Conference Agenda

Career decision-making is one of the most complex tasks for individuals, particularly in rapidly changing labor markets shaped by the Fourth Industrial Revolution (Hirschi, 2018). While career choices have always been influenced by personal, social, and contextual factors (Lent et al., 1994) contemporary shifts—such as unstable employment, project-based work, and the growing demand for interdisciplinary competencies—have intensified the challenges faced by students in navigating their career paths (Hirschi, 2018). Career decisions differ from everyday choices due to their long-term impact, limited reversibility, and the emotional, social, and economic implications they carry (Gati & Kulscar, 2021) The process becomes even more challenging for gifted students (Kerr, 1990).

Gifted individuals, throughout history, have been recognized for their extraordinary contributions to science, politics, arts, and cultures (Jung, 2019). However, their developmental needs are often neglected in educational policies and career counseling practices, which tend to prioritize academic performance over socio-emotional and vocational guidance (Smith & Wood, 2020). Within this population, multipotential individuals represent a distinct subgroup. Their high abilities across multiple domains expand the range of career alternatives but simultaneously creates unique challenges in narrowing down choices. As research shows, multipotential youth often struggle with anxiety, existential concerns, and identity development issues, as any single decision implies the exclusion of other viable paths. For them, career choices are not only about selecting an occupation but also about reconciling their sense of self with multiple, and sometimes conflicting, possibilities (Silverman, 1993)

The situation deepens when multipotentiality intersects with socioeconomic disadvantage. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds often face limited access to social and cultural capital, fewer role models, and restricted opportunities such as internships, mentorship, and extracurricular enrichment (Olszewski-Kubilius, & Thomson, 2015). Families may provide emotional support but often lack the knowledge, resources, and networks required to guide career development effectively. Consequently, disadvantaged multipotential students encounter intensified barriers, including diminished self-efficacy, reduced outcome expectations, and limited exposure to professional pathways. Such challenges increase the risk of underemployment, early school leaving, and career mismatches, representing both individual and societal losses in terms of human capital (Hébert, 2018)

Scholarship has generally examined either multipotentiality or socioeconomic disadvantage seperately, overlooking their intersection. Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) highlights the importance of self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and contextual supports in shaping career development (Lent et al., 1994). Yet, empirical studies remain scarce in addressing how these mechanisms operate specifically among disadvantaged multipotential students, who face the paradox of possessing high abilities yet lacking access to adequate resources.

This study addresses this gap by exploring the career decision-making processes of multipotential students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds in Türkiye. While gifted education is formally recognized within the national education system, the specific construct of multipotentiality remains absent from official definitions and interventions. This research therefore offers theoretical and practical contributions: it reveales how internal factors (such as abilities, interests, and psychological struggles) and external factors (such as family socioeconomic status and cultural context) intersect in shaping students’ career trajectories. By examining a “subgroup within a subgroup,” this study extends SCCT to a novel context but also provides actionable insights for more inclusive and socially just career counseling practices.

Supporting the career development of disadvantaged multipotential students is essential not only for their personal well-being and self-realization but also for fostering social equity and sustainable development (Olszewski-Kubilius, & Thomson, 2015).

By identifying the barriers, contradictions, and coping strategies in their career decision-making processes, this research contributes to the design of tailored interventions that can empower these students to navigate complexity and actualize their diverse potentials.

Building a more inclusive education and school system has been one of the key objectives in the most recent reform of learning support in Finland. Old support system was seen too bureaucratic, and it focused merely on the three support steps. Now the scope should be in concrete support measures and early interventions. Although creating an inclusive school involves much more than the existence or non-existence of special classes or special schools, justifying the use of class-based special education lies at the heart of the inclusion debate. However, in Finland decisions about school placement are not made solely by teachers or officials responsible for allocating resources. Opinions on how support should be organised are also sought from the child or pupil themselves, from their guardians, and, when necessary, from healthcare professionals. The aim of this study is to examine how different actors justify placement in special education classes at the start of schooling.

Society, culture and the structure of the school system have an input in parents’ attitudes towards inclusion. Some studies have shown that parents might have a more positive attitude towards inclusion in general than they have to the specific beliefs to its benefits. If a parent themselves has a child who needs special support their inclusion attitude might be a more negative but there is evidence that this might be reaching a plateau at least in some countries. A big question for the parents seems to be the nature of the childs needs. Physical disabilities and learning difficulties are accepted by the parents but especially children with behavioural issues are considered the hardest ones to teach in normal size classrooms. Even if a parent has a positive attitude towards inclusion they might be worried about the schools resources and the abilities of the teacher together with the societal status of the student needing support.

Children’s own voices are often not brought out in early childhood education documents, nor are children’s own views on their support needs frequently investigated. Barriers to hearing the voices of children in need of support have been identified at both the child level and in professionals’ attitudes and the resources available. Little is known about young children’s own views about different schools, classes and support measures.

Previous studies have shown that healthcare experts are used as authorities and specialists in pedagogical documents, and their views and the diagnoses they provide influence pedagogical decisions and the planning of support. It is therefore important to examine the types of justifications used by healthcare professionals when recommending placement in a special education class for a child at the start of schooling.

The study is situated within the Finnish context. However, the development of inclusive schooling and the identification of beliefs and attitudes that hinder inclusion constitute key challenges more broadly across Europe. Accordingly, the central question of this study is: Why would a special education class be considered preferable to a so-called mainstream classroom?

This paper explores how inclusive education in early childhood instrumental music learning emerges through embodied, relational, and ecological processes. Positioned within the field of inclusive education (ECER Network 04), the study investigates movement-based instrumental pedagogy as a means of understanding how knowing and acting are co-constructed by young learners, caregivers, and teachers through shared musical activity. Rather than framing inclusion as an individual learner attribute or an accommodation strategy, inclusion is approached as an enacted practice that unfolds through participation, interaction, and bodily engagement (Bronfenbrenner, 2001; Studd & Cox, 2019).

Movement-based instrumental learning provides a particularly relevant site for examining inclusion, as it foregrounds multimodal engagement of kinesthetic, sensory, social, and emotional alongside musical development. The body functions as a primary medium through which children and caregivers communicate, explore, and make meaning together (Studd & Cox, 2019). From this perspective, embodied learning becomes both a form of knowing and a mode of action, shaping how inclusion is experienced in practice.

Although embodiment is increasingly recognised within music education research, less attention has been given to how embodied pedagogies contribute to inclusive learning environments by incorporating children’s and families’ voices, particularly in early instrumental contexts. This gap is significant within inclusive education research, where participation, voice, and relational learning are central concerns. Research in developmental psychology and music education demonstrates that early musical interaction supports attachment, attunement, and co-regulation between caregivers and children (Malloch, 1999; Stern, 1985; Trehub et al., 1997; Porges, 2011; Schore, 2001). However, these insights are less frequently integrated into instrumental learning contexts, where caregiver participation is often peripheral or implicitly assumed rather than pedagogically supported (Ilari, 2018; Zdzinski, 1996).

The study is guided by the following research questions:

1. How does centering embodied experiences in early instrumental education support inclusive participation for young children?
2. How do shared, movement-based musical experiences enable caregivers to act as co-participants within the learning environment?

The study adopts an ecological framework informed by Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory of development (Bronfenbrenner, 2001) and an inclusive design based on the principals of Universal Design for Learning (CAST. 2018. “Universal Design for Learning Guidelines” V. 2.2. htpp://udlguidelines.cast.org]), alongside theories of embodiment and inclusive pedagogy.

Pedagogical activities draw on Dalcroze Eurhythmics, Suzuki-informed instrumental learning, and the Laban-Bartenieff Movement System, all of which foreground exploration, coordination, relational interaction, and adaptability (Ilari, 2018; Studd & Cox, 2019). Inclusion is therefore understood not as a prescribed outcome but as something done through pedagogical action, emerging from interactions among bodies, relationships, and environments.

Empirically, the research focuses on three movement-integrated workshops, each 90 minutes in length, involving young flute learners (ages 6–8) and their caregivers. These workshops enact inclusive pedagogical conditions in which learning is negotiated collectively rather than transmitted unidirectionally. The workshop setting is treated as a bounded system, allowing examination of embodied joint engagement among caregiver–child dyads, peers, and the researcher-facilitator through multimodal means (Merriam, 1998; Vaiouli et al., 2015). The European and international relevance of the study lies in its contribution to ongoing debates around inclusive education, family engagement, and embodied learning across diverse educational contexts.

By examining how inclusive practices are generated through embodied action, the study aligns directly with ECER 2026’s theme, Knowing and Acting: The Changing Conditions and Potentials of Education Research. It offers empirically grounded insight into how inclusive education can be understood not only as a policy objective but as a lived, relational process shaped through everyday pedagogical interactions.