Conference Agenda

Within the Flemish educational system, student behaviour has emerged as a particularly pressing concern (Flemish Government, 2025). In response to the apparent increase in so‑called “undesirable behaviour” and the rise in school dropout, the Flemish Minister of Education introduced the action plan “Wel-Behaved: From Undesirable Behaviour to Learning-Supported Behaviour” (Flemish Government, 2025). One provision of this plan is the expectation that schools clearly articulate what they require from parents in their specific role and translate these expectations into concrete measures. In doing so, the plan implicitly links the management of challenging behaviour to parental responsibility, while leaving the operationalisation of parental involvement to individual schools (Flemish Government, 2025). The plan does not take into account that the insights of parents of children with challenging behaviour can counterbalance deficit-oriented and individualised perspectives, providing schools with nuanced information that may otherwise be overlooked (Fluyt et al., 2025; MacLeod et al., 2017). In practice, schools often operate from a one-dimensional notion of ‘partnership’ that primarily serves institutional needs rather than equally reflecting parental perspectives (Reay, 1998).

The theoretical framework of this study is grounded in the recognition of the value of parental experiential knowledge and its potential to serve as a counter-narrative to deficit-oriented interpretations of challenging behaviour in regular primary education (Daelman et al., 2024; Tabatabai, 2019). It subsequently offers a critical examination of the concept of ‘partnership’ within parent–professional collaboration in education, emphasising how normative expectations, power asymmetries, and epistemic inequalities continue to restrict meaningful parental participation, despite policy rhetoric that promotes collaboration (Hodge & Runswick-Cole, 2018; McLaughlin et al., 2008; Vandenbussche & Van de Putte, 2019).

This study aims to investigate parental involvement in decision-making processes within regular primary education concerning their child who is labelled with challenging behaviour. To this end, the study applies a critical discourse analysis (Fairclough, 1992) on motivated reports within regular primary education written by the Student Guidance Centres (SGC) in Flanders, specifically about challenging behaviour. In addition, a focusgroup was convened with members of the SGC, and qualitative interviews were conducted with three parents who had personally undergone the process of drafting a motivated report for their child, to enrich the corpus and add a further layer of contextualisation to the data (Fairclough, 1992). The study aims to map how parental perspectives within collaborative processes are reflected in these reports, and what they reveal about current collaboration practices with parents in addressing challenging behaviour in primary education. Furthermore, it explores what these reports may indicate about broader societal understandings of parents, challenging behaviour, and parental collaboration in education.

Objectives and Purposes

This study investigates parents’ perspectives on the implementation of inclusive education in All-Day Schools (ADS) in Lithuania (Dudaitė et al., 2019), aiming to develop an empirically grounded model of inclusive ADS. While inclusive education is widely studied in Lithuania, most studies focus on teachers’ or professionals’ viewpoints (Boyle et al., 2023), often overlooking the voice of parents. This research addresses that gap, highlighting parental perceptions as essential for understanding how inclusion is realized in practice.

Theoretical Framework and Background

The implementation of inclusive education requires not only systemic support, but also a coherent conceptual framework that addresses the diversity of learners and the complexity of educational contexts. This study is grounded in a holistic model of inclusive education (Teschers, 2020), which comprises five interrelated dimensions: a holistic approach to teaching, a whole-child perspective, a whole-school approach (Ainscow, 2020; Guðjónsdóttir & Óskarsdóttir, 2016), a community perspective, and a systemic view. These dimensions are not isolated but mutually reinforcing, providing a theoretical foundation for understanding inclusion as a multi-layered phenomenon. In the context of All-Day Schools (ADS), this implies a necessary shift from fragmented practices toward a coherent model that addresses individual needs, ensures equal opportunities, and fosters collaboration. It is particularly important that the model being developed ensures opportunities for the inclusion of all groups of students, including those with special educational needs, whose participation is currently limited due to the non-compulsory nature of ADS and schools’ lack of readiness to accommodate them (Dudaitė et al., 2019).

Research Questions and/or Hypotheses

This study aims to analyse parents’ perspectives on the implementation of inclusive education in All-Day Schools (ADS) and to assess how current ADS models reflect the principles of inclusion in practice. Accordingly, the following research questions are posed:

(RQ1) How do parents view the implementation of inclusion principles in the ADS their children attend?

(RQ2) How parents evaluate child’s well-being at school (emotional well-being, social inclusion, and academic self-concept)?

(RQ3) What conditions, according to parents, are necessary for the meaningful and comprehensive implementation of inclusive education in ADS?

The preschool years constitute a unique developmental period in which children’s cognitive, emotional, and social capacities rapidly emerge, laying the foundational structures that shape later life experiences. Early education for children with special educational needs has determining effects on both individual development and the quality of life of families. In this context, inclusive education stands out as an educational philosophy that enables children with special needs to participate in learning environments alongside their peers; thus, children gain opportunities for belonging, safe inclusion, interaction, and full participation with typically developing peers (Fleer, 2010; Hyde et al., 2017). Research shows that children with special needs who have access to inclusive preschool education demonstrate more positive developmental outcomes and that the quality of life of families increases (Purcell et al., 2006).

Inclusive education is not limited to the recognition of individual differences; the values of the school community, instructional practices, and intra-team collaboration must be restructured in a way that prioritizes the learning outcomes of all children (Florian, 2017; Florian). However, in practice, numerous challenges such as lack of teacher support, knowledge, and skills, as well as environmental and institutional limitations, directly affect the effectiveness and sustainability of inclusivity (Lee & Recchia, 2016; Warren et al., 2016; Wen et al., 2011). At this point, the role of families is critically important. Families, as the first and most permanent sources of education for children, play a central role in learning processes; therefore, active participation of families in inclusive practices is a determining factor for a child's school success and overall development (Akyol, 2025). Parental involvement increases children's motivation and performance at school and creates positive effects on the quality of life of families (Epstein & Sanders, 2006; Purcell et al., 2006). However, levels of participation vary according to socioeconomic, cultural, and ethnic contexts; therefore, context-sensitive strategies should be developed in family–school interactions (Musendo et al., 2024). For inclusivity to be effective, individual factors such as teacher competencies, in-service training, guidance, and team collaboration, as well as environmental and institutional supports, are necessary. Environmental elements such as legislation, funding, class size, and physical arrangements can act as facilitators or obstacles to implementation (Warren et al., 2016; Wen et al., 2011; Pearson, 2015). The existing literature shows that inclusive preschool practices provide positive effects on children with special needs and their families, but that teacher competencies, resources, and environmental conditions are significant determinants in practice (Purcell et al., 2006; Lee & Recchia, 2016; Kemp, 2016).

This study aims to examine the experiences of a parent of a child diagnosed with ASD who receives inclusive education in the preschool period, thereby addressing the gap in the literature where family perspectives have been relatively less deeply explored and contributing to the understanding of facilitating and hindering factors in practice through family observations. Specifically, the study aims to produce concrete recommendations for practitioners, school administrators, and policymakers by focusing on parents’ experiences regarding the inclusion process, the supportive and hindering factors they observe, and insights derived from these experiences.

This study seeks to answer the following questions: How is the process of starting inclusive education experienced for a child diagnosed with autism in the preschool period? How do the school environment, teacher and peer attitudes, and family–school collaboration affect the child’s development? What are the challenges experienced by the family, and what coping strategies and support mechanisms do they employ? From the parents’ perspective, what factors facilitate and hinder inclusive education?