceptualizations have changed over time with shifting policies and premises (Stenersen & Prøitz 2020). One of these concepts is the powerful movement towards inclusive schooling. Although countries have different historically developed educational contexts, resembling regulations for inclusive schooling have been implemented, and stakeholders have interpreted regulations leading to many variations (Badstieber & Moldenhauer, 2016). School principals play a major role in this chain of international guidelines, national and finally local implementation (Abrahamsen & Aas, 2019). However, due to different understandings of inclusion and variations in local contexts, the role of school leaders in this high-stake policy issue is unclear (Wermke & Prøitz, 2019). The first paper of this symposium analyses inclusion policies in Norway, where especially school leaders play a significant role in reform implementation (Moos et al., 2016).

Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities requires signatory states to ensure ‘an inclusive education system at all levels’ – there are, however, variations in the wording of this article: The version ratified by Switzerland in 2014, for instance, replaces ‘inclusive’ with ‘integrative’. This means that children with disabilities are granted equal access to free, high-quality education in the primary and secondary schools in their community, but not necessarily in mainstream classrooms alongside their peers. Previous research has identified a lack of transparency regarding the implementation of national integration policy by the cantonal departments of education (Kronenberg, 2021) as well as significant differences among Swiss cantons in the legal regulations governing the structure and financing of integrative measures (Wicki, 2020; Wicki & Antognini, 2022). The second paper of this symposium explores the strategies employed by German-speaking cantons in Switzerland to redesign their school system in compliance with Swiss national integration policy and assesses their inclusiveness.

Educational policy and legislation in Portugal have been, since the 70s, on a path to developing a more inclusive education system for all. The development of inclusive education systems requires a joined-up approach that includes not only a focus on “special” groups, but on developing inclusive curricula and pedagogies (including assessment), designed with learner diversity as a starting point, aiming at realising the rights of all learners to education in terms of access to, participation, and success in education. The third paper focuses on the legislation and policy developments in Portugal which intended to develop a national inclusive education system and presents an overview of the development of educational public policies towards inclusion.

Recent research has increasingly focused on students’ and teachers' attitudes, perceptions, beliefs, and self-efficacy regarding diversity and inclusive education. The fourth paper focuses on the national application of questionnaires to teachers in Portugal, exploring their attitudes toward diversity, inclusive cultures, and practices, and identifying correlations and differences in attitudes considering various personal and professional variables. It draws on the broad definition of attitudes, encompassing perceptions, views, beliefs, feelings, and predispositions, as put forth by Van Mieghem et al. (2020). The research is situated within the context of Portuguese TEIP school clusters associated with the Includ-Ed Community Learning Program. This study, part of the LC4Inclusion project (PTDC/CED-EDG/4650/2021), aims to understand the development processes of Learning Communities and strategies used to combat inequality and promote inclusion and success.

By bringing together four perspectives on the development and implementation of national educational policy in three different European countries, we hope to gain new insights into the challenges and opportunities regarding the promotion of inclusive education in Europe.

In Norway, inclusive schooling for all pupils is manifested in legislations with focus on learning environment. In the national curriculum it is written that “a generous and supportive learning environment is the basis for a positive culture where students are encouraged and stimulated for professional and social development” (Directorate for Education and Training, 2020). School principals are obliged to follow this law and have to justify their decisions based on the Education Act (Møller & Skedsmo, 2013). However, the exact role of school principals, their duties and responsibility regarding inclusive schooling is still underexplored (Badstieber, 2021). The study aims to analyze how school leaders´ responsibilities for inclusive schooling are depicted in policy documents in Norway regarding the implementation of inclusion policies since 1994 and how this is understood in the discourse on school leaders´ responsibilities in school leaders’ professional journals in Norway. Due to the Salamanca Declaration and subsequent efforts for more inclusive school systems, the analysis of policy documents begins with the year 1994. For the analysis of the documents Bowen’s content document analysis in the further development of Prøitz (2015) was used. For the first part, school laws and their guiding documents regarding inclusive education were investigated. The second part of the analysis worked with school leader union magazines, partially written by principals for principals. The document material shows how political implementations arrive in professional daily work life and how policies are understood and interpreted by principals and their associations. The material furthermore presents the interface between intentions and practice. Preliminary results indicates that school leaders in Norway had to undertake increasing responsibilities for inclusive school settings over the years. It can be seen in more defined job descriptions regarding the development of competences of school staff, evaluations, and collaboration with other stakeholders. Even though the regulations for inclusion communicate a certain degree of autonomy, control from higher school authorities is increasing and school principals are made more accountable for their decisions. This is made clear through penalties, highly discussed in the union magazines, accompanied by suggestions from lawyers on how to interpret and deal with duties manifested in policies. This study show how policies on inclusion at various times can imply for school leaders in the implementation of an inclusive school for all children.

Abrahamsen, H. N., & Aas, M. (2019). Mellomleder i skolen. Fagbokforlaget. Badstieber, B. (2021). Inklusion als Transformation?! Eine empirische Analyse der Rekontextualisierungsstrategien von Schulleitenden im Kontext schulischer Inklusion. Julius Klinkhardt. Badstieber, B. & Moldenhauer, A. (2016). Schulleitungshandeln in inklusionsorientierten Schulentwicklungsprozessen. In U. Böing & A. Köpfer (Eds.), Be-Hinderung der Teilhabe. Soziale, politische und institutionelle Herausforderungen inklusiver Bildungsräume (pp. 209 - 219). Julius Klinkhardt. Directorate for Education and Training (2020). Overordnet del: Prinsipper for skolens praksis. Læreplanverket for Kunnskapsløftet 2020. https://sokeresultat.udir.no/finn-lareplan.html?fltypefiltermulti=Kunnskapsl%C3%B8ftet%202020 Prøitz, T. S. (2015). Learning Outcomes as a Key Concept in Policy Documents throughout Policy Changes. Scandinavian journal of educational research, 59(3), 275-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2014.904418 Moos, L., Nihlfors, E. & Paulsen, J. M. (2016). Nordic Superintendents: Agents in a Broken Chain. Springer International Publishing. Møller, J., & Skedsmo, G. (2013). Modernising education: New Public Management reform in the Norwegian education system. Journal of educational administration and history, 45(4), 336-353. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2013.822353 Stenersen, C. R., & Prøitz, T. S. (2022). Just a buzzword? The use of concepts and ideas in educational governance. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 66(2), 193-207. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2020.1788153 Wermke, W., & Prøitz, T. S. (2019). Discussing the curriculum-Didaktik dichotomy and comparative conceptualisations of the teaching profession. Education enquiry, 10(4), 300-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2019.1618677

The research presented in this paper aims to identify similarities and differences in the cantonal approaches to the integration of children with ‘special educational needs’ in regular schools and to assess how inclusive these approaches are. This analysis forms part of a larger mixed-methods study on the development and management of integrative schools in Switzerland. It consists of a document analysis examining official programmes published by the 20 German-speaking cantons that outline their implementation of national ‘integrated special education’ legislation. Objectives were captured using the Index for Inclusion (Booth & Ainscow, 2002); measures were recorded inductively, and their implementation – as outlined in the programmes – was coded as inclusive or segregated, consistent with UN terminology (2016). The analysis reveals that inclusion, as conceptualised by the UN (cf. 2016) and operationalised by Booth & Ainscow (2002), is not widely pursued in Swiss special education programmes. Objectives focus heavily on cooperation, coordination, and individualised teaching, while broader approaches to inclusiveness, such as tackling all forms of discrimination, stigmatisation, and bullying, receive little to no attention. The programmes define student support measures mainly along diagnostic lines and try to match the various needs arising from disorders and disabilities (and from learning German as a second language) with appropriate assistance and accommodations. Overall, there is a moderate tendency towards inclusive, rather than segregated implementation, though most support measures are described as optionally inclusive, thus delegating the decision to lower-level educational authorities and leaving room for both inclusive and segregated implementations. Of the twenty cantons under study, one takes a consistently inclusive approach and another two that show similar consistency, albeit to a lesser extent. Overall, this document analysis shows great variety among the 20 cantons, with some striving to provide not just integrated support within the school but inclusive, needs-based support in the classroom. All cantons, however, maintain at least temporary segregation measures and, thus, fall short of providing a fully inclusive classroom setting. The findings of this comprehensive analysis help to identify different political strategies in dealing with the requirements of national and international education policy. Whereas some cantons outline especial efforts towards a more inclusive mainstream education system, others have opted for a more pragmatic approach, trying to strike a balance between goal setting and realisable measures and often leaving many decisions to educational and political actors at the municipal level.

Booth, T., & Ainscow, M. 2002. Index for Inclusion. Developing Learning and Participation in Schools. Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education, United Kingdom. United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 2016. General Comment No. 4. (2016) on the Right to Inclusive Education.

This presentation will focus on the legislation and policy developments in Portugal which intended to develop a national inclusive education system. Two main theories will support our analysis of the Portuguese context: 1) Bernstein’s claim that ‘curriculum, pedagogic practice, and modes of evaluation set the terms for the crucial encounters in the classroom context of teachers and pupils’ (Bernstein, 2003, p. 154); 2) Universal Design for Learning (CAST, 2018) and its principles of using multiple means of engagement, representation, action and expression. These will be used in the context of the recent international policies (e.g., United Nations, 2016; International Bureau of Education-UNESCO, 2016; UNESCO, 2017) to argue that inclusion in education means much more than mainstreaming learners with disabilities, and that it means changing education systems to remove barriers to learning that may be experienced by all learners. Considering inclusive education as a possibility for breaking cultural reproduction and for redistributing power, this presentation will map the Education for All and the inclusive education movements in Portugal. From the 1950s and 60s when a very selective system allowed only a minority of the population to attend education, and extremely low levels of literacy existed. Through to the mid-70s with an awareness of the selective and discriminatory character of education, along with an inflow of migrants from the countries colonised by Portugal (Marques et al., 2007). And, in 1986, through the Fundamental Law of the Education System, which organised schooling into Pre-School, Basic and Secondary Education. Basic education comprises three cycles: First Cycle (Grades 1–4); Second Cycle (Grades 5–6), and Third Cycle (Grades 7–9). Secondary Education includes Grades 10–12. Through an opening of education to children and young people from lower social economic backgrounds (aiming to achieve education for all), and a parallel development of legislation from the late 1970s that expected the increasing presence of some learners with disabilities in mainstream schools (special/inclusive education movement), Portuguese policies have progressively moved towards inclusive education for all, expected to happen in mainstream schools.

Bernstein, B., 2003. Class, Codes and Control, Volume V, The Structuring of Pedagogic Discourse. Routledge, London. CAST. (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2 (p. 2018). CAST. International Bureau of Education-UNESCO, 2016. Reaching Out to All Learners: A Resource Pack for Supporting Inclusive Education. IBE-UNESCO, Geneva. Marques, M.M., Valente-Rosa, M.J., Martins, J.L., 2007. School and diversity in a weak state: the Portuguese case. J. Ethnic Migrat. Stud. 33 (7), 1145–1168. UNESCO, 2017. A Guide for Ensuring Inclusion and Equity in Education. UNESCO, Paris United Nations, 2016. General Comment No. 4 (2016), Article 24: Right to Inclusive Education. UN Committee on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities (CRPD), pp. 1–24

This paper presents findings from the LC4Inclusion project, exploring teacher attitudes towards diversity and inclusive education in Portugal. This study is significant as it delves into an under-researched area within the Portuguese context, examining attitudes across various dimensions and their implications for inclusive education. Recent studies have shifted their focus towards understanding the attitudes, perceptions, beliefs, and self-efficacy of students and teachers in relation to diversity and inclusive education (Guillemot, Lacroix & Nocus, 2022; Semião et al., 2023, Yada et al., 2022). This paper adopts the comprehensive perspective on attitudes, which includes perceptions, views, beliefs, feelings, and predispositions, as described by Van Mieghem et al. (2020). The methodology employed a mixed-methods approach, utilizing an extensive component of questionnaires administered to teachers and students across 59 school clusters and 14 in depth case studies. The questionnaire, adapted from Semião et al. (in press) and based on the Index for Inclusion by Booth and Ainscow (2002), focused on three factors: Diversity and Inclusion, Classroom Practices, and Inclusive Cultures. The study revealed overall positive attitudes towards inclusive education, with variations across different dimensions. Key findings include the influence of teaching level, with primary teachers displaying more favorable attitudes, and the impact of training on enhancing positive perceptions towards inclusion. Similarly for students, those attending elementary school presented significantly more favorable perceptions towards inclusion than those attending high school. Despite positive attitudes, the study identified areas for improvement, particularly in supporting diversity and catering to all students' learning needs. The results also highlighted a moderate level of self-reported knowledge about inclusive education among teachers. The study’s limitations include, the self-report nature of the data collection tool limits insights into how these attitudes translate into actual inclusive practices in schools. In conclusion, inclusive education is a complex challenge that requires an integrated and collaborative approach. Communities of practice in educational settings can be an effective strategy for promoting inclusive education, allowing for the sharing of knowledge and resources, collaboration between teachers, professional development, and the creation of a sense of belonging and cohesion. However, to be effective, it is essential to create favorable conditions for their implementation and operation, including leadership committed to inclusive education, adequate time and resources, and training and support for teachers. The promotion of inclusive education is a fundamental challenge for Portuguese society, and communities of practice can be an important strategy for addressing it in a collaborative and reflective manner.

Booth, T., & Ainscow, M. (2002). Index for Inclusion: Developing learning and participation in schools. CSIE. Guillemot, F., Lacroix, F., & Nocus, I. (2022). Teachers’ attitude towards inclusive education from 2000 to 2020. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 3. Semião et al. (in press). Validação de um questionário sobre educação inclusiva. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial. Semião, D., Mogarro, M.J., Pinto, F.B., Martins, M.J.D., Santos, N., Sousa, O., Marchão, A., Freire, I.P., Lord, L., & Tinoca, L. (2023). Teachers’ Perspectives on Students’ Cultural Diversity: A Systematic Literature Review. Education Sciences, 13, 1215. Van Mieghem et al. (2020). An analysis of research on inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(6), 675-689. Yada, A., Leskinen, M., Savolainen, H., & Schwab, S. (2022). Meta-analysis of the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and attitudes toward inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 109.