Conference Agenda

Classrooms across Europe are becoming more diverse. Students increasingly differ in academic performance, socio-economic background, language proficiency, and migration background. Teachers are expected to respond to this diversity in fair and inclusive ways, while working under uncertainty and often competing expectations. Their educational decisions are shaped not only by research evidence, but also by their professional beliefs and by institutional and cultural contexts. Decisions about differentiated instruction, grade retention, grade acceleration, and tracking are among the most far-reaching responses to student heterogeneity (Eurydice, 2011; Tomlinson et al., 2003).

This symposium brings together three empirical studies from the Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany to examine how teacher beliefs connect educational knowledge with classroom action. Together, the papers explore how teacher beliefs about differentiation and grade retention are structured, how they relate to everyday teaching practices and perceived challenges, and how they may contribute to unequal educational outcomes (Santos, Pipa, & Monteiro, 2023; Tomchin & Impara, 1992). In this way, the symposium directly addresses the ECER 2026 theme “Knowing and Acting: The changing conditions and potentials of education research” by showing how teachers’ educational decisions are shaped by context, values, and professional judgement.

The first paper focuses on primary education in the Netherlands and examines how teachers manage heterogeneity in their classrooms. Using latent profile analysis, the study identifies different patterns in teachers’ use of differentiated instruction and links these patterns to beliefs about grade retention and acceleration. Contrary to the common assumption that differentiation and retention are seen as opposing strategies, the findings suggest that teachers who use more differentiated instruction may also hold more positive views about retention and acceleration (Protheroe, 2007). This paper highlights that teachers’ belief systems are often more complex than policy debates suggest (Tomchin & Impara, 1992) and questions simple contrasts between “progressive” and “traditional” approaches.

The second paper uses a quasi-experimental design in Flemish secondary education to study bias in teacher expectations and recommendations. Through a factorial video vignette experiment, the study examines whether teachers’ judgements about tracking and grade retention are influenced by students’ socio-economic status, ethnicity, name, and language proficiency, while academic performance is held constant. The results show that teachers have higher expectations for more privileged students. Interestingly, these students are also more likely to be advised to change programmes rather than to repeat a grade. This suggests that assumptions about students’ backgrounds and trajectories can shape decision-making in subtle ways. The paper highlights the ethical dimension of teacher judgements and shows how beliefs can translate into unequal educational opportunities.

The third paper draws on large-scale panel data from Germany to examine how teachers’ grade retention beliefs relate to teaching practices, perceived challenges, and career characteristics. Using structural equation modelling, the study finds that teachers who report more use of differentiated instruction are less supportive of grade retention, while those who experience more classroom management difficulties are more supportive of grade retention. At the same time, individual characteristics explain only a small part of the variation in beliefs. This points to the importance of broader contextual factors, such as school policies, school culture, and local grade retention practices (Goos, Pipa, & Peixoto, 2021; Santos et al., 2023).

Taken together, the three papers offer a cross-national and multi-method perspective on teacher beliefs and responses to student heterogeneity. By combining survey data, experimental methods, and large-scale panel analyses, the symposium shows how educational knowledge is interpreted and acted upon under changing social and institutional conditions. The discussant will reflect on the implications of these findings for research, policy, and practice, with a particular focus on equity, professional autonomy, and evidence-informed decision-making.

Primary school teachers work with increasingly diverse groups of students, including pupils who perform well below or above grade-level expectations (OECD, 2023). In the Netherlands, teachers have substantial autonomy in deciding whether students are promoted, retained, or accelerated, alongside adapting instruction to different learning needs (Meissner et al., 2025). Although differentiated instruction (DI) is often described as an alternative to grade retention or acceleration, it is not clear how teachers combine these approaches in practice. This study examines how Dutch primary school teachers manage classroom heterogeneity by analysing patterns of DI use and their relationship with beliefs about grade retention and acceleration. Survey data were collected from 292 teachers using a 49-item questionnaire covering five dimensions of DI (Gaitas & Alves Martins, 2017; Pozas et al., 2020), as well as two parallel scales measuring beliefs about retention and acceleration (Hoogeveen et al., 2005; Ribeiro et al., 2017). Latent profile analysis was used to identify groups of teachers with similar DI practices. Differences in beliefs between these groups were then examined. On average, teachers report using most DI strategies sometimes or often. They generally hold negative views about grade retention as a tool for motivation or classroom management, while expressing somewhat more positive views about early retention and acceleration. Three DI profiles were identified: teachers with average differentiation, teachers with above-average differentiation, and teachers who prefer heterogeneous grouping over homogeneous grouping. These profiles differ clearly in their use of DI strategies. Teachers in the above-average differentiation group hold more positive beliefs about grade retention and some aspects of acceleration than teachers in the other groups. These findings challenge the idea that differentiated instruction and grade retention beliefs are necessarily opposed. Instead, they suggest that teachers’ beliefs are internally complex and that intensive use of DI can coexist with more favourable views of retention and acceleration. The study provides a more nuanced picture of how teachers deal with heterogeneity in their classrooms and raises questions about how educational policies frame responses to student diversity.

Gaitas, S., & Alves Martins, M. (2017). Teacher perceived difficulty in implementing differentiated instructional strategies in primary school. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(5), 544-556. Hoogeveen, L., Van Hell, J. G., & Verhoeven, L. (2005). Teacher attitudes toward academic acceleration and accelerated students in the Netherlands. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29(1), 30-59. Meissner, F., Pepels, J., Pipa, J., Goos, M., Belfi, B., Gaitas, S., Peixoto, F., & Klapproth, F. (2025). Grade retention during compulsory school education in Europe: regulations and practices. Maastricht University Press. OECD. (2023). Equity and inclusion in education: Finding strength through diversity. OECD Publishing. Pozas, M., Letzel, V., & Schneider, C. (2020). Teachers and differentiated instruction: exploring differentiation practices to address student diversity. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 20(3), 217-230. Ribeiro, V. M., Kasmirski, P. R., Gusmão, J. B. D., Batista, A. A. G., Jacomini, M. A., & Crahay, M. (2017). Beliefs of teachers about grade retention. Educação em Revista, 33.

Students from socio-economically disadvantaged or ethnic minority backgrounds are more likely to experience grade retention or downward tracking than similarly performing peers (Boone et al., 2018; Klapproth & Schaltz, 2015; Locke & Sparks, 2019). Teachers play a key role in these processes through their expectations and recommendations (Batruch et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2018). This study examines whether teacher judgements about tracking and grade retention are biased by student background characteristics, even when academic performance is held constant. A factorial video vignette experiment was conducted among 961 teachers in 46 Flemish secondary schools. Teachers evaluated fictitious students who differed in socio-economic status, ethnicity, name, and language proficiency, while their academic performance was the same across profiles. Teachers reported their expectations about students’ future educational pathways and recommended appropriate interventions. The results show clear biases in teacher expectations: Students with higher socio-economic status and ethnic majority backgrounds receive higher expectations for further education. Name cues and language proficiency also influence expectations, pointing to implicit biases in teacher judgement. Interestingly, the most privileged students are more likely to be advised to change programmes rather than to repeat a grade, while recommendations for grade retention do not differ across profiles. Additional analyses suggest that teachers may assume disadvantaged students to be in lower tracks, as expectations about past performance are also biased. These findings show how teacher expectations and recommendations can contribute to social inequality through subtle decision-making processes. By isolating causal effects of student characteristics, the study highlights the normative nature of educational judgements and underlines the need for reflective and evidence-informed approaches to high-stakes decisions.

Batruch, A., Geven, S., Kessenich, E., & van de Werfhorst, H. G. (2023). Are tracking recommendations biased? A review of teachers’ role in the creation of inequalities in tracking decisions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 123, 103985. Boone, S., Thys, S., Van Avermaet, P., & Van Houtte, M. (2018). Class composition as a frame of reference for teachers? The influence of class context on teacher recommendations. British Educational Research Journal, 44(2), 274-293. Klapproth, F., & Schaltz, P. (2015). Who is retained in school, and when? Survival analysis of predictors of grade retention in Luxembourgish secondary school. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 30(1), 119-136. Locke, V. N., & Sparks, P. J. (2019). Who gets held back? An analysis of grade retention using stratified frailty models. Population Research and Policy Review, 38(5), 695-731. Wang, S., Rubie-Davies, C. M., & Meissel, K. (2018). A systematic review of the teacher expectation literature over the past 30 years. Educational Research and Evaluation, 24(3-5), 124-179.

Teachers’ beliefs about grade retention influence important decisions about students’ educational progression (Santos et al., 2023, Wang et al., 2018). However, little is known about how these beliefs relate to everyday teaching practices, perceived challenges, and teachers’ years of experience. This study examines these relationships using large-scale data from Germany. The analyses are based on data from the German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS, Starting Cohort 8; NEPS-Network, 2025) and include 2,443 teachers. Grade retention beliefs were measured using four Likert-scaled items (König et al., 2012) and modelled as a latent construct. Structural equation modelling was used to analyse the associations with differentiated instruction, autonomy, cooperation, occupational stress, job satisfaction, and teaching difficulties, while controlling for basic background characteristics (age, gender, years of teaching experience). An exploratory indicator capturing career timing (age relative to years of teaching experience) was included to account for suppression effects. The results show that teachers who report more use of differentiated instruction are less supportive of grade retention, while teachers who experience more classroom management difficulties are more supportive of retention. Career timing is also related to beliefs, with teachers who are older relative to their years of teaching experience holding less favourable views of grade retention. Other factors are not significantly related, and overall explained variance is limited. The findings suggest that teachers’ grade retention beliefs are strongly influenced by contextual and normative factors, such as school policies, school structures, and local practices. This highlights the importance of multi-level approaches to understanding teacher beliefs and decision-making, and the need to place individual practices within broader educational contexts.

König, J., Darge, K., & Schreiber, M. (2012). Teachers’ beliefs about retention: Effects on teaching quality. In J. König (Ed.), Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs definition and operationalisation – Connections to knowledge and performance – Development and change (pp. 191-204). Waxmann. NEPS Network. (2025). Scientific Use File der NEPS-Startkohorte 8: Klasse 5. [Scientific Use File of NEPS Starting Cohort 8: Grade 5] (Version 1.0.0) [Dataset]. Leibniz Institute for Educational Trajectories. https://doi.org/10.5157/NEPS:SC8:1.0.0 Santos, N. N., Pipa, J., & Monteiro, V. (2023). Analysing grade retention beliefs within teachers’ psycho-pedagogic beliefs system. Teaching and Teacher Education, 121, 103939. Wang, S., Rubie-Davies, C. M., & Meissel, K. (2018). A systematic review of the teacher expectation literature over the past 30 years. Educational Research and Evaluation, 24(3-5), 124-179.